Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

MN Kumar · Post by **MN Kumar** » 12 Feb 2013 18:38

A MiG-27 aircraft of the Indian Air Force crashed in Rajasthan’s Barmer district on Tuesday, but the pilot ejected safely.

The aircraft was on a routine training sortie when it crashed near Allawani Ki Dhani after taking off from Uttarlai airbase, defence spokesperson S.D. Goswamy said.

The pilot baled out safely, he said.

A Court of Enquiry has been ordered into the crash, the spokesperson added.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 13 Feb 2013 05:15

Ex-Air Chief Tyagi was bribed to swing chopper deal, Italy probe report says

...
The 64-page report, filed in the tribunal of Busto Arsizio city for the arrest of Finmeccanica CEO Giuseppe Orsi, gives details of the case being investigated by Italian prosecutors and alleges that the then air chief, S P Tyagi, was instrumental in swinging the deal and was paid — "certain amount of money, not yet quantified" — through intermediaries.
...
...
The Italian report names three brothers — Julie Tyagi, Docsa Tyagi and Sandeep Tyagi — as the Indian intermediaries who allegedly got kickbacks and passed it on to Indian officials. It says Finmeccanica's Orsi and alleged middlemen Guido Haschke, Carlo Gerosa and Christian Michel facilitated the payments to India.

Julie Tyagi is the Indian businessman who had been named in October as a relative of S P Tyagi.
...
...
"Haschke and Gerosa, through the Tyagi brothers, in turn through their cousin Shashi Tyagi managed first to change the tender details, in a favourable way to AgustaWestland, modifying the 'operational ceiling' from 18,000 ft to 15,000 ft of altitude, thus allowing AgustaWestland (which otherwise could not have even submitted an offer) to take part in the tender," the report says.
...
...

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 13 Feb 2013 05:26

MiG-27 crashes in Barmer, pilot ejects safely

JAISALMER: A MiG-27 aircraft of the Indian Air Force crashed soon after take-off in Barmer district on Tuesday, but the pilot managed to eject safely. Two civilians—a three-year-old boy and a 30-year-old woman—were injured as the debris fell on them.

The incident took place at Kumaharon Ki Dhani, 20km away from Barmer district headquarters. A defence spokesperson said the aircraft was on a routine training sortie. "A court of inquiry has been ordered," he said.

The aircraft had left Uttarlai airbase at 3.55pm. It soon developed a technical snag, lost contact with the control room and caught fire. The pilot, who was injured, is undergoing treatment in hospital.

The accident could have been disastrous had the debris fallen on the Mangla Oilfields, 3 km from the accident spot. About 10 oil wells are operational in the area.

After returning from the spot, Barmer superintendent of police Rahul Barhat said the injured civilians were undergoing treatment at a hospital. The wall of a house was damaged and three to four goats killed in the incident.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 13 Feb 2013 07:52

Westland is a jinx

now these expensive toys are going to end up in a junk yard

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 13 Feb 2013 09:39

Surya wrote:Westland is a jinx

In fact they had a helicopter named Westland Jinx. No one bought it until it was renamed WG 30 - which stands for "Wah re Gandhi 30" and the military one was renamed Westland Lynx

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 13 Feb 2013 10:02

meanwhile in tarmak the Ecuadorian PResident flys a dhruv

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Feb 2013 10:17

Surya wrote:Westland is a jinx

now these expensive toys are going to end up in a junk yard

Surya - Any surprises why Tyagi was the Chair holder of Track-II on Siachen?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Feb 2013 11:40

Surya wrote: meanwhile in tarmak the Ecuadorian PResident flys a dhruv

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/

With ALH there is no chance of massive kick back for the elites here AW101 is a better VIP chopper buy

Rohit guru i wanted to respond to your response to my post on the AI thread but due to lack of time i couldnt hopefully soon I can respond.

BTW wasnt the news rumour of Mig-27 without its functioning laser/EO was spread by Surya or was it documented by CAG ?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Feb 2013 12:59

Austin wrote:<SNIP> Rohit guru i wanted to respond to your response to my post on the AI thread but due to lack of time i couldnt hopefully soon I can respond. BTW wasnt the news rumour of Mig-27 without its functioning laser/EO was spread by Surya or was it documented by CAG ?

Soooo mucho loooove......can't hold my tears

....Khushi ke asoon hain yeh!!!

For Mi-27 - catch hold of Surya. Phew!!! finally, we can hound him for something...he lathicharges me for goat droppings on SF thread...especially, with respect to SG

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 13 Feb 2013 17:41

As steve urkel would say
"Did I say thaaattt?"

Hey - no specific part was mentioned by moi

and workarounds were achieved using other imported toys

CAG link please

Regarding Tyagi

lets talk in Siachen thread and where the hell is Shaurya

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 13 Feb 2013 22:31

Someone has to alert the other Indian Track-II Members to lie-low and if possible to cover up their corrupt tracks.
(I have all along called them JaiChands - BR as usual is ahead of the curve)

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 13 Feb 2013 22:49

Surya wrote:As steve urkel would say
"Did I say thaaattt?"

Hey - no specific part was mentioned by moi and workarounds were achieved using other imported toys

CAG link please

Regarding Tyagi

lets talk in Siachen thread and where the hell is Shaurya

Everybody learns. Shaurya is no exception. The only way corruption in the armed forces is going to end is if we have a clean center. UPA got away with 2g, cwg, etc and will add this scam in the kitty. Make sure you cast your vote in the coming election.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 13 Feb 2013 23:42

China’s Increasingly Good Mock Air Battles Prep Pilots for Real War
For 11 days in November, the sky over the northwestern Chinese province of Gansu witnessed some of the most intensive dogfighting to ever take place in China. Jet fighters screamed overhead, twisting and turning in complex aerial maneuvers. Heavily laden bombers lumbered through the tangle of fighters, dodging enemy defenses as they lined up for bombing runs.

The warplanes and their crews were the real deal. It featured the best of the best of the Chinese military, which with 2,700 aircraft possesses the world’s third largest aerial arsenal, after the U.S. and Russia. But the combat over the sprawling Dingxin Air Force Test and Training Base was simulated. Despite the ferocity of the maneuvers, no live weapons were fired. The mock battles of the annual “Red Sword/Blue Sword” exercise are meant to prepare the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) for the possibility of actual high-tech combat.

In terms of authenticity, China’s pretend air battles are getting pretty close to the real thing. That improving realism, combined with Beijing’s new fighters and other hardware, has some observers in the U.S. feeling uneasy. For decades the Pentagon has counted on highly realistic aerial training to mitigate the increasing age and decreasing size of its warplane holdings. “That [training] used to be a significant advantage U.S. air forces held relative to the PLAAF,” Dave Deptula, a retired Air Force general who flew F-15 fighters, tells Danger Room.

..............

Catching Up
Beijing’s air training renaissance has been a long time coming, and maps neatly — though belatedly — onto America’s own advancements in simulated combat. Forty years ago, a humbled U.S. military, bloodied by the war in Vietnam, pioneered the use of realistic scenarios to train air crews for the lethal dangers of actual combat. China, likewise bruised in a botched invasion of Vietnam in 1979, watched from afar as the Americans’ new Red Flag and Topgun exercises — run by the Air Force and Navy, respectively — revolutionized U.S. air power.

Red Flag, in particular, drove major changes in the way America prepares for war. The exercise, which today takes places at least semiannually, recreates an entire war on vast ranges in Nevada or Alaska, pitting a rotating contingent of good guys (“Blue Force”) against ground defenses bolstered by veteran pilots (“Red Force”) specifically tasked with simulating the tactics of potential enemy militaries. These “aggressors,” as they’re known, routinely slaughter the Blue Force, firing simulated missiles and guns tracked by a sophisticated electronic scoring system.

After four decades of refinement, today Red Flag has a reputation for being harder than real war. “It was almost as intense as Red Flag,” one U.S. fighter pilot said of his missions over Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War.

At first, Beijing was unable to copy the Americans’ training innovations. The Chinese air force was wedded to highly restrictive Soviet-style tactics emphasizing direct control of warplanes by ground-based commanders, as opposed to the greater freedom of action and potential for learning afforded U.S. aviators. Moreover, the Cultural Revolution in China in the 1960s had wreaked havoc on the scientific-minded training establishment. “The ideological types in [the People's Republic of China] leadership thought it was capitalistic to train,” wrote one U.S.-based Chinese analyst who goes by “Feng.” The ideologues had even destroyed flight manuals.

It took decades of painful political reform to clear the way for Beijing’s own version of Red Flag. Today the bureaucratic obstacles are fast falling away, and a rapidly modernizing Chinese air force, flush with cash and new equipment, is working hard to catch-up to the Americans. The introduction of the Russian-made Su-30 fighter in the 1990s finally gave the PLAAF a modern warplane it could match with more intensive training techniques. Beijing massively expanded the Dingxin airbase and its adjacent flight range. The Chinese began deploying small numbers of pilots and planes to Kazakhstan for exercises, laying the foundation for far bigger war games back home.

Beijing also formed several aggressor units flying specially painted fighters meant to replicate the planes of China’s rivals.

Incrementally, and without much notice outside of China, the PLAAF transformed routine flight training into the regular Red Sword/Blue Sword mock air battles, modeled on Red Flag. By 2005 Beijing’s war games were well underway. And a few years after that, the frontline improvements began to show. As late as 2008 Chinese fighters couldn’t make it even halfway across the Taiwan Strait before being chased off by Taiwanese fighters and ground-based defenses. Today the situation is reversed, and Taiwanese jets find themselves quickly intercepted. “It shows improved reaction time and professionalism in the PLAAF,” Feng wrote.

Golden Helmets
For November’s Red Sword/Blue Sword exercises, 108 pilots from 14 fighter regiments flocked to Dingxin alongside detachments from bomber and support units. They brought along a dizzying array of jets, including aging J-7s (based on the Soviet-era MiG-21) plus the latest J-10s and J-11s built in China and Su-30s acquired directly from Russia. H-6 bombers and Airborne Early Warning planes with giant radar dishes on top rounded out the aerial armada.

After a work-up period, the main mock fighting went on for 10 days. Some pilots racked up scores of missions and an equal number of simulated kills. The 11 best pilots were awarded the prestigious Golden Helmet award and lavished with praise in state-run media. “Some people are born for flight,” crowed one official news report.

The latest war game contained important lessons for the PLAAF. The twin-engine J-11, a rough analog of America’s F-15, reportedly cleaned up against the smaller single-engine J-10s, which are similar in layout to U.S. F-16s. Besides improving pilot skill, the exercise results could shape Beijing’s warplane production plans.
..............

Already Beijing enjoys one key advantage: Its training exercises receive steady funding, whereas the U.S. Air Force’s own budget has been repeatedly threatened by political posturing in Washington. “Given the massive reductions in U.S. air combat training coming in the event of sequestration, the PLAAF won’t have far to go to match and then exceed us in terms of flying time and exercises,” Deptula warns.
...............

AFAIK IAF is not performing such Blue vs Red exercises with a set timetable either semiannually (massa's Redflag) or annually (like the Chinese) .

"Live wire" currently being chalked up for its "80th anniversary celebrations" just got cancelled until next year because IAF was not ready for it "because some newly procured assets are yet to be integrated":lol:.
Even the latest day-night exercise "Iron fist" being put up to demonstrate air power for the visiting defence attaches from 50 nations probably will be a "show".
Apart from above once in a bluemoon affairs i dont know of any regular events where honest appraisals of tactics and warfare between two task forces say one on defense and other on offence simulating a theater level networked air conflict scenario is being conducted .
The military diplomacy which IAF partakes in regularly with fliendly 3.5's and their allies doesnt count as honest appraisals, because of their "cross embedded" "fliendly" "photo op" nature and they anyway by design are performed at lower specs "cleared" to be revealed to the "other" .

All of this begs the question ... Why doesnt IAF have an internal equivalent to Redflag yet ?
If its such a costly affair at least do a proper one biannually like aero india . Our pilots are second to none professionally but it pays to put them out of their comfort zones from time to time under war like scenarios against their own .

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Feb 2013 04:06

Happy and sad to report this. HAL has issued an RFP for HTT-40 engines. The " initial production requirement is approximately about 124 Numbers of Engines for HTT-40 spread over a period of about 8 years". I think that it will be too late.

Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Supply of TURBOPROP ENGINE for HTT-40 Aircraft Under Development AT HAL, India.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 14 Feb 2013 04:20

indranilroy wrote:Happy and sad to report this. HAL has issued an RFP for HTT-40 engines. The " initial production requirement is approximately about 124 Numbers of Engines for HTT-40 spread over a period of about 8 years". I think that it will be too late.

Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Supply of TURBOPROP ENGINE for HTT-40 Aircraft Under Development AT HAL, India.

I don't know why but in every aeronautical development the project gets stuck at the engine.

Its the root cause for all the delays.

I seriously think we need an "engine man" like Shri APJ Abdul Kalam ji was "missile man" for IGMDP who revolutionized the whole missile development program in India.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Feb 2013 05:03

so basically we need at least advanced versions of 3000 akash or hypersonic wala facing the NE frontier, with good OTH AlGaN radar network. done.

neeraj · Post by **neeraj** » 14 Feb 2013 09:50

indranilroy wrote:Happy and sad to report this. HAL has issued an RFP for HTT-40 engines. The " initial production requirement is approximately about 124 Numbers of Engines for HTT-40 spread over a period of about 8 years". I think that it will be too late.

Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Supply of TURBOPROP ENGINE for HTT-40 Aircraft Under Development AT HAL, India.

IAF has clearly stated that it is not interested in this follow on junk as the PC-7 is cheaper and available now. What is HAL trying to pull?
HAL should focus on IJT and get that flying.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Feb 2013 09:59

neeraj wrote: IAF has clearly stated that it is not interested in this follow on junk as the PC-7 is cheaper and available now. What is HAL trying to pull?
HAL should focus on IJT and get that flying.

Generally things don't bother me so much. But something like this makes me fly off the hook. I hate to do this but may I ask your credentials to call it junk? If possible give reasons for calling it so.

Is developing HTT-40 and obtaining IOC for IJT have an overlap?

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 14 Feb 2013 10:17

Plus, HAL can always market the HTT40 to other countries that can't afford PC-7's.. Was talking to a HAL employee at AI and he very clearly said that the HAL will go ahead and develop this bird and market it, inspite of the scuttling attempt by IAF and if another chaiwala is to be believed, IN has expressed interest in this project and has asked for certain additional capabilities including deck landing ability..

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 14 Feb 2013 11:03

+1 The enabling role IN has played in indigenous projects puts to shame the slavish foreign worship seen in some members of the other two services. Stop taking bribes (Ya, I know he might be a scapegoat) and support indigenous projects. I hope that every large foreign purchase at detriment of a domestic one gets mired in corruption. The fact that no one would sell us ballistic missiles made sure we now have one of the best missile programs in the world, I hope we have the same situation in all other areas where we can make our own stuff.

Arunkumar · Post by **Arunkumar** » 14 Feb 2013 12:11

Cant help admiring navy's far-sightedness on this regard. In a few years time they would be having a sizable air wing and they would need trainer aircraft. So instead of going the RFI - RFP - RIP way , its better to support HTT-40 and IJT.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 14 Feb 2013 20:09

Bala Vignesh wrote:Plus, HAL can always market the HTT40 to other countries that can't afford PC-7's.. Was talking to a HAL employee at AI and he very clearly said that the HAL will go ahead and develop this bird and market it, inspite of the scuttling attempt by IAF and if another chaiwala is to be believed, IN has expressed interest in this project and has asked for certain additional capabilities including deck landing ability..

If this is true then someone in IN is truly helping it to progress in the right direction. Its a master stroke if I may say.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 14 Feb 2013 20:20

Which basic trainer does the IN use right now? Do they have their own HPT-32s, or do they use those belonging to the IAF? It will be great if HAL can get the HTT-40 developed in time to meet the IN's needs. Otherwise, sooner or later the IN will end up buying its own PC-7s. It might have been possible to reduce costs by maintaining engine commonality with the PC-7. But HAL seems to be searching for a more powerful engine.

Arunkumar · Post by **Arunkumar** » 14 Feb 2013 20:34

^^^Initial training is at AFA, dindigul. So it seems same infrastructure currrently for trainees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_ ... ,_Dundigul

gnair · Post by **gnair** » 14 Feb 2013 21:20

indranilroy wrote:Happy and sad to report this. HAL has issued an RFP for HTT-40 engines. The " initial production requirement is approximately about 124 Numbers of Engines for HTT-40 spread over a period of about 8 years". I think that it will be too late.

Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Supply of TURBOPROP ENGINE for HTT-40 Aircraft Under Development AT HAL, India.

HTT-40 is one project that's going to save a lot of FOREX down the road. So ir-respective of who says what or what the requirement is right now, because of the the availability of the Pilatus, one thing that is missing oversight is, that all airframes have a definite life and the question is 'what happens after the post PC-7 useful life' ? Go looking for another import, for all ab-initio training needs?
The 2nd thing about the PC-7 is, it can't be armed, according to standing terms and conditions of purchase with the Swiss. And if a requirement were to emerge for a turbo-proped, single engine STOL light assault platform, that could chase/knock off the drones from across the border or do some heavy intensity COIN work in the Maoist hit areas, or get rid of the camels and cavalry patrol in the Thar, or integrate an aerial platform of such calibre with the BSF or the new Naval police/coastal stations, the PC-7 sure isn't going to cut it.
We need one of our own, that is affordable on an hourly operating cost, that should be about 50% lesser than a single engine rotary platform, like the LUH, be able to operate on dirt strips, carry an ordnance load exceediing 1,000kg and be able to take a lot of punishment. If the HTT-40 can fill in this niche, i think we have a winner.
On the engine side, there is nothing like the proven PT-6 or it's higher powered models that's on the PC-7. Nothing even comes close. An alternative option that HAL could look at is to de-rate the TPE-331 that's on the DO-228. But that would call for some re-jigging, although the engine is manufactured under licence for the Dornier program.
Way to go HAL...but please go beyond the basic trainer specs.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 14 Feb 2013 21:52

^ Good one, Saar.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 14 Feb 2013 23:34

indranilroy wrote:
neeraj wrote: IAF has clearly stated that it is not interested in this follow on junk as the PC-7 is cheaper and available now. What is HAL trying to pull?
HAL should focus on IJT and get that flying.
Generally things don't bother me so much. But something like this makes me fly off the hook. I hate to do this but may I ask your credentials to call it junk? If possible give reasons for calling it so.

Is developing HTT-40 and obtaining IOC for IJT have an overlap?

Does the HAL have unlimited R&D resources? BTW where is the Medium lift helicopter we have been hearing about for so long?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Feb 2013 23:46

Does your electrician also do your plumbing? If not your first question is answered.

The Medium Lift Heli as far as I could get is in project definition stage. HAL had done a lot of studies on its configuration. So, did the AF, Navy and the Army. They have very fundamental and opposing requirements. AF and Army's requirements are similar, but they want something which can carry load at high altitudes. Navy needs something which has higher haulage at sea level. AF/Army's requirement can be sufficed by a 10-12 Ton Heli. While NAvy's requirements can be handled efficiently by a 12-14T heli. To make a single helicopter to do all the above is a difficult ask. They are going to sit down and thrash this thing out. I don't know if there will be one helicopter or more. You and I will come to know of it soon. You should watch the talk by Grp. Capt. Unni Pillai at AEr India Seminar 2013.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 14 Feb 2013 23:48

IIRC, navy has its own fleet of HPT 32's...

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Feb 2013 00:17

Lilo wrote:
China’s Increasingly Good Mock Air Battles Prep Pilots for Real War
For 11 days in November, the sky over the northwestern Chinese province of Gansu witnessed some of the most intensive dogfighting to ever take place in China. Jet fighters screamed overhead, twisting and turning in complex aerial maneuvers. Heavily laden bombers lumbered through the tangle of fighters, dodging enemy defenses as they lined up for bombing runs.

The warplanes and their crews were the real deal. It featured the best of the best of the Chinese military, which with 2,700 aircraft possesses the world’s third largest aerial arsenal, after the U.S. and Russia. But the combat over the sprawling Dingxin Air Force Test and Training Base was simulated. Despite the ferocity of the maneuvers, no live weapons were fired. The mock battles of the annual “Red Sword/Blue Sword” exercise are meant to prepare the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) for the possibility of actual high-tech combat.

In terms of authenticity, China’s pretend air battles are getting pretty close to the real thing. That improving realism, combined with Beijing’s new fighters and other hardware, has some observers in the U.S. feeling uneasy. For decades the Pentagon has counted on highly realistic aerial training to mitigate the increasing age and decreasing size of its warplane holdings. “That [training] used to be a significant advantage U.S. air forces held relative to the PLAAF,” Dave Deptula, a retired Air Force general who flew F-15 fighters, tells Danger Room.

..............

Catching Up
Beijing’s air training renaissance has been a long time coming, and maps neatly — though belatedly — onto America’s own advancements in simulated combat. Forty years ago, a humbled U.S. military, bloodied by the war in Vietnam, pioneered the use of realistic scenarios to train air crews for the lethal dangers of actual combat. China, likewise bruised in a botched invasion of Vietnam in 1979, watched from afar as the Americans’ new Red Flag and Topgun exercises — run by the Air Force and Navy, respectively — revolutionized U.S. air power.

Red Flag, in particular, drove major changes in the way America prepares for war. The exercise, which today takes places at least semiannually, recreates an entire war on vast ranges in Nevada or Alaska, pitting a rotating contingent of good guys (“Blue Force”) against ground defenses bolstered by veteran pilots (“Red Force”) specifically tasked with simulating the tactics of potential enemy militaries. These “aggressors,” as they’re known, routinely slaughter the Blue Force, firing simulated missiles and guns tracked by a sophisticated electronic scoring system.

After four decades of refinement, today Red Flag has a reputation for being harder than real war. “It was almost as intense as Red Flag,” one U.S. fighter pilot said of his missions over Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War.

At first, Beijing was unable to copy the Americans’ training innovations. The Chinese air force was wedded to highly restrictive Soviet-style tactics emphasizing direct control of warplanes by ground-based commanders, as opposed to the greater freedom of action and potential for learning afforded U.S. aviators. Moreover, the Cultural Revolution in China in the 1960s had wreaked havoc on the scientific-minded training establishment. “The ideological types in [the People's Republic of China] leadership thought it was capitalistic to train,” wrote one U.S.-based Chinese analyst who goes by “Feng.” The ideologues had even destroyed flight manuals.

It took decades of painful political reform to clear the way for Beijing’s own version of Red Flag. Today the bureaucratic obstacles are fast falling away, and a rapidly modernizing Chinese air force, flush with cash and new equipment, is working hard to catch-up to the Americans. The introduction of the Russian-made Su-30 fighter in the 1990s finally gave the PLAAF a modern warplane it could match with more intensive training techniques. Beijing massively expanded the Dingxin airbase and its adjacent flight range. The Chinese began deploying small numbers of pilots and planes to Kazakhstan for exercises, laying the foundation for far bigger war games back home.

Beijing also formed several aggressor units flying specially painted fighters meant to replicate the planes of China’s rivals.

Incrementally, and without much notice outside of China, the PLAAF transformed routine flight training into the regular Red Sword/Blue Sword mock air battles, modeled on Red Flag. By 2005 Beijing’s war games were well underway. And a few years after that, the frontline improvements began to show. As late as 2008 Chinese fighters couldn’t make it even halfway across the Taiwan Strait before being chased off by Taiwanese fighters and ground-based defenses. Today the situation is reversed, and Taiwanese jets find themselves quickly intercepted. “It shows improved reaction time and professionalism in the PLAAF,” Feng wrote.

Golden Helmets
For November’s Red Sword/Blue Sword exercises, 108 pilots from 14 fighter regiments flocked to Dingxin alongside detachments from bomber and support units. They brought along a dizzying array of jets, including aging J-7s (based on the Soviet-era MiG-21) plus the latest J-10s and J-11s built in China and Su-30s acquired directly from Russia. H-6 bombers and Airborne Early Warning planes with giant radar dishes on top rounded out the aerial armada.

After a work-up period, the main mock fighting went on for 10 days. Some pilots racked up scores of missions and an equal number of simulated kills. The 11 best pilots were awarded the prestigious Golden Helmet award and lavished with praise in state-run media. “Some people are born for flight,” crowed one official news report.

The latest war game contained important lessons for the PLAAF. The twin-engine J-11, a rough analog of America’s F-15, reportedly cleaned up against the smaller single-engine J-10s, which are similar in layout to U.S. F-16s. Besides improving pilot skill, the exercise results could shape Beijing’s warplane production plans.
..............

Already Beijing enjoys one key advantage: Its training exercises receive steady funding, whereas the U.S. Air Force’s own budget has been repeatedly threatened by political posturing in Washington. “Given the massive reductions in U.S. air combat training coming in the event of sequestration, the PLAAF won’t have far to go to match and then exceed us in terms of flying time and exercises,” Deptula warns.
...............
AFAIK IAF is not performing such Blue vs Red exercises with a set timetable either semiannually (massa's Redflag) or annually (like the Chinese) .

"Live wire" currently being chalked up for its "80th anniversary celebrations" just got cancelled until next year because IAF was not ready for it "because some newly procured assets are yet to be integrated":lol:.
Even the latest day-night exercise "Iron fist" being put up to demonstrate air power for the visiting defence attaches from 50 nations probably will be a "show".
Apart from above once in a bluemoon affairs i dont know of any regular events where honest appraisals of tactics and warfare between two task forces say one on defense and other on offence simulating a theater level networked air conflict scenario is being conducted .
The military diplomacy which IAF partakes in regularly with fliendly 3.5's and their allies doesnt count as honest appraisals, because of their "cross embedded" "fliendly" "photo op" nature and they anyway by design are performed at lower specs "cleared" to be revealed to the "other" .

All of this begs the question ... Why doesnt IAF have an internal equivalent to Redflag yet ?
If its such a costly affair at least do a proper one biannually like aero india . Our pilots are second to none professionally but it pays to put them out of their comfort zones from time to time under war like scenarios against their own .

Lilo,

The IAF's training regimen is in fact harder than these artificially scripted red force versus blue force scenarios.

To understand, please read this:

http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/exercise-ia ... cle01.html

Officials from the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf did not provide specifics about how their aircraft fared, but said the experience is causing the service to reevaluate the way it trains its pilots for air-to-air operations.

“What happened to us was it looks like our red air training might not be as good because the adversaries are better than we thought,” Snodgrass said. “And in the case of the Indian Air Force both their training and some of their equipment was better than we anticipated.”

“Red air” refers to the way the Air Force simulates enemy capability in air combat training. Because the service has assumed for years that its fighters are more capable than enemy aircraft, the U.S. pilots that simulate the enemy, known as “red” forces, in air combat training are required to operate under rules that constrain their combat capability.

“We have always believed that our technology was superior to everyone else’s technology, that we would fight a somewhat inferior adversary, so we have had to supply a simulated adversary from our own resources; we call that ‘red air,’” Snodgrass said.

As a result, Air Force pilots are used to flying against an enemy whose combat capability is deliberately limited.

“There are manoeuvering limits as well as weapons employment limits, what we believe enemy aircraft may be able to do with their weapons systems, so we try to simulate that in our own airplane with our own weapons,” Snodgrass explained. “It becomes very complex because instead of using the airplane the way it was designed, you now have to come up with rules of thumb that limit what you do and cause you to not perform . . . the way we really would want to in combat.”

One reason the Indian pilots proved so formidable is that their training regimen does not include a concept of “red air.” Instead, “they fly pretty much blue-on-blue . . . [a] full-up airplane with no restrictions against somebody else’s airplane with no restrictions, and that leads to more proficiency with your aircraft,” Neubeck said.

To see this in action, watch this clip.
Watch the first two clips, but if you want to see the debrief: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMSFNHOQFy0
After 0:58

There was a longer version of the clip where you have the pilots argueing and debating in the debrief. No holds barred about tactics & what occurred etc. So even at the squadron level, the IAF training is demanding.

Next at the larger level, for pilots to get a better understanding of across the board complexity:

http://www.fighterpilotuniversity.com/a ... ing/tacde/

FSL and FCL:

They are also taught how to instruct others after returning to their units.

Over a period of seven days, at the end of each set of FCL, FSL and MFC courses, TACDE conducts Exercise Akraman (Invasion). Pupils get to apply all that they had learnt during the training. This trial by fire gives them confidence to undertake realistic missions with confidence if and when required.

TACDE has EW, SAGW (SAMs) & fighters. In other words, you have to graduate from the IAF version of Red Flag to succeed.

Next, there are the exercises with the Indian Army. These have forces allocated to both sides & the IAF usually takes part with the Army. Note Livewire is the main exercise with IronFist an adjunct and its cancellation to integrate newer assets makes sense, because the IAF is a frugal force and seeks to maximize what it can get from training hours.

To see the number of exercises etc.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/in ... ecade.html

After Red Flag, IAF was looking towards creating its own version as well. But do remember, that these exercises come with a significant hidden cost. Operational flying hours are added on which means increased wear and tear on equipment, regular squadron training may get disrupted and it has to be judged whether the actual effort has a tangible return.

To sum up:
1. IAF training is demanding and realistic - blue on blue leads to enhanced proficiency versus artificially scripted red versus blue

2. IAF also has internal & joint trainings conducted every few years where many pilots take part (almost a fifth of the combat fleet at any one time)

3. IAF pilots go through a training regimen at TACDE which too dwells on the entire battle arena & are trained to take those lessons back home

4. IAF squadrons/detachments operate with an entire gamut of aircraft, SAMs and radars, which means even a regular base commander can have a lot of training flexibility to keep skills fresh. Unlike the USAF at home (which being based out of continental US) which does not usually have as many similar resources at each base (being more developed to fight expeditionary wars with AWACs and the like) rather than SAMs etc and has hence built up large integrated test ranges. India fielded around 60 FUs (per press reports so nothing secret) of the SAM-3, plus has SAM-8 and the Igla, plus many radars and systems integrated into its structure which allow for training flexibility. For more, please read:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Today ... 5-SAD.html
Now all these are being replaced, modernized. Basically, there is a lot of inhouse capability that allows for training to be kept current.

Please note the high praise given to IAF training so far, which validates the IAFs training methods. And actually made the USAF reevaluate its methods:

“The Air Force is re-examining, from what I can understand, our concept of red air and how we might be able to provide red air to our fighter forces so that we get [the best] training we can afford,” Snodgrass said.

Neubeck said the service probably needs to “take off the handcuffs that we put on our red air training aids and allow them to be more aggressive and make the red air tougher than we have in the past.”

Although India is a friendly nation, the lesson of Cope India is that almost any nation could surpass the United States’ air combat capability if the Pentagon does not continue to invest in better training and technology, the Elmendorf officials said. At last count, for example, there were over 5,000 MIG-21s active in air forces around the world, Snodgrass said. Even American fighters, such as Boeing’s F-15, are being sold in upgraded versions to countries around the world.

“I believe what this demonstrates is that the capacity exists out there for any nation with the appropriate resources and the will to acquire technology and to train their aircrews to be very, very capable,” said Col. Russ Handy, commander of the 3rd Operations Group. “In the long term this could occur in nations outside of the Indian Air Force.”

5. IAF is also evaluating creating its own mini-Red Flag sort of exercise above and beyond all the methods above, but again, it should bring some value & be sustainable. In a way, the sort of systems that will be available to the IAF (from different countries, type of technologies) are unique to the IAF. And if used properly, they can provide excellent training.

Last but not least, it would be very dismissive of us to when thinking of the IAF to suggest that the exercises it conducts with its foreign peers are scripted or don't bring value. They may not reveal all classified methods or the like, but they bring a lot of impact & have also had good lessons for the IAF. The Mirage 2000 upgrade for instance flows in part from the BVR challenge IAF Mirage 2000 Hs faced against French AF Mirages in Gwalior, as the latter were qualitatively ahead in avionics. Against the RAF, Su-30 MKIs fought their way through BVR traps mounted by Tornados with E-3s, something the RAF has made into its specialty & the MKIs still came out ahead. Against the RSAF in Kalaikunda, the Bisons did not fare as well against the RSAF F-16s as they had against the USAF F-16s sending the IAF looking for lessons. These multi-national efforts have surely taught the IAF a lot!Note, for Red Flag, a bulk of the pilots were young (to deliberately spread maximum experience through that segment that would remain in the AF the longest) and went through an intense training regimen to quickly ramp them up before RF (as versus sending the usual more trained aircrew who would have gradually worked their way upto that level of expertise). Net, IAF would not even host these exercises at the frequency they have, if they did not have significant value.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 15 Feb 2013 01:23

Karan M,

Chinese penchant for shamelessly copying everything from nuts and bolts to warfare doctrine is well established at this point. Many a times they are so utterly busy with copying that they don't even stop to figure out whether it makes any sense to copy at all, or whether there are any advantages to it. It has more to do with showing their people that they can have an identical existence to the US in every way even with a communist government in charge. But every once in a while they will copy something useful and reap its benefits. Law or probability in action.

Nothing new there.

But I think what we should really take away from this report (about PLAAF red-flag exercises) is not so much how they compare with our own exercises but rather how they compare with what the PLAAF had before.

This will improve their standards regardless of how low or high they may be compared to ours.

And IMHO, this makes it significant.

Does it make an immediate threat to us: of course not. But one of the things that will result from this within the PLAAF is a culture of greater freedom of action at the pilot level, more aggressiveness in combat and higher proficiency with their systems (IF they run with the actual ideas and principles of the USAF model and NOT try to replace it with typical commie C&C aspects; something they are liable to do, IMO). And as the graduates of this line of thought make it up the command ladder, you will see the PLAAF beginning to transform itself from within (Maybe!).

This is of course a worse case scenario and something I have played around with in the scenarios dhaga. Should be interesting to see how this process turns out for the Chinese.

Just some thoughts.

-Vivek

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Feb 2013 03:52

VA, agreed. Their proficiency will improve and that is a challenge.

My reply was more around Lilo's concern that we dont have something exactly similar and were hence at a disadvantage. I just wished to point out IAF has a pretty robust training system in place at multiple levels.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 15 Feb 2013 04:00

Karan ji ,

thanks for your reply,

Let me clarify that by Red vs Blue i dont imply any sort of downrated Reds against the TFTA Blues or viceversa - it maybe an obvious scenario for massa Air wings expected to steam roll over turd world AFs while keeping their enormous H&D intact by managing to decimate the opposition without loosing even one of their fighters to the enemy action.... but thats hardly applicable to us
if a war occurs with say China it will be a super messy one in which some land based assets on either side are initially taken out through cruise or ballistic missiles or surprise strikes as a prelude to the real airwar .

Thus A good scenario in my case is one with a good degree of unpredictability

Blues: A deep strike force of Su30's escorting Jaguars or Mirage 2000s or Mig 27 into enemy territory with phalcon support operating from friendly territory
Reds : Point defence fighters Mig 29 , Mig21 , LCA etc detecting and fending off the attack with SAMs , AWACS , Radars - basically with the whole deal available in the theater (quality of theater assets could be at various levels - Optimal , SubOptimal and Desperate )

With proliferation of tech especially related to sensors and EW , unkowns will be quite high for a strike force especially for a turd world force like us, same will be the case with Pakis or Chinese if they decide to come over. Early detection of the strike force is a given and its only going to get tougher. Mission decisions taken by pilots will still play a significant role in deciding the outcome in spite of the apparent technological advantage wrt specs say Radar range , BVR WVR capability , stealth and maneuverability. Unlike late 90s BVR counter measures are proliferating and kill probabilities are getting lower neccesiating WVR engagements - here too pilots capabilities will decide the outcome to a large degree. To subject pilots to such open ended fluid battlefields where unknowns are high and hone their instincts through training should be the aim of these regular exercises .

Chinese are doing a lot more training than us (probably because except the engines much of their gear is home made and they are not constrained by a need to preserve airframe life as in case of IAF where much of it is imported and that too Russian) . Coupled with the changing culture in PLAAF (the article mentions it) the results will be coming in. But most importantly PLAAF is training to beat a far superior force (US and its allies) in the war over the taiwan straits - that gives them the motivation and mindset to invest in continuous training within the limited capabilities of their gear in comparision to the western one's - this the biggest cause for my dhoti shiver. IMO we only recently acquired this mindset when people began speaking about a two front war.

Re: American praise to our training- its well known in diplomatic circles that Indians are susceptible to praise so i choose to have a pessimistic outlook wrt americans because of various factors like first time novelty, DRFM, funding needs of their MIC ,pitch for MMRCA etc. As you mentioned regarding french mirage2ks i would have loved to hear accounts similar to americans from russians - its a pity we dont get to train more often with their original versions against our export versions - atleast we dont need to hold back against the ruskies as they already know the capability of much of our fighter gear and are least likely to have an air skirmish with us - ever .

Re: BVR traps- if you mean DRFM the Chinese too are supposed to be good at this as mentioned in some comments to the article

2. IAF also has internal & joint trainings conducted every few years where many pilots take part (almost a fifth of the combat fleet at any one time)

Actually this was what i had in mind - Can you reveal more details on this ?
i hope this can be upscaled to a full fledged regular event

Re: In squadron training and In base training - Former we have to assume that the chinese too undertake in greater amounts than us, latter is good when specialization of combatants is low - aka tech levels are low, So it will have diminishing returns in the future as tech develops and increased specialization along with it.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 15 Feb 2013 04:06

Chinese are doing a lot more training than us (probably because except the engines much of their gear is home made and they are largely not constrained by a need to preserve airframe life as in case of IAF where much of it is imported and that too Russian) .

How did you arrive at this conclusion from that article? Especially since it doesn't mention anything about IAF training practices.

Chinese engines aren't home made. The J-10 and J-11 still use the AL-31, just like our MKIs. Chinese engines aren't in widespread use yet. They must be license producing the AL-31 just like we produce the AL-31 and RD-33.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 15 Feb 2013 04:12

^^ More aircraft more resources and more intent and relatively robust inhouse aviation complex to support airframes

Thats why i excepted the engines didnt i ?

Also the article alludes to it

Already Beijing enjoys one key advantage: Its training exercises receive steady funding, whereas the U.S. Air Force’s own budget has been repeatedly threatened by political posturing in Washington. “Given the massive reductions in U.S. air combat training coming in the event of sequestration, the PLAAF won’t have far to go to match and then exceed us in terms of flying time and exercises,” Deptula warns.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Feb 2013 04:55

Lilo wrote:Karan ji ,

thanks for your reply,

Let me clarify that by Red vs Blue i dont imply any sort of downrated Reds against the TFTA Blues or viceversa - it maybe an obvious scenario for massa Air wings expected to steam roll over turd world AFs while keeping their enormous H&D intact by managing to decimate the opposition without loosing even one of their fighters to the enemy action.... but thats hardly applicable to us
if a war occurs with say China it will be a super messy one in which some land based assets on either side are initially taken out through cruise or ballistic missiles or surprise strikes as a prelude to the real airwar .

Thus A good scenario in my case is one with a good degree of unpredictability

Blues: A deep strike force of Su30's escorting Jaguars or Mirage 2000s or Mig 27 into enemy territory with phalcon support operating from friendly territory
Reds : Point defence fighters Mig 29 , Mig21 , LCA etc detecting and fending off the attack with SAMs , AWACS , Radars - basically with the whole deal available in the theater (quality of theater assets could be at various levels - Optimal , SubOptimal and Desperate )

With proliferation of tech especially related to sensors and EW , unkowns will be quite high for a strike force especially for a turd world force like us, same will be the case with Pakis or Chinese if they decide to come over. Early detection of the strike force is a given and its only going to get tougher. Mission decisions taken by pilots will still play a significant role in deciding the outcome in spite of the apparent technological advantage wrt specs say Radar range , BVR WVR capability , stealth and maneuverability. Unlike late 90s BVR counter measures are proliferating and kill probabilities are getting lower neccesiating WVR engagements - here too pilots capabilities will decide the outcome to a large degree. To subject pilots to such open ended fluid battlefields where unknowns are high and hone their instincts through training should be the aim of these regular exercises .

But if the PLAAF has copied the US, then they are making the same mistakes of downrated reds versus super blues. Just check the PS image of an IAF JF-17 automatically assuming the enemy has worse aircraft/systems

LiLo, what you are not understanding is that the IAF routinely trains all the time, once they get enough pilots operational for combat training! Then squadrons are combined, strike units flown down & all this is much easier in the IAF because, the same base can hold multiple assets!!

I am afraid you are very unaware of how the IAF has been doing these things "fluid exercises" way before the PRC got its act together by copying Red Flag!!

Once it became sure that it had a certain amount of maturity & political support to experiment, it went on its experimental spree of training with foreign AF and guess what they discovered, the IAF pilot is on the whole, flies equal/higher hours than most of his peers, has better training on the systems and is able to exploit his aircraft better. All these make him formidable in the air, especially when the system is modern, even if not state of the art. The tactics at Cope-4 were demonstrative. The Americans couldnt figure out what was going on!!

Next:

Chinese are doing a lot more training than us (probably because except the engines much of their gear is home made and they are not constrained by a need to preserve airframe life as in case of IAF where much of it is imported and that too Russian) .

Sorry LiLo this is just speculative and incorrect. The IAF does not operate on the basis of conserving airframe life. They literally work them to bits and only hoard them towards the end of service life if replacements are delayed. Further, TTL extensions are done as well. The average IAF pilot would (in earlier days), fly 300 sorties a year! Today, with longer endurance, the number of sorties has declined but hours have ramped up with more that can be done per mission! That means 180 hour plus a year. These are figures which are kept as standard by the IAF. Not like some CHinese pilot who achieved 200 hours and was given an award etc. In the past few years, IAF pilots have flown against pretty much any AF, and have not been found wanting either.

Plus, the entire reason IAF asks for indigenization is because it can source vast majority of spares locally. Which is increasingly the case with aircraft like the Jaguars or MiGs where 90% is local. Same will be for the MKI too (current 50%).

Coupled with the changing culture in PLAAF (the article mentions it) the results will be coming in. But most importantly PLAAF is training to beat a far superior force (US and its allies) in the war over the taiwan straits - that gives them the motivation and mindset to invest in continuous training within the limited capabilities of their gear in comparision to the western one's - this the biggest cause for my dhoti shiver. IMO we only recently acquired this mindset when people began speaking about a two front war.

A dhoti shiver which is a pointless dhoti shiver. Please read this about an offensive AF. Mindset is ALL about attack, attack, attack.

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2015/st ... 410100.htm

Note the important data point that with all the issues regarding modernization this that, the MiG21 pilot flew 2/day 20 times a month! Thats 40 sorties a month. And 480 a year. In flying hours, 240 as each MiG-21 sortie could last a half hour.

My point is that across the board, the one thing the IAF never compromised on, was training. Jugaad or methods, but everything got to a point where things would work.

Next, if the PLAAF is training against the US, thats fine They are as usual copying.

We arent. IAF is now all about effects, and platforms plus methods that cause those effects. Its systems thinking which is something that works. They are acquiring best in class equipment, but the bigger issue is how they intend to fight a war, which is why they are investing heavily in networking. And note, unlike the PLAAF, the IAF has actually seen multiple wars where it participated heavily.

Re: American praise to our training- its well known in diplomatic circles that Indians are susceptible to praise so i choose to have a pessimistic outlook wrt americans because of various factors like first time novelty, DRFM, funding needs of their MIC ,pitch for MMRCA etc.

Sorry, you cant discount credible sources just because you have a belief that Indians getting praised! First, be aware of the exact incidents. That these guys got smacked, nobody on the Indian side said anything, it became a scandal in the US with the team that went to India getting picked on, and finally that team broke the story to AWST to get a more balanced account!

What further gives the lie to the theory of the US doing this as some sort of tactic is when we went to Red Flag, a US pilot actually played to the gallery by saying a lot of rubbish about the IAF. All it did was provoke a senior IAf guy to release kill stats at Mountain Home, which spoke for themselves:http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... n-you.html

Kill ratios at Mountain Home between IAF rookies (for the most part) and USAF aggressors were 21:1.

This again brings home the point that IAF pilots are very well trained. Lets look at the French, in Garuda who said the Indian pilots were quiet and very professional and adopted to NATO call signs very quickly. Pretty much every AF out there wants to exercise with India. Its the IAF which doesn't have the time, since they have a strict training schedule.

As you mentioned regarding french mirage2ks i would have loved to hear accounts similar to americans from russians - its a pity we dont get to train more often with their original versions against our export versions - atleast we dont need to hold back against the ruskies as they already know the capability of much of our fighter gear and are least likely to have an air skirmish with us - ever .

The problem is the Russian AF is in no state to exercise with us. In the past few years, their pilots were barely at 100 hours per year. This a country investing billions into nukes. Which is why, in authoritarian countries, regular troops may deliberately be kept at a lower priority. Today, things are better..

Re: BVR traps- if you mean DRFM the Chinese too are supposed to be good at this as mentioned in some comments to the article

No, BVR traps are traps conducted by LFE fighters supported by AWACS, complex ambushes! The RAF specializes at these, and we got an opportunity to work through them!

DRFM is ASIC tech for Jammers - India has them as well.

Actually this was what i had in mind - Can you reveal more details on this ?
i hope this can be upscaled to a full fledged regular event

I'll dig up some..

Re: In squadron training and In base training - Former we have to assume that the chinese too undertake in greater amounts than us, latter is good when specialization of combatants is low - aka tech levels are low, So it will have diminishing returns in the future as tech develops and increased specialization along with it.

Which is where you dont seem to understand how the IAF setup works. An IAF squadron will be led by and may even have several TACDE grads. That means specialization is high with both FCL and FSL guys in the same unit! These guys are the best there are, and they will raise the levels by bringing in that level of knowledge to the team. Next, unlike the PLAAF, India does not bunch its units into elite/average/good. Our items and technology are spread across the board and everyone gets to try/work hard across the board. MiG-27 UPG squadron may have MiG-29s escort them, against a Su-30K strike! since all the AFB are nearby and can do this. And for this, India needs no once in a year exercise. Tell me, which is more realistic? The Chinese are going about it all wrong, typical of their hierarchy BS trying to set up an elite school with elite pilots and the rest of the AF is coming for trainign and to get its asses kicked by these elites. IAF just spreads the elites around, they prove their worth in constant exercises!

Further, your point about tech is also mistaken! Technology is now spreading across the board, which mneans the force with the greater exposure, grows faster. Thats whats happening in India. With Su-30 MKI style upgrades going to DARIN Jaguars and MiGs have their own...

What makes you think the average Indian base is not going to be tech heavy? It will have everything possible..and with multirole fighters, that sort of base is good to practise against (own SAGW/SENSOR systems), own AA interceptors etc.

The Chinese are at the walk stage of the crawl/walk/run system of aircombat. We are at the run stage. They too will get to the run stage, but by then, India will have learnt far more than these guys have. Which is what makes our international exercises important, as we are always looking for that one weak point or USP that can swing things, or a better process, or just to see whether our methods work consistently.

The RSAF is considered a proper well trained AF by the USAF. They now train with us routinely at KKD with their latest F16s and radars and SAMs.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Feb 2013 04:58

Lilo wrote:^^ More aircraft more resources and more intent and relatively robust inhouse aviation complex to support airframes

Thats why i excepted the engines didnt i ?

Also the article alludes to it

Already Beijing enjoys one key advantage: Its training exercises receive steady funding, whereas the U.S. Air Force’s own budget has been repeatedly threatened by political posturing in Washington. “Given the massive reductions in U.S. air combat training coming in the event of sequestration, the PLAAF won’t have far to go to match and then exceed us in terms of flying time and exercises,” Deptula warns.

The Chinese Flankers had issues with build quality and even had Ukrainian intervention. They got no design TOT for critical parts either. Their so called J-10B is nowhere and prototypes of J-20 and J-31 are busy flying around. Net, a lot of PR, but the actual operational details regarding logistics, problems faced, solved all hidden away.

In contrast, whatever the IAF faces, its open about it, and solves that. Lets not get sidetracked by claims of a mythical force which is yet to show what its facts really are.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Feb 2013 05:06

To understand how the exercises bring value, these are the transcripts of two pilots Moose and Ragin who flew in Cope India the second one. Their posts were removed later but archived by then.

Quote:Ragins

As far as what is posted on the internet regarding news stories and who beat who, you can make your own decisions. I would venture to say that the stories of the outcome of the exercise were already written before we flew 10.5 hours across the South Pacific to get there. What really happened there? Both sides had set of notional missiles with notional ranges. Guns kills were based on aspect and range with no regard to stability of WEZ or tracking solutions. Both sides fought hard, but also had integrity for the debrief and no-one tried to skirt around the facts. Sometimes the IAF killed the Vipers and sometimes the we killed the IAF...but a lot of the operations were not designed as IAF vs USAF. Most were mixed configs on both sides.

We got some gun footage and so did they. They made some mistakes and so did we...that's what happens and you learn from it. But, throughout the entire exercise, there was not one safety incident. The USAF lost no fighter sorties due to maintenance the entire two weeks and the IAF only lost one. For two weeks of training, both sides got more out of their training than they probably would in two months.

Quote:Moose69

We started off on the first day with mixed formations doing fingertip flying, which was really cool. Next was some BFM, ACM, and Tactical intercepts. Then came the BVR Air Combat Tactics with us flying in mixed LFE formations with Su-30s, Mig 29s, Mig-27s, Mig-21 Bisons, and Mirage 2000s. The last phase was HVAA (High Value Asset) OCA and DCA. We did get into close combat with every jet they had and it was awesome... Their Sus and Migs really have a lot of power and it was impressive to see how they handled in BFM. The SU-30 was soooo easy to spot those because it makes the F-15 look like a Viper. One thing to note on the BFM strategies was that their pilots would do maneuvers that we had not really thought of before...I am not saying that we didn't know how to react to it, I just mean that when we saw them do a certain maneuver we would think "wow, I never thought of doing that before"....so it was good learning on both sides.

Quote:Moose69

Lets start with the Bison in WVR and BVR...thse are all on the unclass side of course. There were never any true 1v1 BFM against Bisons because, lets face it, it's an old airframe and can in no way turn with the Viper. There were, however, some TI to ACM with Fulcrums and Bisons together. Now keep in mind that we were fighting with fictitious weapons, and the Bison felt it had the best advantage to blow through a WVR engagement and "light the candle". On the LFE side, they did openly (because I was in an integrated "package" with them) stick with the floggers as strikers. I thought the fact that they would also do TI and 1v1 ACM with Fulcrums was interesting too.
Now the Fulcrum, I thought, has the most powerful engines as a ratio of aircraft size. Everytime one would take off it would do a slow climb at high AOA and then power out of it, a few times it looked as if it was going to stall at any moment...it was truely impressive to watch. The guys who had incentive rides in the fulcrum were impressived with it's power and maneuverability. It is a large aircraft and was not too difficult to spot in the air unless they were using haze or the sun to their advantage. Their engines tended to smoke significantly.

Quote:Moose69

As for BFM, we were all impressed with how the Fulcrum performed...very close to the viper.

Quote:Moose69

The Su-30 can perform very well, especially with an experienced pilot who knows his airplane. Their squadron commander was an outstanding pilot whom we all respect deeply. If the Su-30 ever gets into WVR without being spotted (you can see the guy a looong way off), then you are going to have your hands full.

Quote:Moose69

I am sure that they are impressed with the USAF F-16s but whether or not we were there to sell them Vipers is way above my pay-grade. As for the MKIs, they only did BFM for a few days and then split. The MKI is the pride of their fleet and the SU-30ks are eventually going away. There were only a couple of pilots that flew against them and from what I am told it handled nicely. I am not sure of what I can talk about in that area.

Quote:Moose69

The Mirages are great in BFM because they are hard to see. Their delta wings give them a good instant turn capabililty too. I would say that in a BVR arena it is essential to have the aircraft on your radar if you want to do anything...In the dogfight arena.....if you don't have visual on the aircraft then you have already lost.
I don't think I can get into details about radars but the Mirage seemed like a pretty nice jet in all arenas.

Quote:Moose69

As for flying hours, one of the Flanker pilots told me openly that he gets about 200 hours a year in the front seat...Their higher ranking dudes fly in the back seat and act as Mission Commanders.
I would feel comfortable against the MKI only in BVR...the thing has thrust vectoring for crying out loud

Having flow in mixed formations now with all of their jets i would say that they are very capable and probably the best air force in Asia. Some of their planes are old but the skill of the IAF pilots make them hold their own. I do think that the Viper holds up very well with most of them, however, because we are downright hard to see and our maneuverability is awesome. Getting slow with some of these jets is not advised.

Quote:Ragins

One question that I would like to address is that of the MiG-29 vs the Mirage. I had the priviledge to fly against the Fulcrum in ACM and the M2000 in BFM. I would say that the Fulcrum has the exclusive reign of power, but would not weight that in excess of the M2000's ability to point it's nose (which is quite impressive...trust me). However, we did not get the chance to fly with the MiG-29s in BVR combat. The M2000s could hold their own quite well (in combat as well as on the golf course). Once again, I think it is a good example of the real question being of pilot, techinique, and above all else reaction making the real difference.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 15 Feb 2013 05:11

Karan M, its really interesting to hear these stories about exercises, what is your take on IAF establishing no fly zones say in Afganistan, an uncontested airspace for the most part and in TSP & Tibet which is mostly contested?

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 15 Feb 2013 05:13

Probably OT here so admins can delete if it causes trouble.

Karan,

I see you still have significant patience dealing with these dhoti-shivering comments. The SOP for these commentators is always to compare anything and everything done by the Pakistanis and Cheen in order to find its Indian direct equivalent. And failing that, to go into Dhoti-Shivering mode.

The other extreme seems to be go into "India is great, Cheen is crap" mode and to deny anything done by our Mandarin friends as Photo-shopped, fake and obviously of low quality (applied as a blanket statement of course). This is the Dhoti-flaunting mode.

I on the other hand have long since lost patience on this type of comments.

Left to me, I would openly say what the dhoti-shiver (

)/Dhoti-flaunting (

) person is wanting to hear: "Yes, the IAF is nowhere near the great Cheen. Now go away." OR "Yes, the PLAAF is made of J-7s onlee and even their nuts (also bolts) are falling apart. Now go away."

Makes for a much smaller discussion and then allows us to move to more relevant discussion topics.

JMT

-Vivek