Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Locked
deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4024
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by deejay »

Singha wrote:The state government has suggested setting up new ALGs at Koloriang (Kurung Kumey) and Anini (Dibang Valley district). The existing eight ALGs that were mostly constructed in the wake of the Chinese aggression of 1962 are located at Tuting, Mechuka, Aalo, Tawang, Wallong, Ziro, Vijoynagar and Pasighat. While the Army initially operated Dakota and Otter aircrafts to these ALGs, it has been using AN-32 aircrafts to these ALGs since 1984. - See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... RU0yw.dpuf
Most of these ALGs are not in use of fixed wing and will come in use by AN 32s once extension is executed.

Singha sir has missed Daparijo in this lot. Aalo will be Along. Mechuka is straight out of Swiss Alps picture postcard and will be tourist hit for all seasons.

Anini will be new, it is high up on the hill side but there is space for an ALG. A beautiful, high waterfall just before Anini should be IMO, among the highest in India.

Vijaynagar, it is wonderful gateway to Namdafa forest reserve. Even, otherwise all these places are something out of a dream. I fell in love with Arunachal. Lots of beautiful and some very challenging treks. Excellent white water rafting.

Added Later: RV, AN 32s generally operate from Mohanbari (next door to Chabua). Mohanbari is also the Dibrugarh airport. Entire ALGs of Arunachal is manned by IAF staff posted at Mohanbari.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by rohitvats »

deejay wrote:<SNIP> Added Later: RV, AN 32s generally operate from Mohanbari (next door to Chabua). Mohanbari is also the Dibrugarh airport. Entire ALGs of Arunachal is manned by IAF staff posted at Mohanbari.
deejay - I spent my 10th class holidays post my board examinations at Mohanbari! An elder cousin brother was posted to the ASC Air Maintenance Unit next door...which supplies the stuff your heptr boys and An-32s carried to army posts in the sector.

Used to sit on the roof of my brother's CO's house which fell right below the approach Mi-8 chaps took to the LZ. It was amazing fun, especially in the evenings...the lights at the front used for landing is pretty powerful.
deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4024
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by deejay »

rohitvats wrote:
deejay wrote:<SNIP> Added Later: RV, AN 32s generally operate from Mohanbari (next door to Chabua). Mohanbari is also the Dibrugarh airport. Entire ALGs of Arunachal is manned by IAF staff posted at Mohanbari.
deejay - I spent my 10th class holidays post my board examinations at Mohanbari! An elder cousin brother was posted to the ASC Air Maintenance Unit next door...which supplies the stuff your heptr boys and An-32s carried to army posts in the sector.

Used to sit on the roof of my brother's CO's house which fell right below the approach Mi-8 chaps took to the LZ. It was amazing fun, especially in the evenings...the lights at the front used for landing is pretty powerful.
Yaa, I was there again last October, my course mate was commanding my Unit. Nice feel. It is still the same. Chabua has changed a lot.

The ASC unit next door was always a part of our celebrations as we practically worked together. I knew an officer posted there very well. This was pre Op Parakram.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by shiv »

*deleted*
Found what I was looking for
Last edited by shiv on 14 Oct 2015 05:23, edited 1 time in total.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Viv S »

American F-35, Russian PAK-FA Are India’s Fifth Generation Fighter Options
Source : Pinaki Bharracharya with bureau inputs ~ Dated : Tuesday, October 13, 2015

India may have delayed participating in the Russian Fifth generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project to explore other options, namely the Lockheed Martin built F-35.

A talk in the corridors of South Block, headquarters of the ministry of defence (MoD) goes that the reason the IAF and the MoD is seeking to reduce the numbers of the Russian FGFAs is to have an option of purchasing another variety of fifth generation aircraft.

A former senior air force officer told Defenseworld.net, “they have made the offer indirectly,” referring to the American F-35. He refused to elaborate on what that ‘indirect offer’ was. Some other sources opined that ever since the US lost out on the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) contract, it had been trying to get India interested in the F-35.

The ministry’s response to the American feelers is not yet known. But the fact remains that the prototype development contract for the Russian FGFA, PAK-FA or T-50, has not yet been concluded despite pressure from Russia to sign the contract. In December 2010, India had earmarked $295 million for getting the project started. The prototype development contract entails an investment of US$350 million.

India slowed down its participation in the prototype development and reduced its original order for 166 single-seater and 48 two-seater fighters to 127 single-seater PAK FA which was further bought down to about 35-55 units.

The latest information is that India might order the PAK-FA in a fly away condition after Russia completes its development schedule of the aircraft putting in all the technologies and weapons it originally promised including super-cruise and a high degree of radar immunity.

Recently, Defenseworld.net reported that the IAF has expressed the desire to have some of its pilots flying the aircraft in Russia. This is to familiarise them with the aircraft and discover what would be the elements needed for the Indian variety.

The former IAF officer opined that having already sunk money in the PAK-FA project, India would not want to opt out of the project, however given that China has forged ahead with its own fifth generation fighter project, India may like to have more than one FGFA option in the interest of speedy aircraft acquisition.

The US government is busy fulfilling orders from F-35 partner countries and may look at new customers a few years from now by which time India might be ready to look this futuristic aircraft.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2405
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Thakur_B »

✈Anantha Krishnan M✈ ‏@writetake 21h21 hours ago
#HAL #IJT #Sitara All eyes on HAL as IJT all set for the crucial spin and stall test. @gopalsutar @armingindia
https://twitter.com/writetake/status/653793270380662784
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3801
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Paul »

http://www.defenceiq.com/air-forces-and ... cipates-e/
SAAB still chasing India with Gripen, anticipates EW variant
Contributor: Georg Mader

Saab believes India could still be a customer for the JAS 39 Gripen fighter despite the country’s apparent decision to purchase the Dassault Rafale fleet, according to Lennart Sindahl, the company’s senior executive vice president and head of SAAB Aeronautics.
“We’re looking into India again,” Sindahl confirmed. “They have for the moment decided for a direct buy of 36 Rafales and the former ‘commercial’ tender [MMRCA, for 126] is cancelled. However, they need a large amount of additional aircraft – several squadrons, in fact.”
Sindahl also made reference to other foreign customers in Saab’s line-of-sight. Among them are Thailand – a present Gripen operator, which is seeking more aircraft – Malaysia and Indonesia (both for fighters and airborne early warning platforms), and Colombia, which has declared an interest in replacing its IAI Kfir C-10 fleet.
Meanwhile, long-term commercial plans are assessing the viability of converting a variant of Gripen into an electronic warfare (EW) variant similar to how Boeing has adapted the F/A-18F Super Hornet into the EA-18G Growler.
“If you look into future combat scenarios, if you have a high-end air force with a broad threat situation, something like a ‘Growler Gripen’ would make a real difference,” Sindahl said.
“That‘s what we’re looking into, and that’s why it’s so good to have Brazil on board with the F-model.”
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

An EA-35E (Gripen) sounds a fairly bad idea and most likely a shot in the dark by SAAB. Modern EW systems (digital, actively scanned arrays particularly those employing high power semi-conductors) are high power consuming and you can finally enclose a wideband jamming capability in a much smaller form factor but the power requirements are huge. The Next Generation Jammer consumes 2-3 times the power of the current ALQ-99 pods and that means more efficient RAT's. So no multiple EFT's (all round coverage plus heavy EW kit). With under 8000 pounds/3500kg of internal fuel a Gripen-E (largest Gripen till date) based Jammer aircraft would have abysmal range and loiter time, something critical for a stand-off jammer.

If you go for a smaller system you then force a customer to buy a large number of jammer aircraft and you also subject yourself to enemy air defenses because you cannot stand off as much. A half baked idea at best!!
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Indranil »

Well, your points are strong and most would agree.

1. Gripen's counter-arguments: a) yes, but better than no fighter-based jammer and b) nobody with a fleet of F-18s is going to buy a few GRipen-based jammers. In the same vein, nobody with a fleet of Gripens will buy a few jammers based on some other platform.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20787
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Karan M »

India even used MiG-21s and Canberras with a couple of pods for jamming.. no reason why a Gripen can't be used for jamming.. it wont be as effective loiter or generation wise as a Growler, but it can be useful even so against most tactical QRSAM/SHORAD/VSHORAD threats..if not SA-3XX types.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

indranilroy wrote:Well, your points are strong and most would agree.

1. Gripen's counter-arguments: a) yes, but better than no fighter-based jammer and b) nobody with a fleet of F-18s is going to buy a few GRipen-based jammers. In the same vein, nobody with a fleet of Gripens will buy a few jammers based on some other platform.

Then its not a Growler in its Stand Off EA/EW duties especially when the G has a fairly complex wideband jamming profile requirement, and the Gripen family already has jamming pods that it deploys that focus in the sort of threat one would want in an escort for example. It may make sense for Sweden (although If I were them I'd mount pods on a business jet) but it has nothing going vis-à-vis the IAF' and its decision for a fighter. The IAF already operates much larger aircraft with more internal fuel and performance making them much better candidates for stand off persistent electronic attack especially when the spectrum that requires jamming is only getting larger with digital, software defined electronics and networks that have opened up a large portion of the RF domain that would require suppression.

In that case it makes just more sense to just add the existing pods on Gripen's as and when required. Integrating and converting a fighter to a stand off wideband multi-mission EA/EW costs about the same, regardless of the size of the aircraft so the argument that such an example would make sense for a potential customer is rather weak in my opinion particularly if SAAB thinks that it can be something that makes the Gripen for IAF more attractive. Now ofcourse if Sweden was to self-fund the development, induct a Gripen_G someone may buy it, but then most of the market the Gripen caters too is the cost-conscious customer that may not want to buy single mission jets and may prefer simply to use the existing EW options integrated into the Gripen-E or pod mounted extensions that the Gripen flies with.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Indranil »

I don't think he was addressing it towards IAF. After the first paragraph he moves on. I think with EW, he is referring to Brazil.

If there is any aircraft that IAF should modify for the EW, it should the MKIs.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5412
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by srai »

Anyone know of the IAF's thinking on whether it plans to acquire dedicated fighter jammers, like on modified Su-30MKI? In all the recent wars the U.S. Allies have fought, U.S. Has pretty much provided most of this specialized support through EA-6 and now F-18G. According to some reports at the time, one of the reasons for the F-117 being shot down was due to unavailability of EA-6s to help provide ingress/egress coverage. They have lost only a handful of planes to SAMs in all of those conflicts because of such specialized support. Would be a huge force multiplier to induct a squadron of these EW MKIs. Money well worth spending on.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by vasu raya »

Swedish Jammer pods on the Embraer ERJ-145 jet, the same one used by DRDO's AEW&CS?
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by shiv »

Reading a link posted recently I became aware of yet another design philosophy difference between the USA and Russia based on the type of wars they tend to fight. (US fights wars far away using aircraft. Russia plans for land surface wars in areas contiguous with its territory. Unless India starts sending expeditions to Africa or the far east Indians wars are going to be over Pakistan or Tibet - i.e. more like Russian wars.

Let me say where I am going.

The US has tended to design electronics to be carried on planes for far away military expeditions. The power of those electronics - say jammers and the size of antennas are restricted by the size of the aircraft. What Russia does is to place oversize mega-power jammers and antennas on land where power supply is not a constraint - huge trucks with diesel generators, If we can scan and jam airspace 200-400 km over Pakistan and Tibet - sitting on some convenient high point we need not be looking at putting puny jammers on our payload restricted aircraft. Just a thought. Don;t know if that is feasible though
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20787
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Karan M »

Thats airspace jamming but we need to jam ground based AD too. For that you need aircraft based systems for LOS as well.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Singha »

there has been a discussion of the two next-gen wingtip jammers on Su30 + the huge centerline pod jammer.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker. ... ocId181281

the Su24, Platypus and Backfire/Bear/Blackjack will also have very powerful EW kits.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

deleted
Last edited by brar_w on 15 Oct 2015 13:37, edited 1 time in total.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

@ Shiv, there is no real shortage of power Jam from even airborne assets thanks to advances in modern RAT's over the last many decades. Each of the NGJ pods for example had to demonstrate a minimum of 60KW and as high as 90 KW power production at the desired altitude and airspeed (more than triple of the old 70's and 80's era AN/ALQ-99 for example). Each one of the modern RAT pods can produce around 70% of the electricity produced by the entire F-22 for example. Even with gallium Nitride based antennas, I doubt the current Next Generation Jammer will require that much power, so they really aren't restricted by power on modern RAT's anymore. Under the heavy loadout condition when the NGJ is completely fielded the load out is most likely going to be a three pod setup (2 Inc 1 and 1 Inc2 , or 1+1+1) which from a power/electricity perspective is still 2-3 times as large a potential footprint as any ground based system currently fielded or in the works. Only other ground or air based systems that I can foresee that would require larger power generation would be Directed Energy Weapons that even with say a 60% effecieincy model, may require anywhere from 300-500 KW power generators, but even that is possible with existing RAT technology as long as long as the platform performance is not a factor (such as a gunship for example). Air based platforms also have high mobility so can get into a good position vis-à-vis the air or ground threat based on the ESM data they process or receive allowing them to more optimally use the jamming potential available to them while still having enough power to stand off. In addition to the proliferation of sophisticated passive EW sollutions fleet wide, modern solid state and particularly AESA based jammers allow you to focus your energy on a very narrow range depending upon the threat, and the computing in modern systems allows you to quickly hop and keep up with the thread. Narrower and more channelized jamming, coupled with constant ESM data means greater range for the desired effect.

http://atgi.us/pdf/news/Aviation-Week-HiRAT.pdf

Ground based jamming is quite good, and of course a layer of added complexity for the opposition to grapple with but as Karan has mentioned it has different requirements and performs a different tasks where it cannot take over the full spectrum of the airborne electronic attack mission. It is also preemptive jamming where you flood a given RF with available power. Modern stand off airborne jamming is shifting away from preemptively jamming an RF to managing the electronic warfare environment and having the flexibility to maneuver along with the opponent. This has been largely driven by the sophistication of ESM techniques and equipment (also available to the opponent) where you have to have the adaptability to switch within a very wide band and also carry both organically and though your networks the ability to determine the emissions, chart their source, run an analysis on the nature of the emission, check your database, seek permission and then attack that emission. With Electronically scanned arrays, and software defined radios and data links that emission can rapidly change and the loop needs to be completed essentially in real time to keep up with the threat. This has forced dedicated EW/EA communities to essentially become managers of EW where a majority of the time is spent looking at the threat, and figuring out how it is adopting and less time is spent in brute force preemptive jamming mode due to the proliferation of sophisticate ESM kit thanks to the general advances in the electronics field. These ESM systems have made brute force preemptive jamming tough since by its very nature it isn't flexible or wideband enough (obviously) and it opens up the jamming payload to countermeasures and obviously to targeting. preemptively jamming an RF is easy and required in areas where the opponent is technology restricted and inferior. In Afghanistan it was easily accomplished at times with an empty back seat since there was no ESM based management of EW. From ground based systems the network required to develop comprehensive, real time wide band capability is going to be a challenge (hence most systems are largely defensive) especially when you throw in comms and data links into the equation. You'll also struggle getting data in through non LOS links amidst EW/EA environment that the enemy has a vote in, and finally the feedback loop will most likely be longer.

