All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
KOLKATA: A MiG-27 fighter aircraft crashed in West Bengal's Jalpaiguri district on Saturday morning, killing the two pilots onboard, a defence official said.
The aircraft crashed in Moinaguri village in Jalpaiguri.
Twelve villagers, including four children, were injured in the accident, Wing Commander Mahesh Upasani, the defence spokesperson (eastern headquarters), said here.
Very sad!! RIP
Wonder if this was an upgraded one or the non-upgraded aircraft
NEW DELHI: In yet another crash in IAF, a `swing-wing' MiG-27 fighter went down in Jalpaiguri district of West Bengal on Saturday. Though the pilot managed to eject safely, the crash killed at least one villager and injured over 10 others on the ground.
NEW DELHI: With British PM David Cameron slated to come visiting next week, India is getting all set to order another 57 British Hawk AJTs (advanced jet trainers) in a project worth around Rs 9,400 crore. what is 9400 Crore in $ values? ~ $2 Billion?
As reported by TOI earlier, this will be "a follow-on" order to the ongoing Rs 8,000-crore AJT project, finalized in March 2004 with BAE Systems, under which IAF is already getting 66 Hawk AJTs.
The AJT project has been dogged by some controversy, hit as the Hawks were by the disruption in the supply of some spares from BAE Systems. But the glitches seem to have been ironed out now.
As per the original contract, while IAF received 24 of the twin-seater trainers in "flyaway condition" from BAE Systems, the other 42 are being progressively manufactured indigenously by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd under transfer of technology.
The Navy will get 17 of the 57 new Hawks, which will also be manfactured by HAL, for its own aircraft carrier-based fighter training. Towards this, Navy inked a Rs 3,042-crore deal with HAL on Friday. "We will get the delivery over 36 months from 2013 onwards," said a Navy officer.
The Hawks already inducted at the Bidar airbase are being used to train rookie IAF pilots on the intricacies of combat fighter jet flying.
The AJTs help the young pilots to bridge the quantum jump from flying sub-sonic aircraft like HPT-32 and Kiran trainers to directly handling the supersonic 'highly-unforgiving' MiG-21s, without any transitional training to improve inadequate flying skills as was the norm earlier.
Apart from their sheer usefulness in training rookie pilots, the Hawks can also be used as ground attack or air defence aircraft in times of war, capable as they are of carrying 6,800 pounds of weapons, rockets, bombs and air-to-air missiles.
As per the original contract, while IAF received 24 of the twin-seater trainers in "flyaway condition" from BAE Systems, the other 42 are being progressively manufactured indigenously by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd under transfer of technology.
So I assume this deal with BAE is just for the avionics and engines. HAL should manufacture the rest.
Is there any plan for the an indigenous advanced jet trainer?
It might be a novice and hyper-excited idea, but how about downsizing the LCA trainer?!!! What i mean is scale it down to about 75%. That way we don't have to reinvent the aerodynamics. Basically design it around a Adour Mk 821 (Or a smaller Kaveri deriavative to give it a TWR of close to 1.2 to 1.5). We might get rid off a lot of avionics, make the tank smaller, reduce the hardpoints (there will be some work here). This should bring its empty weight down to about 4.5T. The ratios seem to match up well! We already have a lot of the critical building blocks in place!
The Chinese upgraded the JL-9 from the JJ-7 in 2 years. There is no reason why we can't downgrade the Tejas trainer in similar time. I mean one can throw the feasibility study of this to a bunch of guys as training. The big guns would only need to supervise them and approve the final design.
LSP-6 is supposed to roll out by Oct-Nov. By experimental, I really think it is a vehicle for AoA tests/envelope expansion/weight-scrapping. If we start designing an advanced trainer today and come up with the design by 1 to 2 years, we would have almost all the data points ready by then. A prototype would be a maximum of 2 years from then. I believe we can start flight testing within 4 years.
Am I being unrealistic in the timeline?!! Think of it, we can have a Yak-130/Hawk/T-50/M-346/Mako/JL-9/L-15 equivalent in 5-7 years without much of a development cost!!!
P.S. Please feel free to tear away this suggestion to smithereens if it deserves it. Mods please move it to a suitable thread if necessary!
indranilroy wrote:Is there any plan for the an indigenous advanced jet trainer?
It might be a novice and hyper-excited idea, but how about downsizing the LCA trainer?!!! What i mean is scale it down to about 75%. That way we don't have to reinvent the aerodynamics. Basically design it around a Adour Mk 821 (Or a smaller Kaveri deriavative to give it a TWR of close to 1.2 to 1.5). We might get rid off a lot of avionics, make the tank smaller, reduce the hardpoints (there will be some work here). This should bring its empty weight down to about 4.5T. The ratios seem to match up well! We already have a lot of the critical building blocks in place!
Actually if we make it a 0.75 LCA, I wonder if we could convert it into a UCAV.
indranilroy wrote:Is there any plan for the an indigenous advanced jet trainer?
There was and a mockup was there in Aero India 2007 (or 2005 maybe). It was called the "CAT" - Combat Advanced Trainer. The plane was shelved - I don't know for what reason.
Last edited by shiv on 28 Jul 2010 07:59, edited 1 time in total.
those a/c which BSF have like legacy jets come under home ministry and seem to be kept for ministers and 'top officials' to flit around the country.
for actually moving units and supplies around in a shifting sandbox like the maoist war they do need some non-VIP a/c with jump seats (preferably hard so that top officials are not tempted to comandeer them).
the model of depending on IAF to provide planes at unexpected moments to NSG has not worked - they need a few dedicated planes and helis and they need to practice rapid deployment and airlifts to even remote places not just metros. more they practice , better they will get.
like the delta force who started off as a pure-CT unit but later went back into a military SF role, perhaps the NSG can also supplement the armySF in operations against domestic and external terrorists. using the dutch concept of total football, enemy shouldnt be able to id particular sets of capabilities and work around
them based on unit name and location ..... you go up against a sluggish looking fullback and suddenly it has shape-shifted into a ronaldo who is 10 yards past you with the ball before you realize what happened
Dmurphy wrote:What?? we want to be the new Kubers of the defence worlds, hainji? Or a south asian clone of USAF? A classic WTF!
Why so, sir? We have a clear requirement for TpT aircraft in the 15-20tonnes category....and btw, IIRC, this RFP has gone to C-130J also....finally, some movement in the airlift front. We've have clear staggered airlift capability coming up - AN-32<C-130J<IL-76<C-17...
Dmurphy wrote:What?? we want to be the new Kubers of the defence worlds, hainji? Or a south asian clone of USAF? A classic WTF!
Why so, sir? We have a clear requirement for TpT aircraft in the 15-20tonnes category....and btw, IIRC, this RFP has gone to C-130J also....finally, some movement in the airlift front. We've have clear staggered airlift capability coming up - AN-32<C-130J<IL-76<C-17...
Rohit,
The C 27 is an An 32 class lifter. my question is whay we require two diffrent airframes for same job. Also when the MTA is clearly agreed between India and Russia then why is the C 130 beig acquired as the payload class and other attributes are nearly identical.
indranilroy wrote:Is there any plan for the an indigenous advanced jet trainer?
There was and a mockup was there in Aero India 2007 (or 2005 maybe). It was called the "CAT" - Combat Advanced Trainer. The plane was shelved - I don't know for what reason.
Thanks Shiv. It was in Aero 2005. I had read it from a link posted here at BR (chacko had wrote it up). I was at Aero 2007, I don't remember seeing it there .
MRTA is incorrectly reported to have 55 tons MTOW. Actually it has 68 tons MTOW from HAL poster at Aero Expo and I suppose HAL should know.
India clearly needs a turboprop in category of An-32 i.e. around 20-30tons MTOW which can be C-27 or CASA-295 or IL-112. Preferably India should start license producing one of these as ultimately we will need around 100-200 of this category.
NAL-RTA is civilian aircraft and in any case around 10 years away
Last edited by vic on 28 Jul 2010 10:48, edited 1 time in total.
vic wrote:MRTA is incorrectly reported to have 55 tons MTOW. Actually it has 68 tons MTOW from HAL poster at Aero Expo and I suppose HAL should know. India clearly need a turboprop in category of An-32 i.e. around 20tons MTOW which can be C-27 or CASA-295 or IL-112. Preferably India should start license producing one of these as ultimately we will need around 100-200 of this category
MTOW is different from the max payload. MRTA is supposed to have 20 tons payload.
Alenia had proposed a joint venture with the Tata to produce the c-27j for India, this I think came when the deal to upgrade the An-32 was being negotiated.
The C 27 is an An 32 class lifter. my question is whay we require two diffrent airframes for same job. Also when the MTA is clearly agreed between India and Russia then why is the C 130 beig acquired as the payload class and other attributes are nearly identical.
Not very wise in terms of spare and training IMO.
JMT
AN-32 Class? The wiki says C-27J payload is 11,500kgs...AN-32 has max payload of 7,500kgs. So, they are hardly in same class. Yes, one can argue that why do we need multiple a/c in a 'narrow band' of payload. IIRC, one of the Baltic countries has replaced AN-26 with C-27J. And btw, this is only an RFI - and we don't know to who all it has gone.
As for MTA - it is good 6-8 years away. Can't wait till then, can we?
indranil, there was a proposal called LIFT(lead in fighter trainer) based on the LCA platform but minus all the bells and whistles which increases the price. the good thing was that it did not envisage altering the structure (LCA is anyway quite small, the KAI T-50 or F-5/T-38 talon is of similar size and weight, both used as high performance trainers) which would have required intensive testing but a simple dumbing down that would have reduced weight and price. it would have been used in a role similar to MOFTU migs.
not sure what happened to it.
vic wrote:If HAL is supplying jags at around US$ 15-20 million then a Hawk should have been around 10-15Million per unit but is 3 times more costly, what gives?
Why do you think that AJT should be USD 10-15million? You've raised this point earlier and implied in your post was that it is becaus of corruption....please let us know a logical explanation of this argument. Thanx.
Ex-Lavi program manager and minister of defense Moshe Arens writes in Haaretz today that Israel would be better off launching a joint development program with Russia and India to build a new fighter rather than spend $11 billion to buy 75 Lockheed Martin F-35s.
vic wrote:If HAL is supplying jags at around US$ 15-20 million then a Hawk should have been around 10-15Million per unit but is 3 times more costly, what gives?
India has been building Jaguars for more than two decades now. And the level of indigenization is pretty high on the Jaguar. Add the fact that the tooling and machinery are also quite old and those costs already recovered from sales so far. So, the unit price too is quite low.
For the hawk, it is a newer plane, new engine, new avionics etc. And you are paying in today's dollars. Plus add the fees for ToT, new equipment and machinery etc and the costs all add up.
Rahul M wrote:indranil, there was a proposal called LIFT(lead in fighter trainer) based on the LCA platform but minus all the bells and whistles which increases the price. the good thing was that it did not envisage altering the structure (LCA is anyway quite small, the KAI T-50 or F-5/T-38 talon is of similar size and weight, both used as high performance trainers) which would have required intensive testing but a simple dumbing down that would have reduced weight and price. it would have been used in a role similar to MOFTU migs.
not sure what happened to it.
CAT is a different concept and IMHO no longer makes sense when the hawk is paid for and all. LIFT is different, it can be used to impart basic combat skills while the costlier type trainers takes care of more advanced type specific skills.
rohitvats wrote:And btw, this is only an RFI - and we don't know to who all it has gone.
As for MTA - it is good 6-8 years away. Can't wait till then, can we?
Rohit, its just that with the impending C-130 supply and an indigenous "Multi-Role"TA in the offing, another aircraft of similar calibre doesn't make much sense.
Why couldn't we just order a stripped down version of the C-130J without the electronic gibberish inside it? It will get along well logistics wise.
And so what if the MRTA takes another 6 years? Its not like the C-27 is going to be delivered in 6 months. The "very public" evaluation/negotiation of the vendors/ACs and then add to it delivery time will make it atleast 4 years before the first C-27 lands here.
Having a totally different aircraft for a very specific role makes it like having 10 different hands to khujao 10 different parts of the body . JMT.
IAF is also looking for AWACs and mid-air refuelers, both of which use the old IL 76 airframes. The IL 76 is out or production and unavailable – China had bought 40 of its best available airframes – and IAF’s new AWACs should be on other airframes. The current AWACs on order are the Israeli Phalcons.
Dmurphy wrote: Rohit, its just that with the impending C-130 supply and an indigenous "Multi-Role"TA in the offing, another aircraft of similar calibre doesn't make much sense. Why couldn't we just order a stripped down version of the C-130J without the electronic gibberish inside it? It will get along well logistics wise.
Very true.....that is why said that we need to wait and see to who all the RFI has been sent. If all the a/c are in 10K-12K range, then something is up. There are one possibility here - IAF considers the present strength of AN-32 fleet as inadequate and is looking for newer a/c to increase the same.
As for the C-130J, I'd like nothing better than 40-50 C-130J in IAF service...that a/c is phenomenal. But with reports of IAF already committed to 45-50 MTA aircraft and planned C-17 purchase+upgrade of AN-32.....my guess is IAF will make do with minimum increment in the 15-25tonnes category.
And so what if the MRTA takes another 6 years? Its not like the C-27 is going to be delivered in 6 months. The "very public" evaluation/negotiation of the vendors/ACs and then add to it delivery time will make it atleast 4 years before the first C-27 lands here.
Like I said, 6-8years for MTA to fructify and then IOC/FOC and serial production.....so, we may be looking at some 'interim solution'...
vic wrote:If HAL is supplying jags at around US$ 15-20 million then a Hawk should have been around 10-15Million per unit but is 3 times more costly, what gives?
India has been building Jaguars for more than two decades now. And the level of indigenization is pretty high on the Jaguar. Add the fact that the tooling and machinery are also quite old and those costs already recovered from sales so far. So, the unit price too is quite low.
For the hawk, it is a newer plane, new engine, new avionics etc. And you are paying in today's dollars. Plus add the fees for ToT, new equipment and machinery etc and the costs all add up.
HAL already has the machinery, jigs and tools to assemble Hawks. The latest batch of 57 Hawks shouldn't have included the cost of these.
Nevertheless, this is significantly cheaper and makes much more sense than going for another AJT type like the M-346 or Yak-130 or KAI's T-50 which would have been an unnecessary headache for the IAF in terms of logistics and training.
I think BAe understood this and asked for a high licence fee initially which they eventually reduced and the deal was struck.
A boatload of details of the MiG-29K, MiG-35 and the MiG-29UPG upgrade are available in a recent Air International issue by Piotr Butowski. Can’t scan so I’ll post the main points
-MiG-29K Bort 941 is a company (MiG) prototype and not that of the IN.
-MiG-29Ks have LEVCON-Krueger flaps at the leading edge near the wing root. A picture of the MiG-29K from front on clearly illustrated these 4 separate LEVCON like slats. These are meant to increase aircraft stability and lifting force
-MiG-29K’s digital quadruplex FBW is the KSU-9.41
-RD-33MK Sea Wasp engine has an improved fan that increases airflow by 6.5% and the TET by 40 degC which results in a max thrust of 88.3 kN, 6.9 kN more than the RD-33 engine
-It now incorporates on-condition maintenance procedures instead of fixed duration overhaul periods and the lifetime of the MiG-29K is 4000 hours or 40 years.
-Flight hour cost will be 40% lesser than regular MiG-29s as per RAC MiG
-Fuel weight is increased to 5200 kgs (11,464 lbs), viz 50% more than a standard MiG-29. It has a new large 2150 lit (473 Imp gal) ventral tank instead of a 1520 lt (334 Imp gal) tank on a standard MiG-29 and 2 underwing 1150 litre (253 Imp gal) tanks are also added.
-So, MiG-29Ks have 50% longer range and will carry twice as heavy a weapon load
-Avionics are integrated into the PrNK-29K navigation-targeting suite by RPKB design bureau at Ramenskoye. All devices are connected by data bus complying with MIL-STD-1553B standard, controlled by a computing system made by RPKB.
-OLS-UE Imaging Infrared Search and Track sensor is used on the MiG-29K which was developed by NIIPP Precision Instruments bureau in Moscow. It can detect and automatically track aerial targets at a distance of 60 km (32 nm) and the embedded laser rangefinder ranges to 20 km (11nm)
-The Zhuk-ME radar made by Phazotron NIIR company has additional modes of work and cooperation with the remaining equipment.
-Radar range is 130 km (70nm) and enables simultaneous engagement of 4 aerial targets with RVV-AE missiles.
-Israeli Elta EL/M-8222 podded self protection jammer is mounted on the starboard underwing pylon.
-3 colour MFDs are used and the HUD is IKSh-1M. All displays are made by RPKB company.
- in the MiG-29KUB, the rear seat has 4 MFI-10 displays
-anti-shipping missiles are the Kh-35E which works upto a distance of 130km and the supersonic Kh-31 which works upto 70 km. The Kh-31 has been tested by a MiG-29K but was not ordered by the IN. It is possible that the IN may buy longer range air-to-surface missiles for the MiG-29K for e.g the 3M14 and 3M54 missiles of the Calibr-A (Club) system
-Almost no difference between MiG-29K and KUB except extra fuel tank in place of displays and ejection seat in the MiG-29KUB
-Sources indicate that the Russian Navy will buy at least 24 MiG-29K/KUB fighters and this was confirmed by RAC MiG sources
-Assemblies for the manufacture of 16 MiG-29K/KUBs are already complete and now they are manufacturing additional assemblies “for another client” which might likely be the RuN
-MiG-29Ks will operate alongside Su-33s on Admiral Kuz. The original service life of these Su-33s were to expire in 2012 but some of these will receive a life extension which will allow them to be used for another 10 years
-Most foreign equipment on the MiG-29K is of Indian origin (UHF/VHF radios, radio altimeter, TACAN navigation system, ILS/VOR/MKR recievers, Tarang RWR, etc.) and these will be replaced with Russian systems for the RuN. An exception will be made for the French made Sagem Sigma 95 INS and a service center will be set up in Russia for it
-There is a possible further order from India too for the MiG-29K for which the RFI has been sent out recently
-Due to this reason, MiG intends to further develop the MiG-29K and also continue development of carrier borne fighters beyond the MiG-29K. MiG will become a carrier borne fighter specialist in the confines of the Russian United Aircraft Corp (UAC).
-MiG-29K wing span is 39ft 4 in in comparison to regular MiG-29 wing span of 37ft 3in to allow for lower speeds on approach to the carrier.
Now coming to the MiG-35
-MiG-35 self-protection suite includes Tarang Mk2 RWR or L150 Pastel, SOAR Infrared missile approach warning system and the SOLO warning device.
-MiG and Italian Elettronica S.P.A declared that they cooperated in the integration of the ELT/S68(V)2 self-protection jammer into the MiG-35 self-protection suite. The ELT 568 version covers H-J band (onboard section) and the E-G band (podded section). The Russian option for this is the SAP-518 system made by KNIRT. It includes high-band onboard section and medium band podded section
-The MiG-35 has two 16 round launchers of chaff/flares with the installation on the empennage beams at the sides of the engines, and the decoys are designed to be launched downwards
-Zhuk-AE’s initial version, the FGA29 has 680 T/R modules and the bigger FGA35 version will have 1064 T/R modules and it is planned for production aircraft
-For the first time the Zhuk-AE was switched on in June 2008 in the airplane in a demonstration config with 240 T/R modules and in October 2008 in full config with 680 T/R modules
-The MiG-35 will be able to carry 6500 kgs of ordnance on 11 hardpoints (10 underwing and 1 under fuselage)
-New generation of weapons for the MiG-35 include Zvezda Kh-38M modular air to surface missile, extended range Raduga Kh-59M missiles, including its new variants Kh-59MK, Kh-59M2E and Kh-59MK2 as well as heavy Novator cruise missiles 3M-14AE and 3M-54AE1.
Pogosyan stated that the Zhuk-AE may not be the final AESA for the MiG-35. A variant of the Sh121 being developed for the PAK-FA can be used for the MiG-35 as well.
When the IAF has trained with USAF and other AFs, have they tried finding out what works against stealth planes? I think the IAF has played against the F-22 at one of the exercises, maybe Red Flag 07, were they able to try their radars on the Raptor?
. JMT.
