Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Surya » 15 Aug 2008 23:25

I think it should not be shut - but not sure how good the Jag is for CAS

It is relatibvely think skinned and has barely enough power.

A Super Jaguar would make more sense with uprated engines

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby ramana » 16 Aug 2008 00:20

Baljeet, Why? dont do that again. The thread will remain or die on its own merits.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Victor » 16 Aug 2008 00:41

In the Georgian war thread, there are pictures of single tanks blown up from the top with little damage to surrounding area. This is only possible to do with highly maneuverable, slow-speed CAS aircraft like the Su-25 Frogfoot and the A-10 Thunderbolt using depleted uranium shells. Jaguar would have flattend the whole block because it is optimised for low level supesonic flight and is not designed to be maneuvreable at slower speeds.

That being said, you make a good point about our experience and comfort level with the Jags. Nothing better than if we could churn them out by the hundred if it was the best use of resources.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16834
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rahul M » 16 Aug 2008 01:02

well the real CAS birds for IAF are the mig-27s, with their swing wings, they should have good low level handling and maneuverability. with around a hundred of them, they, along with the BNs and the older mig-21s will be our primary CAS platforms. of course, one can't expect the fishbeds to carry along much longer, so the floggers it will be.
interestingly, no nation is designing a specialized CAS bird in the near future, in spite of the fact that their AFs expect to do a lot of CAS ops in the near future. they expect to cover that role with the conventional multi-role a/c and the helos.
undoubtedly, money has a lot to do with this decision, with the cost of designing new a/c ballooning by the day, it's just not feasible to design a platform for every niche.
at least for the USAF, one factor that mitigates this problem to some extent are the stand-off weapons, if those are accurate enough, they allow unarmoured a/c with poor low level handling and relatively low quality/shorter range jammers to perform the CAS jobs effectively.
for on-the field presence they would probably use the attack choppers, to be called in at short notice.
I don't think the jags quite fit in those roles at the moment.
in GW1, RAF learned it the hard way with low level CAS operations.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3246
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Kakkaji » 16 Aug 2008 01:12

Raj Malhotra wrote:Hence is it not premature to end its production line? There is also school of thought that we ended the production line of Ajeet, Mig-21 & 27 a decade too early. Hence we are upgrading old airframes of Mig-21s at great cost.


I agree. Numbers have their own logic.

The Jags may not be suitable for CAS but if we have more numbers, they will come in handy.

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 768
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Y. Kanan » 16 Aug 2008 01:28

The future of CAS is precision guided munitions; strafing is for low-tech armies that either can't afford the widespread use of PGM's (India at the moment) or for those militaries that simply don't give a damn about losses (Russia).

If you don't mind throwing planes and pilots away, then yes strafing is dramatic and fun. Nothing like watching an SU-25 or A-10 swooping down to blaze away with automatic cannon. Trouble is, against any real opponent these aircraft get knocked out the sky by SAM's. It's great when you're beating up on a helpless opponent like Iraq but these tactics would cost dearly against Chinese or Pakistani forces.

Indeed the current trend is for UAV's to provide CAS; they're cheap and can linger on target much longer than fighters or helicopters. Look at what they're doing with the next-gen Predators nowadays.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16834
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rahul M » 16 Aug 2008 01:31

Kakkaji wrote:
Raj Malhotra wrote:Hence is it not premature to end its production line? There is also school of thought that we ended the production line of Ajeet, Mig-21 & 27 a decade too early. Hence we are upgrading old airframes of Mig-21s at great cost.


I agree. Numbers have their own logic.

The Jags may not be suitable for CAS but if we have more numbers, they will come in handy.

in what role to be exact ??

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3246
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Kakkaji » 16 Aug 2008 02:03

Rahul M wrote:in what role to be exact ??


DPSA
Maritime Strike
Attrition Reserves

I want more, more, more in all these categories (and more). :P

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby PaulJI » 16 Aug 2008 02:09

Victor wrote:In the Georgian war thread, there are pictures of single tanks blown up from the top with little damage to surrounding area. This is only possible to do with highly maneuverable, slow-speed CAS aircraft like the Su-25 Frogfoot and the A-10 Thunderbolt using depleted uranium shells.

It is possible to do the same with PGMs from aircraft, including helicopters & UAVs. The Brimstone missile, for example, could do exactly the same to tanks, & is carried by supersonic aircraft such as Tornado.

It is also possible to do the same from ground level with top-attack missiles, artillery (e.g. BONUS), & mortars (e.g. STRIX).

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16834
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rahul M » 16 Aug 2008 02:17

Kakkaji wrote:DPSA
Maritime Strike
Attrition Reserves

I want more, more, more in all these categories (and more). :P

hmm..
I think the mki would be better in those roles. (I confess that I've been dreaming about maritime mki's :oops: )

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Victor » 16 Aug 2008 02:27

PaulJI wrote: It is possible to do the same with PGMs from aircraft, including helicopters & UAVs. The Brimstone missile, for example, could do exactly the same to tanks, & is carried by supersonic aircraft such as Tornado.

It is also possible to do the same from ground level with top-attack missiles, artillery (e.g. BONUS), & mortars (e.g. STRIX).

True. For India it would be Nag. This was probably not the case in Georgia though. From the footage there were swarms of Frogfoots.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2499
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Cybaru » 16 Aug 2008 02:33

Whats the cost for producing new upgraded jags?

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3246
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Kakkaji » 16 Aug 2008 02:46

Rahul M wrote:
Kakkaji wrote:DPSA
Maritime Strike
Attrition Reserves

I want more, more, more in all these categories (and more). :P

hmm..
I think the mki would be better in those roles. (I confess that I've been dreaming about maritime mki's :oops: )


It is a question of cost and numbers.

Think about a 2 or 3 front war.

Think about flight after flight of Jaguars headed west from west coast airports, sinking any ships headed towards Pakistan, hundreds of miles from their destinations, far outside the envelope of Paki air defenses.

Think about round the clock bombardment of Chittagong port reducing it to rubble within two days, by flights of Jaguars approaching from both north and south.

With MKIs fighting air battles with Paki F-16s, let swarms of Jaguars streak in and pound Paki economic targets, and their airports and army bases, hundreds of miles from the border. Let Paki air defenses be saturated by waves of Jaguars coming in.

Those are my dreams. :)

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 768
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Y. Kanan » 16 Aug 2008 05:55

Kakkaji wrote:Those are my dreams. :)


Heh... well keep dreaming....

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby shiv » 16 Aug 2008 06:40

When the jaguar was designed (and much later selected) for the IAF the considerations were completely different.

It was a stable platform that would fly at low levels to avoid radar. The twin engine enhanced survivability against foreign object damage at low levels and the navigation - attack system allowed release of dumb bombs accurately at a predetermined spot while the Jags roared past in a single pass.

The original had virtually no self defence capability and was therefore nowhere near "multi-role". I believe it was an Indian request to create overwing rails for AAMs. Obviously the Jag has come a long way since that time but it still incorporates fairly old technology that probably hang like millstones around its neck. Lack of FBW probably makes it more demanding to fly at low levels, lack of FADEC makes it the pilot's responsibility to calculate optimum fuel usage and engine power. Lack of modular electronics and self diagnostic systems (i assume) make it far more intensive to service than a more modern aircraft and those box intakes and what I presume is an all metal construction were never meant to be stealthy.

Oh yes I believe more life can be squeezed out of the Jaguar - but with diminishing returns. Without definite inside knowledge I would guess that the following issues are important. The UK may have wound up (or maybe winding up) spare parts supply for the Jag. That means that we have to make every nut and bolt and rivet and ring instead of easily importing and maintaining a stock of these items. Should we spend resources on setting up entire manufacturing lines for these items, or should we shift to something more modern?

