Indian Military Aviation

[shukla]

X-post (thought this might be very relevant here as well)

BREAKING NEWS - Russia may sell Su-35 to China


The new Su-35S is labelled a “4++ Generation” derivative of the baseline Su-27S Flanker B. It is a comprehensive redesign of the aircraft's systems, and employs a supercruise capable 117S variant engine. Depicted the second prototype during flight test. The Su-35S is expected to be the last Flanker variant to be mass produced before the PAK-FA enters full rate production (KnAAPO image).

Russia May Sell Su-35s to China
Defensenews

Breaking its earlier tradition of keeping China at bay when came to sales of advanced weapons, Russia is prepared to discuss selling its most modern Su-35 4++ generation fighters to China, said the deputy director of the Russian government arms export agency, Rosoboronexport. "We are ready to work with the Chinese partners in this direction," Alexander Mikheyev told reporters after the opening ceremony of China's Zhuhai Airshow 2010, according to the Russian official RIA-Novosti news agency.

Mikheyev said that Russia and China are in the initial stage of negotiations and will be discussing the features of the export variant of the Su-35 and how to integrate it with previously supplied Su-30 fighters and the locally assembled (under Russian license) Su-27s. A source in Rosoboronexport said that this contract would mark a departure from recent stagnation in Russian arms sales to China.

Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China
RIA

Russia's state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport said on Tuesday it was ready to hold talks with China on the delivery of advanced Su-35 fighter aircraft to the Chinese air force. "We are ready to work with our Chinese partners to this end [Su-35 deliveries]," Deputy General Director of Rosoboronexport Alexander Mikheyev said at the Airshow China 2010, which is being held on November 16-21 in Zhuhai.

Russia's Sukhoi aircraft maker earlier said it planned to start deliveries of the new aircraft, billed as "4++ generation using fifth-generation technology," to foreign clients in 2011 and produce Su-35s over a period of 10 years up to 2020.
China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition (Airshow China) is the only international aerospace trade show in China that is endorsed by the Chinese central government. The biannual arms exhibition has been held in Zhuhai since 1996.

[Kartik]

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.

CM, its not about the platform's capabilities compared to the F-16 alone- it’s the fact that it allows the PAF to scale up in numbers in a very affordable way, AND take the infant steps in aerospace that will eventually be crucial for them. it will eventually allow them to gain enough confidence to start developing electronics, avionics, maybe even their own air launched weapons (instead of South African ones that they claim are indigenous) and all because they are manufacturing that aircraft at PAC Kamra. The F-16 is a bigger threat, no second thoughts about it. But, the crucial aspect was that it was costlier, and to build up a fleet of 150-200 F-16s to replace their large fleets of A-5, F-7 and Mirage-3/V would've cost them more than they could afford. And the US had the ability to apply sanctions and thus cripple them at any time if they were pissed off enough.

The JF-17 would've eventually emerged, but the WS-10A engine is not yet ready. At the recent Farnborough show their paltan leader said that it was about 5 years away from being ready to power the JF-17. Meaning that if the RD-93 was not an option, they would have to go to the US or EU for the F-404/F414 or the Ej200 and the China connection means that neither will be made available easily to them. Plus the cost would've been driven up by around 5 million $ per aircraft just like that.

I'm not saying that the Russians did the wrong thing by selling the RD-93 to China and allowing it to be re-exported to other nations from their own point of view(from ours yes, but from their pov, it’s the only way to sell some Klimov engines). But, what I was mentioning was how many BRFites who revile the US for its weapons sales/aid to the TSP totally overlook these sales from Russia to China that have impacted us in as big if not bigger ways. So the point being- MONEY hain toh HONEY hain. Plain business and that’s all so.

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.

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.

there are two hindi words I'd like to use here- aukaad and haisiyat. They define the difference between China and Pakistan. The Pakis aukaad is such that they have no recourse but to keep buttering up the Chinese (fraternal relationship, tallel than mountain, deepel than ocean friendship) because they are literally their maai-baaps now.

