Indian Military Aviation

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 09 Apr 2010 08:29

negi, in exercises between AdlA m2k and USAF f-16's, m2k routinely came out on top.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 09 Apr 2010 09:20

negi wrote:CM turning and twisting was never M2K's forte it is a Mig alley , but if you noticed how Israelis used their Mirages against more maneuverable Migs you would realise there is more than one way to skin a cat , and in today's age of BVR missiles specially backed by a radar in class of RDY-2 , M2K can give the Blk50/52 a run for its money . Having said that imo it is the AIM 120 C5's in PAF arsenal which have increased their capability by a significant amount .

Yes, operational tactics and playing to your strengths make a world of difference; however, I have not heard of the Israelis tackling fulcrums with any great success, not with Mirages nor with solahs (although current solahs have markedly improved thanks to an HMS). Heard that a couple of IAF Raam downed a couple of Syrian fulcrums in the early 2000s. No doubt also that the mirages cleaned up on fishbeds in years gone by, although iirc, TSP pilots who were far better trained gave the Yehudis a nice run for their money.

HOwever, from what I've read, in earlier times, solahs, atharahs, 2000s all were wiped pretty clean by fulcrums thanks to the HMS/Archer combo. FWIW, a gent who served as instructor at Laage and had about 500 hours on the Luftwaffe fulcrum stated that it turned better (STR/ITR) than an Eagle, but not the solah. Also, iirc, "moose" (or one of the other USAF jocks) of Cope India 04/05 fame did mention being totally impressed by the M2k's nose pointing ability.

But no dissing the 2000; afterall, in the one instance they did meet for real, the M2k kicked batootie! Yes, M2k-5s with Mica/RDY can surely pose serious problems to the blk-50, esp. if like the Greeks, you can train against the solah! So, ultimately tactics make all the difference.

CM.

CM.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 09 Apr 2010 09:57

Cain Marko wrote:... Yes, M2k-5s with Mica/RDY can surely pose serious problems to the blk-50, esp. if like the Greeks, you can train against the solah!..

The Singapore AF would come in real handy in that regard. (as will any further Indo-Khanate exercises, providing the khans bring their solahs along with the pandrahs)

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 09 Apr 2010 09:59

I have a recent AFM where there is a very nice article by a USAF jock of excercises with the Solah and some East Yuropean AF Fulcrums will try to post it on ze wkend....

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 09 Apr 2010 11:47

andy B wrote:I have a recent AFM where there is a very nice article by a USAF jock of excercises with the Solah and some East Yuropean AF Fulcrums will try to post it on ze wkend....

This is a pretty good read.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... 5.html#top

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 09 Apr 2010 12:09

Viv S wrote:
andy B wrote:I have a recent AFM where there is a very nice article by a USAF jock of excercises with the Solah and some East Yuropean AF Fulcrums will try to post it on ze wkend....
This is pretty good read.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... 5.html#top

Thanks have read that one before the article that I have has some very similar points too.

Having said that the above article is comparing the solah C with the fulcrum A. It will be interesting to see what happens once the Fulcrums get updated as with a glass cockpit their cockpit workload is going to be significantly reduced in addition HOTAS will make it a lot faster to work around the cockpit not to mention mucho easier to read critical info on MFDs with a mucho better radar than the original 019. Not sure if the series 3 produces more thrust but it will always be welcome plus it will also have the Adder to fall back on (IAF fulcurms already have em IIRC)

Sree · Post by **Sree** » 09 Apr 2010 13:35

This is pretty good read.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... 5.html#top

... the above article is comparing the solah C with the fulcrum A. ...

Guys:

When using the above Code One article, to inform comparisons between any F-16 variant and any other aircraft type - bear in mind that Code One Magazine is a Lockheed Martin publication.

Not necessarily the most neutral arbiter, when the F-16 is involved.

Regards

Sree

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 09 Apr 2010 18:05

IAF to Revamp Pilot Training

The training programme for pilots in the Indian Air Force (IAF) has been stalled since its basic trainer, the HPT-32 Deepak, was grounded after a crash that killed two pilots in July last year. The major flaws included the engine, which shuts down due to the absence of fuel flow during aerial manoeuvring, as well as other aircraft design issues.

However, the state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), which manufactures the HPT-32 Deepak, has been directed to fit a number of trainer aircraft with a Ballistic Recovery System (BRS).The proposition is that each HPT-32 Deepak aircraft should have an enormous parachute that opens when the engine shuts off and enables the aircraft to slowly come down with the crew still in their seats.

As for the Indian Defence Ministry, a fast-track purchase of 75 aircraft from the international market has been approved to replace the “Stage-1″ Deepak, but the aircraft will only come through by 2013-14 to the IAF.

As per the hierarchy of the training exercises that the IAF carried out till last year, a trainee pilot would get eighty hours of basic training on the HPT-32 Deepak aircraft before selected pilots graduated to the second stage of fighter pilot training on the Kiran Mark-1 aircraft. The third and final stage of training was on the Kiran Mark-2 aircraft.

However, due to the lack of the first stage trainer aircraft, the IAF is conducting basic training on a jet aircraft which is the Kiran Mark-1 aircraft. Although there is a risk entailed in conducting basic training on a jet-engined aircraft like the Kiran Mark-1 aircraft, the IAF has little choice since it needs fighter pilots to graduate and fly the aircraft it possesses.

As for HAL, it is also developing an Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT) called the ‘Sitara’ to replace the Kiran Mark-1 used in the second stage of the IAF training. The IAF has ordered a limited series production of 12 aircraft. However, these will also take some time before they are supplied to the IAF. As for the third stage of IAF training, the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer (AJT) is slowly replacing the Kiran Mark-2 aircraft.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 10 Apr 2010 00:54

MC-130J Combat Super Hercules, With Indian Tricolour, Gets Ready For IAF

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_QKkSf03VuFY/S ... tion-1.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QKkSf03VuFY/S ... line-1.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QKkSf03VuFY/S ... tops-1.jpg

Brahmananda · Post by **Brahmananda** » 10 Apr 2010 01:55

nice pics of the c-130J, cant wait to see these babies flying in india.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Apr 2010 02:18

While going through an earlier issue of AW&ST (Feb 1, 2010) I came across an interesting advert, which might be of interest from the upcoming tanker tender perspective.

It’s an ad by IAI (Israel Aircraft Industries) for a Future Tanker Transport Aircraft, called the IAI-BEDEK. It shows a Boeing 767 tanker refuelling a Mirage-2000 and Su-30MKI through drogue, and an F-16 through a boom. Essentially, a config similar to the Boeing 767 tanker proposal except for the winglets on the Boeing proposal.

It then describes it as
-B767 conversion to a Multi Mission Tanker Transport (MMTT) in various configurations
-Conversion to Smart Tactical Tankers (STT)
- AAR system integration on B767, B707, C-130 and Il-78 aircraft (did they have anything to do with the IL-78 Midas in the IAF? I thought that the Il-78s in IAF used Chobham drogue systems)

After the cancellation of the tanker deal, and with Boeing indicating that they’re not sure if they’ll participate in the IAF tender given that they’re concentrating on the USAF one, could IAI be trying to gain entry from the side door by offering a tanker conversion using existing airframes available in the market?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Apr 2010 04:25

Quick question re. M2k upgrade - For A2A, CCM - will they load up on Mica IIR or buy ASRAAM? IIRC, the Mica with TVC and what not (Plus being just 20kgs more than the ASRAAM) was supposedly some shakes up close as well?

CM

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Apr 2010 05:05

Cain Marko wrote:Quick question re. M2k upgrade - For A2A, CCM - will they load up on Mica IIR or buy ASRAAM? IIRC, the Mica with TVC and what not (Plus being just 20kgs more than the ASRAAM) was supposedly some shakes up close as well?

CM

yup, the intent of the design was to offer maximum commonality for a BVR and WVR weapon to reduce costs by increasing the production numbers. The only difference between the two versions lies in the seeker, datalink and the pylon interfaces (IR requires nitrogen cooling through umbilicals).

And very few IR weapons can actually be used at BVR ranges, which is a testament to the quality of the IR seeker on the MICA. aerodynamic friction leading to heating of the seeker can basically reduce IR seeker sensitivity which tends to restrict the range of IR missiles. And it is supposed to have very good ability to reject counter-measures like flares.

plus, the LOBL and LOAL features are there on the MICA IR even while being used from BVR ranges, giving the pilot almost silent interception capability..use one Mirage-2000-5 to detect a bogey with its RDY-2 or have an AWACS pass the target data and the launching platform far away can keep its nose cold and fire the MICA IR in LOAL mode. almost no MAWS can detect a BVR MICA IR plume when its launched 30-40 kms away. Then it'll cruise up to the target, lock-on to the target without any warning and then homes in, all the while undetected.