My feeling is that the Jag line may have to come to an end soon. Get the LCA going, and plan for an MCA to replace the MRCA to be inducted. Plan for UCAVs and space based assets.

JMHO

chakkunny
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 26
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 02:13

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby chakkunny » 16 Aug 2008 07:57

If you want CAS, my suggestion would be to go for what was suggested by Singha saar a long time ago. An-26G gunship which would
act like a poor man's AC130 in a low threat environment and act as a real time airborne FAC in a high threat environment, with onboard operators guiding Nishants operating at low level for target acquisition and issuing launch orders to LCAs carrying PGM's and extended range Nags from standoff ranges. Useful for COIN, CAS, Spec Ops and BI.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Raj Malhotra » 16 Aug 2008 13:33

My opinion about the issues are as follows;-

1. Any dedicated CAS like A-10 is better but that is not going to happen. Mig-27 is very maintenace heavy and only single engined which makes it vulnerable.

2. Jags are optimised for supersonic low level but adequate for CAS, as was said in an article by Jasjeet Singh in an old edition of IDR.

3. AT present - it is the "cheapest" option available.

4. If we can keep Mig-21s flying then why not Jags.

5. We have adequate number of Jags to make it economical to produce spareparts

6. Also not that per reports Jags is very economical to fly/maintain


So for mountains "at present" it is the best solution for CAS. Or Su-30MKI, order another 100 of them. Difficulty is even that line is not being given emphasis and no open source about any plan from 2014 onwards.

To take on China and Pak together we need to have to ahve around 45-60 squads and jags is good enough to make numbers.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby satya » 16 Aug 2008 13:41

Why dont we go for a dedicated CAS aircraft in likes of Su-39 ( upgraded Su-25) , twin engined and heavily armoured and can carry 4 tonnes of ammo and fairly long range and loitering capability .Also can be operated in mountain terrain and can be operated from FOBs . Even earlier Su-25 had a very good record during Afghan operations with loss of 20-30 aircrafts for a total of 60,000 hrs of combat sorties .

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Raj Malhotra » 16 Aug 2008 13:56

The idea is not to induct new "imported" aircraft and maximise the use of "present' indigenous capabilities. Even Hawk has lot of nuts and bolts similar to Jag, so there is argument of commanlity there also.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby satya » 16 Aug 2008 14:31

why we are looking for a "jugaad" , name it anything but Jag in CAS role is nothing more than a Jugaad . Its always Jugaad we believe in , it seems .
JMTs

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby shiv » 16 Aug 2008 15:48

Raj Malhotra wrote:My opinion about the issues are as follows;-

1. Any dedicated CAS like A-10 is better but that is not going to happen. Mig-27 is very maintenace heavy and only single engined which makes it vulnerable.

2. Jags are optimised for supersonic low level but adequate for CAS, as was said in an article by Jasjeet Singh in an old edition of IDR.

3. AT present - it is the "cheapest" option available.

4. If we can keep Mig-21s flying then why not Jags.

5. We have adequate number of Jags to make it economical to produce spareparts

6. Also not that per reports Jags is very economical to fly/maintain


So for mountains "at present" it is the best solution for CAS. Or Su-30MKI, order another 100 of them. Difficulty is even that line is not being given emphasis and no open source about any plan from 2014 onwards.

To take on China and Pak together we need to have to ahve around 45-60 squads and jags is good enough to make numbers.


Hawk can be used for CAS

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Austin » 16 Aug 2008 16:49

The Jags are here to stay for a long time at least till 2025 and perhaps beyond . the Jags are good A/C to be used regionally and more specifically in Indo-Pak context.

If the IAF keeps its avionics , EW and Weapons upto date it is one of the best Ground Attack Fighter / CAS in this part of the world , it has good range/weapons payload even for a Lo-Lo mission ideal in Indo-Pak conflict.

It though has some issue with the engine ( derating at high temperature ) , but IAF has the option to upgrade the engine as offered by the Brits .

The Hawk at best in its latest avtar can be defined as a LIFT type aircraft , while the Jags were designed as a thoroughbred strike/attack aircraft.

Considering the repeat orders that Jags got from IAF , we will see it in our inventory for long time to come.

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby PaulJI » 16 Aug 2008 18:57

Austin wrote:The Jags are here to stay for a long time at least till 2025 and perhaps beyond . the Jags are good A/C to be used regionally and more specifically in Indo-Pak context....
It though has some issue with the engine ( derating at high temperature ) , but IAF has the option to upgrade the engine as offered by the Brits.

The IAF chose the Adour Mk 871 for its Hawks. RAF Jaguars were using the Mk 106 (reheated Mk 871) when retired. The reheated Mk 811 Adour used by IAF Jaguars is an earlier version. The Mk 106 has more thrust than the 811, but I think only a little.

Neither the 871 nor 106 has FADEC, AFAIK. The un-reheated Mk 951, fitted to new Hawks for the RAF, Bahrain, & South Africa has FADEC, more thrust, & expected to have twice the life, & I don't know why India didn't select it for the Hawk. South Africa ordered the Hawk with Adour Mk 951 in 1999, years before India ordered it with 871, & took delivery starting in May 2006. Bahrain ordered it in 2002, delivered from July 2006. 7 years elapsed between the last sale of Hawks with the 871 & the signing of the Indian contract, during which three nations selected, & two signed contracts for, the 951.

A 951 with reheat could be fitted to Jaguar. India could also retrofit the Hawk with the 951, but I fear that would be much more expensive than it would have been to have it fitted from the start.

Kapil
Webmaster BR
Posts: 282
Joined: 16 Jun 2001 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Kapil » 16 Aug 2008 23:21

Nice and much needed topic.

The Jag is brilliant at low level strike.
But,is it a viable aircraft in today's SAM environment in our neighbourhood?
And it's underpowered like anything.

I personally would advocate pruning down the Jag numbers,

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16834
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rahul M » 16 Aug 2008 23:27

Kapil ji, so what would be the CAS solution for the IAF, say 10 years down the line ?

Rupak
Webmaster BR
Posts: 322
Joined: 14 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rupak » 16 Aug 2008 23:43

The Jag was never designed for close air support, it was meant for interdiction. It was bought to fill the DPSA requirement, whereas the MiG-23BN/27 were bought to fill a TASA requirement. The IAF has always complained that in 1971, the Army was calling in air strikes for tasks that could be better handled by its own artillery. While this may be worth debating, the fact of the matter is with the imminent deployment of Army Aviation brigades (WI Dhruvs) and eventually UCAVs, the Army will have enough organic airpower to deal with CAS tasks formerly assigned to the IAF.

I believe, and the IAF would agree, that rather than being bogged down with CAS, the IAF is better left to undertake interdiction and strike missions against enemy logistics and C3I, as well as infrastructure.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16834
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rahul M » 16 Aug 2008 23:50

I know people will shoot me for this, but I'm very, very skeptical about the chances of a light helicopter in even a rudimentary AD environment. leave alone SAMs and MANPADS, even the AD guns and small arms can do them in.
other than IR jammers, LCH's armour needs to be beefed up considerably, even if that means giving up some payload capacity. if US army's experience in iraq is anything to go by, a helo won't survive a modern battlefield unless it is immune to small arms fire and can take substantial punishment.

Rupak
Webmaster BR
Posts: 322
Joined: 14 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rupak » 17 Aug 2008 06:06

You raise very valid concerns, Rahul. The Dhruv and Lancer (to a limited extent) are built to be as survivable as possible with protection against small arms fire and automated countermeasures. Nothing is ever foolproof and aircraft will be lost. Compared against the capability offered by an Su-7 or Hunter during the 1970s, this offers a quantum jump in effective firepower (precision, standoff range, etc.). Furthermore, the deployment of Pinakas, Smerch and of course Brahmos makes the need to deploy Jaguars and MiG-27s in dangerous CAS missions less compelling. Note the change in ops philosophy within the duration of the Kargil war, when direct fire artillery together with standoff guided weapon delivery had the desired effect against enemy positions vs. the more conventional CAS approach originally employed.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby shiv » 17 Aug 2008 06:27

My guess is that if the army were to have its way it would acquire an Air Force of its own with dedicated CAS machines. Right now the Air Force has to divide its time between CAS and deeper missions.

Jasjit Singh brings this out well in his book, where he speaks of the dilemmas that come up, and the fact that a few missions to cut the logistics lines and communications to a battle area may be more effective in winning a particular battle at the expense of complaints that the Air Force did not provide CAS. Giving CAS to the same battle takes resources out to concentrate on one battle, rather than trying to help out an entire front or zone. The lives of some men may be better preserved by that CAS but the battle itself may go on much longer and may even be lost because the limited air assets have been concentrating on CAS rather than on interdiction of supply/comm lines.

The Army of course is going to be using helicopters for starters.

ksmahesh
BRFite
Posts: 209
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 17:55
Location: Mt Everest - its the coolest one

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby ksmahesh » 17 Aug 2008 06:44

Sell it to african nations. My layman's approach would involve using old bomber aircrafts (like jags) in naval role. (If airforce is unhappy with the planes). If Airforce wants to retire these planes navy could have them easily.
my 2 paisa

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Raj Malhotra » 17 Aug 2008 10:21

IAF may wel think that CAS will bog it down but Army would want it and assets would have to deployed for CAS.

So the issue is that "at present" what is the best asset for CAS which should be augumented? I say Jags.

Jags, IMHO is underpowered for take off but once in air it can hold its own even for CAS.

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

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Shankar » 17 Aug 2008 10:30

jags are required and in large numbers

it is ideal to take out logistic dumps ,bridges and railroads flying fast and very very low .No other indian aircraft have that low flying capability even Mig 27 .
Jaguars though not as good as mig 27 in tank busting role they can complement the mig 27s very well and they are quite good point defense aircraft too particularly with Mica and against attack choppers .On dessert it can and sure will be used in runway denial role like in gulf war

we can always upgrade with better weapons and avionics and computers from sukhois and even the engine buit should never shut down the line

lastly navy can keep on getting more and more two seater version giving it a formidable area denial capability with sukhois

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Raj Malhotra » 17 Aug 2008 10:45

USN is turning F-18 into general purpose aircraft from lot of specialised airframes.The same is the case for JSF. Hence "at present" Jags are best bet for CAS. Order 100-200 more Jags for CAS.

When FGFA comes on line this role will be taken over by Su-30MKIs.

AJT Hawk will be replaced augumented by LCA LIFT

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby John Snow » 17 Aug 2008 10:59

The Jaguar was the logical replacement for Hunter (hawker siddeley).

Four Hunters of the IAF destroyed dozens of Pakistani T-59 and Sherman tanks in the Battle of Longewala. The Hunters destroyed nearly 100 different vehicles of the Pakistan Army in the same battle.


which is Close and low air support.

I think now the era of anti tank missiles and Pinaka kind of weapons the need for jaguar in CLAS is changing bt we can always extend Jaguars by our own creative ways to make it do different kind of things on the running musharafs. Probably in Tibet also should the need arise?

My do paise

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby shiv » 17 Aug 2008 15:02

The IAF has used MiG 27s and MiG 21s in the CAS role in Tilpat/Pokhran demonstrations. Jags with cluster bombs can serve a useful role.

