Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 07 Nov 2015 04:19

There is one thing I have heard over and over again. In the current set up, if you get deputed as a TP to HAL/ADA, kiss your growth within IAF bye-bye. But that is true of most countries too. TPs are not driven by promotions. It is a different kind of job satisfaction and a completely different order of prestige. Probably, the only ones that rival them are astronauts, or battle aces. If I were a pilot, probably, I would yearn to be a TP. I would not be chosen, that's another matter.

srai · Post by **srai** » 07 Nov 2015 05:06

^^^
Yep, heard that one too.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Nov 2015 06:03

indranilroy wrote:There is one thing I have heard over and over again. In the current set up, if you get deputed as a TP to HAL/ADA, kiss your growth within IAF bye-bye. But that is true of most countries too. TPs are not driven by promotions. It is a different kind of job satisfaction and a completely different order of prestige. Probably, the only ones that rival them are astronauts, or battle aces. If I were a pilot, probably, I would yearn to be a TP. I would not be chosen, that's another matter.

Test pilots are people who can be relied upon not to take unnecessary risks. Taking some risk is part of the job description of fighter pilots (and others as well) - which makes for a different kind of story to tell. The risk taking IAF pilot story is like one I read recently about a transport pilot who asked his No2 whether he had seen the Taj Mahal while they were near Agra, The latter said "No" after which his boss asked him to maintain total radio silence and they flew a few rings round the Taj at very low level while the ATC was having an apoplectic fit. Since he is now no more I can recall that my late cousin Suresh once said how he had done barrel rolls over an airliner belonging to a certain nation over the Himalayas

The test pilot kind of story is one of coolness under pressure with no machogiri. Here is a story that has been posted on these pages many times before:
viewtopic.php?p=31701#p31701

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Nov 2015 06:19

On the question of promotions in the IAF - every person has to make personal choices. Reading and listening to anecdotes - one realizes that things can happen that put "black marks" against some good people that eventually reflect on the promotion ladder. Sometimes the story is remembered with bitterness. Sometimes it is a story of a person who "stood up" against an erring superior and/or did the right thing in a difficult situation. In some cases flattery gets some people ahead. Varies..IAF is an organization like any other.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 07 Nov 2015 09:05

srai wrote:...

Deejayji, good to have discussion with you on this topic. Always good to have insider info on how things are structured and work behind the scenes. Those are the very questions that need to be clarified. How has NFTC program evolved in the last 10-years as more and more indigenous platforms for testing have become available along with domestically upgraded platforms? One of the things you pointed out was that permanent move is also possible now. Before it was only deputation. When did that change take place? How does promotions work for the permanent movers? How are roles divided up between services TP on permanent move vs deputed one vs ex-services TP vs HAL-employed TP (are they part of NFTC)? Future evolution? Outsiders like me only hear selective sound bites in news media/public forums and our perceptions are shaped by them like for example one that I have heard a few times is if LCA had crashed, especially early on, it would have been the end of that program and so the designers had to go over and above to ensure mishaps didn't occur (inferred as: flight testing occurred at slower pace).

I will give it a shot but there may be some inconsistencies with current policies since I do not have any direct info on what new 'P' staff policies are. Also, my exposure is more from a helicopter POV, could have variances in fighter stream. I think for BRF, Hari Nair sir may be the best source of information.

How does one become a TP in IAF:
QRs: Min 05/06 Yrs of service, Not more than 30 (or 32?) yrs of age, minimum science graduate.

Application: Pilots must apply with due permission of the CO. This was difficult as most people applying for TP were good in their existing jobs too and the CO's would be hesitant of letting go the good guys.

Other Impacts: Some TP aspirants are on high trajectory in merit as they have already done their Flight Instructor's course etc. Also such people are naturally well read and they would have contributed towards a better IAF even as part of an Op Sqn.

Perception: Though individuals may vary but by and large a TP is the ultimate badge for a pilot, though as an officer it may not be so.

Entrance: Written tests, Interviews / Viva, Presentation, etc, etc. Most applicants are rejected here. I heard nos like 30% to 40% rejections.

Training: At TP School in a tri-service environment at ASTE. Few rejections (very few) even at this stage. Training along with Flight Test Engineers.

