Indian Military Aviation

[Rahul M]

darshan, about half are helos if memory serves right and most of the fatalities are also from helo accidents and the lone An-32 that crashed in bad weather. I agree with your sentiment but in practice it's not always possible to move on to the latest at a moment's notice.

[Aditya G]

...India is one of those countries where more planes and pilots have been lost to Crashes than due to enemy action in all the wars combined that we have fought.

Your comment is straight from pre-2005 era.

After ACM Kitcha's onslaught the press cut such rhetoric.

[Kartik]

Meanwhile, our good friends are eager to sell to the Chinese another 100 RD-93 engines for their FC-1 Xiaolong/JF-17 Thunder Bandar.

And they're also looking to sell the Su-35 to the PLAAF.

Russia looking to sell 100 more RD-93 engines to China

Russia looking to sell Su-35 to China

[darshhan]

Kartik , I have not compiled the statistics till now.I will try to do it soon.Although what I have read points to MIG 21s and MIG 27s as forming the bulk of the aircraft which have crashed.The rate for other aircraft such as Mirages and Sukhois involved in crashes is very low.Atleast that is my observation.I will try to compile the exact statistics as soon as possible.

Look I do understand that certain level of attrition is a fact of life.Then again some type of aircraft might be more crash prone than others.For eg.rotorcrafts.Infact I am quite sure that a sizeable no. of crashes are helicopter crashes.But I am not complaining against Helicopters.Because I know that there is no better alternative available to replace them for the tasks that they execute.Hence I am able to accept the helicopter losses.Even the most modern helicopters have a horrid crash rate.

But it is not that replacements for MIG-21s and 27s are not available.There are substitutes available.Fixed wing aircraft have become much safer compared to 1960's or 1970's. The only problem is that the bureaucracy both in IAF and MoD are not showing the urgency required to replace them.

And I do agree with you that MIG 27s have only recently started crashing at a higher rate.That is my observation as well.But again that might be due to obsolence.This is the point that I am trying to make.

[darshhan]

darshan, about half are helos if memory serves right and most of the fatalities are also from helo accidents and the lone An-32 that crashed in bad weather. I agree with your sentiment but in practice it's not always possible to move on to the latest at a moment's notice.

Rahul M ji, I agree that choppers are also involved in these crashes but I have never complained against helos.I am just saying that MIG-21s and 27s are obsolete and they need to be replaced.Let us hope that IAF is working towards replacing them.If they are able to do so even within 5 or 6 years that would be commendable.

[Indranil]

Meanwhile, our good friends are eager to sell to the Chinese another 100 RD-93 engines for their FC-1 Xiaolong/JF-17 Thunder Bandar.

And they're also looking to sell the Su-35 to the PLAAF.

Russia looking to sell 100 more RD-93 engines to China

Russia looking to sell Su-35 to China

It's just amazing. And then a Russian dignitary would come across and say how Russia favours India to China and how Russia will never supply the cutting edge to China, but do so with India and a tune will go up about how Russia is our only "TRUE" friend.

If Su-35 and RD-93 are not cutting edge, then what is? Besides haven't they already said that China is one of the intended export markets for the PakFA from 2025?

Also brings to fort one more point, though I would be thrashed for bringing this forward. None-the-less, I don't see
1. US selling arms to China in the next fifty years, does it mark a change in the geopolitical situation?
2. Our friends have been harping about how we are doing a great facour to Boeing by buying 10-16 planes. Havn't we helped Russia with the Mig-29K, engines of which are now being sold to China (in the hundreds). Havn't we provided the impetus to Sukhoi beyond Su-27, excerpts of which are going into the Su-35. Aren't we going to pump 25-30 billion (considering there are no overruns) with the PakFA, which might also find its way through to Chinese hands. Today we provide the impetus again for a AN-124 or IL-476 revival. What is the guarantee that those planes won't be sold to China anytime in the future.

If US can't be trusted for providing alms to Pak, how can Russia be trusted with providing arms to China. For a matter of fact look at the scale. A squadron F-16 against 200 JF-17s and Su-35s.

I am not saying Russia have not helped us in the past or that US is suddenly our closest brothers. I am just saying plese stop playing that "all weather friend" card. Nobody is a saint out there. Russia is helping us because we are doling out the money. US is selling there stuff to us for the same reason. We should look for just our interests and as cold heartedly as possible.

Sorry for the rant. JMT

[negi]

^ Boss China is the elephant in the room, everyone does business with them including us (check our yearly trade figures) there is no reason to be senti in such matters and it works both ways , aren't we buying a lot of Israel and US of late ? Weapons sales is an important source of revenue for Russians at least unlike the Unkil they don't disburse free weapons to the TSP. You see there is a difference between providing arms as 'aid' package versus selling (I for one do not have any issues if Unkil sells the F-16 at 40million USD a piece to the TSP).

[Viv S]

^ Boss China is the elephant in the room, everyone does business with them including us (check our yearly trade figures) there is no reason to be senti in such matters and it works both ways , aren't we buying a lot of Israel and US of late ? Weapons sales is an important source of revenue for Russians at least unlike the Unkil they don't disburse free weapons to the TSP. You see there is a difference between providing arms as 'aid' package versus selling (I for one do not have any issues if Unkil sells the F-16 at 40million USD a piece to the TSP).

Weapons to Pakistan aren't really free. They have to pay a heavy price in terms of sovereignty. They have to live with the CIA, and likes of Blackwater running around while drones keep bombing their territory. Given the cost their self nurtured insurgency is extracting from them (economic growth has come to a shuddering stop with only IMF funds preventing a backslide), I wish them a lot more such weapons in the future.

