Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

SidSoma · Post by **SidSoma** » 11 Apr 2019 09:16

I did read that Taiwan is not happy with their Mirage 2000s and is looking to move to western platform. This may be a good chance if it proves to be economical. But yes these will have to be upgraded and that will take time.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Apr 2019 10:23

SidSoma wrote:I did read that Taiwan is not happy with their Mirage 2000s and is looking to move to western platform. This may be a good chance if it proves to be economical. But yes these will have to be upgraded and that will take time.

Mirage 2000 is a western platform. I guess you meant American?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Apr 2019 18:25

Austin wrote:https://twitter.com/manupubby/status/11 ... 7060180992

Negative balance of power was created in the region after the US provided 500 AMRAAMs to the Pakistani air force. This gave them BVR capability that was missing for Pakistan during the Kargil war - Air Marshal Nohwar at an Ananta seminar on Balakot
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.

PAF did not see the 'little fish' that snuck up when its fighters were concentrating on getting a bigger aircraft like the Su 30 MKI - Air Marshal Nohwar.

The R 73 fired by Wing Commander Abhinandan is the most potent close range air to air missile in the world- Air Marshal Nohwar.
The Balakot strike was not a silver bullet. There can be no silver bullet when it comes to Pak sponsored terror. Will require a patient and long term approach - former High Commissioner to Pak Sharat Sabharwal.

Interesting for a serving Air Marshal to confess AMRAAM to change Balance of Power negatively for IAF

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Apr 2019 18:33

AMRAAM that C5 variant eas very adavanced variant sold to Pakis and GOI in 2006 to 2008 kept quiet, till date it is thier only BVR missile.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Apr 2019 18:35

Austin, AM Nohwar is retired AFAIK.

2nd of course, it affects the IAF negatively. PAF went from no BVR to having a 3rd of its force BVR equipped. Isn't that common sense?! We lost the so called BVR advantage vs the PAF.

What is this confession business? Have you been in an alternative world, by any chance? Every magazine article helmed by any rtd person associated with IAF has been screaming about this topic for a decade now, ever since the first US notification came.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Apr 2019 21:20

Karan , I dont recollect any one making a hue and cry over it when they got AMRAAM or other stuff , Nor did IAF came out with any official statement of AMRAAM negitively affecting the balance , atleast I didnt see any.

This is first IAF Air Vice Marshal who has mentioned of Pakistani air force having greater BVR missile capabilities

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 11 Apr 2019 21:39

War is one system going at another. If this was a full war with the entire spectrum of Indian capabilities brought to bear upon the Pukes Air Farce, the outcome would be quite lopsided. In one off skirmishes, the aggressor can tailor the scenario to maximize on their advantages. In such a scenario, the AMRAAM equipment can help the Puke Air Farce to save face. Meteor equipped Rafales, SFDR & I-Derby ER equipped Tejas will put 'paid to' against any such misadventures in future.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Apr 2019 21:50

Austin What confession? US did change balance of power by equipping Fizzile Ya with 500 AMRAAMS which is more than the effective fighter force in IAF. They also supplied JDAM and Paveway and large number of Mk84 & BLU 109 bombs. And who knows half Pakis like Chuck Yeager genre might be helping them integrate nooks.
Please understand the uphill battle Indian forces fight with enemy and Politicians.

I don't want such comments in the forum. Its not a free speech platform.

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Apr 2019 22:34

Hey people can have an opinion and most importantly a perspective ; let's see it this way AM Nohwar has seen both phases i.e. when he was flying initially , TSP did not have the AIM 120 and then in late 2000s they got new AIM 120 C5s , we haven't inducted any BVR AAM after R-77 (Mica being medium range) so it would definitely affect those who sat in leadership roles and did not have to deal with a PAF that had no significant BVR capability and suddenly got gifted hundreds of AIM 120s . We have a leadership across entire fabric that is risk averse everything we do or plan is a result of this core trait.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Apr 2019 23:08

Austin wrote:Karan , I dont recollect any one making a hue and cry over it when they got AMRAAM or other stuff , Nor did IAF came out with any official statement of AMRAAM negitively affecting the balance , atleast I didnt see any.

