'Make in India' Single engined fighter

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 26 Nov 2017 00:27

Cain Marko wrote:
All in all very good news for Tejas, if true. But frankly I just think it is Russian spin on the situation


I tend to agree with the later part. Russians are trying hard to push MiG35 somehow through the door. And its amply clear that Single Engine requirement was to keep MiG and EF out or it would have been MMRCA all over again. I think even if there is a TEF tender, it wont go to the Ruskies because clearly (IMO) IAF has had enough of Russian stuff.

TPFscopes
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 21 Sep 2017 23:53

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby TPFscopes » 26 Nov 2017 03:09

Cain Marko wrote:
Philip wrote:Going ,going ,gone...the SEF (gone for a 'Burton" what? ) and welcome back the ...MMRCA! :rotfl:

This report if true will make a mockery of our entire def. procurement plans and the reputation of the IAF as a clear thinking service will hit the deck.

http://www.defencenews.in/article/Rude- ... ets-454725


All in all very good news for Tejas, if true. But frankly I just think it is Russian spin on the situation

Russian might get a chance because IAF need a load of fighter jets in a very short of timeframe for replacement of oldies and to increase the number of squadrons.

AFAIK, IAF will buy F/A-18 manufactured jointly by HAL-Boeing, you may call it as licence production and it will be a strategic deal. 2nd There will be more 150+ Rafales for IAF+IN combinedly and rest will be Dassault assisted LCAs ( As Dassault asked to assist in LCA program and they can..)

The only option viable for russians is to share PAKFA partnership with its critical techs... Otherwise they will be limited to IA and IN.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2391
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 26 Nov 2017 03:24

Allowing two-engines could mean this has come to pass:

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2017-09-07/russia-pitches-mig-35-india-fgfa-project-falters?amp

As the contest to supply a new fighter aircraft to the Indian Air Force (IAF) heats up, the MiG-35 has emerged as a viable candidate. India is supposedly seeking about 220 single-engine fighters to replace 11 squadrons of MiG-21/27s that entered service in the 1990s.
...
According to an Indian defense official, “The MiG-35 is 25 percent cheaper [than rival candidates for the IAF requirement]; has an AESA radar; has commonality with the fleet; and being in the light to medium category enables it to land in the same airfields that the [indigenous] Light Combat Aircraft does. If the FGFA does not go through, Russia will have to be compensated, and this is the only contract left at the moment.

If the MiG-35 is chosen, it would likely be built at the Nashik facility of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL). Spare capacity will soon be available there, when work on Su-30MKI upgrades for the IAF is completed.


For good or ill, we might need to welcome yet and another bunch of Fulcrums.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby srai » 26 Nov 2017 04:04

^^^
..."If the FGFA does not go through, Russia will have to be compensated, and this is the only contract left at the moment.”

Entitlements!

Yes India, keep importing your weapons to compensate foreign nations. Make sure they all get their fair share :mrgreen:

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15298
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Karan M » 26 Nov 2017 04:10

We will have to buy 400 of them for 120 to be available at any time.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby srai » 26 Nov 2017 04:44

Karan M wrote:We will have to buy 400 of them for 120 to be available at any time.

All future contracts, India needs to sign PBL with the manufacturer for guaranteed x servicibility rates under defined conditions for y number of years. That seems to be missing in contracts with Russian products whereas its standard in Western ones.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1116
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ArjunPandit » 26 Nov 2017 04:57

With the way things have gone on in last decade, I won't be surprised if these vendors blacklist India for the never ending drama for no outcome

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 143
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby arvin » 26 Nov 2017 05:50

ArjunPandit wrote:With the way things have gone on in last decade, I won't be surprised if these vendors blacklist India for the never ending drama for no outcome


Thats the best thing to happen. Will put an end to RFI - RFP - RIP saga going for multiple deals.
ISRO and BARC are examples of how sanctions have benefitted us. The current naval tender for 57 should be the last of imports we need in fighters. Only orders worth expanding are Tejas and Sukhoi 30 MKI.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9136
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 26 Nov 2017 06:12

