MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 08 Mar 2020 09:16

Post deleted

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 08 Mar 2020 09:40

- post by UB deleted-

The goats in Ulan Batar are stampeding like those Longhorns in Texas.

Aah. But this stops here. The Cowboys on their Pintos, Greys and Mustangs are here. All ganged up.

The last thing we need is losing "cattle" to the "foot in mouth" disease on the most idiotic of threads which is a maze to nowhere. No cup awaits for those who reach the center and nor is there a portkey to Lord Voldemort.

This contest of "You Know Who" knows more than ... must end here because the contest of the thread title has no whinner. Right?

And be cautioned one and all - Don't take on a Mod like this. Please post your heartburns in the appropriate thread.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 08 Mar 2020 09:53

No heartburn at all. ldevji. All good things come to an end, and so must I, good, bad or ugly. What must be said, must be said, to sleep in peace. On the issue of "taking on": no, I thought I only "took on" a sincere postor whom I considered to be a friend with the same objectives at heart as I, in debate, and rebutted points that he raised in rebutting me towards refining understanding of what may be best going forward. No insults, no anger, certainly I was not "out of control", and I have no "skin" in the game except whatever brings postors to BRF (Brochure Rah-rah..?) . But oops! Did I disagree with a Moderator again! Sorry onlee!!!!!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Mar 2020 10:23

UB - thank you for your kind words, I appreciate your posts otherwise, and have indicated so repeatedly. I sympathize with your frustrations even with some of our PSBs etc. But the comments against a bunch of combat pilots who actually fought on Feb 27th were not ok.

Stating they turned tail, left Abhinandan alone etc, all of which is completely untrue as they were engaged in their own battles & in fact Abhinandan's ORP was sent in as reinforcement along with several other fighters. Since you are so well versed with the details, you might want to use Google Earth, see the bases around the conflict area, what they field, and why the MiG-21 Bison was an ORP favorite and why it was also the first to reach the theater. Similarly, the sarcasm directed at those who were engaged in SAM duty was also unwarranted, as they and their peers have all been through enough already, as is common after any such unfortunate incident. Thinking of the families involved on both sides should give us pause.

I would encourage you to revisit your post & see what you said. I suspect if our positions were reversed, you would not accept it either.

I might also add this. The kind of posts you did make above, would have ensured any other poster got more than a single warning & would likely be banned from BRF for a significant duration.

In your case, that is most definitely not the case, so you return without having to engage in another "brawl" and can contribute productively.

Mods do give productive posters significant leeway and that leeway has been extended to you, repeatedly. Thanks.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 08 Mar 2020 20:06

UlanBatori wrote: ldevji. All good things come to an end, and so must I, good, bad or ugly.

Not to worry. I will fortify myself with Red Bull to keep the exhaustion at bay while I parse thorough your pingrezi posts

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Mar 2020 20:52

The entire MMRCA exercise was originally to find a replacement for hundreds of retiring MIGs which thanks to both the IAF and babudom, have wasted years of time and money of the same, enjoying a taste of firangware for over a decade, resulting in only 36 Rafales being bought. Instead of an affordable SE or light TE replacement, the field has been thrown open to almost everything under the sun, from new heavyweight entrants like the F-15EX whatever, the SU-35 too light SE fighters like the Gripen. Analyzing the merits of each case is going to be even more time-consuming and difficult than the earlier exercise.And if the moolah isn't there after years of evaluation, another "small batch" stock from the winning OEM? Simply ridiculous!

The CDS must shut down this fraud of an exercise ( when LCA production can be doubled) and simply augment numbers of types existing in service ( including some qty. of Rafales) ,equipping them with the ordnance reqd. Balakot underscored what I've often quoted from former USN CNO, Adm. Greenert." Who needs a sports car when a bomb truck will do?" If our aircraft have inferior AAMs to those of the enemy, it will require extra effort and greater casualties to win the day.We have two options.Acquire EW/ ECM measures to defeat the enemy's advantage- and this must include extra AWACS/ AEW aircraft in the inventory, and/ or acquire or develop superior AAMs ,if we feel that the improved versions of existing ones are adequate for now.

