Indian Military Aviation

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 25 Mar 2010 14:48

Hindustan Times

Air Force Eyes US KC-130J Tankers
Rahul Singh , Hindustan Times
Atlanta, March 24, 2010
First Published: 23:50 IST(24/3/2010)

The Indian Air Force appears to have shifted into overdrive to expand the reach of its fighter planes, enabling them to deploy swiftly to distant theatres of operations. It is toying with the idea of buying tankers from the US to reinforce its aerial refuelling capabilities.

The air force’s interest in US military contractor Lockheed Martin’s KC-130J tanker, used by the Marines, follows the cancellation of a proposed $2 billion (Rs 9,000 crore) deal for importing six Airbus 330 tankers manufactured by European aerospace major EADS.

The IAF, which currently operates the Ilyushin-78 tankers, is leaning on an existing contract to place orders for KC-130J tankers. It had ordered six C-130J Super Hercules transport planes, configured for special operations and airborne assault, three years back in a deal worth $1.2 billion (Rs 5,400 crore) under the US government’s foreign military sales programme. Military contracts usually have a provision for placing follow on orders.

Jack Crisler, who heads Lockheed Martin’s International Air Mobility Programs, told Hindustan Times, “The IAF has sought details about the capabilities of the KC-130J tanker (a variant of the C-130J). There’s a strong indication that it may place a follow on order for six tankers.” The first C-130J will be delivered to the IAF early next year. Indian Pilots will Kick Off Conversion Training on the C-130Js at Lockheed Martin’s Marietta facility where the plane is manufactured and Little Rock Air Force Base in Arkansas.

The finance ministry has put the air force on rocky ground by refusing to support the proposed acquisition of Airbus 330 MRTT (multi-role tanker transport) arguing that they were overpriced. The IAF had chosen the Airbus platform over Il-78 tankers after exhaustive trials.

The hunt for new tankers will not end with the KC-130J as the defence ministry is likely to float a fresh international tender for longer range tankers.

The KC-130J can tank up not only fighter planes but also helicopters, enabling them to remain airborne longer.

The air force’s existing helicopter fleet cannot be aerially refuelled.

But the New Class of Attack and Heavy-lift Choppers that India Proposes to Acquire are Configured for Mid-Air Refuelling, a Senior IAF Officer said.

sum · Post by **sum** » 25 Mar 2010 15:08

The finance ministry has put the air force on rocky ground by refusing to support the proposed acquisition of Airbus 330 MRTT (multi-role tanker transport) arguing that they were overpriced. The IAF had chosen the Airbus platform over Il-78 tankers after exhaustive trials.

The hunt for new tankers will not end with the KC-130J as the defence ministry is likely to float a fresh international tender for longer range tankers.

Am confused onlee.... What is this short range and long range refuellers? Why cant we have one single type insstead of a refueller circus?

Also, if A-330 is deemed too expensive, how on earth will KC-130 be cheaper? Also, what is the point of another round of tender when the only reason for rejection was price? Cant simple bargaining be done with Airbus instead of restating the whole process??

The article raises more questions than answers!!!!

JimmyJ · Post by **JimmyJ** » 25 Mar 2010 15:13

sum wrote:

Am confused onlee.... What is this short range and long range refuellers? Why cant we have one single type insstead of a refueller circus?

Philosophy saar just "new design philosophy"

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Mar 2010 15:35

Why not opt for IL-76 with the Westernized and fuel efficient PS-90A2 engine and end IAF misery and get the logistics advantage.

Why cant those babu and IAF just make life simple rather then make it more complex and imaginative.

I mean why should solution be always complex and time consuming.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 25 Mar 2010 16:09

Austin-> I am guessing an answer to your question and that is the Il-78's will be clase to thier stall speed if they are refuelling Helicopters, hence go for turboprop based KC-130J refueller.

for Fighter Jets the IL-78 is more appropriate.

