Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 29 Aug 2019 03:45

IAF to get 'building blaster' Spice-2000 bombs by mid-September.

In a major boost for India's aerial firepower, the Indian Air Force is set to receive the 'building blaster' version of the Balakot air strike-fame Spice-2000 bombs by mid-September. Top IAF sources told ANI that the Spice-2000 bombs are scheduled to be delivered to the Indian Air Force (IAF) from Israel around mid-September along with the Mark 84 warhead and bombs which can destroy buildings completely.

The supply of these weapons from Israel will happen around the time when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is likely to visit India for a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The Indian Air Force had signed a contract with Israel in June this year for acquiring more than 100 Spice 2000 bombs under the emergency procurement powers of the services given by the Narendra Modi government.

The contract was signed as the Air Force wanted to acquire the bombs after their successful usage in the Balakot airstrikes against a Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist camp in Pakistan.

During the Balakot strikes, the Air Force had dropped Spice-2000 bombs from Mirage-2000 fighter aircraft after a pack of 12 of these fighters crossed the Line of Control to strike the Jaish facility in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

However, the Spice-2000 bombs used in the Balakot strikes were the penetrator version which made holes using their weight in the concrete rooftops of the buildings in the Jaish camp which don't destroy buildings but explode inside killing people with the mix of 70-80 kg explosives with shrapnel.

Under the emergency powers, the three services could buy any equipment of their choice worth up to ₹300 crore to prepare for any hostilities.

The Spice-2000 bombs have been acquired from Israel which is one of the main weapon and ammunition supplier of the Air Force.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 29 Aug 2019 20:55

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 30 Aug 2019 02:25

Deal possible by Modi-Putin annual summit next month?

IAF plans to buy 21 MiG-29, 12 Su-30MKI

NEW DELHI: In a move likely to boost its dwindling fighter squadron strength, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is pushing a proposal for acquiring 33 new combat aircraft including 21 MiG-29s and 12 Sukhoi 30s.

A proposal in this regard by the IAF is likely to be taken up before a high-level meeting of the Defence Ministry in the next few weeks, government sources told ANI.

The 12 Su-30 MKIs are being planned to be inducted for replacing the number of aircraft lost by the Air Force in different accidents, they said.

The 12 additional Sukhois will help the Indian Air Force to maintain its fleet of 272 Su-30MKI fighters.

India had placed orders for 272 Su-30 fighter jets over a period of 10-15 years in different batches and senior officers feel that the number of planes acquired so far would be enough for the service's heavy-weight aircraft requirement.

The 21 MiG 29s that the Indian Air Force is planning to acquire are from Russia which has offered to sell these planes to help the Air Force to meet its requirement of new fighters.

"As per plans, the MiG-29s on offer would be of the latest upgraded MiG-29s which are already in service with the IAF. The radars and other equipment on the planes would also be of the latest standards," the sources said.

The negotiations for the MiG-29s are at an advanced stage and the IAF is hoping to finalise the deal at the earliest possible, they said.

The Indian Air Force had carried out a study to check if the airframes of the MiG-29s on offer were good enough for it to operate for a long time.

MiG-29s are flown by the Air Force and the pilots are familiar with it but the ones offered by the Russians are different from the ones in the Indian inventory.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 30 Aug 2019 02:57

The 12 additional Sukhois will help the Indian Air Force to maintain its fleet of 272 Su-30MKI fighters.

That is incorrect. The final number should be 270 not 272. 2 extra aircraft were ordered as attrition replacements after 2 had crashed. At 18 aircraft per squadron, it translates into 15 squadrons exactly. Not sure if Su-30 squadrons have more than 18 aircraft, with a couple of extra aircraft as squadron reserves which would bring the total number of squadrons down to 14.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 30 Aug 2019 02:59

Article title is misleading. 33 total, inclusive of 21 MiG-29s and 12 Su-30s, not 33 MiG-29s.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Aug 2019 04:03

corrected

LakshmanPST · Post by **LakshmanPST** » 30 Aug 2019 09:03

nachiket wrote:
The 12 additional Sukhois will help the Indian Air Force to maintain its fleet of 272 Su-30MKI fighters.
That is incorrect. The final number should be 270 not 272. 2 extra aircraft were ordered as attrition replacements after 2 had crashed. At 18 aircraft per squadron, it translates into 15 squadrons exactly. Not sure if Su-30 squadrons have more than 18 aircraft, with a couple of extra aircraft as squadron reserves which would bring the total number of squadrons down to 14.