We are reportedly planning to equip almost every type in service from MKIs to LCAs with Astra- ER with a 100km+ range, 300km also envisaged. That being the case, if the objective still stands at replacing numbers retiring, the measures suggested above could suffice.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 08 Mar 2020 22:20

Rakesh wrote:Many on the forum are reading too much into one air battle (Feb 27) and even in that, the IAF certainly came out on top. All this talk about about the IAF not being able to engage the PAF fighters is because of the ROEs and the fact the PAF strike force turned back right after firing their AMRAAMs. And secondly, not a single AIM-120C5 AMRAAM hit a Su-30MKI. Not one single AMRAAM. And the PAF fired around 4 - 5 of them at minimum at the IAF interceptors. Those jammers - aboard the Rambha - did an exceptional job and so did the pilots who manned Avenger 1 and Avenger 2 on Feb 27.

^^^^^

MeshaVishwas wrote:Well what do we have here! (Wingtips are loaded with the SAP pods)

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12364 ... 32160?s=20 ---> SAP-518 integrated on Su-30MKI wing tip stations. It's an electronic counter measure podded system. Impregnable. Extremely effective against radars & EM/RF missiles in its operating band of 5-18GHz.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12366 ... 73984?s=20 ---> SAP-14 of has some envelope limitations. Su-30 equipped with SAP-14 & two SAP-518 pods is in-famously called Growlerski by some westerners, due to its immense ECM capability. I presume Growler also has envelope limitations.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Mar 2020 01:45

ldev wrote: Consider that Turkey which has taken delivery of the S400 has not used it in the current skirmish against Syria and is in fact asking the US to provide Patriot batteries to defend southern Turkey.

The Turks haven't yet stood up any S-400 batteries. Just receiving a few elements of the S-400 system doesn't imply that they are ready and operational.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 09 Mar 2020 02:02

Kartik wrote:
ldev wrote: Consider that Turkey which has taken delivery of the S400 has not used it in the current skirmish against Syria and is in fact asking the US to provide Patriot batteries to defend southern Turkey.
The Turks haven't yet stood up any S-400 batteries. Just receiving a few elements of the S-400 system doesn't imply that they are ready and operational.

News reports speak of the S-400 radars being tested against Turkish airforce F-16s in late November 2019 with full operational capability to follow in April 2020. We are already in the second week of March. In a situation where Turkey urgently needs SAM assets in the south of the country, would it not make more sense to speed up the operationalization of the S-400 by 2-3 weeks rather than go the US asking for Patriots? Unless the Turks are really worried that the Russians will drag the operational capability out or if the Turks do not have confidence that they can actually use the S400 on the Russian backed Syrian air force. Either way it is bad.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 09 Mar 2020 02:06

Rakesh wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Many on the forum are reading too much into one air battle (Feb 27) and even in that, the IAF certainly came out on top. All this talk about about the IAF not being able to engage the PAF fighters is because of the ROEs and the fact the PAF strike force turned back right after firing their AMRAAMs. And secondly, not a single AIM-120C5 AMRAAM hit a Su-30MKI. Not one single AMRAAM. And the PAF fired around 4 - 5 of them at minimum at the IAF interceptors. Those jammers - aboard the Rambha - did an exceptional job and so did the pilots who manned Avenger 1 and Avenger 2 on Feb 27.
^^^^^
MeshaVishwas wrote:Well what do we have here! (Wingtips are loaded with the SAP pods)

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12364 ... 32160?s=20 ---> SAP-518 integrated on Su-30MKI wing tip stations. It's an electronic counter measure podded system. Impregnable. Extremely effective against radars & EM/RF missiles in its operating band of 5-18GHz.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12366 ... 73984?s=20 ---> SAP-14 of has some envelope limitations. Su-30 equipped with SAP-14 & two SAP-518 pods is in-famously called Growlerski by some westerners, due to its immense ECM capability. I presume Growler also has envelope limitations.

There is no question that the SU-30s evaded the AMRAAMs, maybe with the aid of the SAP-518 wing tip pods which according to all published information severely restrict the SU-30's performance envelope. The bigger question is whether the R-77s were any good. And from the Air Chief's recent interview, that answer is clear.

dineshchaturvedi · Post by **dineshchaturvedi** » 09 Mar 2020 02:09

I am reading about reports of IAF asking Boeing for F-15 Ex. What do you think the chances of it making into IAF are?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gKclNJaPLQ

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Mar 2020 02:11

Kartik wrote:
ldev wrote: Consider that Turkey which has taken delivery of the S400 has not used it in the current skirmish against Syria and is in fact asking the US to provide Patriot batteries to defend southern Turkey.
The Turks haven't yet stood up any S-400 batteries. Just receiving a few elements of the S-400 system doesn't imply that they are ready and operational.

