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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33970
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 17 Aug 2017 14:37

chetak wrote:The AN32 is a special order quickly b@st@rdized aircraft made for the IAF from the AN26 civilian version transport using the AI20 series of engines that were capable of being overhauled in India.

The amount of problems caused by this hasty b@stardiz@tion is unmentionable.

Why were sims not ordered for them as well as the IL 76?? if someone were so inclined?? The technology was certainly available at the time. It was a mind set. How did the IN go the sim way??

Chetakji the upengining of An 26 ("Curl") to create An-32 was for hot and high performance - but that is a digression from the question. It is well known that simulators are available for C-130 and C-17. But I am asking about the IAF workhorses An 32 and Il 76. India has more than 100 An 32s and 17 Il 76 (as per Wiki). C-17 and C-130 have a long long way to go before they can come anywhere near meeting the IAF's logistic role

Who makes simulators for An 32 and Il 76?

To my knowledge no one does - although some efforts have gone towards making An 32 simulators in recent years (not sure) Google gives me no info so if I have missed the fact that there are Il 76 and An 32 full motion simulators available, please update my information

I will be happy to have my qibla set right, but if there are no simulators available, how can anyone order them?

Also I would like to question your assertion sans further information:
The amount of problems caused by this hasty b@stardiz@tion is unmentionable.

This is the first time I am hearing about problems and you have worded it in a manner that makes me wonder how the IAF has operated that plane for decades from Indian Ocean to Himalayas with an excellent safety record. Please expand on that so we can all learn. If the plane is bad the maintenance must be extraordinarily good.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 953
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

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

Postby Manish_P » 17 Aug 2017 15:14

Indranil wrote:The truth is they wanted to hand in under the wing. They couldn't. So they went over the wing.


Indranil sir - Some points and counter-points (from other forums) which i had found earlier when i was reading up on the topic of the over-wing pylons on the big cat.. just felt like sharing

These are by different posters on different forums (not sure if the names should be mentioned)

The original reason was to "save" pylons by placing the magic2 sraam's on the top.This was first done by the IAF'S ASTE(test establishment which does iaf specific modifications) and the design was then given over to HAL.Subsequently,the design was *licenced* to Bae and the RAF followed suit.They did pay royalty for quite a few years..or might be still doing so.


Most missiles drop, then fire...as opposed to firing from the rail. Bombs and wing tanks would be equally troublesome for the same reason. Gravity is not your friend when your wing is under whatever you're trying to drop. Let's not forget we're trying to maintain laminar airflow over the wing to get efficient lift. Pylons on top can only spoil that effort.


Putting engines up there makes at least a little sense; keeping the engines as far from the ground as possible reduces the chances of foreign object damage, and is also a bit safer for ground crews. However, it also makes maintenance that much harder (and risky). A dropped wrench while working on a Citation results in a loud clank as the wrench hits the floor. Do the same while working above the wing....sharp-bottomed dents are a no-no in aviation. It also makes it difficult for routine pre-flight checks.


The English Electric Lightning - possible inspiration ?
Image 1, Image 2

Edit- Above links changed to pure image links, since the original link has non-family content on the web page.
Last edited by Manish_P on 17 Aug 2017 20:10, edited 1 time in total.

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

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

Postby chetak » 17 Aug 2017 15:36

shiv wrote:
chetak wrote:The AN32 is a special order quickly b@st@rdized aircraft made for the IAF from the AN26 civilian version transport using the AI20 series of engines that were capable of being overhauled in India.

The amount of problems caused by this hasty b@stardiz@tion is unmentionable.

Why were sims not ordered for them as well as the IL 76?? if someone were so inclined?? The technology was certainly available at the time. It was a mind set. How did the IN go the sim way??

Chetakji the upengining of An 32 was for hot and high performance - but that is a digression from the question. It is well known that simulators are available for C-130 and C-17. But I am asking about the IAF workhorses An 32 and Il 76

Who makes simulators for An 32 and Il 76?

