MiG-21 Bison shoots down F-16 in Kashmir

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Apr 2019 04:06

Karan M wrote:Outrageous! Violation of their fundamentals ~~riots~~!

Fixed it.

Jihad-efistula are bad and deny their POK their proper due.
Na insaafi.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Apr 2019 07:21

He he.

Meanwhile, Maroof sir ji takes an axe to the topic.
https://salute.co.in/the-new-indo-pak-e ... r-strikes/

THE NEW INDO-PAK EQUATION FOLLOWING THE AIR STRIKES
by Maroof Raza

Those who question the truth behind the Indian air force’s spectacular air strikes on terror camps deep inside Pakistan, are unable to explain why Pakistan’s reactions were filled with confusion and contradictory statements, like they were after the US raid on Abottabad, as the sheer audacity of the Indian air strikes had left Pakistan’s brass hats stunned. And then, why did Pakistan resort to launching an air armada a day later on Indian military positions a day later across the LOC? Either the Pakistani brass hats were responding to the wide criticism they were subjected to at home specially on social media – that they weren’t good enough to defend Pakistan – or that they were keen to draw India into a war, since the Pulwama attack had only led to a precisely executed air strike. Interestingly, it has been argued by a well informed American author that Pakistan’s armed forces wanted the return of a strong leadership (under Mr Modi?)in India, as it would allow them to drum up the fears of India’s aggressive intent, and thus control over the country’s polity and its depleted resources. But they never quite expected such an audacious attack.

Most importantly, the air strike has blown a hole through the Pakistani article of faith, that their nuclear arsenal was a protective shield against all their adventurism on Indian soil. In the past, the reluctance in Delhi to respond with military force either after the attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001- despite a massive military mobilization thereafter- or the attack on Mumbai in November 2008, had further emboldened Pakistan’s military to use ‘terrorism as a tool’ to bleed India endlessly. Its underlying message was: if an Indian military response did push Pakistan into a corner, then Pakistan wouldn’t hesitate to use its nuclear bombs. However, studies and war gaming over the past decades (in think tanks abroad) have confirmed that the military brass of both India and Pakistan are most unlikely to even consider the use of their nuclear arsenal at the height of a military confrontation, as the Kargil conflict had shown. Moreover, war is a costly option, and Pakistani brass knows that the cost to them would be unbearable. While the Kargil conflict had cost an estimated Rs 5000 crores a week, a current war would cost each side about Rs 6000 ($1 billion dollars) a day. Thus a week long military campaign would wipe out all that there is in Pakistan’s foreign exchange reserves! For India, such a cost to finally put Pakistan’s generals out of the terror business, still might just be worth it!

Also, the air strikes on Balakot had at least two other firsts to its credit. It is perhaps the first time a nuclear armed country has resorted to the use of air power at targets in the territory of another nuclear armed country. The other is the downing of a Pakistani F16 fighter jet by a vintage 1960s model MiG 21 fighter. This has stunned the West and the US arms lobbies that want to push India into a deal to buy upgraded F16s. Hence, their silence or denials about the F16 being used, by Pakistan a day after the Indian air strikes, as a face saving attack an Indian military brigade headquarters near the LOC. This was achieved in all probability with accurate satellite intelligence provided to India by the Israelis. Pakistani denials and now a Chinese claim that it was their JF-17 fighter that downed the MIG-21, are both to save its face at home, and to pacify the US, which apparently needs to give permission for the use of its equipment against another US-friendly country. The question India might want to ask itself is: ‘if the US decides on who is a friend or a foe, then who all could India use the $15 billion worth of military arms and platforms against, that New Delhi has recently bought from the US?’

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Apr 2019 07:23

Basically irrespective of what the Narangs, the Pandas, Fairs etc bloviate, the Delhi establishment is well aware of the shenanigans of the lobby's that wanted India to buy American. I hope this does not mean we end up buying the equally compromised Gripen for our needs. We should focus on getting more Rafales and Modi and co, should budget for it.