Given the display in Syria, I would consider the Russians to be out-and-out winners for the Indian requirements. The others are not even in the picture. True, there were no direct F-16/F-15/F-22/F-35 A-A encounters (the PAF stayed sitting on their thumbs in Kargil war as well), but the operational record was simply fabulous. They fought and won the whole war, losing a total of 3 planes - one Su-24 to sneak Turkish backstabbing, one MiG fell off the aircraft carrier Rustograd, and one helicopter was shot down, AFAIK. Maybe one more Su crashed. In 2 years of intense combat from unprepared bases.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3106
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 26 Nov 2017 12:34

chola wrote:Allowing two-engines could mean this has come to pass:

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2017-09-07/russia-pitches-mig-35-india-fgfa-project-falters?amp

As the contest to supply a new fighter aircraft to the Indian Air Force (IAF) heats up, the MiG-35 has emerged as a viable candidate. India is supposedly seeking about 220 single-engine fighters to replace 11 squadrons of MiG-21/27s that entered service in the 1990s.
...
According to an Indian defense official, “The MiG-35 is 25 percent cheaper [than rival candidates for the IAF requirement]; has an AESA radar; has commonality with the fleet; and being in the light to medium category enables it to land in the same airfields that the [indigenous] Light Combat Aircraft does. If the FGFA does not go through, Russia will have to be compensated, and this is the only contract left at the moment.

If the MiG-35 is chosen, it would likely be built at the Nashik facility of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL). Spare capacity will soon be available there, when work on Su-30MKI upgrades for the IAF is completed.


For good or ill, we might need to welcome yet and another bunch of Fulcrums.


I think the iaf will suddenly express great love for the fgfa if this happens.... They absolutely don't want a fulcrum. In fact, they simply don't want anything Russian at this point. From their perspective, they want something with high uptimes, battle ready and way to induct aka Western bird. Although I'm not quite sure how the gripen would fulfill these criteria.

Hence the reluctance towards the fgfa.... The mig35 is nowhere in their sights I'm sure.

Frankly the most likely Russian fighter imports in the next few years will in all probability be additional MKI. a recent remark by the ACM actually suggests that this has already been done. Add to this the super mki upgrade and another pakfa mki buy to keep the HAL mki line chugging. By the time HAL is done with the additional mkis and the upgrade, the Russians will have sorted out the pakfa with the new engines etc, and the iaf will be in a more plant mood. Cue in pakfa mki aka fgfa at Hal for the next 10 years 2025-2035.

Frankly I don't think the fgfa deal is going anywhere...

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19330
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 26 Nov 2017 15:55

The OAF ...sorry, awful Splck,IAF, reminds me of the London Eye, going round and round and round in one big circle.Who knows, with the prospect of more Fulcrums, a sudden love for the SU-57 as said above might appear! Like Saul on the road to Damascus, Air HQ may discover that its teething problems have all disappeared!

There is a great window of opportunity for HAL.contracted for 40 MK-1s, to prove a point.
Last edited by Philip on 26 Nov 2017 22:39, edited 1 time in total.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Will » 26 Nov 2017 18:50

Me thinks talk about scrapping the SE started after the Rafale allegations and Reliance. The IAF dosent want the F-16. That leaves the Gripen. Imagine the stink if the SE was handed to Adani on a platter. That’s why I had said SAAB shot itself in the foot by tying up with Adani. Hits too close to the ruling dispensation.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Kashi » 26 Nov 2017 19:09

Will wrote:Me thinks talk about scrapping the SE started after the Rafale allegations and Reliance.


I think it was probably the other way round. All the talk of SEF being cancelled and suddenly there was this avalanche of reports on Rafale deal and whatnot.