To my knowledge no one does - although some efforts have gone towards making An 32 simulators in recent years (not sure) Google gives me no info so if I have missed the fact that there are Il 76 and An 32 full motion simulators available, please update my information

I will be happy to have my qibla set right, but if there are no simulators available, how can anyone order them?

Also I would like to question your assertion sans further information:
The amount of problems caused by this hasty b@stardiz@tion is unmentionable.

This is the first time I am hearing about problems and you have worded it in a manner that makes me wonder how the IAF has operated that plane for decades from Indian Ocean to Himalayas with an excellent safety record. Please expand on that so we can all learn


@Shivji

Open forum, so will not expand further. Maybe during some meet. The problems have largely been overcome now but it took a while. There are some compromises too.

the safety record is not the issue.

For making a sim, basically, you need an "aircraft pack" and an "engine pack" meaning detailed flight data as well as detailed engine data. These are available only from the respective manufacturers and they provide it on payment to companies that make the sim.

Of course, the making of the sim is enormously complicated and the visual data base has to be integrated as well.

there are multiple and different operating systems that need to be tied together.

There are many sim manufacturers who can do this work, including russian companies.

If you ask for the sim, and are prepared to pay the costs, they will make it for you. I cannot vouch for this but I heard that the Airbus 380 sim is/was costlier than the aircraft itself.

Sims run 20-22 hours a day, 7 days a week. They are too expensive to keep down but very much cheaper than the airborne aircraft used for training.

no one is going to make a sim like some dosa stall on the foot path waiting for customers with frying dosas on the skillet. You have to specifically ask for the military sim if you have a sufficient fleet strength.

The only exceptions are hugely successful commercial aircraft like the boeing or airbus. Sim manufacturers will develop a sim, on their own, get it certified and sell because they are assured of huge orders from airlines and training facilities the world over. So you have 6/7 manufacturers, all selling the boeing series and airbus series of sims. It helps that most of the aircraft in a series generally have a common cockpit layout, so just by booting into a different version of the software you can train on say, the airbus 318, 319, 320, 321 etc in the very same simulator, sometimes with very minimal hardware changes.

Its the same for the boeing series too.

I understand and respect your passion for aircraft. I still cannot help but look up and scan the sky whenever I hear an aircraft engine.

I cringe many a time when I see needless details casually bandied about on the open forum. It would take some one interested many months to dig out the same info from the open source and just by monitoring this forum it falls into their laps. Not everyone monitoring is passionately or even benignly interested in aviation and surely have other motives.

I have seen callous aholes, even after being repeatedly cautioned, walking around with submarine noise signatures in their briefcases and leaving it about openly on unattended office tables, freely accessible to one and all. "Going for tea" is what they said.

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12908
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

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

Postby negi » 17 Aug 2017 15:52

The need for SIMs is real I think until recently Coast Gaurd used to rely on IN dorniers for getting their pilots enough training so the ratio of aircraft to number of trainees was lower than desirable for both specially the CG; it makes a lot of sense for modernized aviation arms to supplement their course with SIM based training.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33970
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 17 Aug 2017 16:03

Chetak I don't doubt the usefulness of simulators. I am only questioning the criticism of the IAF for not having simulators for An-32 and Il 76 when simulators were simply not available. Simulators have become "easier" to make ever since computing power became exceptional, and after fly-by-wire aircraft became commonplace - simulators were the way to go. In my (relatively uninformed) view - even in 1990 computer power and memory were not good enough for a realistic simulator. But I may be wrong here.

But with regard to the IAF they were operating the An 32 and Il 76 from an era before flight simulation became the norm. Even the Russians - who probably did not fly their own planes as much as the IAF does, did not create a simulator.