[Luxtor]

Strategic Strokes

The Indian air force is exploring upgrade options for U.S. military aircraft that will be handed over without key capabilities in the absence of an agreement governing those systems.

The U.S. is withholding several subsystems until India ratifies the Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement, which governs current and future transfers of intelligence systems to India. India is not ready to commit to the security pact and instead is willing to take slightly less capable U.S. systems initially, expecting to backfill the missing features later.

The strategy will be tested when the Indian air force starts taking delivery of six Lockheed Martin C-130Js next month. They are the first U.S.-built aircraft the country has acquired in 40 years.
...
...
Service officials say discussions are already underway with Israel and France on ways to upgrade the C-130Js to sidestep the security pact. Those talks date back almost a year and cover purchase of advanced encrypted communications equipment for the Indian C-130Js. However, the U.S. would have to approve the upgrade, an Indian air force acquisition official notes.

The equipment India wants that is off the list mostly centers on communications, including the AN/ARC-222 Single-Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (Sincgars), Raytheon KV-119 IFF Digital Transponder, Tacterm/ANDVT Secure Voice (HF) terminal and the Vinson KY-58 Secure Voice (UHF/VHF) module.

“The technology that is being withheld is some excellent communications equipment that the [Indian air force] would do well to own and operate, especially since special operations are part of the fleet profile,” the acquisition officer says. “However, considering the larger political picture, it has been generally agreed that sourcing such equipment from a third party will not pose an operational problem. We are in discussions with all concerned regarding the integration of such equipment on a [U.S.-provided] platform.”
....
...
Besides the $5-billion C-17 deal, there was an order for 107 General Electric F414 engines for India’s Light Combat Aircraft valued at $822 million. There also were several team arrangements. Software developer Palantir Technologies of Palo Alto, Calif., says it will help the Maharashtra State Police to identify security threats, and Implant Sciences of Wilmington, Mass., will provide its Quantum Sniffer H-150 explosives detection technology to the Indian army.

Since we don't want to sign the CISMoA, Can't BEL or some other Indian entity develop these communication equipment "in-house" instead of getting it from someone else? Indigenous development of such systems would make it even more secure and we wouldn't have to worry about "back-door-ing" by the OEM country's intelligence.

[Cain Marko]

Meanwhile, our good friends are eager to sell to the Chinese another 100 RD-93 engines for their FC-1 Xiaolong/JF-17 Thunder Bandar.

And they're also looking to sell the Su-35 to the PLAAF.

Russia looking to sell 100 more RD-93 engines to China

Russia looking to sell Su-35 to China

It's just amazing. And then a Russian dignitary would come across and say how Russia favours India to China and how Russia will never supply the cutting edge to China, but do so with India and a tune will go up about how Russia is our only "TRUE" friend.

If Su-35 and RD-93 are not cutting edge, then what is? Besides haven't they already said that China is one of the intended export markets for the PakFA from 2025?

First, RD-93 is NOT really cutting edge from the Klimov stable - the RD-33MK is, and these are on offer along with the MIG-35 to India. These are also the ones on the 29k (not the 93s). This also addresses your second point.

Second, Rosboro offering something at a Chinese Airshow (what do you expect them to say, we only offer to India, and that too at a chinese show?) hardly means that the RUssians are all gung ho. In fact this happened the last time at Zhuhai as well - nothing came of it. I'd like to see that come from a govt. authority instead of a commercial interest. And even if offered officially, the Russkis won't give the Chinese something as good as what they have. Also, the MKI is about to go a step further - the upgrade deal is massive and I am guessing it will be an iteration above the 35 even.

Comparing the Indo-russian strategic partnership which has lasted fruitfully for decades to a INdo-US partnership which is still in its infancy is ridiculous, and irrelevant on many levels. THe problem with China selling JF-17s to Pak is not a russian problem, INdia needs to take it up with the Chinese. The last superdooper hardware sold by the Russians to china were probly the Kilos.

The Russians have surely squeezed out every drop that they can from India, but this has been both ways. India has not just simply accepted what the russians have offered, but haggled, and modified and made the designers go through a LOT to get hardware upto its desired levels, basically equal to or better than western counterparts, at a fraction of the cost. That is called a MUTUALLY beneficial relationship. So harping on the idea that, "ooh India bailed Russian entities out of trouble and were taken for a ride in the process" is simply wrong, India got a LOT in return.

IOWs, don't take a couple of media reports that seriously.

CM.

[Kartik]

It's just amazing. And then a Russian dignitary would come across and say how Russia favours India to China and how Russia will never supply the cutting edge to China, but do so with India and a tune will go up about how Russia is our only "TRUE" friend.
If Su-35 and RD-93 are not cutting edge, then what is? Besides haven't they already said that China is one of the intended export markets for the PakFA from 2025?

Also brings to fort one more point, though I would be thrashed for bringing this forward. None-the-less, I don't see
1. US selling arms to China in the next fifty years, does it mark a change in the geopolitical situation?
2. Our friends have been harping about how we are doing a great facour to Boeing by buying 10-16 planes. Havn't we helped Russia with the Mig-29K, engines of which are now being sold to China (in the hundreds). Havn't we provided the impetus to Sukhoi beyond Su-27, excerpts of which are going into the Su-35. Aren't we going to pump 25-30 billion (considering there are no overruns) with the PakFA, which might also find its way through to Chinese hands. Today we provide the impetus again for a AN-124 or IL-476 revival. What is the guarantee that those planes won't be sold to China anytime in the future.

If US can't be trusted for providing alms to Pak, how can Russia be trusted with providing arms to China. For a matter of fact look at the scale. A squadron F-16 against 200 JF-17s and Su-35s.