I wonder if we'll get to know just how many MICA's the IAF will order..

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Apr 2010 05:52

FWIW, MiG-27 engine upgrade seems definitely on the cards, at least for the 40 upgraded birds.

CM.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 10 Apr 2010 08:05

Cain Marko wrote:FWIW, MiG-27 engine upgrade seems definitely on the cards, at least for the 40 upgraded birds.

CM.

Is it worth upgrading them at this stage of life ,Darin upgrades are ok but engine upgrades for a aircraft which will be phased out in a decade time

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Apr 2010 08:35

Any news on Jag and Tejas engine selection ?

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 10 Apr 2010 08:53

Didnt know mirage can also do this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb0mWd3T ... re=related

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Apr 2010 09:55

Some of our new roads are better paved than our runways so not a big deal . Stretches of Pune mumbai expressway can very well be utilized if need arises.

vishal · Post by **vishal** » 10 Apr 2010 10:50

Just saw this in a month old issue of AW&ST. The IAF is listed as an export customer for SAP-518 & SAP-14 centreline EW pods.

"Descriptions of their capabilities sound much like standard jamming techniques offered by the US's ALQ-99."

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Apr 2010 12:30

negi wrote:Some of our new roads are better paved than our runways so not a big deal . Stretches of Pune mumbai expressway can very well be utilized if need arises.

Just keep in mind that every runway or road used as a runway has something known as a Load Classification Number (LCN) or a Pavement Classification Number (PCN). If you want aircraft to be operating from such roads (unlimited operations), their LCN has to be higher than the Aircraft Classification Number (ACN). Its not necessary that just because the roads look well paved that they can withstand the kind of loads a fighter would put on them. Large trucks distribute their loads over several wheels thereby not having the kind of concentrated loads that fighters with 2 main landing gears would put on them. Even the aircraft tires are designed keeping this in mind. Carrier fighters have the highest psi air pressure, those operating from concrete runways have high pressure tires and those that need to operate from runways with surface irregularities need lower tire pressures..lowest for off-road operations.

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Apr 2010 12:52

I am aware of those , however LCN numbers are usually used in conjunction with larger AC , we are talking about fighters using specific stretches of road in emergency situations only not as a regular airstrip . PAF has already demonstrated the capability with Mirage-IIIs and F-7s on Islamabad-Lahore expressway unless people are trying to say the expressway project was conceived keeping air ops in mind I don't see how it is not possible for any modern freeway built to contemporary standards to be used for such operations in case of an emergency . Light fighters like Gripen, Mig-21 and even M2Ks should be able to do this as long airstrip is long and wide enough and lamp posts and obstacles removed.

At this point in time we are not even concerned with bring back load if you observe even PAF video showed the Mirages landing in clean config .

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 10 Apr 2010 17:36

Juggi G wrote:MC-130J Combat Super Hercules, With Indian Tricolour, Gets Ready For IAF

IAF will be using for our SFs, but technically it is a "C-130J" and not a "MC-130J". Likely some features from the MC-130 are missing.

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 10 Apr 2010 18:27

For the serialnumber junkies - did you notice K3801 on the board? ......nice.......

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 10 Apr 2010 18:50

will this go to a No 38 sqdn ?

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 10 Apr 2010 18:51

Rahul M wrote:will this go to a No 38 sqdn ?

I hope not. There are a couple of still numberplated Transport Squadrons (19 and 42) that need some resurrection first.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 10 Apr 2010 18:53

thx. any details on the AEW&C sqdns ?

P.S. caption for this pic http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... 4.jpg.html says

An Indian air force IL-78 air-to-air refueller lands at Lajes Field July 13. The IAF stopped at Lajes Field on their way to Red Flag at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. This is the first time the IAF has deployed to the United States. Two IL-78s and one IL-76 transport aircraft escorted eight SU-30 MKI aircraft to Lajes Field. (Photo by Master Sgt. Charles Beha)

there was the jag deployment earlier.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 10 Apr 2010 19:18

IAF wants national policy on aerospace technology

'It's high time a national policy on aerospace technology is put on a fast track to achieve self-reliance in the sector and scale up manufacturing various types of aircraft for military and civilian operations, with greater involvement of the private sector,' IAF Vice Chief Air Marshal Pranab Kumar Barbora said here at a national convention on aeronautical technologies.

Regretting that India missed out in developing middle level technologies post-independence, Barbora said though the manufacturing sector was able to produce a passenger car (Landmaster/Ambassador) in 1960s and achieved near self-reliance in space technology in the subsequent decades, the absence of any development in the aerospace industry had created a void.

'Though we are a major economic power to reckon with in South Asia, we have not leveraged it to bargain for greater access to aerospace technologies or attracting overseas investment through joint ventures to develop our state-run or private industry,' Barbora told about 700 delegates participating in the two-day convention.

The role of aerospace industry is not limited to meeting defence needs but to civilian applications (also) as the aviation sector plays a vital role in the economic growth of the country. While China produced an entire Airbus, some of our state-run firms like Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) supply only doors or under carriage for passenger jets,' Barbora lamented.

Pointing out that indigenisation was not happening at the pace it should have for speeding up self-reliance, Barbora said the country was lagging behind in completing projects like the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) or Kaveri engine even two decades after they were taken up.

'The government must encourage the private sector by assuring firm orders to recover investments made in developing the technologies and products. Ban on defence exports by the private sector should be lifted to ensure the industry attracts more entrepreneurs, explore joint ventures with overseas firms and secure technology transfers,' Barbora pointed out.

Admitting developing sophisticated aerospace technologies takes longer time, Barbora said a sound national policy would enable the stakeholders to work in a time frame and deliver the equipment required for the armed forces, especially the IAF, which was spending billions of dollars in buying aircraft and spare parts from global aerospace majors.

'If we don't produce in time, others will take advantage of our delays and sell their products to us. The Indian aerospace industry should not only produce for defence and civil aviation sectors, but also to export,' Barbora said, adding Pakistan exports more than India does.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 10 Apr 2010 20:43

'Vayu Shakti - 2010' Videos and Photographs

http://indianairforce.nic.in/

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 10 Apr 2010 22:46

Kakarat wrote:'Vayu Shakti - 2010' Videos and Photographs

http://indianairforce.nic.in/

Thanks! Good bandwidth on the site too!

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 10 Apr 2010 22:47

Kakarat wrote:'Vayu Shakti - 2010' Videos and Photographs

http://indianairforce.nic.in/

Thanks for that.

sum · Post by **sum** » 10 Apr 2010 23:31

What is the logo on the T-shirt?
Who are these guys, Garuds?

Y. Kanan · Post by **Y. Kanan** » 11 Apr 2010 00:08

negi wrote:Having said that imo it is the AIM 120 C5's in PAF arsenal which have increased their capability by a significant amount .

The PAF gaining such a potent BVR capability (with the most proven and effective BVR missile ever built) was a very significant milestone. It was part of a larger pattern over the last decade where the PAF (and the Pakistani armed forces in general) have increasingly caught up to us in every area where we'd previously enjoyed superiority.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 11 Apr 2010 03:39

A more Direct Link to Indian Air Force - Vayu Shakti 2010

http://www.indianairforce.nic.in/show_vayushakti.php

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2010 06:00

Juggi G wrote:A more Direct Link to Indian Air Force - Vayu Shakti 2010

http://www.indianairforce.nic.in/show_vayushakti.php

Great- this needs to be placed in the Military multimedia thread too..

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 10:49

X-post from R&D

IAF vice-chief prefers reverse engg to build defence systems

IAF Vice-Chief Air Marshal Pranab Kumar Barbora today suggested India should go the Chinese way by gathering technical data to produce defence equipment through reverse engineering.

Addressing a gathering at a convention of The Frontiers of Aeronautical Technologies and 61st AGM in Bangalore, Air Marshal Babora said, “Do reverse engineering. Don't be scared. Our neighbours are already doing it. If someone does not give you, and you want it, do reverse engineering.”

His comments, however, might not go down well with Americans and Europeans, who are finding it hard to protect their intellectual property rights.

Reverse engineering is a process of analysing a technology to ascertain how it was designed. The knowledge is then used to build the equipment or system or make improvements to it without using any physical part of the original.