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 25 Mar 2010 16:23

But even then why do those VIP helicopters need refuelling? Can't they plan the flightplan keeping in mind the refuelling stops? IMHO if VIPs need to travel long distances then they always have those VIP jets at their disposal. For aerial surveys of flood hit areas and attending the pre-election meetings the range of these helos is sufficient. Just another wasteful spending by our Babus.

The only practical application, that I can think of, of aerial refuelling for Helos is SAR missions over sea.

Added later : Isn't refuelling a helo with, say, President or PM on board risky?

Cheers....

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Mar 2010 16:33

I think a more appropriate thing to do will be to refuel one chopper by the other .

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 25 Mar 2010 17:30

neerajb wrote:But even then why do those VIP helicopters need refuelling?

In general I assume it is for a time when the Helo is serving as a flying command center during war or so.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Mar 2010 17:50

we dont even have a fixed wing command center which is a lot easier to fit out in space & power.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 25 Mar 2010 18:49

I just don't understand the Indian need to create museums, be it fighters or tankers, event with AWACS we are looking at 2 different types, Why cant stuff be standardized.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 25 Mar 2010 22:03

Juggi G wrote:Air Force Eyes US KC-130J Tankers
But the New Class of Attack and Heavy-lift Choppers that India Proposes to Acquire are Configured for Mid-Air Refuelling, a Senior IAF Officer said.

Didn't know LCH was capable of tanking mid flight??? when was this feature incorporated???
And if they are not talking about LCH then what other attack helo's are we planning to buy...

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 25 Mar 2010 23:00

Bala Vignesh wrote:
Didn't know LCH was capable of tanking mid flight??? when was this feature incorporated???
And if they are not talking about LCH then what other attack helo's are we planning to buy...

Bala Vignesh ji,

According to one recent brainstorming in the Army, the attack helo types are going to be operating right up there in the FEBA.

They will take the heaviest hit as well as the majority of the early casualties.

Hardly the time and place to be tanking. The tanker will be a nice juicy target for some happy jet jock with a BVR.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 25 Mar 2010 23:06

chetak wrote:
Bala Vignesh wrote:
Didn't know LCH was capable of tanking mid flight??? when was this feature incorporated???
And if they are not talking about LCH then what other attack helo's are we planning to buy...

Bala Vignesh ji,

According to one recent brainstorming in the Army, the attack helo types are going to be operating right up there in the FEBA.

They will take the heaviest hit as well as the majority of the early casualties.

Hardly the time and place to be tanking. The tanker will be a nice juicy target for some happy jet jock with a BVR.

My thoughts exactly, chetakji..

so why procure an aerial tanker that can only tank helicopters or small planes for our aerial tankers... its just dumb in my opinion...

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 25 Mar 2010 23:26

Bala Vignesh wrote: My thoughts exactly, chetakji..

so why procure an aerial tanker that can only tank helicopters or small planes for our aerial tankers... its just dumb in my opinion...

Bala Vignesh ji,

Maybe it's like the official paki wish list being discussed in the US?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 25 Mar 2010 23:33

sathyaC wrote:when in the world we will the LCH take 2 air

sathyaC ji,

It may be that HAL is confused because the LCH has a tail wheel.

They are now talking end of the month. (end of the financial year syndrome?)

These guys have truly proved that IST is indeed Indian stretchable time!

The LCH area is cordoned off and no body is talking.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 25 Mar 2010 23:42

Bala Vignesh wrote:Didn't know LCH was capable of tanking mid flight??? when was this feature incorporated???
And if they are not talking about LCH then what other attack helo's are we planning to buy...

Elementary, Bala. The stage is set for the Apache. There isn't the slightest of doubts in my mind now that the IA is getting Apaches as its next heavy attack helicopters. Followed by Chinooks as the heavy utility chopper and a new heavy class CSAR chopper (AW-101 follow-on ?), all with aerial refuelling capability.

And while others are whining about the use of this, or why the KC-130J is being looked into, concerned about the IAF's fleet looking like a zoo, I feel its actually a good idea. the reason is the Il-78 cannot refuel choppers due to its much higher speeds. a turbo-prop KC-130J is far more suited to such tasks.

SAR roles especially require refuelling unless bases are closely interspersed, since their missions for locating downed personnel or trapped civilians can take hours in all kinds of weather. This will be especially true in the North East where jungles and mountainous terrain make it hard to locate anyone and bad weather is common, and the combination of bad weather and fuel status means many SAR missions are called off, which can doom the victim/s.

And as the IAF and IN begin to operate more and more in waters far from the coasts, they will see more and more incidents where crew may be out at sea far from any land base and far from the radius of existing CSAR choppers (Chetak) which are very short ranged for this role.

It wasn't a problem till now because the Sea Harrier was range limited and even then its radius of operations would be in a way, decided by how far a CSAR Chetak could get to from the carrier if the pilot had to bail out. not so with the newer fighters. the MiG-29Ks have far greater range and with buddy refuelling can get much further, putting them well out of the range of any nearby CSAR Chetaks or Dhruvs. The Su-30MKIs that fly to Andamans from Pune or Bareilly, they're all capable of flying very far from land and unless there are carriers nearby with Chetaks ready for CSAR, if anything untoward happens over the sea, you can kiss the crew good bye since no one can get to them or if they do they can't linger around to rescue them. they will need some long-range, high endurance choppers as well and they can only be tanked by other choppers or the KC-130J.

During combat its even more important to have this capability alongwith large CSAR helicopters that can reach battlezones, sometimes flying around enemy concentrations which means additional flight time and more fuel requirements. The same is true for large utility choppers as well.

BTW, there's something called "drafting", a term borrowed from other aerodynamic sources and used in racing as well. A helicopter flying behind a KC-130 during tanking ops actually uses less power as it uses trailing wing-tip vortices from the KC-130 to generate additional lift and consequently it can use less power, resulting in lower fuel burn while it is flying behind the tanker. I don't recall the exact figures from some trial, but its around 20-25% or so lower fuel burn.

sawant · Post by **sawant** » 26 Mar 2010 01:04

I have a newbie question ... arent choppers more vulnerable when refueling ... considering that their operating altitude is lower than most aircrafts... arent we better refuelling them thru trucks rather than high flying planes

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 26 Mar 2010 02:44

sawant wrote:I have a newbie question ... arent choppers more vulnerable when refueling ... considering that their operating altitude is lower than most aircrafts... arent we better refuelling them thru trucks rather than high flying planes

It is not possible to have refuelling trucks available at remote points. Besides it would mean it has to land which makes it a very easy target.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 26 Mar 2010 07:59

India lines up Israeli drones in race with Pak

NEW DELHI: New battlelines are being drawn for a spy drone versus spy drone face-off between India and Pakistan. Even as Islamabad continues to badger Washington to give it armed drones like `Predators', New Delhi is quietly working towards bolstering its fleet of reconnaissance and `killer' Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs).

In the latest such contract inked with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) a few days ago, India has ordered a few more `Heron' MALE (medium-altitude, long endurance) drones, ground control systems and data terminals for around Rs 700 crore, defence ministry sources said on Thursday.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 26 Mar 2010 14:54

Kartik sir,
I understand the quantum jump in our operational capabilities that a refuelling helicopters brings to us but we currently have no such aircraft in the inventory of any of the forces... so what's the point of buying tankers for these nonexistent aircrafts??? Also if we are planning to buy aircrafts with this capabilities then shouldn't we first concentrate on getting them???

A Noob doubt, Can the Dhruv be outfitted with a Refueling probe???

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 26 Mar 2010 16:07

^^^

Maybe reason behind rejecting IL78 is simpler then we all are thinking.

