Transport Aircraft for IAF

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Viv S » 24 Dec 2014 03:07

Two C-17 squadrons to shut down

The Air Force will inactivate two C-17 squadrons over the next two years in a budget-saving move, according to new details released by Air Mobility Command Monday.

Sixteen C-17 Globemasters — eight from the 17th Airlift Squadron at Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina, and eight from the 10th Airlift Squadron at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington — will transition from primary inventory to backup inventory, saving the Air Force about $110 million a year, an AMC news release said. That means the planes will no longer receive funding for personnel and flying hours but will continue to get necessary resources to support weapon system sustainment.

Eventually, however, the Air Force plans to transfer the aircraft to the reserve component.

"In this fiscally constrained environment, we have to balance readiness, capability and capacity," Major Gen. Michael Stough, director of AMC strategic plans, requirements and programs, said in the release.

"To best preserve this capability, the intent is to fund these aircraft back into primary mission aircraft inventory in future years, and transfer them to the Reserve Component — we're working with our Air National Guard partners to do that, perhaps even as early as" fiscal 2016, Stough said. "We rely on our total force partners to meet our global requirements; we couldn't do the mission without them. We'll continue to leverage the unique strengths of the active and Reserve components to meet current and future requirements with available resources."

The inactivations were first announced in March as part of budget submissions, but Monday's release provides the most details so far.

The C-17 squadron at Charleston will make the transition in fiscal 2015, followed by the McChord C-17 squadron in fiscal 2016.

The C-17, which made its debut in 1991, is considered the Air Force's workhorse in providing troop and cargo transport — often in war zones and areas affected by natural disasters and humanitarian crises. This summer, C-17s ferried food and supplies to Yazidis stranded on Mount Sinjar.

As of this May, the Air Force had 187 C-17s in its active-duty inventory, 14 in the Air Force Reserve and 12 in the Air National Guard.

Air Force Times

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cosmo_R » 24 Dec 2014 03:40

Viv S wrote:Two C-17 squadrons to shut down

The Air Force will inactivate two C-17 squadrons over the next two years in a budget-saving move, according to new details released by Air Mobility Command Monday.

...

Air Force Times


What a great opportunity for a FMS lease, a negotiating lever for the 8 unsold and a a showpiece for Obama.

added later: Think of how much we waste on capex and opex for Air India so that Babooze and Netaz can go first class free.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20435
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 24 Dec 2014 11:43

The C-17 "chicken" has indeed come home to roost! As I've said before umpteen times,what was the indecent haste to acquire so many "big birds"? The IL-76s have been doing fantastic service for decades and in the new avatar,is even more capable with greater payload,etc.NR has posted news about modernization of IL-76s at a third of a new one. I posted before stas/figs that one could acquire 3 new IL-76s latest avatar for the price of just one C-17! The truth that has been enunciated ad nauseum is that the C-17 sale appeared out of nowhere,just after Snake-Oil's sealing the N-deal to save Boeing's backside. The promises made to Dubya to buy large numbers of US mil. eqpt. saw us sign on for C-17s and P-8Is,plus C-130s. No grouse with the P-8s and C-130s-I've even advocated in the past more C-130s instead of the big birds.Boeing was on the verge of closing its C-17 production line and India was armtwisted into buying the same to save US jobs.

So now the urgently required C-17s,a higher priority than even fighter aircraft will see these most expensive chickens lay eggs in the hen-coop as "hen-gar queens" (pun intended!). The IAF/GOI of the day is paying a heavy price for Snake-Oil's abdication of India's security to Yanqui interests.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 24 Dec 2014 11:56

er but the 150+ C17s will remain in service atleast till 2050 because the usaf has no other option. the C5 and C141 are mostly gone or mothballed and C17 is their only game in town for long haul ops...

likewise the US has managed to keep in service 100s of 707 (E3, E8) and kc135 airframes and B52s some dating back to the 1960s.