It only goes on to show how deep the tentacles run.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby deejay » 26 Nov 2017 21:18

Methinks Congressis are losing Gujarat and hence trying wild accusations about anything and everything.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 26 Nov 2017 21:36

Kashi wrote:
Will wrote:Me thinks talk about scrapping the SE started after the Rafale allegations and Reliance.


I think it was probably the other way round. All the talk of SEF being cancelled and suddenly there was this avalanche of reports on Rafale deal and whatnot.

It only goes on to show how deep the tentacles run.


And how do you expect the backlash which would perhaps leave SEF in limbo or worse will convert it into another MMRCA, and perhaps only would go on to help LCA in long run (long shot but there is possibility, now that we have a platform at hand, unlike old times).


deejay wrote:Methinks Congressis are losing Gujarat and hence trying wild accusations about anything and everything.

I agree. Perhaps the got the wind that GOI cannot declare the details due to secrecy clause. And aam junta gives shit to details, 99% only go by headlines.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5212
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 26 Nov 2017 21:37

Adani mulls making Saab Gripen fighter jet at Mihan
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cit ... 773871.cms

NAGPUR: Adani Group, which has tied up with Sweden's Saab AB, has shortlisted Mihan-SEZ as one of its probable sites for setting up an aircraft manufacturing unit. The company, which forged an alliance with the Swedish aircraft maker in September, plans to make Gripen fighter jets in India, if it bags a contract from the Indian Air Force (IAF). Senior officials of Maharashtra Airport Development Company (MADC) said that a team from Adani visited the SEZ recently. Nagpur is one of the sites which the company has shortlisted for its proposed project. Adani Group would need around 100 acres for a unit to make fighter planes here. If the deal works out, this would bring one more major defence unit to Mihan-SEZ. Reliance, which held the ground breaking ceremony for its unit here recently, plans to start production by first quarter of 2018. Reliance has tied up with France's Dassault. It will be carrying out works under the offset agreement arising out of the purchase of 36 Rafale aircraft by the IAF. It may begin with making aircraft spares, with plans to eventually make the entire plane.

A mail sent to Adani Group for its comments on the Nagpur plans went unanswered. Sources in MADC said this is expected to be one of the major investments in aviation-cum defence sector in the SEZ, if the company finally chooses Nagpur. UAE's Sharaf group has also shown interest in taking up land in Mihan-SEZ for setting up a logistics park. A team from the company had visited the site this week. Since it was the first visit, not many details about the project were submitted to MADC, said sources. However, MADC officials said they are confident that the deal would come through. There is another proposal from a leading business group. However, the company does not want to divulge its name at this stage, said a MADC official. MADC, which is the developer of Mihan-SEZ, has also written letters to companies which have taken up land but not begun operations as yet. MADC vice-chairman-cum-managing director Suresh Kakani told TOI that the companies were asked about their plans on the Mihan land. Since the entities have been allotted land in the SEZ, MADC, in its capacity as developer, has asked investors to inform about their plans. The letters have been sent to all the companies which have not utilized the land allotted in the SEZ so far, he said.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5212
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 27 Nov 2017 01:41

Cain Marko wrote:From their perspective, they want something with high uptimes, battle ready and way to induct aka Western bird. Although I'm not quite sure how the gripen would fulfill these criteria.

One of the key advantages of the Gripen - Saab even markets it as such - is the high uptime and battle readiness. It will be on par (if not exceed) with the F-16. Saab even uses marketing buzz words like GMC - Gripen Maintenance Concept. I am sure you have seen the videos below. The F-Solah is cheaper (unit cost) and has a wider array of weaponry at its disposal. Has a longer range as well. Also a more mature and proven platform. The Gripen is still evolving, which is what the IAF might prefer.




brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6511
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby brar_w » 27 Nov 2017 02:49

It remains to be seen whether the mission-system heavy Gripen-E can be delivered with the same logistical footprint as the Gripen C. Gripen C claims are as irrelevant to SAABs SEF offering as those of the F-16A vis-a-vis F-16 Blk. 70 offered to India.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Kashi » 27 Nov 2017 04:20

JayS wrote:And how do you expect the backlash which would perhaps leave SEF in limbo or worse will convert it into another MMRCA, and perhaps only would go on to help LCA in long run (long shot but there is possibility, now that we have a platform at hand, unlike old times).


