How do you PM on this forumshiv wrote: 1.I need a son
2.For that I need a wife
3. but the wife should be exactly 5 feet sevenand a half, should weigh 52 kg and be guaranteed not to get high BP after age 50
Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Lisa: The PM feature does not work properly. Your best bet to contact Hakeemji is to check his profile if he has an email address listed. If not, ask him.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Indian Air Force clears 12 national highways as emergency landing strips
http://www.firstpost.com/india/indian-a ... 72615.html
http://www.firstpost.com/india/indian-a ... 72615.html
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Indian Air Force Set To Get 48 More Mi-17 Transport Helicopters This Year
http://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/in ... 26886.html
http://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/in ... 26886.html
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Indian Air Force’s Jaguar Still Performs Poorly After 20 Years, Says Auditor
https://sputniknews.com/asia/2017073110 ... air-force/
https://sputniknews.com/asia/2017073110 ... air-force/
“Against the requirement of 108 autopilots projected by IAF, only 18 autopilots could be integrated on the Jaguar aircraft as of March 2017. The integrated autopilots were also functioning sub-optimally due to malfunctioning of their vital component i.e. Auto Pilot Electronic Unit (APEU). Thus, the flying aid capability envisaged by IAF for the Jaguar aircraft in 1997 remains largely unrealized even after 20 years,” CAG said in a report tabled in Parliament on July 28.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Impirted from France Auto pilots gentlemen. State of the art and all that.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Why does Jaguar need Autopilot now when all these years they could fly low and fast without one ? Too much automation would make pilot lazy
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2176
- Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
- Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Is this related to a terrain following radar?
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Autopilot was requested to aid in PGM capability, not for basic navigation. I think the logic published in media (during that time) was that its almost impossible for pilots for arm and release a PGM munition when pilot is engaged in navigating the plane.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
It had more to do with the targetting than arming and releasing. The pilot would be overloaded with simultaneous operations of the both flying the aircraft steadily to target and lasing the target for guidance of the PGM. Auto pilot would enable him to fly a steady heading with minimal supervision so that he can track the target for lasing.Sid wrote:Autopilot was requested to aid in PGM capability, not for basic navigation. I think the logic published in media (during that time) was that its almost impossible for pilots for arm and release a PGM munition when pilot is engaged in navigating the plane.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Indian report slams Il-76 availability rate
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... te-439958/
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... te-439958/
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
So then why is the IAF requiring the LCA to be IFR capable - only 2 IL78s (32% availability of the 6 aircraft fleet) are available. Will they have time to refuel LCAs - there are 275 MKIs, 60 odd M2ks and 120+ Jags.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Buddy-buddy from 130 MKI @ 49% availabilityVivek K wrote:So then why is the IAF requiring the LCA to be IFR capable - only 2 IL78s (32% availability of the 6 aircraft fleet) are available. Will they have time to refuel LCAs - there are 275 MKIs, 60 odd M2ks and 120+ Jags.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
IAF IL-76s are two plus decades old,all to be upgraded.The sooner the better.One cannot expect fantastic serviceability for an old aircraft where the original OEM no longer exists! Uzbekistan.
All old 76/78 platforms will need upgrading immediately.
Same too with the Jags.Jag upgrades have been touted at the last three airshows.MOD lethargy appalling.
All old 76/78 platforms will need upgrading immediately.
Same too with the Jags.Jag upgrades have been touted at the last three airshows.MOD lethargy appalling.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Are all MKIs equipped with buddy refueling capability and will IAF be using MKIs as tankers instead of as offensive weapons? So 49% of 50% meaning there will only be 75 MKIs available at a given time?shiv wrote:Buddy-buddy from 130 MKI @ 49% availabilityVivek K wrote:So then why is the IAF requiring the LCA to be IFR capable - only 2 IL78s (32% availability of the 6 aircraft fleet) are available. Will they have time to refuel LCAs - there are 275 MKIs, 60 odd M2ks and 120+ Jags.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
^^That percentage was typed in jest. I have no reports or sources. That said I think that any MKI can be used along with a suitable fuel delivery pack on a pylon
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
If we are unable to fit IFR, why should we question the need for it? If there was no need why was it not brought up before? Is it the case of declaring the grapes are sour because they could not be reached?shiv wrote:Buddy-buddy from 130 MKI @ 49% availabilitySo then why is the IAF requiring the LCA to be IFR capable - only 2 IL78s (32% availability of the 6 aircraft fleet) are available. Will they have time to refuel LCAs - there are 275 MKIs, 60 odd M2ks and 120+ Jags.
