Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Sep 2020 14:20

Nobody has that, Mig 21 Kopyo radar has about 50 km range against F16 sized targets, but 27-Feb-19 was a unique situation where the Bisons came from behind the Pir Panjal range with full afterburner, in that situation better to close and get an R-73 kill than waiting for R-77 lock and then launch.

When the group of 4 F16 launched the LGB at BHQ Nowshera the Bisons would have been around 50KM away when detected at Mach 2. By the time the F16 turned aroudn etc another 30 secs were gone, hence it made sense to quite come from behind and get a passive R-73 kill.

It would not apply to engagements in Punjab or Rajastan.

mody · Post by **mody** » 11 Sep 2020 15:49

For any fighter aircraft engagement, if the opposing aircraft is within range of WVR or short range IR missile, then it will always be the preferred choice of weapon, as opposed to RF guided long range BVR missile.
Even more so since the advent of modern IR guided missiles like the R-73 and all others that have followed in its footsteps.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Sep 2020 19:39

The key difference in recent years giving the PAF much kmproved capability was the acquisition of Swedish Eriye AEW aircraft.This allowed the PAF to refine their tactics for snap strikes/ shots in large number to allow their inferior attacking force to escape execution by our MKIs,which were also not allegedly based closer to the LOC.AWACS and AEWC aircraft act as force miltipliers and the situational awareness vs the enemy is significantly enhanced.
Sending up aircraft intoday's modern combat scenario without AWACS/ AEW aircraft is akin to sending a blind lambtothr slaughter says one of our AMs.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 11 Sep 2020 21:00

Philip wrote:The key difference in recent years giving the PAF much kmproved capability was the acquisition of Swedish Eriye AEW aircraft.This allowed the PAF to refine their tactics for snap strikes/ shots in large number to allow their inferior attacking force to escape execution by our MKIs,which were also not allegedly based closer to the LOC.AWACS and AEWC aircraft act as force miltipliers and the situational awareness vs the enemy is significantly enhanced.
Sending up aircraft intoday's modern combat scenario without AWACS/ AEW aircraft is akin to sending a blind lambtothr slaughter says one of our AMs.

This issue was discussed ... it was not abt AEW etc.. it was purely a ROE issue ...who was guiding abhi ...a ground controller not some fancy awacs...the paf with their aew were caught with pants down.. iaf with grpund based assets have enough sa abt paki airspace

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 11 Sep 2020 22:52

Hmm .... when convenient, we abandon our stance to cover the armed forces behinds! I agree with Philip here. There is a reason why AEWs/AWACS are used by airforces. Of course one is to have a portable radar you can move to wherever it is needed and the other is to see beyond terrestrial obstacles. The Abhi incident has been discussed extensively and it is time to let go and to learn its lessons. It seems that lessons are to buy more Rafale (per IAF).

What is the upgrade path and timeline for the MKIs? Such a massive number makes them the backbone of IAF. Modernizing these to be even more lethal air dominance fighters would have a multiplier effect against Chicom.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Sep 2020 00:50

MKI upgrade decision to SS std. is now several years old inthf tooth. It is a mystery why this has not been accelerated.The aircraft has the greatest upgrade capability of any bird in the IAF's menagerie and right now is the only BMos carrier until the smaller NG variant arrives,hopefully by 2025. Nasik will soon end MKI production,what will it then do? Years ago the expectation was that the FGFA production would replace it. That bus has left and even if it returns,the budget may not allow the price of the ticket of any local production,only an outright buy..

The logical step is to start upgrades asap.Both M2Ks and 29s are getting their upgrade shots.The MKIs with upgrades will be a quantum leap forward if the planned deep upgrade involving radars,engines,avionics,plus new AAMs and ASMs take place.With upgrades MKIs could easily serve until 2040 a move giving the IAF a more solid improved capability for its backbone at much lower cost than acquiring anything new.A $15-20 M cost per unit ( estimated given the $12+M for a MIG-29) would cost only between $3-4 B for 200+ upgrades. Imagine the effect on the IAF of 200 ( out of the inventory of 272+) SS SU-30s which can carry BMos 400km range ASMs, ASTRA-ER, a 200 - 400km RuAAM and newer A2A and A2G missiles at approx.half the cost of the 36 Rafales we're buying. The effect on the PLAF and PAF will be even more.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 12 Sep 2020 03:03

Vivek K wrote:Hmm .... when convenient, we abandon our stance to cover the armed forces behinds! I agree with Philip here. There is a reason why AEWs/AWACS are used by airforces. Of course one is to have a portable radar you can move to wherever it is needed and the other is to see beyond terrestrial obstacles. The Abhi incident has been discussed extensively and it is time to let go and to learn its lessons. It seems that lessons are to buy more Rafale (per IAF).

What is the upgrade path and timeline for the MKIs? Such a massive number makes them the backbone of IAF. Modernizing these to be even more lethal air dominance fighters would have a multiplier effect against Chicom.

I don't care what upgrade path is used tbh. But I would like to see the R37 (which is being used on the newer SMs) on the MKI. That single piece would make enemy AEW decidedly less dangerous. Hopefully it is already on order for the incoming MKI and 29s.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 12 Sep 2020 03:12

Whatever happened to the KS-172 missile that we had started some sort of partnership on. There is news every now and then, but nothing concrete.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 12 Sep 2020 03:58

Cybaru wrote:Whatever happened to the KS-172 missile that we had started some sort of partnership on. There is news every now and then, but nothing concrete.

It is long dead. The Russians are working on the modernized version of the R-37 instead called the R-37M.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 Sep 2020 17:33

Extremely rare shot of a Su-30MKI with a SAP-514 jammer pod carried on the centerline.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 12 Sep 2020 21:32

Cain Marko wrote:
vivek_ahuja wrote:
The concern is that the AMRAAM is built on the experience gained from the combat experience of the early generation of AMRAAMs, Phoenix and Sparrows etc.. By comparison, Russian AAMs have typically had a dismal performance in the field and their truly powerful Soviet versions were never tested in combat conditions to suggest how well they might do. When it comes to IR missiles, the Russians are very good. With BVR missiles, however, all of their R-77 series remain untested and unproven.
.
Vivek sir. If combat experience is what really matters, then both the m2ks and Rafale would be dead in the water/air. After all, what combat experience has the mica or meteor seen?
But the case for the astra is a given. And the goi is now ordering them in numbers.

I didn't say that is all that matters. I said, if you have to choose between two combat-unproven missiles: one imported and one homegrown, why would you choose the imported option?

The answer to this question has been provided above by Karan M and others: speed of acquisition and production ramp-up of homegrown missiles. Hopefully these latest batches will be the last of Russian BVR AAMs for the IAF.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Sep 2020 03:08

Step 1 as with BMos, JVs can be established to accomplish the same for some major programmes,where we lack certain tech. capability. Even Euro giants collaborate for major programmes for reasons of tech. ,timeframes and costs. Engine technology is perhaps the most critical area where decades of Kaveri development has borne no fruit. A mega engine R&D centre for all aircraft/ helo types must be set up with JV help from willing OEMs,so that in the future desi engines may be designed and built
albeit with firang tech. input.

Regarding Ru/ Sov. era missiles, most conflicts where they came off second best was generally with vastly inferior nations opposed to the US,like Iraq for instance. Israel has always had superior aircraft and weaponry thanks to US largesse, than its Arab neighbours. When in the hands of competent military forces of countries like India,Vietnam and Egypt in the YK war, Ru origin SAMs,aircraft ,etc. performed well. In the Syrian conflict inferior ISIS has come a cropper against Sov/ Ru weaponry,esp. LRCMs like Kalibir.The gap has narrowed between western and Ru AAMs in recent years.After all Abhi shot down an F-16 with a venerable Sov.era R-73 SRAAM that entered service in the 1980s!

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 13 Sep 2020 13:41

tsarkar wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:It was ROE which allowed the use of First shot by PAF.

Cain Marko wrote:My point about roe was that the iaf did not have the green light on initiating missile release. The paf therefore managed to fire first. Not because of any subpar equipment of the iaf. Again, the bars mki combo is quite capable in bvr and can out distance/shoot the amraam/f16/apg68.
Very true, gentlemen.

If at all it was restrictive ROEs that prevented from at least firing at the pakistani fighters then it is to be seen as a failure of IAF's higher command leadership.

My understanding though is;

- Su-30MKIs: The avenger formation attempted to get into position where they could fire back at the F-16s. They were disciplined and well trained so you did not see them firing off missiles unlike Pakistanis who let loose a volley of BVRAAMs to keep the defenders away. in that sense F-16 BARCAP succeeded in their attempt while Su-30 also faired well in this BVR fight where F-16s were at considerable advantage.

- MiG-29: arrived too late on the scene

- MiG-21: despatched from Srinagar ORP they went across the LoC and made contact with enemy fighters. ROE did not restrict them.

- Mirage-2000: already on CAP station, did not have enough juice to pursue JF-17s

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Sep 2020 21:21

Aditya G wrote:If at all it was restrictive ROEs that prevented from at least firing at the pakistani fighters then it is to be seen as a failure of IAF's higher command leadership.

Which is my PoV from Day 1. Higher command leadership failure was also exhibited in Mi-17 self shootdown.

However the blame is equally of the bureaucracy and the establishment.

Firstly the MEA press release in a very silly manner called it a non military pre-emptive action hoping Pakistan military establishment wont interfere.

Hence this non-military preemptive action was specifically targeted at the JeM camp

https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.h ... at_Balakot

However in Pakistan H&D is a serious issue and they will strike back no matter what. The irrationality was discounted by leadership of bureaucracy including military.

Secondly, as per then WAC Chief video interview, Pakistani fighters taking off from border airfields usually go west to their depth areas to practice. This time they formed up in their west depth areas and immediately headed east and built up local superiority in numbers.

IAF scrambled its fighters after the Pakistani's turned east and that gave too little time for the IAF planes to take off, gain altitude, form up and engage.

IAF should have scrambled fighters the moment Pakistanis were detected taking off and headed west in their depth areas to form up. That would have given IAF fighters that extra time to form up and engage the Pakistanis.

Thirdly, in olden days, when communications was poor, field fighters had freedom of action. Depending on the immediate situation, pilots/sailors/soldiers could decide tactical actions.

During the 1971 Karachi missile strike, the CNS Admiral Nanda attempted to micro-manage the missile boat from Delhi. The electronic emissions could have seriously compromised the force. Fortunately radio communications between missile boats and Delhi failed and the at sea commanders got back their freedom of action resulting in a spectacular victory.

With improved modern communication, there is a tendency of HQ to micro-manage and take decision making powers away from field fighters.

So with ROE like "report to HQ if Pakistani's cross LOC or fire on you and bosses will tell you what to do next" wastes precious seconds of valuable reaction times.

In addition, MEA & MHA Babu's these days sitting in command centers also want a say in military tactical decisions further FUBAR-ing the situation.

Had the Mirage's & Su-30 already in air had the authority to act, they could have launched their own BVR shots on perceiving Pakistani threats instead of waiting for orders.

Breaking ROE results in pilots getting court martialled that ends their careers which pilots fear more than getting shot down and killed.

The shooting down of IAF Mi-17 by IAF Spyder battery shows the poor command & control as well. Its brings us down to the level of Iran shooting Ukranian airline and Russians shooting Malaysian airline.

I had seriously hoped the Modi Government would clean up the Luytens military bureaucracy as well. We have more Admirals than capital ships and more AVM/AM/ACM than Rafales. They try to justify their positions by micro-managing that proves deadly in critical situations.

Micro management is a serious problem in the Indian mentality. Even before civilians started telling their bosses "signal is bad/network is bad" to get rid of micro managing bosses off their backs, fauji's found that excuse earlier.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 13 Sep 2020 21:33

Philip wrote:Regarding Ru/ Sov. era missiles, most conflicts where they came off second best was generally with vastly inferior nations opposed to the US,like Iraq for instance. Israel has always had superior aircraft and weaponry thanks to US largesse, than its Arab neighbours. When in the hands of competent military forces of countries like India,Vietnam and Egypt in the YK war, Ru origin SAMs,aircraft ,etc. performed well. In the Syrian conflict inferior ISIS has come a cropper against Sov/ Ru weaponry,esp. LRCMs like Kalibir.The gap has narrowed between western and Ru AAMs in recent years.After all Abhi shot down an F-16 with a venerable Sov.era R-73 SRAAM that entered service in the 1980s!

Everyone is aware of the potency of Russian IR sensors and missiles. The debate above was with regard to their BVR AAMs. I have no doubt that we will continue to rely for a while longer on the Russian IR missiles.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Sep 2020 00:55

Reg. the BVR inventory,Meteor is now with us but only onthe Rafale. Astra to be carried across the board and the expectation of newer Ru and Israeli AAMs.However, I feel that we should further pursue in haste the BMos AAM ,meant to be an AWACS killer.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Sep 2020 08:43

Compounding the problem was our radio's were compromised and Pakistanis were listening in to every conversation.

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/news/mod ... e-says-cag

The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) has criticised the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and the Ministry of Defence for wasting 16 years and Rs 116 cr in an effort to provide jam-resistant and secure radio sets to the Indian Air Force. The very/ultra high frequency (V/UHF) radio sets available with the Indian Air Force were scheduled to be phased out by 2004 as their network was considered vulnerable to interference by the enemy.

In order to meet the requirement, the Ministry of Defence sanctioned a project in 1993 for designing and developing jam resistant INCOM airborne radio sets. However, during the development stage certain concessions were granted to HAL. Based on the performance of the system during laboratory evaluation, the IAF accepted the INCOM airborne radio sets in 1996 and signed a contract with HAL in 1997 for their supply at a cost of Rs 70.89 cr. The delivery of the sets for the aircraft fleet continued till 2004 and evaluation trials in that period revealed the system's poor performance and unreliability.

"Despite being aware of these unsatisfactory trial results and the fact that the INCOM sets were expected to be used in highly sophisticated environment, five more contracts were signed between July 2003 and March 2006 at a cost of Rs 45.24 cr. Most of the sets have been supplied between March 2004 and July 2010," says the CAG report.

The report also mentions that the performance and reliability of the newly delivered sets were far below requirements. The contracted specifications like frequency range, speech secrecy and anti-jamming were not met. "This has led to aborted missions, potentially unsafe situations in the air and low aircraft availability. The electronic counter measure (ECCM) modes have not been proven to be satisfactory on any aircraft," the report says.

Surprisingly, HAL failed to rectify these defects and said in May 2008 that they had reached the limits of their technological capability to develop the sets any further. The project was then shut down. The IAF said in 2009 that INCOM's performance was not up to the mark and observed that the radio sets were adversely affecting operations on aircraft fleets where INCOM was installed.

The IAF, however, continued to use the obsolete radio sets. The Air Headquarters in February2010 accepted that operations were getting adversely affected because of the continued use of the existing sets as they were unreliable and could no longer be maintained due to non-availability of spare parts.

Responding to the CAG report, the Ministry of Defence accepted the facts but tried to justify the expenditure. "Rs 116 cr could not be treated as unfruitful as the INCOM sets continued to be used on aircraft albeit with reduced capability," the MoD said in response to the CAG report.

There is absolutely no accountability when HAL shrugs off and moves off from INCOM. Or ARDE shrugs off and moves on from INSAS.

Given that money was already spent on HAL project, Finance Ministry and MoD Defence Accounts were loathe to spend again on new radios

The fact that Pakistanis had better situational awareness is also due to a basic flaw - substandard radios.

Imagine a game where the enemy listens to your every move.

More details here http://shashitharoor.in/questions_inpar ... etails/318

vimal · Post by **vimal** » 14 Sep 2020 09:29

^^ No wonder that IAF holds HAL in such utter contempt. HAL is a system integrator nothing more, it has no capability or desire to build anything from scratch. I wonder if there was a way for a private player to get involved and provide this system.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Sep 2020 09:41

On a larger note, the Pakistanis being un-evolved tribals have a razor sharp focus on the hunt and the kill. They get the best of breed equipment, train and practice relentlessly, for war and kill without any care of the consequences.

We are a more refined people who tie our feet with ropes of "what will the world think" or "what will domestic audience think" or "effect on general elections" or "effect in panchayat elections" or "what will be the effect of dogfight over Naushera on apples in Himachal and oranges in Nagpur"

I actually sighed deeply on seeing the "non-military" press release by MEA.

40+ soldiers killed and the GoI Ministry front ending the response is...MEA

We were spinning press releases of non-military action and next day their military launched attacks making a mockery of that press release.

We dont owe anyone any explanation for any action. Period. Especially convoluted "non-military" theories.

They killed ours, we kill more of theirs, period.

The Israelis or Russians dont give press releases. They just strike. Putin doesnt give press releases for his actions in Crimea or Ukraine.

We are too concerned thinking what others will think and tie ropes around our feet in critical combat situations.

Rishirishi · Post by **Rishirishi** » 14 Sep 2020 15:52

We are a more refined people who tie our feet with ropes of "what will the world think" or "what will domestic audience think" or "effect on general elections" or "effect in panchayat elections" or "what will be the effect of dogfight over Naushera on apples in Himachal and oranges in Nagpur"

The purchase decisions are taking by GOI Babus, sitting safely in their chair, while spinning up fancy theories. Hand the entire budget over to the armed forces and let them make the allocations and prioritizations. They are supposed to put their lives on stake, and the country cant trust them for making purchase decisions

Face it PAF has managed to pull up a decent airforce , with a much smaller budget and access to less technology.
The people who delivered the INSAS crap should be put on the front and face enemy bullets with them. India and Indians have the capability to produce and manage very complex projects. The worlds best saddlery is made in Kanpur and Indian PSU's cant even make decent boots for the military.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 14 Sep 2020 23:30

Sir you have dug deep with this comment.

We were not prepared for the media/info war at all. My sense is that our plan was not to reveal the strike at all - it was DG-ISPR who started tweeting about the strike at 5:30AM. Perhaps our thought was to strike and not boast about it to keep situ de-escalated. There is a merit to that approach as well - however, there is also merit in rubbing the enemy's nose into the ground. Case in point is Galwan Valley battle - was there a harm in using that to heap humiliation on the Chinese?

tsarkar wrote:On a larger note, the Pakistanis being un-evolved tribals have a razor sharp focus on the hunt and the kill. They get the best of breed equipment, train and practice relentlessly, for war and kill without any care of the consequences.

We are a more refined people who tie our feet with ropes of "what will the world think" or "what will domestic audience think" or "effect on general elections" or "effect in panchayat elections" or "what will be the effect of dogfight over Naushera on apples in Himachal and oranges in Nagpur"

I actually sighed deeply on seeing the "non-military" press release by MEA.

40+ soldiers killed and the GoI Ministry front ending the response is...MEA

We were spinning press releases of non-military action and next day their military launched attacks making a mockery of that press release.

We dont owe anyone any explanation for any action. Period. Especially convoluted "non-military" theories.

They killed ours, we kill more of theirs, period.

The Israelis or Russians dont give press releases. They just strike. Putin doesnt give press releases for his actions in Crimea or Ukraine.

We are too concerned thinking what others will think and tie ropes around our feet in critical combat situations.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 14 Sep 2020 23:38

Aditya G wrote:Sir you have dug deep with this comment.

We were not prepared for the media/info war at all. My sense is that our plan was not to reveal the strike at all - it was DG-ISPR who started tweeting about the strike at 5:30AM. Perhaps our thought was to strike and not boast about it to keep situ de-escalated. There is a merit to that approach as well - however, there is also merit in rubbing the enemy's nose into the ground. Case in point is Galwan Valley battle - was there a harm in using that to heap humiliation on the Chinese?

Can't agree more. The British left a number of little legacies to screw us over. Their biggest one is called our bureaucracy. Modi and Co have to figure out a way to sideline these buggers.

Something's I wonder if there is not some greater maleficence at play here. I recall my dad would often say that the tsp rangers during 65 would tease our boys that their orders came from the gun barrel, while ours came from Delhi.

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 15 Sep 2020 02:50

Aditya G wrote: - Su-30MKIs: The avenger formation attempted to get into position where they could fire back at the F-16s. They were disciplined and well trained so you did not see them firing off missiles unlike Pakistanis who let loose a volley of BVRAAMs to keep the defenders away. in that sense F-16 BARCAP succeeded in their attempt while Su-30 also faired well in this BVR fight where F-16s were at considerable advantage.

Are we sure about this? I have heard reports that the MKI's computer failed to compute a firing solution.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 Sep 2020 03:02

ManuJ wrote:Are we sure about this? I have heard reports that the MKI's computer failed to compute a firing solution.

AFAIK, not true.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 15 Sep 2020 03:17

Rakesh wrote:
ManuJ wrote:Are we sure about this? I have heard reports that the MKI's computer failed to compute a firing solution.
AFAIK, not true.

Well that story has been circulated and written about by even likes of Vishnu Som. Shekhar Gupta repeated this exact piece of news in his recent cut the clutter on Rafale Induction.

I don't know if this has been countered and/or critically analyzed by you, KaranM, Brar etc here. Rakesh/Karan/Brar and other gurus if you have any pointers on this please share. I would like to keep it for my record. Have faced this in some debates but didn't have a counter.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 15 Sep 2020 05:02

We are a nation of 1.3b souls and yet we all behave as if PDSU's, defense lab's, and civil servants are the only entities that are causing harm to the nation and are hindering India's rightful place.

tsarkar wrote:There is absolutely no accountability when HAL shrugs off and moves off from INCOM.

What kind of accountability are we asking for? Per the article, it was mentioned that HAL did all it could and reached a technology barrier which it's not able to scale.

tsarkar wrote:HAL failed to rectify these defects and said in May 2008 that they had reached the limits of their technological capability to develop the sets any further. The project was then shut down

When an organization comes forward and frankly says what it said in the above mentioned quote, do you punish them because they are telling the truth? 11 years has passed since May 1998 and that fateful day in 2019 when we found out that our SDR's or lack of them, hampered our ops and contributed to us losing a bird. What were the military planners doing in these 11 years to mitigate the issue? It boggles my mind that IAF did not comprehend the severity of lack of secure comms. Below is a gem which lays out our muddled mindset

tsarkar wrote:The IAF, however, continued to use the obsolete radio sets. The Air Headquarters in February2010 accepted that operations were getting adversely affected because of the continued use of the existing sets as they were unreliable and could no longer be maintained due to non-availability of spare parts. Imagine a game where the enemy listens to your every move.

Looks like IAF failed to imagine this.

vimal wrote:HAL is a system integrator nothing more, it has no capability or desire to build anything from scratch.

And why is this a bad thing? If HAL cannot do it, and we have not mandated/created other labs to take up original work, how is that HAL's fault? At the end of the day HAL can only deliver what it's manpower is capable of delivering.

tsarkar wrote:The Israelis or Russians dont give press releases. They just strike. Putin doesnt give press releases for his actions in Crimea or Ukraine. We are too concerned thinking what others will think and tie ropes around our feet in critical combat situations.

The above thinking is our collective mindset as a nation. Saddens me to say this.

Rishirishi wrote:The purchase decisions are taking by GOI Babus, sitting safely in their chair, while spinning up fancy theories. The purchase decisions are taking by GOI Babus, sitting safely in their chair, while spinning up fancy theories. Hand the entire budget over to the armed forces and let them make the allocations and prioritizations.

Oh please. There are plenty of examples where armed forces are also guilty of irresponsible purchase decisions. If your wish was true, IAF would be looking at another 300 Rafales and we would be eating grass for the next 30 years.

Rishirishi wrote:The people who delivered the INSAS crap should be put on the front and face enemy bullets with them.

And say why is that? INSAS was developed as per the GSQR specifications. If we can live with sub standard foreign weapons, why should our own countrymen be prosecuted for delivering what was asked of them, and within their capabilities? Every soldier I known raves about AK's simplicity, but won't trust it with accuracy. Yet, it's always the desi janata that must be marched to the gallows for their supposed in inadequacies.

Rishirishi wrote:India and Indians have the capability to produce and manage very complex projects.

Are any of these "capable indians" serving the country then?

For years and years IAF swore by Su-30MKI's capabilities and redesigned its fighter landscape by transitioning into a heavy fighter air force, yet Su-30MKI was no where to be found when s**t hit the fan and was relegated to dodging and ducking incoming missiles. Maybe we are (at least I am) purposefully ignoring the truth here that MKI might be obsolete for offensive ops in its current state and armament.

EDIT: I'm not trying to blame one entity over another, but we sink and swim as a nation. More than anything, we fail at helping ourselves and our own countrymen and are quick to resort to un-necessary criticism over a helping hand. I sincerely hope and pray that the Chinese misadventures along our Eastern borders bring some systemic changes in our thought process. We should be answerable to ourselves, first.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Sep 2020 10:15

A few years ago ,in an AAM discussion,I said that the PAF's amcquisition of AIM-120 AMRAAMs would pose a future problem. What we have totally ignored is that after Balakot strike ,the PAF response was a failure.Its objective was to strike the Bde. HQ with PGMs which was just across the border and snap shoot at our counter-attacking aircraft. The raid was a quick in-and-out op. too short for full interception.AMRAAMs were fired at MKIs which failed. Our MKIs were based at air bases not closer to the LOC/ border as infra facilities had not been completed said one report. The need for more AWACS was realised. There was no penetration in depth by Paki aircraft which shows that the PAF pays a healthy respect for our fleet esp. the MKIs. We did not from all available info, allow hot pursuit of enemy aircraft over Paki airspace as would happen in an all out war.Had we allowed a hot chase,a few PAF birds would've hit the dirt.The attempt also brings into Q of the state of our integrated air defence system. Did we fire any SAMs at them? Tragically,one of our helos was shot down by a SR SAM by one of pur own missile batteries.

In retrospect, we find that in any future incident,trying to counter with restrictions serves no purpose.He must be crushed.We're seeing it in Ladakh too. A defensive posture only invites attacks from the enemy who has the advantage of surprise.The enemy has to be destroyed with max. prejudice. IAF tactics need to be tweaked a little for counter-offensive ops. The fleeing PAF aircraft should've been pursued and their air bases hit with PGMs.It is here that the MKI comes into its own with BMos,both in the LR ASM variant and the new AAM and its unmatched range ,endurance and payload.It should be given a free hand to exploit its full capabilities. With the Rafale armed with Meteor,Scalp,Hammer,etc .is also available.Any future spat in the air with the PAF must see it suffer heavy casualties. The upgrade of MKIs to SS std. Must be approved asap.A large part of the fleet must be upgraded for both BMos and also carry the Ru AWACS killer AAM along with better radars,engines ,avionics and weaponry.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 15 Sep 2020 10:50

@Rakesh & Jay, some quotes are incorrectly attributed to me. Request if you could quote the proper authors.

I'll edit this post later and respond to the points directed at me.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 Sep 2020 11:51

Philip wrote:
. The fleeing PAF aircraft should've been pursued and their air bases hit with PGMs.I

A Much more simpler solution would IAF to attack the PAF and force PAF to defend its army.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 15 Sep 2020 11:59

I haven't followed this thread for a while now so this information may not be new to members ...

https://twitter.com/singhshwetabh71/sta ... 9470851073

MKI's got integrated with SDR, HDMS, Garuthama, local VOL/IRS and Radio Altimeter

Total Technical Life (TTL) of Aircraft Accessories Gear Box KSA-2 of RD-33 Aero Engine extended from 1100 hours to 1200 hours.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 Sep 2020 12:40

Looks like HAL annual report for 2019-20 is out

https://hal-india.co.in/Common/Uploads/ ... 0Final.pdf

Quoting from significant achivements on Page 34-35

Overhaul (ROH) of one Su-30 MKI Aircraft with less than 15 months cycle time
Indigenously developed Test Rig for combustion chamber, Main manifold and Ground Support Equipment (GSE) for IAF Bases and GU 3 Tester for Su 30 fleet
Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS), Garuthma Store of DRDO, indigenous VOR/ILS, Software Defined Radio (SDR) and Radio Altimeter were integrated on Su-30 MKI Aircraft.