I am not saying Russia have not helped us in the past or that US is suddenly our closest brothers. I am just saying plese stop playing that "all weather friend" card. Nobody is a saint out there. Russia is helping us because we are doling out the money. US is selling there stuff to us for the same reason. We should look for just our interests and as cold heartedly as possible.

Sorry for the rant. JMT

There are plenty of posters on this forum itself who will constantly ignore these type of sales and blow their tops when the US sells or provides "aid" to the Pakis. Just recently in the news were reports of the Russians trying to open talks on Su-33 sales to the PLAN. That while they are still supplying MiG-29Ks to the IN. And while the Pakis will be major irritants, they are not the type of existential threat that the Chinese are.

The fact is that while the Russians may sell us a couple of items that they won't sell to the Chinese, that doesn't mean that we can turn a blind eye to the other sales that have in many ways helped China leap over 2 generations of obsolete technology. This is true whether it be radars, avionics, sensors (like active missile warhead seekers), artillery (Smerch rip-offs), anti-aircraft systems (S-300 ripoffs) or engine technology (Al-31 and RD-93 sales and help with the WS-10 and WS-13). If they're not selling them the originals (like in the case of the AL-31 or RD-93 engines) then they are in some way aiding in the Chinese reverse engineering by continuing arms sales even when the Chinese have no respect for their IP.

There would be no J-10 or JF-17 were it not for the Russians. I think the Russophile BRFites need to keep this in mind every time they go off on a US baiting spree and how the US cannot be trusted and so on and so forth. The point is correctly put forth by you- it's all about the money and there is no saint nor an "all weather ally" as much as some people love to remind us of how it used to be in the Soviet days. Russia has shown a willingness to part with technology for money both to India and China and in some ways it has helped us and in others it has been an issue. at least the US shares our mistrust of China and has avoided technology or weapons transfers to them so far.

And on Keypubs, some Chinese posters are posting (no doubt picked up from their defence forums) that the latest Chinese J-20 is close to taxi trials and that it might be using the same Saturn 117S engines as used on the PAK-FA prototype and that the Russians are surreptiously giving Chinese some help with the J-20 program. If that is true, then our investing billions of $ and the IAF's future in the T-50 isn't paying off as it should. the GoI must take this matter up with the Russians and tell that if true, India will withdraw from the PAK-FA program altogether. Then let them pick up the bits and try to make a successful program all on their own. Without a massive dose of Indian money the PAK-FA won't be achieving operational status anytime before 2020, nor will it be as big a success as it would be if it is a JV.

Keypub forum post

But since there is in fact a program current at Chengdu (No. 611) for the aircraft, its more than just mere rumor of "a couple of fans" - It is a real program. And an official has gone on national Chinese TV to explain the connection between the Chinese J-20 from Chengdu and the Russian Sukhoi T-50. The J-20 prototypes are even said to be powered by the Saturn 117S engine - the same engine as in the T-50. Hell, even the rear shot of the J-20 CG has an un-mistakeable resemblance to the aft end of the T-50 - even the all-moving vertical tail fins are the same. With the secrecy of the Chinese - who knows what agreements have been made between the Chinese and the Russians on this program. Here are three images from Chinese TV, of General Zhang Zhaozhang, talking about the connection between the J-20 and the T-50. J-20 prototypes 2001 and 2002 have already been built and 2001 has already conducted slow taxi tests at Chengdu - to fly before the end of 2010.

This would in fact be a very very serious breach of trust with India if the Russians have been secretly helping the Chinese to develop stealth technologies, build a prototype and fly it while asking India to fork out billions for the PAK-FA. This J-20 will be the primary threat to the IAF for the next few decades from both the east and the west, and will be the PAK-FA's primary export threat as well. I can scarcely believe that the Russians are so foolish as to axe their own foot time and again. Penny wise and pound foolish.

[Kartik]

First, RD-93 is NOT really cutting edge from the Klimov stable - the RD-33MK is, and these are on offer along with the MIG-35 to India. These are also the ones on the 29k (not the 93s). This also addresses your second point.

Yet, the JF-17 wouldn't even be operational were it not for the RD-93. the EJ-200 would be way out of their budget and would likely face issues due to possible theft of IP by the Chinese. If no RD-93s were sold, the Pakis would have a massive problem on their hands.

Second, Rosboro offering something at a Chinese Airshow (what do you expect them to say, we only offer to India, and that too at a chinese show?) hardly means that the RUssians are all gung ho. In fact this happened the last time at Zhuhai as well - nothing came of it. I'd like to see that come from a govt. authority instead of a commercial interest. And even if offered officially, the Russkis won't give the Chinese something as good as what they have. Also, the MKI is about to go a step further - the upgrade deal is massive and I am guessing it will be an iteration above the 35 even.

Comparing the Indo-russian strategic partnership which has lasted fruitfully for decades to a INdo-US partnership which is still in its infancy is ridiculous, and irrelevant on many levels. THe problem with China selling JF-17s to Pak is not a russian problem, INdia needs to take it up with the Chinese. The last superdooper hardware sold by the Russians to china were probly the Kilos.

The Russians have surely squeezed out every drop that they can from India, but this has been both ways. India has not just simply accepted what the russians have offered, but haggled, and modified and made the designers go through a LOT to get hardware upto its desired levels, basically equal to or better than western counterparts, at a fraction of the cost. That is called a MUTUALLY beneficial relationship. So harping on the idea that, "ooh India bailed Russian entities out of trouble and were taken for a ride in the process" is simply wrong, India got a LOT in return.

IOWs, don't take a couple of media reports that seriously.

CM, if that is the way to look at it, then why is anyone cribbing about PAF F-16 Block 52+ sales and upgrades to existing PAF Block 15 F-16s? After all no Block 60s were sold or offered. No F/A-18E/Fs sold or offered, no E-2Ds, no P-8Is (ok, they've got P-3Cs), no C-17s, no Apaches, etc.. Why were the AMRAAM C-5 and AIM-9M sales an issue ? They didn't sell them the more capable C-7 version or the AIM-9X version. So the same argument can be made about US sales to Pakis also. After all the US offers India equipment that is definitely on par or more cutting edge compared to the Pakis. And while US aid or sales to Pakis is a major irritant, the bigger issue is Chinese building competence in all sorts of technologies and then eventually supplying them at "friendship" prices just to keep India occupied with Pakistan.

The fact is that if you take a long hard look at the Chinese orbat, right from its army to its navy to its air force, the Russian influence is massive. Either in the form of direct imports or reverse engineered equipment. Russian help has let the Chinese skip many years of learning and move straight on to more advanced versions without having to induct iteratively into service and learn from experience (the way they did in Soviet days, witness the numerous iterative J-7 variants). The huge advances made by the Chinese in electro-optics, radar, guided weaponry, etc. is with a great deal of thanks to the Russians. And that equipment will eventually find its way into Paki hands as well, and without hurting its economy either thanks to very lenient credit.

And despite the bad experience of IP theft, they continue selling them technology and weapons. And regarding the authenticity of those articles, remember that it was at Zhuhai that the now famous episode of the RD-93 sale occurred- where Indian media said that India had applied pressure on the Russians to not sell the RD-93 engines and Russian execs said that the sale would go through and eventually Putin himself let the sale go through. This time, the issue isn't with Chinese interest- it is with regard to Russian interest in selling what is its current top-of-the-line fighter to a known chor. I guess their attitude is make some profits before they develop that on their own or buy it from somewhere else instead.

[negi]

There are plenty of posters on this forum itself who will constantly ignore these type of sales and blow their tops when the US sells or provides "aid" to the Pakis. Just recently in the news were reports of the Russians trying to open talks on Su-33 sales to the PLAN. That while they are still supplying MiG-29Ks to the IN. And while the Pakis will be major irritants, they are not the type of existential threat that the Chinese are.The fact is that while the Russians may sell us a couple of items that they won't sell to the Chinese, that doesn't mean that we can turn a blind eye to the other sales that have in many ways helped China leap over 2 generations of obsolete technology. This is true whether it be radars, avionics, sensors (like active missile warhead seekers), artillery (Smerch rip-offs), anti-aircraft systems (S-300 ripoffs) or engine technology (Al-31 and RD-93 sales and help with the WS-10 and WS-13). If they're not selling them the originals (like in the case of the AL-31 or RD-93 engines) then they are in some way aiding in the Chinese reverse engineering by continuing arms sales even when the Chinese have no respect for their IP.

Surprising that it comes from you, China and TSP are not comparable by any stretch of imagination whether we like it or not as things stand today not many countries in the world are ready to confront China (yes not even USA) that aside one also needs to account for the fact that Russia economically is not even a shadow of erstwhile USSR unlike USA it is too heavily dependent on weapon sales as a source of revenue, mind you given a choice they would not have entertained a Brahmos type JV or even the MKI type program (there was a serious opposition within Russia's MIC against ventures involving IP sharing). The whole of the PLAN fleet is powered by the tfta MTU engines same is true for their latest MBTs and if I am not wrong lot of European stuff goes into their latest attack heli program all this when they were supposed to be under an arms embargo . Their satellite program received a major shot in the arm when Unkil based Lora and Hughes helped them with trouble shooting their Long March series rockets which were otherwise going kaboom in mid air , same is true for the multi-satellite dispensers which Unkil helped China perfect I think we know what kind of use such technology can be put into. Likes of LM have JVs with state owned companies (check Beijing Metstar Co) and despite Lizard's glittering record in proliferation of nukes and missiles the self professed savior of democracy in the world eased the curbs on export of missile technology to China last year.

And if you blame the Russians for continuing to export to China for reverse engineering , then by that logic US should stop issuing Visas to Chinese students and Academia , no ? After all the Chinese have reported to have got their hands on the Unkil's prized nuke jewels.

There would be no J-10 or JF-17 were it not for the Russians. I think the Russophile BRFites need to keep this in mind every time they go off on a US baiting spree and how the US cannot be trusted and so on and so forth.

By that logic there would be no DF-31 and LM series space launch vehicles thanks to Unkil based companies for helping with trajectory correction and multi-satellite dispensers . Had Unkil not connived with the Lizard; TSP,Iran and NoKo would have never acquired nukes nor would each of these sheep shaggers be roaming with same exact copy of NoDong.

And while you are at it, you know how much high quality iron ore does India export to China ? I won't be surprised if the steel that goes into their warships or MBTs is processed from the same, the point is China is a 800lb gorilla can't exactly blame countries for selling stuff to it. It is a huge folly to compare it buying weapons from Russia to US subsidizing weapons sales to TSP.

[shiv]

The point that I want to make is that our planes are crashing mainly due to obsolence.I do not see SU 30 MKI crashing this often or for that matter Mirage-2000.Even Mig-29 does not seem to crash that much.It is only Mig-21 and 27 that seem to crash mostly.That is why I said these planes have to be replaced as quickly as possible.According to me the best contender would be LCA MK1.

Twin engine. And please - the MiG 21's reasons were different. Please be a little sensitive to the level of awareness that is shown on here. The MiG 27 was crash prone for several reasons including poor quality control. The MiG 21 was not "crash prone". Poor quality control did cause crashes but it was a fighter that encouraged pilot error by its relatively "docile characteristics" (to use a term in a BR article). And it was used as AJT for decades while India negotiated for an AJT.