To those who apply linear equations to combat - Do some air combat tactics analysis and research. A lot of detailed PHDs on this is available. In India, TACDE and some other organisations have done some excellent research on this. Find your answers. You may have to work hard for exact IAF tactics since they may not be available open source.
For a simple analysis, if you look at ~80% - 90% of mission that IAF will be required to undertake, they will be in range for a Su 30. The refueling needs will be higher for aircraft with shorter legs. The LCA, Jaguars and Mirage 2Ks will benefit more from IFR than a Su 30.
Here are some:
http://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/i ... 5180-1.htm
Also, if IFR is removed, what capabilities are lost for the LCA, is a counter thought. LCA is a very potent platform. Of course with every reduced capability, the ability of LCA to remain a front line option for IAF drops.
Actual tactics if not available already on open source should not be shared publicly IMO but a keen student should be able to get to it.
Now, since the development of a particular capability is challenging and is taking some effort, should that be dropped? IMO, it should not.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Deejay sir,deejay wrote:
http://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/i ... 5180-1.htm
The link is not working. Can you post the gist of it here instead of the link.
As an aside, can you please drop an email at DJVIGNESH at g(oogle)mail.com.
Thanks.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
The Full CAG Report is here http://cag.gov.in/content/report-no24-2 ... e-services
Covers Akash , IL Jags Aeroengines and others On IL page 39
Low availability is also due to non conclusion of LTMA as per CAG
Covers Akash , IL Jags Aeroengines and others On IL page 39
Low availability is also due to non conclusion of LTMA as per CAG
(c) Non conclusion of Long Term Maintenance Agreement for IL fleet
Another reason for the poor availability of spares and maintenance support was the non
conclusion of Long Term Maintenance Agreement (LTMA) with the OEM. IAF mooted
the proposal for LTMA in April 2011 with M/s Ilyushin Aviation Complex (IAC), Russia
to sustain 70 per cent serviceability of the fleet at any given time. MoD in January 2014
reviewed the proposal and in view of the change in requirement and circumstances,
directed the Air HQ to put up a fresh proposal to be processed by the Ministry for
approval (Acceptance of Necessity). Till date, Air HQ had not processed the proposal
(April 2017).
2.7.7 Recommendations
The authorisation (policy page) of IL-76 should be revised from 12 to 14 aircraft
by Ministry of Defence.
Air corridors for air to air refuelling should be designated at the earliest to ensure
smooth air to air refuelling operations and training.
IAF needs to finalise the Long Term Maintenance Agreement for IL fleet to
sustain the envisaged 70 per cent serviceability.
Since the IL fleet is going to be operational for the next 20 years or more, MoD
may consider upgrading its avionics to remove constraints in its operations and to
comply with current aviation standards, so as to allow for flying in international
air space since there may be such a requirement in case of eventualities.
MoD may consider concluding a separate contract for overhaul of aero-engines of
IL-78 aircraft in order to get full benefits of overhaul, instead of getting the
overhaul under the same contract for overhaul of IL-76 aero-engines.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Wow! Its not working for me either and I had accessed it this morning. Also its behind a paywall now.Bala Vignesh wrote:Deejay sir,deejay wrote:
http://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/i ... 5180-1.htm
The link is not working. Can you post the gist of it here instead of the link.
As an aside, can you please drop an email at DJVIGNESH at g(oogle)mail.com.
Thanks.
Anyways, not from the article but from the back of my head and very briefly - Air to Air refuel, allows one to take off max load, max temperature with low fuel and refuel after take off
Air to Air refuel allows mid air refuel en-route (ingress/ egress)
Air to Air refuel allows light fighters packaged with heavier buddies to target at their range limits and ensure return (say 02 heavies for 04 lights strike package)
Increase CAP loiter times
It essentially is a force multiplier and one can get the returns of an MCA while flying an LCA. There are many use cases. Each terrain, geography, target and air defence environment carries its own sets of challenges; IFR will permit options (with largest impact on low range aircraft) which other wise were not available.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
imo they should get the supersonic drop tanks qualified for the Tejas asap.
the M2k has them from day1.
the jaguars have drop tanks.
the Mig29 i have seen fly with a underbelly drop tank and the humpback of the UPG will add some fuel ?
