Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 16 Jun 2014 15:43

Aditya_V wrote:Is it 39+22 Apaches? or is it a total of 39. Hope the army aviation corps cordinates with AF well during times of war.

Total 39 , 17 will be under IA and 22 Under IAF but under IA command .

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 16 Jun 2014 16:33

What are the LCH numbers speculated at?

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 16 Jun 2014 16:48

^^^ Any Indian media reporting this Apache deal?

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 16 Jun 2014 19:10

karan_mc wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:Is it 39+22 Apaches? or is it a total of 39. Hope the army aviation corps cordinates with AF well during times of war.
Total 39 , 17 will be under IA and 22 Under IAF but under IA command .

Nope. The report clearly states that the 39 will go to army after IAF gets the first 22, so total of 61. Initial reports on the matter last year also pointed to that (ie. all further deliveries) though the number for the army was not settled at the time.

Makes sense for the CAS and attack role to go to army though the duplication and overlap of the same aircraft in 2 services in these times of financial crunch is strange. Even if it is simply to pacify both services and stop the unseemly bickering, hopefully we will figure out a way to keep a common maintenance and servicing arrangement, perhaps a civilian outfit linked to Boeing/Tata.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 16 Jun 2014 20:00

114 LCH , 39 Apaches n 60 Rudra will make IA most formidable force but isn't too much for Western Sector

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 16 Jun 2014 20:22

Rudra numbers should be increased, one Sq for each division at least and then some for RAPIDS!! 60 is a low number. They can complement Apache for the strike corps!!

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 16 Jun 2014 20:45

Victor wrote: Makes sense for the CAS and attack role to go to army though the duplication and overlap of the same aircraft in 2 services in these times of financial crunch is strange. Even if it is simply to pacify both services and stop the unseemly bickering, hopefully we will figure out a way to keep a common maintenance and servicing arrangement, perhaps a civilian outfit linked to Boeing/Tata.

We need to look at it from mission perspective. Just as Apaches for CAS needs to be in IA for closer co-ordination with IA ground elements, IAF needs Apaches (and possibly LCHs) to work with their CSAR assets (Garud Commandos in their ALHs/ Mi17s).

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 16 Jun 2014 22:41

^ Not denying that Apache will help IAF in that role but they wanted to keep CAS to themselves too which thankfully MoD has not bought. Anyway, the question is about duplication of costly servicing and maintenance of a relatively small number of highly specialized aircraft.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Jun 2014 01:23

With man portable anti-aircraft missiles proliferating aren't helicopter gunships sitting ducks in todays environment?

Yes they are at a much increased risk. But then they are there for a role which is risky to begin with . Anyhow its a cat and mouse game. The helo world isn't sitting still either

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poTn9fFGiDQ[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZAB3gjGork[/youtube]

http://optics.org/news/2/10/7

Northrop grumman CIRCM

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabili ... fault.aspx

The Apache already carries the ALQ-144A (V) and a replacement effort is underway that will develop a new IRCM for the apache and other aircrafts that carry the system.

http://www.baesystems.com/product/BAES_ ... p67itlga_4

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 17 Jun 2014 08:24

I remember reading that the IAF was looking to use its Apaches for (S|D)EAD.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 17 Jun 2014 15:59

US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel was offering JV on Helicopters , Was he talking about New Variant of Apache ??

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 17 Jun 2014 16:23

SEAD = Suppresion Enemy Air Defence

DEAD = ??

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 17 Jun 2014 16:28

destruction

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Jun 2014 16:32

DEAD is destruction of enemy air defenses. Most use the term interchangeably however SEAD can mean suppression of the Air defences either through Electronic warfare, cyberwarfare, launching a CHAMP like missile or cutting off the supply lines, blowing out the power supply etc while DEAD is strictly used in cases where the air defense has to be totally destroyed i.e a bomb or missile through the C2C of that IAD or destruction of launchers, radars etc. Tactically SEAD and DEAD are two different things requiring different resources and mission planning.