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 10 Apr 2019 09:38

YashG wrote: ----- How is this count done? . . .

I am not a person of our (or any other country's) Defence Forces. Still, because the same question had arisen in my mind earlier, I am hazarding a guess.

Like in automobiles, for each aircraft, possibly, there are incorporated by the Seller, one or more "unique engine numbers" and "chassis id numbers" (in this context, may be structure of the mainframe/fuselage/wings etc which would be the foundation parts of the aircraft) which cannot be easily faked (say, just by repainting over the aircraft). If any of the unique ids of the aircraft are tampered with or, say, a different engine has been fitted as a part of maintenance for genuine reasons, I would imagine that the current owner of the aircraft to whom it has been sold, would have to provide credible explanations to the Inspector/Stock taker. For sure, such stock taking would be time consuming but nevertheless undertaken to comply with the sale conditions.

For example, in a related field, IAEA has several methods to verify nuclear materials and components which are subject to its inspections.

If a flying fighter can be tracked by their electronic signature(s), can they not be counted as well even as they "are on duty"?

Just my random thought. Please ignore if I am wrong.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Apr 2019 10:07

You guys have to understand why the US does these checks, to make sure thier equipment has not been taken apart and has been inspected by say China etc, so it will include running Diagnostic software checks with special equipment, so a repainted turkish F-116 will not cut it. It is another matter whether the US will choose to disclose that the Pakistan has a missing F-16.

https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/US ... ies-07211/

saip · Post by **saip** » 10 Apr 2019 10:30

May be it is an electronic count and not a physical count (like today's cars report to their manufacturers their health). USA may not even tell Pakistan they did the count and they may not tell us if one of planes is missing.

Ramesh · Post by **Ramesh** » 10 Apr 2019 11:54

saip wrote:May be it is an electronic count and not a physical count (like today's cars report to their manufacturers their health). USA may not even tell Pakistan they did the count and they may not tell us if one of planes is missing.

Remember the case of missing Malaysian Airliner. It had emerged that Rolls Royce engine was transmitting location to its headquarters in UK.

VikramA · Post by **VikramA** » 10 Apr 2019 17:48

"We had to take defensive measures at all times after the Balakot strike as the Pakistani air force had greater BVR missile capabilities" - Air Marshal Nohwar

What am I missing here. At 50 km range both aim 120 and r77 are equally potent plus su 30 have a advantage because of bigger radar.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Apr 2019 17:55

VikramA wrote:"We had to take defensive measures at all times after the Balakot strike as the Pakistani air force had greater BVR missile capabilities" - Air Marshal Nohwar

What am I missing here. At 50 km range both aim 120 and r77 are equally potent plus su 30 have a advantage because of bigger radar.

Simple, we could not fire first and expected pak to follow peacetime ROE or wanted Pak to Break the peace time ROE, Given more power and Radar an Su 30 can get into a much better launch position than a F16 in times of war.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 10 Apr 2019 18:46

You have to remember that the escalation ladder was experimental, India had to go up slowly since the pak potential reaction was unknown; it wasnt a simple case of who can fire what but... what is the right thing to do and contain the situation to acceptable limits

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 10 Apr 2019 19:37

PAF has been proved to be a 1 trick pony !

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 10 Apr 2019 19:58

Lalmohan wrote:You have to remember that the escalation ladder was experimental, India had to go up slowly since the pak potential reaction was unknown; it wasnt a simple case of who can fire what but... what is the right thing to do and contain the situation to acceptable limits

I hope the next time we do not have to wait to play by the book and wait for a paki action to go up the escalation ladder. We know desperate and paper tiger pakis will at the first chance fire from a safe (stand off) region well within their country. War is dirty and it does not make sense for us to fight with both hands ties behind our back. In sticking to rules, we lost a golden chance. Imagine what could have been if SU30 had truly gone on action mode and a couple of paki F16's were downed. The pakis would have been shit scared to make further raids at the fear of loosing more of their F16s.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Apr 2019 20:07

manjgu wrote:PAF has been proved to be a 1 trick ~~pony~~ ass!

More accurate.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Apr 2019 20:09

I think that Lara Seligman article had F16 vendor interests and used unnamed sources for peddling that line.
Essential what the story was saying is F16s was not vulnerable to MiG-21 Bison.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 10 Apr 2019 22:56

VikramA wrote:"We had to take defensive measures at all times after the Balakot strike as the Pakistani air force had greater BVR missile capabilities" - Air Marshal Nohwar

What am I missing here. At 50 km range both aim 120 and r77 are equally potent plus su 30 have a advantage because of bigger radar.

IAF is not confident in the capabilities of the R77. End of story. Only the MICA, that too only on the few upgraded mirages is capable. The sad story is, if the Derby-ER is demonstrated on the Tejas, that might be the most potent BVR fighter in the Indian arsenal.

VikramA · Post by **VikramA** » 10 Apr 2019 23:23

sudeepj wrote:
VikramA wrote:"We had to take defensive measures at all times after the Balakot strike as the Pakistani air force had greater BVR missile capabilities" - Air Marshal Nohwar

What am I missing here. At 50 km range both aim 120 and r77 are equally potent plus su 30 have a advantage because of bigger radar.
IAF is not confident in the capabilities of the R77. End of story. Only the MICA, that too only on the few upgraded mirages is capable. The sad story is, if the Derby-ER is demonstrated on the Tejas, that might be the most potent BVR fighter in the Indian arsenal.

so what is the solution to this problem. meteor or mica cannot be integated on a russian radar and same goes for derby. we are able to intergate deby on tejas because it has a Israeli radar. russia does not have anything comparable to meteor which is in production (they have r77-me ramjet BVRAAR but it is not in production) and our own SFDR ramjet propulsion powered astra is atleast 5 years away from induction. what are the 200+ su30 mki supposed to to till then?

srin · Post by **srin** » 10 Apr 2019 23:27

^^^ carry the Astra (Mk1) ?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 10 Apr 2019 23:28

VikramA wrote: so what is the solution to this problem. meteor or mica cannot be integated on a russian radar and same goes for derby. we are able to intergate deby on tejas because it has a Israeli radar. russia does not have anything comparable to meteor which is in production (they have r77-me ramjet BVRAAR but it is not in production) and our own SFDR ramjet propulsion powered astra is atleast 5 years away from induction. what are the 200+ su30 mki supposed to to till then?

Our own Astra has already been integrated and trials completed on the Su-30. It is already in production. It will replace the R-77 in the MKI fleet.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Apr 2019 23:32

I dont think this IAF not confident in R77 is true, then IAF would not have ordered soo many SU30 or upgraded MiG 29, Mig 21 to fire R77 or IN would have ordered INS VikramAditya plus Mig 29K. Plus M2000 upgradedversions also didnt fire MICA. Simple reason ROE, once Amraam were fired Su30 had to spoof , by the time they did engagements were amd there no IAf orders to cross the border later and go after PAF aircraft.

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 312074.cms

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Apr 2019 23:33

The initial batch of R-77s were indeed faulty. But that has been resolved. As Aditya indicated above, R-77 is in widespread use across many Russian platforms in the IAF and IN.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Apr 2019 23:37

From the artcle posted

Sticky App Banner
ET
Download AppTOP NEWS

Defence
Pakistan broke LoC rules; India went by book
As more details of the February 27 aerial battle emerges, it is clear that PAF fired at Indian jets first.
By Manu Pubby, ET Bureau | Mar 08, 2019, 06.30 AM IST
View in App

BCCL
‘Used in first strike role, Amraam would have been a surprise factor’
NEW DELHI: When the Pakistan Air Force used American-supplied Amraam (advanced medium-range air-to-air missile) in the Nowshera sector, it violated rules of engagement as the missiles were used for first strike, giving F16s a temporary advantage, forcing defending Indian Air Force fighters to take evasive action.
The subsequent shooting down of an F16 by Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman is being defined as a defensive action after his MiG21 was targeted and at least three more Amraams locked in Su30MKIs deployed to thwart the air intrusion.
As more details of the February 27 aerial battle emerges, it is clear that PAF fired at Indian jets first and one F16 of its strike package of three fighters that had intruded went down after a brief aerial duel within visual range.
ADVERTISEMENT

