Transport Aircraft for IAF

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8839
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby brar_w » 15 Oct 2019 05:13

Cybaru wrote:THis is what prompted my question. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-sho ... tion-line/


Anything is possible if you throw enough money at the problem. But realistically, the cost-benefit is not there. USAF needs a couple of squadrons of airlift. That is not to justify the Capital expense of funding a production run for which Boeing would have to first chose a location (they sold the land on which the C-17 factory was based to a residential/commercial developer), then move or order new machinery, move, hire and train the workforce, and then re-certify the entire facility for DOD compliance. Meanwhile, there are other ways to affordable, over time, achieve the same airlift footprint without embarking on such an expensive endeavor. The same will happen with the P-8, and the V-22 in the short term. On the P-8 it will be only the cost of restarting production of the MPA specific equipment but there will be a cost involved. Boeing has this issue with its legacy programs getting close to a sunset and has been communicating this to potential interested parties so that they can hurry up and place orders. They did the same on the C-17..few responded and were able to scoop up the orders. They should have built tails and used them as a contracted service. Many at the Air Force Association's annual have been talking about this for the last few years. But Boeing chose not to take that risk and shut it down.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Indranil » 15 Oct 2019 05:18

So, Chinese and Russians will be the only ones left with the capability to roll out aircrafts with 50 ton+ airlift capability?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8839
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby brar_w » 15 Oct 2019 05:32

Yes for now. The C-5 fleet for the USAF is being upgraded which will add life and improve reliability. There are more than 50 C-5A's at the boneyard that can be upgraded and brought back into the active duty if needed.The more than 200 C-17's don't need a replacement for some time still. USAF has funded next generation mobility focused Science and Technology programs that will support the work for their replacement in the future. In the meantime, I'm sure they will look at contracted airlift to fill gaps so that they can plan 5-6 years at a time in the interim utilizing in production systems like the C-130, A-400 and KC-390 or even leasing commercial airlift options.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2608
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 15 Oct 2019 06:46

Time to convert all older Air India planes to cargo mode and move it for regular duty! Save them C17s for when really needed for outsized cargo or try QATAR and UAE to sell their fleet to us.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4708
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby chola » 15 Oct 2019 08:32

The Japanese are actively looking for overseas customer of their well-regarded Kawasaki C2 transport.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/avalon/2019/02/28/japan-pitches-c-2-for-new-zealand-transport-fleet/

Image

I am surprised that India had not been mentioned as a possible buyer/partner.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 04:10

This could be a game changer for the IAF, if it proceeds with the C-295! Even if a dozen of the 56 odd C-295s would be used as dedicated or semi-dedicated tankers, it would solve one of the pressing problems facing the IAF, which is the serious lack of refueling tankers and the inability to get the tender past the single vendor situation.

Image

C-295 conducts first wet contacts as tanker

Airbus announced in a press release on 29 January that a C295 had performed wet contacts as a tanker for the first time with a Spanish Air Force (Ejército del Aire Español: EdAE) C295 earlier in the month.

This was part of an air-to-air (AAR) flight test campaign that began with dry contacts in December using a C295 in closed ramp configuration with a 100 ft (30 m) hose and remote vision system.

The company reported that wet contacts had been conducted by flights out of Seville in January between an Airbus C295 aircraft fitted with a removable AAR kit and an EdAE C295 acting as a receiver at flight speeds of 100–130 kt (185–241 km/h).

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Indranil » 30 Jan 2020 04:45

I will reengine the HS748 and convert them to tankers.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2909
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby abhik » 30 Jan 2020 10:25

What is the useful fuel load that a C-295 actually transfer? I doubt it can refuel more than one MKI per sortie (it actually weights less than an MKI) which sounds quite pathetic. Better to go for a purpose built aircraft like A330 MRTT that has 65t useful payload.

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Manish_P » 30 Jan 2020 11:25

^ Approx 6000 Kg as per the brochure

It need not be restricted to refuel only Su30 MKIs

Yes, it is no alternative to a dedicated tanker.

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Avinandan » 30 Jan 2020 14:01

Indranil wrote:I will reengine the HS748 and convert them to tankers.

Indranil Saar, HS748 will have similar payload as C295.
Shouldn't HAL or IAF assist GTRE by providing couple of planes for Kaveri testing or is it because Kaveri can't be retrofitted to a propeller based plane ?

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7730
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby nachiket » 31 Jan 2020 00:26

Does the C-295 tanker variant have extra fuel tanks in the cargo hold or something? Otherwise, looking at its regular fuel capacity, I don't see how it can be useful.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2608
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 31 Jan 2020 00:30

Indranil wrote:I will reengine the HS748 and convert them to tankers.


That would be pretty awesome for refueling over extended Indian territory. You could even give two to every Squadron. One could effectively fuel one - two aircraft at a time, which should be enough.