Porkies recently bought the same system, maybe that's why they don't want it and making all such excuses to buy a system that's zillion times costlier then current one.

just my 2 cents...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Mar 2010 16:33

if one can guarantee total air superiority and no enemy artillery or missiles, then fuel bladders can be airlifted into fwd areas by medium or heavy helicopters flying low and slow.

http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/ ... 2L-517.jpg

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 26 Mar 2010 19:31

Sid wrote:^^^

Maybe reason behind rejecting IL78 is simpler then we all are thinking.

Porkies recently bought the same system, maybe that's why they don't want it and making all such excuses to buy a system that's zillion times costlier then current one.

just my 2 cents...

True sidji,
But there is a significant difference between the systems we operate and the porkies operate...so that should not be a issue... And if you look at things like this, then Porkies operate a variant of the MiG21, which was till sometime ago, the mainstay of IAF...

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 26 Mar 2010 20:46

press release so posting in full

Indian Air Force Mig-29 Aircraft to Receive IFF from Thales

Thales has been awarded a contract by Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG (RSK-MiG) to deliver IFF1 Combined Interrogator Transponder (CIT) and Cryptographic National Secure Mode (NSM), for the retrofit of the MiG-29 multi-role fighter aircraft of the Indian Air Force. The first CIT will be delivered to RSK-MiG in 2010 and the first building block of a comprehensive secure identification capability in India mid-2011.

The IFF CIT equipment chosen in the TSB 2500 family offers a modern digital identification capability, compliant with the NATO Standard MKXA2modes. It will enable Indian Air Force MiG-29 fighter aircraft to be interoperable with western military aircrafts and so to avoid friendly fire. Moreover, the cryptographic mode will offer India a first national secure identification capability for protecting its own assets. According to the contract, Thales will deliver IFF for the whole Indian fleet of 63 MiG-29.

"This MiG-29 IFF retrofit perfectly illustrates the excellence of Thales's IFF solutions for the modernisation of existing aircraft" said Patrice Caine, Vice President, in charge of RadioCom activities at Thales. "We think, that one of Thales's missions is to provide our customers with solutions that can help them to be more efficient while ensuring a better protection. Thales's IFF secure solution fully meets this goal".

The TSB 2500 IFF Combined Interrogator Transponder is one of the most advanced systems compliant with the latest NATO and ICAO3 standards and regulations. It can securely operate either with cryptographic national mode or with the Mode 4 / Mode 5 NATO modes. More than 16,000 IFF equipments have been installed onboard more than one hundred types of platforms worldwide including airborne, ground and naval platforms.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 26 Mar 2010 21:30

Bala Vignesh wrote:Kartik sir,
I understand the quantum jump in our operational capabilities that a refuelling helicopters brings to us but we currently have no such aircraft in the inventory of any of the forces... so what's the point of buying tankers for these nonexistent aircrafts??? Also if we are planning to buy aircrafts with this capabilities then shouldn't we first concentrate on getting them???

A Noob doubt, Can the Dhruv be outfitted with a Refueling probe???

its actually the opposite. the part where helicopters recieve probes and their plumbing is modified is the easy part and even our existing Mi-17IV and Dhruv fleet can get them if the IAF states a requirement. That can be done by HAL or the BRDs themselves.

The thing that was missing was the capability to refuel them since we didn't have tankers and those that we do are too fast for helos.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 26 Mar 2010 21:46

Kartik wrote: its actually the opposite. the part where helicopters recieve probes and their plumbing is modified is the easy part and even our existing Mi-17IV and Dhruv fleet can get them if the IAF states a requirement. That can be done by HAL or the BRDs themselves.

The thing that was missing was the capability to refuel them since we didn't have tankers and those that we do are too fast for helos.

Oh... Didn't know that... If that is the case, then the procurement of KC130 is fine... But can't we modify an ATR or even AN32/26(if available) to do this role??? just a thought...

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 26 Mar 2010 23:04

Just in from Shiv's Blog
4 MMRCA contenders fail Leh trials...
This could very well spice things up... "Sincerely" hope the Super Viper hasn't failed...

...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 Mar 2010 23:16

all six have been tested yet ? I sure hope that counts the amriki birds out. the superbug anyway failed the desert trials, this will make it a failure in two subjects for it.

if this news is true, my guesses would be f-16, f-18, rafale, mig-35. could be grip instead of rafale as well.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 26 Mar 2010 23:19

^^Good! That should make it easy for the IAF to pick one shouldn't it?

I'm hazarding a guess here. Since it is likely that IAF's Mig-29s have already been tested in Hot and High conditions when they were inducted or sometime after that and we haven't heard of them ever facing any problems its unlikely that the Mig-35 (which is basically a glorified Mig-29) would face problems either.

Secondly, since the LCA presumably passed trials with the GE-F404 engine, the Gripen (which has yet to be tested at Leh) shouldn't face much of a problem with the same engine (and similar T/W ratio) either.

So one of these two should win!! My personal favorite is the Gripen. The single engined fighter will (probably) have a lower life cycle cost than the twin engined Mig-35 and there is nothing that the Mig-35 can do that the Gripen can't do just as well.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 26 Mar 2010 23:23

On second thought, there has to be something wrong with the news article. When exactly did they test the Mig-35? Do you mean to tell me that the Mig-35 was in India and the Bangalore jingoes failed to notice it?

Impossible!

We know the gripen hasn't been tested because it is being tested right now and they haven't even got to Leh yet.

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 26 Mar 2010 23:41

Rahul M wrote:all six have been tested yet ? I sure hope that counts the amriki birds out. the superbug anyway failed the desert trials, this will make it a failure in two subjects for it.

if this news is true, my guesses would be f-16, f-18, rafale, mig-35. could be grip instead of rafale as well.

Didn't IAF Mig-29s operate out of Leh? If yes, unlikely that Mg-35 would fail.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 Mar 2010 23:44

good point. personally, as long as those two f's are in that list, I don't care.

johnny_m · Post by **johnny_m** » 27 Mar 2010 01:47

My guess on the planes that failed.

Rafale Gripen Typhoon F 16

Mig 35 and Super Hornet

passes

saip · Post by **saip** » 27 Mar 2010 03:01

How can it be F16? Pakis are operating it for years not necessarily in Leh like conditions but would not they have tested it? They are clamoring for more of the same. True beggers cant be choosers and it may be that they dont intend to operate it in Leh/Siachen like conditions (assuming that both have simillar conditions)

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 27 Mar 2010 03:12

A person in the comment section says that Mig and Rafale made it through.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 27 Mar 2010 03:58

EXCLUSIVE: IAF Floats Tender For Six Amphibious Aircraft

...
The Indian Air Force has floated a brand new tender this month for six amphibious aircraft for "search and rescue missions, inter-island communication, rapid response duties and reconnaissance of islands". The IAF has set down a preference for a twin turboprop craft with a range of at least 800-nm.
...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Mar 2010 08:00

why IAF and why not IN ? strange.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 27 Mar 2010 08:11

Bala Vignesh wrote:Just in from Shiv's Blog
4 MMRCA contenders fail Leh trials...

Don't count anybody out just yet. As opposed to the desert and hot&humid climate, fighter aircrafts flying Leh is a rare thing. Not so with the transport aircrafts though. So I wonder what sort of weightage the Leh trials carry.

And is it also one of the reasons the aircraft manufacturers are being allowed to revise their bids? So that the fighters who have been dealt a moral blow in Leh can at least make up for it by lowering their prices?

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 27 Mar 2010 09:39

johnny_m wrote:My guess on the planes that failed.

Rafale Gripen Typhoon F 16

Mig 35 and Super Hornet passes

That's a really amazing guess since Gripen had not been tested yet when the news came out that 4 out of 6 aircraft had failed the startup test.

http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/23/stories ... 522200.htm

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 27 Mar 2010 23:41

for all we know... the gripen may have gone directly to leh from bangalore to catch the last bit of the winter... and it worked great too... so no point saying that the results are false since we have no concrete details... lets just wait and see how this pans out...