Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

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.
Arun.prabhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Arun.prabhu » 24 Nov 2017 23:17

Philip wrote:The LCA is a good point defence fighter with added GA/CS capability.Equipped with both BVR and WVR AAMs that we are using on our marquee MKIs, and given its size and reduced stealth, it should be ideal for the fighter/ fighter-ground attack class that does most of the biz during wartime.The ball is now in the ,mantra.

.


Absolutely one hundred percent agree.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 657
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby ArjunPandit » 25 Nov 2017 00:24

Arun.prabhu wrote:....Oper di gur gur di annexe di bay dhania di mung daal di of Toba Tek Singh and Pakistan.....
Bhavnao mein na bha karo....sab rakshak hai yahan

he prabu!
this ponga pundit requests you to please read this statement of yours

Katare
BRFite
Posts: 1890
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Katare » 25 Nov 2017 01:07

Arun,
Why are u arguing with me on something that i don’t disagree on with you. Don’t you read before writing?

Arun.prabhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Arun.prabhu » 25 Nov 2017 01:27

Katare wrote:Arun,
Why are u arguing with me on something that i don’t disagree on with you. Don’t you read before writing?

Well, I’m about to be banned for getting in karan’s Face elsewhere, but in my defence here, I don’t know Hindi and google translate doesn’t help. So sorry if I misunderstood you.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby fanne » 25 Nov 2017 17:44

Karan, the Canberra's were retired mainly because they were obsolete (and additionally parts were hard to come by). How we are managing our Mig27, we can maintain the Canberra's (parts hard to come by, maybe easier than Canberra), we have two squadron to maintain (40 planes), with over 150 planes (not counting Mig23s) planes being used for parts.
But if Canberra would be a easier fit and cheap, lets do it, or stop penny pinching and buy a IL-76 (in fact we have many sitting because we have a lousy restacking policy, parts are only ordered when needed, some time they have a lag time of 1.5 years (and add another year for Russian inefficiency), we can improve the policy and convert few of these as test beds (does licensing allow for that?)

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Khalsa » 26 Nov 2017 13:55

ArjunPandit wrote:
Arun.prabhu wrote:....Oper di gur gur di annexe di bay dhania di mung daal di of Toba Tek Singh and Pakistan.....
Bhavnao mein na bha karo....sab rakshak hai yahan

he prabu!
this ponga pundit requests you to please read this statement of yours


LOL
toba tek singh what ?
can I get a bit of whats going on with Dal , Dhania and Toba tek Singh.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15951
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby chetak » 27 Nov 2017 11:14

whatsapp forward


This is a great read, acceleration all the way

1979. A MiG-21 fighter base in Tezpur, Assam. I was scheduled for a practice low-level strike mission as the wing-man in a two-aircraft mission. I was Golf2 in Golf formation.

To get over the hassles of routing and timings and traffic disruptions at other airfields, specially civilian airfields, practice missions like these take off from their airfield, carry out a triangular navigation exercise and mock-strike one's own airfield.

We were to simulate attacking an enemy airfield with a Reinforced Cement Concrete runway using Durandal concrete buster bombs, render the runway unusable and get away. We also had to ensure that we stayed below the vision of early-warning radar. Which meant we had to fly at 100 metres above the ground or less.

The Durandal Bomb is a specialized concrete busting bomb manufactured by Matra of France (now MBDA). As the bomb is released, a drogue chute opens and tilts the bomb due to air drag. As soon as the bomb angle to the ground reaches 40 degrees, a rocket booster fires and drives the rocket onto the concrete surface. At the concrete surface, a primary charge drives the warhead under the concrete. Thereafter, a selectable time-delay causes a secondary charge to explode, raising concrete slabs up into the air, thereby destroying the runway surface and making it very difficult to repair. Just creating pot-holes with conventional bombs makes no sense because pot-holes can be easily filled up in no time at all. A Durandal Bomb can penetrate up to 16 inches of concrete!

As the wing-man, I planned the navigation sortie, which took us in a wide arc over the Brahmaputra and the Kaziranga National Park, northwards crossing the Brahmaputra once again, towards the Nameri National Park before turning left, crossing the Kameng River and aligning with the runway for an attack along Runway 23. It was monsoon season and one of those rare days that allowed low-level flying. The Brahmaputra was swollen and its banks were up to 60 kms apart - flying over the river was like flying over a sea.

After a briefing by my formation leader Golf1, we proceeded to our respective aircraft. Our navigation plan had been filed with Air Traffic Control, including our Estimated Time on Target (ETT).

ETT is almost a fetish with fighter pilots and during air exercises, penalties are imposed for ETTs beyond +/- 4 seconds. So to hit a target at a designated time, one has to work backwards from ETT to navigation time to take-off-roll time, to throttle opening time, to taxiing time, to engine starting time to strap-up time... As everything was very finely timed, with a small margin added, we strapped up in our cockpits, closed the canopy and armed the canopy and ejection seat explosive and rocket cartridges, started engines and taxied out to Runway 05. Remember this information - the runway in use is 05 and the raid is going to come in along 23, i.e. the opposite direction of taking off and landing traffic.

We had ATC clearance for take off, so we lined up on either half of the runway for a formation take off - two fighter aircraft taking off together, using half the runway each. Golf1 called out "Reheat" over the radio telephone and both of us lit-up our afterburners, the kick in the seat of the pants telling us it had lit-up, holding the aircraft, straining against brakes. "Wheels roll NOW" and we both released brakes, reset our chronometers and begin rolling down the runway. Golf1 keeps his afterburner at partial setting so that Golf2 has a small power-band to play within, for keeping station. The acceleration is exhilarating! At 200 kph the Air Speed Indicator (ASI) begins to register. Keep station. Speed at acceleration marker OK. Keep station. 360 kph. Unstick. We're airborne. Wheels up. Climb to 500 m, turn Southwards and set course to first checkpoint. Carry out cockpit checks and descend to 100m above the ground.

The barometric altimeter can no longer give us reliable readings. At such close quarters to the ground you cannot trust a pressure device. We have set our radio altimeter alarm at 50m and engaged the auto-pilot recovery mode - if the aircraft descends below 50m the auto pilot will, quite violently, pull up the aircraft above that.

We're at 900 kph now, 100m above the ground, flying in a loose tactical formation, separated from each other by 100 metres. 900 kph is a great speed to fly at, because mental calculation of distances is so easy with a whole number of 15 km/min or 4 secs to a km. The navigation route, drawn on a paper map, with checkpoint timings, is visible on my right thigh, inserted in a talc pocket sewed on to the right thigh of my flying overalls. But both of us have memorized every checkpoint timing to the second. We reach our first checkpoint on time and turn left Northwards towards our next checkpoint. Inside the turn Golf1 points out a herd of rhinos. Oh yes, "contact!", I call out. As we roll out of the turn, I check my chronometer - yes, the turn was perfect, our timing is perfect to the second.

The only navigation equipment practically available to a MiG-21 pilot in those days was the Eyeball Mk-I; no GPS, no Variable Omni Range (VOR), no Instrument Landing System (ILS). There was an Automatic Direction Finder (ADF) which would tell you the direction to a ground based radio beacon. You knew sine and cosine values for all angles in 15 degree increments by rote, so that your angle to a beacon, your chronometer and your Air Speed Indicator (ASI) could allow you to calculate mentally your distance to a beacon. But during operations all beacons would be switched off, specially in enemy territory! There was a good primary compass too, but a compass is a pretty useless piece of equipment if you don't know where you are in the first place!

At our next checkpoint we turn left over the Kameng River, and hope we are aligned with the runway, still more than 30 km away, eyes straining to check the first sight of the runway so that we can carry out last second manoeuvres to align with the runway. Golf1 will carry out a Durandal bomb run on the left of the runway. I will bomb the right side. We are now in tighter formation, with me about 50 m behind and half a runway width to the right of Golf1. A quick look at the chronometer. We're bang on time. "Runway contact" I call out. "Contact" responds Golf1. We make a quick correction in alignment. We're less than 10 km from target, approaching it at 900 kph! A few seconds more...

The runway is approaching us at a weird perspective at level flight, 100m above the ground, instead of the 8 to 9 degree glide slope one is used to, while approaching it for landing. Centre... centre... the right thumb slides slowly to the bomb release button on the joystick, calmly pushing aside the safety guard. Oxygen flow has increased to both pilots. Heartbeats are in the range of 150 - 180 bpm, blood pressure shooting up to above 180/120 mm Hg. We're over the runway 23 dumbbell when suddenly, both of us jam each other's radio call with a "BOGEY 12 O'CLOCK!"

In millisecond time frames, two super-tuned human bodies, threw two high performance jet fighters into an extremely violent, rivet-popping climbing turn to left and right, away from the runway centre, saving themselves and an Indian Airlines Fokker Friendship aircraft and all its passengers, from sudden death!

An obvious ATC error had almost killed two fighter pilots and a few dozen other people. Golf1 and Golf 2 climbed and regrouped, joined circuit and landed.

We never did learn whether the Indian Airlines pilot even saw what had almost happened! We only know, like us, he didn't file a near-miss report or call ATC about the incident. Our fighters, having exceeded g-tolerance limits, were taken off the fleet for detailed airframe checks. The errant Air Traffic Controller drove down to the Squadron tea-room and hugged both of us in a gesture of apology, it being assumed that he would be standing drinks at the bar that evening.

Otherwise, it was just another day in the life of a fighter pilot.
--

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 958
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Manish_P » 27 Nov 2017 12:13

Chetak sir, thanks so much for sharing this. I absolutely love to read such articles.. the fine points (like below quoted) fascinate me no end!

900 kph is a great speed to fly at, because mental calculation of distances is so easy with a whole number of 15 km/min or 4 secs to a km.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5880
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Indranil » 27 Nov 2017 13:33

Khalsa wrote:
LOL
toba tek singh what ?
can I get a bit of whats going on with Dal , Dhania and Toba tek Singh.

No.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 14621
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Karan M » 28 Nov 2017 03:43

Fanne, even the MiG-27s are due to be retired anytime now, as soon as the IAF can get enough Su-30s or LCAs or Rafales into its force.

I really doubt if we have enough spares to put the Canberras into regular use. It would be easier and simpler to just get an IL-76. And a business jet + a fighter jet for other sensor and powerplant trials.

fanne wrote:Karan, the Canberra's were retired mainly because they were obsolete (and additionally parts were hard to come by). How we are managing our Mig27, we can maintain the Canberra's (parts hard to come by, maybe easier than Canberra), we have two squadron to maintain (40 planes), with over 150 planes (not counting Mig23s) planes being used for parts.
But if Canberra would be a easier fit and cheap, lets do it, or stop penny pinching and buy a IL-76 (in fact we have many sitting because we have a lousy restacking policy, parts are only ordered when needed, some time they have a lag time of 1.5 years (and add another year for Russian inefficiency), we can improve the policy and convert few of these as test beds (does licensing allow for that?)

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Khalsa » 28 Nov 2017 08:12

Indranil wrote:
Khalsa wrote:
LOL
toba tek singh what ?
can I get a bit of whats going on with Dal , Dhania and Toba tek Singh.

No.

why ?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33986
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 28 Nov 2017 08:24

Manish_P wrote:Chetak sir, thanks so much for sharing this. I absolutely love to read such articles.. the fine points (like below quoted) fascinate me no end!

900 kph is a great speed to fly at, because mental calculation of distances is so easy with a whole number of 15 km/min or 4 secs to a km.

+1

Incidentally 900 kmph is about 500 knots. That is why the latter figure keeps appearing I guess.

SiddharthS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 26
Joined: 04 Sep 2017 15:45

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby SiddharthS » 29 Nov 2017 03:20

This should be the IAF's future force structure :


2030          43 sq
                                          no.of sq

Tejas mk1               40           2.2
Tejas mk1a            126          7            2020-25      25 per year
Tejas mk2              150          8.3            2025-30       30 per year
Su-30mki               314        17.4
Mig-29                     66          3.6
Rafale                      36          2
Mirage                     45          2.5


2030-35       45.4 sq

Tejas mk1                40           2.2
Tejas mk1a             126          7
Tejas mk2              150           8.3            
Tejas mk3              100           5.5      20 per year
Su-30mki               314         17.4
Rafale                      36           2
AMCA Block 1           54           3         10.8 per year


2035-40        47.5 sq

Tejas mk1                 40          2.2
Tejas mk1a              126          7
Tejas mk2                150          8.3
Tejas mk3                100          5.5
Su-30mki                 126          7
Rafale                        36          2
AMCA Block 1             54          3
AMCA Block 2           100          5.5       20 per year
Ghatak blk 1            126           7          25 per year


2040-45          52.3 sq

Tejas mk1a               126          7
Tejas mk2                 126          7 
Tejas mk3                 150          8.3
Rafale                         36         2
AMCA Block 1               54        3
AMCA Block 2             100        5.5
Amca Block 3             100        5.5      20 per year
Ghatak blk 1              126        7
Ghatak blk 2              126        7         25 per year

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4128
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Rakesh » 29 Nov 2017 03:59

India’s Soviet-Origin Mi-17 Helicopters to Undergo Lethal Upgrade
https://sputniknews.com/military/201711 ... s-upgrade/

https://twitter.com/IndianDefenceRA/sta ... 6567069702 ---> IAF approaches HAL for retrofitting 60 of its Soviet-origin Mi-17 with the Tactical Air Navigation System (TACAN) as well as the VHF Omni-directional Radio Range (VOR) equipment and instrument landing system.

Image

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Khalsa » 30 Nov 2017 05:14

^^^^ Daemn @@@

the steel finish is impressive.
Just a PS at the moment I guess

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5880
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Indranil » 30 Nov 2017 05:25

A lot of PS.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4128
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Rakesh » 30 Nov 2017 05:42

Or it is a model.


srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3685
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby srai » 01 Dec 2017 12:51


deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3625
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby deejay » 01 Dec 2017 13:00



In fairness, the Eurofighter Typhoon offer was for the larger order of 126 jets involving better economies of scale. The price for 36 flyaway jets was not discussed as India did not engage in detailed talks with the consortium.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 01 Dec 2017 13:01


Several sources involved in the process told ThePrint that while a patient hearing was given initially to Eurofighter, a clear signal came from South Block that only the Rafale was being considered.

Also, unlike the process followed with France, where several options on numbers and capabilities were discussed, talks with Germany and Britain did not go beyond a paper proposal.

The Eurofighter Typhoon had been offered at a total cost of €17.5 billion for 126 fighters, or €138 million per plane.

The Rafale deal cost India €7.1 billion for 36 jets, which translates to €197 million per jet.

Even if the €353 million performance based logistics cost – the money to maintain and fly the fighters for five years – is deducted, the Rafale jets cost India €187 million per fighter.



Clearly between the two selected types L1 Tender was not followed else Eurofighter would be the winner by a good margin

Seems now more and more likely Rafale deal is turning out to be a Scam in Making. MOD should put up a White Paper and clear the air.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3625
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby deejay » 01 Dec 2017 13:04

I understood differently Austin. The original MMRCA tender was cancelled. Eurofighter was not L1 in that. In their proposal after the scrapping they quoted lower than Rafale. There was no tender for the 36 aircraft deal as it was to expedite purchase.

SCAM or a decision which needed to be out of the ordinary is a matter of inclination as of now.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 01 Dec 2017 13:05

deejay wrote:
srai wrote:Original letter attached. Nice :)


In fairness, the Eurofighter Typhoon offer was for the larger order of 126 jets involving better economies of scale. The price for 36 flyaway jets was not discussed as India did not engage in detailed talks with the consortium.


Outright purchase of 36 fighter for Eurofighter should be cheaper as it does not involve any TOT , Lic Production cost that 126 Deal had envisaged.

French military products are known to be expensive and if MOD had determined to purchase Rafale over Eurofighter MOD should clarify why , was this something of Strategic Nature or was Reliance was favoured.

Way back in 2004 German offered to provide 6 Type 212 submarine over French Scorpene at the cost of 4 Type 212 subs but MOD did not opt for it.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 01 Dec 2017 13:07

deejay wrote:I understood differently Austin. The original MMRCA tender was cancelled. Eurofighter was not L1 in that. In their proposal after the scrapping they quoted lower than Rafale. There was no tender for the 36 aircraft deal as it was to expedite purchase.


So what was the cost of Rafale in original MMRCA tender we know from these letters the cost of Eurofighter ?

MOD should clarify on cost of 36 fighter for Rafale versus Eurofighter to settle the matter

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3625
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby deejay » 01 Dec 2017 13:10

Austin wrote:...
Outright purchase of 36 fighter for Eurofighter should be cheaper as it does not involve any TOT , Lic Production cost that 126 Deal had envisaged.

French military products are known to be expensive and if MOD had determined to purchase Rafale over Eurofighter MOD should clarify why , was this something of Strategic Nature or was Reliance was favoured.

Way back in 2004 German offered to provide 6 Type 212 submarine over French Scorpene at the cost of 4 Type 212 subs but MOD did not opt for it.


Why was Eurofighter not L1 in the original tender? I have some interaction with these companies - both Rafale guys and Eurofighter guys - the letter vs hidden costs would be an interesting conversation.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3625
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby deejay » 01 Dec 2017 13:22

Austin wrote:[...

So what was the cost of Rafale in original MMRCA tender we know from these letters the cost of Eurofighter ?

MOD should clarify on cost of 36 fighter for Rafale versus Eurofighter to settle the matter


A clue is in the letter attached (and I am typing from there):

The Print attached letter says among other things:
" Recent developments and further maturity in the Eurofighter Typhoon program have generated synergies that result in approximately 20% reduction of our previous firm-fixed price"


Do notice, they do not say the price reduction is because there is not TOT etc.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 01 Dec 2017 13:29

The only good reason I see why GOI would have opted for costlier Rafale if it turns out to be true is because the French would have helped in Hardwiring it for nuclear Role something Mirage has done in past.

The NPT ayatollah in EU and US wont let us do that.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3625
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby deejay » 01 Dec 2017 13:59

Austin wrote:The only good reason I see why GOI would have opted for costlier Rafale if it turns out to be true is because the French would have helped in Hardwiring it for nuclear Role something Mirage has done in past.

The NPT ayatollah in EU and US wont let us do that.


That is a given and clear from the bases selected and nos ordered.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Austin » 01 Dec 2017 14:03

deejay wrote:
Austin wrote:The only good reason I see why GOI would have opted for costlier Rafale if it turns out to be true is because the French would have helped in Hardwiring it for nuclear Role something Mirage has done in past.

The NPT ayatollah in EU and US wont let us do that.


That is a given and clear from the bases selected and nos ordered.


Yes and GOI will neither confirm or deny this to maintain ambiguity

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3625
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby deejay » 01 Dec 2017 14:08

We can't confirm or deny for Opsec reasons.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33986
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 01 Dec 2017 16:56


I would be wary of news like this.

Politically such news is to embarrass the current Central govt. In Karnataka it is now being claimed that NDA has cheated the State by selecting Rafale and is demanding cancellation. Our nation is chock full of oiseaules of this type

I would throw this news report straight in the bin. It reminds me of my neighbour Ranganathan in the UK who used to ask "How much did you spend on this xyz da?"Me "108 pounds" He: "Aiyo. I could have got it for 96 pounds in Tottenham court road"

I also think this "hardwiring for nuclear role" is unlikely because we already have too many methods of nuclear delivery and not enough aircraft for plain ol' conventional war.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3685
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby srai » 01 Dec 2017 18:41

^^^
The lesson to be applied for future purchases is to do the final negotiation with both the L1 and L2 winners to get the best price. Let those two vendors compete and offer "special" prices. Negotiating with just one L1 selection, the GoI hardly has any leverage to get the lowest prices. Instead, the prices went up during negotiation with just the L1 vendor.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JayS » 01 Dec 2017 19:01

shiv wrote:


I also think this "hardwiring for nuclear role" is unlikely because we already have too many methods of nuclear delivery and not enough aircraft for plain ol' conventional war.


In fact N-delivery seems to be the crucial point for purchasing 35 Rafale. Otherwise it makes literally no sense to buy 36 of them. Aren't our M2K the only N-delivery capable jets..? I suppose Rafales are replacement of those post 2030. True Silver bullet.

Also lets not forget, more than a billion are paid for India specific changes. When you have only 36 units to spread this cost over, that's a huge hike in per unit price right there. This is a fixed one time cost and does not scale with order, which other factors like Maintenance cost, weaponry arguably scale. Another fixed component is establishment of 2 based. Again too low numbers to spread the cost over. Without considering these points if anyone compared per unit price for 126 against that of 36, the article or opinion can be straightaway thrown into dustbin. Its substance less, even if done without any bad intentions.

Its makes all the sense to order 36 more Rafales.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Viv S » 01 Dec 2017 19:07

deejay wrote:Why was Eurofighter not L1 in the original tender? I have some interaction with these companies - both Rafale guys and Eurofighter guys - the letter vs hidden costs would be an interesting conversation.

Could you elaborate further?

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Viv S » 01 Dec 2017 19:12

JayS wrote:In fact N-delivery seems to be the crucial point for purchasing 35 Rafale. Otherwise it makes literally no sense to buy 36 of them. Aren't our M2K the only N-delivery capable jets..? I suppose Rafales are replacement of those post 2030. True Silver bullet.

Well the Jaguars & Su-30s are also rumored to have been rigged for the nuclear role.

I'm sceptical about the nuclear dimension to the Rafale purchase given that -

Image

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33986
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 01 Dec 2017 19:14

JayS wrote:
shiv wrote:
I also think this "hardwiring for nuclear role" is unlikely because we already have too many methods of nuclear delivery and not enough aircraft for plain ol' conventional war.


In fact N-delivery seems to be the crucial point for purchasing 35 Rafale. Otherwise it makes literally no sense to buy 36 of them. Aren't our M2K the only N-delivery capable jets..? I suppose Rafales are replacement of those post 2030. True Silver bullet.

I don't think so. This is yet another rumour started on the internet with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

As I see it - it is completely absurd for the air force or the MoD to spend an arm and a leg just for nuclear delivery on a plane that CANNOT reach eastern China and we already have planes to cover all of Pakistan. We do not have planes for conventional attack and defence and force levels are going down. No matter what we think I don't think 36 planes are going to be reserved for the nuclear attack role when the probability of nuclear delivery by aircraft is probably 0.1% compared with the 99.9% need for conventional role.

Apart from Mirage 2000 and Su 30 I think even Jaguars have practised "toss bombing" for nuclear delivery.

This is just one more internet bogey that can never be proven or disproved within the lifespan of anyone on this forum
Last edited by shiv on 01 Dec 2017 19:18, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JayS » 01 Dec 2017 19:17

Viv S wrote:
JayS wrote:In fact N-delivery seems to be the crucial point for purchasing 35 Rafale. Otherwise it makes literally no sense to buy 36 of them. Aren't our M2K the only N-delivery capable jets..? I suppose Rafales are replacement of those post 2030. True Silver bullet.

Well the Jaguars & Su-30s are also rumored to have been rigged for the nuclear role.

I'm sceptical about the nuclear dimension to the Rafale purchase given that -

Image


Jaguars are slated to be retired in a decade or so. And I have got the impression from various sources that I came across that Su-30MKI are not capable of N-delivery (due to Russian restrictions). I may be wrong though.

But even if one considers this argument to be acceptable, Rafale IMO still scores in one more place - ability of long range deep penetration with N-weapon due to its 4.5 gen features e.g. reduced RCS etc.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby JayS » 01 Dec 2017 19:18

shiv wrote:
JayS wrote:
In fact N-delivery seems to be the crucial point for purchasing 35 Rafale. Otherwise it makes literally no sense to buy 36 of them. Aren't our M2K the only N-delivery capable jets..? I suppose Rafales are replacement of those post 2030. True Silver bullet.

I don't think so. This is yet another rumour started on the internet with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

As I see it - it is completely absurd for the air force or the MoD to spend an arm and a leg just for nuclear delivery on a plane that CANNOT reach eastern China and we already have planes to cover all of Pakistan. We do not have planes for conventional attack and defence and force levels are going down. No matter what we think I don't think 36 planes are going to be reserved for the nuclear attack role when the probability of nuclear delivery by aircraft is probably 0.1% compared with the 99.9% need for conventional role.

This is just one more internet bogey that can never be proven or disproved within the lifespan of anyone on this forum

I agree. I always held an opinion that Rafale holds an edge due to perceived flexibility shown by the French in past and due to IAF's experience with M2K, much before the G2G deal happened. And if it doesn't seem logical to me, then its entirely possible due to limitation of my knowledge and imagination. No claim of knowing something or trying to sell it. I am just giving my opinion, for the sake of inducing discussion.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby Viv S » 01 Dec 2017 19:51

JayS wrote:Jaguars are slated to be retired in a decade or so. And I have got the impression from various sources that I came across that Su-30MKI are not capable of N-delivery (due to Russian restrictions). I may be wrong though.

Given that the MC is domestic & HAL has developed enough confidence with the type to autonomously modify it for BrahMos carriage, I don't think adapting it for nuclear carriage would be a hassle. In any case, the interface between a conventional & nuclear BrahMos would be quite similar, if not the same, with the arming mechanism/safeties installed on the missile itself.

But even if one considers this argument to be acceptable, Rafale IMO still scores in one more place - ability of long range deep penetration with N-weapon due to its 4.5 gen features e.g. reduced RCS etc.

Well the EW gear gives the Rafale a big edge while delivering gravity bombs. Reduced RCS, maybe not so much - not once its laden with all the external fuel required for a long range flight.

Of course, if a N-ALCM is introduced into the picture, the Su-30 becomes the clearly safer option for the nuclear role. Worth noting that the AdlA performs the same role with ASMP-As launched by Rafales & Mirage 2000Ns.

Image

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33986
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Postby shiv » 01 Dec 2017 19:55

On another note I have never seen from any official source, aviation magazine or similar document the statement that the French helped us "hardwire" the Mirage 2000 for the nuclear delivery role. This is not the sort of information that the SFC or Air Force would talk about. Mostly such info comes from the media claiming to be "close to" "sources". And we know how much the media can be trusted.

The thing is - I think we as a people like to swallow such stories true or not. I fond it interesting that the story about Pakistan is exactly the opposite - ie that the US did not supply what Pakis needed for nuclear delivery. They did it themselves on their F-16s


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aditya_V, deb_v, gauravsharma, srin, Thakur_B, Vivek K, Yahoo [Bot] and 47 guests