ET Prime
PEOPLE
All about Rivigo’s pressure-cooker culture
The standing rules of engagement — and they applied on the morning of February 27 as India had declared that its air strikes at Balakot the previous day was a non-military action against terrorists — do not permit fighter jets to fire across LoC. The use of force is permitted only in case of an air intrusion or if fired upon.
PAF took advantage of Amraam, with a set of F16s firing at Indian targets from across LoC, at a distance of over 50 km. The other set, which intruded into Nowshera was thwarted by the MiG21s scrambled from Srinagar, with Varthaman managing to bring one down with a short-range R73 missile.
ADVERTISEMENT

“Used in the first strike role from across the LoC, Amraam would have been a surprise factor, given the standoff range it has,” said veteran fighter pilot during Kargil, Sameer Joshi.
While Su30MKIs with their R77 missiles were capable of targeting the F16s — they are believed to have also locked their radars into the enemy — the surprise first strike took them temporarily off target as they took emergency countermeasures. In the subsequent minutes when the Indian jets moved back into position, the F16s retreated but not before one of them was shot down. “Whoever shoots first has the advantage. But it is commendable that the MiG21 still managed to target lock the technologically superior F16 while under attack,” a military source said.

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Apr 2019 23:38

Our science projects will always remain n years away , we better buy Meteor for anyways Rafales are coming at least they and one last upgrade of M2Ks might be able to use Meteors. Others will use the usual mix of hodgepodge which jokers in our system like to go with.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 10 Apr 2019 23:39

negi wrote:Our science projects will always remain n years away , we better buy Meteor for anyways Rafales are coming at least they and one last upgrade of M2Ks might be able to use Meteors. Others will use the usual mix of hodgepodge which jokers in our system like to go with.

Saar did you read my post about Astra already being in production? Yet you call it a Science project? Where does this unrelenting need to run down indigenous projects come from?

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Apr 2019 23:41

Aditya_V wrote:I dont think this IAF not confident in R77 is true, then IAF would not have ordered soo many SU30 or upgraded MiG 29, Mig 21 to fire R77 or IN would have ordered INS VikramAditya plus Mig 29K. Plus M2000 upgradedversions also didnt fire MICA. Simple reason ROE, once Amraam were fired Su30 had to spoof , by the time they did engagements were amd there no IAf orders to cross the border later and go after PAF aircraft.

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 312074.cms

Well we did not fire simply because initiative was with them i.e. always the guy who chooses to engage has an initiative may be they sneaked in to a range which was close to may be NEZ for AIM 120s fired and quickly disengaged or remained on edge of that zone , our guys knew limitations of our R 77s , moreover because remember we were so damn well prepared for we had hardly what 4-6 in air against 20+ of theirs so may be our guys obviously did not have luxury of firing first and hoping one of them will hit the target. TSP played the game well except that they did not account for a guy like Abhinandan else whatever we did was just regulation percentage tennis , nothing extraordinary played safe and all that.

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Apr 2019 23:42

nachiket wrote:
negi wrote:Our science projects will always remain n years away , we better buy Meteor for anyways Rafales are coming at least they and one last upgrade of M2Ks might be able to use Meteors. Others will use the usual mix of hodgepodge which jokers in our system like to go with.
Saar did you read my post about Astra already being in production? Yet you call it a Science project? Where does this unrelenting need to run down indigenous projects come from?

I don't regard Astra a science project however I know our forces better Astra gives nothing more than what R-77 gives may be marginally better however it's coming in 2020 , IAF with new Rafales would want better you want to place a bet there ? That mention of SFDR etc is a science project simply because common sense would say first field the Astra , see how it fares in real world release subsequent improvements , there is a reason AIM 120 has had so many iterations . Tomorrow some scramjet tech might bet published in some paper in some corner it does not mean we start building it , we seem to be all over the place.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Apr 2019 23:43

The point to note Pakis knew Politically F16 with Amraam was the worst option still went for it while JF17 and Mirages did not fire any AAM. And wasting 5 AAM is no joke , Nato had called AMRAAM as Slammer, that reputation is in tatters. There is unfortunately a bias in thoughts inspite of retired IAF stating what happenned we are complety dismissing IAF capabilities

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 10 Apr 2019 23:48

Aditya_V wrote:The point to note Pakis knew Politically F16 with Amraam was the worst option still went for it while JF17 and Mirages did not fire any AAM. And wasting 5 AAM is no joke , Nato had called AMRAAM as Slammer, that reputation is in tatters. There is unfortunately a bias in thoughts inspite of retired IAF stating what happenned we are complety dismissing IAF capabilities

The Mirage 3's are not BVR capable. Mirage 5's are strike only. The JF17 is supposed to be but the fact that they did not fire anything means they might be waiting for the PL-15 or some other Chinese AAM to be delivered. The F-16's are their only true BVR capable fighters.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 10 Apr 2019 23:53

negi wrote: I don't regard Astra a science project however I know our forces better Astra gives nothing more than what R-77 gives may be marginally better however it's coming in 2020 , IAF with new Rafales would want better you want to place a bet there ? That mention of SFDR etc is a science project simply because common sense would say first field the Astra , see how it fares in real world release subsequent improvements , there is a reason AIM 120 has had so many iterations . Tomorrow some scramjet tech might bet published in some paper in some corner it does not mean we start building it , we seem to be all over the place.

Then what did you refer to as "our science projects"? Meteor is already coming with the Rafales. But it is an expensive solution which is not integrated on anything else. We will have to pay them to integrate it even on the M2k which the IAF might do. But what about the rest of the fleet? If we are worried about R-77 reliability only Astra can help us there. And you can't improve performance beyond AMRAAM/R-77 levels without going the Ramjet route like the Meteor. Which we are also doing, as the recent test of the SFDR shows. So they are doing exactly as you said already. Yet you deride it as a science project.
Frankly I am disappointed that a BRF oldie is talking like this. I mean why blame DDM if this is the situation.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Apr 2019 23:54

sudeepj wrote:
VikramA wrote:"We had to take defensive measures at all times after the Balakot strike as the Pakistani air force had greater BVR missile capabilities" - Air Marshal Nohwar

What am I missing here. At 50 km range both aim 120 and r77 are equally potent plus su 30 have a advantage because of bigger radar.
IAF is not confident in the capabilities of the R77. End of story. Only the MICA, that too only on the few upgraded mirages is capable. The sad story is, if the Derby-ER is demonstrated on the Tejas, that might be the most potent BVR fighter in the Indian arsenal.

Not true, please dont give more ideas to DDM. We have a large and capable R77 inventory and even a deal with the makers has been struck thanks to Parrikar, to keep these missiles in service for a fair amount of time with BDL to take over maintainamce and life extension when necessary.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Apr 2019 23:55

That is point to stress Pakistan claims JF 17 as wonder aircraft but end of the day was neither BVR or PGM capable. Similarly the PL15 capabilities Aesa seeker are still chinese claims, not sure how true these claims are? Suppossed to be dual pulse motor and not Ramjet yet supposed to be 150km engagement range? And when JF17 couldnt fire Pl10 Nad Pl12 that day I dont see Pl15 it in actual Paf service till 2030.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Apr 2019 23:59

negi wrote: I don't regard Astra a science project however I know our forces better Astra gives nothing more than what R-77 gives may be marginally better however it's coming in 2020 , IAF with new Rafales would want better you want to place a bet there ? That mention of SFDR etc is a science project simply because common sense would say first field the Astra , see how it fares in real world release subsequent improvements , there is a reason AIM 120 has had so many iterations . Tomorrow some scramjet tech might bet published in some paper in some corner it does not mean we start building it , we seem to be all over the place.

Astra offers greater range than R77 (not R77-1) and it has more modes which the baseline R77 does not advertise, such as buddy designation. That makes it far more lethal than a baseline R77 especially as it permits more complex engagement geometries.

VikramA · Post by **VikramA** » 11 Apr 2019 00:01

Aditya_V wrote:From the artcle posted...

if this is remotely true ,then the blame lies with the IAF HQ which formulated such ROE and with the political body which directed it and approved it. this is similar to the nonsense that "we will not cross the LOC" in kargil.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Apr 2019 00:09

Thats always been the problem, we play by the rules Pakis dont, we even warned the PAF twice that day.

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Apr 2019 00:11

Karan M wrote:
negi wrote: I don't regard Astra a science project however I know our forces better Astra gives nothing more than what R-77 gives may be marginally better however it's coming in 2020 , IAF with new Rafales would want better you want to place a bet there ? That mention of SFDR etc is a science project simply because common sense would say first field the Astra , see how it fares in real world release subsequent improvements , there is a reason AIM 120 has had so many iterations . Tomorrow some scramjet tech might bet published in some paper in some corner it does not mean we start building it , we seem to be all over the place.
Astra offers greater range than R77 (not R77-1) and it has more modes which the baseline R77 does not advertise, such as buddy designation. That makes it far more lethal than a baseline R77 especially as it permits more complex engagement geometries.

All that's fine and dandy however in this scenario all these wouldn't have mattered due to following facts :

1. You fire a missile to engage a bogey at edge of it's NEZ when you have the luxury of missing , remember we were outnumbered by a factor of 3-4 . R-77 and AIM 120 C5 are comparable in terms of NEZ per open source info. Pakis had numbers on their side in the air and they came with a 'pre-meditated' move we had to guess/evaluate and respond.
2. When you are the aggressor i.e. you choose at what point of your flight envelope you are pulling the trigger you stand a better chance of scoring a lucky shot at NEZ's edge in this case F-16s were the aggressors , in our case we first had to dodge the AIM 120s and then only think about engaging assuming bogeys were still in range , we either were not in a position or what I believe had to think twice because we were outnumbered.

I am strong believer in domestic weapons programs however I don't like tokenisms and empty celebration of 26 jan parade level demonstrations , Astra has an uphill task because Rafale will come with it's own BVR AAM we all should hope it is at least the Meteor else all the money would be a waste. I also find this whole narrative/argument that our indigenous programs are not in time only due to want of funds and lack of buyer support , as fickle minded as our forces might be but even our MIL complex is no better I mean we all know it's a zero sum game , out of n crores allocated in the kitty if you want to pursue hypersonic Avatar , SFDR and what not while we are still yet to commission a normal BVR AAM I would simply call this lack of focus and a classic case of too many departments within a large institution trying to pursue their own pet projects, I mean for all I care they are most welcome to pursue n projects but then at end of the day said institution cannot claim they ran out of money for X when you spread yourselves too thin.

We have been working on too wide a spectrum , even likes of IAI and Rafael do not work on as many areas as us right from food for soldier , super soldier project , NAG , trishul , Akash , Astra , SFDR you name it we have stuffed our fingers into every god damn space imagine if we would have reduced this area of focus to fewer items and channeled more money and resources into some high ticket items may be few of them would have already been in active service in large numbers.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Apr 2019 00:14

There are only 36 Rafales using Meteors but 270 Su-30s which can potentially use the Astra now that it is integrated with the Bars radar. I don't understand how Astra's success or failure depends on the Meteor acquisition.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 11 Apr 2019 00:14

VikramA wrote:if this is remotely true ,then the blame lies with the IAF HQ which formulated such ROE and with the political body which directed it and approved it. this is similar to the nonsense that "we will not cross the LOC" in kargil.

Please understand why ROEs exist in the first place. Pakis do not understand that, but we must. During BVR combat, without a definitive lock, if a missile had hit a civilian airliner flying in the general vicinity, the fallout of that would have been disastrous. Escalation would be understatement at that point. It was a divine miracle that the jammed AMRAAMs all hit the ground instead of finding another target.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Apr 2019 00:18

negi wrote: SFDR and what not while we are still yet to commission a normal BVR AAM I would simply call this lack of focus and a classic case of too many departments within a large institution trying to pursue their own pet projects, I mean for all I care they are most welcome to pursue n projects but then at end of the day said institution cannot claim they ran out of money for X when you spread yourselves too thin.

What does this mean? The Astra's development trials have been completed to IAF's satisfaction. They have tested against electronic and real targets, high G release, ECM environment etc. Production has begun. How long are they supposed to wait to start the next project? We are playing catch up in this area, we don't have the luxury of time. If they don't start work on the SFDR they will be blamed later for being too slow. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Apr 2019 00:21

nachiket wrote:There are only 36 Rafales using Meteors but 270 Su-30s which can potentially use the Astra now that it is integrated with the Bars radar. I don't understand how Astra's success or failure depends on the Meteor acquisition.

I never said any of what you are implying , I am only saying that IF , IF IAF feels R-77 is inadequate they will say the same thing about Astra their engagement envelopes are comparable , nothing more nothing less. Meteor's reference is relevant because when/if it will enter service with Rafale's it will become a benchmark for BVR AAM it is not up to you or me , that's the pattern of how our services go about procuring stuff.

Why is IN not using Dhruv's and buying shiny new MH60 R ? I mean obviously they are in different weight and range category but then so is Meteor and Astra that's how our forces work they will buy latest and shiniest thing out there in their budget. 5 years down the line we will be world's largest importer of arms in pure USD terms at that point in time I am sure we will enjoy some benefits , stuff like may be MBDA will agree to integrate Meteor with Tejas or other way to look at things is if our economy is doing well and IAF budget increases we will order more Rafales

Astra , Arjun , Tejas et al they all will see service but action ? I don't think so .

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Apr 2019 00:23

negi wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:I dont think this IAF not confident in R77 is true, then IAF would not have ordered soo many SU30 or upgraded MiG 29, Mig 21 to fire R77 or IN would have ordered INS VikramAditya plus Mig 29K. Plus M2000 upgradedversions also didnt fire MICA. Simple reason ROE, once Amraam were fired Su30 had to spoof , by the time they did engagements were amd there no IAf orders to cross the border later and go after PAF aircraft.

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 312074.cms
Well we did not fire simply because initiative was with them i.e. always the guy who chooses to engage has an initiative may be they sneaked in to a range which was close to may be NEZ for AIM 120s fired and quickly disengaged or remained on edge of that zone , our guys knew limitations of our R 77s , moreover because remember we were so damn well prepared for we had hardly what 4-6 in air against 20+ of theirs so may be our guys obviously did not have luxury of firing first and hoping one of them will hit the target. TSP played the game well except that they did not account for a guy like Abhinandan else whatever we did was just regulation percentage tennis , nothing extraordinary played safe and all that.

Have you read the accounts of what happened? The F16s engaged from height at RMax1 (they just didnt want to take any risk). By not getting to NEZ, they screwed up their Pk, which the IAF pilots exploited by immediately deploying countermeasures and maneuvering out of the AMRAAMs engagement zone by cranking. If they had delayed, panicked, they would have had casualties. They then went hot on the F16s which forced the F16s to disengage. In short, TSP didnt play the game well at all. They just undertook a very half baked strike which their pilots were too unskilled or unwilling to exploit, they had the advantage of numbers but even so, they broke off. Sinha remarks their BVR tactics were poor because with 5 AMRAAMs wasted, if they had continued on the same path, they would have literally emptied their entire inventory. The Su30s didnt hit back with R77s because the range, speed differential was too high for a MRAAM to overcome (same issue for even AMRAAM if roles were reversed). The Erieye then reportedly sought to maneuver the 2nd package of F16s which had completed a LGB run, but couldnt guide it in as the time available was limited, towards the Su30s, to ambush them from below. The IAF GCI then vectored the multiple flights of Bisons into the F16s to prevent this. The F16s broke off the vector towards the Su30s and launched on them, which Abhinandan ignored and went onto get his F16. Up north, a much larger JF17, Mirage 3/5 package couldnt fix two Mirage 2000s and broke off after launching/jettisoning multiple Raptor glide bombs. The Erieye was worried the Mirages would intercept the F16s, but before that the GCI already had the Bisons stuck in. The Bisons weren't picked up in advance by the Erieye because a mountain range blocked the radar from behind which the Bisons emerged, otherwise chances are they wouldn't even have attempted the ambush and disengaged earlier.

In short the IAF repeatedly outmaneuvered the F16s and held their ground against superior numbers and the GCI/QRA worked flawlessly. All our SOPs worked and the Pakistanis showed a thorough lack of commitment to a kill. Despite superior numbers (8:2 vs the Su30s for instance), they just wouldn't risk any casualties and close in to the merge or even risk a NEZ high Pk shot (exposing themselves to R77 shots in turn).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Apr 2019 00:36

negi wrote: All that's fine and dandy however in this scenario all these wouldn't have mattered due to following facts :

1. You fire a missile to engage a bogey at edge of it's NEZ when you have the luxury of missing , remember we were outnumbered by a factor of 3-4 . R-77 and AIM 120 C5 are comparable in terms of NEZ per open source info.
2. When you are the aggressor i.e. you choose at what point of your flight envelope you are pulling the trigger you stand a better chance of scoring a lucky shot at NEZ's edge, in our case we first had to dodge the AIM 120s and then only think about engaging assuming bogeys were still in range .

I have the details in my post below. Basically, trying to just score lucky shots and then scramming just implies PAF didnt have the guts or willingness to play an aggressive and accurate BVR game. Other more experienced forces dont do this, because they know a competent adversary will fight back.

I am strong believer in domestic weapons programs however I don't like tokenisms and empty celebration of 26 jan parade level demonstrations , Astra has an uphill task because Rafale will come with it's own BVR AAM we all should hope it is at least the Meteor else all the money would be a waste.

Meteor cant be integrated on the Su30 as MBDA refused to do so. Astra has cleared user associated trials, and a LSP run is already underway at BDL which has set up an entire production line for Astra. All this implies a proper production run.

I also find this whole narrative/argument that our indigenous programs are not in time only due to want of funds and lack of buyer support , as fickle minded as our forces might be but even our MIL complex is no better I mean we all know it's a zero sum game , out of n crores allocated in the kitty if you want to pursue hypersonic Avatar , SFDR and what not while we are still yet to commission a normal BVR AAM I would simply call this lack of focus and a classic case of too many departments within a large institution trying to pursue their own pet projects, I mean for all I care they are most welcome to pursue n projects but then at end of the day said institution cannot claim they ran out of money for X when you spread yourselves too thin.

That is a fair point, but Astra is far ahead in development so its funding or lack thereof wont be a critical factor at present. And IAI and Rafael have a much wider spectrum of products because they started earlier than us. We will catch up.

We have been working on too wide a spectrum , even likes of IAI and Rafael do not work on as many areas as us right from food for soldier , super soldier project , NAG , trishul , Akash , Astra , SFDR you name it we have stuffed our fingers into every god damn space imagine if we would have reduced this area of focus to fewer items and channeled more money and resources into some high ticket items may be few of them would have already been in active service in large numbers.

Most of these programs are mission mode, which means funding is allocated up front from services and production agency, plus IAF. If you have fewer programs, cost allocated to program wont automatically rise as you are assuming, MOD/MOF will benchmark against prior programs and allocate accordingly. Also we dont really have "too many" programs, we have 2-3 in each segment which is what we need. If we dont work on this, mass imports will throttle us.