Initial Operational Capability for the Turkish S-400 is expected by mid April.

chola · Post by **chola** » 09 Mar 2020 03:08

dineshchaturvedi wrote:I am reading about reports of IAF asking Boeing for F-15 Ex. What do you think the chances of it making into IAF are?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gKclNJaPLQ

Where? I have heard nothing of this. Youtube is not a reliable source. I like American equipment but this would never be considered with the MKI still being produced.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2020 03:45

ldev wrote:There is no question that the SU-30s evaded the AMRAAMs, maybe with the aid of the SAP-518 wing tip pods which according to all published information severely restrict the SU-30's performance envelope. The bigger question is whether the R-77s were any good. And from the Air Chief's recent interview, that answer is clear.

The "Russian" jammer did the job. It successfully jammed the "American" AMRAAM and the Su-30 subsequently evaded the AMRAAM despite the severe restriction in the performance envelope. Some reports state Israeli jammers were onboard the Su-30, but let us stick to the SAP-518 since bashing Russian maal is a good past time to do

Retired Mirage 2000 pilot, Sameer Joshi, provides the reason why the R-77s could not engage.

Outgunned By Pak F-16s, IAF Plans To Re-Arm Its Sukhois With Israeli Missiles
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/outgunn ... es-2044172
28 May 2019

''The PAF surprised the IAF by launching air-to-air missiles from inside Pakistan-occupied Kashmir," says Sameer Joshi, a Kargil veteran. ''The AMRAAM effectively outranged the IAF air-to-air missiles which did not get a command to launch," he said.

That command to launch was not given due to the peacetime ROEs that were still in effect.

And despite the Air Chief's comments, post Balakot the Indian Air Force spent $700 million on a new batch of Russian missiles and that includes the much maligned R-77. And this new batch of Russian missiles will be fitted aboard a variety of aircraft, including the Su-30MKI. The Derby and Astra will also come. The Rambha will have a "buffet" of missiles to choose from.

If the R-77 was dismal, the IAF would not waste $700 million to acquire even more of them. Especially post Balakot.

Wiser after Balakot, India orders missiles worth $700 million from Russia
https://theprint.in/defence/wiser-after ... ia/249553/
13 June 2019

After the Balakot strike and the dogfight with the Pakistani air force in February, India is looking to increase its stockpile of missiles with the Modi government ordering weaponry worth about $700 million for the Indian Air Force from Russia. These include air-to-air missiles with an extended range as well air-to-surface missiles, The Print has learnHighly placed sources said close to 300 short-range air-to-air missiles, the R-73, and 400 medium-range air-to-air guided missiles, the RVV-AE, also known as the R-77, have been ordered.

Roop · Post by **Roop** » 09 Mar 2020 07:08

dineshchaturvedi wrote:I am reading about reports of IAF asking Boeing for F-15 Ex. What do you think the chances of it making into IAF are?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gKclNJaPLQ

IMO the chances are very low, but not zero.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2020 09:51

dineshchaturvedi wrote:I am reading about reports of IAF asking Boeing for F-15EX. What do you think the chances of it making into IAF are?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gKclNJaPLQ

Like Roop said above, low. It will overlap the Rambha of which there will eventually be 272 examples. MMRCA (Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft) is now called MRFA (Multi Role Fighter Aircraft). So under that acronym every fighter will be considered. I believe Boeing has received the clearance from GOTUS to put the F-15EX into the competition. If brar_w is reading, he can confirm.

chola wrote:Where? I have heard nothing of this. Youtube is not a reliable source. I like American equipment but this would never be considered with the MKI still being produced.

Boeing mulls F-15EX offer to India
https://www.flightglobal.com/singapore- ... 94.article
12 Feb 2020

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Mar 2020 10:57

ldev wrote:There is no question that the SU-30s evaded the AMRAAMs, maybe with the aid of the SAP-518 wing tip pods which according to all published information severely restrict the SU-30's performance envelope. The bigger question is whether the R-77s were any good. And from the Air Chief's recent interview, that answer is clear.

What "all published" information is there? Bar one report by Livefist. The SAP-518 pods weight, size comes into play when the aircraft is heavily loaded. Here is my post from 2014 on the same. Like I had surmised the SAP-518 does use ESA, but AESA not PESA.

What's more important to note is what the SAP-518 test configuration for the IAF was.
viewtopic.php?p=1884347#p1884347

The tests were carried out for nine configurations, including clean configuration, with bombs (2 tons) at station 1 & 2 (centerline of the aircraft), with BrahMos missile at the newly-developed station 13, R-27 missiles at station 3-6, R-73 missiles at station 7-10 and SAP518 pod (ECM jamming pod) at station 11-12. "The preliminary results show good agreement between natural frequencies of clean aircraft and design values. These are ongoing tests and are complex in nature. Multiple agencies are involved in the project and we are confident of achieving the tasks within the set targets," Tyagi said. The National Aerospace Laboratories too recently conducted extensive wind tunnel experiments (separation tests) to monitor the health of the aircraft, after BrahMos missile is released.

The aircraft is carrying 2 Tons of bombs (+ pylons), 6 AAMs (+ pylons), Brahmos (+ heavyweight pylon). Thats where the SAP-518s weight comes into play.

Note the pics here:
https://malaysiamilitarypower.blogspot. ... erski.html

Do the pods appear to be restricting the envelope in anyway? Would a mere 6 AAMs (pylons already fitted) make a significant difference? Clearly not. The reason they aren't carrying the AAMs is because of the flight hours per AAM.

In 2018, Russia decided to equip all its Su-30 SMs with the SAP-518 as well.
https://www.airrecognition.com/index.ph ... ience.html

Regarding R-77s, the missile we have is the RVV-AE. It is an older variant, and its updated variant is the RVV-SD. The RVV-SD is a better compare to the AIM-120 C5/C7. It entered service in 2015-16, and we didn't procure it.

chola · Post by **chola** » 09 Mar 2020 11:58

Rakesh wrote:
chola wrote:Where? I have heard nothing of this. Youtube is not a reliable source. I like American equipment but this would never be considered with the MKI still being produced.

Boeing mulls F-15EX offer to India
https://www.flightglobal.com/singapore- ... 94.article
12 Feb 2020

Whoa, Admiral. Okay, Boeing wants to offer it. Hmmm, with MKI nearing end, Boeing is hoping to offer the F-15ex. I hope it gets nowhere. Not with TEDBF, ORCA and AMCA coming after the MKI.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2020 18:22

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/123 ... 89474?s=20 ----> India has assiduously avoided inducting US platforms for serving as the teeth of its military. A few Apaches & M-777s don't cut it. Neither do support platforms. There are obvious reasons behind this, which is why DC is desperate to get the MMRCA tender.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/123 ... 98432?s=20 ----> Bottomline: If India continues to subsidize foreign military industries in the 2020s, instead of developing & refining its own military-industrial sector (which means you actually build domestic stuff), its security will be in jeopardy in the 2030s.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2020 18:35

Karan M wrote:Note the pics here:
https://malaysiamilitarypower.blogspot. ... erski.html

Do the pods appear to be restricting the envelope in anyway? Would a mere 6 AAMs (pylons already fitted) make a significant difference? Clearly not. The reason they aren't carrying the AAMs is because of the flight hours per AAM.

In 2018, Russia decided to equip all its Su-30 SMs with the SAP-518 as well.
https://www.airrecognition.com/index.ph ... ience.html

Regarding R-77s, the missile we have is the RVV-AE. It is an older variant, and its updated variant is the RVV-SD. The RVV-SD is a better compare to the AIM-120 C5/C7. It entered service in 2015-16, and we didn't procure it.

That is some awesome info. Thank you so much for posting these links. Gives it much more clarity.

I am even more impressed with the Rambha now.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2020 18:47

chola wrote:Whoa, Admiral. Okay, Boeing wants to offer it. Hmmm, with MKI nearing end, Boeing is hoping to offer the F-15ex. I hope it gets nowhere. Not with TEDBF, ORCA and AMCA coming after the MKI.

See the second tweet above from Saurav Jha. Right above my reply to KaranM.

License production of any fighter - incl Rafale - is a waste of money. When budgets permit, buy Rafale off the shelf onlee (in small quantities, 2 to 4 squadrons more) and get offsets via components. End this contest once in for all.

Focus on production lines of Tejas, TEDBF/ORCA and AMCA. I remember the heated back-and-forth we had in the single engine fighter contest. Thank you for seeing the light

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 10 Mar 2020 03:27

Rakesh wrote:Outgunned By Pak F-16s, IAF Plans To Re-Arm Its Sukhois With Israeli Missiles
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/outgunn ... es-2044172
28 May 2019

''The PAF surprised the IAF by launching air-to-air missiles from inside Pakistan-occupied Kashmir," says Sameer Joshi, a Kargil veteran. ''The AMRAAM effectively outranged the IAF air-to-air missiles which did not get a command to launch," he said.
That command to launch was not given due to the peacetime ROEs that were still in effect.

Hi Rakesh, that's not the reason. The MKIs were flying at 16-20k feet, while the F-16s were at 30-40k feet. The altitude differential put the F-16s outside the R-77's effective range.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Mar 2020 06:32

Mihir wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Outgunned By Pak F-16s, IAF Plans To Re-Arm Its Sukhois With Israeli Missiles
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/outgunn ... es-2044172
28 May 2019

That command to launch was not given due to the peacetime ROEs that were still in effect.
Hi Rakesh, that's not the reason. The MKIs were flying at 16-20k feet, while the F-16s were at 30-40k feet. The altitude differential put the F-16s outside the R-77's effective range.

This makes some sense. And thats the difficulty in being put on the defensive by first shots going against you. The Meteor might help here.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Mar 2020 11:32

Or even RVV-SD/BD's were acquired from the Russians, in future Astra-II and SFDR's.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Mar 2020 12:51

Q.What were our AWACS doing at the time? Surely the MKIs should've been flying at a higher alt. than th÷ F-16s? Why were they not picked up first? I remember one report saying something about a transition period between AWACS replacing each other giving a window of opportunity to the fnemy. True?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Mar 2020 13:00

This is probably the wrong thread, but the PAF upper Hand was only a few Minutes, once the 2 MIg 29's from Udampur and 2 more Su-30MKI from Adampur plus additional Mig 21 Bisons from Srinagar and Udhampur started coming the PAF abandoned the field. Remember the PAF had a window of 5-10 minutes

From Imran Khan and Ghafoora Statements 2 hrs after the event and the fake award, it clearly looks like the PAF had promised IK and Paki leadership that they will have Su-30MKI kills that day, must have a clear plan with their best involved, they were so shocked that they immediately announced Wing Commander's return while ideally they would have loved to drag his release for a few months.

What we Indians want is Air- Dominance over Pakis that will not come with atleast 300-400 Indian aircraft produced with Indian weapons in peace time.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Mar 2020 13:35

Philip wrote:Q.What were our AWACS doing at the time? Surely the MKIs should've been flying at a higher alt. than th÷ F-16s? Why were they not picked up first? I remember one report saying something about a transition period between AWACS replacing each other giving a window of opportunity to the fnemy. True?

There was a Phalcon on station.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 10 Mar 2020 20:40

"Indian Air Force was far superior to Pakistan Air Force during the 1999 Kargil war. Pakistan had only about 20 km range ... due to which they remained away. However, between 1999 and 2014, Pakistan, through various purchases, had acquired a capacity of 100 km (correct: 85 km) range, whereas we had upgraded our BVR only 55-60 km on Su-30MKI (armed with medium range R-27). We were now in danger of being shot down by Pakistani fighters staying 100 km away and not being able to retaliate. And Rafale deal took care of this with a missile with a range of 150 km fitted on aircraft. A fighter aircraft is not only an aircraft, the aircraft is probably a smaller part of the total cost. The real cost comes in purchasing special equipment ... because you have to make it fighting-fit" Manohar Parrikar

This is the late Manohar Parrikar defending the 36 Rafale purchase and it's pricing during the ruckus drummed up by the Congress Party. Isn't what he apprehended exactly what happened on February 27 last year? That the IAF's Russian missiles were outranged? Is the ad hoc purchase of $700 MM of Russian missiles qualitatively different compared to what the IAF had in it's inventory when Manohar Parrikar made this statement?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Mar 2020 20:58

1. We don't know what was in the purchase from Russia - public reports apart, they can be misleading or disinfo.
2. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... s?from=mdr is the source (no mention of 85km?)
But what he says is likely what the IAF told him and the Astra matches the range profile he mentions above for the PAF, so the issue is being addressed even without the Russian missiles.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 10 Mar 2020 21:09

Karan M wrote:1. We don't know what was in the purchase from Russia - public reports apart, they can be misleading or disinfo.
2. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... s?from=mdr is the source (no mention of 85km?)
But what he says is likely what the IAF told him and the Astra matches the range profile he mentions above for the PAF, so the issue is being addressed even without the Russian missiles.

Frankly the quicker the IAF re-arms the SU-30s with the Astra and the Derby ER, the better it will be. The Astra Mk 2 or whatever it will be called will take some time to mature....And the ASRAAM as well.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Mar 2020 21:44

They have per reports already initiated the process for Astra. Derby ER just adds additional ECCM diversity.
Astra Mk2 is likely to begin developmental trials this year.
ASRAAM integration on the Su-30 is fairly advanced. I wont be surprised if tests are already underway or deployment.

raghuk · Post by **raghuk** » 10 Mar 2020 21:45

Cain Marko wrote:IIRC India and Israel have been working already on a uav cheetah for the Indian Navy since 2008. It's still not flown afaik suggesting that such things are not so easy in combat conditions. As such this does not obviate the need for manned 5 gen fighters.

The NRUAV never took off. It has been brought out many times but nothing worth mentioning was ever done. HAL has built a mini autonomous helicopter to get an understanding of the control system. This knowledge is being used to develop the RUAV which is a 100% HAL effort with technical inputs from IIT-K.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Mar 2020 23:30

ldev wrote:
"Indian Air Force was far superior to Pakistan Air Force during the 1999 Kargil war. Pakistan had only about 20 km range ... due to which they remained away. However, between 1999 and 2014, Pakistan, through various purchases, had acquired a capacity of 100 km (correct: 85 km) range, whereas we had upgraded our BVR only 55-60 km on Su-30MKI (armed with medium range R-27). We were now in danger of being shot down by Pakistani fighters staying 100 km away and not being able to retaliate. And Rafale deal took care of this with a missile with a range of 150 km fitted on aircraft. A fighter aircraft is not only an aircraft, the aircraft is probably a smaller part of the total cost. The real cost comes in purchasing special equipment ... because you have to make it fighting-fit" Manohar Parrikar
This is the late Manohar Parrikar defending the 36 Rafale purchase and it's pricing during the ruckus drummed up by the Congress Party. Isn't what he apprehended exactly what happened on February 27 last year? That the IAF's Russian missiles were outranged? Is the ad hoc purchase of $700 MM of Russian missiles qualitatively different compared to what the IAF had in it's inventory when Manohar Parrikar made this statement?

The quote you selected states R-27. You were talking about the R-77. Different missile.

Your own words ---> "The bigger question is whether the R-77s were any good."

So please decide which Russian missile it is you want to talk about ---> the R-27 or the R-77?

Secondly, the IAF rarely advertises the different missiles it has in its inventory. So while we all know that the Su-30MKI can carry the R-73, R-27, R-77...what is not talked about is which version of the R-73, R-27, R-77 is acquired. Educated guesses tell us that the initial batch of MiG-29s and Su-30s came in with early models of these missiles. When did the IAF acquire the later models is anyone's guess. This new order of $700 million will be a later model variant, so it will have qualitative differences. Longer range, more resistant to jamming, etc, etc, etc.

Like I asked earlier, if the Russian missiles were that dismal....why would the IAF just spend $700 million on acquiring even more of them? What is the point of having a longer range missile (in this case American AMRAAMs), if these missiles could not find their mark against a single Russian origin Su-30MKI? The only one that believes that they shot a Rambha down is the PAF. There are measures taken to counter that very scenario, which is what the IAF did on Feb 27th and which is exactly what Group Captain HV Thakur (retd) is stating in the back-and-forth tweet below.

https://twitter.com/a473629/status/1235 ... 99840?s=20 ---> I know that Astra is one of the best in our inventory. But our adversary has AIM-120. We need to outgun them. That's my point.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12356 ... 49856?s=20 ---> No! This is completely misunderstood. Abstract Ex - think about it. police gun range = 100 meters, but thief's gun range = 120 meters. Will this be reason enough for the thief to be allowed to escape? No. There's all kinds of tactics. For policing, as also, for air combat.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Mar 2020 23:33

Karan M wrote:They have per reports already initiated the process for Astra. Derby ER just adds additional ECCM diversity.
Astra Mk2 is likely to begin developmental trials this year.
ASRAAM integration on the Su-30 is fairly advanced. I wont be surprised if tests are already underway or deployment.

Astra Mk2 is that far along in development? That's the dual pulse missile right? Not the one based on the SFDR technology that was tested last year?

Regarding ASRAAM integration on Su-30, there were reports that Russia was miffed and didn't want it to go ahead. Hopefully, the IAF is going ahead nevertheless. Derby ER should be some ways away, given that no contract has been signed as yet. Hopefully within a few months time it should be signed.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Mar 2020 23:48

Where does the derby er for into this whole thing. In terms of rangeb purely, how does one rate it? Iirc marketing agents were comparing it to meteor earlier...

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Mar 2020 00:29

Kartik wrote:Astra Mk2 is that far along in development? That's the dual pulse missile right? Not the one based on the SFDR technology that was tested last year?

Yes, that's the one.

Regarding ASRAAM integration on Su-30, there were reports that Russia was miffed and didn't want it to go ahead. Hopefully, the IAF is going ahead nevertheless. Derby ER should be some ways away, given that no contract has been signed as yet. Hopefully within a few months time it should be signed.

We will go

to Russia and offer them a bribe somewhere else. I hope a few hundred Astra are in service even as we order the i-Derby ER.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Mar 2020 02:29

I have rarely seen a pic of any IAF MKI carrying an all R-77- R-73 loadout. It is usually a mix of R-27R's, R-77's and R-73's. Even the latest picture to emerge of the MKI with the SAP-518 on the wingtips shows the aircraft armed with R-27's not R-77s. The whole discussion about R-77 (or more specifically the RVV-AE variant which we have) vs the AIM-120C5 does not take into account that we do not know for sure what loadout was carried by the defending MKI's.

My guess would be a mix of R-27R's (and perhaps T's), R-77's and R-73'. Given that they were heavily outnumbered, even if they did get a firing solution for the R-77's the pilots will have to take into account that the initial shots from long range would probably miss as the bandits maneuvered (made easier by their altitude advantage). They could not afford to waste any missiles in that scenario.

The paki F-16's had the same problem but they fired the AMRAAMs anyway since they had more to spare and that's exactly what ended up happening when the MKIs evaded all the missiles. But the MKI's did not have the same luxury.

As for the R-27's, I don't know how the IAF has planned to keep them relevant in the current scenario where most of its adversaries are armed with active homing AAM's. But I do remember a fresh order for the 27's (maybe the ER/ET variants) a few years back. So they still see a use for them I guess. I remember being surprised back then because we did not order the RVV-SD at the same time but chose to spend money on the R-27's.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Mar 2020 04:58

Cain Marko wrote:Where does the derby er for into this whole thing. In terms of rangeb purely, how does one rate it? Iirc marketing agents were comparing it to meteor earlier...

54 NM or 100 km max range. Dual pulse motor and new software defined RF seeker.

From AW&ST

The latest variant is equipped with a new seeker that employs an advanced solid-state Software Defined Radar (SDR), based on combat proven technology derived from the Tamir missile, the interceptor used in RAFAEL’s Iron Dome system.

The new seeker is lighter and more compact than its predecessor, thus clearing valuable space which has been used by the missile designers to increase the propulsion system by adding a second mode (kick), accelerating the missile at the terminal phase of the flight. This new addition increases the range of the I-Derby ER beyond 100 km., significantly more than its current “short/medium” range capability.

This “second kick” greatly improves the missile’s performance. “This phase is not serial, but operates independently of the primary rocket propulsion as it is activated at any time during the fight, by the flight control system.” Yaniv explains. The second pulse would likely kick in when the missile is closing on its target, accelerating it and increasing its kinematic envelope, thus increasing its “no escape zone”.