Critical of the defence industry’s inability to be self-reliant in producing indegenous systems for defence and aerospace requirements, Air Marshal Barbora said, “We have got the best brains, but it has to be focussed to get the product.”

Prodding the defence establishment and manufacturers to go for joint ventures and get the technological knowhow of systems, Barbora said: “No country has produced fighter aircraft on its own. It has been a joint effort of like-minded countries.”

These comments are quite significant, especially in the wake of 'going indigenous' drive..

vishal · Post by **vishal** » 11 Apr 2010 14:02

^^
What is even more heartening is that they are not being made by an outgoing chief as is usually the case.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 16:23

vishal wrote:^^
What is even more heartening is that they are not being made by an outgoing chief as is usually the case.

X-post from R&D..

It is a MONUMENTAL statement - as it comes from a high ranked official in the current' establishment!!I am not sure if it stems just from lack of belief in the current R&D setup or just pure frustration from lack of optimal results (and especially 'on time') which has crippled the workforce..

Whatever the reason it is of extreme proportions by any means, especially as India has never adopted or shown an inclination towards such an approach... If this can be actually achieved or not is just another debate altogether.. but the fact that one of the officials has shown an interest of such an approach would be paradigm shift in a one dimensional approach with stress on indigenization.

Reverse engineering!!! Weather this is a right approach or not the question. Till two days ago such a debate with regards to India adopting such an approach could not have be imagined. The world in general has condemned such an approach, as the one adopted by China for example. The Americans, Russians, etc are already struggling with intellectual property rights. We already know that the Russians have started refusing sale of high tech equipment to China citing this very approach.

From my point of view, there are should only be two approaches.. You either accept that you don't have the capability or the expertise or the resources or the funding to build - and "you buy." Or you use everything that you've got, invest heavily and work to the best of your ability to "build and invent." I don't think there is a middle ground. We have shown that we have the R&D expertise to come up with necessary goods like the Nag, IAC, Nuclear subs,.. We are able to address this issue but just not in a timely fashion. Its not to say that we have achieved everything we have set out to achieve..but its better to have tried and failed then not tried at all.. In which circumstances we can buy or go in for JV's. The last thing we want to do is to send wrong signals to the countries selling us high tech equipments. If we do adopt such an approach, we might never build an indigenous industry capable of surviving independently. We still want to be in a position to be able to buy systems we cant build.

Though the middle ground would seem far quicker.. Using reverse engineering or "announcing the adoption" of such an approach would only be counterproductive in a larger scheme of things. In the end if we do use such an approach we would eventually be boycotted the sale of high tech equipment and end up being pushed in the corner to go indigenous. Why not adopt self-reliance first up?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 11 Apr 2010 17:00

I've a lot of respect for AM Barbora, I just wish he didn't make this statement in public.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 17:55

Ukraine offers to co-develop transport aircraft with India

"Ukraine has offered to jointly produce a 10-12 tonne class weight aircraft with us based on their already existing Antonov-148 commercial aircraft and the proposal is being considered by the government," defence ministry officials told PTI.

The payload carrying capacity of the proposed aircraft -- An-178, offered by the Ukrainians to the Indian Air Force, will be between that of the C-130J and the force's workhorse An-32 aircraft, they added. The C-130J Hercules, which will be delivered to India in the first quarter next year, can carry around 20 tonnes and the An-32s can carry a payload of around six tonnes.

If the Ukrainian proposal is approved, this will be the second such co-development programme for transport aircraft after India and Russia signed a contract for developing the Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA) few years back. The Ukrainian government has also offered to manufacture and export the proposed aircraft to friendly countries, officials said.

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Apr 2010 19:15

Interesting interview with Air chief in NDTV. Some points ( just caught a few mins):

* Says IAF NEVER involved in offensive air-ops in internal matters,even in J&K. But, then slightly contradicts himself when he says that in J&K( and Congo), IAF sets aside sectors and specific areas where they find no civilian present. In those places, pilots given a free hand.

* Says that project MAFIA ( Modernisation of Air field Infrastructure) is in full swing and is a top priority.

* Very UNHAPPY ( didn't hide his disgust) with the LCA project since the last 20 years when he has been hearing about it. Hopes that the project has at least turned the corner and wil deliver.

* Pretty happy with LCH. IAF deeply involved at all stages of this project. However, feel long way to go still for it to be fully ready.

Need to catch the whole interview( re-telecast) for more points.