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.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 22 Feb 2015 18:34

Aero India 2015: New UAC chief bullish on fifth-gen fighter progress

Another data point:

Meanwhile, UAC officials said the preliminary design for the HAL/UAC Medium Transport Aircraft had been completed and that the next step for the programme was to "define the technical performance characteristics". A Russian Air Force/IAF committee had been established to discuss this and after this was completed, the next step was to define the programme's "commercial parameters".

IHS Jane's reported in October 2012 that the two sides had signed a preliminary design phase (PDP) contract for the MTA, which is expected to have a payload of between 15 and 20 tonnes. Previously reported plans envisage 45 aircraft for the IAF, 100 for the Russian Air Force, and 60 for the international export market.

The Indian and Russian governments signed a collaborative agreement to develop the MTA in November 2007, with the joint venture between HAL and UAC being formed in 2010


Some time to go.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20419
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 22 Feb 2015 19:13

The MTA prog. is mirroring the successful format of BMos Corp. BMos has its own HQ.The MTA is an ambitious programme with several special variants poss. too.Tankers,AEW,ELINT,etc.
The dimensions of the hold are identical with the IL76-90,as well as the cockpit instrumentation-all glass cockpit. New IL-76-90s,the latest avatar of the Il-76 being built in large number for the RuAF,etc., are also being built for our extra Phalcon AWACS platforms. Let's see how the engine selection works out.The first step should be the engine selection. If there is no engine on the world market for the same requirements,why did we plump for the design in the first place? There are several medium sized transports already flying and in production from both east and west.Something missing in the info here.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1625
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 22 Feb 2015 19:17

^

you have mentioned these additional Phalcons on another thread too. AFAIK no additional Phalcons are being procured. There was some news a couples of years ago of 2 more being considered but that was dropped. Do you have any new info backed by credible sources ?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 22 Feb 2015 20:06

Projects that were/are a success have had dependable engines.

MTA will depend on an engine, not a plush HQ.

So will the FGFA. The current engine will not do.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20419
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 22 Feb 2015 20:19

Akshay,there was a mention of it in the media not too long ago.Shall try and find it.Overloaded with info right now. Was talking to one of the boffins in charge at the DRDO pav. where a large model of a wide-bodied Airbus configured as an AEW aircraft was displayed. There was some mention of the extra aircraft requirement,need for an in-between aircraft between the Phalcons,and AEW EMBs. The med. sized bird is not immediately in the offing though talks are on to find the suitable platform. It would then make sense for acquiring 2 more AWACS as any future med. AEW aircraft would take several years to fructify,strengthening of the fuselage,etc. for mounting the radome.The availability of a "proven platform",A-50/IL-76-90, was mentioned.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby arun » 22 Feb 2015 20:48

NRao wrote:
Aero India: MTA project fails to meet requirements

........... {Snipped} ..................


........... {Snipped} .................. ‘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.’ ........... {Snipped} ..................



Looks like the IAF requirement is for the MTA to be able to fly into Fukche Advanced Landing Ground which is at an elevation of 4176 Metres.

Daulat Beg Oldie on which our C-130J landed is at an elevation of 5065 meters and clearly is not being planned to have the MTA dropping in.

The yet to developed 15,600 kgf PD-14M version of the in-development PD-14 Turbofan is presumably the engine that will deliver the capability.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 22 Feb 2015 21:24

India has been searching for an engine, for the MTA, in the West for some time now. So, I very much doubt that a Russian engine is an alternative - unless, the West is not willing to provide one within a certain cost. (Cannot find any new news on MTA engine from the West.)

MTA is meant for transport, 20 T at that.

Anything beyond that - tanker, AWACS, etc is a icing, but clearly in the TBD category. A very long way off and i very much doubt that those are options right now. However, IF the MTA does come to pass, what India gets is not just a transport, but how to design a transport.

But, if we are to believe the news feeds from the past few days, the *Indian* MTA is at least a year out, if not 3+ years.

I think the Russians are ready to rock-n-roll. Indian recs seems to be holding them back.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 22 Feb 2015 21:55

Nrao,

The price has probably gone up due to this new engine requirement. I think we should avoid russian engine at all costs. CFM has their new leap-1C or CFM56-5C4 for 78 to 80 ton AUP class of airplanes. Perhaps that would be a perfect fit for the 68 Ton MTA. Going with a new engine and paying for it has its usual downsides. We should pick something off the shelf and get this puppy in the air. I think the dalals will try and scuttle and delay this as much as possible. Something the russians have to keep in mind. Once we order another class of planes, this project will end up getting shelved.
Last edited by Cybaru on 23 Feb 2015 01:00, edited 2 times in total.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1625
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 23 Feb 2015 00:49

Thank you for the input Philip. I think the media report you are referring to is livefist. However I doubt very much that this is correct.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 23 Feb 2015 03:12

CY,

There are two aspects, as far as I am concerned. And, assuming I have covered the major news items, they are: Learn how to design/build a "transport" (not sure if this is a single category that covers light, medium, heavy - I suspect not) and provide a viable transport for the IAF.