As far as IT skills in India to create software simulators (let alone full motion simulators) - I would say that only the generation that has entered the Air Force in the last 10 years has any useful skill in IT. The rest are old codgers who think email and Facebook offer great privacy and look proudly upon their children who have "great IT skills" in MS Word and Excel

Ironically I briefly "flew" an LCA software sim in ADA before the first flight of Tejas and much later a HJT 36 Sitara sim (with late Baldev Singh stopping me from crashing). There is an ALH sim as well - I don't know if it is being used, But An 32 and IL 76 do not have sims - and I expect it is because all the flight characteristics have not been converted to usable digital data.

Aero India some years ago also had a tank sim - I think it was a T-72 (or Arjun) I can't recall. I think the army uses INSAS sims - but it's been a while since I saw any information on that.

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

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

Postby chetak » 17 Aug 2017 17:10

shiv wrote:Chetak I don't doubt the usefulness of simulators. I am only questioning the criticism of the IAF for not having simulators for An-32 and Il 76 when simulators were simply not available. Simulators have become "easier" to make ever since computing power became exceptional, and after fly-by-wire aircraft became commonplace - simulators were the way to go. In my (relatively uninformed) view - even in 1990 computer power and memory were not good enough for a realistic simulator. But I may be wrong here.

But with regard to the IAF they were operating the An 32 and Il 76 from an era before flight simulation became the norm. Even the Russians - who probably did not fly their own planes as much as the IAF does, did not create a simulator.

As far as IT skills in India to create software simulators (let alone full motion simulators) - I would say that only the generation that has entered the Air Force in the last 10 years has any useful skill in IT. The rest are old codgers who think email and Facebook offer great privacy and look proudly upon their children who have "great IT skills" in MS Word and Excel

Ironically I briefly "flew" an LCA software sim in ADA before the first flight of Tejas and much later a HJT 36 Sitara sim (with late Baldev Singh stopping me from crashing). There is an ALH sim as well - I don't know if it is being used, But An 32 and IL 76 do not have sims - and I expect it is because all the flight characteristics have not been converted to usable digital data.

Aero India some years ago also had a tank sim - I think it was a T-72 (or Arjun) I can't recall. I think the army uses INSAS sims - but it's been a while since I saw any information on that.


IIRC, the sea harrier sim has a pdp-11 heart and massive disk drives. Computing power was available.

This discussion is going no where fast. Lets agree to disagree.

There is a very valid reason as to why the IN so determinedly and in solitary splendor :) , peeled off into indigenous development stuff years ago and ab initio established capacities for in-house R&D, developing, nurturing and sustaining captive PSUs like BEL and the major shipyards.

A chosen lot were sent abroad to do MTech and PhDs in carefully specified topics and immediately set to development work and this was before anyone else even had a suspicion that such a talent pool was going to be required.

Despite what anyone may think, no one service is the repository of aviation knowledge. Other forces too are equally proficient. some services make it a point not to encroach into the domain of others but will yield to none in professional matters and therein lies the rub.

On the forum, some will bat for one and still others for another.

some have taken the high road and some others the low road. As long as the destination is the same, it really should not matter. At the end of the day, there are not that many young men in the world, with barely visible wispy mustaches, able to routinely take off, fly far out at sea and land back on a rolling and pitching, hand kerchief sized deck, day or night, rain or shine.

Crew proficiency is environmentally derived and defined and not universally applicable and it's also not some god given gift available only to the chosen few. Those who train will benefit. If the environment changes, retrain again. Horses for courses.

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

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

Postby chetak » 17 Aug 2017 17:51

@ramana ji,

the perfidy of the british is slowly unraveling.

They well knew that we did not have 13 million pounds in spare change lying around.


theresa may coming to India with outstretched hands for trade deals is looking increasingly comical.

This, considering the fact that the scared british virtually gave away the rolls royce derwent engines to russia for a mere pittance and helped their future enemies to establish a massive aircraft industry.

Truly 'great oaks from little acorns grow'.