More like sabotage, on the lines of "If you don't buy our outdated stuff, we'll ensure that you cannot buy anything else either."

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5212
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 27 Nov 2017 05:25

Do that and what is left of Strategic Partnership?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9136
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 27 Nov 2017 07:10

That Gripen turnaround video is really cool. Learned 2 new tricks.
1) To hang a towel below something where I am removing or installing screws so that I don't have to be on all fours searching for dropped parts.
2) Those green portable cranes to lift missiles onto racks. Really cool. Though they have to hand-crank it too many times. An electric motor would have been nice, surely they could charge those in the truck.
3)But without a dedicated pair of maintenance trucks packed with specific tools, there is no hope, even to bring a ladder for the pilot to get down and go to the forest for a "p".

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9136
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 27 Nov 2017 07:20

The transfer of the F-16 line is IMO a neat tax-break for Lockheed-Martin: a holdover from the General Dynamics days. They need the floor space for the new F-35 production line. It costs a lot to dispose of all those hi-tech machines. Now they palm it off to a 3rd world country, and voila, out come exports of F-16s to nations that cannot be customers for the F-22 or F-35, minting money. And most of all, keeping them too poor to buy Boeing FA18s. Win-win. India should negotiate to get that line at the throwaway price that is its true value to L-M. But the sub-contractors who make all the pieces of the F-16 for screwdriver-giri final assembly, must continue to be fed. So if you think through all that, you see that the whole deal covers something else very very different. IOW, the big $$ that India pays for the assembly line and the per unit cost of Block 70 F16s, may be covering something completely different. This is why I say that there is no merit in discussing the merits or otherwise of the F16 deal. It could be Block 85 Chevy Tahoe SUVs, for all that it matters. No one One High is interested.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5212
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 27 Nov 2017 08:28

UB, thank you for not posting in Pinglish. Your posts are like a breath of fresh air now and easy to read.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6664
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 27 Nov 2017 08:40

I said the same thing in the beginning. This is very smart of LM. Instead of paying people to clear stuff away, they get paid. Fringe benefits apply plus you get to look benevolent.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby shiv » 27 Nov 2017 08:41

Rakesh wrote:UB, thank you for not posting in Pinglish. Your posts are like a breath of fresh air now and easy to read.

His account has been hacked

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1116
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ArjunPandit » 27 Nov 2017 08:57

I think he smoked some chinese weed on weekend to get a high and tahts what is reflecting in his forgotten pinglish, wait till he comes to normalcy, i wont be surprised to see some chinese hieroglyphs

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5212
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 27 Nov 2017 09:01

Not one word about the Indian line.

How the F-16 fighter jet put Fort Worth on the aerospace map
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/busin ... 88298.html

Building more F-16s is precisely what Lockheed hopes to do, just not in Fort Worth. First and foremost, Lockheed needs the room at the plant for the ramp up of its next legacy fighter jet project, the F-35. The company, which employs about 14,500 people in Fort Worth — 8,800 on the F-35 program — plans to hire an additional 1,800 employees by 2020. This year Lockheed will build 66 F-35s. It plans to produce as many as 160 a year by 2019.

Moving the F-16 to its Greenville plant was logical, since that’s where Lockheed is developing the new T-50A trainer that shares some of the same engineering DNA of the Fighting Falcon’s design. Lockheed also is on the cusp of selling 19 new F-16 fighters to Bahrain in a deal worth $2.7 billion, a price tag that could grow to $4 billion if an upgrade is included. And earlier this year, the Air Force extended the service life of the F-16, meaning that it will be using the fighter to 2048 and beyond.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5212
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 27 Nov 2017 09:06

Gripen Returns to Dubai After 12-Year Absence
http://aviationweek.com/dubai-air-show- ... ar-absence

The appearance comes towards the end of an important year in the Gripen program, with the highlight being the first flight, in June, of the Gripen E. The next-generation model, which is due to begin deliveries to its Swedish and Brazilian customers in 2019. Hjelm says the flight-test program has so far completed "13, 14" flights. "So far, everything has followed the plan," he says. "We're even a little bit ahead. A couple of weeks ago we flew supersonic for the first time. We're now getting some very good test data out of the program; we also have two more test aircraft that are now in production."

As well as flight-testing the hardware, Saab has been focusing on development and testing of the Gripen E software. "We're really taking a step for the Gripen E program when it comes to digitalization," Hjelm says. "We want to make the Gripen E really future-proof. I won't say that it'll be like a smartphone, where you can just add and remove apps - but definitely we will take a huge step in making it much easier to upgrade in the future without touching the flight-critical parts."

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Kashi » 27 Nov 2017 10:23

Rakesh wrote:Do that and what is left of Strategic Partnership?


Was the strategic partnership affected when Boeing supplied a rusting wind tunnel or when Indian diplomat was cavity searched in Washington?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3106
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 27 Nov 2017 11:17

TPFscopes wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:
All in all very good news for Tejas, if true. But frankly I just think it is Russian spin on the situation

Russian might get a chance because IAF need a load of fighter jets in a very short of timeframe for replacement of oldies and to increase the number of squadrons.

AFAIK, IAF will buy F/A-18 manufactured jointly by HAL-Boeing, you may call it as licence production and it will be a strategic deal. 2nd There will be more 150+ Rafales for IAF+IN combinedly and rest will be Dassault assisted LCAs ( As Dassault asked to assist in LCA program and they can..)

The only option viable for russians is to share PAKFA partnership with its critical techs... Otherwise they will be limited to IA and IN.


Rafale and shornet in large numbers? That's a lot of $ss

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3106
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 27 Nov 2017 11:23

Rakesh wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:From their perspective, they want something with high uptimes, battle ready and way to induct aka Western bird. Although I'm not quite sure how the gripen would fulfill these criteria.

One of the key advantages of the Gripen - Saab even markets it as such - is the high uptime and battle readiness. It will be on par (if not exceed) with the F-16. Saab even uses marketing buzz words like GMC - Gripen Maintenance Concept. I am sure you have seen the videos below. The F-Solah is cheaper (unit cost) and has a wider array of weaponry at its disposal. Has a longer range as well. Also a more mature and proven platform. The Gripen is still evolving, which is what the IAF might prefer.

]

Thanks for the videos, I was aware of quick turnaround times being the gripens usp, but had never really seen the videos.

However, I should have clarified my point a bit better in the original post... the NGs turnaround times and uptimes are not established and it is not a mature platform that would be done with all developmental woes at the time of induction. Hence I cast doubt on the NGs ability to best a well proven platform like the solah wrt these criteria.
As far as the advantages of a newer design are concerned, I'm not entirely sure what this gripen brings to the table over another highly optimized 4 gen bird like the solah.

Also it is not just the variety in weapons that makes the solah tempting, it is also the distinct payload advantage that it has of about 2 extra tons. Not to mention power.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1228
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Khalsa » 27 Nov 2017 13:28

okay since we have bashed this for 126 pages
what do you do ?

