Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 08 Oct 2012 10:49

Nice piece of work on IAF Mi-17 V-5 by NDTV...

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/ndt...video-featured

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 08 Oct 2012 10:56

Archived Webcast of Air Force Day celebration

http://www.webcast.gov.in/iafday/index.html

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 08 Oct 2012 11:05

I am cross posting this from the space thread. Maybe my formatting is all wrong--kindly excuse.

Folks. This is what happens when your country collaborates in space/defence technology with other , advanced nations creating technology. The tech trickles down into the basic equipment used by the armed forces, after gestating for a while and entering a darwinian race of technology commercialization.

This is great news. What this means is, that we will , for the longest time, have a technology lead in the arms and ammo our forces use over communist China and the Paki.

So, end conclusion is that we are set for a long era of good peace and prosperity, based on the shoulders of better weaponry, which is based on better technology and science and collaboration.

The salient features of the above phenomenon are shown by this;

avinodhin
Post subject: Re: Indian Space Program DiscussionPosted: 07 Oct 2012 14:21

BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 11 Sep 2012 22:20
Posts: 12
chiragAS wrote:
avinodhin wrote:
India poised for giant leap in space science, 56% jump in collaboration with US, France, Russia

NEW DELHI: India may have taken a giant leap into the hallowed club of space research, with leaders like the United States and Russia, increasingly joining hands with Indian space scientists in quest for the unknown. Latest data on India's international collaboration in space sciences has shown an almost 56% increase between 2001-05 and 2006-10.

Between 2001 and 2005, 629 publications were internationally co-authored between Indian and international space scientists. The output increased to almost 980 publications by 2006-10 — a growth of 55.8% in raw volume.

These internationally co-authored publications, which contributed to 45.2% of India's total research output in 2001-05 increased to 47.1% by 2006-10.

The analysis, done by Thomson Reuters and submitted to the ministry of science and technology, says these levels of international cooperation are the highest among all the fields under analysis. The US was India's most frequent collaborating partner in this field with American researchers co-authoring 465 publications with their Indian counterparts — 22.3% of India's total research output in space science.

France was the second most important collaborating partner with India, co-authoring 206 publications with Indian researchers in 2006-10. France accounted for 9.9% of India's total research output in this field, an increase of 1.7% since 2001-05.

Collaborating in space science as percentage of India's total research output in this field also increased with the UK (+0.8%) and Germany (+1.4%), Russia (+1.9%), Spain (+1.4%), Australia (+0.7%) and the Netherlands (+0.7%). Collaboration has increased substantially across the board with all major countries.

Consider the case of Russia. Indian and Russian space scientists co-authored 29 papers between 2001 and 2005, and the output increased to 82 papers between 2005 and 2010. Ditto for Germany. As against 98 papers co-authored in 2001-05, the output rose to 175 in 2006-10.

Similarly, with the UK, the output increased from 107 to 177 during the same period, Italy (from 83 to 119), the US (from 316 to 465), Spain (from 45 to 96), Japan (from 80 to 109), France (from 114 to 206) and Australia (from 51 to 91).

According to the Planning Commission, the 11th five year Plan witnessed significant progress in international cooperative endeavours in space science.

Where is the Source link. It seems you have copied it from some newspaper and pasted it in whole without giving credit to the source.

Sorry boss, it was unintentional..find the link below here..

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 704448.cms

darshand · Post by **darshand** » 08 Oct 2012 16:35

Prithwiraj wrote:Archived Webcast of Air Force Day celebration

http://www.webcast.gov.in/iafday/index.html

Just started watching it and noticed @ 3:44 - 2 F16s. New MMRCA winner??

anand_sankar · Post by **anand_sankar** » 08 Oct 2012 16:54

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 716973.cms

You must read this article in simply in the scenario of demand v/s supply. As our armed forces modernize, they are essentially competing with the mainstream economy for skilled people. The realisation should be dawning now in the services that whether it is a man or a woman, what matters are the skill set and the aptitude to duty that they bring. It is only a matter of very little time now that we will be seeing women taking much larger frontline roles that stop just a fraction short of bayonet charge or firing from an aircraft. Women can easily command duties such as air defence installations, command supply logistic or work in Combat Information Centres (CIC) in the heart of a warship or submarines.

Why not be the tip of the spear? Absolutely yes. That mindset will come soon too as proportion of women in vital roles increases. It is sad when I see people citing the reason that a female soldier being tortured on capture is worse than a male soldier. Torture is torture, period, the suffering is the same man or woman.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 08 Oct 2012 17:16

darshand wrote:
Prithwiraj wrote:Archived Webcast of Air Force Day celebration

http://www.webcast.gov.in/iafday/index.html
Just started watching it and noticed @ 3:44 - 2 F16s. New MMRCA winner??

These were loaned from PAF

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 08 Oct 2012 17:20

Anand_Sarkarji, please take the detailed discussion about suitability of women to topic of "women in combat" thread. You will a much more detailed analysis of the topic.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 09 Oct 2012 07:54

tid bit, I have missed it if it was posted before. OCU is now at KKD.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 09 Oct 2012 13:25

I wonder which bird they are flying now?? The FL's should have been out of service for quite some time now.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 09 Oct 2012 13:53

http://issuu.com/spguide/docs/sp_s_avia ... 2?mode=a_p

October issue of SP's Aviation is an IAF special. Apart from the 80th anniversary, there are a lot of tidbits about IAF issues like modernisation, indigenisation etc. Also available at

http://www.spsaviation.net/ebook.asp?Id ... &year=2012

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Oct 2012 03:26

did we miss this?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/mig-2 ... ipt-276000

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 10 Oct 2012 07:50

^^^ Title is so misleading. It is only the oldest type 77 that will be retired in 2014. Also watching the accompanied video is must as the written transcript is missing a lot of the interview.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Oct 2012 17:54

Defmin has assured today the bitter fight over ownership of gunship helicopters is a family fight and will be sorted out soon!

I can see iaf rejecting the rudra if ia gets approval to preserve h&d and going for superiah american maal only.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 10 Oct 2012 18:13

Singha, the issue is not who gets which maal. If, for example, LCH performs similar functions as Apache then they can't split them between two services. Under that assumption IA will use it's assets and will be loath to involve IAF, a scenario that can lead to Kargil type delays. They should take this opportunity to embed IAF personnel and assets directly into IA units. We need more interoperability rather than compete against each other.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 10 Oct 2012 20:33

India is going to use the Honeywell F125IN engine for upgrading the Jaguars. Rolls Royce pulled out of the race leaving Honeywell as the only option.

http://www.honeywellforjaguar.com/ is a site dedicated for it.

From http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... ghters.htm

the tender to upgrade IAF’s 100 odd Jaguar aircraft with new engines was about to be issued – likely by October end – to the US Honeywell.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 10 Oct 2012 22:15

Not sure how many of you have seen this incredible footage...

2 APACHES KILL A PLATOON OF TALIBAN

srin · Post by **srin** » 10 Oct 2012 22:58

nakul wrote:India is going to use the Honeywell F125IN engine for upgrading the Jaguars. Rolls Royce pulled out of the race leaving Honeywell as the only option.

http://www.honeywellforjaguar.com/ is a site dedicated for it.

From http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... ghters.htm
the tender to upgrade IAF’s 100 odd Jaguar aircraft with new engines was about to be issued – likely by October end – to the US Honeywell.

Isn't that actually worse - in these St. Anthony days, won't that cause the tender to be scrapped ? IIRC, we'd scrapped an Artillery RFP a couple of years ago because we landed into single-vendor situation (and that was because we blacklisted the other firm).

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 10 Oct 2012 23:08

The single vendor situation caused the earlier tender to be withdrawn. This their next attempt. They don't have a choice other than Honeywell so they will have to go with it or forfeit the engine change altogether unless they change the requirements for it. Rolls Royce does have an engine but it does not meet IAF's requirements.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 11 Oct 2012 06:25

Heard Honeywell engine is a very good fit, it was tested with the Jaguar to the satisfaction of IAF brass, hence RR pulled out.

srin · Post by **srin** » 11 Oct 2012 10:03

nakul wrote:The single vendor situation caused the earlier tender to be withdrawn. This their next attempt. They don't have a choice other than Honeywell so they will have to go with it or forfeit the engine change altogether unless they change the requirements for it. Rolls Royce does have an engine but it does not meet IAF's requirements.

I still don't understand our procurement rules logic - if we're having only a single vendor for a re-issued tender, then we're okay to procure ?

Why haven't we applied this to our Artillery procurement ?

vineetmehta · Post by **vineetmehta** » 11 Oct 2012 11:38

nakul wrote:The single vendor situation caused the earlier tender to be withdrawn. This their next attempt. They don't have a choice other than Honeywell so they will have to go with it or forfeit the engine change altogether unless they change the requirements for it. Rolls Royce does have an engine but it does not meet IAF's requirements.

Fundamentally there is no issue with going with a single vendor procurement provided that the reasons, justifications and decision making is done in a transparent manner. Idea is to demonstrate that no malpractices exist.

Since defence procurement is very different and complex as compared to public procurement it might have variations.

arijitkm · Post by **arijitkm** » 11 Oct 2012 18:46

Death knell for HAL-IJT ???

JET TRAINER

The IAF had decided to induct an intermediate jet trainer built by British Aerospace Systems. The initial process of induction had already started, Air Marshal Singh said.

“The advanced jet trainer Hawk has proved to be a very useful aircraft for training. We are happy with its performance. We hope to get similar results from the intermediate jet trainer manufactured by BAE Systems,” he said.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Oct 2012 19:37

BAE systems website does not indicate they have a IJT. it could be a stripped down hawk with FCS tuned for gentler handling maybe ? it would already have all safety features like spin recovery chute and so on. engine could be derated as is, by controlling the throttle and fuel flow I think. FCS can be tuned in SW to limit the degree of manouvers.

John · Post by **John** » 11 Oct 2012 19:49

Perhaps procure the T-45, which USN uses in both roles?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 Oct 2012 20:05

Which brings up a good question?

why can't the IAF do the same?? a derated \simpler Hawk for intermediate sylabus?

I hope they do it .. would be the most logical choice while MOD and HAL can continue to do post mortems on how the IJT program was effed up

and I think the AM may have let the cat out of the bag and is probably going to rapped for it

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 12 Oct 2012 13:56

PTI Reporting: Army gets control over attack helicopters.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Oct 2012 14:16

http://www.business-standard.com/genera ... ers/67475/

Nothwithstanding stiff opposition from the Air Force, government has decided to give the control of attack helicopters to the Army.

"We have received a letter from the defence ministry and we have been given the attack helicopters by the government," Army Chief Gen Bikram Singh told PTI here.

The Army had been demanding control over attack and medium-lift helicopters saying they are mainly used for its operations and that is why they should be under it. The IAF has been strongly opposing the demand.

Army had been maintaining that the induction of tactical and attack choppers into the force was an "inescapable operational necessity" as infrastructure along the borders with China is "far from satisfactory" and such assets would be required to cut down on the time for movement.
The tussle between the two Services over the issue had come out in open when IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne said the country cannot afford to have these "little air forces" doing their own things.

Defence Minister A K Antony had played down the tussle, saying it was a "family problem" and the Government was in the final stages of resolving the matter.

As per its plans, the Army wants to raise attack chopper squadrons as part of its strike corps and then raise them at every corps leve

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Oct 2012 14:26

I am ordering a sinful thick cheese pizza today evening to celebrate this, with ice cold fanta already @ home.

I need to see 'swarms' of sand painted Rudra with 8xhelina flying low and fast through the ladakh terrain.

and lets not forget the khan style green or pink tinted optronics balls moving this way and that.

maybe have a couple of Para SF types sitting on the wings to do a ==

adityadange · Post by **adityadange** » 12 Oct 2012 14:37

As per its plans, the Army wants to raise attack chopper squadrons as part of its strike corps and then raise them at every corps leve

if i am not mistaken we have 4 strike corpse. so 1 sq for each of them makes some 80 attack helos. am i right?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 12 Oct 2012 14:38

^^^

If this goes through, then what happens to the Longbow purchase. Will it be owned by the IAF? Or by the IA.

Personally, I say cancel the longbow purchase and spend the money saved in developing and producing a MMW FCS for the LCH.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Oct 2012 14:43

No the IAF chief Browne has clearly said the apaches will be paid for, owned and operated by the IAF. I guess he already knew the decision when he said this, so just made the ownership issue clear.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 12 Oct 2012 15:27

Good decision. For CAS, light-medium attack helos should be with the arm that most closely needs to interact with them. Heavier helos are fine with the IAF, but the light ones should be with IA.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 12 Oct 2012 18:37

Hmmm... so now only IAF wouldn't have rotary wing assets with a radar, IN has the Kamov, IAF's irony is that they control many of medium helos, the Mi-17v5

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Oct 2012 18:47

I fail to understand why the IAF should own and operate the Mi17 completely either - if its used in a CAS role obviously the same argument as the Rudra/WSI-Dhruv applies, if its applied in a transport role it will be carrying goods for army & armymen 80%.

the rest 20% might be fwd air controllers, garud CSAR, IAFs own liaison sorties between nearby bases.....for these they can operate whatever are the suitable platforms.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 12 Oct 2012 18:57

singha Agree

here is another thing -

parachutes are packed by IAF guys - so the SF\paratroopers when they go for a jump have to pray that these guys packed it well -

Some guys tried to apply the US part of getting packers to randomly pick a pack, strap it on and jump and all hell broke loose

The IAF was like - stick this system or find another way to go for a jump

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Oct 2012 20:05

IAF turned 80 - official video posted on youtube by Shiv aroor.
has some good footage of our swank new infra including a Phalcon hangar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... CpZAbSHUtQ

overall compared to the "akash yoddha" video of a decade ago, the std of base infra looks more chi chi now both interior and exterior.

the onlee eyesore (soon to yield to Akash) are the SA3 missile trucks.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 12 Oct 2012 21:46

adityadange wrote:
As per its plans, the Army wants to raise attack chopper squadrons as part of its strike corps and then raise them at every corps leve
if i am not mistaken we have 4 strike corpse. so 1 sq for each of them makes some 80 attack helos. am i right?

4th Strike Corps is not approved.. this was to be the Mountain Strike Corps... the three Strike Corps (based on public domain knowledge) is I, II and XXI, but they have a Buddy Corps (pivot corps) in X, XI and XII Corps. ORBAT gurus, please chime in...
IA was planning to induct around 100 Rudras and LCHs into AAC SQs.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 Oct 2012 22:50

Singha wrote:IAF turned 80 - official video posted on youtube by Shiv aroor.
has some good footage of our swank new infra including a Phalcon hangar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... CpZAbSHUtQ

overall compared to the "akash yoddha" video of a decade ago, the std of base infra looks more chi chi now both interior and exterior.

the onlee eyesore (soon to yield to Akash) are the SA3 missile trucks.

In the first minute itself, they show Wing Cmdr K Nachiket, of Kargil ejection fame and then Grp Cpt AP Singh, who was a Tejas test pilot and now looks like he's re-joined the IAF as an active duty officer after completing his stint at NFTC.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 12 Oct 2012 23:07

merlin wrote:Good decision. For CAS, light-medium attack helos should be with the arm that most closely needs to interact with them. Heavier helos are fine with the IAF, but the light ones should be with IA.

ALL attack helos ought to be under the Army's control including the heavy AH-64Ds. Fact is EVERY major military in the world has assigned its attack helicopters to army aviation forces. The only exceptions are the Russian military (midst of major reorganisation) and the Israel Defence Forces (no formal army) as well as a few smaller militaries like that of South Africa and Singapore.

The IAF was quite simply being parochial in its objections. And it does a disservice to the nation in its attempt to postpone the inevitable.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 12 Oct 2012 23:50

Army may get the 1st batch of Longbows per this report:
Indian Army to get its own attack helicopters

The first batch of Apache helicopters to be bought from USA programme may go the Indian Army.

Great news if true. It would mean that these machines would likely be used immediately in J&K to make jihadi keema instead of sitting in an IAF hangar waiting for a "real" war.