Rafales can use upto 3 large tanks - it looks like tanks carrying the plane from some angles.
AAR can only be provided for special missions and platforms - ELINT, AWACS etc at best with 6 refuelers.
the Su30 our main patrol a2a plane has enough internal fuel.
the M2k has them from day1.
the jaguars have drop tanks.
the Mig29 i have seen fly with a underbelly drop tank and the humpback of the UPG will add some fuel ?
Rafales can use upto 3 large tanks - it looks like tanks carrying the plane from some angles.
AAR can only be provided for special missions and platforms - ELINT, AWACS etc at best with 6 refuelers.
the Su30 our main patrol a2a plane has enough internal fuel.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Under what circumstances are supersonic drop tanks needed?
I ask because I can think of several situations where the tanks have to be jettisoned
1. In an emergency when some sort of nifty combat manoeuvring is required
2. For quick acceleration and getaway
The only situation I can think of where the supersonic tanks stay on and the plane flies supersonic is on the way in to a target where the plane thunders inwards on afterburner, gulping fuel from the tanks getting to target quickly, at which point he drops his tanks leaving naked useless pylons, but at least he can deliver what he has. Or else if the airspace is clear he can fly back with empty tanks. This would be useful for "very far away" targets. The US and France regularly fly over water. What would the LCA need them for? What sort of situation would the LCA need supersonic tanks if an air to air refuelling can be done after takeoff with full load and 50% fuel? Standard subsonic tanks would do. Unless the name "supersonic" means "high subsonic'
I ask because I can think of several situations where the tanks have to be jettisoned
1. In an emergency when some sort of nifty combat manoeuvring is required
2. For quick acceleration and getaway
The only situation I can think of where the supersonic tanks stay on and the plane flies supersonic is on the way in to a target where the plane thunders inwards on afterburner, gulping fuel from the tanks getting to target quickly, at which point he drops his tanks leaving naked useless pylons, but at least he can deliver what he has. Or else if the airspace is clear he can fly back with empty tanks. This would be useful for "very far away" targets. The US and France regularly fly over water. What would the LCA need them for? What sort of situation would the LCA need supersonic tanks if an air to air refuelling can be done after takeoff with full load and 50% fuel? Standard subsonic tanks would do. Unless the name "supersonic" means "high subsonic'
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
The question is - why delay FOC for IFR when IAF for the foreseeable future will not have enough platforms for LCA's to be refuelled in flight. Putting in IFR is not "rocket science" but will take its required time and analysis. Unless we just want to put up a stick and not complain about the drag penalty.deejay wrote: If we are unable to fit IFR, why should we question the need for it? If there was no need why was it not brought up before? Is it the case of declaring the grapes are sour because they could not be reached?
And this is an added requirement, not an original one. So why delay FOC for it?
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
IAF is not holding up FOC to LCA for want of IFR or supersonic tanks.
1. They are flight testing the plane with the probe to every corner of the envelop. At some corners it is expected to generate some hiccups, all par for the course. All things that India has to learn. IAF's expectation is to clear all corners before FOC. The actual inflight refueling tests will be completed post FOC.
2. The supersonic tanks have been designed. They are qualifying it before they can put it on the plane. My peeve is that it seems like they are allowing perfection get in the way of good enough. A slightly modified tank from even the Mig21 could have worked. That is the problem of employing a research institute to do work.
1. They are flight testing the plane with the probe to every corner of the envelop. At some corners it is expected to generate some hiccups, all par for the course. All things that India has to learn. IAF's expectation is to clear all corners before FOC. The actual inflight refueling tests will be completed post FOC.
2. The supersonic tanks have been designed. They are qualifying it before they can put it on the plane. My peeve is that it seems like they are allowing perfection get in the way of good enough. A slightly modified tank from even the Mig21 could have worked. That is the problem of employing a research institute to do work.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Manu Pubby write that Jaguars have been fitted with AESA radar. First of 58.
Engine still up in the air.
I don't understand it's best to change out engine along with the DARIN III upgrade.
Don't have to bring the plane to factory twice.
Engine still up in the air.
I don't understand it's best to change out engine along with the DARIN III upgrade.
Don't have to bring the plane to factory twice.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
That means 2052 is cleared for lca
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Yes he did say that. First Jaguar with EL-2052
https://twitter.com/shatrujeet009/statu ... 1421958145
https://twitter.com/shatrujeet009/statu ... 1421958145
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
> Under what circumstances are supersonic drop tanks needed?
long T-shaped CAP intercepts on fast movers is my theory. fly sustained supersonic to head them off. i have heard of f22's / foxhounds doing this and covering 100s of miles in a few mins as befits their king lion role protecting vast 'areas'
speed is a advantage - if you let the attackers get closer to target, they will release standoff a2g weapons from way out too...these days 40km glide weapons and 60km powered weapons are proliferating.
good point about the Bison supersonic tanks....every big name 60s fighter was Mach2 ... the mighty XB70 valkyrie and Foxbat were pushing to the bold new age of Mach3 before it collapsed back to mach1.8 - mach2 as the norm
long T-shaped CAP intercepts on fast movers is my theory. fly sustained supersonic to head them off. i have heard of f22's / foxhounds doing this and covering 100s of miles in a few mins as befits their king lion role protecting vast 'areas'
speed is a advantage - if you let the attackers get closer to target, they will release standoff a2g weapons from way out too...these days 40km glide weapons and 60km powered weapons are proliferating.
good point about the Bison supersonic tanks....every big name 60s fighter was Mach2 ... the mighty XB70 valkyrie and Foxbat were pushing to the bold new age of Mach3 before it collapsed back to mach1.8 - mach2 as the norm
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
IAF’s first Jaguar with advanced AESA radar to fly this month
https://theprint.in/2017/08/04/iafs-fir ... month/amp/
https://theprint.in/2017/08/04/iafs-fir ... month/amp/
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Interesting points.deejay wrote:Wow! Its not working for me either and I had accessed it this morning. Also its behind a paywall now.Bala Vignesh wrote: Deejay sir,
The link is not working. Can you post the gist of it here instead of the link.
As an aside, can you please drop an email at DJVIGNESH at g(oogle)mail.com.
Thanks.
Anyways, not from the article but from the back of my head and very briefly - Air to Air refuel, allows one to take off max load, max temperature with low fuel and refuel after take off
Air to Air refuel allows mid air refuel en-route (ingress/ egress)
Air to Air refuel allows light fighters packaged with heavier buddies to target at their range limits and ensure return (say 02 heavies for 04 lights strike package)
Increase CAP loiter times
It essentially is a force multiplier and one can get the returns of an MCA while flying an LCA. There are many use cases. Each terrain, geography, target and air defence environment carries its own sets of challenges; IFR will permit options (with largest impact on low range aircraft) which other wise were not available.
I feel the following about A2A refueling.
Fueling Costs:
1. Fuel costs 10X in air than being fueled on ground.
2. Takes time to refuel the whole strike package of different kinds (2AA / 4-6AG /2 SEAD package)
3. Multiple refuelers may be required for the whole package
Between Enemy zone and Friendly skies:
4. The refuelers are HVAA and will need fighter CAP when in non protected zone between Enemy zone and friendly skies.
5. The CAP for refuelers will need to refuel from the mother ship as well
6. Will require different procedures/cross-training for refueling in hot zone
7. May need AWACS on Patrol as well (most likely refueling will happen in AEW zone only)
Behind Friendly skies:
8. Refueling will take place 100-200 kms from active zone
9. Much relaxed refueling procedures, may not need CAP
10. In case for an all out war, CAP/AEW will be required - Loss will mean long range strike packages will be neutralized
Given number "2", "3" and "8", it might be possible to refuel the whole strike package at forward air bases much faster than what you could do in air. It will be much safer as well. Less things can go wrong. For now, hope IAF gives LCA a pass till it gets way more refuelers in air.
Last edited by Cybaru on 06 Aug 2017 03:21, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Won't that be huge loss of their main mandate? Can they do buddy buddy refueling and still carry a full strike package?shiv wrote:Buddy-buddy from 130 MKI @ 49% availabilityVivek K wrote:So then why is the IAF requiring the LCA to be IFR capable - only 2 IL78s (32% availability of the 6 aircraft fleet) are available. Will they have time to refuel LCAs - there are 275 MKIs, 60 odd M2ks and 120+ Jags.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Assumption is LCA flies from deep in India and needs refuelling.
Is this true?
Also with Turbofan engine does it need refueling?
Is this true?
Also with Turbofan engine does it need refueling?
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Wow! Who woulda thunk That Jaguars would be the first fighter aircraft to fly with AESA radar in IAF. An 80s underpowered DPSA would fly Israeli AESA in 2017!!!
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Still under powered NO?
What happened to re engine plans?
What happened to re engine plans?
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
I think we have some illusions about "main mandate". Main mandate is anything that it can be used for that cannot be done better by some other aircraft in a given situation.Cybaru wrote:Won't that be huge loss of their main mandate? Can they do buddy buddy refueling and still carry a full strike package?shiv wrote: Buddy-buddy from 130 MKI @ 49% availability
Our Su-30s came as air dominance fighters. We have made them into strike fighters and refuellers and SAR using whatchamacallit tree penetrating radar. We can also use them as mini AWACS I guess.
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
What happened with midair refuellers, looks like another tender now. We need to go with KC-46A or A330. Considering the delivery and quality of US planes C-17, C-130J, P-8I, I'd prefer KC.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... kfOAN.html
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... kfOAN.html
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
a330mrtt is also proven. in service with raf & australia among others.
in both kc46 and a330 the refueling operators sit behind the pilot now and use MFD and cameras not lie down at the back peering from a window anymore.
both can be rigged up for cargo , seats, ambulances role ....
in both kc46 and a330 the refueling operators sit behind the pilot now and use MFD and cameras not lie down at the back peering from a window anymore.
both can be rigged up for cargo , seats, ambulances role ....
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Refuelling tender is in cold storage due to financial issue and other prioritiesKarthik S wrote:What happened with midair refuellers, looks like another tender now. We need to go with KC-46A or A330. Considering the delivery and quality of US planes C-17, C-130J, P-8I, I'd prefer KC.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... kfOAN.html
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
Yep, also makes it easier for AF pilots to move to civilian role once they decide to move on , they can move to any Airbus series with little conversion trainingSingha wrote:a330mrtt is also proven. in service with raf & australia among others.
....
I wonder if they can opt for A330 NEO series it's quite impressive in fuel conservation and capability compared to 20 years old A330
Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016
The NEO will be more expensive. The MRTT program will already face significant pricing pressure from Boeing on account of them offering a smaller, cheaper platform and one that is being produced at a stable rate in excess of a dozen a year supporting an order book that is over 170 aircraft. Airbus's immediate concern outside of the European market would be cost competitiveness given the sort of fixed price production lot contracts Boeing is signing for the KC-46 already (see LOT 3 Contract).
At some point in the next 4-5 years however Airbus would have to make the switch or offer the MRTT as a conversion option to used aircraft only since they'll be making the production switch to the new A330 family on the commercial side. Alternatively, they could produce white tails and keep them in anticipation of future awards.
One problem with performance improvements targeting efficiency is that Military aircraft and tankers don't put in as many cycles as civilian airliners so when you work the math it likely won't come out to the same as if you were an airliner so acquisition cost may play a more influential role in the decision making than LCC where the numbers will look different for a military operator than an airline.
At some point in the next 4-5 years however Airbus would have to make the switch or offer the MRTT as a conversion option to used aircraft only since they'll be making the production switch to the new A330 family on the commercial side. Alternatively, they could produce white tails and keep them in anticipation of future awards.
One problem with performance improvements targeting efficiency is that Military aircraft and tankers don't put in as many cycles as civilian airliners so when you work the math it likely won't come out to the same as if you were an airliner so acquisition cost may play a more influential role in the decision making than LCC where the numbers will look different for a military operator than an airline.