TL;DR version :-
We need more tankers, by yesterday.
We also need more ELINT/SIGINT and strike aircraft, preferably stealthy, but we will come to that discussion.
An unmanned, twin-engined, flying-wing, stealthy aircraft powered by dry kaveris is our best bet to achieve that, IMHO.
Think enlarged, twin engined AURA.
Want to know more ? Please, read on !
I.Background
We all know about the 'fighter gap' IAF is suffering from and it doesn't appear to be getting better anytime soon. IAF will likely be at around
~30 sqn by the end of the decade, approximately 2/3 of its sanctioned strength of 42 sqn. With this depleted strength it is expected to
a) protect Indian airspace on 2 fronts (3 maybe, if PLAAF starts deploying in BD/Myanmar) from not only OPFOR fighter aircraft but also assorted cruise
missiles, kamikaze UAV's and the like. Did I mention a significant chunk of those fighters would be stealthy ??
b) counter OPFOR heavies like AEW/tankers/bombers etc
c) aid the army in ground engagements on a front stretching from Gujarat to Arunachal
d) aid the navy in its own engagements from arabian sea to andaman sea
To accomplish all this, IAF has an actual fighter squadron strength that is ~66% of its already conservative projected requirement.
That's not adequate, not by a long shot. If war actually breaks out, those numbers would not be enough to perform its primary role of
protecting Indian airspace AND execute the secondary role of taking the fight to the enemy.
To support the depleted fighter strength, we have a grand total of 6 refuelers.
Even if 4 are serviceable at any one time, where will you deploy them ? 1 each in four corners of the country ??
Your fighters would have to land again and again in order to refuel, making it that much challenging to maintain continuous CAP's.
Long range strikes would be near impossible beyond token attempts.
II. The case against tankers converted from transports/airliners :
a) there are no easy options, we have been trying for more than a decade now ? It's either too costly or too complicated and all of them require
yet more imports which do nothing for the Indian economy or the indegenisation effort. If we go for this option spending costly FOREX on it, 25-30
years down the line we will be in the exact same position, again. Hat in hand, asking for massa to please sell us some doodads for a few billion USD,
which the babus at MoF dont want to spend.
b) These designs are not survivable in the modern battlefield, they are slow flying and non-stealthy, the worst combination possible.
These can be detected from 100's of KM away and would be juicy targets for OPFOR stealth fighters like the J-20 with its long range missiles like PL-15.
I posit that this variety of tankers and other support aircraft are past their sell-by date. Just because western air forces continue to fly them
because of legacy reasons is not reason enough for us to the same mistake. Secondly, the geography available in the Indian sub-continent to hide such
an asset is much less than what the US can access in the pacific, for example, making these more vulnerable in our case.
III. Single point of failure Vs Distributed system
One 200,000 kg tanker out of 4 (3?) operational at any one time is a single point of failure for a large section of the IAF. Let's see how.
Destruction of a large tanker like IL-78 is not only loss of a capital asset, it throws into jeopardy entire squadrons' flight schedules and
warfighting capability. I believe forces worldwide would eventually move to dedicated purpose built tankers that are smaller, cheaper, more
survivable and most importantly, much more agile to operate.
One step in this direction is the MQ-25 being used by US navy; as legacy tankers start retiring, all forces preparing to fight peer adversaries would
switch to MQ-25 and similar platforms. However, with an effective fuel load of ~7500 kg at 500km, it is still a limited platform. There's no reason why such a
platform has to be the smallest possible single engined bird. The sweet spot, as far as India is concerned would be a twin engined unmanned platform,
as we would see in the next section. A large number of such aircraft, designed and made in India, for India, can transform the IAF.
IV. Unmanned, twin-engined, flying-wing, stealthy
Let's deal with these attributes one by one :
Unmanned : Refueling is one of the more simpler, repetitive tasks in the air force, relatively speaking of course. This is a functions that's just
begging to be automated. No need to risk a person in that role, at most a pilot can remotely supervise its functions from ground.
Twin engined : Use the dry kaveri, it seems to be working and it is mostly immune from sanctions. With a thrust of 45-50 kN each, 2 kaveris would
generate enough thrust to power a 25,000 kg class aircraft.
FLying Wing : Inherently stealthy design, current AURA design knowledge can be used to create a larger version, saving time and cost. The wings have
enough volume to carry large amount of fuel. Max speed would be strictly subsonic.
Stealthy : See above. AURA is already designed to be low observable. Even in a tanker, LO/VLO characteristics would serve as an invaluable survival
parameter.
So, let's have a back of the envelope estimate of the specs :
Length : 12 m
Width : 22 m
MaxT/O : 25,000-30,000 kg
Tx Fuel load ~ 10,000 kg
V. Use Cases
a) Unmanned tankers
at an average of 2 tankers/fighter sqn, IAF would require approx. 60 of these. Unlike the IL-78's and the converted 767's et al (if and when they come),
these won't need to be centrally held. Flights of 4-8 aircraft can be based alongwith fighter sqns spread across the country, providing refueling
service as and when required. A more robust, flexible and agile solution at approximately same/less cost of procuring new KC-46.
b) Long range strike
Kind of self-explnatory, an aircraft of this class would have around 8-10t payload, with stealth to boot. This can be an excellent strike option, in
autonomous of loyal wingman roles. Could also perform as trucks for long range AAMs.
c) ISR/ELINT/SIGINT roles. IAF badly needs to update and expand those assets and foreign maal are too costly. A novel use can be thought of where a flying network of these aircraft while in tankers roles could act as the passive reciever part of a bistatic network, helping in detection of OPFOR stealth aircraft.
d) Naval roles : All 3 roles mentioned above, but for the Navy. The dimensions would allow it to operate from carriers but only with those having catapults (I am guessing here). And the next IAC is supposed to have those.
Additionally, IN lacks proper AEW assets for its carriers, (yes, I do know about Ka31 and the recent helo based project)
An AEW based on this design with conformal arrays would be indecently capable. Admittedly, the mission commander can't fly on it but the radar picture can
be transmitted to the Command and Control team on ground.
So, there you have it. My idea of how the IAF could evolve in the future.
Aero and non-aero experts, feel free to join in and pick holes/improve the idea. Indranil and co, I am looking at you guys.
Cheers.
p.s. request a bit of latitude from fellow mods to allow this thread for a bit.
p.p.s BRFites please feel free to think of a name for this project as well.
so cant make even an educated guess of technical parameters.