Then you have been in a parallel universe sorry to say. Here is an article from Air Marshal Raghu Rajan from 2013.
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... air-force/

The PAF is also in the process of acquiring Beyond Visual Range Air-to- Air Missile (BVR AAM) capability for its fighter fleet, a lethal weapon system she did not possess earlier. These are the American AIM 120-C Advanced Medium Air-to Air Missile (AMRAAM) to arm the F-16C. The Chinese PL-12 (BVR AAM) for the new JF-17 Chinese jets, will allow the PAF to contest the Russian R-77 BVR AAMs, on board the Indian MiG-21 BISON and Su-30 MKI fighters.

Gp Captain Murli Menon in 2016
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... for-india/

In the 1990s, the PAF had a relatively older fleet barring the early model F-16s, no AWACS or flight refueling capability, no BVR air-to-air missiles, limited night attack and Electronic Warfare (EW) capabilities. It was definitely outmatched by the IAF in quantity and quality. Within 15 years, a major transformation has taken place.
The IAF has lost the qualitative edge vis-a-vis the PAF and the PLAAF, and may descend into numerical parity with the PAF for the first time in the near future because of our failure to induct new systems in time and in sufficient quantities. The IAF’s draw down will become critical by 2020 with all MiG 21s, MiG 27s and portions of the Jaguar fleet being phased out. No replacements in sufficient quantities are available as of now.

IDSA in 2011.

In 2009, there were reports that the US has concluded a US $ 284 million deal to supply Pakistan with 200 Raytheon AIM-9M-8/9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles (AAMs) and 500 AIM-120C5 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) systems. The AMRAAM sale marks the biggest single export order in the history of the AIM-120 programme and gives the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) a beyond-visual range (BVR) active-radar AAM capability for the first time. According to the report, the missiles will be carried by the PAFs newly ordered F-16C/D Block 50/52 aircraft and its existing F-16A/B Block 15s, which will acquire AMRAAM compatibility as part of a mid-life upgrade39. The induction of the AMRAAM into the PAF gives it a significant combat capability that had previously been denied.

There are literally dozens of articles from veteran crying bloody murder over declining squadron numbers, MMRCA, PAF getting AWACS, AMRAAM, F-16..

Its not the IAFs job to whine in public, its their job to alert the GOI and make them take action. At least now we have S-400, Rafale and some Tejas Mk1A on order.

This is first IAF Air Vice Marshal who has mentioned of Pakistani air force having greater BVR missile capabilities

Again, wake up. There are dozens of rtd people who have been loudly talking of PAF having AMRAAM, BVR, declining IAF squadron numbers, this, that..

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Apr 2019 23:12

negi wrote:Hey people can have an opinion and most importantly a perspective ; let's see it this way AM Nohwar has seen both phases i.e. when he was flying initially , TSP did not have the AIM 120 and then in late 2000s they got new AIM 120 C5s , we haven't inducted any BVR AAM after R-77 (Mica being medium range) so it would definitely affect those who sat in leadership roles and did not have to deal with a PAF that had no significant BVR capability and suddenly got gifted hundreds of AIM 120s .

Yes, exactly. PAF went from being zero BVR to having it on 85 platforms & even 185 (if all JF-17s have it). Even if the Chinese BVR is junk (like their radars) it still complicates our planning.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Apr 2019 23:29

MICA is very much in the same class as AMRAAM and R-77. Maximum advertized range may be a little less but the difference is not too large. It is a more modern missile than the older R-77s we have and may actually be a better match to the AMRAAM. Max range is not everything.

Also a lot depends on the fighter radar as well. R-77 will be less potent on a Mig-21 than a Su-30MKI. ANd in that respect the RDY+MICA combo on the upgraded Mirages is no slouch.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 16 Apr 2019 10:51

X posted

Defence Ministry Completes Negotiations To Buy C-295 Aircraft; Approval From DAC After Lok Sabha Elections

Defence Ministry Completes Negotiations To Buy C-295 Aircraft; Approval From DAC After Lok Sabha Elections

Apr 15 2019,

the aircraft in the picture is only for representational purposes

While the negotiations to acquire C-295 aircraft have concluded, the deal is expected to be approved by the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) only in June after the Lok Sabha elections, reports The Hindu.

“Negotiations for the C-295 deal have been completed. However, the deal needs clearance from the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) as there is a change from earlier parameters,” said a senior defence official.“The next DAC meeting will be held in June. So we will push the deal at that time.”

India is looking to buy 62 Airbus Defence and Space C295 medium transport aircraft (MTA) for the Indian Air Force (IAF) and the Indian Coast Guard (ICG) from the Tata Advanced Systems Limited (TASL).

The firm is a joint venture (JV) between the Tata Group and the European aerospace giant Airbus. The EUR 2.8 billion ($3.15 billion) deal will deliver 56 C295s for the IAF to replace the ageing fleet of Avro 748M transports, and six for the ICG.

Make In India

Under the deal, while 16 C295s will be imported, the remaining 46 aircraft will be assembled at a facility to be set up by the JV near Bangalore. Also as per the 2013 MTA tender, 24 of these will be imported in kit-form for local assembly and contain 30 per cent locally-sourced components. However, the remaining 22 platforms will have 60 per cent of the parts sourced from domestic manufacturers.

from wiki

Data from Airbus Military,

General characteristics

Crew: Two
Capacity: 71 troops
Payload: 9,250 kg (20,400 lb)
Length: 24.50 m (80 ft 3 in)
Wingspan: 25.81 m (84 ft 8 in)
Height: 8.60 m (28 ft 3 in)
Wing area: 59 m² (634.8 ft²)
Empty weight: 11000kg ()
Max. takeoff weight: 23,200 kg (51,146 lb)
Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127G Hamilton Standard 586-F (six bladed), 1,972 kW (2,645 hp) each
Performance

Maximum speed: 576 km/h (311 knots, 358 mph)
Cruise speed: 480 km/h (260 knots, 300 mph)
Range: with 3,000 kg (6,600 lb) payload, 4,600 km (2,500 nmi / 2,875 mi); (with 6,000 kg (13,200 lb) payload, 3,700 km (2,000 nmi / 2,300 mi))
Range with max 9,250 kg (20,400 lb) payload: 1,300 km (700 nmi / 805 mi)
Ferry range: 5,400 km (2,900 nmi / 3,335 mi)
Service ceiling: 9,100 m (30,000 ft)
Takeoff run: 670 m (2,200 ft)
Landing run: 320 m (1,050 ft)

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2019 10:58

What an utter waste of scarce money when so many far more urgent acquisitions are pending.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 16 Apr 2019 11:07

Is there no concept of priorities in our acquisitions? I mean we're stuck at 5 AWACS and 6 old refuelers. There seems to be zero co-ordination between MoD and the IAF.

negi · Post by **negi** » 16 Apr 2019 11:22

Well why is it a waste , when S400 , AK203 and dozens of similar imports are justified so is this . Every year the MoD has to do bandar bant between the services ICG has been asking for it's own medium range AC for a long long time , their pilots were spending time in IN bases and sharing IN assets to even maintain minimum flying hours to ICG this is their top ask , MoD's modus operandi is to give everyone something to cheer about this is one such item where there is synergy between what IAF and ICG need so it must have been easy one to sign on. We have too many organisations , too many cooks at every level , top heavy structure and more men per task than any other military on this planet , add to this how MoD works and we will always be surprised by such acquisitions

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 16 Apr 2019 11:24

S-400 and the rifles satisfy a critical need. Reason for imports vs local manufacture for the rifles can be debated. But nobody is arguing that the current INSAS did not need replacing.

In the case of C-295 I fail to see the critical need.

negi · Post by **negi** » 16 Apr 2019 11:26

You may feel that way ICG may not. India has done just fine without any BMD for all this while we could have waited for AAD to hit a commercial run , same with LCH over the Longbow , next version of INSAS with it's deficiencies fixed over the AK 203 etc etc but we chose to import because of some reason or other . ICG has been asking for this AC type for more than 10 years now .

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Apr 2019 11:28

IAF badly needed transport aircraft to replace HS-748 and AN-32 as these types facing block obsolescence in next 5-10 years. Eventually, they might buy more of this type.

The MTA capability chosen by IAF now differs greatly compared to planned Indo-Russian MTA though from Turbofan to Turboprop from 20T Payload to ~ 9 T

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2019 11:36

negi wrote:Well why is it a waste , when S400 , AK203 and dozens of similar imports are justified so is this .

S400s and AK203s are arguably amongst the most important warfighting acquisitions we made. One which compensates somewhat for our falling a/c numbers. Another a design that just works everywhere and is soldier proof. But the C295? More of a good to have item rather than one essential to have.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2019 11:39

negi wrote:You may feel that way ICG may not. India has done just fine without any BMD for all this while we could have waited for AAD to hit a commercial run , same with LCH over the Longbow , next version of INSAS with it's deficiencies fixed over the AK 203 etc etc but we chose to import because of some reason or other . ICG has been asking for this AC type for more than 10 years now .

This is not just BMD which too is a critical need, but AD plus BMD. IAF plans to use S400s to regain the AWACS edge (use it to push back Erieyes further into Pak territory) and also compensate for falling squadron numbers. Ak is a soldier favorite and its design is suoposedly simple enough that even OFB QA/QC wont mess it up.

We could have bought a few P8I for ICG or even a handful of C295. Avros BTW have a lot of life left in them and with engine upgrades can easily soldier on for a couple of decades per reports. This is a luxury purchase when we are missing essential items for lack of funds.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economic ... 758953.cms

negi · Post by **negi** » 16 Apr 2019 11:40

As I said here on forum everything is seen on technical merits ; real life is different organisations have to preserve their turf etc etc . Our prioritization cannot be good or bad based on one or two purchases it is the way it is because of institutional culture and how we work, the same prioritzation that gave us S400 also gave us C295 is what I am saying , we cannot critque one but defend another because we like one over the other .

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2019 11:42

Wohi tho...these turf battles are bloody breaking our entire bank and ruining us.

And those two purchases arent the same. S400 can literally save millions of lives in a BMD attack, what can new aircraft in IAFs comms squadron do?? Think it through, you dont need 56 aircraft for CG, only some 8-10.

Clearly there is no prioritisation schedule. If there was, warfighting assets would take precedence first and foremost.

Forget 1-2 purchases, same theme runs throughout. Subs w/o torpedoes etc.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2019 11:51

For the same price as C295 deal $3.15 Bn, 2 Phalcons, 1 Netra, some 100 Su30s upgraded.

$3.15 Billion= 2 Phalcons at $800Mn, 3 Netras at $300Mn, and 100x Su30 upgrades at $15 Mn each = $1.5Bn. Still adds up to $2.6 Bn. Use the remaining $600 Mn for CG C-295s!!

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Apr 2019 12:50

Logistics is never a luxury. I like the C295 purchase and hope it becomes a permanent fixture in our mil landscape with Tata providing the locally built platform for many roles including AEW, MPA besides being a base medium transport.

The numbers are decisive but not overkill with a MII commitment in the private industry. I like it. This is a good system urgently needed to replace two old work horses in the Avro and An-32.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 16 Apr 2019 14:05

chola wrote:This is a good system urgently needed to replace two old work horses in the Avro and An-32.

The Avro is already obsolete and currently used to move cargo and not people. The An-32 will become obsolete in next 5-10 years. So a recapitalization of the transport fleet is imminent. Though personally I would have wished for more C-130 given its STOL capabilities. The Utopian transport fleet would be all C-17 and C-130

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Apr 2019 14:13

i wonder if the short chassis C130J is somewhat comparable in cost and size to the C295?
all the 130 we got were the long chassis c130J-30 which is around 20 feet longer.
i think both versions are still made though long chassis is probably most of it now.

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Apr 2019 14:24

tsarkar wrote:
chola wrote:This is a good system urgently needed to replace two old work horses in the Avro and An-32.
The Avro is already obsolete and currently used to move cargo and not people. The An-32 will become obsolete in next 5-10 years. So a recapitalization of the transport fleet is imminent. Though personally I would have wished for more C-130 given its STOL capabilities. The Utopian transport fleet would be all C-17 and C-130

I don't disagree, Saar. But little chance of LockMart JV I would think. Sixty years and 3000 examples and not one built overseas.

I think the C295 can be that locally ubiquitous medium sized jack of many trades that the C-130 plays for NATO. Smaller yes but within our capability to make.

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Apr 2019 14:51

Singha wrote:i wonder if the short chassis C130J is somewhat comparable in cost and size to the C295?
all the 130 we got were the long chassis c130J-30 which is around 20 feet longer.
i think both versions are still made though long chassis is probably most of it now.

Still 4 engines vs 2 with twice the payload. It will be quite a bit more expensive me thinks. USAF purchase in 2016 for 14 brand new C130Js was nearly $1B, give or take $70m per unit. C295's unit cost is around $28m.

The C130 short version won't come near to halving the cost though I have no figures for it.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 16 Apr 2019 15:05

Re: C295, we've to distinguish between tactical/emergency purchases versus strategic acquisitions. IAF and GoI has shown ability to negotiate a deal that'll create a line in India to produce new airframes for next decade, if not longer. We will have better control of supply chain, upgrade roadmap thru the life of these airframes. Avro/An-32 have given us zilch ability and we're completely at the mercy of OEMs.

All other urgent requirements are equally valid but not mutually exclusive. They'll not be setting up domestic expertise like C295 deal will.

So stop this whining like Western media comparing Indian Space program to number of people below poverty line.

negi · Post by **negi** » 16 Apr 2019 15:28

India has never thought about logistics when we import stuff it's always based on other variables ; if logistics was our thing we wouldn't operate world's most diverse AC fleet in terms of OEMs .

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 Apr 2019 16:01

may not be entirely true. have heard anecdotally that we keep bare minimum spares inventory and our very low labour costs compared to the western countries offsets some of the economics. plus there is jugaaR onlee...
very low spares is a problem in war time

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2019 19:06

We actually over provision for spares but now with all these PBL agreements that might change as the onus is on the OEM to guarantee high uptime.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 16 Apr 2019 19:15

Indeed disappointing decision by Govt.

For 7 years st. antony, choked purchase of offensive weapons, while cleared c 17, c130 type non-offensive platforms were cleared at lightening speed. To make up for that modi was supposed to focus on inducting offensive weapons ...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Apr 2019 22:00

It is a good decision , You cant forever fly the HS-748 and AN-32 fleet , these are just refurbished and flown for now much beyond their service life and very soon will end TTL in next 5-10 years , IAF trasport fleet faces block obsolence

The new aircraft will more effecient , needing lesser crew just 2 over 3-4 for the current one and more fuel effecient too saving on fuel cost.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2019 22:24

HAL notes the Avros have 2 decades of airframe life in them, so not 5-10 years.

The Avros are in IAFs communications squadrons and with the C-130, plus AN-32 upgrades they are not exactly crying out for replacement.

We are wasting $ 3.2 Billion on these aircraft.

In a shooting war, you need upgrades to the combat units first and foremost.

The HAL upgrade would put enough life in these aircraft, save us tons of money which could be used for combat assets.

But never mind, lets make a "strategic decision" to blow up our scarce funds.

Note the numbers once more. For the price of these 60 odd C-295s, you can get 2x Phalcons, 3x Netras, 100x Su-30 upgrades plus have $600 Mn approx for several C-295s for the Coast Guard but lets ignore that.

negi · Post by **negi** » 16 Apr 2019 23:38

By logistics I never meant spares I meant seeking commonality in terms of ops , training etc . We operate AC from more US, UK, Ru , Fr and the list goes on even when importing AC for same mission instead of follow on order of the type we ended up ordering something completely different simply because it was just about issuing a tender , doing field trials and signing a cheque . Pilots get to fly something new , IAF gets to tick a checkbox and MoD et al anyways don't care about any of this for their headache is to deal primarily with finances and politics.

Indian military has not fought truly large scale wars that spanned months leave alone years that's why such things won't sink in easily , we always had big powers watching over every conflict that we participated in and quickly cooled things when things were getting a bit too hot for the either side , the only conflict where we got stretched was the one where we lost to China and to this day there haven't been any lessons learnt.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Apr 2019 23:55

PAF is getting whatever it can lay its hands on. PLAAF, the same. We are waiting for the latest and greatest.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 17 Apr 2019 00:01

I understand C-295 replacing ghe Avro. But how does it cater to An-32 obsolescence? It lacks the overpowered engines of the An-32 that gave it the ability to take off from Leh and other high altitude bases and ALG's with useful payload.

Many years ago when the Avro replacement was being talked about, there was another aircraft in the fray - the Alenia C-27J Spartan, which is kind of like a little brother of the C-130. Uses the same engines too. Had much better performance than the C-295. But they withdrew from the competition for some reason.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Apr 2019 00:59

Indranil wrote:PAF is getting whatever it can lay its hands on. PLAAF, the same. We are waiting for the latest and greatest.

There is a Yiddish saying:
"Overfeed on hope, you will die of starvation!"