They use the same begging tactics coupled with veiled threats to withdraw support to the US effort in Af'tan to get concessions from them. The simple way to do it is to say that "meri haisiyat jitni hogi main utna effort karoonga". If you want me to do more, give me more weapons.

In the same way that Russia looks to its own business interests when it sells China stuff for hard cash while being oblivious to any long term effects, the US is also going to look out for its own interests and it cannot call Pakis' bluff on the terror effort. I cannot see why people think its alright for Russia to sell to China for money and for the US to give or sell stuff to Pakis. The Chinese can afford it easily so whether its sold or given for free will scarcely matter to them.

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.

Same applies to the Pakis too doesn't it? Eventually they'd get it from China anyway, so why shouldn’t the US try and gain some brownie points in Paki strategic circles by selling them some weapons?

IMO, double standards shouldn’t be applied here- either we all roundly criticize weapons and technology sales/transfers/aid to Pakistan from US AND to China from Russia or we accept that no nation will act in our interests simply because we want them to. Unless we have economic muscle to back up that displeasure, no one else will care. The problem is that India has almost never shown its displeasure openly coupled with implied/veiled threats of loss of business in any way to either nation to make them even pause to blink. Would either the US or Russia today think of large scale weapons sales to Taiwan? That is what I'm talking about- we either learn to live with it even if we're unhappy with the situation, or we do something about it.

[negi]

But, what I was mentioning was how many BRFites who revile the US for its weapons sales/aid to the TSP totally overlook these sales from Russia to China that have impacted us in as big if not bigger ways. So the point being- MONEY hain toh HONEY hain. Plain business and that’s all so.Same applies to the Pakis too doesn't it? Eventually they'd get it from China anyway, so why shouldn’t the US try and gain some brownie points in Paki strategic circles by selling them some weapons? IMO, double standards shouldn’t be applied here- either we all roundly criticize weapons and technology sales/transfers/aid to Pakistan from US AND to China from Russia

Firstly those are two different issues; India for a start has never even PROTESTED against supply of any military platform to China, in case of the RD-93 engine supply Russia did initially delay the additional sales however the key point to note is India simply does not have the clout to prevent Russia from selling stuff to China, there is a reason why Russia doesn't sell key offensive platform to TSP (it has otherwise sold stuff to every other so called rogue country country). Also if you followed the TSP's MBT acquisition you would have known that Russians blocked the supply of key components of the T-80UD to Ukraine as a result of which the delivery of tanks was delayed (apparently Ukrainians had to build the components in house) apparently under Indian pressure.

As for US aid to TSP its not just about brownie points this is a country that sent its fleet in our backyard to back a country that initiated the war in principle they were as guilty as the aggressor itself, so no Sir there is no similarity between the Ru and the Unkil as far as India is concerned.

[Kanson]

But, what I was mentioning was how many BRFites who revile the US for its weapons sales/aid to the TSP totally overlook these sales from Russia to China that have impacted us in as big if not bigger ways. So the point being- MONEY hain toh HONEY hain. Plain business and that’s all so.Same applies to the Pakis too doesn't it? Eventually they'd get it from China anyway, so why shouldn’t the US try and gain some brownie points in Paki strategic circles by selling them some weapons? IMO, double standards shouldn’t be applied here- either we all roundly criticize weapons and technology sales/transfers/aid to Pakistan from US AND to China from Russia

Firstly those are two different issues; India for a start has never even PROTESTED against supply of any military platform to China, in case of the RD-93 engine supply Russia did initially delay the additional sales however the key point to note is India simply does not have the clout to prevent Russia from selling stuff to China, there is a reason why Russia doesn't sell key offensive platform to TSP (it has otherwise sold stuff to every other so called rogue country country). Also if you followed the TSP's MBT acquisition you would have known that Russians blocked the supply of key components of the T-80UD to Ukraine as a result of which the delivery of tanks was delayed (apparently Ukrainians had to build the components in house) apparently under Indian pressure.

