Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 15 Dec 2016

nam · Post by **nam** » 18 Sep 2019 21:37

Not operational.They have a new AESA radar, no confirmation if it is GaN based.

In terms on tech prototype, japan probably has everything under the sun.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 19 Sep 2019 05:22

nam wrote:Not operational.They have a new AESA radar, no confirmation if it is GaN based.

In terms on tech prototype, japan probably has everything under the sun.

it is GaN based. They've gone way past just having an AESA radar. They've built an entire suite including a passive RF sensor and IR camera plus the GaN radar.

This is from AW&ST

Japan has flight-tested an integrated suite of sensors for its next fighter, creating a single system from a gallium-nitride (GaN) radar, a passive radio-frequency (RF) sensor and an infrared camera. So far, results look good, the defense ministry says.

The developmental system is the product of a 10-year effort aimed at overcoming the difficulty of detecting stealthy targets. It is part of a wider program of technology accumulation for the proposed combat aircraft, the Future Fighter, that has already tested airframe and propulsion demonstrators.

Radar and passive RF sensor share the nose AESA

Limited details of the system provided by ministry officials to Aviation Week suggest the radar generates unusually high power, near the limit of what could be achieved.

The unnamed system was built into a Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) F-2 and tested in the air from May to July, the officials said. Program engineers are reviewing results. That review is the only further work currently scheduled, though the data could conceivably show a need for more flight testing.

The data reviewed so far have verified the design, the officials said in an interview with Aviation Week. There would be time to further improve it for the Future Fighter, which is due to enter service in the mid-2030s, but the defense ministry says no such decision has been made. The ministry proposes in its budget request for the fiscal year beginning April 2020 to “launch” the fighter program, which may mean the beginning of full-scale development.

Objectives of the sensor program include avoiding radar emissions by maximizing the use of passive detection and, if the radar must emit, doing so in ways that reduce the possibility of counter-detection. The passive RF sensor and radar use the same nose array, so GaN technology is applied to both. Since the array faces forward, an operational system will presumably need passive RF antennas elsewhere on the airframe for all-round coverage; on other fighters these are usually mounted on the edges of wings and tail surfaces. The infrared sensor is carried in an MHI ASM-2 missile airframe under the F-2’s left wing.

...

The integration is evidently aimed at achieving sensor fusion, a process by which a single consolidated picture is presented in the cockpit—ideally generated by merging data from separate sensors to create each track and without imposing the work of sensor management on the pilot. Such features are already available in other aircraft—for example, on the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning. Japan’s step forward appears to be doing it with GaN technology.

Producing the software to achieve this integration was one of two major challenges in the program, the ministry says.

The antenna is an active, electronically scanned array (AESA), made up of an undisclosed number of transmitter-receiver modules—which are like little radars that act in unison to form beams of variable frequencies. Each module is in turn made up of GaN elements.

In designing the modules to be small and highly powered, it was especially hard to cope with the exhaust heat, the ministry says, identifying this as the other big challenge. The statement is revealing because program managers could have had higher power without pushing the limits of the cooling system design. Compared with gallium arsenide, a GaN radar converts more of its input power to RF emission, rather than heat. For a given input, the cooling problem is reduced even as the radar emits a stronger signal, improving detection performance.

..

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 19 Sep 2019 17:42

AVCM Bhaduria to be next Air chief (I was fully expecting this). LCA is in good hand. Finally the govt is rewarding people who have supported desi effort.

VikramA · Post by **VikramA** » 19 Sep 2019 18:07

He not only headed the lca development at one point but also handled the Rafale deal with Dassault . Might we expect some sort of Dassault technical assistance in AMCA as offset for rafale

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Sep 2019 02:59

India-US: Important defence deals are expected to be announced next week
https://www.financialexpress.com/defenc ... k/1710230/

Raytheon’s National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System-II

This has been designed as a competition to the S-400 Triumf advanced air defence missile system of Russia and has the capability to intercept ballistic missiles at high altitude. As has been reported earlier, Raytheon’s National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System-II (NASAMS-II) missile shield system which is going to be contracted by India is likely to be announced next week. This Rs 6,000 crore system from the US is expected to secure India’s airspace against aerial threats ranging from drones to ballistic missiles.

What is NASAMS-II?

It is an upgraded version of the Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace/Raytheon National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS).
It has new 3D mobile surveillance radars and 12 missile launchers which can be used for quick reaction.
Its battery has up to 12 multi-missile launchers. And each of them carries six AIM-120-series advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles (AMRAAMs) or other surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). There are eight AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel X-band 3D radars, Fire Distribution Centres (FDCs) and MPS 500 electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) sensor system vehicles.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 20 Sep 2019 03:02

Raytheon’s National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System-II

This has been designed as a competition to the S-400 Triumf advanced air defence missile system of Russia and has the capability to intercept ballistic missiles at high altitude. As has been reported earlier, Raytheon’s National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System-II (NASAMS-II) missile shield system which is going to be contracted by India is likely to be announced next week. This Rs 6,000 crore system from the US is expected to secure India’s airspace against aerial threats ranging from drones to ballistic missiles.

That is some high grade baloney right there

. I doubt even Raytheon themselves would attempt to compare the NASAMS-2 with the S-400. Clueless and/or ill-intentioned DDM spreading misinformation as usual.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Sep 2019 19:54

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 21 Sep 2019 19:58

NASAMS is not a BMD system and is not a Raytheon product. The SI and prime is Kongsberg of Norway.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 22 Sep 2019 07:30

NRao wrote:...

Discussion turns very interesting from 13:45 onwards ... LCA, Balakot etc .. please do watch.

I love how he credits national leadership. We are lucky to have this govt.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Sep 2019 18:16

The MiG-29 is a ‘Super Hunter’: Account from a MiG-29 fighter pilot

https://hushkit.net/2019/09/07/the-mig- ... ter-pilot/

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 23 Sep 2019 21:24

^^^^^A post praising roosi maal here and a post pointing to an article criticizing LCA elsewhere! A plot is being executed and a silent war on domestic MIC being waged.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 24 Sep 2019 00:59

Vivek K wrote:^^^^^A post praising roosi maal here and a post pointing to an article criticizing LCA elsewhere! A plot is being executed and a silent war on domestic MIC being waged.

you mean on brf? Seriously?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 24 Sep 2019 02:09

Oh yes - seriously!!

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 24 Sep 2019 02:29

Since it is so obvious to you saar, why don't you name the conspiring post/posters

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Sep 2019 02:31

Can the two of you drop this? Why ruin a thread?

And Vivek, you gotta chill. Not every phoren purchase is a conspiracy.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 24 Sep 2019 02:51

Rakesh wrote:Can the two of you drop this? Why ruin a thread?

And Vivek, you gotta chill. Not every phoren purchase is a conspiracy.

Sorry Saar. But it is fun to needle Vivekji.... Just couldn't resist. No more from me.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 24 Sep 2019 08:56

Vivek K wrote:^^^^^A post praising roosi maal here and a post pointing to an article criticizing LCA elsewhere! A plot is being executed and a silent war on domestic MIC being waged.

The Mig29 is a superturd when compared to the LCA.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 24 Sep 2019 11:17

NRao wrote:...

@18:00 - "The fuel consumption in the LCA at 7000-8000-10000 feet you get in the MiG 21 at 33000 feet"

Would that be just engine tech development or a combination of it and the LCA's size and shaping..

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 24 Sep 2019 11:27

The LCA’s engine is far more fuel efficient than the turbojet of the Mig-21. So that is not surprising.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 24 Sep 2019 23:58

Rakesh wrote:Can the two of you drop this? Why ruin a thread?

And Vivek, you gotta chill. Not every phoren purchase is a conspiracy.

Admiral Sahab - one needs a fanatic fanboy to correct such a heavy bias against domestic MIC. Request someone to educate us on the differences betweent eh LCA and the Rafale. I will hold the trigger back though if these roosi and western fanboys do the same. What is the key to the Rafale purchase?

Rafale LCA
a) Length - 50.20 ft 43.3 ft
b) Empty Wt 9,500 kg 6,560 kg
c) MTOW 24,500 kg 13,500 kg
d) Armament 8200 kg 4,000 kg (/)
e) Radar track 170 km for 3m2 150 km for 2 m2
f) Range (LO-LO-LO) No accurate numbers
(Hi-Lo-Hi) No accurate numbers
g) Costs $215 million (??) $40 million (??)
h) Missiles Meteor 150 km (60 Astra 110 km head-on (20 km
km no escape zone) tail chase)

I think both aircraft have helmet mounted - LCA has the Elbit DASH. Can the Astra receive course corrections from Netra or Phalcon or Ground Radars to allow targeting up to 150 km range?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 25 Sep 2019 00:55

Vivek K wrote: Admiral Sahab - one needs a fanatic fanboy to correct such a heavy bias against domestic MIC. Request someone to educate us on the differences betweent eh LCA and the Rafale. I will hold the trigger back though if these roosi and western fanboys do the same. What is the key to the Rafale purchase?

Rafale LCA

g) Costs $215 million (??) $40 million (??)

I think both aircraft have helmet mounted - LCA has the Elbit DASH. Can the Astra receive course corrections from Netra or Phalcon or Ground Radars to allow targeting up to 150 km range?

Lets not be intellectually dishonest. The Rafale's flyaway cost versus the acquisition cost is different. You deliberately quote the program acquisition cost of the Rafale (which includes airframe, engines, spares, logistics equipment, simulators, base development costs, ISE development cost, weapons, Performance Based Logistics, etc.) but for the LCA Mk1A you quote the airframe cost alone.

It is not yet clear what the total program acquisition cost for the LCA Mk1A will be since the ground equipment portion of the deal is being negotiated. When that is finalized and announced, you'll know what it is and it will certainly be much higher than $40 million per LCA Mk1A.

When you keep repeating the attacks on all foreign equipment, you start losing those who genuinely support indigenous programs as well. the Air Force needs a mix of the best equipment out there that is mature (like the Rafale) and indigenous LCA that are still work in progress and have plenty of potential, but the airframe is a light airframe that has it's associated cons.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 25 Sep 2019 05:48

Karnik - it is amazing to read about intellectual dishonesty from you. All you needed was to correct my figure for the Rafale if you think it is incorrect. But you went into personal attacks instead. I would welcome the airframe cost as you put it of the Rafale and also expected MLU cost (going by the M2k) experience, MLU cost will be as much as the airframe cost.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 25 Sep 2019 06:03

You want to give you an MLU cost even before the first aircraft has even touched down on Indian soil?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 25 Sep 2019 06:55

Well keep that in mind. M2K MLUS were performed at prices higher than purchase price. And an idea about that would give an idea about life cycle cost.

Bart S · Post by **Bart S** » 25 Sep 2019 07:09

Vivek K wrote:Well keep that in mind. M2K MLUS were performed at prices higher than purchase price. And an idea about that would give an idea about life cycle cost.

It's not a simple comparison like that - time value of money and exchange rate changes need to be factored in if you want to talk about the MLU cost in today's $$, even assuming that we can ballpark the cost of an MLU with any level of accuracy.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 25 Sep 2019 07:10

where is this discussion heading towards ? looks like each one is talking past each other as there are inadequate facts on both sides

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 25 Sep 2019 07:13

Vivek K wrote:Well keep that in mind. M2K MLUS were performed at prices higher than purchase price. And an idea about that would give an idea about life cycle cost.

Please provide the underlying data to support that claim. Even if it were true what does it really mean? That modern aircraft cost is heavily influenced by mission system and that mission systems cost more in 2010s than they did a few decades earlier ? That is a pretty well known fact on advanced military aerospace projects.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 25 Sep 2019 10:17

Mort Walker wrote:
Vivek K wrote:^^^^^A post praising roosi maal here and a post pointing to an article criticizing LCA elsewhere! A plot is being executed and a silent war on domestic MIC being waged.
The Mig29 is a superturd when compared to the LCA.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 25 Sep 2019 10:29

Vivek K wrote: Admiral Sahab - one needs a fanatic fanboy to correct such a heavy bias against domestic MIC. Request someone to educate us on the differences betweent eh LCA and the Rafale. I will hold the trigger back though if these roosi and western fanboys do the same. What is the key to the Rafale purchase?

Rafale LCA
a) Length - 50.20 ft 43.3 ft
b) Empty Wt 9,500 kg 6,560 kg
c) MTOW 24,500 kg 13,500 kg
d) Armament 8200 kg 4,000 kg (/)
e) Radar track 170 km for 3m2 150 km for 2 m2
f) Range (LO-LO-LO) No accurate numbers
(Hi-Lo-Hi) No accurate numbers
g) Costs $215 million (??) $40 million (??)
h) Missiles Meteor 150 km (60 Astra 110 km head-on (20 km
km no escape zone) tail chase)

I think both aircraft have helmet mounted - LCA has the Elbit DASH. Can the Astra receive course corrections from Netra or Phalcon or Ground Radars to allow targeting up to 150 km range?

Vivek,
The difference between the Rafale and LCA, even MWF will be very large on most parameters you put forth. Just as an example take the TWR and payload. They are of different categories altogether so the comparison will be truly apples to oranges.

I see the Rafale acquisition as a ready and debugged silver bullet against current and near future threats from TSP or China. The Rafale will continue to give the IAF technological superiority over both opponents (arguably against China as well) at least till the 2030s. This is one way to make up for the severe shortage in numbers in the short term. Couple that with the s400 and you see the IAF will get some breathing room and so will LCA production lines. In the meanwhile MKI upgrades will start, which will again give a boost to air power. All in all, a good purchase.

Having said this, what really puzzles and irritates me is that the Mk1 has not seen additional orders for FOC standard - I was hoping for about 40-60 birds. Any newer platform, which still has to be tested such as the Mk1A might see delays and additional Mk1s would do nicely at such a time. If there are no delays,these can simply be built to MK1A standards. Instead, we see this supposed commitment to the MWF - very suspicious to my eyes.

As such, I'm not totally convinced of another purchase of 36 Rafale although I'm not against it either - a bit ambivalent I spose

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 25 Sep 2019 20:17

Another from Hush Kit (on a roll recently)

Flying & fighting in the Mirage 2000: Interview with Mirage 2000 pilot

Few aircraft inspire confidence and love in their pilots like the Mirage 2000. We spoke to Group Captain MJA Vinod (formerly of the Indian Air Force) about the Mirage 2000 and found out it is a lot more potent than many observers believe and how it may even have some advantages over the much vaunted Su-30 Flanker.

Admiral Ji can use these against those jealous of his love for the new French lass

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Sep 2019 20:19

Since I love the French lass so much, I should change my title from Admiral to Amiral (the French spelling of the word!)

BTW, you beat me to posting this article. But thank you for posting.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 25 Sep 2019 20:22

Amiral...

OK. I learn something new every day i visit BRF

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Sep 2019 20:24

Just do not call me Amirale....that is for a female officer holding the rank

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 25 Sep 2019 20:27

Ah.. that close eh. Duly noted

By the way, no words minced by the aviator...

"Right now, with the kind of radar and other sensors Mirage 2000 I/TI has, I would rate it the best in the sub-continent. When Mirage 2000 is in the air, the Pakistani military run, and that is a fact.”

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Sep 2019 20:32

Manish_P wrote:Ah.. that close eh. Duly noted

Indeed. Same pronunciation, but different spelling.

Manish_P wrote:By the way, no words minced by the aviator...

"Right now, with the kind of radar and other sensors Mirage 2000 I/TI has, I would rate it the best in the sub-continent. When Mirage 2000 is in the air, the Pakistani military run, and that is a fact.”

Confirmed by a PAF JF-17 pilot who did an interview with hush kit.

naird · Post by **naird** » 25 Sep 2019 20:35

Manish_P wrote:Ah.. that close eh. Duly noted

By the way, no words minced by the aviator...

"Right now, with the kind of radar and other sensors Mirage 2000 I/TI has, I would rate it the best in the sub-continent. When Mirage 2000 is in the air, the Pakistani military run, and that is a fact.”

His comments on JF 17 are absolutely brutal ! There is going to be some real burn in Paki circles. What is surprising is the disdain he has for Viper, maybe those singapore F16s have indeed shown us the real limitations of the a/c

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Sep 2019 20:40

The Indian Air Force flies some of the best fighter aircraft out there ---> upgraded Mirage 2000Is, upgraded MiG-29UPGs, Su-30MKI (will become even more potent with the Super Sukhoi upgrade) and the upcoming Rafale F3R. The IAF is confident of all their birds and that is clearly evident in the above pilot's interview.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Sep 2019 20:44

Oops and I forgot to mention the MiG-21 Bison. Deadly enough to shoot down a F-16!

kit · Post by **kit** » 25 Sep 2019 20:59

Rakesh wrote:The Indian Air Force flies some of the best fighter aircraft out there ---> upgraded Mirage 2000Is, upgraded MiG-29UPGs, Su-30MKI (will become even more potent with the Super Sukhoi upgrade) and the upcoming Rafale F3R. The IAF is confident of all their birds and that is clearly evident in the above pilot's interview.

And the TACDE ranks among the worlds best schools in terms of tactics. Why else does the pentagon want to scale up the scope of exercises !

( also there has been an espionage effort at stealing from TACDE establishment )

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 25 Sep 2019 21:47

Manish_P wrote:
NRao wrote:...
@18:00 - "The fuel consumption in the LCA at 7000-8000-10000 feet you get in the MiG 21 at 33000 feet"
Would that be just engine tech development or a combination of it and the LCA's size and shaping..

Inherent design & related trade offs basically.