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.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 06 Jun 2020 19:38

ldev wrote:
srai wrote:Radar and weapon can be decoupled through WCS and MC.


If that be the case why did MBDA refuse to integrate the Meteor on the LCA?

Meteor is MBDA product ... not Indian. They can chose to do what their commercial interest dictates.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3948
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Postby kit » 06 Jun 2020 20:29

srai wrote:
ldev wrote:
If that be the case why did MBDA refuse to integrate the Meteor on the LCA?

Meteor is MBDA product ... not Indian. They can chose to do what their commercial interest dictates.



they will , just a matter of time when the Astra mk 2 enters the horizon !

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 06 Jun 2020 20:37

What were the reasons that the Thales RBE2 lost out to Elta 2052 for the LCA? The Thales radar would have integrated the Meteor on the LCA which the IAF wanted. How likely is that that with the RBE2 and Spectra on the LCA the IAF would have continued to be lukewarm to large numbers of the LCA being inducted?

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 540
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

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

Postby ashishvikas » 06 Jun 2020 21:04

^^ Never seen a official IAF requirement for Meteor on Tejas line. Have you ?

basant
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

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

Postby basant » 06 Jun 2020 21:06

ldev wrote:What were the reasons that the Thales RBE2 lost out to Elta 2052 for the LCA? The Thales radar would have integrated the Meteor on the LCA which the IAF wanted. How likely is that that with the RBE2 and Spectra on the LCA the IAF would have continued to be lukewarm to large numbers of the LCA being inducted?

LCA's main weaponry included multiple Israeli's missiles (Python & Derby). Meteor requires a radar with much longer range which is considered unnecessary/risky at best given the diameter of its radome and available power for operation. Considering the economics and logistics for the number and desired role for Tejas, it makes more sense to go for 2052.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8762
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 06 Jun 2020 21:26

Meteor is a quite a slow program as far as integration is concerned. The first non partner designed program to which it will be integrated will be the F-35 and that will happen by 2023/2024 so four years out. Somewhere in that time-frame or perhaps a little to its right, the Rafale will acquire the ability to utilize the two-way data link. Later, perhaps by the late 2020's or early 2030's the Korean KFX will acquire the capability. So don't expect MKI's or LCA's to be capable of operationalizing the Meteor for at least 10-12 years out if that decision is even made (somewhere between all this Japan is hybridizing the Meteor and may integrate it on some of its indigenous programs). No one Meteor program partner seems to have exclusive control over decisions made on the program. Germany is responsible for the propulsion stack, and as the Saudi export issues showed, needs to be on board just like France and the UK. That is partially what slows things up.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8762
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 06 Jun 2020 23:07

somdev wrote:RAF Typhoon force is now Meteor enabled (Project Centurion) for QRA missions. The radar is now lagging behind with CAPTOR-E upgrades stuck in quagmire.


Yes that was back in 2018 IIRC. That would make it 18 years between when the UK finally jumped on and selected the weapon to arm its future Typhoon's and when it first hit a patrol with the weapon. As I wrote, this program moves at a fairly slow pace. Some of it is due to the multi-national (political and industrial work and co-dependencies) nature of the program. So don't expect any rapid contract to add a plethora of new platforms to chosen for Meteor integration. They'll probably work with 1 or 2 at a time and spend a number of years on each given its a complicated integration process followed by a flight test program which is based on individual platform's test fleet and range availability.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19531
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 07 Jun 2020 06:58

ldev wrote:
Karan M wrote:
What the Raven is seeking to develop, was already deployed on the Su-30 and especially the Su-35 quite sometime back.

What the Raven brings to the table is a whole host of Western and Israeli missiles and PGM to the table from AAMRAAMs to the Meteor to SCALP/Storm Shadow, Asraam, Python 5 and India can also negotiate to integrate Astra, NGARM (when ready), Brahmos and Nirbhay or it's successor. Yes the Irbis E claims a scan angle of 120 degrees vs 100 degrees for the Raven. What Irbis E does is lock India into the Russian weapons system in perpetuity, no other choice e.g. you want a long range AAM, have to ask the Russians for the RVV-BD. Integrate the Raven and you can get the Meteor, AMRAAM 120d if the US will sell that variant or the Astra 2 when ready.


Again, incorrect. The scan angle matters a ton for BVR combat. Did you even see the image I posted? The radar merely provides targeting information. The weapons can be guided in via dedicated datalinks unique to the specific AAM. Do you think the Bars locked in India to Russian weapons for all perpetuity? How do you think its guiding in Astra and how exactly is the IAF planning to integrate ASRAAM which too has a radar cued mode if Russian radars can't provide targeting information to non Russian weapons?

Weapons are NOT = radar availability unless the missile is datalinked via the radar itself. MBDA makes the weapons. US manufacturers make them. Just because you buy a European radar, let alone the fact no NATO supplier will easily countenance handing over a radar set to a Russian manufacturer to integrate, without significant political support and then you will suddenly convince the Americans to hand over AMRAAM - not merely any AMRAAM mind, but AIM-120D. India dropped the idea of taking the Brit SHAR upgrade because the AAMs were AMRAAMs and they were not available to India. We then went with the Israelis who gave us the radar and missile both, but with limitations.