I think Su30 squadrons have 20 jets per squadron... So, it is more like 13.5 squadrons...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Aug 2019 09:05

0.5 sqn with TACDE.

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 30 Aug 2019 12:03

The upgraded mig 29 have a calender life of 40 years and 4000 hours. The fatigue analysis of IAF mig 29 have life extended to 3500 hours. That works out to 90 hours / years and start retiring from 2027 onwards on completion of 40 years service life.
The additional 21 Mig29 can be expected to serve for 15 to 20 years @200-240 hours /year will add valuable flying hours to present 3 sq of mig 29 so that the pilots get adequate flying training. It's just a stop gap buy.
12 Su 30 addition will take the total buy to 284 nos of which 9 have crashed. Will result in 14.5 sq @ 18/sq.
Limited buy of Su 30 means that IAF will go for large buy of Rafales.

srai · Post by **srai** » 31 Aug 2019 03:48

...
12 Su 30 addition will take the total buy to 284 nos of which 9 have crashed. Will result in 14.5 sq @ 18/sq.
...

13.5 squadrons including reserves

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 600926.cms

...
Sources said that the Air Force will have a total of 13.5 squadrons of the planes in service by the end of 2021-22, with few of them being in reserve.
...

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 31 Aug 2019 04:03

India moves towards broad adoption of ASRAAM missile- FlightGlobal

MBDA’s Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM) appears set for integration on several Indian combat aircraft.

The weapon will be part of the missile armament for Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) Tejas Mk-1A, a combat capable version of the Hawk Mk132 called Hawk-India (Hawk-i) and Sukhoi SU-30MKIs, in addition to upgraded Sepecat/HAL Jaguar strike aircraft.

ASRAAM emerged as the winner of a competitive evaluation for the air force’s ‘New Generation Close Combat Missile’ (NGCCM) programme. MBDA was awarded a £250 million ($428 million) contract in July 2014 to supply the missile for the Jaguar.

The company is keen to produce the weapon in India. “MBDA is committed to setting up an ASRAAM live build facility in India,” it says. “We have opened up our supply chains to Indian businesses.”

HAL is now integrating ASRAAM on two Jaguars.

“Integration will be completed by this year,” says HAL. “Firing trials will be taken up by the air force post integration. On successful completion of trials and demonstrations, HAL will take up series modification of Jaguar aircraft for integration of ASRAAM based on the requirement of the air force.”

In 2009, HAL was contracted to upgrade 61 Jaguars from the Display, Attack, Range and Inertial Navigation-I (DARIN-I) standard to the DARIN-III standard. The air force operates approximately 110 Jaguars of different variants.

HAL is in discussions with the air force for integration of ASRAAM on Tejas Mk-1A, even as it awaits an order for 83 aircraft. “At present, there is no directive from IAF on carrying out the modification.”

MBDA, however, sees a clear opportunity for integrating the weapon with Tejas. “Fitting ASRAAM to Tejas would be consistent with the IAF’s aspiration for ASRAAM to be its fleet-wide short-range air-to-air missile.”

In regard to integrating the weapon on the Su-30MKI, HAL has this to say: “At present, there is no directive from IAF on carrying out modification on Su-30MKI aircraft for integration of ASRAAM. However, HAL is keen to carry out the modification.”

More than 200 SU-30MKIs have been manufactured under licence in India.

HAL has integrated the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile on the SU-30MKI, as well as indigenously developed weapons such as the Astra Beyond Visual Air-to-Air Missile (BVRAAM), New Generation Anti-Radiation Missile (NGARM), and various precision guided munitions.

In addition to ASRAAM, MBDA’s Brimstone is also being considered for the indigenously developed Hawk-i, which is a HAL funded upgrade of BAE Systems Hawk Mk132 jet trainers, manufactured under license.

“We believe that arming Hawk is a logical step for India, and that ASRAAM and Brimstone together offer a mature and high-performance weapon suite that, if fitted to Hawk, could be decisive in a major conflict….with Brimstone, a single Hawk has the ability to accurately and easily destroy six tanks simultaneously,” says MBDA.