As for US aid to TSP its not just about brownie points this is a country that sent its fleet in our backyard to back a country that initiated the war in principle they were as guilty as the aggressor itself, so no Sir there is no similarity between the Ru and the Unkil as far as India is concerned.

Negi, as I see it, you are comparing two era which can't be comparable. One is about Cold war era and before collapse of USSR which used to be our patron. An interim period from 1990s to early 2000s and then the second era from early 2000s.

During the era one, we deepened our military relation with USSR in 70s as it offered us that can satiate our appetite and secondly, though not highlighted, USSR was not selling weapons to China and Pak during that period.

Our relationship with Israel deepened not only becoz it offered us those techs and weapons but it was under mutual consideration of not selling those weapons to China and Pak. Further ban of weapon sales to China only increased our relationship.

Same case with USA & other countries. If suppose Israel reverses its decision of not to sell weapons to China, I guess, we may carry with that relationship but the importance of it starts reducing.

It seems Russia gave a word that it wont sell to China and Pak the same stuff that was offered to us. But we all know Russia is not USSR and the relationship is on a bumpy ride.

Just an observation.

[Austin]

Israel only stopped selling weapons to China under US protest ( much of Israel defence industry is subsidised by US ) and not to protect India interest , AFAIK Israel never supplied weapons to Pakistan for their own interest as Pakistan supported the Palestinian cause.

India does not guarantee Russia or any country that it would buy weapons only from them and expects in return it will not sell weapons to its competitor , India buys weapons as she feels best for her need be it from France , Israel, US or Russia.

No country in the world will sell or not sell weapons because India likes or does not like it , else they end up being out of business. Its our sovereign right to buy weapon from any one we will is best and its their sovereign right to sell.

Hence I do not see merit in argument that US should not sell advanced weapon to Pakistan or Russia should not sell it to China , although Russia has been sensitive what it can and wants to sell to Pakistan to protect its own and India interest.

[Indranil]

^^^ Pakistan is hardly a market. They know if they sell arms to India, a lot of honey will dry up.

RD-93 will make 100s of JF-17s fly across the border. Call them bandar or whatever but they will get avionics and weapons upgrade in -10 years and become formidable in numbers. Besides they will serve as a stepping stone to a better design. That won't have been so easily possible but for the RD-93 engines. Was Russia not aware of this? Then how can we say that they are not selling to TSP to safeguard Indian interest. They are looking at theirs. RD-93 goes under the hood and so they don't have a problem with it.

So please accept the situation of TODAY. Russia is looking after its interests and not India's. India is a honey pot (currently the biggest on the globe). Hence the interest. Same applies for US. Plain and simple. So don't demonize only one. Either accept that everybody looking after their own interest is logical or demonize both.

[negi]

Guys need to differentiate between this sabzi mandi of weapons and geopolitics the former might not necessarily have a bearing on the latter the criticism of US is not ONLY because it sells some tin crap to TSP , this should not be too hard to understand , is it ? It sells weapons to a country which uses them to protect its terrorist infrastructure and wage war against India .

If relations between countries are judged by merely who is selling what to whom then trust me China is in everyone's good books including ours. Yes there is a special relationship with Russia something that is more or less unaffected by sale of RD-93s to Cheena, they have sold stuff to India which is not even available for sale in the international market (read Akulas, Brahmos JV and assistance with Arihant to name a few)

[Kanson]

Israel only stopped selling weapons to China under US protest ( much of Israel defence industry is subsidised by US ) and not to protect India interest , AFAIK Israel never supplied weapons to Pakistan for their own interest as Pakistan supported the Palestinian cause.

Before that, an understanding was reached. Weapons ban by US only further increased our relationship.

India does not guarantee Russia or any country that it would buy weapons only from them and expects in return it will not sell weapons to its competitor , India buys weapons as she feels best for her need be it from France , Israel, US or Russia.

Then what is the meaning of pledging 10 billion USD for weapon purchase for the next 10 yrs.

No country in the world will sell or not sell weapons because India likes or does not like it , else they end up being out of business. Its our sovereign right to buy weapon from any one we will is best and its their sovereign right to sell.

Hence I do not see merit in argument that US should not sell advanced weapon to Pakistan or Russia should not sell it to China.

Hi tech weapons are not a general business commodity that is available or to purchase as per market demand. Why US is obstructing to F-22 sale. Heck, leave F-22, will US sell F-16 to Iran or Cuba? Or will Russia sell its latest Su-35 to Britain?

It may be fashionable to talk about one's sovereign rights. Then why even for a resale of weapons system you need permission from the parent country? US is very explicit. Russian have their own way of protecting their turf. The time you misuse your mutual understanding with your seller, he wont be interested in giving you the latest stuff next time but then we are talking about politics.

Let say, we breach the understanding and sharing the Israelis tech with Iran, next time will Israel be willing to do business with us? That is sellers paradox. Same way if Israel is selling the same weapon platform to our foe after selling that to us will we be interested in approaching again? This is buyers paradox.

[Austin]

^^^ Pakistan is hardly a market. They know if they sell arms to India, a lot of honey will dry up.

Every market starts with a something small and then grows , look at Russia-Vietnam defence relationship over two decades.

RD-93 will make 100s of JF-17s fly across the border. Call them bandar or whatever but they will get avionics and weapons upgrade in -10 years and become formidable in numbers. Besides they will serve as a stepping stone to a better design. That won't have been so easily possible but for the RD-93 engines. Was Russia not aware of this? Then how can we say that they are not selling to TSP to safeguard Indian interest. They are looking at theirs. RD-93 goes under the hood and so they don't have a problem with it.

Well if they grow in design and develop a better aircraft then its quite logical and its their sovereign right , much like we did with Tejas.

We never did any thing actively to stop such deal , We never managed to stop them going nuclear or stop supporting terrorism , an engine and plane is a small thing.

Well hypothetically if India forces Russia to stop RD-33 transfer and Russia says ok this is a big business loss , compensate us with buying MMRCA will that be a happy situation for us ? tommorow we will want to stop US from selling F-16 or stop aiding with money which any way they go and buy arms , US says we will do buy x defence system from us ?

please accept the situation of TODAY. Russia is looking after its interests and not India's. India is a honey pot (currently the biggest on the globe). Hence the interest. Same applies for US. Plain and simple. So don't demonize only one. Either accept that everybody looking after their own interest is logical or demonize both.

Much like India is looking at its own interest and not Russia's or US , so yes they all including us looks after own interest.

[Austin]

Before that, an understanding was reached. Weapons ban by US only further increased our relationship.

They banned weapons to China only to protect their interest not ours , get this clear.
If US so cares about India , let them ban weapon sale to Pakistan and stop giving baksheesh.

Then what is the meaning of pledging 10 billion USD for weapon purchase for the next 10 yrs.

To buy arms for us for next 10 years and increase our learning curve , we dont give 10 billion dollar as baksheesh to Russia in return for nothing. We buy arms from them because its cheap and competitive and some times similar weapons and technology will not be available else where and we pay money.

Hi tech weapons are not a general business commodity that is available or to purchase as per market demand. Why US is obstructing to F-22 sale. Heck, leave F-22, will US sell F-16 to Iran or Cuba? Or will Russia sell its latest Su-35 to Britain?

Its still a business guided by own interest and generates good revenue.

If US is willing to sell weapons to Iran and Cuba they would be more than happy to buy it if its affordable , Britian part of NATO have their own military alliance and buys weapons from their own blocks and allies. Ofcourse they also compete in neutral countries like India and others.

[negi]

Austin, Indranil obviously every country bats for it's own interests (and it should) but what needs to be understood is at any given point in time there is a mutual alignment of interests between the two countries , the whole thing boils down to the question if it's RU or US whose interests in the region are in mutual conflict with ours (of course on a relative scale) .

[Juggi G]

That Night of November 19
The Indian Express

[rohitvats]

That Night of November 19
The Indian Express

Request you to please post a small excerpt from the news items you link.

Thank you.

[rohitvats]

Now, Now, Now.......how did the jingoes piss this artist impression of C-130J in IAF colors:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/T ... arrior.jpg

[Cain Marko]

Same applies to the Pakis too doesn't it? Eventually they'd get it from China anyway, so why shouldn’t the US try and gain some brownie points in Paki strategic circles by selling them some weapons?

Because Kartik, US is hardly "selling" them to Pak; the top end stuff is literally being doled out. $ 13 billion in military aid since 2001! Russia does not do this - China has to pay hard cash for roosi maal.

Also, while you may consider China as a greater, existential threat than Pakistan, I beg to differ. Much of the top end hardware that China has from Russia was firstly, and largely (even now) used in US specific directions. China did not AFAIK start positioning flankers or S300s in India's direction as soon as it received them.

Pakistan otoh, getting Orions or Solahs to blast the Taliban AF is a little bit too much wool. Those arms are and will be used directly to monitor and work against India.

IMVHO, India has shared borders with Chinaland for 1000s of years, we have only one real instance of skullduggery here. China is wary of India and vice versa, it will not push for an all out war with India unless its existence is threatened, however, it will continue to use Pak as a proxy, which Pak is only to happy to br.

IMO, double standards shouldn’t be applied here- either we all roundly criticize weapons and technology sales/transfers/aid to Pakistan from US AND to China from Russia or we accept that no nation will act in our interests simply because we want them to.

THere is no double standard Kartik, the difference between selling arms and doling them out for a vague and non existent reason such as fighting rag tag talibunnies, is clear.

Unless we have economic muscle to back up that displeasure, no one else will care. The problem is that India has almost never shown its displeasure openly coupled with implied/veiled threats of loss of business in any way to either nation to make them even pause to blink.

I agree on this point, India should have a stronger spine.

Would either the US or Russia today think of large scale weapons sales to Taiwan? That is what I'm talking about- we either learn to live with it even if we're unhappy with the situation, or we do something about it.

Let alone doling free goodies, does Russia today think of arms sales to Pakistan? Dare I say that the US supplies greater moral and military support to Taiwan than does Russia to Pakistan?. To say that US giving topend freebees to Pak = Russia selling degraded h/w to China (one of its biggest markets) is skewed. Now if Russia was doling stuff to Pak, the comparison would be valid.

CM

[Kartik]

Although this belongs in the Paki aviation thread, I'm posting it here to highlight what Indranil and I have been talking about. Now we're likely to see S-300 clones in PAF service as well apart from the SD-10 that received extensive Russian help and transfer of seeker technology from Agat.

What excuse/cover do the Russophiles have for this now?

article link

In a separate interview in Zhuhai with the China Daily newspaper, Suleman said Pakistan was evaluating the advanced Hongqi-18 and several other Chinese surface-to-air systems.

[Viv S]

Same applies to the Pakis too doesn't it? Eventually they'd get it from China anyway, so why shouldn’t the US try and gain some brownie points in Paki strategic circles by selling them some weapons?

Because Kartik, US is hardly "selling" them to Pak; the top end stuff is literally being doled out. $ 13 billion in military aid since 2001! Russia does not do this - China has to pay hard cash for roosi maal.

On the contrary, while the popular opinion is that arms to Pakistan are free, the Paks have effectively rented out their country to the US. They're paying in kind not cash. Having the CIA, US-SF and Blackwater shooting up their sovereign territory while their citizens (and 'visitors') are bombed by American drones, is the price to pay for American weapons and IMF loans. Also, ISAF supply routes run through Pakistan, so they have a certain amount of leverage. And with regard to the quality of equipment given out, only the 500 AMRAAMs are anything close to a game changer.