US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel was offering JV on Helicopters , Was he talking about New Variant of Apache ??

I do not think that apache NG is in the works although I could be wrong. If I were to guess, i'd guess it would be the Raider.

http://raider.sikorsky.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy-Xb3X-bC0

as it is in the tech demonstration phase where the entire cost is being borne by Sikorsky and its partners. Not only does a long term requirement exist for such an aircraft but industrial partnership is being looked at as a means to offset government R&D.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 23 Jun 2014 15:12

http://andhrabuzz.com/kcr-inaugurates-d ... rts-plant/

KCR inaugurates Dornier airplane spare parts plant

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Jun 2014 23:52

This TASL move to produce DO-228 fuselage and wings is extremely interesting. HAL chairman really wanted to increase revenue of HAL through this project. I don't understand what could have gone wrong. Ostensibly, HAL was producing parts on time.

The 14-18 seater section just heated up. In order of increasing performance and costs, we will have 3 offerings:
1. Mahindra will land with its Nomad in 2-3 years too. (GA-10 is to be certified this Fall). Next up is the GA-18 project.
2. TASL with Do-228 NG. Although I am very sure RUAG will not allow final assembly outside of Germany.
3. HAL will be fielding the Saras.

Very very interesting times ahead.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 24 Jun 2014 09:56

What is the difference between Do-228 NG and Do-228 with respect to structure? If the difference is not much why will RUAG not allow final assembly outside Germany? For workshare and jobs related reasons or strategic?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 24 Jun 2014 10:07

merlin wrote:What is the difference between Do-228 NG and Do-228 with respect to structure? If the difference is not much why will RUAG not allow final assembly outside Germany? For workshare and jobs related reasons or strategic?

Financial. The biggest profit comes from assembling all the parts and selling the complete product. The same reason why RUAG did not delegate this task to HAL.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Jun 2014 10:27

Apache deal very welcome,as it will fast track the AAC's establishment as an instrument with teeth.Especially welcome in the stand-off with China.The IAF should in quick time relieve itself of the close-support helo ops to the AAC. The 3-4 doz. Apaches supported by at least 100+ LCHs attack helos will be a formidable force.If you add to that the armed MI-17s,armed Dhruvs and LAHs ,the IA will have a considerable attack helo capability throughout the inventory.

I'm not so sure about Raider,as any Indian participation would come with a whole lot of strings attached. It would be better if we embarked upon a futuristic helo development programme,across the board for the 3 services,as the numbers we require are large.Foreign helo manufacturers could be roped in for the tech expertise that they have component wise. A multi-role medium helo that would serve the IN for maritime/ASW duties,a medium lift helo for the IA/IAF could add upto to 200+.The new high-speed helo concepts could also be looked at .

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 24 Jun 2014 11:35

I'm not so sure about Raider,as any Indian participation would come with a whole lot of strings attached. It would be better if we embarked upon a futuristic helo development programme,across the board for the 3 services,as the numbers we require are large.Foreign helo manufacturers could be roped in for the tech expertise that they have component wise. A multi-role medium helo that would serve the IN for maritime/ASW duties,a medium lift helo for the IA/IAF could add upto to 200+.The new high-speed helo concepts could also be looked at

I don't see India contribute to the raider. I foresee Tata being a part of the project with or without backing from the establishment. The phase 1 partners are firmed up but this family of aircraft (raider is a tech demonstrator and the technology will result in many other demonstrators over the years) is going to result in plenty of prototypes with industry partnerships all the way to 2030.

srin · Post by **srin** » 24 Jun 2014 12:26

There used to be something called the Comanche - stealthy chopper, looked like LCH but a bit stubby. The marketing was awesome. There will probably be a Discovery documentary too, praising it to high heavens. I even played a video game flying Comanche long ago. The ugly truth was that it was over-weight and over-budget even by American standards.

The raider reminds of Comanche - nice marketing video. I wonder if this is something that HAL can't do with Dhruv, given focus and time and resources.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 24 Jun 2014 14:12

The raider reminds of Comanche - nice marketing video. I wonder if this is something that HAL can't do with Dhruv, given focus and time and resources.

That just goes to show that you have not really looked up the raider, what it is, and what the purpose of its existence.

Some points:

* The comanche was a cold war product, delayed, yes, over budget yes capable? Very much so. Post-cold war it was chopped because the cost to get it out to the fleet after its issues were sorted was deemed to be too much for the then budget. Had the apache been in a similar state of development and the cold war ended it may also well have been cancelled. So the comanche was cancelled, and it had good documentary and a company video. With that yardstick every chopper coming out of the US for ever that has a video and that is a new design is bound to fail?

Lets overlook that ridiculous claim and get back to what the raider is and how its different

* The raider is not a helicopter for the army - It is a tech demonstrator designed and funded by the industrial team lead by Sikorsky. Its the extension of the X-2 program which demonstrated a lot of the capabilities of the design especially those having to do with maneuverability and speed. There is no government funding for the raider. Its all funded internally and by industry partners (lockheed, Boeing, Northrop and a host of smaller companies).

* The raider is not going to be offered to HAL to co-develop at least not the way I thought it would be offered. Tata's and Sikorsky have a partnership and a business relationship. If Indian companies are to jump into this developmental effort then this its not going to be through the government but an internal arrangement between Tata and Sikorsky. This may never materialize, but the basic technology designed for the Raider will be extensively tested on the raider prototype which is going to be out soon and then followed into another prototype. Its going to be business arrangement (if at all) if the companies partnering see that an economic advantage exists to be a part of a team that if successful will design the bulk of the US army and marine core's rotary winged assets (just look at the aircraft this and other designs using this technology will replace) and those of the nation's which also use similar kit that will require replacement.

* These are technology demonstrator efforts to eventually develop, validate, demonstrate and refine technologies that are going to be the basis of helicopter designs for the next major US Army and MC helicopter replacement cycles. Helos such as the black hawk, cobra, kiowa warrior, apache etc will all need replacement and the industry around the world is teaming up to align themselves with partners so that it can benefit financially and technologically from the R&D dollar that is likely to come - first through industry funded ventures and then through government spending.

Besides the X2 and the Raider, the next prototype Sikorsky will fly that uses a similar technology (as demonstrated by the X2, and that which will fly with the Raider very soon) will be the SB-1 Defiant which will be their design submission along with Boeing for the US Army's JMR competition. The Defiant would take flight in 2017. This is the next big helo competition in the west and should be adopted as a replacement for the Black Hawk family worldwide. This is one of the top priorities for the US Army so it should be well funded. Facing Boeing Sirkosky is the Bell lead team.

More background: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... on-386742/

The Defiant design, which uses a lot of the technology tested and developed on the X-2 and Raider prototypes.

http://news.usni.org/2014/06/17/sikorsk ... ter-design

As you can see the Raider or the technology has absolutely nothing in common with the Comanche other then that both were helicopters.

How big is the program for the companies concerned? Well, some pundits think that the company that looses the JMR competition may then be a ripe candidate for acquisition by a larger giant that does not have much rotary winged assets in its portfolio. It also reflects the limited amount of money going into HELO research at the industrial level worldwide. These projects are perhaps the last BIG things for these helo companies to latch onto. For smaller partner companies being a part of the design and development teams is not only a learning experience (advanced composites ) but also a gateway to prove themselves before the big contracts are signed. Unless there is catastrophic need Sikorsky is not likely to bring in outside industry into the team it has already formed if it wins the JMR for example.

Advantages for India: If tata or others can work an arrangement to be a part of this, it will have access to industrial R&D from some of the top defense companies in the world. It would also be a part of the team that will produce hundreds if not thousands of helicopters in the coming decades. If successful Tata's expansion in the helicopter world would be self funded and would not require nurturing on part GOI through "sead" projects to get it up to the mark.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 30 Jun 2014 20:54

Not sure where to put this but it bears watching very closely. We finally have CAS aircraft in a manpad rich environment against a fairly sophisticated foe.
Su-25 Frogfoots reach Iraq

The Russian move was at least an implicit rebuke to the United States, which the Iraqis believe has been too slow to supply American F-16s and attack helicopters

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 30 Jun 2014 20:55

Victor - maybe international military news thread

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 01 Jul 2014 00:16

HAL has invited "partnership / technical assistance / consultancy from a well experienced airframe design house" "for weight reduction / optimization" (Click)

The Current status of the development
The aircraft is in an advanced stage of development and is expected to enter service within the coming year. The company has a firm order of 85 aircraft from the Indian defence services. Further orders for this aircraft are expected once it is operationalised.

The Scope of the RFI
The HJT-36 aircraft presently weighs around 4150 Kg in its Normal Training Configuration, i.e., with two pilots and full internal fuel without any external stores. HAL is envisaging achieving maximum possible weight reduction / optimisation for the aircraft.

P.S. This means Sitara is overweight by around 550 kgs over its designed weight. Part of this is expected: AL-55I engine and paraphernalia would have increased weight by 50-100 kgs. The increased thrust from the AL-55I engine will also compensate for some weight gain. But, it will be nice to see the plane shave off around 300 kgs.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Jul 2014 03:52

Would that mean that there is no difference between the old French engine and the one Russia provided? Is it that with the new engine the thrust is more, but so is the weight?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 01 Jul 2014 04:20

No. The TWR and SFC of AL-55I is better than Larzac engine. The engine itself is only about 20-50 kgs heavier.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 01 Jul 2014 05:30

What do we use in the Frogfoot/A10 role? Jags & Mig 27s? Not unthinkable that columns of Tanzeems similar to ISIS may come out of Muridke, Binori etc. to confront IA. In fact this is the oldest PA tactic in the book, in use since 1947.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Jul 2014 07:36

Rudradev wrote:What do we use in the Frogfoot/A10 role? Jags & Mig 27s? Not unthinkable that columns of Tanzeems similar to ISIS may come out of Muridke, Binori etc. to confront IA. In fact this is the oldest PA tactic in the book, in use since 1947.

MiG 21/LCA/ MiG 27 or Mi 25/35 Armed Dhruv/LCH. Hawk/IJT, Mi 17 are alternatives

In the past Mysteres, Su-7s, Hunters and Gnats have been used

Of course the Paki army is uniformed LeT Tanzeem

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 01 Jul 2014 18:46

Rudradev i,
that is my pet peeve. CAS aircraft are specelized, mostly twin engined (and engine widely seperated to take hits, A10 and su25, many instances these planes have come back home with one engine shot), heavily armoured (Mig27, the pilot sits in a Titanium bathtub), optamised for slower speed, high high speed ingress and out, cockpit tilted in front for better view of ground down below, primary weapon being cannon to aim an shoot (along with specelised A2G). LCA is sadly none of that. LCH only goes that far and no further 9with all attendent limitation of a helo over an aircraft). With Mig27 gone, we may not have a dedicated CAS. UAV sadly cannot fulfill this niche.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 02 Jul 2014 16:44

Is the IAF Equipped for a Two-Front War ?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Jul 2014 09:47

Rudradev wrote:What do we use in the Frogfoot/A10 role? Jags & Mig 27s? Not unthinkable that columns of Tanzeems similar to ISIS may come out of Muridke, Binori etc. to confront IA. In fact this is the oldest PA tactic in the book, in use since 1947.

With the IAF having swept whats left of the PAF from the sky. The best way to deal with them is massed arty fire, directed by UAVs. It is the cheapest way to deal with the swines. They are welcome to try and swarm though the no mans land, with air burst shell bursting all around them. With the cargo round laying and relaying the minefields cleared by human waves.

Those that survive the movement through the killing fields can be dealt with by liquid cooled machine guns. As they were prevalent in the early decades of the last century.

Alternatively, the Russian terminator tanks type vehicle would be extremity useful, on this battlefield.

Off-course, this is massively OT for this thread.