Between this, C295 pallet system (if added) & the current 6 Il-78, we probably don't need more refuelers.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8839
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby brar_w » 31 Jan 2020 00:34

I always wondered why the IAF never mixed in KC-130J's with the C-130J order. You can take the former and use it for tanking and convert it to the latter by removing the external tanks and the internal fuel tank.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 31 Jan 2020 04:35

abhik wrote:What is the useful fuel load that a C-295 actually transfer? I doubt it can refuel more than one MKI per sortie (it actually weights less than an MKI) which sounds quite pathetic. Better to go for a purpose built aircraft like A330 MRTT that has 65t useful payload.


The C-295, if built and acquired in the numbers that are being talked about (56 odd) will be more than what the IAF needs for basic transport duties given the 11 C-17s and 12 C-130Js plus the Il-76s. A secondary role of tanker makes a lot of sense as a force multiplier, with fuel tanks that can be easily removed when not performing the role of a tanker. It is an ADDITIONAL role, you're not buying C-295s purely for that role, but rather configuring a small portion of your fleet to double as tankers.

It's obvious that it's better to have purpose built tankers, like the B-767 MRTT, A-330 MRTT or KC-46A, but that entire tender is stuck in some quagmire and showing no signs of emerging. At least this way the IAF will have airframes that can perform tanker duties when required rather than sit and wait another decade for another MRTT tender to be started and then cancelled.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 31 Jan 2020 04:35

brar_w wrote:I always wondered why the IAF never mixed in KC-130J's with the C-130J order. You can take the former and use it for tanking and convert it to the latter by removing the external tanks and the internal fuel tank.


I never understood it either. Poor planning is my guess.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1275
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Rishirishi » 31 Jan 2020 05:40

With the old Hawker Siddeley 748 and AN-32 getting old, I am sure the IAF needs to find replacements for the 160+ AC. In addition civilian demand will probably increase. What about teaming up with SAAB to produce the Saab2000 ? in India? Perhaps some parts can be replaced with carbon to make it even more fuel efficient. They are fast, reliable and fuel efficient.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 01 Feb 2020 11:08

For heavlifters,the new upgraded IL-76s with all- round extra performance,smaller crew,etc., is a very cost effective acquisition,costing 1/3 to 1/4 that of a new C-17,not in production too. The legacy Uzbek assembled ones have given us decades of excellent service and are all being upgraded to almost the new 476 std. A new med. lifter is required and the dust is being shaken off another MTA programme required to replace by the end of the decade the 100+ AN-32s which were built in the UKR.The UKR's defence industry has taken a beating after its civil war and spat with Russia, who are now rapidly building plants at home to replace Sov. era weapon systems dependent upon other ex- Sov. republic nations for components like engines,etc. Great names like Antonov will find the going tough in the future without orders from Ru and its CIS allies unless their differences are quickly settled.

At the light transport level, the C-295 is a good step forward but orders must be substantial to keep local) manufacturing costs low and establish the suppport chain.We've been making the DO-228 for decades.Surely we can build upon that experience and squeeze out an improved larger version?

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4669
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Manish_Sharma » 01 Feb 2020 21:10

^Il 76/476 spend most time in maintenance , very very very low availability

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4708
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby chola » 01 Feb 2020 21:41

We need to get on with the C-295. It's almost inevitable we'll be buying a good number for our medium transport needs.

But the potential and the versatility of the thing is really amazing:


C-295 MPA/Persuader
Maritime patrol/anti-submarine warfare version. Provision for six hardpoints.

C-295 AEW&C
Prototype airborne early warning and control version with EL/W-2090 360 degree radar dome. The AESA radar was developed by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) and has an integrated IFF (Identification friend or foe) system.

C-295 Firefighter
Dedicated aerial firefighting aircraft.

CC-295 SAR
Dedicated search and rescue aircraft for the Royal Canadian Air Force.

C-295 SIGINT
Dedicated signals intelligence version.

AC-295 Gunship
Gunship version developed by Airbus Defence and Space, based on the AC-235 Light Gunship configuration.

KC-295
Dedicated tanker aircraft.



The big one, IMHO, is the flying chapati.
Image

If we can get licensed MII production of this beauty, we would have a platform for so many critical force multipliers.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Philip » 01 Feb 2020 22:39

We don't have any 476s.We have the A-50 version for the AWACS though.They're the new avatar.Yes,I would thinkcthat legacy IL-76s 3 decades on would require more extensive support.But the bird is so reliable and capable that the IAF is upgrading the entire fleet.

The need for an MTA is gaining strength despite AN-32 upgrades. The IAF must wisely choose a JV partner forthe same sooner rather than later.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1621
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Thakur_B » 01 Feb 2020 23:19

C295 will cover Avro replacement well, but the Sutlej need replacing too. Sooner or later we will have to bite between Kawasaki C2, Emb C390 and C130.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby souravB » 02 Feb 2020 04:22

I am going to ask a very obvious question which will sound very stupid.
If anybody can help me understand why IAF doesn't outsource logistics? not the whole thing but the bread and butter stuff and progressively, with clearly formulated SOPs, some critical stuff too. IAF can then maintain it's transport fleet with less variants and less numbers even. It does keep focus of IAF on its teeth, rather its tail.
Thanks.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Kartik » 14 Feb 2020 03:34

Few more details on the wet contact trials of the C-295 tanker. If the C-295 is acquired and built by Tata, this is a must-have feature on at least a dozen of them. They don't need to be dedicated tankers mind you, so there is inherent flexibility to taken on transport roles when required.

Wet contacts fuel C-295 tanker trial

Airbus Defence & Space has furthered its flight-test activities on the C295 by demonstrating the medium transport’s ability to transfer fuel during an initial series of “wet” contacts.

Performed in January from the manufacturer’s final assembly site in Seville, Spain, the air-to-air refuelling (AAR) flights involved an Airbus test aircraft and a Spanish air force C295 receiver.

“In total, the aircraft fitted with the removable AAR kit performed five wet contacts, transferring 1.5t of fuel,” Airbus says. The activity was conducted in daylight conditions across a flight envelope of 100-130kt (185-240kt), it adds.

Once adapted for the tanker role, the C295 deploys a 30m (100ft)-long refuelling hose from its closed cargo ramp, with operations supported via the use of a remote vision system.

“The flight test campaign also included night flight operations and the successful proximity test in pre-contact position with a Spanish air force [Boeing] F-18 fighter at a flight speed of 210kt,” says Airbus.


rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 626
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby rajsunder » 14 Feb 2020 07:01

chola wrote:The Japanese are actively looking for overseas customer of their well-regarded Kawasaki C2 transport.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/avalon/2019/02/28/japan-pitches-c-2-for-new-zealand-transport-fleet/

Image

I am surprised that India had not been mentioned as a possible buyer/partner.

Japanese arms tend to be on the costlier side. I bet this plane would be at least 150% the cost of an equivalent western cargo plane.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2608
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Cybaru » 14 Feb 2020 07:22

I am still stuck with Indranil's idea of HS748 conversion for both MPA and refuelers. Most fighters won't need more than 4 tons unless they are rambha - so for 2/3rd of the fleet - they should pan out and be able to fuel two fighters at a time.

most drogue type refueling activity takes a lot of time - so for example, refueling a whole package of 6 m2ks with one il-78/a330 will take for ever. Best to have smaller platforms that can fuel two at a time and three of those can refuel the whole strike package at the same time of 30-45 mins.

I am still deeply against a dedicated refueler like A330... Too few, too expensive, too long...

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4708
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby chola » 14 Feb 2020 08:44

rajsunder wrote:
chola wrote:The Japanese are actively looking for overseas customer of their well-regarded Kawasaki C2 transport.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/avalon/2019/02/28/japan-pitches-c-2-for-new-zealand-transport-fleet/

Image

I am surprised that India had not been mentioned as a possible buyer/partner.

Japanese arms tend to be on the costlier side. I bet this plane would be at least 150% the cost of an equivalent western cargo plane.


Yes, most likely. But them going after the New Zealanders but not us as potential partners/customers surprised me. Not that I really care. Their stuff are even more expensive than the goras as you noted. But it kind of tells me where we are in their geo-strategic view.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1682
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby Khalsa » 14 Feb 2020 17:05

chola wrote:
rajsunder wrote:Japanese arms tend to be on the costlier side. I bet this plane would be at least 150% the cost of an equivalent western cargo plane.


Yes, most likely. But them going after the New Zealanders but not us as potential partners/customers surprised me. Not that I really care. Their stuff are even more expensive than the goras as you noted. But it kind of tells me where we are in their geo-strategic view.


First of all
the NZ Govt put aside a Billion Plus for the replacements of 5 X C-130s. As expected every man and his dog pitched their aircraft. The brazilians , Japs and Europeans. The ones making the least amount of noise were the Americans.

The winner is the stretched version of the Herc. 5 X C-130s have been ordered.

The Japs did this (if it bothers you) because the money is set aside, no ToT involved. Its a simple no nonsense buy that is actually more faster than how Singapore buys a/c. With mera desh mahan. Grandsons are born to the managers who first float the tender to buy a Mirage 2K replacements.

Sorry I am a bit negative these days. This def expo 2020 has done my head in.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4708
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Postby chola » 14 Feb 2020 22:57

^^^ Thanks for the explanation, Khalsa ji. No need to apologize for any negativity. I haven't been a happy camper myself lately (with these billions being set aside for Kamovs and Apaches while our own helos get little orders.)


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nash, Rakesh and 49 guests