So, HAL keen to integrate the ASRAAM with Tejas Mk1A and Su-30MKI aircraft, while IAF is basically taking its own sweet time till the matter gains sudden urgency and then they'll be cribbing about how it is taking forever to get the missile integrated by HAL. Same old story being repeated. How much will HAL ask for to get the ASRAAM integration completed on the Tejas Mk1A and Su-30MKI? Why can't the IAF get that file moving, if it really wants to use the ASRAAM as the fleet wide standard CCM?

srai · Post by **srai** » 31 Aug 2019 07:03

^^^
The current trend in customer expectation seems to be that HAL funds its own R&D/integration without any guarantees. Then haggle on final costs on purchase/integration into the fleet. Seeing this across multiple programs.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Aug 2019 22:49

Q.Why can't there be a universal missile for both WVR and BVR in same manner as we have with naval SAMs like Barak, B-8, etc. The same seeker options with a smaller AAM perhaps, unless higher speeds and performance are required for WVR.Barring extra fuel for range , eventually the AAM has to chase the same sharply manoeuvring fighter in terminal phase.
Can this be attempted with Aastra?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 31 Aug 2019 22:59

IAF is yet to decide on a SPJ for the LCA Mk1, FOC. Taking their own sweet time and doing eff-all in the process. And if there's a shooting war tomorrow, those birds will have to deploy without SPJs, and then folks will leak stuff to the media about how the Tejas lacks the same. Super frustrating!

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 01 Sep 2019 23:43

details already posted above.

apologies didn't see that.

twitter

Thread: #Indian Air Force plans to buy 21 MiG-29s & 12 Sukhoi 30 fighter jets - A proposal in this regard by the IAF is likely to be taken up before a high-level meeting of the Defence Ministry in the next few weeks

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 02 Sep 2019 15:56

Abhinandan Varthaman's trademark mustache is gone!!

he seems to have trimmed it.

twitter

Indian Air Force Chief BS Dhanoa flew a sortie with Wg Cdr Abhinandan Varthaman at AF Stn Pathankot today in a MiG-21 trainer. This was the last sortie flown by ACM Dhanoa in a fighter aircraft before his retirement. They took off around 1130h for a 30 min sortie.

srai · Post by **srai** » 02 Sep 2019 18:25

Matra-BAe AIM-132 ASRAAM
- The RAAF's New WVR AAM
Some interesting tidbits

...
The AIM-132 ASRAAM - A Technical Perspective

The ASRAAM is radically different in many respects from other established and development missiles designed for WVR combat. The missile is heavily optimised for best possible pre-merge performance, following the contemporary dictum that whoever gets the first shot off is likely to win. Therefore the missile is built from the outset to acquire an opponent and successfully engage it at maximum range. Should the first shot not succeed, the missile is designed to provide close-in performance to destroy the target aircraft at close quarters.
...
Performance and Operational Philosophy

The ASRAAM is designed to enable the early engagement of opposing fighter aircraft, and this is reflected in the missile's combination of highly sensitive FPA seeker, midcourse inertial package and high energy motor. In a pre-merge engagement scenario, the FPA seeker allows target acquisition at significant BVR ranges, and the inertial midcourse guidance package means that the missile can be fired if necessary even blind to intercept an inbound threat aircraft. The high energy motor provides very high acceleration, and range performance which has traditionally been the domain of radar guided BVR missiles. Like its BVR active radar counterpart, the AMRAAM, ASRAAM will fly itself to a geometrically appropriate position, activate its seeker, acquire the target and home to impact. Because a short burn motor is used, and the FPA seeker is of course passive, the victim aircraft may have little if any warning of the inbound ASRAAM.

...

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 02 Sep 2019 20:45

^^^
There must be some down side also to this approach (i.e. maneuverability), it's FPA is nothing special compared to its western contemporaries and weighs about same too (so total energy of it rocket motor should be in the same range). Also in this scenario why not shoot off a BVR missile instead in the first place?

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 02 Sep 2019 21:04

chetak wrote:details already posted above.

apologies didn't see that.

twitter

Thread: #Indian Air Force plans to buy 21 MiG-29s & 12 Sukhoi 30 fighter jets - A proposal in this regard by the IAF is likely to be taken up before a high-level meeting of the Defence Ministry in the next few weeks

If IAF does not have the money for commited contracts, on what basis are they sending proposals to MoD? Really hope they don't go for the rusting Mig-29s, IMO it will be the worst way to spend the little money we actually have.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Sep 2019 15:23

abhik wrote:^^^
There must be some down side also to this approach (i.e. maneuverability), it's FPA is nothing special compared to its western contemporaries and weighs about same too (so total energy of it rocket motor should be in the same range). Also in this scenario why not shoot off a BVR missile instead in the first place?

IIR near BVR/BVR missiles are ideal in the tail chase scenario where the seeker can maintain lock on a high-heat target. Its FPA is contemporary - that allows the missile to home in on specific targets and wont be distracted by conventional flares, easily. Its got a larger airframe than the AIM-9X so it outranges it.

In fact after Abhi's kill - I am surprised you are even questioning the value of the ASRAAM!

Its a lethal capability - a high speed dash missile, which is entirely passive. An incoming fighter may have no idea he's been fired upon at all, especially if the firing platform was not active with its radar, used its own IRST for the bearing fix + datalinked radar info from its peer, used it to fire an ASRAAM salvo.

The Russian R-27TE is very similar in concept.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Sep 2019 15:50

abhik wrote:
chetak wrote:details already posted above.

apologies didn't see that.

twitter

If IAF does not have the money for commited contracts, on what basis are they sending proposals to MoD? Really hope they don't go for the rusting Mig-29s, IMO it will be the worst way to spend the little money we actually have.

Where is the evidence that IAF does not have capex for committed contracts?
Also, if the MOD clears the proposal, it is implicit that the MOF is backing it, as its part of the review process. Please read up on how the approval process works.

Prithwiraj · Post by **Prithwiraj** » 03 Sep 2019 16:50

Back to back 6 Su 30 MKI take off from some airbase in India with a lone drummer cheering them by the side of the runway --- with lots of newly built or under construction hangers.. quite a video --- I wonder which airbase it is. Another quality video from the best Aviation videographer of India (IMHO) - Abhishek Singh

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 03 Sep 2019 17:19

Prithwiraj wrote:Back to back 6 Su 30 MKI take off from some airbase in India with a lone drummer cheering them by the side of the runway --- with lots of newly built or under construction hangers.. quite a video --- I wonder which airbase it is. Another quality video from the best Aviation videographer of India (IMHO) - Abhishek Singh

marvelous !!

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 03 Sep 2019 22:26

Karan M wrote:
abhik wrote:^^^
There must be some down side also to this approach (i.e. maneuverability), it's FPA is nothing special compared to its western contemporaries and weighs about same too (so total energy of it rocket motor should be in the same range). Also in this scenario why not shoot off a BVR missile instead in the first place?
IIR near BVR/BVR missiles are ideal in the tail chase scenario where the seeker can maintain lock on a high-heat target. Its FPA is contemporary - that allows the missile to home in on specific targets and wont be distracted by conventional flares, easily. Its got a larger airframe than the AIM-9X so it outranges it.

In fact after Abhi's kill - I am surprised you are even questioning the value of the ASRAAM!

Its a lethal capability - a high speed dash missile, which is entirely passive. An incoming fighter may have no idea he's been fired upon at all, especially if the firing platform was not active with its radar, used its own IRST for the bearing fix + datalinked radar info from its peer, used it to fire an ASRAAM salvo.

The Russian R-27TE is very similar in concept.

As per the above, ASRAAM has a higher range as it has a short burn motor (compared to others WVR) which takes it to a higher speed, but that also means it is coasting for longer, and possibly has lower maneuverability while the rocket is firing (for e.g. if the target is behind the launching aircraft). Per wiki the Germans left ASRAAM project due these concerns and went with their own design.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Sep 2019 22:43

Have you read the entire article. It says:

The missile's REMUS powerplant is unique in several respects. Manufactured by Royal Ordnance, Summerfield, the motor uses a proprietary strip steel laminate casing, rather than a conventional machined tubular casing. The laminated casing is stiffer, lighter, and much more tolerant of physical mishandling or shrapnel/spall/bullet damage in comparison with conventional designs. The casing forms a combustion chamber which exhausts through a blast tube and fixed geometry nozzle. With a 6.5" external diameter, the motor contains roughly 70% more propellant per unit length in comparison with the established Mk.36 Sidewinder motor. Using a low smoke, low flame propellant, the motor is designed with a boost only burn profile. As a result, the missile exhibits arguably the best kinematic performance of any contemporary WVR missile design.

In short, you have misunderstood how it works as there is no indication either that the quoted range includes its coasting time. Rather, it makes more sense that the quoted range is when the motor is *on* allowing the missile to engage maneuvering, agile targets at greater range. It contains more fuel, goes farther.

Next, Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASRAAM#Description

To provide the needed power, the ASRAAM is built on a 16.51 cm (6½ inch) diameter rocket motor compared with Sidewinder's (AIM-9M and X) and IRIS-T's 12.7 cm (5 inch) motors (which trace their history to the 1950s unguided Zuni rocket). This gives the ASRAAM significantly more thrust and therefore increased speed and range up to 50 km

The ASRAAM has a more energetic motor (1.5x the dia) than the IRIS-T - Germany's choice.

How much maneuverability or agility does a WVR missile need is determined by a bunch of factors - the G's pulled relate to speed, seeker capability (not getting seduced by countermeasures).. but there is no *credible* report yet which suggests the ASRAAM *lacks* maneuverability. If anything, because of the larger motor it will be more agile with an expanded NEZ and its maneuverability too is sufficient (i.e. it pulls enough G's at the correct speed, to keep the target within its seekers tracking limits and it can either lead or chase the target depending on its algorithms).

Each time a missile maneuvers, it loses energy. In the case of the ASRAAM because of its larger motor, it retains more energy to spend than the average competitor. In short, its more agile.

A Python in comparison has far more surfaces. Its designers can claim that it is more maneuverable but there are persistent complaints that draggy missiles tend to lose out on sustained chases or at range. IRIS-T is an interesting case. It has the standard Mica style lifting body mid-body wings and seems to rely on thrust vectoring for its real maneuverability.

In short, the ASRAAM can well be maneuverable enough to make dodging it, within its NEZ, really hard (if not entirely impossible, despite the use of the term) and can give IAF fighters a significant advantage over the PLAAF and PAF fighters in a variety of scenarios. Allows for an entirely passive launch at range, and speed.

Also allows IAF fighters to engage *RF optimized* stealth fighters at near-BVR ranges (30km+) also low flying cruise missiles etc which cannot use clutter to avoid RF missile shots.

Its arguably the only missile (apart from the Mica-IR) which can assist the IAF in the LO opponent scenario. The Mica even features a datalink mode. But a datalink can be detected. The ASRAAM is entirely passive.

An Irbis-E equipped Su-30 upgrade + ASRAAM can be a J-20 killer.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Sep 2019 00:01

KaranM,
I would like a discussion of WVR needs in IAF.
Lets first quantify whats the threat?
What types of current WVR in IAF inventory? Aircraft and WVR.
What should be the WVR for meeting the threats?
And possible solutions and quantities?
Take into account that in crises times WVR are flwon and there are only so many sorties that can be flown before they unit becomes a dud.
Please select your team.

I think this will give a white paper from BRF open source.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 04 Sep 2019 07:54

Karan M wrote:
Also allows IAF fighters to engage *RF optimized* stealth fighters at near-BVR ranges (30km+) also low flying cruise missiles etc which cannot use clutter to avoid RF missile shots.

Its arguably the only missile (apart from the Mica-IR) which can assist the IAF in the LO opponent scenario. The Mica even features a datalink mode. But a datalink can be detected. The ASRAAM is entirely passive.

An Irbis-E equipped Su-30 upgrade + ASRAAM can be a J-20 killer.

I would add upgrade IRST along with Irbis-E (Prefer a 2000 TR modules GaN AESA radar instead though).

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Sep 2019 09:09

Sumeet wrote:I would add upgrade IRST along with Irbis-E (Prefer a 2000 TR modules GaN AESA radar instead though).

Is any country fielding a GaN based FCR yet?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Sep 2019 12:24

Even the upgraded Mirages and 29UPG dont have a PESA/AESA , IAF has opted for Slotted Array for even its premium aircraft Mirages.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Sep 2019 12:50

ramana wrote:KaranM,
I would like a discussion of WVR needs in IAF.
Lets first quantify whats the threat?
What types of current WVR in IAF inventory? Aircraft and WVR.
What should be the WVR for meeting the threats?
And possible solutions and quantities?
Take into account that in crises times WVR are flwon and there are only so many sorties that can be flown before they unit becomes a dud.
Please select your team.

I think this will give a white paper from BRF open source.

Let me collect some data on this.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Sep 2019 12:53

Austin wrote:Even the upgraded Mirages and 29UPG dont have a PESA/AESA , IAF has opted for Slotted Array for even its premium aircraft Mirages.

They don't have options.
The Russians didn't have an AESA when the MiG-29 Upg was signed and the Mirage aircraft upgrade was so expensive we opted for the less expensive RDY3 (as versus the premium RDY2).
The RDY3 is the redbadged RC-400 on which I had posted before, still a capable set drawing on Thales rich operational experience, but its likely the first true AESA in AF service will be the RBE-2 and then the one on LCA Mk1A, but the set on Su-30 will outrange them both.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Sep 2019 12:54

Sumeet wrote:
Karan M wrote:
Also allows IAF fighters to engage *RF optimized* stealth fighters at near-BVR ranges (30km+) also low flying cruise missiles etc which cannot use clutter to avoid RF missile shots.

Its arguably the only missile (apart from the Mica-IR) which can assist the IAF in the LO opponent scenario. The Mica even features a datalink mode. But a datalink can be detected. The ASRAAM is entirely passive.

An Irbis-E equipped Su-30 upgrade + ASRAAM can be a J-20 killer.
I would add upgrade IRST along with Irbis-E (Prefer a 2000 TR modules GaN AESA radar instead though).

An IDDM IRST program has been cleared by DAC, no idea whether it has made significant progress.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 04 Sep 2019 15:14

Karan M wrote:
Austin wrote:Even the upgraded Mirages and 29UPG dont have a PESA/AESA , IAF has opted for Slotted Array for even its premium aircraft Mirages.
They don't have options.
The Russians didn't have an AESA when the MiG-29 Upg was signed and the Mirage aircraft upgrade was so expensive we opted for the less expensive RDY3 (as versus the premium RDY2).
The RDY3 is the redbadged RC-400 on which I had posted before, still a capable set drawing on Thales rich operational experience, but its likely the first true AESA in AF service will be the RBE-2 and then the one on LCA Mk1A, but the set on Su-30 will outrange them both.

Jag??

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Sep 2019 15:30

Good catch - had forgotten about DARIN-3 entirely, not sure though whether the DARIN-3s will be "all up" in terms of capability/antenna size.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 04 Sep 2019 19:11

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/11 ... 35106?s=21

#BreakingNews

HAL's #HTT40 finally undertakes 5-turn spin successfully today. It is mandatory to demonstrate a 6-turn (dropping from the sky at 1000 ft/min) and the young ARDC team is all focussed for this in a few days, weather permitting. What an achievement. 1/2 @akananth

Big round of applause to the #HTT40 team for they knew that success would at striking range one day. Despite all kinds of mess #HAL is in now, this team stuck to their guns, focussed. All the best for 6-turn spin. @manoharparrikar will be a happy man. 2/2

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 05 Sep 2019 01:16

Cain Marko wrote:
Sumeet wrote:I would add upgrade IRST along with Irbis-E (Prefer a 2000 TR modules GaN AESA radar instead though).
Is any country fielding a GaN based FCR yet?

Our LCA Tejas could have been one of the first to feature GaN AESA radar but ... (see below)

From 2015:

https://saabgroup.com/media/stories/sto ... echnology/

Recently Saab won the prestigious Aviation Week Laureate Award for bringing gallium nitride (GaN) electronics to military radar and electronic-warfare systems, introducing the technology into products for delivery in 2016.

In early March Saab received the award, dubbed the Oscars of the defence and aviation industries, for bringing GaN technology to the market through the new members of the extended Giraffe surface radar family, as well Electronic Warfare. “This is further acknowledgement Saab is world leading in active electronically scanned array (AESA) technology for surface and airborne radar and electronic warfare”, remarked Micael Johansson, head of Saab business area Electronic Defence Systems.

GaN is a semi-conductive material currently under intensive development. Areas of use include LED-lights and Blu-ray components, and now it is also being incorporated into microwave applications in the military industry. GaN technology is already included in the new members of Saab’s extended surface radar family, which were launched in 2014. GaN gives higher power efficiently, higher output power and is a more robust material for chip design. This allows an extended range through higher output and higher reliability.

