Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 12 Oct 2012 23:53

^^I think that is just speculation by UndeeTV. The IAF is paying for the Apaches. They won't part with them. They were against the IA acquiring even the LCH. That will go ahead as planned now, since the govt. has backed the IA.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Oct 2012 00:44

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/h ... 992279.ece
Finally!

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 13 Oct 2012 01:00

nachiket wrote:^^I think that is just speculation by UndeeTV. The IAF is paying for the Apaches. They won't part with them. They were against the IA acquiring even the LCH. That will go ahead as planned now, since the govt. has backed the IA.

Nachiket and Victor, it is far too early to say which force will get which assets, a rule of thumb could be all current assets stay where they are, future helos will go to the Army Or, only attack helos (current and future) would be with Army. Heavy lift and Medium lift helos be with IAF.
IA wants all attack copter and Medium Lift Helos (meaning Mi-8s and Mi-17s). Does this mean, all Druvs in IAF stay with IAF? somehow no mention of Druvs.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 13 Oct 2012 01:02

SaiK wrote:http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/h ... 992279.ece
Finally!

finally more details are emerging about what was actually signed. next milestone is design completion which is almost 15-24 months away.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 13 Oct 2012 08:34

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/army- ... y/1016167/

...the confusion on the Apache continues, depending on the publication one reads they will go to IAF, Army, issue is still open.

Next time the service chiefs want to blame MoD babus for the ills that plague them they should think about the cheap turf politics and lip service they pay to jointness.

NAK Browne's "little air forces" comment is just laughable - the Navy, Coast Guard, BSF all have their little air forces. Should disband his little commando force of Garuds first before preaching to others.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Oct 2012 09:09

even the army aviation corps operates close to 200 dhruv, chetak and cheetal helos. thats bigger than the inventory of most countries AFs.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Oct 2012 09:33

The right thing to do would be for the IAF to hand over Apaches/Armed Dhruv/Mi-35 to Indian Army and let then run the show the way they feel its right for their business.

IAF has this big brotherly attitude and thinks every thing that can fly should be under its command unless its forced to relinquish it.

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

Singha wrote:even the army aviation corps operates close to 200 dhruv, chetak and cheetal helos. thats bigger than the inventory of most countries AFs.

And yet it is not enough.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Oct 2012 10:01

sir the US 1st airborne div operates that number of helos when reinforced in the field...chinooks, blackhawks, apaches, lil birds...

IA needs around 500 gunships and 2000 transport helis to be anywhere near comfort levels.

we need the means and technology to launch airborne brigade size attacks at multiple points into tibet and collapse the PLA defences in greater depths rather than just play ping-pong at the border in a war of attrition or worse just taking back what we lose in initial chaotic phase of a surprise war.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Oct 2012 10:43

Gentlemen, please to control your testosterone levels...these are early days and we are far away from seeing the actual picture on the ground. Consider the following:

1. Attack helicopters - Army Aviation Corps (AAC) simply does not have the capability to man, maintain and fly these machines. One simply does not wake up one fine morning and says today I'm going to fly the little Mi-35 instead of my Cheetah helicopter. Right from the pilot to the smallest sub-system that goes into these machines will have to be mastered by the IA. And it is not happening anytime soon. Same is the case with Apaches....would the transition be more easier for experienced IAF pilots flying Mi-35 for donkey years now or AAC guys flying Dhruvs or Cheetah?

And what happens to the cadre of pilots and airmen in IAF who work in the two Mi-24/35 Squadrons? You don't simply let such talent sit idle because AAC will not fly attack helicopters.

The way I see it, AAC will start absorbing gunships with induction of Rudra and LCH. The nucleus of combat pilots will need to be built from ground up. I would not be surprised if the IA asks for its AAC pilots to be trained and seconded to Mi-24/35 and Apache units. And in due course of time, when there is sufficient mass and body of trained manpower, these units may transition to AAC.

