Indian Military Aviation

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Jun 2009 19:06

Samay,

There are some concerns that are common to India and the US. This is a topic under "Indian interests", but, two items of interest:

1) The entire world is the "backyard" of a super power, so we will see India and the US cooperating in some areas - they have to, and, opposing in others, and
2) Indian "interest" has been growing, which leads to more #1 (good and bad)

One thing for sure, there can be no fear of either doing something or not doing it. If something needs to be done but cannot be done, then revisit it another day, with better planning and resources.

Back to the thread.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 15 Jun 2009 19:12

1) The entire world is the "backyard" of a super power, so we will see India and the US cooperating in some areas - they have to, and, opposing in others, and
2) Indian "interest" has been growing, which leads to more #1 (good and bad)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
till today show me where is cooperation between two countries???

except one that america wants military orders for its companies and this has been one sided which only favours america

even pakistan has nuke deal with france .
all uranium/reactors coming from russia,france,kazak,canada in india.

if we had similar deal with russia/france americans have objected over it strongly.
show me any military/civilian area where US helping indians out

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 15 Jun 2009 19:50

There are two versions of C17, C17A Globemaster III and C17B Globemaster IV. We are gonna get the C17B Globemaster IV

What happened to the joint venture between Alenia and Tata's

(no C27J Spartan

)

The MRTA is like some super-duper story that fails to materialize

On paper this plane looks like such an obvious commercial success. Even the successor to the C130J for the USAF looks like MRTA-on-a-diet. I hope we see some good news on this front.

Russia and India owe it to their friendship to make the MRTA a success.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 15 Jun 2009 20:16

Drevin wrote:There are two versions of C17, C17A Globemaster III and C17B Globemaster IV. We are gonna get the C17B Globemaster IV

What happened to the joint venture between Alenia and Tata's (no C27J Spartan )

The MRTA is like some super-duper story that fails to materialize On paper this plane looks like such an obvious commercial success. Even the successor to the C130J for the USAF looks like MRTA-on-a-diet. I hope we see some good news on this front.

Actually there are only 2 aircraft currently available in heavy cargo aircraft category. One is the Ilyushin-76 and the other is the C017 GlobeMaster-III. It would have been better if IAF had gone for joint venture on this class of aircraft with the Russians. It would have presented greater export opportunities.

The Tata-Alenia deal was supposed to go through only if MRTA didn't materialize. But,during AI-09, the people I spoke to said that they had already decide on work-share and other aspects of MRTA between Ilyushin and HAL.

The Tata-Alenia deal could still materialize if there is DoD and IAF/IN back the deal with assurance of orders in enough numbers to make the deal profitable to the TATAs. That's the only thing private players care about.

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 15 Jun 2009 20:43

Tata's is probably one of the few pvt companys' in India with a western launch pad.

Best chance for a pvt joint venture to work would be with Tata's keeping in mind the context of Ford Motors famous selection of Tata's to own the JLR brands.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Jun 2009 21:32

Folks - let me state my personal view.

The IL 76 had its first flight in 1971 and production was stopped in 1997

Production of the C-17 really took off only in the late 1980s. The C-17 uses technologies that cannot be applied to the Il 76. The C 17 uses flap blowing (a type of thrust vectoring) to achieve lift at very slow speeds.

It also has thrust reversing that makes it possible to back up and reverse in small airfields. And the Il 76 is incredibly noisy.

And (I need to confirm this) - the C 17 has a cargo cabin wide enough to accommodate even the Arjun. Those of you who have read the story (on BR) of how the IAF transported T 72s to Leh in the Il 76 will know how dicey it was. Imagine an a/c that can do that with relative ease.

Finally the C 17 slow speed performance up close is superlative. Check the video (from Aero India) - watch those flaps taking the exhaust gases and diverting them down 2 min 30 onwards

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Jun 2009 22:18

wow pretty amazing slow n low capability. this thing will take to thoise like a duck to water.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 15 Jun 2009 22:24

I can vouch for the low noise of the C-17. I have witnessed it doing touch and gos from close quarters.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Jun 2009 22:38

Is that short landing great or what. Looks like it touches down at 4:21 and stops at 4:30!!!

