Page 3 of 3

Posted: 08 Jul 2005 16:23
by MN Kumar
Are the IAF Garuda's too form a part of the contingent? Who takes care of the security of the equipment and aircraft while on a foreign tour? I am asking this cause we have seen pictures of visiting forces where their personnel guard the equipment and aircrafts.

Posted: 08 Jul 2005 16:36
by rajpa
Men in Blue shine in French skyline

http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=309298

Posted: 08 Jul 2005 16:51
by daulat
theres a nice trend building up of IAF training with Adel'A prior to the USAF - seems to be a good curriculum builder before engaging with the 'best of the best'

i also wonder if Adel'A will conclude it needs a heavy fighter more urgently now?

Posted: 08 Jul 2005 20:32
by Aditya G
I am asking this cause we have seen pictures of visiting forces where their personnel guard the equipment and aircrafts.


Are you sure? I dont recollect any images of armed guards from visiting AF in India. Though possibly some ground duty staff always stick around the bird 24x7

Daulat, IMHO AdA is as "best" as it can get - i.e. as good as the IAF. Not sure why you call USAF that after we waxed them in Gwalior. (Sure we dont have AWCAS and airborne lasers, but then we digress ... )

Posted: 08 Jul 2005 21:18
by daulat
Aditya G wrote:


Daulat, IMHO AdA is as "best" as it can get - i.e. as good as the IAF. Not sure why you call USAF that after we waxed them in Gwalior. (Sure we dont have AWCAS and airborne lasers, but then we digress ... )


i was attempting some sardonic humour onlee... amreekis think they are the best na? that is all we need to know ;)

with respect, the AdA and others will have some capabilities and experience significantly more advanced than the IAF - e.g. awacs ops, electronic ops, force deployment, etc. - so i am more than happy we are working with them and learning from them. at some stage we will be deployed as integrated forces with them... perhaps for UN missions, perhaps other things...?

Posted: 08 Jul 2005 22:42
by Aditya G
perhaps other things...?


I hear you, fellow jingo :twisted: My personal wish is to see IAF deployed with NATO forces in A'stan

Waise i think the closest we have worked with them is in Congo (ONUC and MONUC). Ivory Coast is a potential area for collab. With RAF we had Op Khukri in Sierra Leone.

Posted: 08 Jul 2005 23:10
by Paul Mead
sudipn wrote:
Singha wrote:he obviously meant the N001 Myech radar is inferior to the RDY on 2000-5. I believe the RDY-2 was onlee on the UAE M2K-9 (aka 2005-mk2).

just raw range and power isnt the only yardstick, sophistication also counts and in this the leading western radars have always been better - one of the reasons why we went to time and expense of developing the back end of Bars ourself.


I would not be surprised if the 2000-5 RDY was the RDY-2...
ne ways here is a quick refral of the two radars which were pitted against each other........

RDY radar
Thomson-CSF/Detexis quote the look-up,look-down, shoot-up,shoot-down performance as being 70 km. In actual practice engagements conducted by the French AdlA, RDY has demonstrated it´s ability to detect, reliably, fighter size targets at 140 km.

N001VE fire-control radar
orignal range 100km, engage 2 targets simultaneously

these two radars are very closely matched... even though the RDY radar says it has a 140 km range one has to understand that it is for detection only.. the track range is 70kms...i am not too sure of the N001VE track range... but ne ways these two radars do seem to be verry closely matched... except for the fact that due to its inherently large size the su-30 would be a bigger radar target ...aand due to a bigger radar would radiate more energy..


From Su-27 Flight Manual

The range RLPK in the free space and in lookdown engagements is practically identical and depends on the flight altitude of aircraft, hemisphere of attack and comprises, for a fighter (RCS = 3 sq m):

a) in flight of aircraft at high altitudes (more than 8500 m):
- in ZPS [rear hemisphere]
with the lookdown attack Search = 30-40km; Track = 30-35km;
with the lookup attack Search = 50-55km; Track= 45-50km;

in PPS [front hemisphere] the detection ranges are comparable to ranges in flight at medium altitudes;

b) in flight of aircraft at medium altitudes (more than 1000 m)
- in PPS Search = 80-100km, Track = 65-80 km
- in ZPS Search = 25-35 km, Track = 25-30 km;

c) in flight of aircraft at the low altitudes (200 m):
- in PPS Search = 35-40 km, Track = 28-32 km
- in ZPS Search = 20-25 km, Track = 18-20 km

Regarding the IRST:

Detection range against a military thrust fighter target in the rear hemisphere (0/4-2/4) is 50km against a pure sky background, 20-35km against ground, water or cloudy background.

In 1/4 aspect (directly behind), with the target in full afterburner, range is 90-100km.

Lock-on range is 70% of detection range.

Head-on range (5-15deg offset) is only 10km. The manual says to increase detection range the pilot should increase offset angle.

Posted: 09 Jul 2005 03:09
by bhavani
Personally,

My Wish is to see IAF in practice with IAF(Israeli air force), I wonder how our guys will fare against the other IAF.

Posted: 10 Jul 2005 13:38
by khukri
Jane's Defence Weekly has a cover story on the exercise and the performance of the Su's against the Armee de l air. The cover blurb seems to indicate that things went very well but I dont have access to the subscriber version of the story.


*Indian Su-30K fighters display new capabilities
·India's deployment of Su-30K fighters for a French exercise was the first outside India ·The Indian Su-30Ks took on French Mirage 2000C and 2000-5 fighters...
08-Jul-2005



Anyone have subscriber access?

Posted: 11 Jul 2005 16:06
by Vick
khukri wrote:Anyone have subscriber access?


Scroll down to post #56

Posted: 11 Jul 2005 20:08
by khukri
.thanks Vick - much appreciated!

Posted: 12 Jul 2005 01:31
by Cain Marko
don't know if this was posted already, but here is some interesting stuff (dunno much about this website either, but figure that something is better than nothing)

http://www.indiadefence.com/GarudaII.htm

kind Regards,
CM.