India’s Disappointing Marut Jet Fighter Proved Itself in Combat


India’s Disappointing Marut Jet Fighter Proved Itself in Combat

Image

Sebastien Roblin
August 13, 2017


Fifty years ago, India brought into service its first domestically built jet fighter, the HF-24 Marut—indeed, the first operational jet fighter designed and produced by an Asian country besides Russia. Unfortunately, the HF-24 project was hampered by over ambitious goals, poor government oversight and underpowered jet engines, producing a disappointing subsonic light attack plane—foreshadowing some of the difficulties that would plague today’s Tejas fighter. And yet, the Marut went onto win a major victory for India during its brief combat career.

By the 1950s, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) had developed a few propeller planes and had experience license-building British Vampire jets. In 1956, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru authorized the domestic development of a Mach 2 multirole jet fighter with a range of five hundred miles, with the expansion of the Indian aeronautics sector a major objective.


This represented an enormously ambitious project for HAL. New Delhi recruited top talent in the form of Kurt Tank, designer of the legendary Focke-Wulf 190—the best German single-engine fighter of World War II. Even with Tank onboard, HAL had to massively ramp up its design staff (twelvefold!) and expand its facilities to accommodate a project of this scale.

By 1959 Kurt had already produced a full-scale X-241 glider mockup of the plane, and a flying prototype followed in 1961. However, his swept-wing twin-engine design counted upon an uprated Bristol BOr.12 Orpheus afterburning turbojet that could produce 8,150 pounds of thrust. Unfortunately, New Delhi was unwilling to invest 13 million pounds for Bristol to develop the engine, so the HAL team spent years fruitlessly shopping for an alternative in the Soviet Union, Europe and the United States, only for shifting political winds to nix the deal at every turn.

In the end, HAL was forced to make do with non-afterburning Orpheus 703 turbojets, which generated only 4,850 pounds of thrust. As a result, what was intended to be a Mach 2 fighter could only barely attain Mach 1, and even then only at high altitudes.


The HF-24 Marut (“Spirit of the Tempest”) was already obsolete by the time it entered service in 1967, unable to keep up with Indian MiG-21s or Pakistani F-104 Starfighters. Vastly disappointed, the Indian Air Force ditched planned-for radar and air-to-air missile capabilities, and relegated the jet to light attack duties. Only 147 HF-24s were procured, (including eighteen two-seat trainer variants). These equipped the Indian Air Force’s No. 10 Flying Dagger, No. 31 Lions and No. 220 Desert Tigers squadrons—leaving each sixteen-plane squadron with an unusually large surplus of redundant aircraft. To add insult to injury, it cost more to produce each Marut domestically than it did to buy more capable fighters abroad.

At least as a bomber, the Marut could carry up to four thousand pounds of unguided bombs and a hundred sixty-eight-millimeter rockets, in addition to the heavy firepower of its four thirty-millimeter cannons—though the recoil from firing all four guns at once proved so great that they sometimes popped the canopy-ejection switch, and led one test plane to fatally crash! The Marut otherwise had relatively precise controls and good low-speed handling.

Four years later, just as the first two Marut squadrons were beginning to overcome the type’s teething problems, India and Pakistan were on a collision course for war over Bangladesh, then known as East Pakistan. The underperforming fighter bombers were about to star in one of the most famous air-to-ground actions of the war.

Knowing war was imminent, Pakistan hoped to capture territory along the West Pakistan border in a preemptive strike on December 3, 1971 to compensate for the weak position of its forces in East Pakistan. One thrust on the first day of the war was aimed at Jaisalmer and eventually Jodhpur—but held as its first target the isolated border outpost of Longewala, located in the middle of the Thar desert.

The Pakistani force constituted two infantry brigades and armored battalions totaling to more than two thousand infantry and forty-five Type 59 tanks (Chinese copies of the Soviet T-54/55). At Longewala, they faced only the 120 men of “A” Company of the Twenty-Third Battalion of the Punjab Regiment. The outpost boasted only a single 106-millimeter recoilless antitank gun mounted on a jeep, a few mortars and medium machine guns, and a camel-riding squad of the border patrol. By any normal tactical calculus, there was no way the defenders should have held out for long.