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 15 Jun 2009 23:47

Another interesting thing I saw in AI-09 about C-17 was it's excellent turn-rate at low speeds. I don't think Il-76 can get even close to that.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 00:34

And the Il 76 is incredibly noisy.
--------------------------------------------
now what is use of saying this again and again ,it shows this fellow reads nothing

il76 in air force service can be fitted with D30KP BURLAK engine availalbe from 2011
and this engines meets "ICAO 2008 REQUIREMENTS" for noise and emission also increases the range by 10%.

an aircraft of these size doesn't need to be manouvarable and IL76 fitted with PS90A engines can do all what c17 can.

one can talk about which aircraft is superior to other and one must the price difference between two aircrafts is over 100 million ,so more you pay more you get

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 16 Jun 2009 00:48

^^ Please use the 'quote' functionality so it is easier to figure out who you are referring to.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 16 Jun 2009 01:00

shameekg wrote:^^ Please use the 'quote' functionality so it is easier to figure out who you are referring to.

he posted all his post in the same manner till now

,
whole page looks like a garbage dump from him, never seen such an enthusiast in dumping anything
Good posts from gurus is hidden somewhere

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 16 Jun 2009 01:00

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:And the Il 76 is incredibly noisy.
--------------------------------------------
now what is use of saying this again and again ,it shows this fellow reads nothing

...
one can talk about which aircraft is superior to other and one must the price difference between two aircrafts is over 100 million ,so more you pay more you get

Andrew a small request to you. When you respond to any post and wish to include it your reply then use the Quote button at the bottom of that post. It makes it easy for the other poster/readers.

Edit Later: I see that Shameekg had the same thoughts as me so hopefully Andrew will indulge our requests.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 01:01

BijuShet wrote:
Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:And the Il 76 is incredibly noisy.
--------------------------------------------
now what is use of saying this again and again ,it shows this fellow reads nothing

...
one can talk about which aircraft is superior to other and one must the price difference between two aircrafts is over 100 million ,so more you pay more you get
Andrew a small request to you. When you respond to any post and wish to include it your reply then use the Quote button at the bottom of that post. It makes it easy for the other poster/readers.

i got it how to do it as you can see now actually i did not know this

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 16 Jun 2009 01:03

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
BijuShet wrote: Andrew a small request to you. When you respond to any post and wish to include it your reply then use the Quote button at the bottom of that post. It makes it easy for the other poster/readers.
i got it how to do it as you can see now actually i did not know this

Thanks Andrew.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 16 Jun 2009 01:05

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
i got it how to do it as you can see now actually i did not know this

You have been telling us what you know/dont know in all the threads,past 24 hrs or so, please send something worth reading.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 01:11

Samay wrote:
Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
i got it how to do it as you can see now actually i did not know this
You have been telling us what you know/dont know in all the threads,past 24 hrs or so, please send something worth reading.

I write truth and truth is always bitter

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 16 Jun 2009 01:20

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
Samay wrote: You have been telling us what you know/dont know in all the threads,past 24 hrs or so, please send something worth reading.
I write truth and truth is always bitter

OT Warning on.
Andrew your writing may be true but Truth is not always bitter.
Case in point: A Ripe mango is sweet is a fact and is true. How does this statement become bitter? Please clarify.

OT Warning off.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 01:25

people saying i am not writing which is worth to read,but i never criticized anyone for what they post here that their posting isn't worth to read

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 16 Jun 2009 01:42

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:people saying i am not writing which is worth to read,but i never criticized anyone for what they post here that their posting isn't worth to read

OT Warning on...
Andrew you have been on this forum for less than 1 week and yet you seemed to have antogonized a lot of posters. I suggest you take a deep breath and ask yourself why you are here. Do you wish to share and learn with the rest of us ? Do you wish for others here to bow to your superior intellect ? A lot of people who post here have spent a good deal of time on many of these topics that you are posting on and they feel you are adding to the noise factor instead of the signal factor. I suggest you take a little more time in composing your thoughts and please use MS Word if you have it to correct the grammatical errors in your post. In your rebuttal please try to be a little more detailed and add facts/numbers to buttress your claims. It will make others engage you seriously rather than chide or ignore you. I assure you that if you show a little patience you will find this place is a fountain of knowledge to quench your thirst and not a public pool where bladder control is optional.
Now I am back to lurk mode. OT Warning off.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 16 Jun 2009 02:21

C-130, P-8I, A-330 for the tankers, and now the C-17!! Wow India is starting to base their arms purchases on Performance over Price. Which is a great thing!!