From 2017 (SAAB press release)

Saab Offers World Class Sensor Package for Indian Tejas LCA

15 February 2017

Defence and security company Saab offers a fighter sensor package for the Indian Tejas LCA Mk1A fighter aircraft. The package consist of a state-of-the-art Saab AESA fighter radar closely integrated with a compact electronic warfare suite using Gallium Nitride based AESA technology.

Saab, in partnership with Indian industry, offers a solution that will bring the required Airborne Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Fighter radar and Electronic warfare capability to India and the Indian Air Force. Thanks to our extensive technology development Saab can offer the latest technology, on time for the LCA Mk 1A needs, at low risk.

The AESA fighter radar is developed by Saab with antenna technology based on the latest technologies using Gallium Nitride (GaN) and Silicone Carbide (SiC) substrates in combination with the latest generation of exciter/receiver and processor technology, giving optimum installed performance in a dense signal environment.

The radar has a complete mode suite which includes air-to-air, air-to-ground and air-to-sea capabilities. A built-in memory provides a tool to record a large amount of data from performed flights. Integration in the LCA Mk1A fighter aircraft is enabled by the limited space, power and cooling required.

The EW suite consists of sensors and transmitters developed by Saab and is a highly capable and extremely compact solution that provides essential situational awareness and self-protection. The heart of the suite is an alectronic warfare receiver which is connected to a front end receiver and fin tip antennas inside the aircraft. Included is also an external AESA jammer pod.

The radar warning system is based on ultra-wideband digital receivers and has very high probability of intercept, very good sensitivity and very high selectivity for handling the complex signal environment of today.

The AESA jammer pod is small in size, low on weight and drag. Self-protection is based on Wideband Digital RF Memory (DRFM) that provides advanced jamming techniques and arbitrary combination of jamming waveforms. Transmission is performed by using GaN-based AESA:s. The EW suite also includes ground support systems and recording capability for advanced mission planning and post flight analysis.

Saab’s solutions are based on the latest state-of-the-art technologies and COTS (commercial-off-the-shelf) available. The AESA fighter radar and electronic warfare units have no ITAR-restricted (Internationally Traffic in Arms Regulations) components, due to the high degree of Saab in-house developed and manufactured building blocks. Using contemporary technology provides the adaptability and growth potential needed to stay ahead. Technologies are re-used between variants and platforms in order to minimize Life Cycle Cost (LCC).

“In our partnership, the transfer of technology will secure an indigenous Indian capability for series production, maintenance, repair and overhaul capability. Testing and development of the fighter sensor package will have synergies with the systems developed for Gripen,” says Anders Carp, head of Saab business area Surveillance.

From 2019: (SAAB at Aero India 2019)
https://saabgroup.com/media/news-press/ ... ndia-2019/

Saab AESA Fighter Radar: Saab’s GaN-based (Gallium Nitride) next-generation radars are on contract and in production for a variety of users. Our new AESA fighter radar is one more example of this leap-ahead technology that is a truly unique achievement and a defining component of future air power capabilities.

But we went ahead with Israeli offer over SAAB due to commonality with DARIN III upgrade for Jaguar

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 05 Sep 2019 01:55

Karan M wrote:
Austin wrote:Even the upgraded Mirages and 29UPG dont have a PESA/AESA , IAF has opted for Slotted Array for even its premium aircraft Mirages.
They don't have options.
The Russians didn't have an AESA when the MiG-29 Upg was signed and the Mirage aircraft upgrade was so expensive we opted for the less expensive RDY3 (as versus the premium RDY2).
The RDY3 is the redbadged RC-400 on which I had posted before, still a capable set drawing on Thales rich operational experience, but its likely the first true AESA in AF service will be the RBE-2 and then the one on LCA Mk1A, but the set on Su-30 will outrange them both.

I don't know in which year we will see a Russian AESA and with current state of their economy how good it will be. I wish we just go ahead and collaborate with Elta for a GaN based AESA radar till Uttam is mature and put it across LCA and MKI MLU. Every time I see that big nose of MKI I dream of a 2000+ TR modules AESA. I have a wish list for MKI upgrade pretty similar to what is being done via DARIN III capability for Jaguar MAX.

It's truly ironic that it will be first aircraft in IAF to fly with AESA (an aircraft from 1960s)

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Sep 2019 03:11

Not directly related to the IAF, but found this interesting and posted it because it has implications for the IAF combat fleet as well..non IRST equipped fighters that is, unless the range of the Litening 4i's FLIR and CCD is better than the IRST on the MiG-29UPG and Su-30MKI

Czech Gripens conduct Baltic air policing with new Litening pods

...

The aircraft are armed with their usual cannons: the AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAMs).

“The pods will be used mainly for long-range visual detection of aircraft during the day and at night,” said Major Tomáš Maruščák, spokesperson of the general staff of the Czech Armed Forces. This means the pods will not be used to designate ground targets during the Baltic air policing mission. Instead, aircraft detection and airspace control will be conducted using the pod’s charge-coupled device (CCD) high-definition colour camera and forward-looking infrared (FLIR) sensor.

Which means that theoretically, the non IRST equipped Tejas Mk1, Mk1A, Mirage-2000 and possibly even Jaguar can use their Litening 3 or Litening 4i pods to detect and ID airborne targets. Unless that is a new feature that was introduced on the Litening 4 and is not on the Litening 3 that is also in IAF's stocks.

I have read a report that states that India placed an order for 164 Litening 4i pods. And then a year later, it was reported that Rafael had offered Litening 4i pods to India for its 36 Rafale order as well. Since we aren't getting Damocles, I assume that the Litening 4i is what will equip Rafale as well.

Does anyone know whether the Litening 3 that we had before the 4i can also ID aerial targets like the Litening 4i?

India acquires Litening targeting pod

June 2016

Rafael will supply 164 examples of its Litening targeting pod to the Indian air force, for use on four types of combat aircraft including New Delhi’s Sukhoi Su-30 fighters.

Guy Oren, director of Rafael's electro-optical systems unit, says the pods will be delivered in the next couple of years.

An advanced version of the Litening 4 – the Litening 4 I – will be supplied. The improved system has been equipped with upgraded infrared cameras and a charge-coupled device colour camera to help identify targets on the ground, particularly dense areas, Rafael says.

The company adds that the new version doubles up as a surveillance and reconnaissance system in addition to being a targeting pod.
..

and then a year later, this report that claimed that Rafael was "targeting" an Indian contract and would offer the Litening 4i for the Rafale jets

Flight Global- Rafael targets Indian contract with Litening pods

July 2017
...

India is being offered Litening systems including in a 4I standard, which Rafael says enables host aircraft to fly intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance missions.
..

The Indian air force already uses the Rafael-produced pod on several types of combat aircraft, having acquired the system in the Litening III standard. Rafael also is to supply its advanced 4I version of the system for use by the Aeronautical Development Agency's Tejas light combat aircraft.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 06 Sep 2019 21:08

Let me pose a question here that, to my knowledge, does not get enough discussion, but which bothers me to no end:

I get the distinct feeling that the IAF likes to concentrate its crown jewels (especially those limited by numbers) to key locations during peacetime. Some examples:
1. Apaches being concentrated in one airbase east and one airbase west for dealing with Pak and China.
2. Rafales now poised to be concentrated in one airbase east and one airbase west for dealing with Pak and China.
3. AWACS concentrated in one airbase (but thankfully they keep moving because of operational requirements).
4. C-17s mostly based out of one airbase.
5. IL-76s based out of two airbases.
And some other examples like these.

The point is: are we not making ourselves sitting ducks for a surprise attack runway/airbase denial attacks on just a handful of airbases to remove most of the key assets from the IAF ORBAT?

Or is it the stated assumption of everyone that such a surprise attack is not possible and therefore the IAF will always get ample time to distribute its resources prior to wartime?

In the age of long-range cruise missiles deployed by our enemies (which could strike within minutes or an hour at most), and limited radar coverage on our northern borders to detect such an incoming strike, is it really a safe assumption that hostilities will always be predictable ahead of time?

Am I the only one paranoid about this?

nam · Post by **nam** » 06 Sep 2019 21:53

Sumeet wrote: I would add upgrade IRST along with Irbis-E (Prefer a 2000 TR modules GaN AESA radar instead though).

There won't be a 2000 TRM GaN jet FCR!

For the simple reason, the jet won't be able to provide enough power for such a radar!

A 10W 2k TRM GaAs can theorically pump out 20KW power. A 30W GaN 2k TRM will do 60KW! Jet's cannot produce so much power.

There is no FCR radar pumping out 20KW, forget 60kW.

GaN radar will always be smaller and for all practical purpose will have lower TRM count than GaAs radars.