You claim on the one hand the IAF went to trouble to integrate kit onto the Su-30, and then you want non standard items, which don't even exist, namely a Su-30 sized AESA, to be developed, integrated - political, business clearances all be managed somehow, never mind the blacklist, and then weapons will appear along with them. This from a commercial manufacturer, not the DRDO/BEL who just jump at what the IAF wants. Who funds this? Does SAAB own Leonardo?

The same weapons which BTW are sought to be marketed as exclusive to the fighters, so as to give them a competitive edge in the Indian competition, and make them superior to the existing IAF fleet would then be added automatically to this deal. Instead why can't India add them individually as it already can? Do you think we need to buy the CAPTOR-E to think of adding ASRAAM to the Su-30s even today? How do you think that's happening?

And do you seriously think adding a radar this to a fighter is going to be easy and doable in the timeframe envisaged? The EMI/EMC issues, getting the power envelope fixed, and to solve them you want to hand over all the data to an European OEM which also sells all these items worldwide including to Pak? Would the IAF agree?

Here, India is thinking of taking a proven high power FCR which was developed specifically for the Flanker and combining it with its own avionics, or even an upgraded variant of the high power radar the MKI already has, which in most performance parameters matches AESA sets available, but instead we should run after a complex piece of kit which is unique to a platform which is competing for the same piece of the pie, but the associated weapons won't even be guaranteed. How does that figure, exactly?

India has the Astra already, has an Astra Mk2 headed to trials, a SFDR in development, how does purchasing a mere radar give us access to equivalent weapons from the US like the AMRAAM D version, when the radar is European and the weapons are not even integrated on the Gripen?

May be a PESA but those scan angles speak for themselves as does the demonstrated performance, so much so the Russian AF went slow on its Su-57s.


Lol!! The Russians went slow on the SU-57 because they have no money for further development and the current engines they have, the Al-41, the same engine used on the SU-35 (a derivative of the AL-31FP) does not enable the SU-57 to achieve it's design performance numbers. And that is why India for once when it concerns the Russians has been smart and said that the SU-57 will be an off the shelf purchase when it is a mature design and inducted in numbers in the Russian Air Force.


Yes LOL at your inability to deal with the facts as they are. Do you seriously think the engines are all that define the Su-57? That its airframe, its avionics are irrelevant?

The engine on the Su-57 is not the one used on the Su-35. They field the Item 30.
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/25968 ... ful_Engine
The Su-35 engine is the Item 117 which was used to proof test the prototypes and take the program forward. Forget the Item 30, a further variant is planned for the Su-57.

Even as it stands, according to the Russian test pilots, the Su-57 is ahead of the baseline Flanker in kinematics (and why wouldn't it be!), has a much reduced signature and a functional AESA radar and integrated avionics set up which matches whatever the Flanker has, and surpasses it even. But the question the Russians have is this, does it, for the cost, offer them such a generational leap ahead of the latest Flanker so as to move en masse to it, when they can at lower cost add long range capabilities to their Flanker and hence make the airframe more survivable?

The so called kinematics of a new engine are just one small piece of what a Su-57 can offer, but with new LR AAMs, ASMs entering service and a new EW suite plus the Irbis-E, the Su-35 has got a good rework. The Irbis-E is one of the most powerful aircraft radars in existence and likely outperforms the vast majority of worldwide fighter radars bar the similarly sized ones on US F-15s.

Fact is IAF ditched the Su-57 because it had no funds to go for both the Rafale and the Su-57. And it took whatever was already mature and available off the production line asap. But the Su-57 will come, and its very likely we may still end up purchasing the platform.

True as far as the E variant is concerned. And that is why I think the better option is to use the Raven radar and other avionics from Leonardo. Can you imagine the SU-30 with it's payload capacity carrying Amraams, Meteors, Scalp, Astras. It will be a one of kind. That will make the Indian SU-30MKI equivalent to the Israeli F-15 Baz in terms of diverse weapon/sensor integration.


Why does India need the Leonardo radar to make it equivalent to the Baaz when, as things stand we are integrating:
NGARM, SAAW, LRGB, ODL and will also likely integrate the Rudra ASMs
When we have already integrated:
Astra, Spice, Griffin, Brahmos, TBB, Litening 4I, SAR pods
When it already comes with:
KAB-500/1500, Kh-59ME, Kh-29 L/TE, OFAB units apart from R77/R27/R73E

Kindly go back and look at the HAL proposal and understand what they are proposing! Our Su-30s will soon enough exceed the Baaz in weapons diversity with or without any Leonardo, without any comprehensive MLU either as the airframes are anyhow being constantly upgraded.

if Uttam itself is not ready for prime time on the Tejas how many years will it be before the son of Uttam is ready for the SU-30?


Uttam is due for testing and completion in 2 years time. We can very well use a Bars variant or Irbis for the first batch upgrade and then transition to an Uttam variant.

An off the shelf and/or close to maturity radar such as the Raven AESA with the weapons integration capability that it brings will increase the potency of the SU-30 fleet by a factor of who knows how much. It will reduce the pressure on the squadron numbers issue as well.


There is no given the Raven is available, a Su-30 variant will be developed easily (without significant political pressure and incredibly expensive funding) and then come the integration hassles.

About the only thing a well developed AESA can claim is a wider bandwidth performance, better ECCM and ability to generate complex LPI waveforms (but digital RWRs are also becoming common). But is all this even available for an export variant Raven? Will it even make a tactical difference?

How are we not better off putting all that money in Uttam and speeding up its tests when its expressly designed to have those features.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 07 Jun 2020 09:09

I decided to reactivate Daulat Beg Oldi airstrip without any written permission: Air Marshal (retd) Pranab Kumar Barbora.

Since early last month, the Chinese troops have moved inside the Indian territory in Ladakh, the flashpoint being Pangong Tso in the east, and the Galwan Valley that overlooks the newly built and highly strategic road from Darbuk to Shyok to Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO). In the cold desert, DBO plays a critical role: it’s next to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Aksai Chin as well as the historic Karakoram Pass. Located at an altitude of 16,614 ft, DBO houses the world’s highest airstrip — lso called called advanced landing ground — which remained non-operational between 1965 and 2008. In May 2008, the airstrip was reactivated when former vice-chief of air staff, Air Marshal (retd) Pranab Kumar Barbora, who was then the Western Air Command chief, landed an AN-32 aircraft there. The entire mission was secret: there was no written order and even the then defence minister AK Antony was kept in the dark.(Thank God we all know that AK Antony and Sonia Maino would have never given the permission)

Daulat Beg Oldi airstrip was reactivated after 43 years when you flew an AN-32 transporter in May 2008. Would you share some details on why and how that decision was taken?

It all started in 2008 when I joined as the commander-in-chief of Western Air Command, the jurisdiction of which spread from Ladakh to the deserts of Rajasthan. There were about 60 Air Force stations under me. When we analysed how the Indian Air Force could maximise its logistics support to our Army and paramilitary personnel stationed in that difficult terrain near the LAC, Daulat Beg Oldi cropped up.

We had made plans for Ladakh’s other advance landing grounds, too — for example, Thoise, Chushul and Fukche. But Daulat Beg Oldi stood out for various reasons. First, it’s the highest landing ground in the world. Second, it’s just a few kilometres away from the Karakoram Pass. The airstrip was built in 1962 to check the Chinese as well as to stonewall any incursion from Pakistan from the glacier’s side.

But the landing ground had to be abandoned in 1965. We continued to send helicopters there to drop materials though it was beyond helicopters’ safety margins. Why was the landing ground abandoned in 1965?

After the 1962 war, army engineers did a fantastic job in building this landing ground, but a decision was taken not to fly any two-engine aircraft to that height. After all, during the take-off, if one engine fails, all are dead. At that time, Packet was the only aircraft that was found suitable to fly to Daulat Beg Oldi, as the two-engine aircraft was modified in India by adding one more small engine. So, it was practically a three-engine aircraft. But Packet was written off in 1965 after the aircraft had gone through its life cycle, so the airstrip also became unused. The area remains hostile. There is less oxygen, there is no vegetation there. The personnel had to walk for days to reach the outpost.

But why was no attempt made in 43 years to reactivate Daulat Beg Oldi even as threats from China remained a constant?

At least five attempts were made. When I wanted to reopen the airstrip, I spotted five files. But after examining those, I realised that if I created another file and put up my request in writing, I won’t get a go-ahead. All the earlier files had ended with a ‘No’ for various reasons.
(The bloody b a s t ar d s. Modi govt should make this files public and expose the cowards who shirked their reponsibilities to the country to maintain a cozy status quo even as China was developing infrastructure ad buiding roads on its side of the border)


So, I decided to reactivate Daulat Beg Oldi airstrip without any written permission. I decided, let’s not create any file, let nothing be in writing. After all, if you ask for permission, all the old files will be called, and the result will be another ‘No’. Instead, I talked to my counterparts in the Army and select Air Force officers to get a quick study done on the condition of the airstrip and other preparations. After all, it was not used for 43 years. Soon, I received a report — again all verbal — confirming that there was no major crack on the ground. For our part, we had to take care of a few air elements, as AN-32 is not supposed to land above 14,000 feet. More than the landing, what was problematic was the take-off. What if one engine switched off? We undertook special trainings, albeit quietly, to enhance our safety norm. We weighed in various scenarios: like, what if a tyre needed to be changed without switching off the engines? Finally, when we came closer to the date of flying — May 31, 2008 — I spoke to the then chief of air staff (Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi Major) and army chief (General Deepak Kapoor) in Delhi’s Air Force golf course and took their verbal permission. I also briefed the then vicechief of air staff, Pradeep Naik. The defence minister (AK Antony) knew only after we had accomplished the mission.((The F-ing and corrupt Moron)

What happened on the D-day?
We had five people in the aircraft — two Air Force pilots, one navigator, a gunner and I — as we flew the AN-32 from Chandigarh. We landed at Daulat Beg Oldi just before 9 in the morning. We kept the entire operation a secret. My wife somehow got an inkling, but the spouses of other crew did not know anything about the mission. We spent some time on the top; while returning, one of the senior army officers accompanied us. When we took off from Daulat Beg Oldi, it was like a bumpy camel ride on an unpaved ground. But we successfully lifted the aircraft and landed in Thoise before flying back to Chandigarh. There was a standby aircraft flying around to monitor our plane. We immediately transmitted to Delhi — yes, we have reactivated Daulat Beg Oldi. We broke the ice and proved a point that we were capable. We surprised the Chinese. Later, in 2013, a four-engine aircraft C-130 Hercules landed there. Look, it’s 2020 now, not 1962.


Shat Shat Naman to this brave son of India.

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 1752
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

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

Postby yensoy » 07 Jun 2020 10:05

^^^^^^ Absolutely. This is a heroic deed. History is made by the silent efforts of such individuals and their supportive leaders.
With experience, one learns that it's often best to take and action and then apologize rather than try to get permission to take an action. AM Barbora put his entire career on the line when going ahead with this plan - had anything gone wrong, he would have been thrown under the bus by the system.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

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

Postby basant » 07 Jun 2020 10:52

Karan M wrote:...
Uttam is due for testing and completion in 2 years time. We can very well use a Bars variant or Irbis for the first batch upgrade and then transition to an Uttam variant.
...

Sorry sir, couldn't follow. The 'first batch' referred here is Super Sukhoi or some LCA variant?

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 07 Jun 2020 23:55

Karan M wrote:Again, incorrect. The scan angle matters a ton for BVR combat. Did you even see the image I posted? The radar merely provides targeting information. The weapons can be guided in via dedicated datalinks unique to the specific AAM. Do you think the Bars locked in India to Russian weapons for all perpetuity? How do you think its guiding in Astra and how exactly is the IAF planning to integrate ASRAAM which too has a radar cued mode if Russian radars can't provide targeting information to non Russian weapons?

Weapons are NOT = radar availability unless the missile is datalinked via the radar itself. MBDA makes the weapons. US manufacturers make them. Just because you buy a European radar, let alone the fact no NATO supplier will easily countenance handing over a radar set to a Russian manufacturer to integrate, without significant political support and then you will suddenly convince the Americans to hand over AMRAAM - not merely any AMRAAM mind, but AIM-120D. India dropped the idea of taking the Brit SHAR upgrade because the AAMs were AMRAAMs and they were not available to India. We then went with the Israelis who gave us the radar and missile both, but with limitations.

You claim on the one hand the IAF went to trouble to integrate kit onto the Su-30, and then you want non standard items, which don't even exist, namely a Su-30 sized AESA, to be developed, integrated - political, business clearances all be managed somehow, never mind the blacklist, and then weapons will appear along with them. This from a commercial manufacturer, not the DRDO/BEL who just jump at what the IAF wants. Who funds this? Does SAAB own Leonardo?

The same weapons which BTW are sought to be marketed as exclusive to the fighters, so as to give them a competitive edge in the Indian competition, and make them superior to the existing IAF fleet would then be added automatically to this deal. Instead why can't India add them individually as it already can? Do you think we need to buy the CAPTOR-E to think of adding ASRAAM to the Su-30s even today? How do you think that's happening?

And do you seriously think adding a radar this to a fighter is going to be easy and doable in the timeframe envisaged? The EMI/EMC issues, getting the power envelope fixed, and to solve them you want to hand over all the data to an European OEM which also sells all these items worldwide including to Pak? Would the IAF agree?

Here, India is thinking of taking a proven high power FCR which was developed specifically for the Flanker and combining it with its own avionics, or even an upgraded variant of the high power radar the MKI already has, which in most performance parameters matches AESA sets available, but instead we should run after a complex piece of kit which is unique to a platform which is competing for the same piece of the pie, but the associated weapons won't even be guaranteed. How does that figure, exactly?

India has the Astra already, has an Astra Mk2 headed to trials, a SFDR in development, how does purchasing a mere radar give us access to equivalent weapons from the US like the AMRAAM D version, when the radar is European and the weapons are not even integrated on the Gripen?


AFAIK, ASRAAM being a short range missile the seeker locks on to the target directly on launch and therefore does not need integration with the radar and therefore the SU-30, Tejas etc. can carry the ASRAAM. Meteor being long range on the other hand has a two way link for initial guidance from the aircraft radar on launch before the seeker eventually takes over guidance. That security of that two way link is what MBDA is concerned about and the associated source codes.

You are better informed than me to comment about the Astra integration with Bars. My educated guess is that India already has the Bars source codes.

That is why my preferred solution in the short term is to get a European radar which is already qualified on most NATO munitions. Phase two can always transition to Uttam (when ready) and to Astra 2 (when ready) so as not to present a either/or choice between air combat competitiveness in the present vs long term domestic industrial sustainability. And this IMO would be as applicable, actually more applicable for the Tejas than the SU-30. An LCA with the Thales and Meteor combination would be formidable point defence fighter against both of India's adversaries. As would a Uttam and Astra 2 combination for the Tejas down the road. The IAF would have lapped up the Tejas with a 200 plane order.

This genesis of this discussion was the IAF's acknowledgment post Balakot that the AAMRAAM 120 C5 outranged the RVV-AE. Firstly, given the numerous exercises that the IAF has had over the years with Air Forces having various versions of the AMRAAM I am perplexed as to why and how the IAF was surprised by this fact in February of last year with the dust up between PAF F-16s and the SU-30s. But setting aside that, the more important question is what has been done since then to not only plug the gap but to have a BVR advantage in India's favor. This is important because of what is happening on the China border and the very likely scenario of a two front war with the IAF again going up against the PAF F-16s as well as the PLAAF.

Now the answer may be that India is getting/has got the RVV-SD with a range increase to 110 km vs 80 for the AE. But publicly available information indicates that the domestic (Russian Air Force) version i.e. the RVV-77-1 has a different seeker vs the export variant SD, presumably better? Again AFAIK, AMRAAM, Meteor, Mica, ASRAAM do not have two different seekers for the domestic vs export markets. So I am wary of Russian bait and switch tactics. The true test of the RVV-SD will be when there is another clash either with the PAF or the PLAAF to find out if it actually outranges the AMRAAM 120 C5 and the PL-15.

The IAF chief has stated for the record that the Astra is superior to existing Russian AAMs, ( I presume he meant the RVV-AE). So has the Astra been operationally deployed on the SU-30s?

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 08 Jun 2020 00:08

basant wrote:
Karan M wrote:...
Uttam is due for testing and completion in 2 years time. We can very well use a Bars variant or Irbis for the first batch upgrade and then transition to an Uttam variant.
...

Sorry sir, couldn't follow. The 'first batch' referred here is Super Sukhoi or some LCA variant?

He is talking about the Sukhoi radar upgrades to be done in batches.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

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

Postby basant » 08 Jun 2020 00:29

ldev wrote:
basant wrote:Sorry sir, couldn't follow. The 'first batch' referred here is Super Sukhoi or some LCA variant?

He is talking about the Sukhoi radar upgrades to be done in batches.

Thanks. It was posted earlier in the forum too that the testing of Uttam has not just began but is well underway and is expected to be completed within a year or so on LCA. See the link.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 08 Jun 2020 06:45

^^^
Please make links more clearer like so:


Uttam pretty far along ...

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 08 Jun 2020 07:01

ldev
...
That is why my preferred solution in the short term is to get a European radar which is already qualified on most NATO munitions.
...

You are making it sound pretty rosy for your favorite import :wink:

Reality is that integration takes a lot of time. Weapon qualification is at least a 5-year process. To stockpile and attain proficiency add another few years. European munitions are expensive too.

Secondly, what the European will allow or do is pretty much guess work for your end. Most defense exporting nations don’t sell their top tier weapons without caveats. Older technology, they may be more willing to part ways with for the right price, but not the same for latest tech they themselves are just acquiring.

Think about it. Would India readily part ways with its LCA Tejas technology or its various munitions to another country?

basant
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

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

Postby basant » 08 Jun 2020 09:20

srai wrote:^^^
Please make links more clearer like so:
Uttam pretty far along ...

Copied. On a happier note, HVT is back on Twitter with a couple of delightful posts! :D

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19531
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 08 Jun 2020 19:09

basant wrote:
Karan M wrote:...
Uttam is due for testing and completion in 2 years time. We can very well use a Bars variant or Irbis for the first batch upgrade and then transition to an Uttam variant.
...

Sorry sir, couldn't follow. The 'first batch' referred here is Super Sukhoi or some LCA variant?


First batch of the Su-30 MKI upgrade. Use the Bars as the basis. Don't even go for the Irbis unless you must - the PRC has access to its basic architecture (though that's a problem we face with all imports, the middle east is full of US/Euro imports, others have Russian fighters)

Use the time to develop an Uttam variant for the Su-30.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19531
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 08 Jun 2020 19:28

ldev wrote:AFAIK, ASRAAM being a short range missile the seeker locks on to the target directly on launch and therefore does not need integration with the radar and therefore the SU-30, Tejas etc. can carry the ASRAAM.


Nope! All radars have different modes -one of the ones dedicated for WVR is called CCM - close combat mode. In this the radar auto locks/ or is locked by the pilot onto a maneuvering target and passes the data to the WVR missile, to cue its seeker and hence get a quick lock. This is a preferred method for close range combat so the pilot himself does not have to do all the heavy lifting. Apart from that, you have the HMC/S - the missile seeker can be slewed by the helmet mounted sight as well.

Meteor being long range on the other hand has a two way link for initial guidance from the aircraft radar on launch before the seeker eventually takes over guidance. That security of that two way link is what MBDA is concerned about and the associated source codes.


Meteor has a single way datalink on the Rafale. Two way offers better data on the missile itself back to the launch aircraft and hence is even better. MBDA is not bothered about the secrecy of the datalink - if it were, India already has the data via the Rafale. The primary issue, plain and simple, is commercial. MBDA France does not want to give up the USP of the Rafale, its Meteor. What key advantage then does a Rafale have over a Su-30 with a Bars that can guide in a Meteor. We are willing to trade in the larger signature with EW (onboard/offboard), long range radar performance and still get a long reach. At a fraction of the cost of buying and inducting an entirely new Rafale. This is the reason why SAAB won't be happy about Leonardo offering India any Raven if they have co-funded its development. When it comes to the radar itself, the challenge is far more complex than integrating a mere weapon. They have to couple it to the weapons control system. Run EMI/EMC tests. At this point you may need to involve the OEMs of all the other subsystems, who happen to be Russian. This, is something NATO may be unhappy with. So the challenge increases. This is also why IAF has been scouting for a LRAAM for the Su-30 for ages, and didn't get the Meteor. Similarly, the Malaysians who were exploring adding Mica to the Su-30 MKM didn't get it either.

You are better informed than me to comment about the Astra integration with Bars. My educated guess is that India already has the Bars source codes. That is why my preferred solution in the short term is to get a European radar which is already qualified on most NATO munitions. Phase two can always transition to Uttam (when ready) and to Astra 2 (when ready) so as not to present a either/or choice between air combat competitiveness in the present vs long term domestic industrial sustainability. And this IMO would be as applicable, actually more applicable for the Tejas than the SU-30. An LCA with the Thales and Meteor combination would be formidable point defence fighter against both of India's adversaries. As would a Uttam and Astra 2 combination for the Tejas down the road. The IAF would have lapped up the Tejas with a 200 plane order.


We have to understand we don't need the radar source codes to add weapons unless the radar is fundamentally incompatible with the weapon. For instance, trying to add a missile which needs very high grade tracking, to one which provides only "coarse" information. In this case you might need to go back to the OEM and say, hey we need you to modify your radar to give us a mode with tracking accuracies of this caliber otherwise our weapons won't work. Another option is to add your own radar, WCS and chuck the original (PRC did this to their homegrown Flankers), to add their own weapons. In our case, we have added Brahmos, Astra, Spice etc to our Flankers. What does this tell us? It tells us we can add our own weapons. Second, it also means the European radar you are referring to per se does not "own" the weapons. They too go through a test and validation process but more importantly, you run against the issues I mentioned previously - commercial and secrecy. Are we comfortable with NATO guys "owning" the radar on the Su-30? There are no easy answers.

This genesis of this discussion was the IAF's acknowledgment post Balakot that the AAMRAAM 120 C5 outranged the RVV-AE. Firstly, given the numerous exercises that the IAF has had over the years with Air Forces having various versions of the AMRAAM I am perplexed as to why and how the IAF was surprised by this fact in February of last year with the dust up between PAF F-16s and the SU-30s. But setting aside that, the more important question is what has been done since then to not only plug the gap but to have a BVR advantage in India's favor. This is important because of what is happening on the China border and the very likely scenario of a two front war with the IAF again going up against the PAF F-16s as well as the PLAAF.


They weren't surprised. The media was surprised. See Parrikars comment about why the Rafale was necessary. He clearly mentioned AMRAAM outranged the R77. Today, our Astra outranges their AMRAAM. But tomorrow they will get the PL-15 which outranges the Astra Mk1. Which is why we have a Mk2/SFDR in development, otherwise we will be left scrabbling again.

Now the answer may be that India is getting/has got the RVV-SD with a range increase to 110 km vs 80 for the AE. But publicly available information indicates that the domestic (Russian Air Force) version i.e. the RVV-77-1 has a different seeker vs the export variant SD, presumably better? Again AFAIK, AMRAAM, Meteor, Mica, ASRAAM do not have two different seekers for the domestic vs export markets. So I am wary of Russian bait and switch tactics. The true test of the RVV-SD will be when there is another clash either with the PAF or the PLAAF to find out if it actually outranges the AMRAAM 120 C5 and the PL-15.


Astra outmatches the current AMRAAM/SD-10 in service w/PAF. But its only a matter of time before the PL-15 arrives in the western theater.

The IAF chief has stated for the record that the Astra is superior to existing Russian AAMs, ( I presume he meant the RVV-AE). So has the Astra been operationally deployed on the SU-30s?


He said it restores parity. And another very credible source noted its actually a bit superior. As to deployment, if I was the IAF I wouldn't let anyone know unless I had to.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

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

Postby basant » 08 Jun 2020 21:07

Karan M wrote:
basant wrote:Sorry sir, couldn't follow. The 'first batch' referred here is Super Sukhoi or some LCA variant?


First batch of the Su-30 MKI upgrade. Use the Bars as the basis. Don't even go for the Irbis unless you must - the PRC has access to its basic architecture (though that's a problem we face with all imports, the middle east is full of US/Euro imports, others have Russian fighters)

Use the time to develop an Uttam variant for the Su-30.

Thanks for the clarification. The arguement is convincing.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19531
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 09 Jun 2020 02:31

The ranges may not be exact, they are paraphrasing what he heard from AF guys - the nuances in NEZ, RMax etc are not given below and somewhat mixed up. But you have a good idea of the fact we knew the AMRAAM outranged the R77, and we had tactics in place provided we were not hobbled by ROE, allowing the other guy to set the battlefield. Even so, what we did too will come out in due time.

https://www.outlookindia.com/newsscroll ... ms/1206049

09 December 2017 Last Updated at 11:14 pm | Source: PTI

Parrikar says Rafale deal gives India edge over Pak, slams Antony for delay

The former defence minister said that in 1999, the Indian Air Force succeeded in pushing out its Pakistani counterpart out of the Kargil conflict zone, because India had Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles with a range of 30 km on SU30 and MiG 29 aircrafts.

"Pakistan had only about 20 km range ... Due to which they remained away," he said.

However, between 1999 and 2014, Pakistan acquired a capacity of 100 km range whereas India had upgraded its BVR up to 60 km on SU30, he said.

"We were now in danger of being shot down by Pakistani fighters staying 100 km away and not being able to retaliate and Rafale deal took care of this with a missile with a range of 150 km fitted on aircraft," Parrikar said.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3429
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 09 Jun 2020 06:24

Isn't there Russian AAM that outrange AIM-120 Ds? There are several, what's the story with that us not having them?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 09 Jun 2020 07:47

ldev
...
The IAF chief has stated for the record that the Astra is superior to existing Russian AAMs, ( I presume he meant the RVV-AE). So has the Astra been operationally deployed on the SU-30s?


Astra Mk.1 has cleared IAF user trials (2019) and first batch order of 200 units have been placed. Prior to this (2017), 50 units were ordered as pre-production.

Expect the next few years for TADCE to refine tactics and achieve max capability exploitation.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12038
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 09 Jun 2020 11:43

Karan M wrote:The ranges may not be exact, they are paraphrasing what he heard from AF guys - the nuances in NEZ, RMax etc are not given below and somewhat mixed up. But you have a good idea of the fact we knew the AMRAAM outranged the R77, and we had tactics in place provided we were not hobbled by ROE, allowing the other guy to set the battlefield. Even so, what we did too will come out in due time.

https://www.outlookindia.com/newsscroll ... ms/1206049

09 December 2017 Last Updated at 11:14 pm | Source: PTI

Parrikar says Rafale deal gives India edge over Pak, slams Antony for delay

The former defence minister said that in 1999, the Indian Air Force succeeded in pushing out its Pakistani counterpart out of the Kargil conflict zone, because India had Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles with a range of 30 km on SU30 and MiG 29 aircrafts.

"Pakistan had only about 20 km range ... Due to which they remained away," he said.

However, between 1999 and 2014, Pakistan acquired a capacity of 100 km range whereas India had upgraded its BVR up to 60 km on SU30, he said.

"We were now in danger of being shot down by Pakistani fighters staying 100 km away and not being able to retaliate and Rafale deal took care of this with a missile with a range of 150 km fitted on aircraft," Parrikar said.


Some one who likes the Pakis has the balls of large part of our politicians and babus, the moment it was announced Aim 120 C's in 2005 to equip Paki F-16( Pakis were trying publicly for this since 2000), nobody in our side of 1) Purchase and integrate a longer range AAM or 2) Lobby with the US to at least make them Aim 120B's (US sold these on AESA equipped UAE fighters)

Our Politicians and Babus were stupid or someone internationally has control of their Balls- PAF is critical in PA and Jihadi operations- if the IAF has air dominance - Pakistan will be seen as losers and the BIF system morale within India will collapse.

Pakistanis have always tried to keep this edge, they know the importance, in 1965 many IAF had to leave the theater when the AIM 9 equipped star fighter showed up, We need a huge influx of Mig 21's to over come this in 1971- in 1999 their Airforce(PAF) had to watch the IAF pummel their army since they did not have BVR missiles.

Other countries keep working on it like Aim 260, Meteor etc... we completely dropped the ball on it. Similarly we are dilly dallying on AWACS, SDR , ODL etc... We are the only Government in the world who does not seem to understand the importance of Air superiority/ Air dominance ...

We must make 2 years Military service compulsory for writing IAS/AFS/IPS and other top posts in GOI.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19531
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 09 Jun 2020 17:48

fanne wrote:Isn't there Russian AAM that outrange AIM-120 Ds? There are several, what's the story with that us not having them?


RVV-BD only started trials on the Su-35 this year. Big difference from being advertised at airshows to actual readiness.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

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

Postby basant » 09 Jun 2020 18:50

Karan M wrote:
fanne wrote:Isn't there Russian AAM that outrange AIM-120 Ds? There are several, what's the story with that us not having them?


RVV-BD only started trials on the Su-35 this year. Big difference from being advertised at airshows to actual readiness.

There were reports earlier that Su-30MKIs were integrated with the next-gen Russian missiles. See the link.
It is believed that the missiles that it has been testing at the eastern base are RVV-MD short-range missiles, RVV-SD medium-range missiles, and RVV-BD beyond visual range missiles - the next generation of Vympel’s air-to-air missiles.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19531
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 09 Jun 2020 19:00

Unconfirmed reports.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3429
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 09 Jun 2020 19:36

But now there should be no reason to not rush and buy them. For 36 meteor capable Rafael we will have 270 similarly capable su30mki that out ranges solah and plaaf

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12038
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 09 Jun 2020 20:19

Karan M wrote:
fanne wrote:Isn't there Russian AAM that outrange AIM-120 Ds? There are several, what's the story with that us not having them?


RVV-BD only started trials on the Su-35 this year. Big difference from being advertised at airshows to actual readiness.

I think Russia has been integrating them with their Su30SM aircraft also.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9062
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 09 Jun 2020 20:58

Check out that Su-30MKI under the left wing :)

https://twitter.com/Maverick_bharat/sta ... 77024?s=20 ----> Pilot view of Astra BVR firing.