Let alone doling free goodies, does Russia today think of arms sales to Pakistan? Dare I say that the US supplies greater moral and military support to Taiwan than does Russia to Pakistan?. To say that US giving topend freebees to Pak = Russia selling degraded h/w to China (one of its biggest markets) is skewed. Now if Russia was doling stuff to Pak, the comparison would be valid.

Pakistan doesn't have the money to afford any significant quantity of Russian equipment. Their last 'big' purchase of the U-214 was scuppered because the Germans unlike the Chinese were unwilling to advance them a line of credit. None of the Russia's very substantial sales to India was earned through a competition. Every single one was given by the forces or MoD (and no I'm not criticizing those decisions, just pointing them out). Bottomline: the Russians have almost zero incentive to sell to Pakistan. Pakistan still has had all manner of reversed-engineered Russian equipment available to it via China: MiG-21/F-7, S-300/HQ-9, Smerch/A-100, Kilo/Yuan... and the list goes on.

[DavidD]

Both Russia and the U.S. are out to make money, that Russia doesn't sell directly to Pakistan is just a political move, they couldn't care less if Pakistan got their weapons and how they'd use it. However, it doesn't mean that there is no difference between Russia and the U.S. with respect to India. The Americans will try however they can to dictate how and if their weapons would be used by India, while Russian weapons come with no restrictions.

[bhavani]

I dont under why lot of us are trying to fault Russia, China or US. Every one is out there making money. What stopped us from buying S-300, S-400 or Patroit etc. China is going to sell everthing it can to Pakistani. It laid its hand on a lot Russian scientists and engineers and we never cared for any of those who were on market.

Even pakistan will not be able to buy everything that china offers unless Dragon subsidizes. There is a limit on its financial resources. We should have been on out toes and should have kept pace with acquisitions from either Russia or USA. If we had acquired a few S-300 Squadrons and few more Su-27 squadrons, the situation would not have looked so bleak.

I dont think there is no point in finding faults in others, let us look at our own acquisition plans.

[shiv]

I dont think there is no point in finding faults in others, let us look at our own acquisition plans.

True. And if we have the tech - let us stop chasing windmills and start producing things cheap that at least turd world nations will buy from us. We are always trying to make some sooper-dooper tech after someone else has already made it and exported it to hajaar countries. So we are late, and the tech is already old by the time we produce it in numbers and we never have to expand our public sector production lines because we only need to produce 200 in 10 years. For domestic consumion in a country inured to waiting forever.

We are heading in the wrong direction IMO. India needs a rethink, We need to put "production and export" in a different box from "hi tech" and "future developments". If we tie the two together we get LCA and Arjun. Good tech. But too little and very late. And only for domestic consumption.

[Austin]

India is interested in the licensed assembly of aircraft An-148 ( arms tass http://arms-tass.su/ )

Unfortunately its a paid access so just the news link

Could this be a replacement of Do-228 for NE kind of operation ?

[shiv]

India is interested in the licensed assembly of aircraft An-148 ( arms tass http://arms-tass.su/ )

Unfortunately its a paid access so just the news link

Could this be a replacement of Do-228 for NE kind of operation ?

Austin I though Saras was to be the 228 relacement.

Anyhow here is news that I did not know about (via Wiki)
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/201 ... 580300.htm

Hyderabad, March 5

Russian aircraft manufacturer United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) has signed deals with three domestic non-scheduled airlines for supply of 18 aircraft in its An-148 series, including 10 cargo carriers, during the on-going India Aviation 2010 meet.

It has signed deals for supply of eight passenger aircraft, with an option for another eleven. “While we are looking to deliver the passenger aircraft from the first quarter of 2011, delivery of the cargo series will begin from the first quarter of 2012, as we need to complete certain certification process,” Mr Yuri Grudinin, UAC Director, told media persons at the India Aviation 2010 meet here on Friday.

[rohitvats]

I think that is a good replacement planning for AN-32 in long term....but then, where does C-27J fit in? BTW, do we have any planned co-development for replacement of AN-32?

[Pratyush]

The AN 148 is a much more capable aircraft. It will have a greater passenger (90 ?? ) carrying capability compared to the proposed home grown RTA 70. It can fit a nich. If that is what is required.

Rohit,

The Military varient of the 148/158 has been proposed by Antanov & IIRC, HAL was invited to join the project a few months back.

The aircraft was scheduled to have a payload of 16 tons. Bringing it close to the capability of the MTA.

[Austin]

Austin I though Saras was to be the 228 relacement.

I have doubts they will replace one Do-228 LTA with another LTA Saras , considering we do not know how Saras shapes in future flight testing and if it will see wide spread civilian use , my thinking is Saras may end up in small numbers for GOI use like VIP/Def transport and Special use for armed forces , but not wide spread civilian use.

Much like they never replaced the An-26 MTA with similar MTA ( payload/range ) but opted for a bigger aircraft.

The An-148/158 is similar in character to Do-228 but larger payload/range ( ~ 15 -18T ) and is rugged to be used in places with minimum infrastructure available , ideal for Airliner/Military/Cargo in remote areas.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/201 ... 580300.htm

It has signed deals for supply of eight passenger aircraft, with an option for another eleven.

Nice find , I wonder who are the domestic airlines , never heard much on this before.

[Pratyush]

they need to replace a huge number of Yak 40s. And have nothing that can do the job so are looking at the 148/158.

[Austin]

I think that is a good replacement planning for AN-32 in long term....but then, where does C-27J fit in? BTW, do we have any planned co-development for replacement of AN-32?

Rohit the replacement for An-32 is MTA and its a done deal ,there were reports of An-158 for cost effcetive purpose etc but that did not fly much.

MTA JV is more about increasing our learning curve to build a transport/passenger aircraft in 20 T/100 seater category then just to find a suitable replacement for An-26 , the deal will be signed this december when Medvedev visits India. ( as per HAL chairman interview to force )

[rohitvats]

^^^Which basically means that post AN-32 phase out, IAF will have not airlift in sub-10tonnes category. And the staggered airlift will look like MTA<C-130J(Limited numbers)<IL-76(till phased out)<C-17.

IMO, we need something like A-400M/AN-70 to fill the gap between MTA and C-17. Also, IMHO, we cannot let the gap exist below MTA...As it is, we are supposed to be acquiring 45+MTA...while tonnage wise this may represent more airlift...there is no getting around the absolute number of a/c required.

[Singha]

we will ofcourse need 150 MTA (15 squadrons) to make any dent on the tactical transport problem, support airmobile brigades etc. 45+ MTA is a joke. this has got to be our C-130 - a jack of all trades and master of all trades...in dozens of roles ranging from gunships to elint to psyops to casevac ...

[Austin]

Its possible the sub 10T category will be taken care by Medium Lift Helicopter , while MTA can lift cargo worth of 3 An-26. While more C-130J will be procured.

It will boil down to operating cost and uptimes between An-26 versus MTA/C-130 , more then the absolute numbers is what will matter how many is available at any point in time and what is their operating cost per sortie.

The gap between MTA and C-17 can be filled by procuring IL-476 or A-400M , the IL-476 with 40- 60 T payload cost $100million factory price , not sure how much a A-400M will cost.

[Pratyush]

Rohit,

I am not clear regarding the need for sub 10 ton lifter for the IAF. The way I look at it is. IF the 20 ton lifter is available then it can lift more into a given situation as compared to a ten ton lifter. But that does not mean that it will only carry a full load. It can carry a lessor load as well.

Also an aircraft carrying more load an plane its mission in such a way that it makes multiple stops and dilivers its cargo at different ALGs. (Though have no idea how viable it will be in actual practice). In theory one aircraft doing the job of 2 or 3 planes of lessor capability.

So even if the sub 10 ton catagory is left alone the IAF should do fine as long as the numbers are not allowed to go down. As the MTA will have to replace both the Hs 748 and the An 32. The IAF should have arround 130 (??) examples of the 2 flying.

JMT..

[johnny_m]

The Russians may be doing more harm to our long-term interests than the Americans, American sales to Pakistan or Military Aide does not alter the balance of power in the region. But Russia is giving the Chinese technology to make fourth and fifth generation fighters. The Chinese could not manage much more than Mig 21 copies when the Russians sold them Su 27 and its design.

Now this post from Key Pub http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpo ... tcount=430

shows that the Chinese fifth generation is actually a stealthy modified MiG 1.44.

Russian would sell you his **** if you have enough money.

[Singha]

the re-engined and upgraded AN32's will likely soldier on for a decade more. we had better get the MTA into full production by then or be nook nood.

perhaps the austere cargo version of C-130 (if they build a new version this decade) fits the bill as a potential direct replacement for the An32. the airframe is proven - new fuel sipping engines, blind navigation system, weather radar, tacacs and modest glass cockpit will be enough.

the new CH53X supposed to come online in 2014 might be a good product to consider for the Mi26T role (if Chinooks dont meet that spec).

[DavidD]

The Russians may be doing more harm to our long-term interests than the Americans, American sales to Pakistan or Military Aide does not alter the balance of power in the region. But Russia is giving the Chinese technology to make fourth and fifth generation fighters. The Chinese could not manage much more than Mig 21 copies when the Russians sold them Su 27 and its design.

Now this post from Key Pub http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpo ... tcount=430

shows that the Chinese fifth generation is actually a stealthy modified MiG 1.44.

Russian would sell you his **** if you have enough money.

How does it show the Chinese 5th gen is a modified 1.44? The closest to a revealing photo of the JXX is the cockpit mockup, everything else is little more than design concepts(including the WS-15 engine). There is no info reliable info on how it'll look like, but the most prevalent belief on Chinese message boards seems to be that it'll look something like this:

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/2513 ... 254646.jpg

[Pratyush]

SNIP...........

The harm is done because we are not able to design and develop products by ourselves.

[shukla]

City’s IAF station top destination for cadets from abroad
Times of India

Said to be among the IAF's oldest ground training institutes, the MTI, celebrating 75 years of its existence, imparts skills in the mechanical trades to freshly-inducted airmen as well as in-service officers and airmen. "We train airmen from many countries including the European Union. However, those from South East Asian countries outnumber the others. Some defence personnel from many African countries too, come here," Air Officer Commanding of the station, Air Commodore Sanjay Sharma, said on the sidelines of the platinum jubilee celebrations of MTI on Thursday. Before being shifted to Tambaram in 1947, the MTI was located in Secunderabad in Andhra Pradesh.

The syllabus for all cadets, irrespective of their nationalities, is the same. Air warriors are imparted skills in airframe, engine and weapon trades. The first involves maintenance and servicing of airframes and its accessories while the other two involve training in undertaking repairs and servicing of gas turbine engines and armaments. "A uniform syllabus is followed for all. However, the duration varies between three and eight months depending on the nature of the training," said Verma.

The instructors here are said to be facing a unique problem. Unlike doemstic air warriors, those from South East Asian countries, especially Myanmar and Bhutan, are slow in learning the nuance of military tactics, mainly due to their poor communication skills, and this makes the instructors' job more challenging. "Our experience helps us. We try to understand their difficulties and teach them accordingly," said an air force officer.

[SriSri]

Air Force Mi-17 Helicopter Crashes in Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh

[shukla]

Air Force Mi-17 Helicopter Crashes in Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh

11 feared dead, (2 pilots & 10 Jawans were on board)

[Pratyush]

RIP boys...........

The aircraft can be replaced but the lives cannot be.

[Austin]

^^^Hope they find some survivors , RIP