it is russia that hsa been a abject failure in retaining and using its old kit with suitable upgrades except the Bear family.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 24 Dec 2014 13:01

Philip wrote:The C-17 "chicken" has indeed come home to roost! As I've said before umpteen times,what was the indecent haste to acquire so many "big birds"? The IL-76s have been doing fantastic service for decades and in the new avatar,is even more capable with greater payload,etc.NR has posted news about modernization of IL-76s at a third of a new one. I posted before stas/figs that one could acquire 3 new IL-76s latest avatar for the price of just one C-17! The truth that has been enunciated ad nauseum is that the C-17 sale appeared out of nowhere,just after Snake-Oil's sealing the N-deal to save Boeing's backside. The promises made to Dubya to buy large numbers of US mil. eqpt. saw us sign on for C-17s and P-8Is,plus C-130s. No grouse with the P-8s and C-130s-I've even advocated in the past more C-130s instead of the big birds.Boeing was on the verge of closing its C-17 production line and India was armtwisted into buying the same to save US jobs.

So now the urgently required C-17s,a higher priority than even fighter aircraft will see these most expensive chickens lay eggs in the hen-coop as "hen-gar queens" (pun intended!). The IAF/GOI of the day is paying a heavy price for Snake-Oil's abdication of India's security to Yanqui interests.


I'll skip your rant for the most part, but do enlighten us as to why the C-17 will be a hangar queen (a term that rightfully belongs to some other aircraft in the IAF of Russian origin).

And provide some data points instead of the usual rants.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Viv S » 24 Dec 2014 13:02

Philip wrote:The C-17 "chicken" has indeed come home to roost! As I've said before umpteen times,what was the indecent haste to acquire so many "big birds"?

Read it slower. Its the USAF that's deactivated two C-17 squadrons. That's 16 aircraft that might conceivably be available, if we make an effort. This is in context of the discussion about the excess C-17s warehoused by Boeing (that might get sold out by the time we sanction a follow-on purchase).

The IL-76s have been doing fantastic service for decades and in the new avatar,is even more capable with greater payload,etc.NR has posted news about modernization of IL-76s at a third of a new one.

Do you know the serviceability/availability figures for a refurbished IL-76?

I posted before stas/figs that one could acquire 3 new IL-76s latest avatar for the price of just one C-17!

Which I then proved had no grounding in fact. The C-17 is in fact cheaper than the IL-76 per unit of payload. It costs about 50% more flyaway but carries 85% more cargo by both volume and floor area.

So now the urgently required C-17s,a higher priority than even fighter aircraft will see these most expensive chickens lay eggs in the hen-coop as "hen-gar queens" (pun intended!). The IAF/GOI of the day is paying a heavy price for Snake-Oil's abdication of India's security to Yanqui interests.

Again... the article refers not the IAF but to the USAF which has lower demands on its C-17 fleets since Iraq campaign ended and Afghan campaign scaled back.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20435
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 24 Dec 2014 13:30

Oops! major boo-boo! Stand corrected.However,facts on the Il-76 and C-17 remain.The cost of acquisition remain the same 3 for 1.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby member_20317 » 24 Dec 2014 13:58

Philip wrote:Oops! major boo-boo! Stand corrected.However,facts on the Il-76 and C-17 remain.The cost of acquisition remain the same 3 for 1.


You must be regretting absence of a comparable indigenous effort. Had there been one you would have been spared some of the heat and instead IAF/HAL would have taken that for you (like in the LCA-JSF-PAKFA love triangle where LCA gets remembered only when the other side has to be tripped and the rants against IAF or HAL are the only way to prove bona fides). :P

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Viv S » 24 Dec 2014 15:17

Philip wrote:Oops! major boo-boo! Stand corrected.However,facts on the Il-76 and C-17 remain.The cost of acquisition remain the same 3 for 1.


You've posted no source for the 3:1 cost ratio. The 2012 order for 39 IL-476s priced them at about $115 mil. But like the Su-30SMs priced at $30 mil, this figure omits several items contracted to other vendors. The costs for an export customer will be in excess of $150 mil flyaway compared to $250 mil for the C-17.

