SEAD ops in the IAF

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Shankar » 21 Nov 2002 13:13

One ideal aircraft for SEAD operation for us should be SU-25T frogfoot.In afganistan where sukhois experienced SAM threats like Redeye,Stinger and SA-7 forced the sukhoi team to mimimise the infrared signature in model Su-25TM
The installation of intake cones hiding the turbine blades and mixing of exhastwith cold air substantially reduced infrared signature.Use of radar absorbing material will further reduce vulnerability of frogs in SEAD duty.I am sure russians would be only to happy to give them to us
at anew year discount rate

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby daulat » 21 Nov 2002 14:46

There is a limited SEAD ops scenario too in the context of a war of attrition. Take out zones of coverage - particularly in POK, which may or may not signal impending ground intervention. Under some circumstances this scenario does not need to escalate, but merely becomes an extension of the daily artillery duels.

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Rudra » 21 Nov 2002 20:48

I didnt know SU25 could fly from carriers.

this link has shots of SU25 both parked and landing on a carrier.

http://www.milparade.com/2000/40/06_03.shtml

could be useful on future large amphib ships on
Colonial missions in IOR periphery.

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 680
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Y I Patel » 21 Nov 2002 22:19

I have been hesitant to intrude since this started out as a tech thread, but the temptation to jump in and discuss redlines is irresistible!

IMHO the reason for the disproportional impact of S/DEAD on redlines is because of how SEAD affects the situational awareness of the enemy leadership. Most of all, a successful SEAD means the enemy is blinded - maybe partially or temporarily, but blinded nevertheless. If you can't see what is coming at you, you have to assume the worst. Furthermore, because of the speed at which air power acts, you have a very limited response window.

If a land formation breaks through your lines, you atleast know that such formations are not likely to move at more than 50 km/day tops (Sovs expected to do 50 km/d; IA practices at about 30 km/d). So depending upon where the breakthrough occurs, you have a window of time to consider different military as well as political options, such as launching ARS to riposte or suing for talks at UN. But if IAF blows a teeny tiny hole in the AD on the way to Chaklala, you don't even have 15 minutes to make up your mind!

Now let's take this further. Just for argument's sake, suppose IAF blows up a hole in the Paki AD net, north of Zoji La. Skardu is 5 minutes flying time from that hole. But you know what? Kahuta is 5 minutes flying time too! So what is to prevent a bunch of M2Ks from flying south to party over Kahuta or Mangla? Now I know that there are overlapping areas of AD coverage and all that, but you have to remember that things move at Mach 1 in air power. If one AD node goes down north of Zoji La, PAF has to plan a response to potential attacks on supporting nodes north, west, or south of Zoji La, and in the next few minutes!

Air power is a very potent weapon. It does not respect spatial and temporal limitations that land bound forces have to labour under. You want to use air power for precisely those reasons, but the strengths of air power also make its use very destabilizing and escalatory when some constratints have to be respected.

That said, there will be a grand sorting out eventually, where redlines (if any) will be obliterated in the first few minutes of shooting. The first para of the first chapter of that saga will have to be written by IAF SEAD assets. So it is essential that these IAF SEAD capabilities and ops be discussed anyway, without imposing redline induced constraints.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby NRao » 21 Nov 2002 22:44

Since everything is "5 minutes" flying time in TSP, the very semblence of a suppression could get the TSPians acting up.

(As an after thought: Is'nt there something to delay a radar wave? So, instead of SEAD/DEAD and the expected redline senario, let the TSPians "see" but delay the response, so that by the time the M2Ks are above their heads it is too late. I suspect it is risky for the IAF pilots, but it could be a way to avoid the redline business.)

Also, given that there are bound to be overlapping coverages, a hole would essentially signify SEADing/DEADing more than local SEAD/DEAD.

Suffice to state that the IAF is aware of the permutations/combinations and it is more a political handcuff that may limit the amount of SEAD/DEAD. For the redline perception from an Indian perspective may come from teh political wing.

Just for kicks:

The Weasels at War (1991 Desert Storm)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby ramana » 21 Nov 2002 22:47

Badar this is the Yogi I was talking about!

Yogi, You mean SEAD assets right?

Johann, the author of the Bekaa Valley piece commits a major faux pas when she calls Col. Treveor N. Dupuy, British. That too in the Air Force magazine! What other errors are there in that piece?