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 03 Jul 2014 20:57

fanne wrote:Rudradev i,
that is my pet peeve. CAS aircraft are specelized, mostly twin engined (and engine widely seperated to take hits, A10 and su25, many instances these planes have come back home with one engine shot), heavily armoured (Mig27, the pilot sits in a Titanium bathtub), optamised for slower speed, high high speed ingress and out, cockpit tilted in front for better view of ground down below, primary weapon being cannon to aim an shoot (along with specelised A2G). LCA is sadly none of that. LCH only goes that far and no further 9with all attendent limitation of a helo over an aircraft). With Mig27 gone, we may not have a dedicated CAS. UAV sadly cannot fulfill this niche.

An Su-30 MKI could fill a quasi-CAS role because it can fly very slowly. I remember seeing an MKI demonstration at an Aero India a few years ago: the MKI seemed to hang in the air, almost like a helicopter. That capability, along with unguided-rocket pods, would be formidable. Obviously, a specialized CAS aircraft like the Su-25 would be better, though.

NRao: thanks for the correction. I was typing in a hurry.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Jul 2014 23:01

The Su-34 is the successor to the Su-25

Su-24, not 25.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jul 2014 01:02

One of the aircraft being shortlisted for the IJT was reportedly the Yak-130 T/GA.The aircraft was praised in a Vayu issue some time ago by an IAF pilot who flew it. It would be ideal for the close support/GA role.The Hawk too has similar capabilities.

John · Post by **John** » 04 Jul 2014 04:54

Rudradev wrote:What do we use in the Frogfoot/A10 role? Jags & Mig 27s? Not unthinkable that columns of Tanzeems similar to ISIS may come out of Muridke, Binori etc. to confront IA. In fact this is the oldest PA tactic in the book, in use since 1947.

A-10 is best in that scenario since its design reduces IR and stands to have atleast one engine operational if it gets hit. Just recently one hit from a missile was enough to knock out Ukr Su-25.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 04 Jul 2014 06:33

fanne wrote:Rudradev i,
that is my pet peeve. CAS aircraft are specelized, mostly twin engined (and engine widely seperated to take hits, A10 and su25, many instances these planes have come back home with one engine shot), heavily armoured (Mig27, the pilot sits in a Titanium bathtub), optamised for slower speed, high high speed ingress and out, cockpit tilted in front for better view of ground down below, primary weapon being cannon to aim an shoot (along with specelised A2G).

- The MiG-27 has only some armour panels is the cockpit area. Primarily to protect against small arms fire. Its the A-10 and Su-25 that incorporate the titanium buckets. The MiG-27's poor cockpit visibility and lack of low speed maneuverability make it grossly unsuitable an an A-10/Su-25 alternative. Not to mention the gun's recoil was so strong, it practically resulted in electroshock therapy for the airframe.

- The A-10 & Su-25 are both technological dead-ends. They can survive an Igla/Stinger hit, but neither will return to combat. And while it might even be deemed repairable by the OEM, the aircraft is done for the duration of the war. Unlike attack helicopters that can follow oblique flight paths and loiter at safe ranges or behind natural obstacles, CAS aircraft of the type have no option but to dive in headfirst.

- Finally, even for CAS aircraft the weapon of choice is the air-to-ground missile (Maverick, Kh-25) rather than the gun. The same class of missiles (as well as glide bombs) can also be employed from standoff ranges by multi-role aircraft like the Tejas.

Skip to 1:33.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2014 06:53

The helina would be our brimstone but ideally needs mmw,radar for autonomy and ability to strike inert cold targets that ir sensors cannot pick.
even tejas should be able to carry 8.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2014 06:54

I don't know how or if salvo fired brimstone can divide targets instead of all homing on the highest rcs target.
is it spray and pray approach?

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 04 Jul 2014 07:20

^^ Salvo of 4 missiles should not be too much problem for a single jet. Longbow-equipped chopper can engage and attack up to 16 targets simultaneously with missiles fired by itself and networked choppers or UAVs.