Make in India or do another off the shelf purchase till you develop LCA Mk2 or AMCA to fill that area
if make in india then which one.... just answer it don't give your reasons or thinking behind.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6664
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 27 Nov 2017 13:35

Those turnaround times are good for videos. Try sustaining them in a war.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19330
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Philip » 27 Nov 2017 15:27

Where numbers matter!Simple truth.More numbers, ability to keep more in the air better esp. If low cost and low maintenance...but wasn't there an above post by the chief(?) who said that it was a high main. bird?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9136
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby UlanBatori » 27 Nov 2017 22:57

I am trying to figure out the merits of having a large fleet of one kind of fighter (i.e., 1200 LCAs) vs. 30 Rafales and 57 this and 23 that. Tried reading the account of the Bekaa Valley massacre of 1982 when Israel shot down 80+ Syrian aircraft and wiped out the SAM systems with almost no loss. Part of it was that they had HARM missiles, plus UAVs to monitor takeoffs, plus AWACS to direct strikes, plus ECM on their own planes. Also, they figured that Syrian MiG-21 and MiG-23 could not see to the sides with their radars, so once the ground control was knocked out they were blind to missiles coming from their sides. None of this gave any lessons on type of aircraft: If the Syrians had F-16s and F-15s they would have been equally hopeless. Basically, if they went outside the circle marked by their own SAMs, the fighters were dead.
No other war has had such a disproportionate air combat outcome. But what happened in say WW2 (b4 advent of missiles). Then, the fighters' job was to scare off bombers, and escorting bomber groups by engaging enemy fighters trying to get between them. IOW air-to-air combat was everything. Ground fire was not effective except in lower-altitude bombing runs or ground-assualt runs.

A lot of us are conditioned to think by WW2 stories (and 1965 Indo-Pak war stories of individual Gnats bravely engaging small but relatively huge numbers of Paki Sabres. Or Indian bombers such as Canberras being attacked by Paki Starfighters (or vice versa).

In 1971 I don't think there was much air-2-air combat. Pakis in the East got shot down (3 Sabres on Day 1), I think by SAMs? and after that Indian raiders had little interest in engaging the Pakis who were running out of gas. I remember reading about a report during that time: Indian MiG-21s raided a target in East Pak and dropped bombs, Paki Sabres arrived to engage and "the Indian MiGs simply put on the gas (afterburners) and left the Pakis behind". Soon E. Pak's runways were gone, their fuel was gone, their Air Force was down. In the West I think most Indian losses were to ground fire/SAMs, not air combat.

Israel has fought its wars with a mix of Skyhawks, F-4 Phantoms, Kfirs, Mirages, F-15s and F-16s and maybe now F-22/F-35s.

In 1999 the PAF sat with thumbs up their musharrafs and watched IAF make mincemeat of their Northern Flight Infantry on the peaks.

So! What is a future war going to be like? With cheen or Pak - or, houristan forbid, KSA/Eyeran or even NATO?

IOW, is there any point in investing in tiny numbers of prima donna Air Superiority Fighters (of yesterday, obsolete b4 the first one is inducted) instead of building massive numbers of not-so-superior but deadly indi-jeenius fighter-bombers, with the ECM, radar and other features varied from one set to the other by also indi-jeenius innovation to make them unpredictable unlike the Bekaa valley situation?

Back in the 1980s I read somewhere that the Indian approach was to buy 17 fighters from the SU for the cost of one US-supplied Paki fighter. But Indian fighters were all ground-controlled unlike the TFTA independent warriors of the PAF. The Bekaa Valley experience was scary. How has this strategy worked out?

Bottom line: In future wars, does it make a lot of sense to have a mix of small numbers of fighters from different countries (except 1 or 2 stolen for Foreign Technology Assessment/ Reverse Engg, figuring out tactics & frequencies)? Or just go with a very few types, in large numbers, but with a wide variety of tweaks done by indigenous innovation that are not advertised at all? I am leaning towards the latter, obviously.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5182
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ShauryaT » 27 Nov 2017 23:45

UlanBatori wrote:Israel has fought its wars with a mix of Skyhawks, F-4 Phantoms, Kfirs, Mirages, F-15s and F-16s and maybe now F-22/F-35s.

In 1999 the PAF sat with thumbs up their musharrafs and watched IAF make mincemeat of their Northern Flight Infantry on the peaks.