If the IA wants a Gunship squadron for each Corps, we're still far off from seeing that happen anytime soon. The first such squadrons are likely to be equipped with Dhruv Mk4/Rudra and then with LCH when it comes on line. I remember reading an article some time back which said IA wanted a mix of heavy-light gunship brigades for each Corps - with Strike Corps having more heavy elements. IMO, the number of Apache types in AAC will be between 4-6 squadrons....the price is simply too steep.

2. Medium airlift helicopters - The demand from IA stems from requirement to raise Air-Assault Bdes or Combat Aviation Brigades as they are I think being called. IA will perforce need Mi-17V5 type of helicopters to equip such a brigade and herein lies the problem...who owns the helicopters which will work day-in and day-out with these brigades?...These assets and troops they will train with and carry in battlefield will be wedded together and herein lies the dispute. And to raise a CAB is a bloody expensive proposition...capability to launch a full fledged battalion itself is going to be pretty expensive - forget an Air-Assault Bde or Division. So, who pays for and maintains these assets?

As far as Dhruv with IAF go, well, most of them I think are in communication flight role and will stay with IAF.

arun · Post by **arun** » 13 Oct 2012 11:00

RajitO wrote:http://www.indianexpress.com/news/army- ... y/1016167/

...the confusion on the Apache continues, depending on the publication one reads they will go to IAF, Army, issue is still open.

Next time the service chiefs want to blame MoD babus for the ills that plague them they should think about the cheap turf politics and lip service they pay to jointness.

NAK Browne's "little air forces" comment is just laughable - the Navy, Coast Guard, BSF all have their little air forces. Should disband his little commando force of Garuds first before preaching to others.

1.It’s true there is some confusion regards the batch of 22 AH-64 Long Bow’s. Rajat pandit writing in the Economic Times say that the IAF will keep them citing “MoD sources”.

2.Then the artcle also has this bit on the Army’s Helicopter acquisition plans, namely 30-36 “ heavy-duty attack” helicopters and 114 “Rudra” light combat helicopters:

"The Army will get 'future' acquisitions. It will have to come up with its own concrete plans for induction of attack helicopters, with all their infrastructure, maintenance and training matters," said a source.

The Army wants one heavy-duty attack squadron (10-12 helicopters) for each of its three "strike" formations - 1 Corps (Mathura), 2 Corps (Ambala) and 21 Corps ( Bhopal) — in keeping with their primary offensive role. Moreover, it has plans to induct another 114 'Rudra' light combat helicopters for the remaining 10 'pivot' corps.

Read it all here:

Government rebuffs IAF, gives Army attack choppers

arun · Post by **arun** » 13 Oct 2012 11:11

SaiK wrote:http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/h ... 992279.ece

Finally!

X Posted from the Transport Aircraft for IAF thread.

HAL Press Release on the MTA:

HAL Signs MTA Follow-on Contract with Russian Partners

Bangalore, October 12 : Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), the aerospace major, signed the Preliminary Design Phase (PDP) Contract today in New Delhi with the United Aircraft Corporation — Transport Aircraft (UAC-TA), the Russian partner and their JV-Multirole Transport Aircraft Ltd (MTAL) for the Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA) project as a follow on contract of the General Contract signed between the three parties in May 2012.

With this HAL and UAC-TA will start the preliminary design work immediately at Moscow. HAL design team consisting of 30 designers will be positioned at UAC-TA”, says Mr. R.K.Tyagi, Chairman, HAL who was present on the occasion. The primary objective of the project is to achieve self-reliance in design, development and production of aircraft of this size and also to manage the programme with international collaboration and large number of global suppliers, he adds.

The contract was signed by Mr. T. Suvarnaraju, HAL’s Director (Design and Development) and Mr. S.Velmozhkin, General Director, UAC-TA.

An Inter Governmental Agreement was signed on November 12, 2007 to design, develop and produce the multi-role transport aircraft in the 15-20 tonne class, jointly by the Indian and Russian agencies (HAL and UAC-TAS) to meet the requirements of 100 aircraft for the Russian Air Force, 45 aircraft for the IAF and 60 for other countries. The total requirement for the present is 205.

On completion of the agreed work share of the PDP Contract in 10 months, Detail Design Phase (DDP) Contract will be signed to complete the design and development of MTA. The aircraft will be designed for cargo / troop transportation, paradrop/air drop of supplies including ‘low altitude parachute extraction system’ and is to be co-developed by HAL, UAC, and Rosoboronexport of Russia, through MTAL.

HAL will carry out the design and development of its workshare of the MTA at the Aircraft R&D Centre (ARDC) at Bangalore while its Transport Aircraft Division (TAD) at Kanpur will manufacture the prototypes and subsequently the serial production will be undertaken at Kanpur where dedicated facilities are being set up.

HAL’s other R&D Centres and manufacturing Divisions will share development of systems and LRUs and manufacture of components, sub-assemblies and composite structure. HAL will showcase its expertise in design of aircraft as well as systems, manufacturing and flight testing while jointly working with the Russian team in Moscow as well as in India.

HAL has a dedicated Division for manufacture and support of transport aircraft at Kanpur which is the only proven facility in the country for transport aircrafts. This Division has a co-located R&D centre for transport aircraft

The production of 44 seater HS-748 (Avro) passenger/transport Aircraft commenced at this Division in early 1960s. Eighty nine Avro aircrafts were produced at this Division out of which 22 aircrafts were supplied to civilian customers. The Division is still supporting these aircrafts even after five decades inspite of obsolescence and non-availability of OEMs support thanks to R&D efforts in maintaining fleet serviceability. HAL has undertaken a number of upgrades and modifications to overcome obsolescence and performance enhancement.

Subsequently, production of 19 seater Dornier 228 passenger/utility aircraft started in early 1984. So far 116 aircrafts have been produced for various roles out of which 14 aircrafts were supplied to domestic civilian customers besides export of another two aircrafts. HAL is also exporting complete Dornier 228 aircraft structure to Ruag, Germany with EASA certification. Currently, the Division is supplying aircraft to various defence customers. One aircraft will be exported to Seychelles during this financial year. The Division is also expecting a number of bulk orders from domestic/foreign customers in near future.

HAL Press Release

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Oct 2012 11:22

Well, Ajai Shukla seems to reporting a different angle on the Apache Gunships ownership -

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/10/i ... pters.html

In a letter that was issued on Thursday, the MoD has ruled that the military’s entire attack helicopter fleet will be owned, operated and maintained by the army. This includes the 22 Apache AH-64D helicopters that are being procured from US company, Boeing Defence, Space and Security (BDS); as also a new-generation fleet of combat helicopters that Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) is currently developing. That will include 179 Light Combat Helicopters (LCHs) and 76 Rudras, which are a weaponised version of HAL’s Dhruv Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH).

The IAF’s existing fleet of rapidly fading Russian Mi-25/35s, for long the world’s most heavily armed attack helicopter, will continue to be operated by the air force until they are retired from service.

The most immediate effect of this decision will be that, instead of IAF pilots, Army Aviation Corps pilots will be going to the US for training on the Apache AH-64D.

The MoD has also accepted the army’s long-standing request for Mi-17 medium lift helicopters to be located in army camps in J&K, so that heliborne contingents can be launched into operations without delay. The army says that heliborne operations are invariably delayed because a cumbersome IAF hierarchy takes too long to sanction the use of its helicopters.

All in all, a good development - the heartburn and some bad blood not withstanding....but I still fail to see the ability of IA/AAC to support and man Apache Squadrons.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 13 Oct 2012 15:13

Well, Air Marshal Bk Pandey says the IAF will retain some of the Apache's after all

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/attac ... 121013.htm

"However, this decision should not been seen as if the air force is losing all control. Out of the 22 Apaches, a certain amount of choppers would remain with the air force. Also one should not think that the air force would become defunct after this decision. The air force would continue to do its work such as precision attacks, destruction of radar installations and also striking at terrorist camps. The army would only have a direct control over choppers during a ground operation".

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 13 Oct 2012 15:17

rohitvats wrote: And what happens to the cadre of pilots and airmen in IAF who work in the two Mi-24/35 Squadrons? You don't simply let such talent sit idle because AAC will not fly attack helicopters.

Call me crazy if you will, but why not transfer the entire gang of IAF Helo pilots and the support staff to AAC? Wouldn't it mean optimum utilization of their experience and talent? Why not?

mody · Post by **mody** » 13 Oct 2012 16:37

I think the IAF should get the AH-64D, to be used more for taking our enemy air defenses and other more strategic roles.

The LCH and Rudra should form the core of the AAC. Also atleast another 80 Mi-17V5 should be ordered for the AAC, to give the army adequate medium lift capacity. From the existing fleet of Mi-8/Mi-17s also about half the fleet should be eventually transferred to the AAC.

Each of the strike corps can have atleast 16-24 LCH assigned to it. Besides this the northeast should also get 24 LCH and ladakh another 16.
The Rudra can be used for anti-insurgency ops and should be assigned to defensive formations.
The pivot corps can have a mix of LCH and Rudra or purely LCH.

mody · Post by **mody** » 13 Oct 2012 16:49

What will be HAL's share of work in the MTA project?
The Russian's have already designed and produced a variety of Transport aircraft's over the years. What exactly will HAL be contributing in this effort, except maybe making the doors or something.

The project could have made sense, had it been initiated with someone like Embrarer. They do not have a similar plane, cut have enough expertise to be able to design one. The main challenge would have been to get the right performance in Hot and High conditions and operating from un-prepared and under prepared air strips and from short runways.

In the present case, it seems more like the Su-30 project, where the Russian's will have basically everything and the Indian side will only prepare some customization and provide the required nos. to make the project feasible.
Also the nos. 45 for IAF, seems to be too small. It should be atleast 80-100 planes.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Oct 2012 17:59

>>I think the IAF should get the AH-64D, to be used more for taking our enemy air defenses and other more strategic roles.

SEAD/DEAD is done by fixed wing a/c everywhere. sure we have example of GW1 where apaches sneaked in and destroyed a radar station but again a barrage of tomahawks could have done it too using IMINT taken a few hrs ago to fix locations of radars. now other options like KEPD, JASSM, Storm Shadow can do it as well. Rus again has KH55 and KH101 for the job, along with KP31P and KH59.

I dont see whats the role of gunship helis of limited range and speed in taking out enemy air defences. the SA15 types forming inner bubble around S300 sites will generally shred any heli found roaming around on the perimeter.

however I can think of a role for Longbows in sneaking around at night behind the enemy attacking the supply routes upto 100km behind the front in hit and run raids to create confusion and jams, making taking out small bridges using hellfires and so on.....but top cover has to be provided by IAF fighters to ensure no enemy fighters are in area...because even a F16 with AIM9L will make short work of a Apache. they could also attack concentrations of tanks and IFVs moving behind the lines and detected by GMTI systems.

pdj · Post by **pdj** » 13 Oct 2012 19:30

I am not too excited about this decision giving combat helicopters to the army. As rohitvats has pointed out I see serious challenges in raising these units. Not just in recruiting/ converting existing pilots and training but in maintenance and managing the supply chain as well. There is definitely going to be a duplication in capabilities and infrastructure. More seriously these units will need protection in the air from enemy aircraft. This may open a can of worms with the army demanding interceptors etc - I do agree it is unlikely but as per reports the army actually did request for fixed wing aircraft. The air force's focus will also now be completely counter air and high value target oriented. This will result in them abdicating close air support and associated stuff along the FEBA like providing battlefield air defence to the army choppers. The IAF will end up being a very heavy fighter dominated air force with little doctrinal need for aircraft such as the LCA.

I would have preferred a solution like the Soviets had. The VVS was divided into Strategic aviation and Tactical aviation, and oftentimes tactical aviation units were grouped into an air army. For example the GSFG (Group of Soviet Air Forces in Germany) was supported by the 16th air army. They had similar air army's for other areas such as southern europe and the far east(?). These air army's were subordinate to the land forces in that geography and employment restricted to their respective geography.

India could have created smaller 'air corps' along these lines. A total of 3 air corps, one for each of the strike corps. Each air corps could consist of 1 squadron of apache, 2 squadrons of LCH, 2 squadrons of the Rudra and 2 squadrons of LCA for CAS as well as battlefield air superiority. I guess some of the communications / light helicopters could be thrown into the mix as well. These air corps would be manned, operated and maintained by the air force but would be tied to and subordinate to the respective strike corps. Its units would not be allowed to be deployed outside of the strike corps area of operations. Requests for air support etc would not need to go through the air force's command chain but be addressed directly by the strike corps organic air arm. It would force (and require) much closer working of the two forces .

The advantages of such a solution are many - it avoids duplication of resources, it allows for the preservation and concentration of skills and experience. The use of armed helicopters is after all an application of air power and as of now the air force are the guys who have that expertise. It would also offer better career progression for the cadre of chopper pilots. In the current scenario the air force chopper pilots have come out on the minus side. In the long run it would lead to the creation of a cadre of officers (both from the air force and army) who have worked together on a day to day basis. This would do wonders to 'jointmanship'.

On the whole it is still win win for India. We are going to have a pretty lethal and impressive fleet of over 250 armed helicopters.

chiragAS · Post by **chiragAS** » 13 Oct 2012 20:17

Perhaps IAF will keep Apaches for protection of its expensive assets like C-17 etc. TFTA style. Taking out terrorists with sniper like precision who might damage C-17s etc with a shoulder fired stinger etc around make shift air bases at forward locations or during transport planes low altitude flying for cargo drops.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 13 Oct 2012 20:55

pdj wrote: I would have preferred a solution like the Soviets had. The VVS was divided into Strategic aviation and Tactical aviation, and oftentimes tactical aviation units were grouped into an air army.

If you are going to quote Soviet doctrine and advocate it, go the whole hog - The Soviets had a parallel Air Force called the PVO dedicated to the defense of Mother Russia apart from the VVS. Why were the Backfires operated by the AVMF - Soviet Naval Aviation and not VVS's strategic forces?

More seriously these units will need protection in the air from enemy aircraft. This may open a can of worms with the army demanding interceptors etc

Perfect example of creating a strawman argument.

The advantages of such a solution are many - it avoids duplication of resources, it allows for the preservation and concentration of skills and experience.

Which can all be achieved by transferring the majority of rotary-wing assets to the Army.

The use of armed helicopters is after all an application of air power and as of now the air force are the guys who have that expertise

...so Sea Kings operated by the Navy with ASMs and torpedoes are unarmed by your definition and that is not an application of air power. On that note we better kick out those MARCOS operating in Wullar lake as CI ops are an Army specialty.

I hope some on this thread with all these fears spend some time understanding how nd why the USMC has fought to retain its organic close support fixed wing and rotary wing capability and is able to call upon Navy and USAF assets when it needs them in the fight.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Oct 2012 21:42

rohitvats wrote:Gentlemen, please to control your testosterone levels...these are early days and we are far away from seeing the actual picture on the ground. Consider the following:

1. Attack helicopters - Army Aviation Corps (AAC) simply does not have the capability to man, maintain and fly these machines. One simply does not wake up one fine morning and says today I'm going to fly the little Mi-35 instead of my Cheetah helicopter. Right from the pilot to the smallest sub-system that goes into these machines will have to be mastered by the IA. And it is not happening anytime soon. Same is the case with Apaches....would the transition be more easier for experienced IAF pilots flying Mi-35 for donkey years now or AAC guys flying Dhruvs or Cheetah?

And what happens to the cadre of pilots and airmen in IAF who work in the two Mi-24/35 Squadrons? You don't simply let such talent sit idle because AAC will not fly attack helicopters.

Two points to be made here -

Firstly, retention of IAF's experience does not require IAF administration over the assets in question. Experienced IAF officers can be retained on TD within newly formed IA units (assuming the Mi-35s units aren't transferred to the IA in their entirety). The same doesn't apply to the ground staff though - AAC's Dhruv crews may be just as adept with the AH-64D as the IAF's Mi-25/35 crews, if not more.

Secondly, the army's veterans are likely to have flown a variety of aircraft types during their careers including the Cheetah, Chetak, Dhruv as well as the IA's Cheetah derived Lancer attack helos (which would no doubt involve the study and practice of helicopter gunnery). That is a wealth of experience that very much relevant to their training post-conversion to Apaches. It is NOT akin to an air force transport pilot transitioning to the fighter stream, where he would enter a different world altogether. The Indian Army's test pilots for example have been intimately involved in the development of the Rudra and more recently the LCH, at HAL Bangalore.

The way I see it, AAC will start absorbing gunships with induction of Rudra and LCH. The nucleus of combat pilots will need to be built from ground up. I would not be surprised if the IA asks for its AAC pilots to be trained and seconded to Mi-24/35 and Apache units. And in due course of time, when there is sufficient mass and body of trained manpower, these units may transition to AAC.

The assumption being that LCHs and Rudras are somehow easier to fly/operate than the AH-64?

The nucleus of Apache pilots will indeed have to built up regardless of which service inducts the aircraft. But that nucleus of officers will be trained at Fort Rucker, Alabama by an organisation who's experience operating attack helos far far outstrips that of the IAF. Eventually, those lessons will be brought back to Nasik (or Hakimpet), a training syllabus for domestic pilots created and SOPs customized for Indian operating conditions, but those are all activities that the Army's pilots are more than capable of carrying out.

2. Medium airlift helicopters - The demand from IA stems from requirement to raise Air-Assault Bdes or Combat Aviation Brigades as they are I think being called. IA will perforce need Mi-17V5 type of helicopters to equip such a brigade and herein lies the problem...who owns the helicopters which will work day-in and day-out with these brigades?...These assets and troops they will train with and carry in battlefield will be wedded together and herein lies the dispute. And to raise a CAB is a bloody expensive proposition...capability to launch a full fledged battalion itself is going to be pretty expensive - forget an Air-Assault Bde or Division. So, who pays for and maintains these assets?

That sounds reasonable, though I hope the proposed Joint Special Operations Command receives a permanent detachment of medium/heavy lift helos (despite being Army dominated).

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Oct 2012 01:21

slowly, you are getting into the right direction. joint command solves issues.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 15 Oct 2012 09:55

Excellent news, copter borne early warning systems! and then it needs endurance which means need for refueling probes, all on ALH

, thought at least a Mi-17 sized platform would be needed

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/army- ... s/1016832/

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Oct 2012 10:05

europe had a couple projects all mothballed now. they are going for joint ownership of some global hawks now.
the IA initiative looks more tactical now, perhaps in hands of each corps commander.
pretty good idea imo.

http://rpdefense.over-blog.com/article- ... 18365.html
http://www.airforce-technology.com/proj ... elicopter/

The helicopter is equipped with a long-range, multi-mode retractable pulse Doppler radar. A rotating antenna is carried beneath the fuselage. The radar range is 200km, with the helicopter operating at an altitude of 4,000m and a cruise speed of 180km/h.
The radar scans a ground area of 20,000km over a depth of 200km in ten seconds, and the data is then transmitted to a ground station. For moving targets the radar provides a speed resolution of the target of 2m per second.
The cockpit is night-vision goggle compatible. A weather radar is fitted. The helicopter communications systems are encrypted. The navigation equipment includes a Decca navigator and flight log with an SFIM model 155 autopilot, inertial navigation and global positioning system (GPS). Standard equipment includes a VHF omni-directional radio range equipment (VOR), instrument landing system (ILS), radar altimeter and a GPS.
----
the Cougar heli is however around twice the dhruv size. so maybe Mi17V will fit the bill.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 15 Oct 2012 10:46

One justification I can think of UAV vs. Copter based early warning systems is there are supposedly about 3000 heli pads even in and around the Himalayan range vs. at most 15 airfields where fixed wing aircraft can be operated from

Payload and evasive maneuvers also favor choppers, and then some day an unmanned Dhruv might come up assuming ALH will be chosen as the platform

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 15 Oct 2012 11:36

IN has been AEW&C helicopters for a while now. It would be interesting if they are roped in as well. The needs of the 2 armed forces may vary but they might want commonality in the basic frame. The IN uses Kamov copters for this purpose. If this works out well, I hope IN gets involved as well. Until Hawkeye arrives, the Kamov could be supplemented by desi maal. The Chinese already use this from their ships, I hope we get something better than them.

Kapil · Post by **Kapil** » 15 Oct 2012 13:09

Heard a Navy Chetak in 405 went down in Goa today
was on a BOM-HAL BLR Ferry

2 Pilots + a sailor all killed
RIP Guys

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 15 Oct 2012 13:49

vasu raya wrote:Excellent news, copter borne early warning systems! and then it needs endurance which means need for refueling probes, all on ALH , thought at least a Mi-17 sized platform would be needed

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/army- ... s/1016832/

Welcome news, will help the IA improve targeting of the second echelon of the enemy.

mody · Post by **mody** » 15 Oct 2012 14:22

Wasn't DRDO developing a Radar for heli based AEW? What happened to that project?

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 15 Oct 2012 17:57

NAK Browne's "little air forces" comment is just laughable - the Navy, Coast Guard, BSF all have their little air forces. Should disband his little commando force of Garuds first before preaching to others.[/quote]

I suggest a bit more respect, he is after all the Leader of the 4th largest and by far one of the deadliest airforces in this world.

Army should have mi-35s, LCHs, upgraded Mi-8s, M-17Vs and even the AH-64D but all optimised for Air to Ground roles while AF should have AH-64D optimised for A2A roles. I think looking at the trend we should be moving towards a completly integrated military. I agree with singh, we need asap order of over 1500 Dhruvs, another 1500 LUH and 1000 home made MUH to replace the mi-17/8 eventually.

The Apache order is currently ok but we should quickly order more, we need another 122 more. 88 should go for the IA and 44 for IAF.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 15 Oct 2012 18:02

I agree with you. The time is long past when we had to arm one branch & starve the other. Let both IA & IAF acquire weapons for their needs. It's good to see IA looking for AEW helicopters since IAF AEW&C may not always be guaranteed. On its part, IAF should induct helicopters that will fulfill missions beyond the IA's gambit. The latter can take care of CAS with IAF dealing the rest. At the end of the day, a little redundancy will not be bad. Who knows where & which situation the next war is going to be fought. The IAF & IN both share the same airspace for marine operations. It is hightime IAF & IA do it over land.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 15 Oct 2012 18:47

AH 64D optimised for A2A !!! this is something new???
1500 Dhruvs, 1000 LUH, 1000 MUH .. who the hell is going to fly these?

I agree that 'little air force ' comment is little misplaced. But managing air assets from the two arms over a battlefield will be an issue. Hope these issues are address thru excercises etc.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 15 Oct 2012 18:51

Septimus P. wrote:<SNIP>Army should have mi-35s, LCHs, upgraded Mi-8s, M-17Vs and even the AH-64D but all optimised for Air to Ground roles while AF should have AH-64D optimised for A2A roles. I think looking at the trend we should be moving towards a completly integrated military. I agree with singh, we need asap order of over 1500 Dhruvs, another 1500 LUH and 1000 home made MUH to replace the mi-17/8 eventually.

The Apache order is currently ok but we should quickly order more, we need another 122 more. 88 should go for the IA and 44 for IAF.

Apache's optimized for A2A role to do what? Shoot down UAV's as being claimed by one esteemed analyst?

OK. Now,answer this - what is the extend of geography which you think will need to be sanitized (or protected) against UAV intrusion? And, once you calculate that, what is the level of the force (number of helicopters) required? And where will you base them?

BTW, do calculate the cost of ordering the number of helicopters you've stated above. And what use will you put them to.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 15 Oct 2012 19:05

The Apache order is currently ok but we should quickly order more, we need another 122 more. 88 should go for the IA and 44 for IAF

Yeah they is a 5 for a million dollars sale going on right now

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 15 Oct 2012 19:44

Wait, order in next 10 min and we'll double your order for free, just add shipping and handling!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Oct 2012 19:58

>> It's good to see IA looking for AEW helicopters since IAF AEW&C may not always be guaranteed.

IA is looking for GMTI soln not AEW. nobody in India incl IAF has such a platform.

IAF could go for a higher end soln based on EMB145 if they want to play that game. but helicopter mounted is a low hanging fruit kind of first step and IA has taken this long delayed step.

something like this in IAF hands could change the course of war over the vast reaches of tibet
http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/astor/

while the helicopter mounted soln would give the IA corps commanders good lookout upto 100km depth and cue strikes from Smerch and Prahaar onto approaching formations or those trying to relocate/reform in the rear areas.

its a no brainer to have ample number of GMTI birds.

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 15 Oct 2012 21:50

Singha wrote:>> It's good to see IA looking for AEW helicopters since IAF AEW&C may not always be guaranteed.

IA is looking for GMTI soln not AEW.
...<snip>
its a no brainer to have ample number of GMTI birds.

Maybe IA is looking for EL/M-2055 SAR/MTI based helo soln.

Not sure if they got their hands on it's light-weight version on their UAVs, and got suitably impressed - IAI Unveils New Lightweight Airborne SAR/GMTI Payload

The 2055 version provides, IMVHO, sufficient tactical range for IA likings - from the link above:

STRIP mode enables rapid coverage and mapping of a large area from a distance from few tens of kilometers to over 100km. The area coverage rate depends on the resolution which determines the level of details required for interpretation and target detection. Usually, STRIP mode resolution is set at 3 to 1 meter level, considered as sufficient for target detection and overall assessment of an entire region.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 15 Oct 2012 22:14

Regarding the attack choppers ownership confusion, I am all for the IA to have a large force of attack helos, but the MoD in its usual ham-handed manner seems to be making a mess of things (if Shukla is to be believed). Why do they need to create problems in the Apache deal by changing who will operate them at the last minute. It is only 22 helicopters and we have the Rudra getting ready to be inducted and LCH not far behind. Both are much cheaper than the gold-plated Apaches and can be inducted in large numbers by the IA. They can let the IAF fly the few Apaches and the IA fly the LCH and Rudra. No point in complicating the deal now. They should have ideally solved this ownership issue unambiguously much before the attack helo tender was floated by the IAF.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 15 Oct 2012 23:41

NAK Browne's "little air forces" comment is just laughable - the Navy, Coast Guard, BSF all have their little air forces. Should disband his little commando force of Garuds first before preaching to others.

Septimus P. wrote:
I suggest a bit more respect, he is after all the Leader of the 4th largest and by far one of the deadliest airforces in this world.

Parochial comments that undermine other services and are to the detriment of India's war fighting capability lead to a loss of respect for the individual, not of the office that the individual holds. I suppose contradicting Gen. Bikram Singh through both statements made by him and the Air Force PRO is highly respectful.

I agree with singh, we need asap order of over 1500 Dhruvs, another 1500 LUH and 1000 home made MUH to replace the mi-17/8 eventually.

...what about 5 Millenium Falcons, 100 X-wing Fighters and 1 Death Star, while we are fantasizing?

manjgu wrote:But managing air assets from the two arms over a battlefield will be an issue. Hope these issues are address thru excercises etc.

Breaking news! Air assets from all the three arms (four, if you include the Coast Guard) have been doing it for quite some time.