The use of SDR technology means the missile seeker can be reprogrammed with software upgrades including new waveforms, duty cycles and processing techniques, addressing new threats, countermeasures and techniques that may evolve through its lifespan of 20-30 years.

Another advantage of the I-Derby ER is its ability to lock onto targets before and after launch, enabling the aircraft to engage targets at all ranges.
..

A major advantage of the I-Derby ER is that it uses the same missile envelope. Unlike the AIM-120D or Meteor, I-Derby ER will be compatible with aircraft currently cleared to carry Derby. RAFAEL claims it will be able to deliver 80% of the Meteor’s performance at a third of its cost. It is also superior to the AIM-120C7 and more affordable, the company claims. Already cleared on F-16 (Block 52), F-5E, Kfir and Sea Harrier, I-Derby ER integration tests are currently under way on the Indian Tejas LCA.

And here

As a first step Rafael (Static A8) developed the I-Derby with an all-new seeker head and guidance package. The package is more flexible than the previous unit, with a better ability to control the waveform. Its electronic counter-countermeasures performance is improved, a necessary step to match and stay ahead of advances in electronic warfare systems. At the same time, the seeker retains the “lock-on before launch” function that gives the Derby a short-range “fire and forget” capability, in which the missile’s seeker head can be slaved to the pilot’s helmet display for close-in dogfighting.

I-Derby’s seeker/guidance package employs solid-state technology so that physical size and weight has been reduced. At the same time Rafael replaced the large proximity fuse fitted to the original missile with a much smaller RF-based fuse located at the base of the seeker’s radome.

Taken together, these enhancements have freed up considerable volume internally for the fitment of a larger propulsion system, resulting in the I-Derby ER. Rather than just increase the amount of propellant carried, Rafael opted for a dual-pulse motor. The initial launch pulse is similar to that of the original Derby, but a second pulse can now be fired at a time dictated by the missile’s flight control system, which detects when the weapon is running out of energy. Firing the second pulse is normally undertaken shortly before intercept, greatly increasing the missile’s maneuvering energy in the end-game as a means of expanding its no-escape zone.

At the same time, the I-Derby ER’s range is increased to more than 60 miles, placing it into the long-range category and allowing it to better exploit the greater capabilities being introduced by modern fighter radars. The missile is also completely interchangeable with the Derby used in Rafael’s Spyder-SR ground-based air defense system. Theoretically, I-Derby ER could also be adapted with a booster motor as used by the current Spyder-MR system, although Rafael sees little operational need for such a long-ranged system.

I-Derby ER was first unveiled at Aero India in February. Rafael is switching production over to the new version and, while the company remains coy about development status, insists that it will be available to customers within a typical missile order-to-delivery period of around two years. The company has identified at least five potential customers who are looking for a 60-mile long-range air-to-air missile.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 11 Mar 2020 05:07

nachiket wrote:As for the R-27's, I don't know how the IAF has planned to keep them relevant in the current scenario where most of its adversaries are armed with active homing AAM's. But I do remember a fresh order for the 27's (maybe the ER/ET variants) a few years back. So they still see a use for them I guess. I remember being surprised back then because we did not order the RVV-SD at the same time but chose to spend money on the R-27's.

I think that order went to the Ukraine for the r27. As far as why the iaf still buys it, it must find the missiles to be useful one way or another. Iirc, they use these at pretty long ranges.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Mar 2020 11:51

Cain Marko wrote:
nachiket wrote:As for the R-27's, I don't know how the IAF has planned to keep them relevant in the current scenario where most of its adversaries are armed with active homing AAM's. But I do remember a fresh order for the 27's (maybe the ER/ET variants) a few years back. So they still see a use for them I guess. I remember being surprised back then because we did not order the RVV-SD at the same time but chose to spend money on the R-27's.
I think that order went to the Ukraine for the r27. As far as why the iaf still buys it, it must find the missiles to be useful one way or another. Iirc, they use these at pretty long ranges.

They are also much cheaper, they take the flying time and we used them to take out Paki drones in Mar 2019, Many forget Pakis lost around 5-6 drones in Feb and Mar 2019. We shot some of them on the Paki side of the border.