Utilisation: At ASTE as regular TP for the period of posting. ASTE is AVM commanded who will be a TP. Pilots will go back to regular sqn service after their tenure and may get posted back to ASTE later for a second tenure. No impact on career prospects of such pilots. Infact, may even help growth.

Deputation: Voluntary option, based on vacancy at places requiring TPs, like HAL and NFTC. Most people who opt for HAL / NFTC etc do it as a conscious choice knowing that this will impact future prospects in IAF. Infact, most don't plan to come back to IAF and on retiring from IAF may continue with HAL. These are the kind who just love the TP job to the point that they don't want to get out of it.If I am not wrong, out first Cosmonaut, Wg Cdr Rakesh Sharma (Retd) will fall under this category.

Note: The whole TP community is very small and generally know each other very well. They also keep in touch with families of TPs who died either in saddle or otherwise.

I am not informed in any depth on NFTC so will not comment on that.

wig · Post by **wig** » 07 Nov 2015 10:29

Test Pilots do make it to the very top. I recall ACM S Krishnaswamy being a test pilot. from the BRF archives below

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Perso ... swamy.html

Air Chief Marshal Srinivasapuram Krishnaswamy was sent to UK to undergo Test Pilots Course. On his return, he joined the Air Force Flight Test Centre – Aircraft and System Training Establishment (ASTE).
Air Chief Marshal Krishnaswamy, as a test pilot, was involved in flight testing and evaluation of Military as well as civil aircraft and weapon systems.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Nov 2015 14:27

indranilroy wrote:There is one thing I have heard over and over again. In the current set up, if you get deputed as a TP to HAL/ADA, kiss your growth within IAF bye-bye. But that is true of most countries too. TPs are not driven by promotions. It is a different kind of job satisfaction and a completely different order of prestige. Probably, the only ones that rival them are astronauts, or battle aces. If I were a pilot, probably, I would yearn to be a TP. I would not be chosen, that's another matter.

The story is not so straight forward.

The TP in IAF is still a fighter-pilot, though a much more qualified one. And if he has any wish to rise up in IAF, he will have to go through the process of taking responsibilities as Flight Commander, commanding a fighter squadron, staff appointments etc. Which means only a certain percentage of flying career can be devoted to Test Flying. We saw this in the LCA program as well...certain Test Pilots had to leave for other assignments like commanding a fighter squadron.

IIRC, one of the reasons NFTC was established was to have a dedicated pool of Test Pilots...even if IAF pilots revert back to parent organization, there is continuity in the system. And knowledge about Test Flying is institutionalized and not person specific.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Nov 2015 20:02

Hari Nair the man who dropped the first LBGs in Kargil (I think) was a Test pilot before he went back to his sqn. He left before the LCA had its first flight. Last i saw his name mentioned - he was pretty senior.

srai · Post by **srai** » 08 Nov 2015 18:27

rohitvats wrote:
indranilroy wrote:There is one thing I have heard over and over again. In the current set up, if you get deputed as a TP to HAL/ADA, kiss your growth within IAF bye-bye. But that is true of most countries too. TPs are not driven by promotions. It is a different kind of job satisfaction and a completely different order of prestige. Probably, the only ones that rival them are astronauts, or battle aces. If I were a pilot, probably, I would yearn to be a TP. I would not be chosen, that's another matter.
The story is not so straight forward.

The TP in IAF is still a fighter-pilot, though a much more qualified one. And if he has any wish to rise up in IAF, he will have to go through the process of taking responsibilities as Flight Commander, commanding a fighter squadron, staff appointments etc. Which means only a certain percentage of flying career can be devoted to Test Flying. We saw this in the LCA program as well...certain Test Pilots had to leave for other assignments like commanding a fighter squadron.

IIRC, one of the reasons NFTC was established was to have a dedicated pool of Test Pilots...even if IAF pilots revert back to parent organization, there is continuity in the system. And knowledge about Test Flying is institutionalized and not person specific.

AFAIR, Wg Cdr Rajiv Kothiyal, first to fly LCA, quit the IAF after his stint as a TP for the LCA program when he got posted to the North-East for command duties. Remember reading something about it a long while ago.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Nov 2015 18:35

shiv wrote:Hari Nair the man who dropped the first LBGs in Kargil (I think) was a Test pilot before he went back to his sqn. He left before the LCA had its first flight. Last i saw his name mentioned - he was pretty senior.

Raghunathan Nambiar.
https://bademian.wordpress.com/2012/10/ ... in-kargil/

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Nov 2015 20:06

Karan M wrote:
shiv wrote:Hari Nair the man who dropped the first LBGs in Kargil (I think) was a Test pilot before he went back to his sqn. He left before the LCA had its first flight. Last i saw his name mentioned - he was pretty senior.
Raghunathan Nambiar.
https://bademian.wordpress.com/2012/10/ ... in-kargil/

LOL! The name escaped me. Thanks

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Nov 2015 22:42

Parrikar raised R-77 failure on Su-30 and Su-30 serviceability (article has old data of 50-55% from Jan this year) with Russia
http://www.theweek.in/news/india/Parrik ... ussia.html

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Nov 2015 13:25

from livefist. looks like some number of women pilots are already in training. those are std issue fighter g-suits right?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Nov 2015 13:35

^^^If I'm not grossly mistaken, the pic is from Mission Udan series on National Geographic where the winner was given a chance of backseat ride on MKI. The above episode with Mig-29 had a competition on who is the fastest to respond to scramble call from ORP den

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Nov 2015 19:16

A nice publicity documentary by MoD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJDxRVshv1s

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 09 Nov 2015 22:38

rohitvats wrote:^^^If I'm not grossly mistaken, the pic is from Mission Udan series on National Geographic where the winner was given a chance of backseat ride on MKI. The above episode with Mig-29 had a competition on who is the fastest to respond to scramble call from ORP den

Correct

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 10 Nov 2015 06:15

UK-bound Narendra Modi keen to buy more BAE Hawk trainers: Sources

NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Narendra Modi is keen to expand an order for BAE Systems Hawk training aircraft to revive India's aerobatic display team when he visits Britain this week, government sources said on Monday.

Sources familiar with the talks say Modi wants to buy an extra 20 Hawk Mk132s, worth $400-$450 million, on top of existing orders already made for 123 of the single-engine, jet-powered trainers.

If ordered, the new planes would make it possible to revive the Indian Air Force's Surya Kiran (Sun Ray) aerobatic team that has been borrowing Hawks from the training squadrons after its own planes were retired from service.

One stumbling block is that Modi wants the extra planes to be manufactured by local partner Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd ( HAL), but this is not yet possible because of delays to a new defence procurement policy, one defence source said.

India bought a first batch of 66 Hawks in 2004, 24 of which were delivered in fly-away condition and the remainder made at HAL's plant in Bengaluru. A second batch in 2010 of 57 planes is still under production.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 10 Nov 2015 08:07

Sales pitch

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 10 Nov 2015 08:52

Another Import in India after import of micro lights, Pilatus and proposed import of Rafale & T-50.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 10 Nov 2015 17:11

Haven't heard of any plans within the Indian armed forces to acquire Predators.. Atleast none has been made public..

To Challenge Pakistan, India seeks Predator drones

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 10 Nov 2015 17:17

These kind of articles are nowadays very common. You can find articles for all weapon systems being pitched.
India's own predator drones are the Rustom-II's.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Nov 2015 17:20

sudhan wrote:Haven't heard of any plans within the Indian armed forces to acquire Predators.. Atleast none has been made public..

To Challenge Pakistan, India seeks Predator drones

I Call BS on this..Not even the USAF operates the Avenger in any decent ammount and from what is publicly known the production rate is barely enough for one customer (USAF-CIA)...

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Nov 2015 17:55

brar_w wrote:
sudhan wrote:Haven't heard of any plans within the Indian armed forces to acquire Predators.. Atleast none has been made public..

To Challenge Pakistan, India seeks Predator drones
I Call BS on this..Not even the USAF operates the Avenger in any decent ammount and from what is publicly known the production rate is barely enough for one customer (USAF-CIA)...

The article's authors have apparently seen a confirmatory letter from the IAF.

On Sept. 22, the U.S. in a statement backed India’s membership in the Missile Technology Control Regime, a prerequisite for buying the drones. Two days later, India’s Air Force sent a letter to San Diego-based General Atomics saying it wanted to purchase the Avenger, according to a copy seen by Bloomberg. Air Force officials declined to comment on the letter.

Of course, the letter was probably only a 'Request for Information' that the reporters are interpreting as a sale request.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Nov 2015 19:06

uddu wrote:These kind of articles are nowadays very common. You can find articles for all weapon systems being pitched.
India's own predator drones are the Rustom-II's.

They're apparently talking about the Predator-C i.e Avenger. Only stealthy UCAV on the market until the UCLASS rolls around (which will probably be a Boeing/NG entry no earlier than 2025).

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Nov 2015 19:11

a china made "long wing" uav perhaps from KSA was photographed flying over syria per unconfirmed reports.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Nov 2015 20:44

brar_w wrote:
sudhan wrote:Haven't heard of any plans within the Indian armed forces to acquire Predators.. Atleast none has been made public..

To Challenge Pakistan, India seeks Predator drones
I Call BS on this..Not even the USAF operates the Avenger in any decent ammount and from what is publicly known the production rate is barely enough for one customer (USAF-CIA)...

India may have asked for it, but the US may demur.. boy is that title sensationalist or what.

A Predator-C would make sense for the IAF, if its available. But given the current reality of US-India relations, hype apart, it probably won't come. Lets see.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Nov 2015 21:21

Lets see but trying to export a very tightly controlled system like the Avenger, designer around USAF/CIA special requirements would be a significant challenge and I don't think the Pentagon can move at such fast strategic speed under the current establishment in the White House. So far the most kitted predator family that has been asked for has been the certified B for the UK's Protector program.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Nov 2015 23:28

brar_w wrote:Lets see but trying to export a very tightly controlled system like the Avenger, designer around USAF/CIA special requirements would be a significant challenge and I don't think the Pentagon can move at such fast strategic speed under the current establishment in the White House. So far the most kitted predator family that has been asked for has been the certified B for the UK's Protector program.

Unlike say.. the RQ-180, which is an out-and-out classified program, all public information suggests the Avenger is available for export. General Atomics has been marketing it to Canada for example. A close ally but still means the aircraft is 'exportable'.

Canada Restarts Attempt to Buy Drones

By David Pugliese 4:25 p.m. EDT May 16, 2015

VICTORIA, British Columbia — After years of delays, the Canadian military is rebooting its attempt to buy a fleet of UAVs for domestic and international missions.

But it already appears that the US-built Predator could have the inside track on the project worth about CAN $1.5 billion (US $1.4 billion), according to industry sources.

Industry sources say that although some in the Air Force have long wanted the Predator, there could be other new UAVs emerging in the next four years that might be entered in the JUSTAS competition.

Ferro said he is unaware of plans of the firm's various competitors. But he added: "I always expect competition from anyone who can build a MALE [UAV]."

He said General Atomics is looking at handling the JUSTAS requirements by offering Canada the jet-powered Avenger, for operations in the Arctic, as well as the Predator B.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Nov 2015 23:30

Karan M wrote:India may have asked for it, but the US may demur.. boy is that title sensationalist or what.

Lol. Try this.

India seeks armed drones from US to counter Pakistan's Burraq - Express Tribune

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Nov 2015 00:17

Viv S wrote:
brar_w wrote:Lets see but trying to export a very tightly controlled system like the Avenger, designer around USAF/CIA special requirements would be a significant challenge and I don't think the Pentagon can move at such fast strategic speed under the current establishment in the White House. So far the most kitted predator family that has been asked for has been the certified B for the UK's Protector program.
Unlike say.. the RQ-180, which is an out-and-out classified program, all public information suggests the Avenger is available for export. General Atomics has been marketing it to Canada for example. A close ally but still means the aircraft is 'exportable'.

Canada Restarts Attempt to Buy Drones
By David Pugliese 4:25 p.m. EDT May 16, 2015

VICTORIA, British Columbia — After years of delays, the Canadian military is rebooting its attempt to buy a fleet of UAVs for domestic and international missions.

But it already appears that the US-built Predator could have the inside track on the project worth about CAN $1.5 billion (US $1.4 billion), according to industry sources.

Industry sources say that although some in the Air Force have long wanted the Predator, there could be other new UAVs emerging in the next four years that might be entered in the JUSTAS competition.

Ferro said he is unaware of plans of the firm's various competitors. But he added: "I always expect competition from anyone who can build a MALE [UAV]."

He said General Atomics is looking at handling the JUSTAS requirements by offering Canada the jet-powered Avenger, for operations in the Arctic, as well as the Predator B.

It may be open but any export would be taken on a case by case basis as it was not developed for export to begin with. I don't see the current establishment looking to move fast on this. Pentagon wants a totally revamped drone export policy and open up the Predator and Global Hawk Family to all friendly nations. So far the Obama Administration and State have done nothing significant about it. It would be interesting to see this play out as more urgent need drones are pushing some ME nations like Jordan to buy Chinese systems instead.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 12 Nov 2015 15:51

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2015/11/p ... of-75.html

Just thinking if Pilatus was not brought due to all the conspiracy theories and name calling would IAF have managed the below

On May 24, 2012, Pilatus and India’s defence ministry signed a Swiss Franc 557 million (about Rs 4,000 crore) contract for 75 PC-7 Mark II BTAs. The first trainer was delivered in February 2013, and the entire delivery completed in 42 months.
Notwithstanding the controversy over its selection, Pilatus has pleased the IAF with its speed of delivery of the PC-7 Mark II. According to Pilatus Aircraft Ltd, “Since the first delivery in February 2013, the PC-7 Mk II fleet has flown more than 40,000 hours and accumulated well over 80,000 landings”.

IAF officers also talk up the reliability of the PC-7 Mark II. According to figures released today by Pilatus, “The PC-7 Mk II has enabled the IAF to increase the basic training syllabus in terms of flight hours by 220 per cent… and also increase the solo content from 1 to 14 sorties.”

BTW another quote

Meanwhile, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) is developing an indigenous BTA, the Hindustan Turbo Trainer-40 (HTT-40). This is expected to fly early in 2016 and, after two years of flight-testing, seventy HTT-40s will be built to bring the IAF basic trainer fleet to its sanctioned level of 181 aircraft.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Nov 2015 07:24

with an eye to the future we really need to get dedicated bombers of atleast backfire size with internal bays. or we need a refurbished fleet of Bears from the boneyard.

targets are getting much farther out and soon 1000km will be bare minimum needed to escape layered air defences and fighters.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Nov 2015 10:33

Singha wrote:with an eye to the future we really need to get dedicated bombers of atleast backfire size with internal bays. or we need a refurbished fleet of Bears from the boneyard.

targets are getting much farther out and soon 1000km will be bare minimum needed to escape layered air defences and fighters.

What we need is transports. Not bombers. we need to make at least one medium lift transport aircraft and use that experience to design a large aircraft for bombing roles. Logistics is a 24x7x365 occupation of IAF. Combat has occupied very little time and even in that time and in peacetime it is air defence and vigil that is of primary importance.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Nov 2015 11:05

The time we will take to develop a LR bomber will take aeons.We don't have engine tech first of all.There is a report out that Russia has agreed to cooperate with China on engine tech.Why can't we do the same? There are dozens of Backfires mothballed which need a little modernisation-avionics,etc. These could be bought/leased as was planned earlier for the IN. In the latest round of bombing in Syria,12 Backfires took part alongside other bombers.There was a superb clip showing them all taking off at night from an Ru air base.One has little info about our own UCAV,but these drones have very limited payloads.Moreover,given their size,the range of internal PGMs carried is also limited.

In WW2,the British saturation bombing raids on German cities broke the backbone of Germany."Bomber" Harris,later condemned for the willful destruction of German cities and horrendous loss of civilian life ,paid Hitler back in similar coin for his blitz of London and other British cities.The difference between missiles and aircraft is that the aircraft can be used time and time again and if supported by protected by other air dominance fighters,will be difficult to shoot down too. Missiles are very expensive and can be used but once (apart from Kalam's concept of a hypersonic re-usable missile) and canno be recalled.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 21 Nov 2015 22:00

Has anyone noticed that the number of IAF crashes has drastically come down in the past few months. What is going on here?

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 21 Nov 2015 22:11

Paul wrote:Has anyone noticed that the number of IAF crashes has drastically come down in the past few months. What is going on here?

Sir please check annual data: Crashes have a seasonal variance over extended period - Peaks in summer (pre monsson). And please do not CT this. Good that crashes are less or none. No dead people!!!

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 21 Nov 2015 22:21

Philip wrote:The time we will take to develop a LR bomber will take aeons.We don't have engine tech first of all.There is a report out that Russia has agreed to cooperate with China on engine tech.Why can't we do the same? There are dozens of Backfires mothballed which need a little modernisation-avionics,etc. These could be bought/leased as was planned earlier for the IN. In the latest round of bombing in Syria,12 Backfires took part alongside other bombers.There was a superb clip showing them all taking off at night from an Ru air base.One has little info about our own UCAV,but these drones have very limited payloads.Moreover,given their size,the range of internal PGMs carried is also limited.

Agree....a sqd of backfires backed up by a large number of surveillance assets like aew and mpaas would allow for some serious control and possibly power projection in all directions. Would not be too expensive either.

I'm truly dumbfounded as to why more orders for the drdo aew have not been placed. These should have sufficient range so as to monitor tsp, freeing the powerful phalcons for other areas. would be mighty handy in case of war. And then they talk of make in india

here is a platform that is available and much needed, but no..order piecemeal and let's jump to a bigger project.

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 21 Nov 2015 22:30

It was love at first Sight in Pathankot. I was Near the runway End and came through two mig 21 came at very low landing gear open and touched the Runway like a Race Car.. Chutes came from back from end and it slowed down. I know they are old but I feel very excited while seeing a MIG 21 Land at high Speed. No other Can steal the Charm of MIG 21

VishalJ · Post by **VishalJ** » 21 Nov 2015 23:25

Singha wrote:with an eye to the future we really need to get dedicated bombers of atleast backfire size with internal bays. or we need a refurbished fleet of Bears from the boneyard.

Why reach for the boneyard? We have NauSainik Bhaloos, can't we take then from one sena for the other?
IN isnt planning on keeping them once all the P-8i arrive isnt it¿

But why do we need a LR Bomber in the first place?
Don't you need a neutralised opponent to carpet bomb with a large, slow, not-very-agile bombing platform?

vishal · Post by **vishal** » 22 Nov 2015 07:38

Kumar Vinod wrote:It was love at first Sight in Pathankot. I was Near the runway End and came through two mig 21 came at very low landing gear open and touched the Runway like a Race Car.. Chutes came from back from end and it slowed down. I know they are old but I feel very excited while seeing a MIG 21 Land at high Speed. No other Can steal the Charm of MIG 21

This story is OT but it involves a pair of MiG 21's. I must have been in class 4 or 5 at the time and my father was posted at IAF Station Chakeri in Kanpur. The runway was not too far from where we lived (or so it seemed to boys on bicycles). Around 3 or 4 of us rode up to the fence around the tarmac, parked our bicycles there and found a hole in the fence. For lack of much else to do and a complete ignorance of the consequences we started walking/running through the open ground on the side of the tarmac towards the runway. We managed to reach the edge of the runway when we heard sirens screaming in the distance. A minute or so later 2 Jeep's slammed to a standstill right next to us and AF Police jumped out from them. We were taken to a safe location at a distance from the runway & asked a few basic questions. They asked us our fathers' names and service numbers (every kid knows the service number regardless of how young he or she is!). So we asked what the fuss was about (kids can get away with being brazen most of the time). Turns out a pair of MiG21's were on a landing approach and the ATC had to wave them off because they saw a bunch of kids on the runway through their binoculars. The situation was particularly urgent because the MiG's didn't have too much fuel left. The AFP were very nice to us. They took us back to where we had dumped our bicycles and let us go. I still chuckle when I try to imagine what must have gone through the ATC observers head when he saw boys scrambling on the tarmac and the exchange that would have taken place between the pilots & the ATC.

Also, my dad taught my mother how to drive our Amby on a runway because there was nothing there for her to ram the car into. And yes, she had trouble telling the accelerator from the brake at the time which is why my dad decided to take her to the tarmac... in the interest of public safety.