I am a little surprised at your stout defence of what appears to be your own ignorance. I thought you were better informed. The excuse that the US lost 2000 planes in Vietnam ad therefore combat losses outnumber peacetime losses is one of the silliest arguments I have heard. I would sit here and demolish it piece by piece and demand that you either expose or disprove your ignorance - but like I said I thought you were made of better stuff so I will leave it for now. I think you would be better off doing a dignified downhill ski on this one - you will be better respected for that and not mocked when ignorance is revealed layer by layer. If you don't care for all that - I am sure that is fine with me and everyone else who disagrees with you.

[shiv]

60 crashes in 3 years ?

Rahul - the flight safety thread has been there for over two years and the rough number can be counted by checking that thread. I started that thread precisely for that reason.

[Indranil]

CM sahab and Negi sahab,

You are getting me and AFAI could decipher Kartik wrong.

None of us are saying that Russia is a fox or the US is innocent. All I wanted to say is that. They are looking after their interests. Where it places India vis-a-vis China doesn't matter to them as long as there are repercussions on them. And rightly so. Why should they? Russia needs the money, even if it costs them the IP. US doesn't need the money from China. It needs India to counter China. That's it.

We should grow up now. Stop the handholding. We are dolling out the cash. Get the best bargain for our country, cold heartedly if need be. Nobody is no country out there who would put our interests before there's. Not even Russia. Time to accept that fact. If its in their interest they would arm our enemy to the teeth with the tech developed with our "collaboration" (which often means money in this context).

Again JMT.

[negi]

You are getting me and AFAI could decipher Kartik wrong.

Well I think it is the other way round; read up the thread I think it was you and Kartik who started it. I am merely providing another perspective.
You first have to realize the fundamental fact that all these allies-shallies are not formed based on one off deal and it works both ways RU's relations with India do not get affected just because it agrees to sell a platform X to Cheena (strat fora is the right place for that sort of stuff) similarly just because Unkil sells us some AC it does not become our ally.

None of us are saying that Russia is a fox or the US is innocent. All I wanted to say is that. They are looking after their interests. Where it places India vis-a-vis China doesn't matter to them as long as there are repercussions
on them. And rightly so. Why should they?

I think strat fora is right place for above, also I did not quote your post did I ?

Russia needs the money, even if it costs them the IP.

Yes it does but it has no bearing on it being our ally in the region , you see weapons sales are just one aspect there are a lot of other areas where interests have to align for two countries to accept each other as an ally, in case of Unkil TSP will continue to be a key player for it in the near future and hence our interests/priorities would continue to clash.

US doesn't need the money from China. It needs India to counter China. That's it.

This is WRONG, check the bilateral trade figures between US and China you would realize how silly your statement is. Regarding US propping us to counter China it is plain psy ops I have been hearing about it since more than a decade but our relations have warmed up only recently and things on the ground are yet to materialize .

We should grow up now. Stop the handholding. We are dolling out the cash. Get the best bargain for our country, cold heartedly if need be. Nobody is there no country out their who would put our interests before there's. Not even Russia. Time to accept that fact. If its in their interest they would arm our enemy to the teeth with the tech developed with our "collaboration" (which often means money in this context).

I agree, I don't think I said anything contrary to the above.

Btw Indranil do away with 'Sahab' for me .

[Indranil]

^^^ Then we are on the same page.

As I said my (and I think Kartik's too) intention was not to portray the US as a sheep. Russia is not a saint, that's all I wanted to say. It seems we are all the same page on that.

P.S. I didn't mean US doesn't need China's money. What I meant was US doesn't need Chinese money from arms sale or hasn't looked in that direction very far. I think I should have spelled it out correctly.

[Pratyush]

60 crashes in 3 years ?

In the same period how many airframes have been aded to the fleet. As 60 aircraft lost is a huge number.

Also, do we know how many of the crashes were a total loss events and in how many of the cases the airframe could return to service after rebuilding.

[shiv]

60 crashes in 3 years ?

In the same period how many airframes have been aded to the fleet. As 60 aircraft lost is a huge number.

Also, do we know how many of the crashes were a total loss events and in how many of the cases the airframe could return to service after rebuilding.

It is good to look at the flight safety thread for details.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 827338.cms
Dated:Apr 18, 2010

A whopping 45% of IAF air crashes in the last six years have taken place due to human error.

The IAF has informed the parliamentary committee on defence that it had recorded a total of 74 air mishaps between April 2004 and March 2010, of which a high of 42% was due to technical faults in the aircraft and a mere 6% due to bird-hit.

The figures in percentage would mean the IAF has suffered 33 crashes out of 74 due to human errors, 31 due to technical errors in the aircraft and another 4 due to bird hit. Reasons for the remaining six

Read more: 45% of IAF air crashes due to human error - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... z15ViOL2kb

[Pratyush]

But doc. thats not what I have asked.

[shiv]

^^Nevertheless - the number 60 which is a huge number needs to be checked against other information that has earlier been documented. the discussion on this page has been about that "huge number"

Anyhow
http://angle-of-attack.blogspot.com/201 ... -2009.html

IAF Mishap Report -2009
The year 2009 was not good for Indian Air Force as It lost 11 aircrafts including 7 fighters, 2 trainers 1 UAV and 1 transporter. Loss of human life was also very high with 18 personnels killed in these mishaps, no civilian deaths were reported. The infamous MiG-21 crashed 4 times during the year which is a grim reminder that IAF desperately needs to replace them and that to very soon.
However the highlight of the year was the worlds safest fighter aircraft and the pride of the IAF suffered a huge dent in its image. Two Su-30MKIs were lost during the year killing one pilot, a Wing Commander. The first crash was due to accidental turning off of the Fly-By-Wire system. However in this same crash co-pilot Wing Com P.S Nara was killed due to faulty ejection seat. The second crash happened on Nov 30 because of a fire in the engine. In this case both the pilots ejected safely.
Second major highlight of the year was a loss of a An-32 which was lost in a mountainous region of Arunachal Pradesh. This crash killed 13 personnels who were travelling aboard among which many were high ranking officers. This crash was by far the most deadly crash IAF suffered during the year.
The complete list of crashes suffered by IAF is as follows:
[1]
Date: January 21
Aircraft: Kiran Mk-II
Deaths: 1 Pilot [Wing Commander R.S. Dhaliwal]
Damage to property: None
Cause: N/A
Comments: The aircraft crashed at 8.35 a.m. shortly after it took off from the Bidar Air Force Station (about 750km from here), on a regular training sortie. The pilot died instantaneously when the jet crashed. It caught fire soon after it got airborne from the air base. The aircraft belonged to the Suryakiran Aerobatic team of the IAF.
[2]
Date: January 21
Aircraft: Unidentified UAV
Deaths: None
Damage to property: None
Cause: N/A
Comments: The UAV crashed in the state of West Bengal.

[shiv]

Cross post from Flight Safety thread
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 05#p701805
For information on IAF's accidents, Jagan's warbirds page is the best
http://www.warbirdsofindia.com/Crashes/india.php

But this thread is not too bad

On page 1 we have this

Some statistics (official figures that include fighters, Helis, transports etc) of major accidents (but it does not include navy and army)

Code: Select all

Year 	Official 	 
1989-1990 	31 	
1990-1991 	23 	
1991-1992 	32 	
1992-1993 	-NA- 	18+ 	 
1993-1994 	22 	
1994-1995 	25 	
1995-1996 	28 	
1996-1997 	20 	
1997-1998 	17 	
1998-1999 	23 	
1999-2000 	27 	
2000-2001 	26 	
2001-2002 	20 	
2002-2003 	21 	
2003-2004 	15 	
2004-2005 	17 	

Two pages later we have

Updated list for 2005

Code: Select all

AIRFORCE
04-Jan-05	MiG-21Bis	Sqn Ldr	Kaila	
04-Mar-05	Deepak HPT-32	Flt Cdt	Sparsh Rana*	AFA
08-Mar-05	MiG-21Bis	Fg Offr	Tushar Chavan*	
11-May-05	Jaguar IS	Flt Lt	Amit Singh*	16
07-Oct-05	Jaguar IS	Sqn Ldr	Vishal Gupta	
26-Oct-05	MiG-21UM	Sqn Ldr	K R Murthy*	ASTE
13-Dec-05	MiG-21	Sqn Ldr	Bansal	
19-Dec-05	Canberra PR57	Sqn Ldr	Sanjeev Bedi*	106
27-Dec-05	Kiran HJT-16	Wg Cdr	Rahul Bapat	ASTE
				
01-Feb-05	Chetak			
18-Feb-05	Cheetah SA-315			
22-May-05	Mil Mi-8			
21-Jun-05	Mil Mi-17	Gp Capt	Shankar	
19-Oct-05	Cheetah SA-315			

Airforce Combat Ac: 7 
Trainers : 2
Choppers: 5

NAVY
21-Feb-05	Chetak			NAVY
06-May-05	Chetak	Lt Cdr	D Poddar*	NAVY
17-May-05	Sea Harrier			300
19-Aug-05	Kamov 28	Lt Cdr	O Sherawat*	
07-Sep-05	Chetak			NAVY
05-Dec-05	Sea Harrier	Lt Cdr	H S Pannu*	551

HAL
29-Nov-05	HAL Dhruv	Wg Cdr	Krishna	HAL

And now the news that the IAF has had 56 crashes in three and a half years - an accident rate that is still better than the decade 1989 to 1999.

Some of the crashed since 2005 have been recorded in this thread. Spectacular among these have been the Suryakiran crash in Bidar, the ALH crash in Yelahanka, and IJT that was pranged, the Saras and the Sukhoi crash. But we have missed many.

I have no idea whether the news includes UAVs or not. Don't know if Saras and IJT were "IAF" crashes. - just re read the news

But it was understood that the aircraft were from all the three armed forces and the coast guard. “

[shiv]

Cross post from Flight safety thread
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 53#p701853

In recent months I have added the following two pages - these my be interesting as well

http://www.warbirdsofindia.com/Crashes/count.php

http://www.warbirdsofindia.com/Crashes/typecount.php

For the IAF

MiG-21 Accidents (FYs - Financial Years)

The first number is an official disclosure - which is not available for the last three years.

1998-1999 WoI = 10
1999-2000 12 WoI = 14 (1 combat, 1 joint acc for 2 ac)
2000-2001 11 WoI = 12 (1 MAC - so counted as 1)
2001-2002 8 WoI = 8
2002-2003 12 WoI = 12
2003-2004 5 WoI = 5
2004-2005 3 WoI = 3
2005-2006 4 WoI = 4

2006-2007 WoI = 1
2007-2008 WoI = 2
2008-2009 WoI = 2
2009-2010 2 (Till Date)

[shiv]

60 crashes in 3 years ?

Looking at the information on Jagan's page and various news items the total crashes for 2007, 2008 and 2009 is 30.

2007: 9
2008: 10
2009: 11

Unless we have had 30 accidents in 2010 (which we have not) the figure is either WRONG or it includes data on accidents of other aircraft or flying objects - like in the USA a class A accident accounts for deaths or accidents that cost more than USD 2 million.

[Rahul M]

60 crashes in 3 years ?

Rahul - the flight safety thread has been there for over two years and the rough number can be counted by checking that thread. I started that thread precisely for that reason.

I thought he meant fighters only which caught me by surprise.

also, I think 60 is the number of major incidents, not all of which are necessarily write-offs.
Jagan has the records till late 2008.
http://www.warbirds.in/Crashes/crpage.p ... h=&toyear=

edit : you beat me to it. is there a 2009 page @ warbirds or did you count it from the thread ?

[shiv]

^^
And the total for even 4 years is not 60.

[Pratyush]

Shiv and Rahul,

Both of you thanks.

[shiv]

edit : you beat me to it. is there a 2009 page @ warbirds or did you count it from the thread ?

I have posted a 2009 news item above copied from the Flight Safety thread. That's why that damn thread is so useful - these discussions come up again and again and again.

[Indranil]

I was going through this old news.

It had never occurred to me why we don't have a dedicated bomber! What has happened of the 4(+3) lease of the Backfires?

I don't think we have the infrastructure to build such planes now. Should we not show interest towards the Tu-22s that Philip sir spoke on the "INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2" thread. or provide impetus for the Tu-160s.

There are several sqds. of TU-22/22M3s available.They have been mothballed.They have to have better AEW and anti-missile warning systems,but are excellent platforms with a couple of decades of life left in them.Equipped with hypersonic Brahmos and our 1500km LR cruise missile being developed,they would be hugely capable platforms.Why,the US is still using a large number of B-52s and plan to modernise even these too! Thanks to stand-off missiles,any Cold War LR bomber is relevant today.Even our pensioned off Canberra's can be resurrected with the right knid of stand-off missiles.The Oscars are extremely formidable,with a v.heavy weaponload specifically built to destroy carrier task forces (one Oscar built for each US carrier task force).These are being offered to us specifically to deal with any PLAN carrier group,as 4 carriers are being built.LR Backfires operating from our land and island bases and Oscars combined would be a deadly combination able to deal with any navy that challenges the IN in the future.

Please educate this nadaan balak why this field has been afforded such a lackluster interest.

[Indranil]

That is right that bombers would be for offensive capability. But if we want to have any respectable punitive capability, we have to have bomb trucks.

Is it time to step up?

[Surya]

There are several sqds. of TU-22/22M3s available.They have been mothballed.They have to have better AEW and anti-missile warning systems,but are excellent platforms with a couple of decades of life left in them.Equipped with hypersonic Brahmos and our 1500km LR cruise missile being developed,they would be hugely capable platforms.Why,the US is still using a large number of B-52s and plan to modernise even these too! Thanks to stand-off missiles,any Cold War LR bomber is relevant today.Even our pensioned off Canberra's can be resurrected with the right knid of stand-off missiles.The Oscars are extremely formidable,with a v.heavy weaponload specifically built to destroy carrier task forces (one Oscar built for each US carrier task force).These are being offered to us specifically to deal with any PLAN carrier group,as 4 carriers are being built.LR Backfires operating from our land and island bases and Oscars combined would be a deadly combination able to deal with any navy that challenges the IN in the future.

This is more of the same paper thinking.

These cold war tools are maintenance prone, expensive to operate and will be white elephants.

Buying a small number of these from a country which is barely able to sustain its OWN operations to one or two sorties here and there is stupid

[Indranil]

^^^ Rightly so ... But that's how all present day bombers are ... All of them are over 50 years old.

[darshhan]

^^^ Rightly so ... But that's how all present day bombers are ... All of them are over 50 years old.

I am not so sure about TU-22 Backfire.But yes oscars are formidable and can prove to be extremely valuable for India.But will Russia ever part with Oscars?

[Cain Marko]

We are dolling out the cash. Get the best bargain for our country, cold heartedly if need be. Nobody is no country out there who would put our interests before there's. Not even Russia. Time to accept that fact. If its in their interest they would arm our enemy to the teeth with the tech developed with our "collaboration" (which often means money in this context).

Again JMT.

Roysahib,

Of course India should look out for its interests. But what makes you think that it is not vis-a-vis Russia? Get the best bargain? We have squeezed more out from the Russki MIC than the russians themselves - ever since we started paying top dollar for the reqd. hardware and it did not come dirt cheap as a cold war measure, which btw, India has used as well. Like I said, this is as good as it gets - as much of a symbiosis as possible between two countries (bar perhaps a military alliance). Yes, a degree of pragmatism is a MUST for any foreign relationship, however, equating Russki sales to China with US dole to Pak is flawed - Russia is not to China or Pak what US is to both these Indian opponents (both of these have enjoyed some rather great favors from the US admin before including MFN status).

CM.

[Indranil]

CM Sahab ... please do away with the sahib/sir. I do not have much of grey.

As I have said, 2 times in 2 posts that Russia has helped us a lot and it is only valid that it is looking after its interests. Russias interest in earning through weapons trade to China hurts us. US's current situation with Pak and aids to it hurt us too. But then everybody is looking at their own interest.

However some here like to see US as a villain and Russia as angels. That is wrong in my opinion. If we get better equipment from USA, then so be it. why prejudice the source when everybody is guarding their own interest.

Anyways, I feel we are all on the same page but just saying things differently. Besides, this is not a discussion for this thread. So let us let it be here or move it to the strategy/geo-political pages.

[Cain Marko]

Yet, the JF-17 wouldn't even be operational were it not for the RD-93. the EJ-200 would be way out of their budget and would likely face issues due to possible theft of IP by the Chinese. If no RD-93s were sold, the Pakis would have a massive problem on their hands.

Kartik, seriously speaking how much of a threat is the JF-17? Esp. when compared to the F-16? Also, there was always a chance that the JF-17s would have come about one way or another, the Chinese are not too far behind in developing engines. Delayed, but not never. Also, what makes you think that the Chinese would not offer the J10 to Pak instead of the thunder? Or do you think that the Russians should not sell China anything at all? No AL-31s, no flankers, no nothing. Is it reasonable or even remotely pragmatic to expect a hand to mouth russia to look the other way from lucrative commercial deals? Remember again, these are not free unlike the US-Pak deals.

Second, Rosboro offering something at a Chinese Airshow (what do you expect them to say, we only offer to India, and that too at a chinese show?) hardly means that the RUssians are all gung ho. In fact this happened the last time at Zhuhai as well - nothing came of it. I'd like to see that come from a govt. authority instead of a commercial interest. And even if offered officially, the Russkis won't give the Chinese something as good as what they have. Also, the MKI is about to go a step further - the upgrade deal is massive and I am guessing it will be an iteration above the 35 even.

CM, if that is the way to look at it, then why is anyone cribbing about PAF F-16 Block 52+ sales and upgrades to existing PAF Block 15 F-16s? After all no Block 60s were sold or offered. No F/A-18E/Fs sold or offered, no E-2Ds, no P-8Is (ok, they've got P-3Cs), no C-17s, no Apaches, etc.. Why were the AMRAAM C-5 and AIM-9M sales an issue ? They didn't sell them the more capable C-7 version or the AIM-9X version. So the same argument can be made about US sales to Pakis also. After all the US offers India equipment that is definitely on par or more cutting edge compared to the Pakis. And while US aid or sales to Pakis is a major irritant, the bigger issue is Chinese building competence in all sorts of technologies and then eventually supplying them at "friendship" prices just to keep India occupied with Pakistan.

Kartik, you know just as well as anyone that much of what Pak gets, the US gives; it is not the same situation with Chi-Russia, the Chinis pay big $$s for Russina hardware. When Russia starts handing out things to china for free, we will have a reasonable comparison.

The fact is that if you take a long hard look at the Chinese orbat, right from its army to its navy to its air force, the Russian influence is massive. Either in the form of direct imports or reverse engineered equipment. Russian help has let the Chinese skip many years of learning and move straight on to more advanced versions without having to induct iteratively into service and learn from experience (the way they did in Soviet days, witness the numerous iterative J-7 variants). The huge advances made by the Chinese in electro-optics, radar, guided weaponry, etc. is with a great deal of thanks to the Russians. And that equipment will eventually find its way into Paki hands as well, and without hurting its economy either thanks to very lenient credit.

And despite the bad experience of IP theft, they continue selling them technology and weapons. And regarding the authenticity of those articles, remember that it was at Zhuhai that the now famous episode of the RD-93 sale occurred- where Indian media said that India had applied pressure on the Russians to not sell the RD-93 engines and Russian execs said that the sale would go through and eventually Putin himself let the sale go through. This time, the issue isn't with Chinese interest- it is with regard to Russian interest in selling what is its current top-of-the-line fighter to a known chor. I guess their attitude is make some profits before they develop that on their own or buy it from somewhere else instead.

Crucial point that last line, under the circumstances, since the Chinese will get said hardware one way or another, why shouldn't the Russkis make some money? Just because it may hurt Indian sentiments? Expecting Russia to let go of one of its largest markets is utopian, why should they? India will pay them for this loss?

Btw, it remains that the Su-35 has not yet made it to china, and if it ever does, the thing to be concerned about is the Pakfa, which does not seem to be going the Chinese way. Not because Russia loves India, but simply because it likes its own skin.

The alliance bet india-russia therefore is a result of very compelling geo-political reasons and quite favorable for India's needs. The US india relationship otoh, has no such compelling factors on the surface of it, at least not yet. I do feel though that reasons will become compelling soon enough.

Indranil, I was just giving you a taste of your own medicine with the Sahib bit. Rest of the discussion sounds fair enough to me.


CM

[Indranil]

CM,

A few nitpicks.

The reason why Su-35 has not made it to China is not because of Russian reluctance.
And the worst that we can do is underestimate the JF-17. One can always keep upgrading avionics etc.
There is no reason why China would not offer Pak the J-10s if Pak decides to pay for them.

[srai]

Between 130-220 LCAs (40Mk.1 + 90 Mk.2 + 90 Mk.3?) will be replaced by the UCAV post 2040. 180 MKIs will need to be replaced by the UCAV post 2040. By 2050, 400 UCAVs could be in service.

UCAV from 2040??

It will be like IAF operating supersonic jets some 20 years after western airforces used them.

We already have HALE and MALE UAV's operational across the globe. So it won't be too long before Strike UCAV's will be operational given the need arises.
And I don't believe they will ever replace Air superiority platforms apart from augmenting them.

While you are talking about current Gen UAVs being armed, I am talking more about 6th-Gen UCAVs in the line of Aurora (India), Neuron (France), Tarnis (UK) etc. These are all on the drawing boards and won't come online until after 2030 at the earliest.

2040 for an Indian 6th-Gen UCAV is realistic IMO because it has built up its capability up to 4th-Gen through the LCA. In the next 20 years, it will acquire the 5th-Gen and 5.5-Gen capability through the FGFA and AMCA. So 6th-Gen Aurora UCAV by 2040 seems plausible.

[Karan M]

The "irrelevant" bit was overkill, but you get what they mean better by seeing their idea of how to operate the JSF, on a youtube video, the JSF zooms through a merge and just launches over the shoulder HOBs missiles guided by the JHMCS. Easier said than done though.