Image

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 540
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

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

Postby ashishvikas » 09 Jun 2020 21:32


Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9062
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 09 Jun 2020 21:37

Ashish, I deleted my post above yours because you were able to imbed the image in the post.

Instagram was not allowing me, so thanks!

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7672
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 09 Jun 2020 23:59

That Mig-29UPG cockpit photo is wrong. That is not a UPG cockpit. That is an AT-63 II Pampa cockpit.

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 10 Jun 2020 09:31

srai wrote:
ldev
...
That is why my preferred solution in the short term is to get a European radar which is already qualified on most NATO munitions.
...

You are making it sound pretty rosy for your favorite import :wink:

Reality is that integration takes a lot of time. Weapon qualification is at least a 5-year process. To stockpile and attain proficiency add another few years. European munitions are expensive too.

Secondly, what the European will allow or do is pretty much guess work for your end. Most defense exporting nations don’t sell their top tier weapons without caveats. Older technology, they may be more willing to part ways with for the right price, but not the same for latest tech they themselves are just acquiring.

Think about it. Would India readily part ways with its LCA Tejas technology or its various munitions to another country?


What I am trying to get at is that local weapons development and procurement vs imports does not have to be an either/or choice. On the one hand the IAF will want a fighter and munitions which are world class to enable them dominate adversaries. But they are expensive and create a vulnerability in the long term.

Specifically as it relates to the radar for the LCA:

Bids have reportedly been issued to U.S. defense contractors Raytheon and Northrop Grumman, the French company Thales, the Israeli defense company Elta, Swedish aircraft maker SAAB, and Russia’s Rosoboronoexport.


This HAL tender was issued in 2016 about the same time that PM Modi was in France ordering the 36 Rafale. The IAF was in love with the Meteor because it would give them a clear BVR advantage vs the PAF as well as the majority of PLAAF aircraft in Tibet. Unless the PLAAF deploy some of their PL-15 carrying fighters to Tibet. But MBDA had clearly stated that they will integrate the Meteor only with a European radar, in fact they had written to that effect to the IAF.

In yet another letter to the IAF deputy chief on June 21, 2018, MBDA wrote: “MBDA will not be able to offer Meteor for (Tejas) LCA, if a non-European radar is chosen for that platform — we will not be able to gain 6 Partner Nation clearance. Furthermore, the integration of Meteor is only possible using MBDA’s proprietary datalink technology. No other 3rd party is capable of carrying out Meteor integration.”


Elta on the other hand would allow integration of the Astra with the Elta 2052. 3 of the companies responded to the HAL tender, Elta, Thales and one more.When the Chairman of HAL was asked as to why the Elta radar was chosen, he said and I am paraphrasing that it was the cheapest bid that met our tender specifications. In the meantime India was and is working on the Uttam radar and Astra 2 (which is supposed to have a comparable range to the Meteor) both of which will take a few years to fructify. What was the harm in getting the Thales RBE2 for the LCA and get the Meteor and Mica on it until Uttam is ready? Astra is already being integrated on the SU-30. Does the Astra also have to be integrated on the Tejas right now? Or can the Astra and Astra 2 wait till Uttam is ready to be integrated with Tejas? And even if the RBE2 was $10 MM more expensive per unit (and I am just guessing, it should be far less but it's French so expect sticker shock), IMO it would be well worth that added expense.Instead of waiting with bated breath for 4-6 Rafale to touch down in India, the IAF would have had a squadron of Meteor carrying Tejas in operation by now. Yes it would have meant that the Tejas fleet would have had to carry only French munitions until Uttam was ready. But so what? Let the first 40 or 60 or even 83 Tejas have the Thales radar and then switch over to Uttam. Instead of Elta/Astra it would have been Thales/Meteor. At a flyaway cost of 1/3rd the price of a Rafale the IAF would have had a potent cost effective interceptor already flying by now at a time when the northern and western borders are volatile.

So I do not have a favorite import :) my favorite import is one which adds potency to the IAF when that potency is most needed like right now, not some years down the road when HAL get's it's act together, and in this case it would not be an aircraft but the Thales radar, the Meteor and Mica as part of the package for the Tejas.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1281
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Postby ks_sachin » 10 Jun 2020 11:36

Admiral, you are sharp of the eye. We shall call you Hawkeye.

Rakesh wrote:Check out that Su-30MKI under the left wing :)

https://twitter.com/Maverick_bharat/sta ... 77024?s=20 ----> Pilot view of Astra BVR firing.

Image

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2333
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 10 Jun 2020 21:37

---POST DELETED----
Last edited by Rakesh on 10 Jun 2020 21:41, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Do not post updates of any *LIVE* Indian military activity on BRF. First and Last Warning.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9062
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 10 Jun 2020 21:45

mangju, I have deleted your post. Reason is above.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2333
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 10 Jun 2020 22:07

ooooL...sorry. paki glf4 running racetrack pattern from isloo to lawhore to multan and back ... fati padi hai...

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3579
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 10 Jun 2020 22:17

Am I being delusional or IAF has started using IN colors?

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9062
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 10 Jun 2020 22:27

I believe Tipnis grey is still the standard in use. Photographs can show a different shade due to lens, filters, lighting, angle of sun, etc.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests