Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

[Kartik]

So if 2-engine fighters are so expensive (duh), the single engine F-35 becomes more attractive than the Rafale, no? Our patentable selection process should meticulously reexamine life cycle costs considering 1 vs 2 engine, F-35's life expectancy (7 years old vs Rafale's 27 years old) and long-term technological edge over China and Pakistan (most imp)

F-35's life expectancy is 7 years? What does that mean?

[GeorgeWelch]

So if 2-engine fighters are so expensive (duh), the single engine F-35 becomes more attractive than the Rafale, no? Our patentable selection process should meticulously reexamine life cycle costs considering 1 vs 2 engine, F-35's life expectancy (7 years old vs Rafale's 27 years old) and long-term technological edge over China and Pakistan (most imp)

F-35's life expectancy is 7 years? What does that mean?

I think he means the F-35 just came out 7 years ago while the Rafale came out 27 years ago, implying that the F-35 will be around longer into the future

[vina]

The MIG-21 also had 475kg of ballast spread in the front fuselage for COG in the partially unstable design.Limited range and payload,like most Soviet aircraft,defensive in orientation,but available at low cost and in large numbers.had one been able to use the 475kg for fuel,would've dramatically improved the aircraft's capability.

This is EXACTLY the question I had asked TKS /Abhibhushan and others from the IAF dumping on HAL/DRDO/LCA/ and blaming everyone and his mother in law.

WHAT DID YOU DO AS AN INSTITUTION TO ADDRESS THIS. ? You faithfully produced the Mig 21 for 25 years and have used it for 45 years. What are the changes you made ? The Chinese have multiple derivates (including a cranked wing version, an AJT and stuff out of it, with side inlets), so what did YOU DO ? Nothing. You sat on your hands and twiddled your thumbs.

Now, if there is a plane that would have benefited massively from an augmented stability system (even if not a full FBW), it was the Mig 21. You could have massively increased range, performance and safety (and saved tens of pilot's lives ), if you had funded and developed a FBW , put in side inlets and a big radar on the nose of Mig 21 in the 70s and early 80s. You saw the Brits, put an FBW on a Jaguar (the same one you bought) , you saw the French put a FBW on a Mirage III , so why did you NOT put in a FBW on a Mig21 when the benefits would have been immense? How about trading a squadron of say Mig 27 for a R&D program on FBW and active controls and composites on that in the early 70s ? Did you even experiment by putting in an FBW and a composite wing on an Ajeet which we knew inside out ?

Fast forward to 2002 or so, the LCA is flying and instead of focusing on getting it into service, we see a disinterested IAF again sitting in the sidelines and taking potshots , including posting an officer with a sign clearly pasted as " Sucker... Kicked upstairs on his way out" on his forehead as the program in charge, and then a changed weapon specs.

Now, what are you doing about the next gen programs ? Are you fully on board with the AMCA ? Or are you going running again to Rodina and asking for the PAK-FA to be licensed manufactured here after paying a whopping $10b for "co design" (of what I ask) , so that you can run back to them in another 40 years after spending a total of $75b on the Pak-FA ?

It is the same old depressing story.

[vic]

Re Vina:-

We can forget past things but even now:-

What is the effort to develop AJT as follow on of HAWK

Why is even the basic configuration of MLH being delayed?

RTA is practically dead

NCA is comatose

The RFB for replacement of Avro is drafted in a manner that will only help continued imports

What about the turboprop and turbofan variant of Rustom?

What is effort to develop turboshaft engines for MLH, turboprop engines for RTA & Saras, turbofan engines for MRTA?

Why no effort to develop an WVR AAM missile even though we require such a missile in thousands to replace old inventory?

[Sagar G]

Why no effort to develop an WVR AAM missile even though we require such a missile in thousands to replace old inventory?

Never heard of Astra ???

[Sagar G]

The IAF uses all these open attacks on DPSUs in press as messaging. They are warning shots in that they help it lobby for its decisions to be approved. Its always been that way..