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 680
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Y I Patel » 21 Nov 2002 23:07

Niranjan I think we are in accord. Redlines are perforce political in nature. And in the current situation, they may be imposed by third parties too!

ramana thanks for the intro. Yes I mean SEAD. Had switched to DEAD as in Destruction of EAD...

Should also add that here we all are talking about going after PAF C3I assets rather than just missile sites. Their manpads intensity and preferential low alt defenses make SAM hunting meaningless.

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Vick » 22 Nov 2002 00:00

If poking the Pakistanis' eyes out via SEAD is a redline, then taking that logic farther out, would the IAF getting stealth a/c in the future also be a redline?

What does SEAD do? It limits the enemy's SA and reduces decision making and reaction time. That is what stealth a/c do as well. Let's say that in the next 30 yrs the IAF gets aircraft that reduces the PAF radars' effective radar range by 95%. Now, the PAF's reaction time and SA has been severely degraded passively, is this a redline as well?

I think if India and the IAF are willing to concede SEAD as a possible redline breaker, then the IAF is basically consigning itself to high casualties and very degraded list of options. In the case of hostilities, the precedence must not be set where conventional strikes on non-strategic assests is considered taking a step on the nuclear ladder.

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 680
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Y I Patel » 22 Nov 2002 00:10

Vick what you articulate is a fairly widespread notion on BRF that considering redlines is tantamount to tying the military's hands. True, but the hands were tied long ago. What some of us are trying to do is figure out the nature and extent of constraints. If we can figure out where the knots are, we can suggest a way untie the hands, n'est pas?

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Michael » 22 Nov 2002 10:12

Oh well, so much for the thread. We totally derailed it as soon as someone mentioned "red lines". It was a pointless discussion anyway, since nobody really knows much of anything about the IAF's real SEAD capabilities, and besides the juicy stuff wouldn't be fit to post here anyway.

Suffice to say the IAF has a couple dozen jammer aircraft and some older ARM's. Beyond that let's be honest no one really knows much.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Johann » 22 Nov 2002 12:32

So back to IAF SEAD - here's a specific question: do any non-Jaguar IAF squadrons train with the ARMAT?

**************************

Ramana - I noticed that oddity. Dupuy served in a British division on the eastern front in WW2, but beyond that...

Never the less this is probably the single best english language source on Bekaa SEAD operations, and the value is in Ivry's words and the access she enjoyed to write this article.

Her April article is also one of the best overviews of the USAFs role in OEF. I can say with some certainty that data she used in that article is accurate, but its also true that she did enjoy high level USAF access to put together that piece for the AFA.

MN Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 393
Joined: 27 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby MN Kumar » 22 Nov 2002 13:06

I remember there was a discussion sometime back about the possible aquisition of the Harpy UAVs. Potent DEAD platform and cost effective.

IAI Harpy

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Rajit » 22 Nov 2002 13:48

Johann, thks for the info on the Ryan drones..I stand corrected!

As for Harpy.....well we were supposed to have inked a 50 million dollar deal on these (numbers not known)....and as is the case with most Israeli eqpt. this would have got delivered hush hush...so any of you lurkers out there from the air force who would like to break your silence...heres an invite!!

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby JCage » 22 Nov 2002 15:20

Per SIPRI,40 Harpy's.

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Rajit » 22 Nov 2002 17:15

When in doubt ask Nitin:-). Any info on IOC / operators?

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby daulat » 22 Nov 2002 19:27

Harpy

seems from the photos that they are suicide drones - which makes them more missile than UAV?

what does an operational profile look like?

if it doesnt find a target, does it come back? or attack someting else?

does it send data back?

could it be tricked into thinking that its found a radar to attack?

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Rajit » 23 Nov 2002 11:04

Daulat, I think the basic difference with the missile is that if it doesnt find a target it can come back:-).

The way most UCAVs in the SEAD role work is that they are guided into the general area co-ordinates by ground operators, upon which they commence a loitering phase, waiting for radars to light them up after detecting their ingress.Then its a matter of comparing the fingerprint with that in its library and if its says Puki...then yes it does go into fidayeen mode

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Michael » 24 Nov 2002 09:05

Originally posted by nitin:
Per SIPRI,40 Harpy's.
Hey, do you have the link that section of SIPRI where you can do a query and show arms transfers for any country during any given year?

Priyank
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 69
Joined: 22 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Priyank » 24 Nov 2002 09:22

Originally posted by Mike:
Hey, do you have the link that section of SIPRI where you can do a query and show arms transfers for any country during any given year?
Try this link. It does not have a database driven search tool but most if not all of SIPRI's arms transfer reports have been organized and linked on that page. It has a seperate section for India and Pakistan for the years 1992-2001 if that is what you are looking for.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Badar » 25 Nov 2002 01:30

Hi,

YIPatel, I see where you are coming from but I still find it a bit hard to agree with what you say.

Would taking out the PAF C&C really step over a redline? I find it hard to believe so.

In the Indo-Pak senario nuclear weapons are purely political weapons and I believe (naively?) will only be used for protecting or furthering politcal objectives - not military ones. Taking out the C4I will be destabilising, yes - in the sense that a blind opponent will be a wee bit more trigger happy, but it is a strech to characterise it as a "do not cross" nuclear threshold.

We must not forget that deterrance is a two way street - it deterrers both ways. If we are so circumspect about stopping short of goading them enough to make them go nuclear, think how reticent they would be to actually go nuclear?

BTW, Quite frankly, as of today, I dont think it is nuclear weapons that tie down India's hands.

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Michael » 25 Nov 2002 01:53

Originally posted by Priyank:
Try this

link]http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/]link

It does not have a database driven search tool but most if not all of SIPRI's arms transfer reports have been organized and linked on that page. It has a seperate section for India and Pakistan for the years 1992-2001 if that is what you are looking for.
Yes, I already had that one bookmarked. But I remember once I found a SIPRI page where they had a searchable database, and it was kept more up to date also. You could search by country and date. Very handy, but I lost the link.

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 680
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Y I Patel » 25 Nov 2002 22:08

In the Indo-Pak senario nuclear weapons are purely political weapons and I believe (naively?) will only be used for protecting or furthering politcal objectives - not military ones. Taking out the C4I will be destabilising, yes - in the sense that a blind opponent will be a wee bit more trigger happy, but it is a strech to characterise it as a "do not cross" nuclear threshold.

We must not forget that deterrance is a two way street - it deterrers both ways. If we are so circumspect about stopping short of goading them enough to make them go nuclear, think how reticent they would be to actually go nuclear?
Badar I will concede that one should keep a very open mind on the whole issue of SEAD and redlines, and on the issue of redlines in general... since redlines are ultimately about perceptions and reactions, they are heavily dependent on context. The same action can be construed as crossing them in one case, and not crossing them in another - so we take our best prognostication, and then we all pray that the moment of truth never comes to pass!

SEAD is an issue that deserves close attention with or without superimposed redlines. So let's just find out what we can do, and we will worry about related redlines in another thread, on another day. How about that? :)

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby JCage » 25 Nov 2002 22:45

Hi YI Patel,
Two things come to mind:

Yes,redlines are totally driven by context.Ie limited action,limted SEAD..etc.But in the context of "total war", we can expect full blown SEAD.

Maj Gen Ashok Mehta in one of his cribs re: IAF had said they had asked for a full week before the Army march began.That week long period would certainly indicate SEAD efforts a plenty.

Again Sanjay in his articles on the IAF-Pak matchup mentions that the IAF has been stockpiling munitions and intends to take out the PAki n/w like blazes.
This predates the redline business,but is still interesting.

SO the redlines may have to do with the context rather than what will be done,if need be.

Regards,
Nitin

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby ramana » 25 Nov 2002 23:31

In late seventies did India get some USAF RPV/Target drones called 'Chukkar'? And were they assembled in India?

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3547
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby fanne » 26 Nov 2002 02:28

we did, dont know the second part

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby JCage » 26 Nov 2002 02:48

Yes,the Northrop Chukkar.
We were using them till into the 90's i believe,the Lakshya article on BR(Hunter's last flight) makes a reference to them.

Apart from that there was an ADE Aerial target for Missiles called (i kid you not) Fluffy!
Theres also the Ulka-ADE,being made from 1990 onwards and used at Chandipur.Launched by a Jag or Canberra,is a Missile target(MT) with a rocket motor.

Regards,
Nitin

Himanshu
BRFite
Posts: 191
Joined: 25 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: SEAD ops in the IAF

Postby Himanshu » 20 Dec 2002 15:01

Thought that this might come in handy

Weapon Systems Of Pakistan Air Force (Including RADAR installations and Maps)
http://www.geocities.com/baja/dunes/1107/arm.htm#e


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests