ALWAYSJE Menon wrote:Boys leave Philip alone.His heart is in the right place, always has been.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
ALWAYSJE Menon wrote:Boys leave Philip alone.His heart is in the right place, always has been.
that is what c-295/c-27j are for.We need something that slots in between C-130 and Do-228 and can handle the jobs of both Avro and An-32.
Cost reduction which could result in significant increases in Indian procurement ? Not sure if any of that's possible thoughindranilroy wrote:Think about it. If there are enough orders for the C-130J, then why would LM pass on the assembly line to Tata. And if there are not enough C-130J to be ordered, why will Tata set up the assembly line?
Fair enough. Let's start. Keeping international issues aside and assuming LM itself starts manufacturing the planes here (no licensing fee), does it make economic sense to move the plant to India?KrishnaK wrote:Cost reduction which could result in significant increases in Indian procurement ? Not sure if any of that's possible thoughindranilroy wrote:Think about it. If there are enough orders for the C-130J, then why would LM pass on the assembly line to Tata. And if there are not enough C-130J to be ordered, why will Tata set up the assembly line?
LM had offered a line in India IF the orders exceeded 40 from India.indranilroy wrote:Think about it. If there are enough orders for the C-130J, then why would LM pass on the assembly line to Tata. And if there are not enough C-130J to be ordered, why will Tata set up the assembly line?
Lockheed Martin and Tata Advanced Systems have formed a joint venture company in India, Tata Lockheed Martin Aerostructures, for manufacturing airframe components for the C-130J
Not sure how it would qualify as a paper plane when its prototype was just rolled out last week with a first flight planned by the New Year.JTull wrote:Brazil, itself, is ordering 3 more C-295 in addition to 12 it already operates. KC-390 is still a paper plane.
Rohit, since my own knowledge on the IA is not much to write about, what exactly is the payload and equipment requirements of a Para Battalion? And won't 10 C-17s and 12 C-130Js along with whatever Il-76s we have left be adequate for that?rohitvats wrote:^^^When a day comes where India has a clear policy on (a) Employment of Paratroopers in war-time and for out of area intervention (b) deployment of air-mobile brigade/division for out of area contingency - it might realize how much sense having the C-130 manufacturing line means. For we will finally realize the optimal size of air-lift fleet required. BTW, given the situation obtained today, IAF can hardly airlift a single Parachute Battalion! Go chew on that...
Avro replacement 70indranilroy wrote:How are you coming up with that number. That's more than all the transport aircraft in the IAF inventory currently!
Both Brazil and Indonesia too should have been roped in (dunno about S.Africa). Both are ahead of us in transport design and mfg capability but we could provide the heft of numbers to make a joint venture viable. Too late.Singha wrote: we should have approached brazil atleast 5 yrs ago and offered our MTA requirement as guaranteed in exchange for technology and workshare
Kartik - I think I should have been less dramatic in the statement I made. The situation is slightly more complex. Coming to a/c required, there are conflicting reports about the number of a/c required for a parachute battalion and parachute brigade.Kartik wrote:Rohit, since my own knowledge on the IA is not much to write about, what exactly is the payload and equipment requirements of a Para Battalion? And won't 10 C-17s and 12 C-130Js along with whatever Il-76s we have left be adequate for that?rohitvats wrote:^^^When a day comes where India has a clear policy on (a) Employment of Paratroopers in war-time and for out of area intervention (b) deployment of air-mobile brigade/division for out of area contingency - it might realize how much sense having the C-130 manufacturing line means. For we will finally realize the optimal size of air-lift fleet required. BTW, given the situation obtained today, IAF can hardly airlift a single Parachute Battalion! Go chew on that...
Thanks for the detailed reply Rohit. So as things stand as of now, the C-17 and the C-130J have brought about the capability to lift an entire Para battalion and drop them over a significant enough range.rohitvats wrote: Kartik - I think I should have been less dramatic in the statement I made. The situation is slightly more complex. Coming to a/c required, there are conflicting reports about the number of a/c required for a parachute battalion and parachute brigade.
One IAF source (commentary by senior IAF officer in a seminar) says it requires 7-8 x IL-76 and 32 x An-32 to air-lift a single parachute battalion at full scale. An ex-IA Para officer's comment that I distinctly remember reading talks about 50 x An-32 required to lift a single parachute battalion at full scale. If you compare the two statement, they're close in terms of total manpower lift capability of the a/c involved.
IL-76: 120 x 8 - 960
An-32: 40 x 32 - 1,024
Total: 1,984
OR
50 x An-32 x 40 - 1,600.
While a parachute battalion is likely to have a strength of ~800 personnel, the airlift is required to lift the stores and equipment. Also, the cargo cabin volume and dimensions of aircrafts will also impact the utility of the a/c. So, it is function of tonnage, paratrooper carrying capacity and cargo cabin dimensions+volume.
Don't forget that a parachute battalion also has a platoon equipped with BMP-2 along with other vehicles. And drop using only AN-32 will not be able to deliver them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coming to C-17, most think of it as a strategic air-lifter which would be underutilized in para-drop function. However, one must not forget that American expeditionary capability rides on this a/c and hence, it has tremendous flexibility and options when it comes to cargo-drop. A C-17 can drop "single items of equipment weighing up to 60,000 pounds and has a total airdrop cargo weight of 110,000 pounds. Each C-17 has a container-delivery system capacity of 40 containers, with a total rigged weight of 2,350 pounds each."
Therefore, your contention is right that using a mix of C-130, C-17 and IL-76, IAF can NOW airlift and drop a parachute infantry battalion. But we will end up using substantial part of our air-fleet in this effort. Not to mention that any such effort needs to be practiced and prepared for during peace-time.
IL-76 MD cannot carry those many troops, Ilyushin's website specifies 126 Paratroopers or 145 troop transport. It can carry 210 troops in double deck configuration, I think this configuration is not for Para drops.Pratyush wrote:RV, I was under the impression that the IL 76 can drop 210 men.
http://www.ilyushin.org/en/aircrafts/transport/1187/By its transportation capacity,the Il-76MF surpasses Il-76MD by 40%. This is possible due to increased freight compartment volume, installation of new economical engines PS-90A-76, and modernization of the flight navigation complex and other aircraft systems.
By way of considerable extension of the freight compartment length, designers managed to increase the number of transported military personnel and service personnel.
Interesting, we need to see how this Govt will handle lone bidder situation. What could be the reason for non-interest by Alenia and Embraer?VikB wrote:Ukraine Misses Deadline, Lone Bidder Remains for Indian Aircraft Competition
Didn't knew the civil war in Ukraine was being fought on Italian soilVikB wrote:Alenia - Ukraine mess - its mentioned in the article
I think he meant AntonovThakur_B wrote:Didn't knew the civil war in Ukraine was being fought on Italian soilVikB wrote:Alenia - Ukraine mess - its mentioned in the article
afaik not banned since BJP govt sent them a rfq. It must have been the cockeyed requirement for 40 aircraft.VikB wrote:My bad
Alenia - Finameccanica lafda. all companies under that umbrella are currently banned
The defence ministry (MoD) is likely to issue a fresh international tender for building 56 transport aircraft in India to replace the venerable Avro HS-748 in the Indian Air Force (IAF) inventory, say ministry sources.
...
Yet, for various reasons, only one OEM has bid. Amongst those left out is Antonov, of Ukraine, which had partnered Larsen & Toubro (L&T) in a proposal to build the An-132 aircraft in India. However, political turmoil in Ukraine, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea, has stalled its bid.
..
..
The Swedish company, which wanted to supply the Saab-2000 aircraft, has not bid because the MoD is unwilling to let it build all 56 aircraft in India. The RfP insists that 16 aircraft must be supplied in flyaway condition. Saab, having shut down its line in Sweden, wants to build all the aircraft in India, which the RfP does not provide for.
Russian manufacturer, Ilyushin, wants to supply the IL-214. However, this aircraft does not have a rear ramp, which the RfP demands. Interestingly, the Avro, which the new aircraft will replace, does not have a rear ramp either.
A senior MoD procurement official say it would be difficult to continue with a single vendor. A waiver would be required for that deviation from the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP).
...