Indian Military Aviation

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Jul 2011 19:17

shiv ji, the use of louvres was discontinued on the mig-29 longtime back. IIRC mig-29m that first flew in 1980's was the first to remove the louvres.

I don't know if IAF models (all fulcrum-A I think) continue to use them though.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Jul 2011 19:46

The louvres in the initial models were IIRC activated by the whells on the ground causing a trapdoor to shut the intake and open the louvres to prevent FOD of the engine. I recall reading on BRF that the louvres had been discontinued - but I never found out why. But that hump back in the photo above has wide open louvres.

abhinavjo · Post by **abhinavjo** » 30 Jul 2011 20:08

and i read on BRF that the louvers were done away with so as to make way for additional fuel tank on the MiG 29

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Jul 2011 20:11

I guess you are talking about the IAF mig-29upg as humpback ? if so that's because it is a fulcrum-A with the hump added. they haven't changed the louvres.

as to why louvres were deleted, this is what I found

Original FOD doors in air intakes replaced by lighter retractable grids, permitting deletion of overwing louvres and internal ducting in lightweight aluminium-lithium alloy centre-section, providing increased fuel tankage

http://toad-design.com/migalley/index.p ... -variants/
I couldn't make sense of it though. possibly a bad translation from russian.

abhi, that much everyone understands. the point is how do they take care of the FOD situation now that the louvres are gone ?

I think it might be similar to the grill type FOD barriers as is used on the su-30.

abhinavjo · Post by **abhinavjo** » 30 Jul 2011 20:16

Rahul M wrote:abhi, that much everyone understands. the point is how do they take care of the FOD situation now that the louvres are gone ?

They can get people to jhadoo lagao at the runway

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 30 Jul 2011 20:30

AFAIK IAF MiG-29s still use louvres, youtube videos of IAF birds confirm that. Following video shows @03:46 FOD screens retracting just after the landing gear leaves the ground.

[youtube]N62KQlQX3ao&feature=related[/youtube]

Cheers....

vijyeta · Post by **vijyeta** » 31 Jul 2011 01:17

neerajb wrote:AFAIK IAF MiG-29s still use louvres, youtube videos of IAF birds confirm that. Following video shows @03:46 FOD screens retracting just after the landing gear leaves the ground.

Cheers....

The birds in this Video @03:46 are IAF? How do we know?
The trailing UB seems to have RuAF insignia.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Jul 2011 08:21

vijyeta wrote: The birds in this Video @03:46 are IAF? How do we know?
The trailing UB seems to have RuAF insignia.

Simple. Two negatives make a positive. You can't see the insignia. You can't see the louvres. So if Indian MiG 29s have louvres in the video you cannot dispute it.

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 31 Jul 2011 08:27

Mirrage upgrade deal is signed, but the weapons upgrade package is pending....and needs CCS approval as per reports. There has also not yet been official confirmation from MBDA on the receipt of the contract from IAF/Indian Govt.

Cheers.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Jul 2011 11:13

likely a formality - Mica is surely needed to replace the outdated 550 and 530 missiles.

the ARMAT seems to be out of production now, and the french use the rafale sensors and AASM for SEAD role. if M2K units are expected to do their own self-SEAD perhaps a limited number of pods for the sead sensor to hang externally (not sure how feasible, but F16 do have a harm targeting pod) and 250lb AASM weapons could be used.

Mihir.D · Post by **Mihir.D** » 31 Jul 2011 12:02

Is it possible for the Meteor to be fired from the m2k ?

vijyeta · Post by **vijyeta** » 31 Jul 2011 16:43

The MBDA website does not mention M2K as a possible Meteor platform

http://www.mbda-systems.com/products/ai ... meteor/26/

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Jul 2011 19:12

I think the meteor midcourse datalink module is not in any M2K version.

SEAD has shifted from the old days of harm/alarm equipped shooters prowling around ... the french seem to use AASM for targets upto 50km (co-ordinates programmed by the spectra sensor feed) and Scalp for longer range targets. this has not been tested against a strong AD system (china for example), so lord alone knows if thats going to work for us. beating up Libyan AD can be done by anything half-decent.

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 31 Jul 2011 19:55

vijyeta wrote:
neerajb wrote:AFAIK IAF MiG-29s still use louvres, youtube videos of IAF birds confirm that. Following video shows @03:46 FOD screens retracting just after the landing gear leaves the ground.

Cheers....
The birds in this Video @03:46 are IAF? How do we know?
The trailing UB seems to have RuAF insignia.

I meant Nat Geo video of IAF MiG-29s. Here it is:

The russian MiG-29 video was to show the FOD screen retracting on take off, those are not IAF MiG-29s for sure.

Cheers....

Anuj A · Post by **Anuj A** » 31 Jul 2011 22:43

Kartik wrote:MiG-29UPG in IAF colours and what looks like a lighter shade of gray than the earlier Tipnis gray scheme

Is it just me or does it look as if TOPSIGHT hasn't been integrated yet? And if this has been delivered to IAF then why hasn't it got it? Surely those delivered to IAF are complete and fully UPG models not with bit still to be done.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Aug 2011 11:55

livefist has a photo of the new ACM. a stout looking person to put it delicately.

nitinr · Post by **nitinr** » 01 Aug 2011 14:15

^ ^
he is a tough task master.. heard it from a relative who has worked with him..

sum · Post by **sum** » 01 Aug 2011 14:23

Singha wrote:livefist has a photo of the new ACM. a stout looking person to put it delicately.

Singha-saar,
Are you talking about outgoing ACM?
ACM Browne looks pretty fit and ready to go..

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 01 Aug 2011 14:45

Anuj A wrote:
Kartik wrote:MiG-29UPG in IAF colours and what looks like a lighter shade of gray than the earlier Tipnis gray scheme

Is it just me or does it look as if TOPSIGHT hasn't been integrated yet? And if this has been delivered to IAF then why hasn't it got it? Surely those delivered to IAF are complete and fully UPG models not with bit still to be done.

Regarding the discussion with respect to the Louvres, The initial Mig 29's had the system but it was noted to have 2 main disadvantages and hence discontinued in later versions of the Mig-29's

1) Dirt dust was getting stuck at the bottom of the doors.

2) The space for louvres meant there was lesser space for Fuel tanks resulting in lower combat radius, so later versions like Mig-29K do not have these.

From what I have read so far, changes are being done to airframes for extending thier life and to include equipment, hence I was under the impression they would remove the Louvres like later version of the Mig-29's

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Aug 2011 15:51

oops sorry, yes I guess PVN was dined by various bases in a serious way in his last tour of the nation.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 01 Aug 2011 17:29

they have converted my beautiful Mig 29 into an ugle hunchback.

sigh

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 01 Aug 2011 17:55

Singha wrote:oops sorry, yes I guess PVN was dined by various bases in a serious way in his last tour of the nation.

Thanks

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 01 Aug 2011 19:00

Anuj A wrote:Is it just me or does it look as if TOPSIGHT hasn't been integrated yet? And if this has been delivered to IAF then why hasn't it got it? Surely those delivered to IAF are complete and fully UPG models not with bit still to be done.

When did we ever purchase Topsight? Only the Navy did. The IAF has continued with Sura-K, and that helmet in the pic is a typical Zsh-7 type helmet, which the Russians use. It has a small mount on the front for the HMCS optics.
The IAF may prefer to keep the Russian sight, as its much lighter and hence a positive (considering high-G) than a full HMDS same as on the MKI. The MKI is a supermanoueverable fighter, and hence the G profiles are going to much more taxing but even for the 29 UPG, with a wide angle HUD and 3 MFD, a heavy HMDS is not that essential.

Zsh-7 variant
http://i.flamber.ru/files/st2/121192255 ... 2808_g.jpg

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 01 Aug 2011 21:36

Karan M wrote:
Anuj A wrote:Is it just me or does it look as if TOPSIGHT hasn't been integrated yet? And if this has been delivered to IAF then why hasn't it got it? Surely those delivered to IAF are complete and fully UPG models not with bit still to be done.
When did we ever purchase Topsight? Only the Navy did. The IAF has continued with Sura-K, and that helmet in the pic is a typical Zsh-7 type helmet, which the Russians use. It has a small mount on the front for the HMCS optics.
The IAF may prefer to keep the Russian sight, as its much lighter and hence a positive (considering high-G) than a full HMDS same as on the MKI. The MKI is a supermanoueverable fighter, and hence the G profiles are going to much more taxing but even for the 29 UPG, with a wide angle HUD and 3 MFD, a heavy HMDS is not that essential.

Zsh-7 variant
http://i.flamber.ru/files/st2/121192255 ... 2808_g.jpg

Karan, I thought it was the other way around- the Russian Zsh-7 helmet was heavier than all western equivalents but extremely comfortable for pilots. Perhaps Vishnu Som (if he loiters around here) can confirm that.

The Thales/Samtel Top-Owl F HMDS that the IN bought with the MiG-29Ks could have been standardised by the IAF as well. The Mirage-2000-9 upgrade is going to get the HMDS as well, once again most likely to be the Top-Owl F. No reason why MiG-29UPG pilots couldn't benefit from it. Seems like a cost saving measure only.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 01 Aug 2011 22:58

Aditya_V wrote:1) Dirt dust was getting stuck at the bottom of the doors

2) The space for louvres meant there was lesser space for Fuel tanks resulting in lower combat radius, so later versions like Mig-29K do not have these.

a

Indeed the anti-FOD doors themselves became the cause of FOD damage.

Regarding ACM Naik's comments:

My view is that unlike USSR and USA, which had agreed and stated nuclear postures, India and Pakistan do not have any such dialogue except for some CBMs. In this environment it is important that the Govt publicly states at least the high level doctrine clearly and repeatedly. It should not be lost on the people (both India and Pakistan) that we are in a nuclear environment.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 02 Aug 2011 00:46

I stand corrected- it appears that the Elbit DASH HMDS will be used on the Mirage-2000-9 upgrade.

link to Air & Cosmos article translation

the article also states that RDY-3 radar will be integrated- not sure if this is correct or not. Dassault or the IAF really needs to put out a press release stating what the exact avionics fit will be.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Aug 2011 02:14

Kartik,

I should have been clearer.

What I meant was that given the weight of the helmet (any for that matter, though as you said the Russian ones edge on the heavier side, albeit more rugged and comfortable), plus the extensive glass cockpit and wFOV HUD (which can display BVR, WVR cues) at pilot Line of Sight...there is no crying need for a heavy HMDS.

Of course, some advanced HMDS may be equivalent to the weight of the Russian helmet plus SuraK, but unless they bring in a proper jump in capability, tactically useful, I kind of doubt whether they are essential, when you have a good glass cockpit and HMCS.

Now, Navy versus AF - again, different fits and different choices made. IAF has gone for the extra fuel (K i think may have it anyways), custom made EW suite, more advanced radar variant, better IRST set....Navy, has the newer airframe overall with better basic systems, and a new HMDS. Don't know why they chose that - could be something mission specific with regards to their regimen. Remember, the Naval Test Pilot spoke of trying to develop a power available versus payload mark to be available for pilots to view. Perhaps the Navy wanted more imagery in pilot LOS, without having to look down into the cockpit hence the simpler HMCS did not meet their needs.

Coming to the Mirage 2000 I do expect it to get a HMDS, because, well it didnt have any system earlier, and to use the MICA-IR effectively, we will need one.

Over time, I guess, many of the types (at least those without integrated optics) will move to local helmets. We operate many types there as well.

Jaguars have the MK3C/4A (I think these are from DEBEL), Sukhois have the Zsh-7, MiGs have the Zsh-3, Mirages have the Guneau type 458, Hawks have the Alpha-300, Helicopters have the Gallet with NVG (per IAF weblinks).

Alternatively, we will have to standardize on 1-2 advanced types since pretty much every aircraft is coming with integrated optics nowadays and we take whatever the OEM provides, as helmet validation and checkout is very expensive for these HMCS and HMDS types. Russians typically believe in incremental evolution. We'll probably see the FGFA come with a new HMCS in all possibility, plus because Sura-K is from Arsenal Kiev. DASH with LCA. MMRCA will come with one type. Then the upgrades, AMCA...

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Aug 2011 02:51

Austin wrote:
Karan M wrote:Austin, whats with this bizarre response man, what sane guy exists on their side and what sane political boss in the current weird setup can speak on our side? Here we have an Indian military guy supporting deterrence and you object? The opponent we face is a fanatic,he opposes any subtle speak, you need direct responses, irrespective of who delvers the message.
Its better to leave nuclear matter to higher up in political bosses in MOD or PM himself .

And if you think Nuclear weapons in PA is handled by fanatic or cowboys then you are mistaken , there are responsible people out there who takes cares of their weapons much like we have responsible people taking care of ours and nuclear weapons is a tool of deterrent and not fighting wars.

I am telling you that in the current setup headed by a peacenik and a parallel power structure, ask ma'am before saying anything, the services have to support deterrence and they did the right thing. And you are saying, the GOI should do it. Sorry, GOI is too busy giving dossiers and reports cards.

Coming to fanatics and cowboys in Pakistan I do think you need to look into this issue more. If you do so, you'll realize India is dealing with a bunch of irrational, bigots who do the stupidest things having convinced themselves its a perfect plan. They did Kargil, threatened us with nuclear weapons during the crisis (and what if India had actually responded) and later on Nawaz or someone admitted they did not have a proper capability to strike into India at the time. Basically, their entire charade is built around we have nukes, so we will do terror attacks. If you think that is responsible strategy headed by competent people as versus lunatics engaging in brinksmanship, I dont know what to say. The entire military edifice in Pakistan is riddled with people, who in any other country would be fanatics. In Pakistan, they are moderate.

The ISI supposedly guards these weapons. Naval officer from ISI when he heads anti piracy missions tries to play games with larger Indian ships, has his men strip naked and stand at the railings (these dunderheads think that is some insult), others make gestures...this is their "professionalism" of the "protectors". Yeah, they actually did it. Literally w@nkers. With such behaviour, you can imagine 'esprit de corps" and what happens below decks. These are the kind of people the Pakistani Navy recruits and then their seniors encourage it. Churchill joked that the Navy, is rum, sodomy and the lash. Dont know about the first, but the latter two do apparently apply to the PN of today versus RN of 1800s

Conventional services are no better, in terms of their increasing fanaticism and jingoism.

In African ops, we have had repeated issues with these jerks - the troops are so indoctrinated they call Indians kaffirs, attempt to attack Indian troops and when faced with a tough response, run off - only to have their officers lodge protests and what not. These officer idiots then attempt to wine, dine, make Indian officers feel ok, to create the usual PR picture of "we operated well together". Professional?

Take a look at any Pakistani Army journal. Nine out ten refer to conspiracy theories, martial superiority theories, make outright bizarre claims...with professional Brigadiers etc writing the "analysis". If this is the quality of a lot of their ex personnel, with only a handful (eg Tufail, Agha Amin with less bravado and making an attempt at a balance), it speaks volumes for the quality of their training.

Before Zia it was bad enough, after Zia - one can well imagine. One of their original media trumpets, the Aussie blowhard Brian Cloughley wrote a saccharine account of the noble institution and even there was worried that for all his praise, the average soldier was not too bothered about training, because providence would help. This a decade back itself. Now add the increasing fanaticism

Wikileaks has PAF airmen sabotaging F-16s, they even saw a Naval base attacked by professionals who slaughtered the SSGN response team and blew up planes, with insider support, and you say "no fanatics". They even arrested some ex SSG guy for the job. After the act.

They have absolutely no dissent in their leadership system, even as juniors get radicalized in the above cases, as evidenced by Kargil. People who object, whistleblow (eg that SSG General or that journalist) wind up dead.

And if you think n-weapons are a tool of deterrent, not to fight wars, please inform the Indian Army, which has been preparing for tactical nuclear strikes on its conventional forces for a long while. Clearly, they are not as blase about the possibility that the Pakistanis are delusional loons who undertake extremely stupid actions thinking it to be their genius.

Basically, they have trained their men to hold ground, hate indians, be extremely fanatical, and created a few elite units with decent equipment, training and armor formations. For a lot of the rest, its fanaticism. Add the mix of ISI sponsored mullahs and traditional recruiting grounds becoming more fanatical, and people growing through the ranks, and the situation is not rosy. Day to day fighting India is outsourced to the Jihadis whom they are now fighting. Its a big mess. Beard versus Bigger Beard versus no Beard who is actually a big Beard but shaved it off to lay low

Anuj A · Post by **Anuj A** » 02 Aug 2011 05:08

Why I there all this doubt of a HMDS on IAF MIG-29UPG in all press releases it has been mentioned it will be a Thales TOPSIGHT same as IN K's.

The basis of armament control system of the upgraded MiG-29UPG is a new "Zhuk-M2E with slot array design and production corporation Phazotron-NIIR and optical-location station OLS-UEM with a laser, thermal, and televisions in the development of Institute of Semiconductor Devices (similar radar and infrared detection system used on MiG-29K/KUB). Information-control field crew cabin is built on multi-color liquid crystal display. "International" segment includes avionics Helmet-mounted target designation system the French company Thales, inertial-satellite navigation system with French company Sagem, as well as the Indian station and Israeli electronic intelligence station interference (similar systems are used to MiG-29K/KUB).

Mig-29 will also get Thales TopSight-E helmet-mounted sight and display (HMDS) which is also fitted to aircraft for the carrier borne Mig-29k for the Indian Navy.The armament upgrade will include the installation of modern weaponry like smart bombs and substantially improved air-to-air missiles and high-accuracy guided missiles to destroy ground and sea targets.

http://idrw.org/?p=1376

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 02 Aug 2011 07:20

Austin wrote:Its better to leave nuclear matter to higher up in political bosses in MOD or PM himself .

And if you think Nuclear weapons in PA is handled by fanatic or cowboys then you are mistaken, there are responsible people out there who takes cares of their weapons much like we have responsible people taking care of ours and nuclear weapons is a tool of deterrent and not fighting wars.

Austin, please leave your love fest for the GOI out of this. They are spineless and have proven that time and again.

Secondly, I am shocked that after all these years on BRF you can come up with such an asinine comment such as "...there are responsible people out there who takes care of their weapons..." Pakistan is a proven proliferator of nuclear weapons and they have never come up short on that mark.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Aug 2011 10:17

Rakesh wrote:Austin, please leave your love fest for the GOI out of this. They are spineless and have proven that time and again.

Yes they are but they are aware they can start some thing but it may not end in their own terms certainly not in the way they would like.

Secondly, I am shocked that after all these years on BRF you can come up with such an asinine comment such as "...there are responsible people out there who takes care of their weapons..." Pakistan is a proven proliferator of nuclear weapons and they have never come up short on that mark.

So do you think Nuclear Weapons are handled by irresponsible people who would simply press the red button at the first go ? Pakistan has been the proliferator of weapons but so has been the Chinese and US to its allies. No one is stopping India to help the Vietnam and Taiwan with generous help but its a high stake game not everyone can play it well.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 02 Aug 2011 11:28

^^^

You assume that the Nukes are in safe hands. The question that is most important is with increasing levels of Jihadi indoctrinisation how it is possible for the TSP to even find enough responsible people who will keep the nukes safe. Also that those people will not be eliminated / compromised over a period of time, so that, the control of Nukes passes on to Jihadi hands.

manum · Post by **manum** » 02 Aug 2011 11:50

Problem is not only the people...who only care for larger cause of Allah, but also their doctrine which is hazy and there is nothing like a ladder which clearly defines when to press nuclear button...

and they kept it hazy on purpose...and if you keep it hazy on purpose to use it as a deterrent, there is no reason for others to believe you wont press the button at first go, if pressure grows insurmountable...and you know you'll loose on the first step only...

and then to increase deterrent, create a low yield weapon which only increases the possibility of lower threshold of pressing the button...they are almost turning nuclear weapons into a conventional ones...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Aug 2011 12:08

Well there are many theories floating around be it Allah , Jehadi or what ever you can take one theory and debate endlessly. One thing is certain Pakistan will maintain a capable nuclear deterrent viz a viz India becuase it cant compete with India on conventional front as its vastly mismatched and its doctrine and usability is kept hazy intentionally to keep people guessing and its suits them.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 02 Aug 2011 12:47

An anecdote from the book by Brian on the PA - He quotes interaction with an PA Arty Captain on the use of guided arty shells. The captain tellls him that while technology is good but with Allah on their side, who needs advanced technology to deal with enemy i.e. India.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 02 Aug 2011 13:12

Mig 21 crashes in bikaner , pilot ejects but dies

A MiG-21 fighter aircraft today crashed soon after taking off from Naal airfield in Rajasthan's Bikaner district killing the pilot. "The pilot ejected but died due to injuries sustained by him," defence spokesperson S D Goswami said.
The MiG-21 'Type-96' aircraft was on a routine sortie and crashed near the airfield, which is about 15 kms from Bikaner city, he said. This is the second crash of a MiG series fighter aircraft this year.

On February 4, a IAF MiG-21 'Bison' fighter plane had crashed apparently due to an engine problem while on a routine sortie in Madhya Pradesh's Sheopur district but the pilot had ejected safely.
In 2010, a total of 10 IAF aircraft crashes took place including four MiG-27 and two MiG-21 planes.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Aug 2011 13:29

krishnan wrote:Mig 21 crashes in bikaner , pilot ejects but dies

RIP

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Aug 2011 13:34

sooner we get rid of the 21s and Mig27s the better, if necessary by ramping up Tejas and MRCA production rates.

there is not much point flogging them beyond what was initially planned during upgrades, their combat utility in a real surge situation is likely to take a real nosedive under burst mode use.

jimmy_moh · Post by **jimmy_moh** » 02 Aug 2011 14:12

RIP..
Hope those bureaucrats slowing down the procurement programs get some sort of wakeup call from this.
Perhaps a "rang-de-basanti" type movement is needed to roll heads.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 02 Aug 2011 14:55

Why this toilet newspaper is using LCA's pic to depict the picture of the crashed aircraft

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 454610.cms