You have data links now that cover a huge portion of the spectrum, command and control that is covering portions of the military and commercial spectrum, AEW aircrafts operating in the UHF, L band and S band, Fighters operating in the X band with heavy computing and frequency hopping, missiles spread over a wider range, drones being controlled by something different and on top of that you have LAN and WANs on top of SATCOM and other air to air surveillance through the VHF airborne radars - With that much of the spectrum covered, you need agility to contest it and that requires a lot different capability than simply carrying a pod and spreading a lot of energy on a pre defined portion of the spectrum as you got away with earlier since no one was really dominant outside of the mid band and when commms were not as advanced as systems were not as integrated and the suppression of the fringes of the spectrum was easy enough that most did not look to rely on that side of the EMS. Now there is a blend of civil and military, and hybrid non-state warfare is leveraging the commercial in ways not done before (think IED's). You also have the domain of Cyber Electronic Warfare that is focused on network penetration and network manipulation as opposed to traditional electronic warfare. All this requires a lot of flexibility to handle as an advanced opponent say like a China is investing in all areas within the EMS, from radars, to comms, data links and integrated command and control that would naturally leverage unmanned aviation through the LAN's and WAN's in addition to tactical data links. Air based EW provides you that level of flexibility (agility, and the ability to get to a threat), allows for shorter LOS data links to feed the jammer with the EMS Awareness information (Stand off jammers have high quality RWR's and other kit but they still require EW data being fed into them from sources much closer to the emitter) and allows you to jam a mobile threat better since you can get in a lot closer (they still fly at mach .8-.9 ish). It also allows you to mount various payloads given the flexible nature of the threat that you may have to suppress at any given time and this is especially true when the adversary has long range air-defenses that are both mobile and that can be used to set up access challenges over strategic areas relatively quickly. Ground based defensive EW is of course important area of investment, but it does not deal with a lot of the challenges that still remain hence even Russia is investing in pods for the flanker, and even Helicopter based EW and other larger more strategic assets.
Last edited by brar_w on 15 Oct 2015 19:50, edited 9 times in total.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Viv S »

shiv wrote:Reading a link posted recently I became aware of yet another design philosophy difference between the USA and Russia based on the type of wars they tend to fight. (US fights wars far away using aircraft. Russia plans for land surface wars in areas contiguous with its territory. Unless India starts sending expeditions to Africa or the far east Indians wars are going to be over Pakistan or Tibet - i.e. more like Russian wars.
That's a gross oversimplification for two reasons.

One, the US military may fight wars in places across continents, but its supported by a network of global bases rather than operating out of mainland USA. In Middle East that may be Turkey, Bahrain, Oman, UAE or Kuwait. In Europe, Norway, UK and Poland are on the frontline. In E/SE Asia - Japan, South Korea, Philippines & Singapore (as well as Australia & Guam). And in the IOR, there's Diego Garcia. Point being, there are relatively few places in the world that remain 'far away' from a US base.

Two, Russia is such a vast country that their military's responsibilities almost resemble expeditionary warfare. As a result, the RuAF is equipped with the 'heaviest' fleet of aircraft in the world (even more so than the USAF). Between the Su-27, Su-30, Su-34, Su-35, Tu-22M, Tu-160 and the upcoming PAK FA & PAK DA, they'll be fielding a fleet with very impressive reach.

And neither of them are afflicted with a blindspot in other areas. The Russian offensive systems are fairly potent (read: SAP-14, Kh-58U) and area defence still remains a major area of focus for the US, especially on the naval component (AEGIS; SM-3/SM-6).

Both aspects are relevant to us in India as well. We need long range SAM systems to challenge PAF/PLAAF incursions/operations, but you also need powerful SEAD/DEAD capabilities to take on Chinese AD systems which already include AESA-based S-300 class systems and may well include the Russian S-400 in the days to come.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by shiv »

I have seen the claim that Russian land based radars radiate enough power to simply burn through any airborne jammer that may be fielded by the US or NATO. That sort of power is difficult to lug in an aircraft. True or not - that is an interesting concept that I have not heard the US implement- although recently I read (maybe here on BRF) about a US tank transporter or something whose engine can double up as generator when not being used for tank transportation. The Russian have been doing that for decades.

I think that model has been emulated in India when we look at the number of support vehicles for Akash units.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

Deleted
Last edited by brar_w on 16 Oct 2015 07:48, edited 1 time in total.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

shiv wrote:I have seen the claim that Russian land based radars radiate enough power to simply burn through any airborne jammer that may be fielded by the US or NATO. That sort of power is difficult to lug in an aircraft. True or not - that is an interesting concept that I have not heard the US implement- although recently I read (maybe here on BRF) about a US tank transporter or something whose engine can double up as generator when not being used for tank transportation. The Russian have been doing that for decades.

I think that model has been emulated in India when we look at the number of support vehicles for Akash units.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7088&p=1916944#p1916944
Avinash R
BRFite
Posts: 1973
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 19:59

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Avinash R »

What Boeing May 'Make In India': Fighter Plane, Choppers
http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/boeing-exclusive-1232893
All India | Vikram Chandra | Updated: October 16, 2015 15:40 IST

NEW DELHI: India's search for a modern new fighter after the modified Rafale deal has just seen a new twist. The world's biggest airplane manufacturer Boeing has said that it could 'make in India' a state of the art fighter plane.

Boeing makes planes like the F-18 Hornet which was once in the race for India's contract but lost to the French Rafale.
SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5796
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by SBajwa »

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/busine ... 46759.html

New Delhi, October 16
American aviation giant Boeing today said it plans to assemble either its Chinook heavy-lift helicopters or Apache attack choppers in India even as it gears to offer the possibility of manufacturing a fighter jet aircraft in the country.

"We are much closer to have assembly (of) one of those airplanes (choppers) here. That will play out and that's our strategy. This market is too important, capability is too high and commitment is significant and that kind of commitment is important for us," Boeing Chairman Jim McNerney McNerney said.

India had last month signed a contract for 15 Chinook and 22 Apache helicopters. "Large sections of the Chinook fuselage are already manufactured in India and discussions are ongoing with our Indian partners to make Apache parts," Boeing India President Pratyush Kumar had then said.

At a seminar organised here by Boeing, McNerney hoped that India will over the next couple of years call for bids for a fighter aircraft.

"Our approach is going to be to take a current, state-of-the-art fighter and bid. The quantities are uncertain...Our bid will include a proposal to make the plane here," he said.

"The value to India is a very modern production system integrated to make a very sophisticated machine. That kind of industrial base capability is as important as the fighter itself. These modern manufacturing techniques can go into many different industries," he said.

Several foreign aircraft manufacturers have offered to build their fighter planes in India after the government scrapped the global tender for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA).

While India is in talks with France for a formal agreement for off-the-shelf purchase of 36 Rafale jets (two squadrons), Indian Air Force wants at least six more MMRCA-type squadrons.

The Boeing chairman also said that on the defence side, the Indian and US governments have to decide the issue of technology sharing.

"Leaving that aside, and generally speaking, the more cutting edge the technology, then less the sharing will be," he said even as he voiced support for 'Make In India'. — PTI

Boeing plans to assemble Chinook or Apache choppers in India

New Delhi, October 16
American aviation giant Boeing today said it plans to assemble either its Chinook heavy-lift helicopters or Apache attack choppers in India even as it gears to offer the possibility of manufacturing a fighter jet aircraft in the country.

"We are much closer to have assembly (of) one of those airplanes (choppers) here. That will play out and that's our strategy. This market is too important, capability is too high and commitment is significant and that kind of commitment is important for us," Boeing Chairman Jim McNerney McNerney said.

India had last month signed a contract for 15 Chinook and 22 Apache helicopters. "Large sections of the Chinook fuselage are already manufactured in India and discussions are ongoing with our Indian partners to make Apache parts," Boeing India President Pratyush Kumar had then said.

At a seminar organised here by Boeing, McNerney hoped that India will over the next couple of years call for bids for a fighter aircraft.

"Our approach is going to be to take a current, state-of-the-art fighter and bid. The quantities are uncertain...Our bid will include a proposal to make the plane here," he said.

"The value to India is a very modern production system integrated to make a very sophisticated machine. That kind of industrial base capability is as important as the fighter itself. These modern manufacturing techniques can go into many different industries," he said.

Several foreign aircraft manufacturers have offered to build their fighter planes in India after the government scrapped the global tender for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA).

While India is in talks with France for a formal agreement for off-the-shelf purchase of 36 Rafale jets (two squadrons), Indian Air Force wants at least six more MMRCA-type squadrons.

The Boeing chairman also said that on the defence side, the Indian and US governments have to decide the issue of technology sharing.

"Leaving that aside, and generally speaking, the more cutting edge the technology, then less the sharing will be," he said even as he voiced support for 'Make In India'. — PTI
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

Boeing needs to first get its act together and ensure that it has a fighter production capacity in the US before it looks at setting something up in India. If they don't win the T-X, they wont have a line in St Louis into the 2020's, and its a long wait for next generation fighters.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by vasu raya »

Does the F-18 use Moog's actuators?
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19291
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by NRao »

"Our approach is going to be to take a current, state-of-the-art fighter and bid. The quantities are uncertain...Our bid will include a proposal to make the plane here," he said.
He seems to be following LM's proposal from MMRCA. Take the latest they have and build on that an -I version and plunk it in India.

Doable if things get done in the US. But in India it will be a very tall task, doable though.

Even then:
"Leaving that aside, and generally speaking, the more cutting edge the technology, then less the sharing will be," he said even as he voiced support for 'Make In India'.
Key. How far is India willing to go? And what are her needs?

Stumbling block among pretty much all US based companies:
However, he said that some things needed to change, especially the tax regime and long delays in dispute resolution.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by vasu raya »

Any I version, the composites factor has to go up overall, stealth and composites supply chain maybe key differentiators looking at the Tejas & the MKI
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19291
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by NRao »

Any serious effort to "Make in India" for such a product has a very long way to go.

One of the major issues is that India, even today, is not moving as fast as others moved years ago.

As a result, as time goes by, the delta between India and a company like Boeing would only increase. As far as Boeing itself is concerned (and I guess most other aerospace majors too), the sad part is, that it has a very healthy contingent of NRIs!!!!!
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by vasu raya »

once they finalize such a significant aerospace project they can go back and seal the US-TSP nuclear deal, though they already have waited enough to finish the implementation of Indo-US nuclear deal
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Indranil »

brar_w wrote:Boeing needs to first get its act together and ensure that it has a fighter production capacity in the US before it looks at setting something up in India. If they don't win the T-X, they wont have a line in St Louis into the 2020's, and its a long wait for next generation fighters.
+1
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Viv S »

Large sections of the Chinook fuselage are already manufactured in India
Is this true? And if so, by whom? HAL? TASL?
member_27581
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by member_27581 »

indranilroy wrote:
brar_w wrote:Boeing needs to first get its act together and ensure that it has a fighter production capacity in the US before it looks at setting something up in India. If they don't win the T-X, they wont have a line in St Louis into the 2020's, and its a long wait for next generation fighters.
+1
But wouldnt that make the case stronger for them to broaden their customer base and push for orders abroad..less dependence on the single customer.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by brar_w »

ranjan.rao wrote: But wouldnt that make the case stronger for them to broaden their customer base and push for orders abroad..less dependence on the single customer.

It would make them look at diversification, but shipping a production line abroad does nothing for their fighters production base in St. Louis. They have a top notch design base there that is now probably among the best units in the US, but production is a different matter. What they have offered here is just a shot in the dark that they kind off have to do for their shareholders just like the Lockheed's, SAAB's, EurfighterGbmh etc that have also made such unsolicited offers. My point was that if they do not win the T-X their fighter production base will vanish and only a design base will remain and that is what is more important for them compared to pushing for such long shots.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by shiv »

Folks Allah willed that I should watch this. I normally don't
http://social.ndtv.com/vikramchandra/permalink/301861

When it appears online please do watch. Good program.

Parikkar is the most intelligent Defence minister I have seen
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20787
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Karan M »

shiv wrote:Folks Allah willed that I should watch this. I normally don't
http://social.ndtv.com/vikramchandra/permalink/301861

When it appears online please do watch. Good program.

Parikkar is the most intelligent Defence minister I have seen
that's high praise sir. hope he lives up to it! video isn't up yet..only found this very interesting snippet :lol:

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/m ... ing/387266
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20787
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by Karan M »

I think i had posted this one before.
http://www.bel-india.com/?q=IACCS
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Post by SaiK »

LCH dhaaga is locked down.. but LCH is near certification.

Image

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 413502.cms
LCH nears certification, Parrikar visits facility on Friday
Locked