And the effects are there for everybody to see, no change in the ground situation and unnecessary creation of bad blood between agencies. I might have missed the official confirmation but since when did publicly sparring over issues which can well be solved behind the doors have become a mark of professional conduct ??? Even if I take your word for that "Its always been that way" pray point me to the positive changes that such unprofessional conduct has brought. Also Karan please note that the DM has already given the go ahead for the project in question but since Mr. Brown is still whining about it publicly then he has chosen to go against the orders of his boss or he has tacit approval of his boss to do what he is doing or Mr. Anthony has no control over IAF. If any of this is true then it cannot be a good news for Bharat.

[Karan M]

SagarG Just because somebody points out something don't assume they like it or agree with the method. I don't approve of this sort of public mudslinging either. It's not the first time the IAF has done this, and won't be the last time either, judging from the manner in which the MOD is turning a blind eye to all this stuff these many years. They should have stepped in and sorted the issue out in a closed forum.

[Sagar G]

My bad Karan apologies for the same but again as I said before MoD is shadow boxing through AF chief. If he was trying to set things right then he will meet the same fate as V.K.Singh but since nothing of that sort looks anywhere near the horizon then there can be only one logical explanation for Mr. Brown's behaviour.

[Karan M]

I don't think MOD is doing that. Instead I think IAF as usual is using media to settle scores after Shukla attacked them.. In the past they have attacked the LCA and other programs using similar high profile media events. Basically, if the MOD was effective this dept vs dept air your dirty laundry syndrome would not exist.

[abhik]

Why no effort to develop an WVR AAM missile even though we require such a missile in thousands to replace old inventory?

Never heard of Astra ???

Astra is a BVR missile.

[Victor]

Of course, the rubber will really meet the road when some of the more advanced military MRO operations from foreign-led JVs start cutting into the turf of BRD type set-ups.

I may be wrong but I get the feeling that the IAF will gladly cede responsibility to any outfit that demonstrates the capacity for reasonable performance. All they want to do is maintain and fly planes, not make them. But if they see a need, they will do all they can to bring results. IAF has a far more robust and efficient system of incentives and disincentives than HAL can every have and it is this that will bring results. They know that.

[ramana]

I will try. It was conceived in 1970's. I had the history once (2006?). I cannot pin the correct year now as i lost it. There was a mention of it in 1971 and probably culminated in 1973 or 74. This project is some 40 years old.

Edited (It was initially called Advanced strike aircraft. )

In the mid 1970s IAF ca,e with a concept to replace HF 24 Marut with DPSA, Deep Penetration Strike Aircraft. Nothing happened and we finally bought Jaguar

K

The follow-on was HF-74. The problem was lack of good engine as usual.

[Sagar G]

Astra is a BVR missile.

Weren't multiple versions of it reported ???

[Sagar G]

I don't think MOD is doing that. Instead I think IAF as usual is using media to settle scores after Shukla attacked them.. In the past they have attacked the LCA and other programs using similar high profile media events. Basically, if the MOD was effective this dept vs dept air your dirty laundry syndrome would not exist.

You are making MoD look extremely feeble here, if it can carry out propaganda behind the back then it can also reign in over the services given that they are subservient to it.

[Karan M]

Feeble would the word I'd use.. thats if they want things to happen but cant enforce it..
As versus having all stakeholders at each others throats give the bureaucrats power to intervene as adults/peacemakers..

[Sagar G]

So ultimately you are also saying the same thing that I was saying i.e. MoD is shadow boxing only. All this drama is staged by Mr. Anthony with plaint political puppets.

[Philip]

XCpt. from JS's article.

"We strangely however set up an engine plant in the backwoods of Koraput where not even a rail link or airfield existed and the aircraft plant at Nasik! This involved thousands of trucks hauling engines,etc.,adding to costs and inefficiency.The negative part was that licence production dominated and successive govts. became complacent."

Who is primarily responsible for the failure to build up an indigenous aircraft industry is clearly illustrated in the above quote.The MOD/GOI abdicated after the HF-24 project was early retired because we did not look hard enough or try hard enough to achieve full success with the programme.At that time we should've started an engine development programme knowing our weakness.As Ramanna said,the HF-74 was shot down,Dr.Tank's team went into the sunset,and we were at the starting gate again.You can't blame the IAF for this.Have they been in charge of taking the major decisions? Secondly,from the past history,in the '60,'70s and '80s,forex was a major problem and the rupee-rouble route helped us enormously.1000 MIGs were acquired/built.The availability of hundreds of Soviet era aircraft at low cost helped us win the air war of '71 and sustained our advantage over the Pakis for decades.Our complacency and myopia however was severely tested when the USSR collapsed and finding genuine spares and components became problematic.Grey market supplies were in part responsible for many engine failures.There was even in a senior IAF officer's memoirs alleging that HAL sold genuine spares to customers and used dubious spares for the IAF's MIGs.The fact is that the MOD also has few scientific aerospace experts to advise it when it has to referee the spats between DPSUs and the IAF.Hence Kalam's proposals for establishing aviation institutes and establishments to draw up a masterplan for the aviation industry under the guidance of the ASI.

What the IAF is trying to do now,from all the sound bites,is to emulate the IN incrementally to get better designs and delivery.Let's look at the IN's approach.
Fortunately for the IN it inherited the RN approach were the Admiralty controlled all warship design and construction to meet their operational requirements over centuries! It has under the CNS the "Directorate of Naval Design",a "Controller of Warship Production" and the WESEE (Weapons and Electronic Systems Engineering Establisjment),notionally under the MOD but managed under the Chief of Material in NHQ,in close cooperation with the Scientific Adviser to the DM.It ha shighly qualified tech. experts from the IN and the scientific community.The IN's advances in IW,cyber capabilities ,etc., are due to the WESEE.While tech. officers find few vacancies in the top ranks,they enjoy a lot of professional challenge and opportunites in the corporate world when they leave the IN.DRDO labs also work closely with the IN which also assigns IN staff to these labs.What emerges is that these components work together in harmony and has had the full support of the MOD for 6 decades! One has to ask why.Primarily,the vision of the successive chiefs of the IN,which was treated like the "Cinderella" of the services forced it to innovate and indigenise and in focussing on their goal of self-reliance .From humble beginnings producing Leander class FFGs under licence,improving them,creating a new G class using the same powerplant,etc.,and then on to more ambitious designs like the Delhi's,and now even carriers and nuclear subs.This is a staggering success story for any navy that is less than a century old and when compared to the achievements of the other two services in indigenisation no comparison whatsoever.

Therefore,the angst of the IAF expressed by its current chief is a marker,that the IAF wants to go the IN way in order that it has combat worthy aircraft that it requires.In simple language,"birds in the hand and not a few in the bush".The urgent task therefore is to establish the key priorities that the IAF requires and see that the local and JV projects signed on are made to succeed,and a roadmap for future acquisitions prepared that advance indigenisation.In this the fullest cooperation is required from the DPSUs so that they fulfill the IAF's needs,the end-users,who go into battle to defend the nation and not their own misplaced ambitions.The major issue being fought here by babudom is control over the entire aircraft/aerospace industry,the foremost "sunrise" industry in India today,and the massive amounts of expenditure that is budgeted for it. JS wrote how HAL was "emasculated" of its designers by the ADA,which comes under the control of the DRDO.

IMR has some more on latest developments.In a special interview with the IAF chief ,some concerns are expressed.
"The MMRCA induction is extremely crucial to our national security".He says that all efforts are being made to conclude the same so that the CCS can take a call during the current financial year.He also adds that the financial outlay is spread over a period of 13 years and therefore should not be a worry and is confident that the govt. will approve the contract (perhaps more in hope?).

IJT.Hopeful of getting the IOC in Dec. 2015.The problem lies with the engine,the AL-55 has cleared 300 hrs. only as against a full life of 1200 hrs before it can be certified/accepted by the IAF.Kiran's will last until 2017.However,if there is any furtherd elay in the IJT's schedules,it will impinge adversely upon the IAF,which will have to look for "new procurement" (alternatives).

LCA.happy that things are moving at a good pace.D&D delays would impact upon the production schedule.He hopes that the IOC will be over by Nov. this yr. ,but series production would start only from 2014 onwards.

There are other points about establishing a "Weapons Systems" (WS) branch like the Navigation Branch as a shortfall of aircrew is expected as more advanced aircraft are inducted,RPAs (UAVs),etc.

In another article,considering the worst case "what if" scenario,if and when the Rafale deal collapses.,the alternatives.The EF and MIG-35 are waiting in the wings says AM Bharat Kumar (retd).Will post details in the appropriate td.

[Victor]

if and when the Rafale deal collapses.,the alternatives.The EF and MIG-35 are waiting in the wings says AM Bharat Kumar (retd).

Rafale won't collapse. Modi already asked some sharp French gentlemen who visited him a few days ago to set up weapons factories in Gujarat .

BTW, much obliged for the write-up, thanks.

[Philip]

Tx.
Point to ponder.Maj.Gen.Bakshi (retd),familiar figure on telly,says in a piece "fighting smart" in "times of an eco crunch" in IMR,that by 2020,China will have 1300 4th-gen aircraft like SU-27s,30s,J-10s and J-11s,reveres en-engineered Flankers,plus SU-35s being bought to give it the qualitative edge and which ti will have over India for the first time.He says that this is unacceptable and we have to speed up the induction of the rafale,LCA and FGFA JV to counter this massive threat (let alone the threat from Pak).

[member_23455]

Therefore,the angst of the IAF expressed by its current chief is a marker,that the IAF wants to go the IN way in order that it has combat worthy aircraft that it requires.In simple language,"birds in the hand and not a few in the bush".The urgent task therefore is to establish the key priorities that the IAF requires and see that the local and JV projects signed on are made to succeed,and a roadmap for future acquisitions prepared that advance indigenisation.In this the fullest cooperation is required from the DPSUs so that they fulfill the IAF's needs,the end-users,who go into battle to defend the nation and not their own misplaced ambitions.The major issue being fought here by babudom is control over the entire aircraft/aerospace industry,the foremost "sunrise" industry in India today,and the massive amounts of expenditure that is budgeted for it. JS wrote how HAL was "emasculated" of its designers by the ADA,which comes under the control of the DRDO.

While this nails it...the IAF has to take the blame for not wanting to get its hands dirty with setting up a full-fledged acquisitions directorate and the rest of the grunt work that entails. If HAL has stayed in a comfort zone, so has the IAF.

An IAF as overall program manager - be it for a desi or foreign buy - also means one very simple thing...when things go wrong, an Air Marshal is the first to get fired, if at all.

But on the brighter side, change is inevitable now because we have exhausted all other options of looking the other way.

[Austin]

That sort of direction and leadership should come from MOD and not HAL or IAF , MOD likes to play the Defence versus Civil game to keep its own per-emminence and watch the fun from far while nations pays for it in long term.

[member_23455]

Who is left holding the can? MoD or IAF? If the IAF can play political games on CDS and Choppers, it can and has begun to do it on other matters.

[Austin]

Everybody plays games according to its own institutional advantage its natural there will be turf wars within service ...happens every where ..... but MOD is the one that should lead and sort out institutional difference and if they dont agree Enforce it.

On the contrary Indian MOD just plays out the differences within Services and between Services and Civilian Agency to keep playing the game of One Upmanship and to show who is the Boss .... typical of Babus and it goes upward to please their political bosses both of who wants to thrive on their own insecurities.

[Sanku]

Who is left holding the can? MoD or IAF?

The country.

[member_23455]

Everybody plays games according to its own institutional advantage its natural there will be turf wars within service ...happens every where ..... but MOD is the one that should lead and sort out institutional difference and if they dont agree Enforce it.

"Crying baby gets the milk". Who do you think did the leading when the chopper fight was on? The army or the MoD? And when left to its own devices to enforce a settlement the MoD came up with a typically screwed-up half-ass plan that will result in its own hi-jinks.

Just as war is too important to be left to generals, defence management is too important to be left to MoD.

[Austin]

Defence Management should involve all the stake holders including Armed Forces and Civilian and should be lead by MOD.

Now if MOD is broken and for narrow political gains and for the sake of one upmanship by Politician and Babus alike if MOD tries to play the dirty game of setting of one against the other instead of fixing the problem then we would be in a state that we are in now.

[Pratyush]

^^^

In an environment as politically vitiated as India's. It is difficult to believe, that, there will be a solution to the mess we are in. Cause, any change made today will be challenged and overturned by the next government in order to make political points over the previous government.

Furthermore, the MOD can not & will not function in the absence of clear political direction. The last time they had it, Fernandis was the DM. That too before Thelka.

Post Thelka, even though personally innocent, he was Judged guilty by association.

We need a strong political leader, with a clear mandate. For at least 2 or more terms. For things to move and heads to be knocked together, for better performance.

[Philip]

If you look at the situ at the time of Independence and now,one will see that the gap between the services and their political masters has widened considerably with babudom widening its size and scope.In protocol and the pecking order ,the services too have been downgraded.No longer can a service chief have the same relationship that say Mrs.G had with FM Sam. Add to this the acute indifference shown by the political masters and DMs,the recent MPs briefing on the latest Paki mischief,"late for flight, so cut it short boys",incident shows how much the services mean to most MPs.

Look again at the stature of Def. Mins in the past Krishna Menon-who despite his shortcomings started a process of local built weaponry,Chavan,Jagjivan Ram,RV,Rajiv G,Weepy Singh,KC Pant,Chandrasekhar,Uncle George and Pranabda until 2006.We also had Arun Singh's paper on the subject. "The Saint",AKA,has been India's longest serving Def Min. ever,but what great accomplishments has he had when compared with his illustrious predecessors who served for smaller terms? In the cause of indigenisation,the LCA,IJT,basic trainer,Scorpene subs,warship building,tanks,missiles like Nag,etc.,etc.,have languished with extra delays.In foreign acquisitions,the key items like arty and subs have still not been finalised.Only in acquiring transport aircraft ,P-8s and some other items-that too from the US mainly,through FMS,has there been any progress.The shining light has been in strategic and tactical missiles like the Agnis,Prithvi and Shaurya,B'Mos (JV),Akash,etc.In the field of ordnance we can't even manufacture ammo properly.Apart from the "rotten" OFB,BDL too is little better with the useless missile production leading to a huge knee-jerk order of anti-tank missiles from Russia.I'm sure that if we add the ++ and -- of the Saint's track record,it is not going to be a very happy marksheet.One isn't listing the scams of Tatra,AW,etc.,that have plagued decision making too.They are the other side of the page.

As Austin said,the buck stops with the MOD and Def. Min.It is he should cut the gordian knots that hold back keyd ecision-making,stop inter-service squabbling,crack heads of the DPSUs soi that they perform as intended,reward or punish firang suppliers and get the wheels of production moving smoothly.He also has a Min. of Def. production too to help him in the task! None of the service chiefs can pull rank and sit in his chair on on his head! He has two main parallel tasks-firstly to see that the armed forces are equipped with the wherewithal to defend the nation,replace and modernise in timely fashion according to judicious financial planning too and secondly to discern what can be built/manufactured at home and what has to be imported in full, or through JVs,licence production,whatever.In times of crisis,he is the point man to advise the cabinet and PM of the options available that the service chiefs have given him,in tune with other key ministries like External Affairs,Finance,Home,Energy,etc. No doubt it is a huge and challenging responsibility ,but the nation is poorly served if the primary objective is to merely put in the hot seat a non-controversial politician who achieves very little.

If the IAF now belatedly want to go the IN way,better late than never.In fact it is one example and weapon that the CoAS can use to get things moving.The insistence that the LTA not be DPSU manufactured and to use the BRDs for extra work is a small step but in the right direction.The monopoly of the DPSUs has to be broken if they cannot deliver.

[Abhibhushan]

Returning to the thread after Dassera I find an excellent post from Vina

The MIG-21 also had 475kg of ballast spread in the front fuselage for COG in the partially unstable design.Limited range and payload,like most Soviet aircraft,defensive in orientation,but available at low cost and in large numbers.had one been able to use the 475kg for fuel,would've dramatically improved the aircraft's capability.

This is EXACTLY the question I had asked TKS /Abhibhushan and others from the IAF dumping on HAL/DRDO/LCA/ and blaming everyone and his mother in law.

WHAT DID YOU DO AS AN INSTITUTION TO ADDRESS THIS. ? You faithfully produced the Mig 21 for 25 years and have used it for 45 years. What are the changes you made ? The Chinese have multiple derivates (including a cranked wing version, an AJT and stuff out of it, with side inlets), so what did YOU DO ? Nothing. You sat on your hands and twiddled your thumbs.

Now, if there is a plane that would have benefited massively from an augmented stability system (even if not a full FBW), it was the Mig 21. You could have massively increased range, performance and safety (and saved tens of pilot's lives ), if you had funded and developed a FBW , put in side inlets and a big radar on the nose of Mig 21 in the 70s and early 80s. You saw the Brits, put an FBW on a Jaguar (the same one you bought) , you saw the French put a FBW on a Mirage III , so why did you NOT put in a FBW on a Mig21 when the benefits would have been immense? How about trading a squadron of say Mig 27 for a R&D program on FBW and active controls and composites on that in the early 70s ? Did you even experiment by putting in an FBW and a composite wing on an Ajeet .....
.

An excellent question. Actually, I have the same question too. Why did we not try to 'improve' the MiG21 with FBW? As far as the UK is concerned, BAe played with FBW on the Jaguar and not the RAF. In France, it was AMD who played around with FBW on a Mirage III and not the French Air Force. In China, all the wonderful advancement on Russian aircraft were performed at Shenyang and other aviation industry locations, not by the PLAAF. But in India, it is the IAF which is at fault. Stupid kaloo Airforce ! Thank you Vina for reminding of the stupidity of my organization.

[Abhibhushan]

Deleted. Double post.

[chackojoseph]

Tx.
Point to ponder.Maj.Gen.Bakshi (retd),familiar figure on telly,says in a piece "fighting smart" in "times of an eco crunch" in IMR,that by 2020,China will have 1300 4th-gen aircraft like SU-27s,30s,J-10s and J-11s,reveres en-engineered Flankers,plus SU-35s being bought to give it the qualitative edge and which ti will have over India for the first time.He says that this is unacceptable and we have to speed up the induction of the rafale,LCA and FGFA JV to counter this massive threat (let alone the threat from Pak).

Even if we speed up the projects, they will still have what Maj gen narrates. They might have a small 5th gen fighter force too.

At that time, Chinese will be superior to us in both quality and quantity.

The clueless Air Force will ask for another knee jerk purchase.

[vishvak]

What can happen over time is for planning but the least is to order more assembly lines for LCA 1 and then LCA 2 as well.

[member_23455]

An excellent question. Actually, I have the same question too. Why did we not try to 'improve' the MiG21 with FBW? As far as the UK is concerned, BAe played with FBW on the Jaguar and not the RAF. In France, it was AMD who played around with FBW on a Mirage III and not the French Air Force. In China, all the wonderful advancement on Russian aircraft were performed at Shenyang and other aviation industry locations, not by the PLAAF. But in India, it is the IAF which is at fault. Stupid kaloo Airforce ! Thank you Vina for reminding of the stupidity of my organization.

Nicely put

However would you concede that the IAF, no shrinking violet when it comes to protecting its turf in inter-services squabbles, scored an own goal by chosing not to emulate the organizations, processes, and cadres that characterize the acquisitions programs of more advanced air forces? Leave aside the Indian Navy.

[NRao]

An excellent question. Actually, I have the same question too. Why did we not try to 'improve' the MiG21 with FBW? As far as the UK is concerned, BAe played with FBW on the Jaguar and not the RAF. In France, it was AMD who played around with FBW on a Mirage III and not the French Air Force. In China, all the wonderful advancement on Russian aircraft were performed at Shenyang and other aviation industry locations, not by the PLAAF. But in India, it is the IAF which is at fault. Stupid kaloo Airforce ! Thank you Vina for reminding of the stupidity of my organization.

There was a Prof at IIT Bombay that proposed to improve the MiG-21 instead of the LCA effort.

[NRao]

India, Raytheon Negotiate ISTAR Buy

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is negotiating purchase of two intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition reconnaissance (ISTAR) aircraft from Raytheon to boost its ground-detection capabilities.

Negotiations got a push after a visit by US Vice President Joseph Biden to New Delhi July 23, and a team from Raytheon briefed IAF officials here on the ISTAR capabilities on Oct. 11, said a source in the Ministry of Defence.

An executive of Raytheon here said their team has briefed IAF officials, but provided no details.

IAF interest in ISTAR capabilities was boosted by allied operations in Libya.

“The U.S.-led operations in Afghanistan and the Operation Ellamy in Libya have brought to light the use of ISTAR aircraft and IAF decided to acquire these capabilities,” said a retired IAF official.

IAF shortlisted Raytheon after evaluating responses to a request for information sent in 2011 to Thales, Boeing, BAE, Elta and Raytheon. IAF proposes to purchase two ISTAR aircraft from Raytheon on a government-to-government basis at a cost of about $350 million each. Raytheon has offered a Gulfstream platform for the aircraft but has left it open for the IAF to make its own platform selection.

The ISTAR aircraft will use active electronically scanned array radar and be able to scan more than 30,000 kilometers in a minute and analyze the data in 10 to 15 minutes to identify targets. The system would operate in all weather, day and night.

To cover India’s lengthy borders, the ISTAR surveillance aircraft would need to fly as high as 40,000 feet , said an IAF official.

When acquired, the ISTAR aircraft will be integrated with India’s indigenous air command and control system (IACCS).

Being built on the lines of NATO’s air command-and-control system, IACCS will handle air traffic control, surveillance, air mission control, airspace management and force management functions, added the IAF official. IAF’s airborne warning and control system (AWACS), aerostat radars and other radars are being integrated with the IACCS, enabling quick transfer of data from various platforms to a central battlefield management system.

ISTAR aircraft are used against ground targets and for battlefield management, whereas the AWACS are meant for air defense and aerial targeting, said the IAF official. India also uses aerostat radars, which are mini versions of the AWACS and do not help in ground target acquisition.

The service also uses UAVs for surveillance and reconnaissance, but they have limited capabilities.

[Karan M]

The IAFs penny pinching buy 1-2 platforms at a time stuff is baffling. It will take around 4 units to keep one in the air at any particular sector round the clock. Buying 2 aircraft gives a niche capability at best. And then follow on buys get stuck in red tape and cost escalations.

RAF took 5.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raytheon_Sentinel
USAF has 18 JSTARS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_G ... oint_STARS

[vina]

Returning to the thread after Dassera I find an excellent post from Vina
An excellent question. Actually, I have the same question too. Why did we not try to 'improve' the MiG21 with FBW? As far as the UK is concerned, BAe played with FBW on the Jaguar and not the RAF. In France, it was AMD who played around with FBW on a Mirage III and not the French Air Force. In China, all the wonderful advancement on Russian aircraft were performed at Shenyang and other aviation industry locations, not by the PLAAF. But in India, it is the IAF which is at fault. Stupid kaloo Airforce ! Thank you Vina for reminding of the stupidity of my organization.

Indeed. What was common between the French, British, Swedish and Chinese ? All of them faced a formidable adversary (the Chinese basically all their neighbors and two superpowers), with far greater numerical and technological capability. So, how many fighters and trainers did the French, British, Swedish and Chinese (until the Flanker imports after the collapse of the Soviet Union) import ? Do I hear ZERO as an answer ?

What of the IAF , which was faced with a similar situation (even if not as extreme as the Chinese) ? Did it buy in bulk what was built locally and kept pushing the industry for better versions and improvements and new designs on a continual basis ? Rather, it killed every home grown trainer (basic and jet) and spent 40 years before importing the Hawk and now a basic trainer (and now seems hell bent on making sure that HAL does not produce a better specced one , even with it's own money, but screw driver assemble an el-cheapo, watered down, long in the tooth, "good enough" basic trainer the IAF settled on) . And on top of that cold shouldered the LCA (when it finally gets inducted, it will be despite the IAF until 2002, and not because of it).

With such a record, what do we have ? With it being in a similar situation as the IA in terms of engineering,design, product engineering and even product definition capabilities, we have a bombast similar to the IA -DGMF .. Pah.. We can do a much better job..The IAF BRD will , make MMRCA and the trainer! Well, the IA DGMF and their workshops produced the miserable "Huffy and Tuffy" , some lame excuses of armored vehicles, while railing against the Arjun. I shudder to think what the IAF BRDs will come up with while griping against the LCA. I do hope that whatever that contraption is, they pick better names than what the Army did.

[chackojoseph]

Even LCA Mk1 inducted in numbers can be used for the sake of commonality with Mk2 and mk 3. At one point of discussion with a CAPS gent I told him that we should actually delink IAF from Border + roles and let them take fight into Border + 70 kms area, in addition to specialized role like precision strikes (even if within territory). We can have a Paramilitary kind of force that can operate LCA Mk1, subsonic armed trainers and helios. We will require this force even over island territories etc.

Even operationally, for events like Kargil (just 1 of the possibilities being mentioned), IAF was reluctant for want of permission. Use of air paramilitary takes off the stigma.

I understand, this is not a perfect Idea and can be chiseled and improved.

[Victor]

^ This is something I have always wondered about. We don't we have a complete COIN force even though we have one of the world's worst COIN problems. Navy has CG, army had RR but IAF has nothing. We need an airborne version of RR. A few Dorniers can be converted into gunships with night vision/IR, chain guns, rockets with little trouble. Rudra would be a great weapon too as would HAL's trainer which can become a COIN aircraft when/if it ever comes out. Call it Rashtria Hawai Bal or Rashtria Udan Bal or something similar.

[fanne]

I will say, IAF is being criminal in not inducting Tejas MK1 (post FOC) and not wait for MK2, which will come, when it comes, going by history, it will be not before 5-6 years it gets FOC. In 5 years, @16/year it can get 80. It may be not the best fighter, but it is better than nothing, which IAF will have till it starts getting other planes.
It looks silly, that IAF jumps to MK2, because Navy found MK1 not good enough for carrier ops (owing mainly to short runway, and added weight because of landing gear among other things). Last I checked, IAF is not going to fly its fighter from a carrier with Navyisque landing gear.
The logic that MK2 is better than MK1 so lets not induct MK1, well mk3 will be better than Mk2, Rafeal MK 1000 will be better than current version and SU47 will be better than SU30MKI, why buy these and not wait (then we wait for ever). IAF intention is clearly malafide. If MK1 clears FOC induct, and then when MK2 comes online, switch to it.