(The falling Rouble (55/USD down from 35/USD) would have made it cheaper, but the devaluation has been accompanied with rampant inflation, so that has a reduced impact.)

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5675
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby vishvak » 24 Dec 2014 17:48

ravi_g wrote:
Philip wrote:Oops! major boo-boo! Stand corrected.However,facts on the Il-76 and C-17 remain.The cost of acquisition remain the same 3 for 1.


You must be regretting absence of a comparable indigenous effort. Had there been one you would have been spared some of the heat and instead IAF/HAL would have taken that for you (like in the LCA-JSF-PAKFA love triangle where LCA gets remembered only when the other side has to be tripped and the rants against IAF or HAL are the only way to prove bona fides). :P

:rotfl: USA has a winner here, cheaper cost per unit payload, which helps its big MIC.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16508
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 24 Dec 2014 18:37

NR has posted news about modernization of IL-76s at a third of a new one


On the Russian front:

NR does *not* see this as a positive development for the Russians.

On the Indian front:

On the IAF front, the IAF would like another 14 C-17 (8 + 6). The IAF has no funds, which is why they have not taken the next step.

And the IAF IL-76s are expected to be retired in another 6-7 years. This *after* their upgrades

member_28730
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby member_28730 » 24 Dec 2014 21:26

If the Rafale deal is cancelled by the govt. I feel a direct purchase of 3-4 sqns of Mig 29 in its latest avatar would be a relatively quick and economiical stop gap solution to bring in the numbers. If one lot of used M2K ideally 40 (seems a pipe dream now) could be purchased from France or Qatar will further strengthen the sqns. Having done this some of the money saved could be invested in speeding up LCA2 development and production. Our requirement for a 4.5/5th gen aircraft will only be met by the FGFA though.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 1010
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Deans » 26 Dec 2014 11:23

Philip wrote:The Sukhoi Superjet is already in production/orders,with over 100+ for Russian and intl. customers. It is ideal for regional transport,perfect for flights to smaller Tier-2/3 cities from metros. If we really want a regional jet this is the fastest way toi go,we can set up a manufacturing unti here for the same at an HAL unit.


I evaluated this aircraft back in 2011 when I headed commercial operations for Go Airlines. Its only major negative was the high fuel consumption compared to competition. The Embraer aircraft (E 175/E190) is probably a better bet and Air Costa is doing well with the Embraer. Aeroflot had been nudged by the Russian Govt to increase orders for the SSJ.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Viv S » 26 Dec 2014 12:00

Deans wrote:I evaluated this aircraft back in 2011 when I headed commercial operations for Go Airlines. Its only major negative was the high fuel consumption compared to competition. The Embraer aircraft (E 175/E190) is probably a better bet and Air Costa is doing well with the Embraer. Aeroflot had been nudged by the Russian Govt to increase orders for the SSJ.


Do you have any further details that you can share? Also, what was the cost differential for acquisition and maintenance for the SSJ vis a vis the E-175 and CRJ-700?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Austin » 26 Dec 2014 12:19

Deans wrote:I evaluated this aircraft back in 2011 when I headed commercial operations for Go Airlines. Its only major negative was the high fuel consumption compared to competition. The Embraer aircraft (E 175/E190) is probably a better bet and Air Costa is doing well with the Embraer. Aeroflot had been nudged by the Russian Govt to increase orders for the SSJ.


You can find some details of SSJ fuel consumption in the linked interview

http://www.ruaviation.com/docs/3/2013/3/29/66/

- Managers of Bombardier provided data related to the fuel flow rate of the following regional aircraft: CRJ700 - 1,45 tons, CRJ900 - 1,6 tons, CRJ1000 - 1,74 tons per hour. Share your thoughts with us, please.

- If this refers to the cruising flight at the design altitude alone than we have almost the same figure as the one specified for CRJ1000. I would rather compare our jet to our closest rival - Embraer E-190. Superjet’s fuel flow rate is lower by 2% as compared to E-190. E-190 has a fuel flow rate of about 1.8 tons, more precisely - 1,782. In comparison with E-190 our average block-fuel consumption is lower by 2% and it is even lower at cruise. The block-fuel includes taxiing, takeoff and landing approach.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8149
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Pratyush » 26 Dec 2014 12:24

last evening I observed a C 17 flying low over NOIDA. The damn thing was massive and very noisy.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20435
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 26 Dec 2014 17:06

Deans,doesn't the Sukhoi fly with western engines? I thought that RR,etc. were going to provide the engines for the same,certified by the FAA too?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16508
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 27 Dec 2014 03:53

^^^^^

PowerJet, a Russo-French collab.

The SSJ, for what it is worth, outside of this engine, is a non-Russian plane.

Moving along to "transports" in a transports thread.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16508
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 27 Dec 2014 03:56

Reports: NZ considering C-17 acquisition

Other potential customers reportedly included Algeria, India (which already has 10 C-17s in service or on order), the UK, and interest from current and new Middle Eastern C-17 operators such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE.


India seems to be still in the play. The IAF wants 14 more. Somebody needs to come up with the funds to make this happen.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 1010
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Deans » 29 Dec 2014 10:29

NRao wrote:^^^^^

PowerJet, a Russo-French collab.

The SSJ, for what it is worth, outside of this engine, is a non-Russian plane.

Moving along to "transports" in a transports thread.


Yes, the Western content of the aircraft is fairly high. Thales and various US vendors have contributed substantially to it.

At the time I evaluated it (2011), the Embraer was a cheaper aircraft (both the 175 & 190) on acquisition cost and had the experience of providing spares and maintenance in India (which SSJ would have to set up from scratch and where the Bombardier with the Q400 - Supplied to Spice Jet, is suffering).
The comment Austin posted about fuel consumption may be more relevant for Russian conditions (longer distance between
sectors, lower temperatures etc). When serious negotiations start, the vendor (usually with the engine supplier) have to guarantee
the fuel consumption numbers. These numbers will invariably be more conservative than what vendors will claim in interviews.

I still believe there is scope to collaborate with Sukhoi or any Russian company for an Indian built civil or Military transport aircraft if the transaction is denominated in roubles and there is transfer of technology and export rights. At the time the SSJ team did not seem interested in India - going by their level of intoxication during Aero India 2011 :D

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Austin » 06 Feb 2015 17:53

India chooses Multi-Role Transport Aircraft produced jointly with Russia, cancels tender

NEW DELHI, February 6. /TASS/. India has cancelled its international tender on medium-lift military transport aircraft. The country will instead purchase Multi-Role Transport Aircraft (MTA) designed and being manufactured jointly by India and Russia, a spokesperson for India’s Defense Ministry told TASS on Friday.

He said India did not find the proposal of participants in the tender for supplying 56 aircraft worth $3 billion satisfactory. "As a result, the Defense Ministry not only declined the deal, but also cancelled the tender altogether," the spokesperson noted.

The Indian Air Force has also "reconsidered priorities in replenishing its fleet," he said. "We want to purchase multipurpose transport aircraft of the new generation - MTA. This ambitious project is being developed jointly by Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation and India’s Hindustan Aeronautics. We expect to sign the final agreement soon," the spokesperson added.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2274
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby VinodTK » 08 Feb 2015 16:51

Decision likely soon on IAF's Avro replacement
NEW DELHI: The defence ministry is likely to soon take a decision on the joint bid of Tata and Airbus to replace Indian Air Force's ageing fleet of 56 Avro aircraft with C-295 military transport carriers.

Defence ministry sources said the next meetings of the defence acquisition council (DAC) will deliberate on the bid worth multi crore rupees. Though the meeting was scheduled to be held on February 9, it has been delayed by a few more days.

In May 2013, the Ministry had issued a global tender -- called a Request For Proposals (RFP) -- to original equipment manufacturers including US firms Boeing and Lockheed Martin, European multinational Airbus Defence and Space, and Antonov of Ukraine among others.

They were required to tie-up with an Indian private company under which 40 aircraft will be produced here while 16 will be bought off-the-shelf.

However, only a single bidder — Airbus Defence and Space and Tata Advanced Systems Ltd (TASL) consortium — had bid for the proposal in October last year.

Under the current defence procurement policy, single vendor situation is not entertained unless cleared by the DAC.

A decision to this effect was expected to be taken by the Ministry in November last but was delayed as defence minister Manohar Parrikar had sought more information.

The defence sources said a decision could be taken soon. One of the options, besides selecting the consortium, is to go in for re-tendering in which the Indian companies become the main player rather than the foreign ones.

Another option is putting the project on hold and go ahead with the joint development and production of 'Multi-role Transport Aircraft' with Russia, defence analysts said.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2708
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby JTull » 08 Feb 2015 17:14

Perfect opportunity to have 2 assembly lines in India. The Tata one could be up and running in 2 years which in future could lead to enhanced cooperation with Airbus. The HAL lead MTA one would need 5-10 years to get to serial production as development will take time to finish.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16508
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 08 Feb 2015 18:48

Need to wait to find out which way the wind is blowing.

IAF contemplating replacing both An-32 and Avro with Indo-Russian MTA.

Successive failure in finding suitable replacement for ageing Hawker Siddeley HS 748 ” Avro ” aircraft has prompted IAF to reassess their priorities and aircrafts requirements.

IAF had brought 125 AN-32 aircrafts from Soviet Union and recently has upgraded 40 An-32s in Ukraine and the remaining 65 will be overhauled at the BRD-1 aviation plant of the IAF in Kanpur.

United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) of Russia and Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) will jointly work in developing Medium-lift military transport aircraft called Multi-role Transport Aircraft (MTA) which will replace AN-32 fleet operated by IAF in next decade.

IAF also operates 54 elderly fleet of Hawker Siddeley HS 748 which needs replacement and only Airbus who partnered Tata Advanced Systems offered EADS CASA C-295 which could have been manufactured in India. MOD refused to clear the deal due to Single bidder situation for the tender, further delaying already delayed replacement programme.

Retendering of tender for Avro replacement will not be much of help since some of the contenders have already refused to bid due to various reasons and it will be hard to find new vendor proposals next times too feels IAF.


And finally this:

IAF is planning to order 7 more C-130J and additional six to ten C-17s from United States which will further ease Transport issues, While India and Russia have still not reached on a final agreement on development of MTA aircrafts, IAF is hopeful that work share agreements will work out soon .


I thought the 7 C-130J was a done deal (and not planning).

That the decision on the C-17 has been made, but lacks the funds to execute.

And, that the MTA decision hinged on a selecting a Western engine.

?????

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2708
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby JTull » 08 Feb 2015 21:33

Waiting for MTA to be Avro replacement would be a disaster. Russians have shown time and again that putting all eggs in their basket will always be a problem for India.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16508
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 08 Feb 2015 22:47

I would not be surprised if the MTA is totally decoupled.

India was expected to have her own line. What that means remains to be seen. But, we need to wait to see the details.

My understanding is that India had yet to select an engine.

Let us see what happens. But I feel India has learned from the past.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8149
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Pratyush » 09 Feb 2015 11:09

I had been asking for the replacement of the AVRO and AN 32 with a single platform. It seems that the IAF is moving in that direction. I will watch with interest the final decision that the IAF makes. With the hope that the replacement will be made in India by a Pvt player.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20435
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 09 Feb 2015 12:42

It actually makes sense,if the MTA can operate from the airstrips used by the AN-32.Extra Hercules aircraft is v. welcome as these birds have had an outstanding intl. track record However,there is still a need for an aircraft in-between the Do-228 ,of 30+ pass. capacity in a civilian version. Such an aircraft could be well used for feeder routed to smaller cities as a regional transport.ATRs and EMBs make up the higher capacity requirement. MTA needs will be at least 100 aircraft in the future,more if civilian passenger versions are also planned along with spl. variants for AEW,SIGINT/ELINT,ASW,etc.

Here's an interesting titbit,that the Russians are experimenting using their IL-76s as bombers.We also used our AN-12s similarly in '71. Equipped with stand-off missiles and also our "100km glide bomb",the IL-76s have interesting potential in a crisis,esp. in the high Himalayas where the air space is vast and enemy coverage limited. Here the Russians appear to be using the aircraft
for sanitizing the landing grounds with embarked assault troops aboard.

Russia exercises with Il-76 'bombers'
Gareth Jennings, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
02 February 2015

The Russian Air Force (Voyenno-Vozdushnye Sily: VVS) has performed bomb-carrying trials with its Ilyushin Il-76 'Candid' strategic transport aircraft, the company announced on 30 January.

In the exercise, which took place in the Tver region of the country north of Moscow, an Il-76MD was fitted with P-50T practice bombs on four underwing hardpoints.

According to Ilyushin, the modification is geared at enabling the aircraft to operate on unprepared and unfamiliar airfields behind enemy lines. The crews will first visually inspect the airfield using flares, before dropping bombs ahead of landing with troops on board. "Bombing is performed at a speed of 500 km / h at altitudes of 500 to 1,000 m (1,650 ft to 3,280 ft)," a company statement said.

The Military Transport Aviation Command will train "more than 10 teams" in the capability, stationed in the Tver, Orenburg, Pskov, and Taganrog regions of Russia, Ilyushin noted.

COMMENT

Employing transport aircraft as strike assets is not itself something new. In the West, the Lockheed Martin C-130 Hercules has had a secondary role as a gunship almost since it entered service. What makes the Il-76 trials different, and somewhat curious, is that they do not involve the use of stand-off munitions, but of 'dumb' bombs that require the aircraft to fly directly over the target at medium level.

Using troop-carrying transport aircraft as bombers in this way would appear to be an extremely risky tactic. If an enemy airfield needs to be seized by airborne ground forces, dedicated attack aircraft or helicopters would normally be employed to neutralise any surface-to-air defences ahead of the troop-carriers.

Another interesting facet of the trials is where these specially trained Military Transport Aviation Command units will be located. With the exception of the Orenburg region, which borders Kazakhstan, the others are all within easy striking range of either Ukraine or the Baltic republics. As such, these exercises might just as easily be a demonstration of President Vladimir Putin's resolve and capabilities in the face of continued Western pressure over the crisis in Ukraine, as they are a tactic that the VVS would ever choose to employ.

Related articles:
•Russia selects new assault rifles
•Yak-152 trainer to make maiden flight 'in autumn'

Leo.Davidson
BRFite
Posts: 119
Joined: 09 Aug 2011 05:34
Location: Boston, USA

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Leo.Davidson » 11 Feb 2015 07:23

http://idrw.org/archives/57591
Real stupid decision.
The MTA is like the golden egg which when laid will turn out to be a rusted ball of iron. In terms of technology it will be as advanced as the IL-476.
Instead INDIA needs to bail and sleep with Embraer. INDIA can create their own production line at home.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 11 Feb 2015 07:42

the necrophilia wrt to MTA goes on and on.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby RoyG » 11 Feb 2015 12:52

Singha wrote:the necrophilia wrt to MTA goes on and on.


I feel your pain.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby RoyG » 11 Feb 2015 12:53

JTull wrote:Waiting for MTA to be Avro replacement would be a disaster. Russians have shown time and again that putting all eggs in their basket will always be a problem for India.


C-295W deal was pretty good. it is a proven aircraft. HAL and Russians still have a huge lobby.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby arun » 21 Feb 2015 13:52

The Multi-Role Transport Aircraft (MTA) project limps along:

Design of Russia's Multi-Role Transport Aircraft being assessed by India’s Air Force

Russia
February 18, 9:07UTC+3
Russia and India are jointly developing an advanced joint multi-role military and transport aircraft MTA

BANGALORE, February 18. /TASS/. Russia and India are developing an advanced joint multi-role military and transport aircraft MTA, the head of the Russian delegation at 10th international aviation and space exhibition Aero India 2015 told journalists in Bangalore on Wednesday.

"During the fulfillment of the project on the joint development of the multi-purpose transport aircraft, the Russian and Indian engineers completed the aircraft’s design feasibility phase," Anatoly Punchuk said.

The results of the aircraft’s preliminary design study are "in the final stage of being assessed by India’s Air Force," he told journalists at India’s main defense and civil-aviation event, which runs through February 20.

Russia and India have been cooperating fruitfully in the military-technical sphere. Since 1960, Russia has supplied to India arms and military equipment worth about $40 billion, Punchuk said.

Tass

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby arun » 21 Feb 2015 13:52

More on the Medium Transport Aircraft (MTA) from the February 2015 edition of Take Off Magazine (Clicky):

…………………. Another one UAC’s transport aircraft programme is the participation in the codevelopment of the Medium Transport Aircraft (MTA) with a lifting capacity of 20 t within the framework of the Russian-Indian governmental agreement made in 2007. A Russian-Indian joint venture was set up in Bangalore in December 2010 to develop the MTA, and the contract for the first phase of the design work was finalised in October 2012. The participants in the joint venture are Russia’s UAC – Transport Aircraft and India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL). The MTA production in Russia is planned to be launched at the facilities of the Aviastar plant in conjunction with other UAC subsidiaries. According to the estimate of the Russian Ministry of Industry and Trade published as part of the 2013–2025 Aircraft Industry Development Federal Programme, 140 aircraft of the type can be made before 2025, including 80 for Russian customers and 60 in the form of knockdown kits for subsequent assembly by HAL and delivery to the Indian Air Force. According to information at UAC’s and Ilyushin’s official websites, the MTA will have a maximal takeoff weight of 68 t and a lifting capacity of 20 t. It will be capable of carrying 70 paratroopers, 70 casualties or up to 150 infantrymen (the latter in the twodeck variant). The MTA will have the same cargo hold cross-section as the Il-76 has (3.45x3.4 m), with a shorter length (13.85 m). According to UAC, a pair of the advanced PD-14M 15.6-tf thrust turbofans is pondered as the future powerplant for the MTA. The PD-14M is to be derived from the PD-14 turbofan engine designed for the Irkut MC-21 airliner and being subject to bench tests at the present time. According to Ilyushin, production-standard PS-90A-76 turbofans powering the Il-76MD-90A could be used initially. ……………………


Also from Take Off magazine information on 15,600 kgf thrust enhanced version PD-14M model of the in development baseline PD-14 baseline turbofan model. Going by the date of type certification of the PD-14 being in 2017, the PD-14M could be quite some time away:

……………….. The development of the 12,500–15,600-kgf PD-14 new-generation turbofan engine – the first one in the advanced 9–18 tonne engine family being developed by a large team of United Engine Corporation’s subsidiaries led by Aviadvigatel JSC – is the mainstay of the UEC commercial aircraft engine programme.
The PD-14 is a two-shaft separate-flow engine with the gearless fan drive. All engines of the family have a common core with the eight-stage high-pressure compressor, low-emission annular combustor and two-stage high-pressure compressor. The baseline PD-14 will be equipped with a 1,900-mm single-stage fan retaining the diameter of the fan used in the PS-90A engine, a three-stage low-pressure compressor and a six-stage lowpressure turbine.

The baseline 14,000-kgf PD-14 is designed to power the Irkut MC-21-300 short/medium-haul airliner. The shortened version of the airliner, the MC-21-200, is supposed to be fitted with 12,500-kgf PD-14A engines, while the possible stretch version (MC-21-400) as well as the prospective Russian/ Indian medium Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA) are to be powered with the enhanced-thrust PD-14M version capable of 15,600 kgf.

According to the design data, the PD-14 is on a par with its foreign rivals (PW1400G, LEAP-X) in terms of specific fuel Consumption, while having a somewhat lower bypass ratio. ……………………

Aviadvigatel expects to obtain the type certificate from the Interstate Aviation Committee Aviation Register for the PD-14 as soon as 2017.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2590
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 21 Feb 2015 19:26

Why can't we select a non russian engine for our variant?

Eric Leiderman
BRFite
Posts: 364
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Eric Leiderman » 21 Feb 2015 20:32

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ok-408775/

Commercial and tanker option for airbus and thomas cook.

We should look at this option to keep our overheads down, while maintaining a large tanker fleet

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Austin » 22 Feb 2015 09:10

HAL-UAC Multirole Transport Aircraft - 2015 Video


Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2590
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 22 Feb 2015 11:09

Good lord, this planning committee has its own building! I want a sarkari job here. Trips to see natashas. Some talk and no play. Baaaah!

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5675
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby vishvak » 22 Feb 2015 17:51

Cybaru wrote:Why can't we select a non russian engine for our variant?

Do you mean to say that it will not help Make in India program if at many stages we are dependent on foreign manufacturers?

If there is one suggestion to change engine and then there is another (to import planes to keep overheads down), then may be we should go along with Russian engines as well while trying to learn while at it, no? That much can be considered a step so that any such tech knowhow can be extended across various platforms - which is a benefit of Make in India program. By that I mean some of additional weight or performance (engine/landing gear/fuel spent per hour) - which is basic difference between off the shelf solutions and progressively building machines by ourselves.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16508
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 22 Feb 2015 18:23

Why can't we select a non russian engine for our variant?


BTW, the hi-ha goes on:

Aero India: MTA project fails to meet requirements

Russians had selected an engine long back (about an year ago, I want to say).

Indian recs are very specific and one of a kind. Not easy to find an engine.

BTW, this also kills the popular BR thought of collaboration with the Brazilians. That aircraft should not meet Indian recs either.

Failure to meet engine requirements and increased costs in the development of the Il-214 Medium Transport Aircraft – a $600 million Indo-Russian joint venture – are expected to cause further delays.

Although the preliminary design and development of the aircraft was completed over a year ago, the Indian Air Force ‘wanted some clarifications on this’, according to newly appointed Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) chairman T. Suvarna Raju, speaking at a press conference at Aero India 2015 in Bangalore on 19 February.

‘We've done the preliminary design a year back but then the customer, the IAF, wanted some clarifications and we've given them that but the discussion is still on regarding the engine of the MTA,’ Raju explained.

There is a specific performance requirement for the aircraft which is that it needs to be operated at 4.5 km altitude and without the engine stopping. Currently there is no such engine in the world market which would meet this requirement. Existing engines provide only about 3.2 kms.’

This means HAL and United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) will have to go back to the drawing board ‘to ensure that the Russian and Indian Air Forces' requirements are fully met’.

Besides failing to meet engine requirements, increased costs are also holding up development of the MTA.

‘So, as far as the next design is concerned, it's going a bit slow. Also there is a cost increase by the Russian side. Which is up three times the original price and we, that is the HAL designers, are not in agreement with this,’ Raju revealed.

‘We are requesting the Russian side to nominate senior level people to form a steering committee so these issues can be discussed.’

In 2007, HAL, Russia's UAC and Rosoboronexport signed an inter-governmental agreement and soon after signed a general contract, an umbrella document that defines the broad framework of the project.

According to the terms of that contract, India carried out some 40% of the design work, while Russia performed the remaining 60%.

Production was previously expected to begin by 2017 with a total of 205 aircraft set to be manufactured with the Russian Air Force ordering 100 and 45 for the Indian Air Force. The last 60 will be built for export abroad.

Additionally, the IAF plans to phase out the aging AN-32 aircraft in favour of the MTA.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w and 52 guests