However, as the Pakistani troops began to advance at half past midnight without the benefit of tactical reconnaissance, the tanks bogged down in the thick sand dunes around the outpost. The defenders, situated on a rocky outcrop a hundred feet high, waited until the struggling tanks had crept up to short range and then opened fire, destroying twelve of them with their the lone recoilless gun and old World War II–era PIAT antitank projectors. The Pakistani return fire inflicted only two fatalities. The attack ground to a halt as the Pakistani infantry encountered what they believed to be a minefield behind a row of barbed wire—which hours later was discovered not to exist.

A renewed offensive was being organized at the break of dawn when the Marut jets of 10 Squadron, reinforced by four Hawker Hunters, descended on the battlefield, unleashing T-10 rockets and spitting thirty-millimeter cannon shells at the bogged-down armor in what was described as a “turkey shoot.” By the afternoon, the attack planes had destroyed an additional twenty-two tanks and at least a hundred more vehicles, bringing what should have been an overwhelming assault smashing to a halt. This outcome is particularly remarkable as the Indian aircraft did not benefit from the specialized guided antitank missiles that give modern ground-attack planes high lethality against tanks. Indian ground forces counterattacked by noon, sending the Pakistani force into full retreat, setting the tone for the remainder of the war on the Western front.

The Marut remained in the thick of the action throughout the thirteen-day war, strafing airfields, bombing ammunitions dumps, and hitting tanks and artillery on the frontlines—flying over two hundred sorties and suffering three losses to ground fire. A fourth Marut was destroyed on the ground while taxiing on the runway at Uttarlai by a strafing Pakistani Air Force F-104 Starfighter. Nonetheless, the HF-24s boasted a high serviceability rate and proved quite tough, with several of the jets managing to return to base on just one engine after the other was shot up. Major Bakshi of 220 Squadron even scored an air-to-air kill in his Marut on December 7 when he pounced upon a Pakistani F-86 Sabre, a Korean War–era jet fighter.

After the conflict, there were several proposals to improve the HF-24 by installing more-powerful engines (the Marut Mark 1R and 2), but the Indian Air Force had little interest in investing further in the Marut when it could acquire faster and heavier-lifting Su-7, MiG-23 and MiG-27 fighter-bombers from the Soviet Union. The HF-24 began to be phased out of Indian squadrons in the 1980s, with the last aircraft being retired from 31 Squadron in 1990. Many of the airframes had only seen very limited use. Now the homemade jets serve on, only as monuments throughout India.

There are a couple of lessons to be drawn from the story of the Marut. The first regards how poor planning and a lack of direction can cripple even a promising project. Bureaucracy and corruption have caused many Indian defense projects to drag out so long that the systems being acquired are obsolete by the time the red tape has been overcome.

However, the main problem underlying the Marut program remains hardly unique to India. Quite simply, acquiring or building powerful jet engines remains a major stumbling block even for nations that command considerable financial resources, such as China. This explains New Delhi’s continuing interest today in acquiring new jet engine technology from the United States and Russia.

The other lesson is that effective application can be more important than maximizing technical merits. The Marut may have been a mediocre fighter, but at Longewala, the attack jet’s abilities were called upon exactly where they were need, when they were needed and in a situation where they could have maximum impact. Many technically superior weapons are never employed under such favorable circumstances; thus, India’s Marut jet fighter, though considered a failed design, more than pulled its weight in an actual combat.

Sébastien Roblin holds a master’s degree in conflict resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in education, editing and refugee resettlement in France and the United States. He currently writes on security and military history for War Is Boring.

Image: HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics), HF-24, Marut Corporation Name: HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics) Official Nickname: Marut Additional Information: India Designation: HF-24 Tags: HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics), HF-24, Marut Repository. Wikimedia Commons



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

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

Postby Karan M » 19 Aug 2017 02:46

http://aviationweek.com/defense/avenger ... 718683e853

Avenger C Prospects Brighten With Potential International Deal

POWAY, California—General Atomics Aeronautical Systems (GA-ASI) is in the early stages of negotiating the potential sale of as many as 90 Predator C Avenger remotely piloted aircraft to an unidentified international ...