The following are ALL videos of IAF aircraft in firepower demonstrations showing the types of targets they expect to attack an different munitions including cannon, unguided rockets, cluster bombs and retarded bombs

http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=KhVjY48DRQU
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=YWGe_h6Ihdo
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey4RzWOvtog
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=9nF92HgCyRc
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=yHV_I47uSHQ
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=J0oegPHTyWA
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=4acBrWBzZnc
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx8DpE9AiTI
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=47CSHFURYEw
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=PKC8WuTLfM8
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=Ox9KmY5I4pQ
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=4acBrWBzZnc

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Raj Malhotra » 17 Aug 2008 15:10

The traditional type of CAS in which the aircrafts circle overhead and go for repeated passed/dive bombings are over due to manpads.So even CAS will be single pass, heavy bombing type. In this role the jags are good.The point is that among the types in production in India what choice do we have?

Dhruv-too vulnerable, it won't get up, too slow, light weapon load etc.

LCA-Single engined and still 5 years away from mass production

Hawk-too light and single engined and when Jags are there, why should be go for hawk?


So that leaves Jags only!!!IAF has 39 squadrons and wants 45 to tackle two front threat. For dominating both fronts, UN peacemaking, pesty neighbours, they want 60 squadrons. This is apart from CAS as IAF like all airforces hate CAS. So we need cheap and plentiful aircraft for CAS. Army is being pushed to attack choppers for CAS. My point is that choppers are too vulnerable in plains for CAS and useless in mountains. SO we need aircrafts for CAS. Additionally any CAS aircraft will suffer heavy losses or even damage (which may take it out for duration of conflict) means we need big fleet.

Jags are relatively cheap to buy, cheap to maintain, easy to fly etc. So why are we in hurry to lose it???? We can use for making numbers!

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16834
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rahul M » 17 Aug 2008 15:21

what people are not getting is the fact that low level CAS is a thing of the past, especially if the opposition has a dense AD environment, something that is true of the paki areas an IAF a/c has to overfly in order to reach its target. although their SR/MR-SAM cover is rudimentary, they have a well spread MANPADS/AAA environment. I ask people to reread coalition a/c losses in GW1.
start here for instance.
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/atrition.htm

Nayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2553
Joined: 11 Jun 2006 03:48
Location: Vote for Savita Bhabhi as the next BRF admin.

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Nayak » 17 Aug 2008 15:42

Bakis have tonnes of Anzas and chinese copies of Stinger.

Couples with ack-acks, they will have a good cover over their abduls.

If the Artillery can extend the range of smerch and Pinaka to 120 + km and make it accurate to boot, it will be safer.

Rupak
Webmaster BR
Posts: 322
Joined: 14 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby Rupak » 17 Aug 2008 19:15

Shiv has hit the nail on the head! I think with the new aviation brigades envisaged the Army will go a long way in having the CAS force it has always wanted, and one that is considerably more versatile and cheaper to operate than the IAF's!

Raj,
The Hawk is not "too" light. It can deliver a greater quantity of ordnance than either the Su-7 or MiG-21 and to greater distances. If Kargil is anything to go by, then we might also note that the only helo in the attacking formation of Mi-17s was the one without counter-measures, and that too was shot down after evading a number.

Rahul
The list of losses you have posted is not just aircraft flying CAS missions. In fact very few CAS missions were flown in GW1. For an attacking force in the Indian context, where opposing forces are more or less evenly matched in numbers, the biggest threat will be enemy fighters rather than MANPADS or SAMs. Recall the strikes flown during the latter part of the Kargil Ops, where Mirage and Jaguar sorties were flown well outside the effective envelope of MANPADS. In fact several pilots one has spoken to over the years remember seeing MANPADS being fired and then falling away like diwali rockets.


But to return to the Jaguar's utility. It's range and payload allow for great versetility...and it's super cheap to build!
There are many useful missions apart from interdiction that Jags could contribute to, including SEAD, EW, Recce...etc.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Is it too early to end Jaguar Production line??

Postby jamwal » 17 Aug 2008 19:23

Can Jaguars be used in Tibet and carry Brahmos?


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest