Indian Military Aviation

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 24 May 2010 11:02

shiv wrote:A 1000 km range CM hanging from a Sukhoi puts all sorts of interesting targets within reach.

I say 1 sqdn of say 20 - 24 ac should be based in A&N. We control the Bay of Bengal and a substantial part of SE Asia

K

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 24 May 2010 11:07

A question for Jagman and other jingos - Does IAF station Mirages in J&K?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 May 2010 11:14

not that I know of. initially all M2k (tigers & battle axes two sqdns + reserve) were in gwalior. it is alleged they have all moved to jamnagar where the tacde has also shifted from gwalior?

not sure if the third sqdn is also co-located?

Mig29 seem more common over J&K - avantipur (srinagar), Leh(?) and Thoise...perhaps their higher T:W imparts some advantage in cold and thin ops ?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 24 May 2010 12:02

Kersi D wrote:
shiv wrote:A 1000 km range CM hanging from a Sukhoi puts all sorts of interesting targets within reach.
I say 1 sqdn of say 20 - 24 ac should be based in A&N. We control the Bay of Bengal and a substantial part of SE Asia

K

And how do you know we aren't already doing something similar?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 24 May 2010 12:08

OK. How many of you Kuffrs in Capital of Kerala manage to get the glimpse of Rambha's thunder things, hainji??? And not to forget the deep throated roar of the injuns - which made the glass panes shake in moi office???

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 24 May 2010 12:37

Singha wrote:not that I know of. initially all M2k (tigers & battle axes two sqdns + reserve) were in gwalior. it is alleged they have all moved to jamnagar where the tacde has also shifted from gwalior?

not sure if the third sqdn is also co-located?

Mig29 seem more common over J&K - avantipur (srinagar), Leh(?) and Thoise...perhaps their higher T:W imparts some advantage in cold and thin ops ?

AFAIk, all 3 are still based at Maharajpur AFS, Gwalior. Already MiG-21s, Jaguars (No.6 sqdn) and a MiG-29 unit (other 2 at Adampur) are stationed at Jamnagar..when did you hear that No.1 and 7 sqdns moved to Jamnagar ?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 May 2010 12:52

singha ji, are you sure you are not confusing with the No6 moving out from lohegaon to jamnagar ? if not then this is new.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 24 May 2010 13:06

Singha wrote:not that I know of. initially all M2k (tigers & battle axes two sqdns + reserve) were in gwalior. it is alleged they have all moved to jamnagar where the tacde has also shifted from gwalior?

<SNIP>

Sirji, you got the movement wrong. TACDE shifted from Jamnagar to Gwalior once the Electronic War Range and ACMI stuff was established in Gwalior. And Mirages have always been at Gwalior. No peace time relocation for the unit - except for the regular stuff.

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 24 May 2010 16:21

Mihir.D wrote:From a poster on India-Forums Nirbhay will be available in MK1 and MK2 mods. Mk1 will be the tactical missile and will equip all present and future IAF fighters including MRCA and FGFA. It will have a range of 1200 KMs. The MK2 will be more of a strategic weapon with 2500KM range.

Now the point to ponder upon is the tactical applications/targets of a 1200KM missile and how Brahmos-2 and Nirbhay MK1 can be used in synch !!

Can you please post the poster over here ??

@Nirbhay missile
It would be interesting to know how much one missile will cost. If it its expensive like the Bhramos than it will get the status of priced possession which will some what undermine its role. Its not cost effective to fire a 3 million $ missile to take out a building. We ain't Amerikhans yet. Nirbhay should be cheap so the armed force can order massive numbers and fire as many.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 May 2010 17:18

Hellooooooo....

I saw the Avro "Hack" with LCA nosecone flying over HAL /Golf course twice today. Noticed it alsohas a thingy sticking out of the starboard fuselage that looks (from a great distance) like a Litening pod sticking out the side.

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 24 May 2010 17:21

^^Jingo hopes-
Might be carrying out tests of LCA MK-2's AESA radar. lol

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 17:34

I think it is time to embed a camera or two into those golf sticks. High Res, HD perhaps.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 24 May 2010 18:48

I can be BR's Plane spotter if they hire me and provide a good salary !! , just kidding People staying around HAL complex should buy a Nice DSLR i know they are dame expensive .

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 24 May 2010 19:22

smpratik wrote:@Nirbhay missile
It would be interesting to know how much one missile will cost. If it its expensive like the Bhramos than it will get the status of priced possession which will some what undermine its role. Its not cost effective to fire a 3 million $ missile to take out a building. We ain't Amerikhans yet. Nirbhay should be cheap so the armed force can order massive numbers and fire as many.

I am not saying that cost is not / never a factor. But let us look at its usefulness. If we have to launch 3 missiles to destroy a target let us not see the COST or the cost of the target, let us see the usefulness of the target.

For arguments sake let us use say 3 Brahmos (costing say US$ 2.0 million each) to destroy a patrol boat (costing say US$ 10.0 million each). If this patrol boat costing US$ 10 million can cause a US$ 50 million damage, use ONE MORE Brahmos to make sure it is destroyed !!

Our Indian lives and assets are too precious !!!

There is no such thing as an overkill !!

K

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 19:30

I am not sure if I understand this discussion between Bhramos and Nirbhay.

For one the AF Brahmos weighs in at 2500 Kgs, while the Nirbhay is supposed to be around 1000!!!

Also, I would expect the Nirbhay to be inducted much earlier. Much of the technologies are in place, integration, testing and tweeking are the main components I would think.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 24 May 2010 19:44

NRao wrote:I am not sure if I understand this discussion between Bhramos and Nirbhay.

For one the AF Brahmos weighs in at 2500 Kgs, while the Nirbhay is supposed to be around 1000!!!

Also, I would expect the Nirbhay to be inducted much earlier. Much of the technologies are in place, integration, testing and tweeking are the main components I would think.

I too am unsure about the differences.,

But I am game for anything that creates a big bang on people who do not like India or Indians !!!

I am game for anything that gives "brown pants" to those who do not like India or Indians !!!

K

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 May 2010 20:34

if nirbhay appears @ 1000kg, each MKI will be able to carry 3 @ 2200lb each - centerline and inboard pylons and a couple of bvr missiles on fuselage and couple of srams on outboard.

and every other fighter in IAF will be able to manage 2 - jag, tejas, m2k, mrca...m2k & mrca with a big centerline belly tank and
2 x nirbhay would also weigh in as a credible strike option on tier-1 targets.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 20:52

I have not been following the discussion, but other than the weight why would it take 5-10 years for Nirbhay to mature? There are other missiles that have very mature components, which could be used to buildout Nirbhay. 2-3 years would be my estimation. integration with mki would take the longest.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 24 May 2010 21:20

Do people realize that any fighter sized aircraft carrying bulky loads like Brahmos (estimated 2500 kg) or Nirbhay (estimated 1000 kg) will have severe performance limitations and will be extremely sluggish?

Its correct a Su-30MKI has a payload of 8000 kg but no one talks about performance at that load. How many “g” s can the plane pull with that load? The actual number is low. That holds true for any plane.

For comparison, a full load of 6 R-77 and 6 R-73 weighs 1680 kg (175 x 6 + 105 x 6), around 820 kg less than a single Brahmos.

Fighters and cruise missiles are different philosophies, and using the Su-30 as a range booster for the missile is using a valuable asset for a meager role. The Su-30’s performance limitation will increase its vulnerability proportionally.

Kh-59 weighing ~ 800 kg and Kh-31P weighing ~ 600 kg are more appropriate missiles for the fighter.

Don’t make a “three ship formation” out of Su-30, Brahmos and Nirbhay.

http://www.historynet.com/lemays-dream-bomber.htm

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 21:29

IF the MKI is going to unload one or more cruise missiles, what is the idea of juking? Why is there a concern about g-forces and sluggishness? IF a Rafale or a Typhoon can be expected to perform this role without (much?) concern I would think the MKI is far better suited to deliver such a load.

You ar enot going to fight other fighters with such missiles. The idea is only to unload (perhaps with other MKIs escorting these MKIs = “three ship formation”.).

I think there is knowledge overload.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 24 May 2010 21:35

Added later -

The following figures are for F-16A/B model, but illustrates how performance decreases with load. The data below reflects the stressing the hardpoints for different loads. It’s evident that increased payload decreases manoeuvreability.

One fuselage hardpoint 1000 kg at 5.5g 544 kg at 9g
two inlet hardpoints 408 kg at 5.5g 250 kg at 9g
two inboard wing hardpoints 2041 kg at 5.5g 1134 kg at 9g
two center wing hardpoints 1587 kg at 5.5g 907 kg at 9g
two outboard wing hardpoints 318 kg at 5.5g 204 kg at 9g
two wingtip hardpoints 193 kg at 9g

A Su-30MKI carrying a Brahmos bounced by an enemy fighter or painted by an engagement radar will have restricted options. The pilot will probably jettison the Brahmos on learning he’s being painted by a X-Band radar. This holds true for a Mirage carrying Ra’ad as well.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 24 May 2010 21:41

Well I imagine that fighters carrying cruise missiles won't be going too deep into hostile airspace.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 21:42

A Su-30MKI carrying a Brahmos bounced by an enemy fighter or painted by an engagement radar will have restricted options. The pilot will probably jettison the Brahmos on learning he’s being painted by a X-Band radar. This holds true for a Mirage carrying Ra’ad as well.

Is this a normal and acceptable behavior in ALL cases - F-18/Rafale/Typhoon/MiG/SU/etc?

Why would someone jettison a Brahmos if he has other MKIs as escorts?

I would think (since I am not expert) the best defense against a cruise missile attack is to paint the plane and the attacker will either jettison or turn back. Either way I can neutralize a very potent missile by merely investing in a low tech solution - paint the plane. Is it that simple?

Well I imagine that fighters carrying cruise missiles won't be going too deep into hostile airspace.

Even if they have to, that is why they have Growlers and the like.

Oooops. I nearly forgot about those loitering missiles too.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 24 May 2010 21:51

The Storm Shadow/Scalp carried by Eurofighter/Rafale weighs ~ 1200-1300 kg.

Any fighter carrying a heavy load will be extremely vulnerable itself, and hence, this option wont be operationally very popular.

NRao - could you cite the maximum load the Rafale/Eurofighter can carry at 8g/9g? Or what "g" those fine aircraft pull will full load of 7500 kg - 9500 kg? You'll find those numbers extremely surprising and confidential.

X-Band radars are fighter engagement radars...when painted, that means tracked, a missile launch is considered imminent.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 24 May 2010 21:52

I think any fighter carrying a heavy load will be guarded by many more, partly because cruise missiles will probably be followed up by more airbornes strikes so the other planes need to be flying anyways.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 May 2010 22:15

we dont have the luxury of dedicated bombers like blackjack,b1,b52 to function as bomb delivery trucks. su30mki is the heaviest mule we have and it will have to do for new couple decades until we graduate up to new weapons/new planes.

ofcourse the performance will be sluggish and no more agile than a blackjack or b1, but the idea is to sortie from 2500km away in
a safe zone, refuel once and penetrate say 500km only before unleashing standoff ALCMs. if the target is near the border (S300 radar complex), the launch will be from well within indian territory and need no escort. if some penetration is needed, there can be escorting fighters. its a lot cheaper, more timely, less vulnerable and flexible than keeping fleets of ground launcher TELs.

likewise m2k/mrca can also chip in if Nirbhay is cheap and deployed on a mass scale in a smaller 300km version. but "crystal maze" and its future derivatives will likely fill that slot.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 23:00

TSarkar,

I am not sure why you want the load-g factor. I am not even willing to consider that.

Imagine a MKI with a nuclear Nirbhay. Who in his right mind would think about jettisoning or turning back? For all I know that trip by itself is a one-way trip for that pilot. Such a pilot is expected to fight his way till the release point. (And recall the Jag pilots during their game in Alaska, when a Jap AWACS went AWOL? They were able to go in and come back without detection - as the story goes.)

IF per chance he is carrying a non-nuclear Nirbhay, then he should have enough escorts (Growler type included) to clear his path way before he enters such space.

We cannot expect - in most cases - for a tactical flight and certainly a strategic flight - to behave as though it is a normal AC with a NEED to do a 5+g (as an example).

I think you are confusing two different ops. A Nirbhay op will not have expectations of mega g. IF it happens then so be it.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 May 2010 23:03

Carl_T wrote:I think any fighter carrying a heavy load will be guarded by many more, partly because cruise missiles will probably be followed up by more airbornes strikes so the other planes need to be flying anyways.

the airwar paradigm has changed - they are now complex 50-100 aircraft 3D chess games with all moving parts! we need to rethink from dashing chaps in 4 ship formations skimming low over the border to dump some pakistaniyat out and swaggering home

C4ISTAR or whatever the latest acronym is these days...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 23:05

X-Band radars are fighter engagement radars...when painted, that means tracked, a missile launch is considered imminent.

Precisely why they built them Growlers and loitering UAVs. Just to take care of such yahoos. And, during a strategic run I would imagine this is to be expected and beaten. If the expectation of beating such a "paint" is not there, then why even have a Nirbhay? Everyone knows what is the radius of a Nirbhay and everyone know what are most of the strategic assets that India will target. In this game those are the knowns. Idea being how to overcome those knowns.

the airwar paradigm has changed - they are now complex 50-100 aircraft 3D chess games with all moving parts! we need to rethink from dashing chaps in 4 ship formations skimming low over the border to dump some pakistaniyat out and swaggering home

C4ISTAR or whatever the latest acronym is these days...

So true. Technologies have moved on, but thinking is still moored.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 May 2010 23:07

xPosting:

Technology Perspective & Capability Roadmap (2010)

page 28:

47. Loitering Missiles. Artillery Fired Medium Range Loitering Missiles have loitering capability like an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and can strike a target with fully guided precision like a missile. Thus it has capability for acquisition of targets and precision engagement. Each Artillery Fired Medium Range Loitering Missile can carry out one combat mission.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 24 May 2010 23:11

TSarkarji,
Why would a MKI carrying the Brahmos or the Nirbhay bother with maneuvering even if he is painted??? Its not like its a kamikaze attack on the enemy... The sky will be sanitized to some part before they go in and knock out targets, which are most likely to be enemy's forward Air defence systems and other such targets..

NRao sir,
could you post that story about the jags in alaska... I never heard that one... and would love to read it...

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 24 May 2010 23:36

SC refuses to stay modernisation of 30 IAF airfields

A vacation bench comprising Justices GS Singhvi and CK Prasad dismissed Selex Sistemi's petition,
pleading that the contract awarded to Tata Power Company, the successful bidder, be stayed.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 24 May 2010 23:56

Lalmohan wrote:
Carl_T wrote:I think any fighter carrying a heavy load will be guarded by many more, partly because cruise missiles will probably be followed up by more airbornes strikes so the other planes need to be flying anyways.
the airwar paradigm has changed - they are now complex 50-100 aircraft 3D chess games with all moving parts! we need to rethink from dashing chaps in 4 ship formations skimming low over the border to dump some pakistaniyat out and swaggering home

C4ISTAR or whatever the latest acronym is these days...

That is what I meant. MKIs carrying cruise missiles, is only one layer of the whole operation, which will be used in synchronization with other planes in staggered attacks. First planes would gain control of nearby airspace, and then MKIs carrying cruise missiles will unleash their weapons, followed probably by ground attack aircraft with multirole and air dominance planes flying the whole time. Just IMO of course.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 May 2010 05:57

Carl_T wrote:Well I imagine that fighters carrying cruise missiles won't be going too deep into hostile airspace.

True, but they can overfly Myanmar,Laos and the ocean beyond no?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 May 2010 07:03

Carl_T wrote:Well I imagine that fighters carrying cruise missiles won't be going too deep into hostile airspace.

Nope, only 1000 Kms from their intended target + some.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 25 May 2010 07:27

NAL Saras In Tailspin, Russians Called In

Fifteen years after it pulled out from India's Saras light civilian transport aircraft programme, Russia's Myasischev Design Bureau (MDB) is back in the prestigious but persistently shaky airplane project under development by India's National Aerospace Laboratory since the early nineties. The bureau, along with Russia's Tsentralniy Aerogidrodinamicheskiy Institut (TsAGI) and the Gromov Flight Research Institute (LII), have been hurriedly commissioned into the programme to assist in refinement and core modification of the Saras design, which after six years of flight testing, has finally been judged to have faulty design elements. I'm told a team from Myasischev arrived in Bangalore on May 17 on a month-long visit for detailed discussions with programme leaders on the scope of work to be conducted on the Saras, a programme that has been in a fairly troubled state ever since its second prototype crashed tragically last year, killing its three-man test crew. Crash investigations had also pointed to serious flaws in the aircraft's basic design, which could be why the Russians have hurriedly been brought back in. The composition of the Russian team currently at NAL Headquarters in Bangalore tells you a little about what the project is looking for. The team consists of MDB chief designer Dr Alexander Bruk, his deputy Dr Alexander Arkhipov, Chief Specialist on Flight Dynamics Dr Eduard Abramenko, Engineer Designer on Control System Dr Vladimir Vinogadov and Dr Victor Frolovskiy from the Department of Design. The scope of work to be conducted by Myasischev includes flight testing and certification of the aircraft as well.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 May 2010 07:57

NRao wrote:
Carl_T wrote:Well I imagine that fighters carrying cruise missiles won't be going too deep into hostile airspace.
Nope, only 1000 Kms from their intended target + some.

The other question is - does China have "every inch of airspace" covered? You don't have to fly very far into China to put Chengdu within range of a 1000 Km Cruise missile.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 May 2010 08:02

putnanja wrote:NAL Saras In Tailspin, Russians Called In

Better late than never. India seems to have 3 transport aircraft projects in various stages of planning and conception.

One is the Saras. Another is the military medium tranpsort aircraft and there is also a 70 seater regional airliner that has been conceived. Need to see if any of these really "takes off".

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 May 2010 08:56

the MTA is older than my son. wasnt the deal supposed to signed during a meeting with Putin sir last yr, but it never happened.

I think one issue is Russians just dont need a small tactical transport to the extent we do - their distances are vast - leaving aside siberian far east even the distance from moscow region to CAR states needs a IL76 to make any impact.

it may be better to just buy out the design and project from them and engage a Rus factory on contract basis, source the engine from Rus and
start building the rest ourself.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 25 May 2010 09:15

shiv wrote:The other question is - does China have "every inch of airspace" covered?

They do not. Best launch places for the Nirbhay in the ALCM mode are over Tibet, where the radar coverage gaps are maximum. Its a case where the systems in place in Tibet are highly lethal if you enter their "Fuzzy" Detection Range but otherwise the gaps between such systems currently exist. Once you go past through these holes, the gaps become so much larger near northern Tibet etc that the MKIs will have free reign over whole of China in terms of target choices.

The chinese, for their part, are fully aware of their radar coverage deficiencies. That's why their focus on airborne radars etc is far more urgent. However, despite all of their projects under way, the radar holes do exist over much of Tibet and many other regions accessible through Myannar etc. This advantage is quickly disappearing, however, with every passing year. There are no guarantees that by the time we fight a war, they won't have all of these holes blocked off. Even if not around a year, they can block them off during wartime with AWACS deployments etc, just as we are planning to do.

-Vivek Ahuja