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 23 Aug 2017 04:13

IAF staring at midair refuelling crisis, says CAG report
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... wH7nN.html

ashthor
BRFite
Posts: 117
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 11:35

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

Postby ashthor » 23 Aug 2017 14:27

All 10 C17s at Hindon after Yemen Evacuation. A unique click!

Image
https://twitter.com/CestMoiz/status/600154857283031040/photo/1

Ashokk
BRFite
Posts: 264
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Ashokk » 24 Aug 2017 14:52

X-posting:
IAF gets Panagarh Hercules-ready amid high-decibel row with China
KOLKATA: The Indian Air Force has without any fanfare added more teeth to its capabilities in the east by commissioning Air Force Station Arjan Singh in Panagarh, about 150km northwest of Kolkata, in the middle of the stand-off with China in Doklam.

AFS Arjan Singh became fully operational, with its full complement of six C-130J Super Hercules strategic aircraft, in the last week of July. The Doklam stand-off with China started a month earlier.

Panagarh is the second location in the country, after Hindan in Ghaziabad, to have a base for the C-130J aircraft. Technicians and engineers from Lockheed Martin have been building hangars and other facilities for these aircraft at Panagarh for over two years. A senior IAF official in New Delhi said an Ilyushin Il-78 mid-air refueller has also been based at Panagarh to extend the endurance of Eastern Air Command (EAC)'s fighter fleet, particularly the Sukhoi Su-30 MKIs.

"The first of the C-130Js started arriving in India in 2011 and the first squadron (Veiled Vipers) was based at Hindan. These aircraft are considered among the most versatile in their class, capable of landing with troops and equipment at Advanced Landing Grounds with short runways close to the Line of Actual Control with China in India's northeastern states. The Super Hercules is not a mere transport aircraft. It is a strategic asset that can deploy troops in hostile territory at extremely short notice," another IAF officer said.

The hangars and other facilities at the bases at Hindan and Panagarh are hush-hush affairs not without reason. Entire Special Forces units with equipment bunk in air-conditioned quarters below the hangars. This enables them to mobilise within minutes and board the aircraft that are kept ready for take-off at any point of time. When not in actual operation, Special Forces personnel train both with and without the aircraft.

"Panagarh is crucial also because the Indian Army's newly raised 17 Strike Corps is to be headquartered there. Panagarh will also have one of the two high-altitude infantry divisions (59 Division) of the Corps based there. The 17 Strike Corps is being raised keeping in mind threats from across India's northern border. All these make AFS Arjan Singh a key strategic location. It is being kept at a state of full preparedness for 'short and swift' operations," the officer added.

The IAF believes that commissioning of AFS Arjan Singh will raise eyebrows across the LAC but officers maintain that it is all part of a schedule that has nothing to do with the present situation. However, assets like Il-78 refuellers are deployed for better preparedness during contingencies. With squadrons of the Mig-21s and Mig-27s being gradually phased out, the Su-30 MKI has become the mainstay of the EAC. These air-superiority aircraft have a range of 3,000km that can be more than doubled by mid-air refuelling, thereby increasing their potency manifold and enabling them to launch strategic weapons.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9276
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 24 Aug 2017 15:55

The only is going to be Panagarh is near sea level, these guys will not be used to High altitude.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1078
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

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

Postby Kakarat » 24 Aug 2017 18:05

India should consider getting atleast couple of more squadrons of C-130J especially since MRTA has been abandoned. IAF should consider MC-130J Commando II which is based on KC-130J and can operate as both Special operations transport as well as a Tanker.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 28 Aug 2017 08:56

India plans to upgrade security of unused airstrips
http://timesofoman.com/article/115980/W ... w-of-const

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 28 Aug 2017 08:57

Movie on escape of IAF pilots from Pakistan to hit screens on IAF Day
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/630 ... istan.html

Great Indian Escape unveiled
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/c ... eiled.html

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48115
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 30 Aug 2017 03:43

Link to Google Books:

IAF: A Case for Indegenization by Air Cde Jasjit Singh (R)

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 258
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby ManuJ » 30 Aug 2017 06:23

Was looking at AF bases on Google Earth, and noticed that there's not a single active AF wing in Bihar.
Quite unusual for a frontier state.
Is it because fighters taking off from a base in Bihar will have to overfly Nepal?
Would love to see Darbhanga developed as a front line fighter base.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 30 Aug 2017 09:19

ManuJ: In addition to Darbhanga AFS, take a look below...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bihta_Air_Force_Station

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35369
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 30 Aug 2017 09:40

India likely to acquire Tu-22M3 Supersonic Bombers to Hunt down PLAN Warships

http://www.defencenews.in/article.aspx?id=283945

Would this belong here or Naval dhaagas?
Last edited by SaiK on 30 Aug 2017 10:15, edited 1 time in total.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 987
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Thakur_B » 30 Aug 2017 10:04

SaiK wrote:India likely to acquire Tu-22M3 Supersonic Bombers to Hunt down PLAN Warships

http://www.defencenews.in/article.aspx?id=283945

Would this belong here or Naval djaagas?


4 is a piddly number, given that at any given time two would be unavailable. 12 should be a respectable number to have. I was wondering, would brahmos-m fit into the rotating weapons bay of backfire ?

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 258
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby ManuJ » 30 Aug 2017 10:32

Rakesh wrote:ManuJ: In addition to Darbhanga AFS, take a look below...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bihta_Air_Force_Station

Yes, I know about Bihta.
It's in the same state as Darbhanga - maintained by IAF, probably for forward deployment at war time, but afaik, no active wings.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2817
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 30 Aug 2017 12:09

Thakur_B wrote:
SaiK wrote:India likely to acquire Tu-22M3 Supersonic Bombers to Hunt down PLAN Warships

http://www.defencenews.in/article.aspx?id=283945

Would this belong here or Naval djaagas?


4 is a piddly number, given that at any given time two would be unavailable. 12 should be a respectable number to have. I was wondering, would brahmos-m fit into the rotating weapons bay of backfire ?


Buggers should stop teasing me with such news.... If it ever happens I swear I'll change my tag line... And offer mithai in the tradition of the Admiral Saar.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3771
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 30 Aug 2017 12:16

12 Backfires with 24 P-8i will be good number.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60477
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

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

Postby Singha » 30 Aug 2017 12:34

even ruaf is not modernising backfire. they are ploughing funds into blackjack mk2 (new build), MLU of their 16 blackjack mk1 and PAKDA and now a deep modernization of Mig31 for ASAT and anti-CM work.

it will be tough for maintain for anyone but russia. even their appearances over syria have been very rare.

also i do not think it ever had a rotary launcher .
either it was a huge missile semi recessed or traditional wine bottle type bomb racks
https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/u ... -video.jpg
http://www.ausairpower.net/VVS/Kh-22M-Tu-22M-3-1S.jpg

unlike the bears and blackjacks, the backfire was not adapted to the KH55 and KH101 launch mission in late stage of cold war

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60477
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

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

Postby Singha » 30 Aug 2017 12:36

the C130-30J we have is the stretch model. the basic short chassis C130 will be cheaper if costs are a problem. I think its about 25 feet shorter

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3771
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 30 Aug 2017 12:40

That very site, ausairpower, says backfires have rotary launchers for 6 kh-15 missiles.

The bomb bay can also be fitted with an MKU series rotary launcher for six Kh-15 / AS-16 Kickback nuclear or conventional armed defence suppression missiles, a Soviet analogue to the US AGM-69A SRAM carried by the FB-111A and B-52H. Four additional rounds can be carried on the outboard glove stations, and inboard ventral inlet tunnel stations, for a total of 10 weapons.


http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Backfire.html

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19923
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 30 Aug 2017 13:42

Livefist‏Verified account @livefist 52m52 minutes ago

NEWSBREAK: 2 brand new @LockheedMartin C-130Js inbound for the Indian Air Force. 4 more likely delivered by end September. (File photo)

Image

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3771
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 30 Aug 2017 14:01

It's the other way around, he corrected it.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 545
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 30 Aug 2017 14:04

You might blame Unkil for lot of things, but when it comes to Production Deliveries of weapons and kit, nothing beats them.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33970
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 30 Aug 2017 14:36

SaiK wrote:India likely to acquire Tu-22M3 Supersonic Bombers to Hunt down PLAN Warships

http://www.defencenews.in/article.aspx?id=283945

Would this belong here or Naval djaagas?

On May 16th 2017 I wrote
viewtopic.php?p=2152982#p2152982
Buy 6, keep 2 flying by cannibalization

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60477
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

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

Postby Singha » 30 Aug 2017 14:51

have to admit I kind of like this site from ausairpower
Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19923
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 30 Aug 2017 16:35

Backfire dont use Tu-22 any longer they have moved to Kh-32 and the modernised Tu-22M3 will use Kh-32M

This write up by Piotr Butowski has details on Tu-22M3 program

https://www.scribd.com/doc/228257680/Tu-22M3

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 809
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

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

Postby Guddu » 31 Aug 2017 05:37

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KUprBZsdcI

When watching this hercules landing at DBO, the duststorm that is created would likely screw up the engines. Is that not a big limitation of landing at DBO..

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6004
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 31 Aug 2017 05:55

Both the C130 and C17 are designed to be operated from dirt strips. Constantly engaging in such scenarios will increase the burden on maintenance and will likely use up parts faster but from a capability perspective these aircraft are designed to allow for such operations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Rvw6mkF0A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8qU9b_pyF8

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Aug 2017 06:22

Tu-22 discussions go in Indian Navy dhaaga. thanks gents.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33970
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 31 Aug 2017 06:25

brar_w wrote:Both the C130 and C17 are designed to be operated from dirt strips. Constantly engaging in such scenarios will increase the burden on maintenance and will likely use up parts faster but from a capability perspective these aircraft are designed to allow for such operations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Rvw6mkF0A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8qU9b_pyF8

IIRC one of the USPs of Russian transport aircraft was the design, from the outset of being operable fror rough-field airstrips which Russia had/has by the hundred. Even the An-2 - and I think now the Il-76 (not sure) had the ability to control tyre pressure from the cockpit - enabling lower pressures for rough fields. The Russian tendency of standardization and interchangeability of parts and their "short use and replace" philosophy worked well for them - and to an extent worked for India as well.

But the C-17 and C-130 are a different paradigm as far as I know. I suspect the Americans will learn from India as the Russians did. I only wish it was the other way round - with India picking up and building on lessons learned from those who have been there and done that

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6004
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 31 Aug 2017 06:33

PBL programs with different operators with different operational tempos and demands is a good way for OEMs to collect a lot of good data that can then be used to improve components by making them more reliable etc. Same with lessons learned from forward deployment and expeditionary scenarios. Given the IAFs utilization and the fact that they are utilizing a logistical agreement, there should be good lessons learned on how some of the cycles go on lot of the components that are normally stocked by the OEMs.

Specifically to dirt runways, both C-130 and C-17 crews with the USAF routinely practice that. There are a few videos on youtube of US C-17s unloading patriot battery components after landing on a dirt strip at white sands. It is a competency they also take quite seriously as well given the expeditionary nature.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Aug 2017 06:45

Mahindra Defence starts Lockheed Martin C-130J training centre at IAF's Hindon station
http://www.livemint.com/Companies/W8Hn4 ... -cent.html

Mahindra Defence’s facility at Hindon offers training to the crew that operate the C-130J Super Hercules acquired from Lockheed Martin in 2011.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Aug 2017 06:47

Indian Air Force likely to start trials of Astra missile from today
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 50442.html


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, sgopal and 35 guests