Tracking this deal I have found that the Russians were ready to move to the "next phase" about a year+ ago. India was then hunting for an engine in the West. However, this is the first time I have found a reason for this delay from the Indian side - not surprised.

From the data points out there I think the goal "to learn" is about 60-80% done. Chakravyuha ............... needs completion.

But this cannot progress without the need/s for the IAF being designed/built ............. engine (the bane of Indian air MIC?) (seems to me that India better invest MOST in engines - Indian needs in an engine are so unique that even combined efforts of majors will not suffice without huge funds from India. ?????)

??????

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 23 Feb 2015 05:13

Nrao.

You are going to lose performance in the extremes. I think IAF should request a plane that meets 70% of its operational needs and then tweak it to meet the other goals. It doesn't have to fly with a full fuel load when flying from Delhi to LEH or something. They can always vary the fuel and the payload to meet most of the demand to those sectors. Also one plane doesn't have to meet all the requirements. If all the design parameters are needed, then it may not be a 20ton class. So if it needs a plane to land with 20tons at 15000 feet at lahsa airport then, it may need a plane that is designed for 30 tons as normal operations. It will become uber expensive pretty soon the way IAF operates. It may not be able to use these gold plated machines due to budgetary constraints. Look at number of C-17s that are earmarked for storage in USAF.

IAF needs to specify use cases and operational scenarios along with how many times they have not been able to meet that requirement with current fleet and what percentage of flights these comprised of. 1%, 2% etc.

It also needs to see what the cost of adding these features are and what it could cost an extra plane or two for those sectors to meet those demands without adding those features. It might be cheaper to have two to three planes to these sectors to move payload rather than requiring one plane to meet all these demands and incurring extra cost for the whole fleet.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 23 Feb 2015 06:27

for operations upto Leh, even palletized A320 cargo planes can do part of the work if the iaf be willing to lease or buy a 2nd hand fleet and pay a little for cargo conversion.
in the plains such a.c will definitely have superior economics to IL76/C17. to Leh the commercial planes operate with less baggage and fuel than normal so maybe the dedicated cargo planes are superior but our il76 fleet have the old engines.

instead of trying to find unique a.c and engines to fly into ALGs we should look at enlarging the ALGs to take C17 if possible or atleast the C130 and get more C130.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Gyan » 23 Feb 2015 09:02

India should ask for indigenous manufacture and ToT of PD-14M

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2707
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby JTull » 23 Feb 2015 13:49

Gyan wrote:India should ask for indigenous manufacture and ToT of PD-14M


Just like AL-55I? So we can pay $300mln to get it 'developed' and then receive screwdriver ToT 8 years later and in the meantime find out that the engine needs to be taken apart every 10 hrs due to it's unbelievable 'reliability' as it's 'comparable to the best'.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 23 Feb 2015 14:31

Modi saheb, has tagged Russia for "energy". Not by accident. Enough said.


On the MTA, Indians had not even considered a Russian engine, ever, IIRC.

No matter who makes engines, it takes time and *funds* ......... there are no exceptions to that rule. Outside of the US who has had the urgency to invest in such resources? Catching up is never going to be easy. Saying so and promising is a different matter. I think and hope India has learnt from her experiences.

But, with an engine for the MTA or the FGFA, do not carry too much hope. IF it happens GREAT.


CY,

I think the IAF needs to develop a "Plan B" mentality!!!! :(

Not having one hurts everyone.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 23 Feb 2015 18:40

Nrao,

IAF always has a plan B:- "IMPORT" ;)

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Austin » 24 Feb 2015 11:47


vipins
BRFite
Posts: 447
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 17:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby vipins » 01 Mar 2015 17:39


KumarA
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby KumarA » 03 Mar 2015 12:34

A while ago, the gentleman form Lockheed Martin had mentioned that if India purchased more than 40 C-130J aircraft, he would be willing to transfer the entire production line to an JV Indian company. Since then, all one can see is a contract for six aircraft last year, one aircraft this year and Air Chief's statement that he may need more in future. Why can't IAF develop a futuristic planning capability and facilitate transfer of aerospace production infrastruture to Indian shores, by adequate orders and inncentives?

No wonder, Indian Air Force is ridiculed so much in western think tanks !!!

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2707
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby JTull » 03 Mar 2015 13:56

They'd be willing to transfer the production line for 1 aircraft too. Just at what cost, is the question. I can assure you that the domestic job compulsions will not allow US to "transfer" any production line even if we're the only country buying the stuff.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 03 Mar 2015 15:11

they would merely agree to a assembly line here if we ordered 150, like airbus has a line in tianjin. but rest assured all the 1000s of parts including the engine would 95% be sourced from vendors in amrika alone. it is simply not cost effective to locally produce all such parts unless its a local project where the vendors are already here and have supplied parts for the protos - like the Tejas ecosystem or Dhruv ecosystem.

thats why its important to develop domestic products from the ground up, it carries along and scales up tens of vendors who can help with later projects.

sarang
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 16 Jun 2007 11:23
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby sarang » 03 Mar 2015 15:56

Post by JTull » 03 Mar 2015, 13:56
They'd be willing to transfer the production line for 1 aircraft too. Just at what cost, is the question. I can assure you that the domestic job compulsions will not allow US to "transfer" any production line even if we're the only country buying the stuff.


:wink:
Very true. Ameerikhans think they need no one unless the actual need arises and when it does they know very well how to "Use (GUBO) and Throw".

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8148
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Pratyush » 03 Mar 2015 16:47

It has been a while that I have seen such a high level of TFTA ness on the forum.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby JE Menon » 03 Mar 2015 16:55

>>No wonder, Indian Air Force is ridiculed so much in western think tanks !!!

Unlike the air forces of countries entirely dependent on them, no doubt.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8266
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby brar_w » 03 Mar 2015 18:12

JTull wrote:They'd be willing to transfer the production line for 1 aircraft too. Just at what cost, is the question. I can assure you that the domestic job compulsions will not allow US to "transfer" any production line even if we're the only country buying the stuff.


Lockheed is going to have to take some hard decisions as the C-130J winds down. The best way for them financially to keep it going along is to strike a Joint-venture with a private or public sector player in India for example in order to " try " (not a guarantee by any means) to reduce the price of the aircraft to spark greater interest given that they have sold a lot of them and new market capacity (by a lower cost) has to be created especially for the LM-100J. The market needs to be there, the private or public sector player needs to be willing and step up and they need to strike an agreement. This area is doable in my opinion and as good a case for being mutually beneficial (to LMA and to say a Tata) to actually come to fruition if seriously pursued. I am not saying that this is happening or even likely to happen, but if any such JV between any companies is explored in the short to medium term then it is unlikely to be as good as or better then the case for the C-130 FACO or production in India through a 50/50 JV. Another candidate for such a partnership for LMA is Turkey.

Singha wrote:they would merely agree to a assembly line here if we ordered 150, like airbus has a line in tianjin. but rest assured all the 1000s of parts including the engine would 95% be sourced from vendors in amrika alone. it is simply not cost effective to locally produce all such parts unless its a local project where the vendors are already here and have supplied parts for the protos - like the Tejas ecosystem or Dhruv ecosystem.

thats why its important to develop domestic products from the ground up, it carries along and scales up tens of vendors who can help with later projects.


The decision to setup up shop is a financial one taken after considering a host of factors. Moving 100% the component production or even sourcing them locally has a tremendous disruptive affect on the supply chain and production yields in the short-medium term and that needs to be offset by either huge demand or a huge subsidizing efforts on part of the party interested in receiving this capability. A FACO on the other hand tackles the problem of the Assembly_Man_hours and tries to control costs there to ensure a lower price thereby partially meeting the objective. You could potentially move the entire production-process to India but the entire capability would require quite a long time which in turn requires huge investments and a steady order stream to justify all that disruption. How many years has it taken the Su-30 production to become 70% indigenous? It takes a while when local partnerships, MOU's need to be signed/created and then the supplier base given time to actual reach threshold capacity and gain competency in delivering components. Another point to keep in mind is that the suppliers are likely to charge a higher price. The US suppliers made the hard-investments decades ago and have only invested in upgrading some of their facilities. As the production trickles most of their profits have been squeezed and they have a certain degree of flexibility when it comes to working with Lockheed to adjust the price down to become more competitive. A new supplier on the other hand, would have made huge investments in cash and in overcoming the learning_curve and would want to recover that over a relatively short term given the uncertainty surrounding the future export orders. If a JV can guarantee a steady production run for 15 years, then it may be worth the effort, otherwise you would have to think about a FACO and perhaps a gradual outsourcing of component production for the low-hanging fruit. The reason why the US military projects are more competitive in pricing then the European ones even though certain skilled and engineering jobs are higher paying in the US (especially after factoring in the benefits) is because there is a subsidizing effect of the massive Pentagon order. Suppliers working on projects like the C-130/C17 know that there is going to be a steady flow of orders lasting decades.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2273
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby VinodTK » 18 Mar 2015 04:44

Last batch of IAF's AN 32 planes still stuck in Ukraine due to conflict
:
:
:
:
As per a 2009 contract with Ukraine's state-owned Ukrspetsexport Corp, India was to send 40 aircraft for upgrade over four years, starting 2011.

At least 30 of these have been returned. Another 65 of the aircraft were to be upgraded with Ukrainian help at an Indian facility in Kanpur. The upgrade would extend the service life of the transporters from 25 years to 40 years.

While several batches of the aircraft have been refurbished and flown back to India since 2011, Parrikar's statement indicates that the last batch of 5-10 aircraft that were to be completed by March 2014 are now stuck with efforts on the retrieve them.
:
:
:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby NRao » 29 Mar 2015 22:17

Going by A330 For Indian AWACS, Tanker Deal Still In The Air, a few clarifications (sorry if already discussed in other threads):

* Are they differentiating between the Phalcon and the Indian efforts, or are they clubbing them together? Essentially, is the IL-76 (in any form) in play? (Looks to me that the IL is a dead deal)
* This has to be good news for the C295 (and Tata)
* Also, it has to be good news for additional C-17s
* And Airbus should expect thw tanker deal too


All in all, potential for 16 AWACS - is that the expectation?

Perhaps another 10-20 tankers?

13 C-17s (from where?)

Have no clue about the C295.

And the EoL for the IL series (not surprised if that happens).


2 cents:

* This AWACS choice has the highest risk

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3553
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Paul » 30 Mar 2015 01:42

C295/Tata deal is not going thru per press reports due to single vendor bidding.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cosmo_R » 30 Mar 2015 02:17

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


"I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that.." By HAL (9000)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwBmPiOmEGQ

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1640
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Sid » 30 Mar 2015 03:30



These aircrafts are a lost cause. Ukrainians are most probably utilizing them in their war effort.

We should have pulled them out first when Riots started there. Our IL 76/78/AWACs all must be running short on spares too.

Main question, since An32 upgration is almost a dead deal (no upgradation kits from Ukraine) what we will do with our transport fleet? We havent bought new ones and old ones will start falling soon.

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby ArmenT » 30 Mar 2015 05:56

The story gets even more ridiculous
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/support/2015/03/28/india-ukraine-transport-fleet-upgrade-antonov-avro-air-force/70441446/
The last five of 40 AN-32 aircraft being upgraded in Ukraine have become "untraceable," the official said, and the local upgrade of the remaining 64 AN-32s has halted as Ukraine engineers departed and supplies of spares stopped.

However, only 35 aircraft, upgraded at Kiev-based Antonov State Co. facilities in Ukraine, have returned, while the last five remain stranded due to the conflict.

"These five aircraft are almost lost as it is difficult to trace them and diplomatic efforts to find their whereabouts have failed," the Air Force official said.

A diplomat from the Ukraine Embassy said Antonov must resolve this issue with the Indian Air Force, and that the government cannot help. Antonov officials were unavailable for comment.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9989
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby sum » 30 Mar 2015 07:25

^^ Wow....thats quite a blow for the transport fleet. Loosing five at a time!

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Gyan » 30 Mar 2015 08:13

Just wondering as to what will happen Pakistan tank fleet?

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Austin » 30 Mar 2015 09:30

They probably used it in the war and lost it or perhaps canabilised it for spares. Happens all time in Fog of War. Ukr should provide monetary compensation for the 5 , Feel sorry for them.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7307
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby nachiket » 30 Mar 2015 10:10

Austin wrote:They probably used it in the war and lost it or perhaps canabilised it for spares. Happens all time in Fog of War. Ukr should provide monetary compensation for the 5 , Feel sorry for them.

Fat chance of that happening. Ukraine has no money to pay their own debts.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Rony » 31 Mar 2015 06:53

Austin wrote:They probably used it in the war and lost it or perhaps canabilised it for spares. Happens all time in Fog of War. Ukr should provide monetary compensation for the 5 , Feel sorry for them.


Did you read that report ? The Ukrainians true to their nature already washed off their hands.

A diplomat from the Ukraine Embassy said Antonov must resolve this issue with the Indian Air Force, and that the government cannot help. Antonov officials were unavailable for comment.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Surya » 31 Mar 2015 07:41

the air force needs to stop this MTA and Avro replacement nonsense and just plan on the AN 32 replacements.

they are really crucial and the end is going to come very quickly compared to our planning and then GOI will get a request for the only plane available with no Plan B

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Shreeman » 31 Mar 2015 12:38

Image

ze planes, le not missing.

Image

just parked and ujeless.

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

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Singha » 31 Mar 2015 12:59

imo the C130J can fly in and out of all places the AN32 can. albeit it is bigger and more costly.

we can go for the short chassis C130J vs the long chassis 130-J30 we got so far and make that as our replacement.

if we are ok with a jet them the Embraer transport is proceeding towards IOC.



Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ashthor, brar_w, Dennis, nash and 55 guests