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 16 Jun 2009 06:15

From Air Marshal Ashok K. Goyal's blog

IAF chooses C 17 Globemaster III

Chief of Air Staff air Chief Marshal P V Naik told India Strategic that the aircraft had been chosen after a thorough study because of its capability to take off and land on short runways with heavy loads, long range, and ease of operation.

An IL 76 can carry a cargo of around 40 tonnes while a C 17 can carry 70 tonnes, and is much easier to operate with a small crew of two pilots and one loadmaster (total three) only despite its massive size, thanks to its various power-assisted systems. Two observers though can also be seated.

Despite its massive size – 174 ft length, 55 ft height and about 170 ft wingspan – a pilot can fly the aircraft with a simple joystick, much like a fighter aircraft, which can be lifesaving in a battlezone as the aircraft can take off quickly and at steep angles. It is powered by four Pratt & Whitney F-117-PW-100 turbofan engines

According to the Boeing company, the high-wing, 4-engine, multi-service T-tailed military-transport C-17 can carry large equipment including two tanks, supplies and troops directly to small airfields in harsh terrain anywhere in the world day or night.

The massive, sturdy, long-haul aircraft tackles distance, destination and heavy, oversized payloads in unpredictable conditions. It has delivered cargo in every worldwide operation since the 1990s. It can take off from a 7,600-ft airfield, carry a payload of 160,000 pounds, fly 2,400 nautical miles, refuel while in flight for longer range, and land in 3,000 ft or less on a small unpaved or paved airfield day or night.

The aircraft can also be used as an aerial ambulance.

The cost of the aircraft is not available but according to published reports, it was $237 million in 2007.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jun 2009 06:42

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:And the Il 76 is incredibly noisy.
--------------------------------------------
now what is use of saying this again and again ,it shows this fellow reads nothing

il76 in air force service can be fitted with D30KP BURLAK engine availalbe from 2011
and this engines meets "ICAO 2008 REQUIREMENTS" for noise and emission also increases the range by 10%.

an aircraft of these size doesn't need to be manouvarable and IL76 fitted with PS90A engines can do all what c17 can.

one can talk about which aircraft is superior to other and one must the price difference between two aircrafts is over 100 million ,so more you pay more you get

Boss - this is the same sort of promise of "something great will happen in future" which was made about Gorshkov. And we are still waiting.

I enjoyed that joke about price."Price" was another promise made about Gorshkov.

Kindly show me some pictures of an Il 76 production line. Production has stopped. India needs a plane for the next 25-30 years and production of th Il 76 was stopped 12 years ago. Are you trying to push a plane whose production has stopped, is going obsolete and cannot carry modern Russian or Indian battle tanks? Imagine needing spares for decrepit old Il 76s in 2025 and some well read and uncorrupt scholar from Russia says "Oh we stopped manufacturing that junk 40 years ago!

I may not read so much as you. - but are you attributing stupidity to me as well as lack of reading, o well read scholar of BRF? You will need all the corruption that you have found among Indians to sell them your fairy tales.

Thanks but no thanks.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 06:57

shiv wrote:
Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:And the Il 76 is incredibly noisy.
--------------------------------------------
now what is use of saying this again and again ,it shows this fellow reads nothing

il76 in air force service can be fitted with D30KP BURLAK engine availalbe from 2011
and this engines meets "ICAO 2008 REQUIREMENTS" for noise and emission also increases the range by 10%.

an aircraft of these size doesn't need to be manouvarable and IL76 fitted with PS90A engines can do all what c17 can.

one can talk about which aircraft is superior to other and one must the price difference between two aircrafts is over 100 million ,so more you pay more you get

Boss - this is the same sort of promise of "something great will happen in future" which was made about Gorshkov. And we are still waiting.

I enjoyed that joke about price."Price" was another promise made about Gorshkov.

Kindly show me some pictures of an Il 76 production line. Production has stopped. India needs a plane for the next 25-30 years and production of th Il 76 was stopped 12 years ago. Are you trying to push a plane whose production has stopped, is going obsolete and cannot carry modern Russian or Indian battle tanks? Imagine needing spares for decrepit old Il 76s in 2025 and some well read and uncorrupt scholar from Russia says "Oh we stopped manufacturing that junk 40 years ago!

I may not read so much as you. - but are you attributing stupidity to me as well as lack of reading, o well read scholar of BRF? You will need all the corruption that you have found among Indians to sell them your fairy tales.

Thanks but no thanks.

its about upgrading il76 with new engines and avionics not about buying new ones

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 07:15

for il76 production here is pic of production

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/rus/img/cont ... 2005_1.jpg

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 16 Jun 2009 07:21

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:for il76 production here is pic of production

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/rus/img/cont ... 2005_1.jpg

You should link the original article that hosts the picture - and the caption on the pic.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jun 2009 07:30

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote: its about upgrading il76 with new engines and avionics not about buying new ones

Fair enough. Then this discussion has nothing to do with India's requirement and desire to buy new aircraft which may be C 17s.

I am certain that India will consult uncorrupt and well read people such as yourself when the requirement is for upgradation of old, out-of-production Russian aircraft.

But when it comes to buying new and larger transport aircraft, old, refurbished, up engined Il 76s are not in the competition. Right?

Why worry? No need for anyone to get upset about this. Why should the used Lada dealer concern himself with BMW sales.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 07:34

shiv wrote:
Andrew DeCristofaro wrote: its about upgrading il76 with new engines and avionics not about buying new ones
Fair enough. Then this discussion has nothing to do with India's requirement and desire to buy new aircraft which may be C 17s.

I am certain that India will consult uncorrupt and well read people such as yourself when the requirement is for upgradation of old, out-of-production Russian aircraft.

But when it comes to buying new and larger transport aircraft, old, refurbished, up engined Il 76s are not in the competition. Right?

Why worry? No need for anyone to get upset about this. Why should the used Lada dealer concern himself with BMW sales.

i am not concerned at all what india does or doesn't

neither india going to ask you or for that matter anyone here on BRF as well what they do

dipayan · Post by **dipayan** » 16 Jun 2009 07:48

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:for il76 production here is pic of production

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/rus/img/cont ... 2005_1.jpg

Correct me if I am wrong, but those aircraft wings dont seem to have the anhedral characterisitics of an Il-76. Could you please post the original article?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jun 2009 07:50

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote: i am not concerned at all what india does or doesn't

neither india going to ask you or for that matter anyone here on BRF as well what they do

Correct. And thank you for understanding that what anyone says on BRF, including yourself does not matter one bit to what India does. Your reading and opinions are as inconsequential as mine. Welcome to the real world.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 16 Jun 2009 07:52

dipayan wrote:
Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:for il76 production here is pic of production

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/rus/img/cont ... 2005_1.jpg
Correct me if I am wrong, but those aircraft wings dont seem to have the anhedral characterisitics of an Il-76. Could you please post the original article?

although its old article but just to look at it
first one

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/eng/charter/ ... tion_il76/

and second one

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/eng/charter/ ... ing_an124/

Div · Post by **Div** » 16 Jun 2009 08:03

sum wrote:Absolute circus our IAF is turning into...

Guess we now now have most countries planes represented in our fleet..maybe a few KJ-2000s and JF-17s will fill the remaining void!!!

No such thing as "Economies of scale" when it comes to the Indian armed forces.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jun 2009 08:05

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote: although its old article but just to look at it
first one

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/eng/charter/ ... tion_il76/

and second one

http://www.volga-dnepr.com/eng/charter/ ... ing_an124/

Thank you o well read one. That "manufacturing line" photo refers to volga-dnepr upgaradtion to IL-76TD-90VD in Tashkent.

Has the production line for NEW Il 76s been halted or not, o well read one? Let us talk about "uncorrupt" truth. You don't have to become corrupt like Indians on this forum by posting misleading information.

As you have realised - salesmen for Volga DNEPR will not get orders on BRF. We are talking about India's requirement for NEW, super heavy lift aircraft. Not used, out of production, refurbished re engined ones.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jun 2009 08:10

afair, the Midas and Phalcons we purchased were unfinished airframes left over from
soviet era in the Tatarstan factory.

later on PRC placed an order for 35 IL76. unless Ru has a endless supply of semi finished old airframes or the production line restarted, I am not sure how such a large order can be met.

>> F-117-PW-100

its a 40,000lb thrust and uses 2nd gen single crystal tech per fas.org
the PS90 base model has 35,300 and the PS90A2 with western help has
39600.

so with roughly half the payload but equal thrust wouldnt a PS90A2 equipped
IL76 have twice the T:W ratio of a C-17 ?

in contrast the original D-30 on our IL76 (the metal drill noise model

)
develops around 21000lb onree.

which => Phalcon should be able to outrun even a scampering troop of Bandar's
in a head to head race...if the rotodome doesnt fall off.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Jun 2009 09:01

Shiv,

Be very glad. At least the engine seems to be new.

Need to stop feeding trolls.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 17 Jun 2009 17:04

Two press releases on the Jaguar -

http://www.prdomain.com/companies/R/Rol ... 772763.htm

http://news.prnewswire.com/ViewContent. ... 384&EDATE=

Not sure whether second item relates to IAF, however strong possibility given the earlier projected sale of CBU 105 SFW notified September 2008

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 17 Jun 2009 18:06

now IAF buying 6 a330 tankers for a billion euros my question is why only 6 as if there will be no more need for more tankers considering there will be su30,m2000,jaguars,
mig29 upgraded,MRCA,LCA

why not buy 20 a330 in 3.5 billion euros

after 4-5 year some IAF officers start thinking hmmmmmmmm....... we need more tankers

then they will call IAF headquarters and headquarter will say that they will talk about this with MoD

when raksha mantri come to know this he will say hmmmmm........ ok i will talk to finance mantri and cabinet about this

then all cabinet minister from pradhaan mantri to safai mantri start thinking hmmmmmm....... how much we can make out of this for our swiss bank accounts

then govt. will call a middle man then middle man will first think hmmmmmmmmmmm......
how much i gonna make out of this for myself

then he will call AIRBUS guys and will say this my client wants to buy your tankers
so let us sit and talk on price

then airbus people start thinking hmmmmmmm.,..... we sold a330 previously for a billion euros but now we gonna make more out of this

then they will come to middle man and say we have fixed the price 2 billion euros this time .

and after intense negotiations our govt. has to pay this price that is two billion euros

meaning of this story is this

if india buys same tankers from airbus after 4-5 years then india will have to pay twice as much as paid for a330 this year,example mig29k ,same mig29k bought for 45 million now russians asking 75 million

just like BAE increased the price for hawk when india wanted to buy more and for this india issued new RFP for jet trainers

and if 3.5 billion euros is too much then buy 6 a330 from airbus and 6 il78 tankers from russia
and then see who gives delivery on time

buying c17 is wrong decision IAF already has heavy lift capability but air force lacks tankers and its better to go for 10 tankers rather than 10 c17 this time

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 17 Jun 2009 19:25

You buy keeping your requirements in mind.Why 20 , just buy 40 of them, and give each to every sqd.

rrao · Post by **rrao** » 17 Jun 2009 20:02

[quote="tsarkar"]Two press releases on the Jaguar -

http://www.prdomain.com/companies/R/Rol ... 772763.htm

Sir, Its high time the Engines of jags to be replaced.! Hope the new Engines are equipped with FADEC. The older engines have vintage analog Engine control amplifier systems(ECAS) and its a nightmare to do an MRO due to obsolescence! By the way how are Honeywell Engines are faring compared to RR? Any idea?