All very good

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 15 Sep 2020 13:24

Why are we blaming HAL for radios installed in a foreign built aircraft and absolving IAF of all blame? Mirage, Su-30 and most other aircraft were bought and extensively tested by IAF. For Su-30, they tested them for years then created a wishlist of avionics and changes which were implemented using both foreign and Indian OEMs. With all the lofty talks about professional competency, honesty, work ethics and all that, why did the use such critically flawed equipment for decades? Babooze and politicians are easy targets and most people can easily deflect most blame to them.

There are a lot of bad apples in armed forces too which lead to such issues with amazing regularity. You can't just pass blame to some DPSU or MoD or PMO or Martians all the time.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 15 Sep 2020 23:41

tsarkar wrote:@Rakesh & Jay, some quotes are incorrectly attributed to me. Request if you could quote the proper authors.

Made correction, sarkar ji...

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 Sep 2020 23:48

tsarkar wrote:@Rakesh & Jay, some quotes are incorrectly attributed to me. Request if you could quote the proper authors.

I'll edit this post later and respond to the points directed at me.

That is my fault tsarkar, not Jay's. I did not properly check each quote. My apologies.

I see Jay has made the corrections.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Sep 2020 02:22

https://twitter.com/IAF_MCC/status/1305 ... 49409?s=20 ---> 15 Sept 1969: No 222 Squadron was formed at AFS Ambala with Su-7 aircraft. The squadron participated in many combat operations and photo recce missions and has numerous commendations & awards on its roll of honour. The squadron was number plated in 2011 and resurrected in January 2020 with the Su-30MKI.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Sep 2020 02:24

https://twitter.com/Amitraaz/status/130 ... 52289?s=20 ---> So, Su-30MKI has been integrated with Rafael's BNET.

BNET's specifics:

Range: 680 km for relay
340 km for data and voice transmisson.
Mobile Ad-hoc NETwork (no masters)
Flexible frequency range: L+UHF/VHF
Multi-Antenna, Multiband, simultaneous 2/3 waveforms
Data rate: 2 Mbps in Tx, 20 in Rx

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Sep 2020 02:26

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 80096?s=20 ---> Garuthmaa guided glide bomb with 100 km range has been successfully integrated with IAF's Su-30MKIs, thus enhancing the jet's SOW (Stand-Off Weapon) capabilities significantly. New jam proof SDRs (BNET-AR) for secure communications and data linking have also been integrated onboard Su-30MKIs.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 16 Sep 2020 02:57

Excellent, excellent news. Now we need to produce 1000's of these. It needs to become the go-to weapon for attacking ground targets with the IAF. Much cheaper than using SPICE or even LGB's which can be reserved for high-value targets.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Sep 2020 03:17

Amen to that! Looking forward to the day to see the Rambha and the Tejas armed with these.

D.Mahesh · Post by **D.Mahesh** » 16 Sep 2020 05:55

manjgu wrote:
Philip wrote:The key difference in recent years giving the PAF much kmproved capability was the acquisition of Swedish Eriye AEW aircraft.This allowed the PAF to refine their tactics for snap strikes/ shots in large number to allow their inferior attacking force to escape execution by our MKIs,which were also not allegedly based closer to the LOC.AWACS and AEWC aircraft act as force miltipliers and the situational awareness vs the enemy is significantly enhanced.
Sending up aircraft intoday's modern combat scenario without AWACS/ AEW aircraft is akin to sending a blind lambtothr slaughter says one of our AMs.

This issue was discussed ... it was not abt AEW etc.. it was purely a ROE issue ...who was guiding abhi ...a ground controller not some fancy awacs...the paf with their aew were caught with pants down.. iaf with grpund based assets have enough sa abt paki airspace

The Rambha is an absolute beast. 2 x Rambha that day had enough sensor fusion + defence + offence. Those radars are v.v.powerful. EffSolah is designed to work with a lot of overhead. The Rambha + P8I has got enough to throw shade on the Solah.