So! What is a future war going to be like? With cheen or Pak - or, houristan forbid, KSA/Eyeran or even NATO?

IOW, is there any point in investing in tiny numbers of prima donna Air Superiority Fighters (of yesterday, obsolete b4 the first one is inducted) instead of building massive numbers of not-so-superior but deadly indi-jeenius fighter-bombers, with the ECM, radar and other features varied from one set to the other by also indi-jeenius innovation to make them unpredictable unlike the Bekaa valley situation?

Back in the 1980s I read somewhere that the Indian approach was to buy 17 fighters from the SU for the cost of one US-supplied Paki fighter. But Indian fighters were all ground-controlled unlike the TFTA independent warriors of the PAF. The Bekaa Valley experience was scary. How has this strategy worked out?

Bottom line: In future wars, does it make a lot of sense to have a mix of small numbers of fighters from different countries (except 1 or 2 stolen for Foreign Technology Assessment/ Reverse Engg, figuring out tactics & frequencies)? Or just go with a very few types, in large numbers, but with a wide variety of tweaks done by indigenous innovation that are not advertised at all? I am leaning towards the latter, obviously.
The one thing that is not discussed much in the public domain is what is the basis for the quantities and asset type mix being articulated by the IAF. e.g: It seems this magic number of 42 squadrons is a post-1965 assessment. I am not saying we do not need these numbers but that number was arrived at by looking at the then available asset types, threat assessments, and objectives. Recognize that enemy assets have also evolved.

In today's heavily dependent C4ISR, capable SAM systems, fundamentally altered capabilities of the assets, where a Su-30MKI provides for a CAP mission by taking off from Lohegaon and landing in Guwahati with a route that covers the western, northern and eastern border in a single sortie. Do we need a re-assessment of the squadrons and capabilities needed? All I know so far is the IAF has articulated a need in terms of light, medium and heavy categories, that do not directly speak to the threats and opportunities they are looking to meet, with this mix.

The increasing reliance on multi-role aircraft seems to be at the cost of dedicated fighters, where BVR missiles are not exactly proven war commodity with a low pK rate against highly maneuvering targets with defensive capabilities. Is this also due to a confusion over what constitutes our threats and objectives?

Any decision we make, we will be locking ourselves down for 50+ years and into the MIC of that host nation forming a symbiotic relationship of sorts. IF we have to go non-Indian, are we ready for this 50-year marriage?

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

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cosmo_R » 27 Nov 2017 23:56

UlanBatori wrote:T.. there is no hope, even to bring a ladder for the pilot to get down and go to the forest for a "p".


I thought that was what "p"tot tubes were for.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 28 Nov 2017 00:34

Cosmo_R wrote:
UlanBatori wrote:T.. there is no hope, even to bring a ladder for the pilot to get down and go to the forest for a "p".


I thought that was what "p"tot tubes were for.


LOL. Old USN planes used to have tube for peeing while on the mission. Fun story about that in Ben Rich's book. It used to be made up of metal piece and putting in on on the mijjile was rather inconvenient when it would get cold up there. One can imagine. :wink: Ben Rich's first patent was on this - he designed a heating system for the tube. And the pilots were very grateful. :mrgreen:

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1215
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Thakur_B » 28 Nov 2017 01:02

JayS wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:
I thought that was what "p"tot tubes were for.


LOL. Old USN planes used to have tube for peeing while on the mission. Fun story about that in Ben Rich's book. It used to be made up of metal piece and putting in on on the mijjile was rather inconvenient when it would get cold up there. One can imagine. :wink: Ben Rich's first patent was on this - he designed a heating system for the tube. And the pilots were very grateful. :mrgreen:


The very thought of freezing cold metal touching nunuswamy gives me shudders, not to mention, the skin may freeze and get stuck on contact :rotfl:

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1116
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby ArjunPandit » 28 Nov 2017 01:17



Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest