Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 29 Sep 2015 14:20

@Phillip while you are at it, calculate the number of combat sorties flown by AH-64 types (Longbow or no Longbow) and then calculate the helos lost to SAM's. You have two major SAM wars in the Gulf War, and Serbia and two deployments that had limited SAM involvement but mostly small arms fire and RPG's. How many Apache pilots have been killed because the helo is too "gold plated" over the entire combat deployment of the type that has had > 1 million combat hours of usage? You can keep showing up with SLATE opinion pieces to drive home your agenda which is pretty clear (Russian stuff is always good and American stuff is always BAD) but come armed with some facts. Why would you want to use a Helo, for what mission compared to something like the A-10? Use some critical thinking and come up with some of the reasons to prefer one over the other (and vice versa). I have given you the most thorough account of the AH-64's combat deployment, including losses, sorties flown, mission types etc etc and you concentrate on just one in CAS which it has done remarkably well for an attack helicopter. Choosing between the A-10 (and how many A-10's to sustain that orbit for say 10 hours a day on a "available when called" type of a deal).. and the Ah-64 is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a while..Even for CAS an attack helicopter cannot be compared to a fixed wing loiter attack aircraft...they are two different types that serve different roles. How long do you think it would take to place an orbit of A-10's vs a JTAC calling back to base and requesting a two ship helicopter gunship cover?

No A-10, or Su-25 is going to survive a modern day SAM, MANPAD and AAA environment against an opponent that actually knows what they are doing..You'll loose a few and the CONOPS will change to deploying them above a certain hight like say 8000 feet as was done the last time the A-10 faced a credible SAM/MANPAD threat. Same applies to an Ah-64 but no credible military (such that would consider buying a heavy attack aircraft) would consider doing non-permissive CAS with the attack helicopter either. You will do that with your fast jet fleet that is more survivable unless you have no other option (in which case Soldiers and Airmen will gladly go into a high risk environment knowing full well that they may not come back). As a tank killer the AH-64 will likely be employed to check rapid thrusts into Indian territory by armor as Karan has also suggested, in this case you are dealing with a moving army and not trying to penetrate deep into a heavily defended area. You can fly low, hug the terrain with a helicopter like you cannot with a fixed wing aircraft. What you have seen in Iraq II, Afghanistan, and to a lesser extent Syria is permissive CAS where all you need to worry about is a poorly trained Jihadi with mostly small arms fire and RPG's (less int he case in Syria), allowing one to send in CAS aircraft at relatively lower altitudes. Heck in Afghanistan the hawg routinely stayed on station after running out of weapons because just its presence was enough to give the blue team on the ground a tactical advantage. However the IAF or the Indian Army is unlikely to be fighting the Taliban, ISIL, or a similar terrorist organization. If you send in Su-25's and A-10's against a credible opponent with credible weapons like you CAN in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan better be prepared to never see the again. As mentioned earlier, the last real deployment of the hawg against a credible air defense saw it operate above 8000 feet until the air-defenses were dealt with and the ground campaign started. You simply cannot go that low without risking serious damage when using a platform that flies slow, and that has a limited capacity to absorb technology because not having a lot of technology is basically its strong suite (simplicity and ruggedness). In fact if you do not have boots on the ground (requiring CAS) the A-10 or the Su-25 is inferior to the faster jets that fly at altitude and can get to targets in a more time-critical fashion..The A-10 is slow to target but sure it can hang in for longer...which is good for CAS but poor for strike, hence you are seeing more faster jet missions in Syria where there are relatively few (to none) boots on the ground.

BTW, also see how the Su-25's lost in the short Russo-Georgian war were downed..

Anyways, I'll do a more detailed post on CAS and some of the myth's often cited by you and the articles that you dig up in the appropriate thread..

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Sep 2015 14:28

A v,welcome acquisition which will enhance our covert strike capability. However,what is not welcome is the inmability of our boffins to develop successfully our own family of UAV/UCAVs despite over a decade of developmental work.

http://defense-update.com/20150912_new- ... Ze1s[quote]
New Delhi Nods +$400 Million Israeli Mega Drone Procurement

Sep 12, 2015

The IAF has been seeking an unmanned, precision attack capability as a matter of high priority. These new drones will be operated by the Indian Air Force (IAF), which already has a large fleet of Searcher and Heron I reconnaissance drones. Both are produced by Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI).

India has cleared the purchase of 10 Heron TP drones from Israel.

The Indian government recently approved a plan to procure ten new missile-armed drones from Israel. “The $400-million proposal for buying armed Heron TP drones from Israel was cleared last week,” The Economic Times reported.

These new drones will be operated by the Indian Air Force (IAF), which already has a large fleet of Searcher and Heron I reconnaissance drones. Both are produced by Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI). The IAF also has a fleet of Harpy UAVs from Israel – designed as loitering radar-supression weapons. In addition,India operates the HAROP, a spin-off variant of the loitering weapon, designed to attack other surface targets. (Both Harpy and Harop are also made by IAI).

The proposed sale of the Heron TP to India had been on the table since 2012, but, only after the election of the new Modi government, did it receive the necessary political backing.

The IAF has been seeking an unmanned, precision attack capability as a matter of high priority. But the transfer of such systems from foreign suppliers has been blocked by article II of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), which limits the transfer of unmanned means of delivery capable of carrying payloads of 300 kg. or more across distances exceeding 500 km.

The Indian Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) has been working on the development of an indigenous, armed reconnaissance drone for several years, but its Rostum II has been delayed and isn’t expected to reach operational status in the foreseeable future.

In a recent clarification of MTCR Article II, some drones were excluded from the list of forbidden systems, partly due to the fact that they cannot carry a single payload of this size. This clarification paved the way for the the export of Israeli Heron TP and US Predator B (Reaper) drones to foreign customers, as well as some Chinese drones capable of similar performance. Such drones can be operated on armed reconnaissance missions with a full sensor suite, enabling operations in day, night and adverse weather conditions.
IAI Heron TP preparing for take off from Ben Gurion Airport, 2011. Photo: IAI
IAI Heron TP preparing for take off. Photo: IAI

Heron TP has been operational with the Israel Air Force since 2012, but has not been exported so far. It can carry a payload of 1,000 kg., both internally and on under-wing hardpoints. Its payload options include the new M19HD long-range electro-optical payload, enabling surveillance and target acquisition at stand-off range and high altitude. The Heron TP can also carry a ground- surveillance radar to provide similar capabilities under all weather conditions, enabling the drone to locate and strike targets even through dense clouds.

IAI also offers an extended-range version of Heron I, already operational with the Indian Air Force, Army and Navy. This ‘Super Heron’ is also configured to carry external payloads, although less than the larger TP.

The Indian Military has suffered repeated cross-border attacks in the Himalayan mountainous region in Northern India, where the Army and Air Force lack deterrence or retaliation capabilities. One recent attack in Manipur in June 2015 took the lives of 18 Indian soldiers. The Indian Military considers armed drones to be an appropriate means of deterring such attacks. Pakistan has recently fielded its own weaponized unmanned aerial vehicle called Burraq, which recently have been deployed on its first combat mission against Taliban forces in Northern Pakistan. China is also using a weaponized version of its Wing Loong UAVs, equivalent to the U.S. MQ-1 Predator class.

IAI has pitched Heron TP to a number of international customers, the most recent being the Royal Australian Air Force, currently operating Heron I drones. Australia is considering to upgrade its unmanned systems capability, with the deployment of Medium Altitude-Long Endurance MALE) type system, and is currently considering the Israeli Heron TP and US Predator B as two possible alternatives. Germany and Poland are also considering the Heron TP as a future MALE system.[/quote]

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Sep 2015 14:37

Karan M wrote:<SNIP>Wow!! How low did the Jags and MiGs fly? Were they at 30 ft too? Anazing post.

Karan - typical army accommodation is in form of a 2 x 2 matrix. Two houses on ground and one above each. So, total height for the roof should be about ~30 feet. I guess you could add another 20 or so feet to it...As I said, we could clearly make out the upper torso and the oxygen mask of the pilot. So, it should be around 50-60 feet.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Sep 2015 14:56

However,what is not welcome is the inmability of our boffins to develop successfully our own family of UAV/UCAVs despite over a decade of developmental work.

Because "decades of work" may not translate to bleeding edge technology. Gut feeling is India has not invested in R&D so they are leaning on Israel.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Sep 2015 18:45

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:<SNIP>Wow!! How low did the Jags and MiGs fly? Were they at 30 ft too? Anazing post.
Karan - typical army accommodation is in form of a 2 x 2 matrix. Two houses on ground and one above each. So, total height for the roof should be about ~30 feet. I guess you could add another 20 or so feet to it...As I said, we could clearly make out the upper torso and the oxygen mask of the pilot. So, it should be around 50-60 feet.

Multiple pilot references from the IAF speak of 50 feet. One is in Jagan's IAF book in which after the first Vampires were shot down in 1965 Gnats flew to forward bases at 50 feet under radar cover.

I read another one recently - will try and find that. Third - Alfred Cooke the pilot who fought 4 and hit 3 sabres at Kalaikunda in 1965 actually brushed his wingtip on "brush" (in his words) not trees and was told off by his mechanic after he landed - the man did not know about the dogfight.

Fourth - my late cousin Suresh was low enough for his Hunter to be hit by the blast (and he was blinded) of a tank main gun in Longewala when he lost control and his plane brushed a sand dune. I have a photo of the damaged tailpipe compared with an undamaged one

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Sep 2015 19:07

shiv wrote:<SNIP>

Thank you for the data-points!

The resident fighters in Pathankot (Mg-21s) used to follow certain trajectories during regular sorties. And non-regular stuff like exercises, we'd learned to expect them to come from certain directions. The Jaguars were always a surprise and came from anywhere. We'd be lucky to be out in open to catch them.

But I must reemphasize the sheet beauty of watching the huge Hinds do their ballet in the air! One could sit at a vantage point and see them dancing in the air for 20-30 minutes...to a school boy like me at that point in time, it was all very mesmerizing.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 29 Sep 2015 19:37

Philip always likes to put down domestic efforts and that is unfair. Domestic development is full of risk - funding whims of the government of the day due to IMF diktat, brochuritis of IAF and IA leading to unrealistic tasks and decades long testing (Arjun/Akash....). So if the funding holds out, the user may not and if the user is interested, the funding may be delayed.

This all-weather criticism by some posters and unashamed praise of foreign products is ridiculous and disgraceful to the efforts of a proud nation.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Sep 2015 19:54

rohitvats wrote:
shiv wrote:<SNIP>
Thank you for the data-points!

The resident fighters in Pathankot (Mg-21s) used to follow certain trajectories during regular sorties. And non-regular stuff like exercises, we'd learned to expect them to come from certain directions. The Jaguars were always a surprise and came from anywhere. We'd be lucky to be out in open to catch them.

But I must reemphasize the sheet beauty of watching the huge Hinds do their ballet in the air! One could sit at a vantage point and see them dancing in the air for 20-30 minutes...to a school boy like me at that point in time, it was all very mesmerizing.

Nothing like the real thing, but it's something maybe to remind you of your childhood - you can see some treetop flying here only 1.5 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx8DpE9AiTI

Another one - not as low flying but a better quality, newer video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srC5uWJbrUI

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Sep 2015 19:55

Philip wrote:PS:From a well known def analyst.

I am at my wits end to understand any of these procurements...the Apache is a gold plated machine that will kill the IAF. you're right, we should have gone in for an A-10 type of aircraft

The above comment is just plain dumb.

First of all A-10 is not being made any more. So that is gratuitous.

A-64 will make a marked difference to the 2 Armored Divisions to which it will be attached.
The A-64s will be multi-tasked: support armor in plains and the mountain strike corps.

IAF gets relief from close air support and get concentrate on long range and short range strikes.

Its gold plated because it has to survive the battlefield.

In IAF hands it will do wonders.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Sep 2015 20:01

shiv wrote:<SNIP> Nothing like the real thing, but it's something maybe to remind you of your childhood - you can see some treetop flying here only 1.5 minutes<SNIP>

Thanks!

I'm talking about early 90s and the Hinds used to be that yellow-green pattern. The section in first video between .34 - .38 seconds shows them flying very low and you can make out the height in context to vegetation; the chaps used to regularly get down this low. And scare kids playing cricket

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 20:12

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:<SNIP>Wow!! How low did the Jags and MiGs fly? Were they at 30 ft too? Anazing post.
Karan - typical army accommodation is in form of a 2 x 2 matrix. Two houses on ground and one above each. So, total height for the roof should be about ~30 feet. I guess you could add another 20 or so feet to it...As I said, we could clearly make out the upper torso and the oxygen mask of the pilot. So, it should be around 50-60 feet.

Brilliant data point/s - yours and shivs. How many AFs in the world routinely train, with eyeball and skills Mk1, no fancy TFR to fly and fight at 50 ft?
There are pics/videos of joyrides in the African desert or uninhabited flat areas of low flying fighters. What you are describing is an order of magnitude different.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 20:16

Vivek K wrote:Philip always likes to put down domestic efforts and that is unfair. Domestic development is full of risk - funding whims of the government of the day due to IMF diktat, brochuritis of IAF and IA leading to unrealistic tasks and decades long testing (Arjun/Akash....). So if the funding holds out, the user may not and if the user is interested, the funding may be delayed.

This all-weather criticism by some posters and unashamed praise of foreign products is ridiculous and disgraceful to the efforts of a proud nation.

Put him on ignore and you'll be better off for it.. he clearly knows diddly squat about the topic or for that matter most tech topics and just copy pastes drivel in a repetitive fashion.. UAV/UCAV development from the subsytems up is no joke and that very same defense update mentions in another link it took Israel 15 years to get to the capability despite its investment in UAV systems from much before.. Philip as usual in his cherry picking will ignore all that or won't be able to even understand such things, the world of copy paste is good enough, not the world in which you develop everything from actuators to gimbal assemblies and then iteratively improve.. in other words, there are people who do things, folks who actually do things.. and others who stand by and wail, bark, caterwaul.. best to let them be.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 29 Sep 2015 20:41

rohitvats wrote:Or, taking a ride in Arjun tank when they first joined the 43rd Armored Regiment.

Rohit saar, come on! You need to do a write up on this! (or if you already have, pliss to share)

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 30 Sep 2015 07:14

i have also seen jags fly below a overhead tank in punjab... it came low and fast and disappeared in a flash...

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 30 Sep 2015 09:31

arshyam wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Or, taking a ride in Arjun tank when they first joined the 43rd Armored Regiment.
Rohit saar, come on! You need to do a write up on this! (or if you already have, pliss to share)

I think I shared my experience on the Arjun dhaaga many moons back...the last time we had the major Arjun-Tin Can war; Brig RayC used to post on the forum. I earned my spurs on BRF during the last 'Arjun Wars'.

Will put together something soon...but the best part of having a joyride in (and on) Arjun was it came few weeks after I'd been in a T-72, T-55 and Vijayanta. And the whole thing was a world apart!

KBDagha · Post by **KBDagha** » 30 Sep 2015 09:40

I have seen Jags, Mig-27 and Mig-21 very low level flying when visiting my native place... Best was all black Mig-21 low level flying near dry river basin...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Sep 2015 09:49

i saw a video where in a pair of Hinds attacking some target in AF. they were flying like a pair of CAS aircraft would do.
one would climb high and dive steeply, firing its weapons....and then climb steeply again to circle back...as it exited, the 2nd one would dive and attack.

none of the apache hovering below treeline business or creeping around.

however they struggled at high thin air and surrounding mountains gave them a perch to shoot mass small arms, RPGs and Stingers along expected flying paths in and out of bases.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 01 Oct 2015 07:35

rohitvats wrote:..the last time we had the major Arjun-Tin Can war; Brig RayC used to post on the forum. I earned my spurs on BRF during the last 'Arjun Wars'.

True dat, glorious battle 'twas...the halls of Valhalla remember the warriors well

whatever happened to Maharaj?

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 01 Oct 2015 20:10

Saw the CABS hack flying today early evening

Some time later a jet (not sure if it was IJT or Hawk)

Any idea on what they could be testing?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 01 Oct 2015 23:21

>>Saw the CABS hack flying today early evening

Has been a testbed for FCR ie can be Uttam AESA.. or MSWS (air def EW suite)

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Oct 2015 05:45

Ramanna,pl read the Apache experiences posted earlier again,where they came under intense attack from relatively unsophisticated ground fire,took heavy losses and were used sparingly afterwards.That is the official US experience in Afghanistan,etc. 24 Apaches are woefully insufficient for the IA .We need far more LCHs and multi-role armed utility helos to absorb losses from Paki/Chinese air defences,remember our losses to SAMs at Kargil? The comments are from a v.well-informed analyst in the know of matters concerning our armed forces,not a BRF armchair general.he said "A-10 type" not A-10.

Last year, during the Afghanistan war, seven Apaches were flown in to attack Taliban fighters as part of Operation Anaconda. They all got shot up, again by RPGs and machine-gun fire. None crashed, but five were so damaged they were declared "non-mission-capable"—in other words, unable to go back into combat without extensive repair—after the first day.

In the 1999 air war over Kosovo, 24 Apache helicopters were transported to the allied base in Albania. Their arrival was anticipated by many officers and analysts as a turning point in the war. Yet, within days, two choppers crashed during training exercises. Commanders decided not to send any of them into battle; the risk of losing them to Serbian surface-to-air missiles was considered too great.

The A-10 may not be available,but the SU-25 is and there are other light attack dual purpose advanced trainers like the Hawk,Yak-130,etc. which would perform better for the IA than gold-plated Apaches. The problem is that the IAF/air forces in general turn their noses up at lowly close-support/ground attack roles preferring doing combat at higher planes! Neither do thay want armies to possess their own attack helos/close-support aircraft for the same purpose.We had not too long ago an air marshal deriding ambitious "mini-air forces"

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2014090 ... f(Textron) (Credit: Textron)
The low-cost fighters to serve tomorrow’s air forces

Fighter jets, like the Lockheed F-35, are becoming increasingly expensive. Is it possible to make something much cheaper? Angus Batey reports on a new breed of plane poised to take to the skies.

By Angus Batey
3 September 2014

At this summer's Farnborough Air Show in England, the talk was dominated by the mishaps of one plane: the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter. Due to be adopted by major air forces in the decades to come, it was supposed to be the star of the show. But in the end, the $100m-a-unit jet failed to turn up to its coming-out party after an engine fire in one of the production models grounded the fleet.

But another new jet fighter, which had taken less than two years to design, build and fly, did make it to Farnborough. The Textron Scorpion costs $20m, still not exactly a bargain by most people's standards, but a fifth of the cost of the F-35. It suggests that not every advanced defence project has to necessarily come in years late and billions over budget – and points to a new twist in not only the future of fighter-jet design, but also in more humanitarian roles that a budget jet could carry out
The Scorpion took only two years to go from concept to its first flight (Textron)

As Textron AirLand president Bill Anderson has said, the majority of work devoted to designing and developing fighters over the last several decades has focused on creating expensive, sophisticated machines. Whether it's Lockheed’s F-35 and F-22 Raptor, the Eurofighter Typhoon or the Boeing F/A-18, the designs have reflected the desire for advanced performance over affordability. Yet in today's economic environment, cost is becoming an unavoidably compelling issue for even the richest western nations.

Budget busters

Textron aren’t the only ones creating the tech to address this issue. The single jet fighter JF-17 is a Chinese design, currently being built in collaboration with its sole export customer, Pakistan, and is said to be available for around the same per-plane price of US$20m. Meanwhile, a Russian design, the Yak-130, has also been touted as a low-cost plane to carry out everything from air combat to reconnaissance, as well as train pilots.

This isn't the first time plane-makers have offered cheaper designs. The list of current and former operators of the Russian MiG-21 – a 1950s design still going strong today - reads like a who's who of the former Soviet bloc. And other nations who have more recently bought China’s modern upgrades of this old Soviet model show that cheap fighter planes are still a prized purchase for cash-strapped air forces.

The US used to create such designs as well; in the 1960s and 70s, air forces that couldn’t afford the heavy, twin-engined F-4 Phantom were offered the light, adaptable F-5 Freedom Fighter. The F-5 ended up serving in more than 30 air forces, and a reverse-engineered version built in Iran has just entered service with the Iranian Air Force.

There are three main classes of potential customers for planes like the Scorpion, which has a top speed of around 520mph. The first are air forces who want a small jet aircraft capable of carrying out a range of strike and intelligence-gathering missions, and who have either never flown combat jets before or are looking to replace older aircraft. The second are countries who already have, or are developing, high-end fighter forces, but who might buy fewer of the more expensive jets to obtain a larger number of cheaper aircraft. The third are the major military powers who will need the advanced jets for simpler missions in low-risk environments.
The Russian Yak-130 is being marketed as a light strike fighter as well as a training aircraft (AFP/Getty Images)

But how exactly do you make something as complex and technologically challenging as a fighter plane cheaper? Textron looked to its existing suppliers and used components that were already in production, rather than designing everything from scratch (the F-35, for example, uses an engine which was developed especially for the aircraft). The development team was deliberately kept very small, so Anderson and Scorpion chief designer, Dale Tutt, could make decisions quickly.

"Once we'd developed the initial design concept we set high-level design requirements for the team, and we didn't overburden them with a lot of detailed requirements," Tutt says. “We didn't have to invest time in developing, for example, a new engine or ejection seat. We were able to focus on putting those components together for the airplane and get it flying."

Patrol role

Textron also had the advantage of not having to meet the requirements of a specific nation or an air force. This meant that the development team could make changes to the design if they felt it would help the overall project.

"A great example is [British ejection-seat specialists] Martin Baker," says Anderson. "They sent a group of engineers over and they looked at our cockpit cup design, and they said, 'Well, our seat's not gonna work. It'll be several million dollars and 18 months for us to redesign it. But if you can give us about five more inches of volume - three in length and two in width – it will work.' So guess what we did? We made the cockpit tub a little bigger."
(AFP/Getty Images) (Credit: AFP/Getty Images)

The Chinese JF-17 is a supersonic fighter plane with a price tag the same as the slower Scorpion (AFP/Getty Images)

The Scorpion followed its Farnborough appearance with a demonstration at an exercise in Textron's home state of Kansas, designed to simulate the aftermath of a natural disaster (a major tornado strike) on the region. The jet wasn't used in a fighter role: instead it supplied full-motion video surveillance footage to ground commanders, in a role much like the one carried out today by drones in Afghanistan. Textron wants to enter the Scorpion in the competition the US Air Force will run next year to buy 350 jet trainers to replace its obsolete fleet of T-38s, which have been serving since the 1960s. It also points to additional roles, such as border surveillance, humanitarian assistance and maritime patrol, as jobs the jet can also comfortably carry out.

"Even among the very wealthy countries we're speaking to, everyone is recognising we have to become more economical," Anderson stresses. "No doubt we need high-end fighters: but pilots need to fly, and we can't afford the airplanes we have and to fly the pilots enough to make them combat-sufficient. I think most countries recognise that you don't always need a high-end aircraft.”
[/quote]

PS: Just two doz. Apaches are costing us upwards $1.4B.That is approx. $65 to $70m apiece! far more than the comparative costings given below.A Scorpion light attack aircraft costs just around just $20M,a MIG-29K $35M,an MKI-$60/70M,our LCH should surely cost far less.Comparative prices below from a costing site,old prices but gives a good comparison of many models.

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/geo-s ... ters-9398/
Mil Mi 17 $5.9m/$9m
Mil Mi 25 (around the same as the 35)
Mil Mi 35 $12.5m
Mil Mi 26 $10m/$12m
EC 725 Cougar $12m
MH6 little bird $860k
UH-60 ( 1979) $5.9m ( UH-60M $14m 2008)
MH-60 Seahawk $28m
Kamov Ka-52 $12m/$15m
AH-1Z Viper $10.7m
UH-1Y Venom $1.7m per unit (I believe this is an upgrade only for the existing UH-1N/AH-1W)
Bell 412 $2m +/-
Bell 429 $3.9m
EC 635 $4m
EC 175 $???? (Should hit the market 2012)
Kamov Ka-60 ( only 7 built so far $ PRICELESS)
HAL Dhruv $5.1m
Apache Longbow $56.2m
Mil Mi 28 $15/$17m

If the Apache at $1.4B for 24 is not gold-plated then perhaps platinum would be a better description?

PS:Cherry picking.A few blinkered wallahs forget that I've been advocating for long for more LCHs,etc instead of ultra-expensive Apaches.When they fail to debate intelligently,ro do their research well,they resort to personal attacks. Their puerile personal comments are of dustbin quality.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 02 Oct 2015 09:22

Did not know where else to post but the Hindu had this

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/v ... 712885.ece

Tyagi’s kin took €10.05 million: ED
...

Agency attaches prime properties estimated at Rs.6.2 crore

The former Air Chief Marshal S.P. Tyagi’s cousins and their firms received €10.05 million in kickbacks from AgustaWestland-UK through middlemen to help swing the Rs. 3,700-crore VVIP chopper deal in its favour, the Enforcement Directorate has said.

...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Oct 2015 09:30

deejay wrote:Did not know where else to post but the Hindu had this

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/v ... 712885.ece

~~This is particularly ironic. Tyagi was the only non fighter pilot to become CAS, and his cousins are embroiled in this scam.~~

Viv S wrote:
You're thinking of ACM Fali Homi Major.

post edited

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 02 Oct 2015 09:47

shiv wrote:This is particularly ironic. Tyagi was the only non fighter pilot to become CAS, and his cousins are embroiled in this scam.

You're thinking of ACM Fali Homi Major.

srin · Post by **srin** » 02 Oct 2015 09:49

shiv wrote:
deejay wrote:Did not know where else to post but the Hindu had this

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/v ... 712885.ece
This is particularly ironic. Tyagi was the only non fighter pilot to become CAS, and his cousins are embroiled in this scam.

I thought that was ACM Fali Major not SP Tyagi ...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Oct 2015 09:59

Viv S wrote:
shiv wrote:This is particularly ironic. Tyagi was the only non fighter pilot to become CAS, and his cousins are embroiled in this scam.
You're thinking of ACM Fali Homi Major.

Thanks for the correction. I need to edit out my post which I will do.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Oct 2015 10:02

srin wrote: I thought that was ACM Fali Major not SP Tyagi ...

You are right. My bad. I have edited my post.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 02 Oct 2015 23:35

Tyagi-ji is also the one who initally held up Aakash's induction and later agreed to induct but reduced the order in favour of spyder.

Once retired, promptly became the india sales head for spyder.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 03 Oct 2015 03:06

ACM SP Tyagi actually is a fighter pilot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shashindra_Pal_Tyagi

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Oct 2015 03:16

The Turkey thread, now the AMCA. Vanished? Grrrrrrr.....

Parrikar cuts Gordian knot to boost Tejas line

Meanwhile, alongside the Tejas Mark II, ADA would also be working on the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), an indigenous, fifth-generation fighter already on the drawing board. ADA engineers point out that advanced technologies being developed for AMCA would inevitably leak into the Tejas Mark II, making the light fighter more advanced than currently anticipated.

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 03 Oct 2015 08:17

rohitvats wrote:
shiv wrote:<SNIP> Nothing like the real thing, but it's something maybe to remind you of your childhood - you can see some treetop flying here only 1.5 minutes<SNIP>
Thanks!

I'm talking about early 90s and the Hinds used to be that yellow-green pattern. The section in first video between .34 - .38 seconds shows them flying very low and you can make out the height in context to vegetation; the chaps used to regularly get down this low. And scare kids playing cricket

You mean this yellow-green pattern

Article

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 03 Oct 2015 17:55

IAF wants over 100 Rafale or similar jets

NEW DELHI: Indian Air Force on Saturday said it would need at least six squadrons comprising 108 Rafale or similar jets to shore up its capabilities as it hoped that the contract for 36 French fighter aircraft would be inked by year-end.

Noting that two squadron of 18 Rafale jets each might not be enough, Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha said his force would like to have at least six squadrons of the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA).

He hinted that even though the Rafale is the front-runner, India may go in for another aircraft with similar capabilities "if the deal is good".

"Definitely, we would like to have MMRCA variety of aircraft. At least about six squadrons to my mind. Let us see, there may be some other alternatives as well," Raha said addressing a press conference ahead of the Air Force Day on October 8.

He was replying to questions about the possibility of India Air Force wanting more than the 36 Rafales under a government to government deal announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his trip to France in April.

Asked if the additional four squadrons of aircraft will be Rafales or if there is a possibility of other players getting into play, Raha said, "I may wish to have Rafale. But there are equally good aircraft. So if the deal is good and the government decides we need to have six of similar squadron...."

"There are alternatives. I cannot say I only want Rafale. I want capability of Rafale type aircraft. So the government will have a look at it and based on urgency and the type of contract is signed with Dassault Aviation, further decisions may be taken by the government. I cannot predict," he said.

Admitting that the IAF is currently "short" in terms of authorized strength of 42 squadrons, Raha said more aircraft are needed to replace many more squadrons in coming years.

"The need is there. As Air Force, we will like to have more of these (MMRCA) but it will have to be viable in terms of cost, in terms transfer of technology and in terms of Make in India policy that the government is trying to implement.

"So if those terms and conditions are good, then I am sure we will be able to get more. But as of now we are looking at 36," he said.

With the government cancelling the multi-billion tender for 126 MMRCA, there is renewed hope in the aviation industry that India may go in for fresh bids to fill up the gaps.

From Swedish firm Saab to US' Lockheed Martin and the France's Dassault Aviation, most of the global aircraft manufactures have offered their jets in line with the government's push for 'Make in India'.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Oct 2015 18:19

Wasn't there another article where Arup Raha is quoted as saying that they will take Tejas provided the production rate goes up and some capabilities are demonstrated.

If you believe the media then Arup Raha has said two different things. Obviously there some obfuscation somewhere. But where?

The Rafale deal is not looking very healthy as of now. I would be surprised if any of the other contenders were invited again simply because HAL has the skills but not the spare capacity, and private players do not have the skills and are yet to build capacity - which is something that will take 3-4 years at least.

I am inclined to suspect that the above news story of Raha saying 108 Rafale is fekulal. Raha was quoted 2 weeks ago as wanting Su 35 IIRC. Or was he quoted as wanting F-35. So many 35s I can't recall.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 03 Oct 2015 18:43

^^^ F 18 Doc sa'ab (My guess!). Doors are being opened for the SHornet?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Oct 2015 20:31

Or f16...did you notice how much the LM ceo was leaning towards modi when they met? The US ambassador has also been making some noise..and let us not forget the gripen...although neither of these truly match raffle capability wise

I fear that hal is nowhere near mk1 foc std..conversely, perhaps foc is right around the corner and firangis with paid media are creating fud

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 03 Oct 2015 20:41

If furriners are circling Delhi either the Rafale negotiations are not going well or the Tejas is close to induction. Could be both. Do not read too much to Lockheed CEO meeting Modi. Boeing was not pressing for the Hornet, or we do not see Typhoon or Gripens pimps circling over Delhi as well

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Oct 2015 21:00

Swedes have been quite active, even fadnavis was in linkppen and their dm made a quick visit...let us see if merkel and her contingent make any noises about the phoon

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Oct 2015 22:22

we should buy 36 F-18, and 36 typhoons to complement the 36 rafales so the IAF then has 108 rafale type jets.

at least this mmrca circus discussion will stop.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 03 Oct 2015 23:37

ET: IAF forced to adopt 2-aircraft training for pilots: Arup Raha

IAF forced to adopt 2-aircraft training for pilots: Arup Raha

NEW DELHI: With the indigenous Intermediary Jet Trainer (IJT) nowhere in sight, the Indian Air Force has been forced to adopt a new training process under which rookie pilots will train on two aircraft rather than three at present, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha said today.

Under the new programme, pilots will now be trained on Pilatus PC-7 Turbo Trainer and Advanced Jet Trainer (AJT) Hawk aircraft, Raha said.

Kiran, the intermediary jet trainer used currently, will be phased out in the next two-three years.

Raha said as of now ten cadets are being trained on Pilatus and the results are "extremely encouraging".

"With the induction of PC7, almost 75 of them with 38 more on the way, and as you get the HTT 40, indigenously prepared by the HAL for the BTA (Basic Trainer Aircraft) role, we will be well on our way in making up the deficiencies in pilot training.

"We are getting a few more AJT (Advanced Jet Trainer) Hawk aircraft and the training of amateur [immature] pilots will meet our requirements in the future," Raha said.

"Having said that, we don't have the IJT, which is supposed to be indigenously built and supposed to replace Kiran which is going to retire in about two-three years time. Since the replacement is not coming, we are already working on a three-stages two-aircraft programme. The scheme has already been put in place," Raha said.

The HJT-16 Kiran is an Indian two-seat Intermediate Jet Trainer built by Hindustan Aeronautics.

Last year, the CAG had slammed Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) for the 14-year delay in developing the intermediate jet trainer (IJT). The audit watchdog came down heavily on HAL for "adversely affecting" the Stage-II training of IAF pilots - who are forced to train on obsolete and ageing Kiran aircraft - by failing to deliver the Sitara IJT till now.

The Chief of Air Staff was addressing the media ahead of the 83rd Anniversary of the Indian Air Force.

Raha added that Swiss-made Pilatus, has a reasonable flight envelope to substitute the training that was planned on IGT. To make up for the non-availability of the IJT in this fashion is a "well-accepted norm" across the world.

When asked whether the government has given up on IGT, Raha said he has to "choose between a hard place and a rock" and has "no option but to utilise whatever is available and push through a three-stage programme".

With Kiran retiring in two-three years, it was important to look at stage II of training programmes, he said, adding that the Pilatus is large enough to accommodate the syllabus IAF covers in stage 2.

"So, already 10 cadets are training on Stage II on PC7 and the results are so far extremely encouraging. And it is not because that we do not want the IJT...(but) IJT is well behind schedule. If you go by the history, it is already a decade behind," Raha said.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 03 Oct 2015 23:42

ET: Rafale deal 'hopefully' by year-end: IAF chief Arup Raha

Rafale deal 'hopefully' by year-end: IAF chief Arup Raha

NEW DELHI: Admitting that there is a shortage of fighters, the Indian Air Force ( IAF) chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, said on Saturday he is "hopeful" that the deal for purchasing 36 Rafale jets off-the-shelf from France will be finalised by the year-end.

He said that the negotiations for the deal, finalised during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to France in April, was progressing well.

"I am hopeful that the negotiations for the deal will not go beyond this year," the air chief said at the annual conference ahead of Air Force Day on October 8.

"This is my feeling," he added.

The air chief said it will take two to three years for the first of two Rafale squadrons to be operational.

He also said that at least six squadrons of medium multi-role combat aircraft were required, adding that the decision on acquiring these will be taken by the government.