Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Aug 2017 19:28

767 is an old air frame compared to A-330 and any new purchase will be in IAF fleet for 30 years , The 330NEO initial cost will be offset by its low fuel consumption during its life time ....infact IAF has opted for A-330 MRTT all that they need to see if AB can offer A-330NEO model for MRTT

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 06 Aug 2017 19:46

IAF is not an airline and it wouldn't be putting airline like cycles on it so the LCC analysis of a refueling military tanker is different from an airline which will be putting far greater number of annual cycles and flight hours (it becomes a RASM/CASM analysis there). As far LCC is concerned it will be interesting since the KC-46 is actually a smaller aircraft so unless you need that extra 15-20% (40-45K lb. of additional fuel) capacity you will have to carry the larger platform over its lifetime which will be reflected in its life-time fuel consumption. So defining how much threshold fuel needs to be offloaded would play into the overall analysis.

There is nothing that separates these two platforms from being supported for decades to come. The USAF's eventual KC-X and KC-Y fleet will likely approach in excess of 250 aircraft as it is quite likely that KC-Y will simply be an extension of the KC-46 contract (with KC-Z being a new design). KC-X/KC46's will be delivered through 2027 and if they transition into KC-Y deliveries will likely extend into the 2030s so no there wouldn't be any difference as far as support is concerned since Boeing will be producing many times the number of KC46's as Airbus with the MRTT.

It will also be interesting to see if the KC-46 competes for a future IAF contract, and how the IAF value its USAF specific changes. Keep in mind that many of the changes were to be part of the KC-45 (A330) which would have also required an EMD and development to meet USAF requirement for militarization.

infact IAF has opted for A-330 MRTT all that they need to see if AB can offer A-330NEO model for MRTT

From what I understand of the matter, the A330 MRTT was deemed to be quite expensive. How then will the A-330 NEO based tanker, a type which doesn't even exist and which would use a more expensive commercial base be deemed affordable? Unless one finds more money in the budget to make the acquisition affordable one would be looking at used, converted aircraft if new builds have been deemed as too expensive. One would most certainly not seek an even more expensive aircraft as an alternative.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Aug 2017 20:40

It was deemed expensive compared to Il-76 but A330 won the competion against IL-78

Now we will see 4 way contest if ever these deal gets green signal and purchased
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... kfOAN.html

I think A-330 will be good because DRDO AWACS program is also based on A-330 buy a tanker based on A-330 would be logical choice for training and logistics

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 06 Aug 2017 20:47

So if that is the case wouldn't you want to restructure the proposal so that it isn't even more expensive compared to the alternative which the last time around was the IL-76? The gap will get even wider if they choose a more expensive route and providing the IAF, possibly the first batch of a new tanker type based on a new airframe.

Multiple ways exist to lower cost..one strategy could be for Airbus to bulk buy white tails in anticipation for IAF and other orders. Another would be to pick up used aircraft and go that route. Another could be to remove capability and reduce cost. None of this involves re-baselining the bid to include a more expensive option. Commonality with an AWACS would help but it would be one of many data point.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Aug 2017 21:07

We dont know if it was expensive by how much , MOD goes by L1 tender so even a small % change would make it look expensive , saying it is expensive without any stastic is a generic statement.

I would say go for A-330 if DRDO is opting for A-330 for AWACS , there is nothing much to loose and every thing to gain by standardising the fleet.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Aug 2017 21:08

Jaguar Upgrade

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 06 Aug 2017 22:06

Austin wrote:We dont know if it was expensive by how much , MOD goes by L1 tender so even a small % change would make it look expensive , saying it is expensive without any stastic is a generic statement.

A few questions :

* Was it expensive or was it not expensive? If it was affordable and within the budget why was it scrapped?
* How does offering a more expensive option (essentially creating and certifying a new military type) as part of your bid narrow the affordability gap with your competitors? Especially when the market has gotten more and not less price competitive.

In a more competitive and ever increasing price sensitive market for new build tankers Airbus first have to create and certify a new type and then market it to a competitive program unless they are willing to risk a higher bid and one that ups their risk since it can be said that they are not offering a proven or in service tanker.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 06 Aug 2017 23:54

New builds for refuelers make no sense. They will probably put in 50-200 cycles over a year versus commercial aircraft put about 700-1000 (2-3 landings * 30*12) cycles a year. One needs to look at a fleet of A330s being retired by airlines to be converted to Air force use. We could probably buy and refurbish 12-18 of those instead of buying new builds. They will easily last 20-25 years. All Air India fleet should be refurbished and handed over to IAF as they retire. Move A310/320/757 to refueling, transport and support role. Cheap and effective. Refueling is an expensive exercise and it won't be the primary way of doing things.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 06 Aug 2017 23:56

shiv wrote:
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?
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.

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.

Sure we can. But then there is the whole question is it optimal? What is the opportunity cost if it performs that role?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 07 Aug 2017 00:10

Cybaru wrote:New builds for refuelers make no sense. They will probably put in 50-200 cycles over a year versus commercial aircraft put about 700-1000 (2-3 landings * 30*12) cycles a year. One needs to look at a fleet of A330s being retired by airlines to be converted to Air force use. We could probably buy and refurbish 12-18 of those instead of buying new builds. They will easily last 20-25 years. All Air India fleet should be refurbished and handed over to IAF as they retire. Move A310/320/757 to refueling, transport and support role. Cheap and effective. Refueling is an expensive exercise and it won't be the primary way of doing things.

Agreed. There are very few air-forces around the world that can chew up all the lifetime design limits over the anticipated service life where it is cost-beneficial to pay extra upfront to buy some of that reserve. Used airframes should be looked at to lower procurement cost or to buy more aircraft for the same amount.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 07 Aug 2017 01:42

Austin wrote:Jaguar Upgrade

So we are upgrading the Jaguar IS with radars ?
That will mean extensive changes to the nose of the aircraft right. This will be a significant uprgade tghen.

What about the IMs will they get a radar upgrade as well ?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 07 Aug 2017 12:52

^^ 58 Batch 2 and DARIN-1 Jaguars IS will be upgraded to DARIN-3

Jaguar IM are already equipped with Elta 2032 and fired Harpoons using that radar.

Jaguar IS will now have Jaguar IM nose.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Aug 2017 13:19

Will the latest Jaguar with AESA radar upgrade have Derby BVR AAM or will they just have ASRAAM as WVR missile ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Aug 2017 13:24

More Details of Jag DARIN 3 upgrade https://blog.forecastinternational.com/ ... ew-tricks/

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 08 Aug 2017 01:30

tsarkar wrote:^^ 58 Batch 2 and DARIN-1 Jaguars IS will be upgraded to DARIN-3

Jaguar IM are already equipped with Elta 2032 and fired Harpoons using that radar.

Jaguar IS will now have Jaguar IM nose.

Thanks TSarkar.
You really knew how to answer .... (the IM nose bit).

Sheez that will be a super sight to see and behold.
The Jags have performed an excellent quiet service with the IAF and are much feared and respected by the adversaries to strike deep within their strongheld areas.

I still remember seeing a grainy picture of the Chief of Russian Air Force being given a ride in the back of a Jag IB from Ambala, I believe when he visited India in the 90s.

Jags much deserve this upgrade and will contribute and hold the line.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 08 Aug 2017 02:18

Still no news on upgraded Engine for Jaguars . Will it be new Desi 3D printed Engine or from Honeywell?

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 08 Aug 2017 04:04

will the new engine enable it to perform duties in the Tibetan plate? They were not used in Kargil

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Aug 2017 04:20

What I got from reading many reports to get the answer on engines is that Honeywell is the sole vendor after Rolls Royce withdrew their offer as they knew they wont get it and MoD babus are invoking no single vendor clause in Procurement Procedures and stalling the procurement of the engines.

Some one has to take and action to tell them there is no other alternative to buying the Honeywell engines or we lose more squadrons.

The no single vendor clause was to prevent chances of corruption not for unilateral disarmament.

We find same mess in ammunition also.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 08 Aug 2017 05:06

- POOF -

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 08 Aug 2017 06:43

nor have you seen evidence of the MKI being respected.
if you don't like the Jag... fine state that first.

Don't troll me

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Aug 2017 07:27

Khalsa wrote:nor have you seen evidence of the MKI being respected.
if you don't like the Jag... fine state that first.

Don't troll me

Khalsa I agree that was a useless post that should not have been made. I have reported it.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2017 09:54

Jaguar jets still flying without autopilot: CAG

One of the frontline fighters of the Indian Air Force, the Jaguars, are still flying without autopilots, an essential flying aid, the Comptroller and Auditor-General has said.

In a report presented in Parliament on July 28, the CAG said, “The flying aid capability envisaged by the IAF for the Jaguar aircraft in 1997 remains largely unrealised even after 20 years … Meanwhile, the IAF had lost three Jaguar aircraft and one pilot since April 2008 due to pilot disorientation/human error whereas loss of another four Jaguar aircraft was under investigation as of October 2016.”

An autopilot reduces the pilot’s workload, enhances safety of aircraft and cuts aircraft accidents. Jaguars acquired in the 1980s are of older vintage and lack autopilots.

In 1997, the IAF had projected a requirement of 108 autopilots for 108 aircraft but only 35 autopilots were contracted in August 1999 due to “resource crunch” at a cost of ₹37.42 crore which were delivered between 2006 and 2008. A repeat contract for 95 autopilots was concluded only by March 2014.

Sub-optimal function

“Out of 35 autopilots procured earlier, only 18 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),” the report said.

In addition, 30 autopilots received through the repeat contract are yet to be integrated. Thus, as on October 2016, the IAF had a holding of 117 Jaguars, but only 18 could be upgraded with autopilot capability. Even these autopilots were working sub-optimally due to malfunctioning of their APEUs, the report added.

In addition to autopilots, the IAF is undertaking a major modernisation of the Jaguar fleet, which also carry nuclear weapons, with new avionics and sensors to keep them flying for another two decades. The Jaguars have an underpowered engine. However, efforts to equip them with a more powerful engine have been dragging on for several years.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2017 09:55

As per CAG we have 117 Jaguar roughly 6 Squadron , If they AESA it and do a DARIN 3 upgrade then we might well start building new airframe for Jaguar , HAL has Lic prod for this fighter

SajeevJino · Post by **SajeevJino** » 08 Aug 2017 13:13

Austin wrote:As per CAG we have 117 Jaguar roughly 6 Squadron , If they AESA it and do a DARIN 3 upgrade then we might well start building new airframe for Jaguar , HAL has Lic prod for this fighter

Well as per vkthakur, only 58 gets EL/M 2052

Only 58 Jaguars are being fitted with the ELTA AESA - https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/894129279662870528

I've a doubt, older IM versions have Agave radar, which are replaced by some radar not sure its EL/M 2032 or something other.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2017 16:26

IAF officers misused allowance for foreign trips, caused loss of Rs 82 lakh: CAG

Dozens of Indian Air Force (IAF) officers violated defence travel regulations by claiming allowances after visiting foreign countries, causing a loss of more than Rs 82 lakh to the exchequer, the Comptroller and Auditor General has found.

Under the regulations, military officers can claim leave travel concessions (LTC) only for visits within India when they are on leave.

“We examined records pertaining to the period 2010-15 and found that in 49 cases, IAF officers availed of LTC while visiting a foreign country,” read the CAG report tabled in Parliament on Friday.

The national auditor said it reflected the “systemic failure of internal control” in the IAF.

The CAG report said the leave travel claims of the officers were entertained despite the journey from origin to a foreign country not even touching any Indian station.

“Admitting such LTC claims and payments amounting to Rs 82.58 lakh was not only irregular but also in gross violation of the government policy on LTC,” the report said.

Several CAG reports have highlighted the abuse of LTC provisions by government servants.

The report said IAF officers obtained permission from the competent authorities to go on leave to foreign countries with the condition that expenditure would be borne by the officers themselves.

“Subsequently, the officers were applying for all-India LTC under travel regulations for the period of sanctioned leave,” the report said.

The bills of these officers were cleared though not admissible under travel regulations, it noted.

In its reply to the audit findings, the defence ministry said in January 2017 that an internal inquiry into the matter found there was ambiguity in the interpretation of the rules – the CAG did not find the reply convincing. The ministry also said full recoveries would be made from the officers concerned along with penal interest.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Aug 2017 18:11

When we've ordered two more IL-76s (new 476 std ones) for the extra 2 Phalcon AWACS,why are we not buying the same for the desi AEW bird/ The aircraft is significantly cheaper than any A-339 variant,plus will make it easier for the IAF to maintain a similar platform,which is also the same type (IL-78s_)used buy our tanker fleet.The Airbus bird was earlier rejected becos of exorbitant cost.Can't see how another variant will be cheaper . Methinks a French lobby is at play here with strong connections in the MOD's corridors.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 08 Aug 2017 18:17

Philip wrote:When we've ordered two more IL-76s (new 476 std ones) for the extra 2 Phalcon AWACS,why are we not buying the same for the desi AEW bird/ The aircraft is significantly cheaper than any A-339 variant,plus will make it easier for the IAF to maintain a similar platform,which is also the same type (IL-78s_)used buy our tanker fleet.The Airbus bird was earlier rejected becos of exorbitant cost.Can't see how another variant will be cheaper . Methinks a French lobby is at play here with strong connections in the MOD's corridors.

Sir, you still stick to IL series? What are their availability rates? Is availability of AWACS during a war is more important or lower upfront cost of the plane.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 08 Aug 2017 18:20

Are they waiting for some HAL HTFE-25 version for jaguar ???

Do we have any info on that engine

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Aug 2017 18:25

The 12 naval jaguars got el2032 and derby

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 09 Aug 2017 01:20

shiv wrote:
Khalsa wrote:nor have you seen evidence of the MKI being respected.
if you don't like the Jag... fine state that first.

Don't troll me
Khalsa I agree that was a useless post that should not have been made. I have reported it.

Much appreciated Saar.
Thank you

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 09 Aug 2017 01:23

Austin wrote:As per CAG we have 117 Jaguar roughly 6 Squadron , If they AESA it and do a DARIN 3 upgrade then we might well start building new airframe for Jaguar , HAL has Lic prod for this fighter

Correct thats something that needs consideration.
Are the following things at play ?
- a lot of air frames at end of life so don't sink more millions into it.
- we have license to manufacture so manufacture more to fill any attrition numbers

However what I don't understand are two things.
Why drop the total Jag numbers at the end of the upgrade + when the oldest airframes expire
And Why not license manufacture more to fill the gap left by retiring Mig-27s.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Aug 2017 02:50

Khalsa and Hakeem sirs : Thank you for reporting the post. On one hand, I agree with you that the post was inflammatory and could derail the thread. So, I have deleted that post. On the other hand, I disagree that it was trolling. So, I have closed that report without any further moderation. By the way, Khalsa sir, I think you gave a very classy reply.

Raveen sir: We can discuss the efficacy of Jaguar as a deep strike platform, but not beginning with such a post. If you start the discussion in a better way, I would love to partake in the discussion. Although, I must say that I would be on the other side of you. Although, I would have loved to see Marut in its place today, I still love the Jaguars a lot.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Aug 2017 04:36

Khalsa: Talking about Jaguars in the Indian Air Force, please click on the link below....the BEST Jaguar shot I have seen to date. Click on the link below. Bloody beautiful shot!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGuvTz1V0AAohk1.jpg

And I got it from this link...Angad Singh takes some awesome pictures. And so does Vishal Jolapara.

https://twitter.com/zone5aviation/statu ... 8037303296

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Aug 2017 04:58

India’s Hasimara AFS during the Doka La standoff
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/rest-of ... -standoff/

SajeevJino · Post by **SajeevJino** » 09 Aug 2017 12:02

Singha wrote:The 12 naval jaguars got el2032 and derby

Not sure about the Derby for Jaguar IM, early 2014 we bought 300+ ASRAAM from UK to mount on Jaguar( no idea those for IM or IS ) - http://www.livemint.com/Politics/xHoQvH ... llion.html

Well I think those EL/M 2032 and Derby was part of Naval Harriers

IAF might have those ASRAAM and EL/M 2032

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 09 Aug 2017 16:00

No Derby, the Asraam won the contest atleat then.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 09 Aug 2017 16:50

Austin wrote:As per CAG we have 117 Jaguar roughly 6 Squadron , If they AESA it and do a DARIN 3 upgrade then we might well start building new airframe for Jaguar , HAL has Lic prod for this fighter

Can't manufacture new airframes, Austinji, since the Hawk line has replaced the Jaguar line and all the tools were repurposed for it.

Bharadwaj · Post by **Bharadwaj** » 09 Aug 2017 21:38

Rakesh wrote:India’s Hasimara AFS during the Doka La standoff
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/rest-of ... -standoff/

The IAF in its quest for perfection sometimes loses chances for sending a message across.... They should have sent a pair of the so called three legged cheetahs on a temporary deployment to Hasimara during the standoff rather than wait for the super duper french megajet to arrive in 2019. It is arguable if this would have had an operational impact but it certainly would have sent the Chinese into a tizzy.

Prithwiraj · Post by **Prithwiraj** » 09 Aug 2017 22:51

I think there SU-30MKI Sq. available in North East.

Bharadwaj · Post by **Bharadwaj** » 09 Aug 2017 23:05

Prithwiraj wrote:I think there SU-30MKI Sq. available in North East.

I am very aware of that... but the psy ops value of parking a pair of our locally built fighters near the border during a standoff cannot be underestimated. It would have got our already jumpy neighbors something more to think about.