Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 18 Apr 2015 07:50

Oops! Smoke generator it is - the fins had me fooled - too eager for BVR integration and FOC I guess. The image was this one:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/India--- ... 2615801/L/

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 18 Apr 2015 22:34

Looks like C-295 deal going to be signed soon. Slowly nibbling around the edges of HAL territory.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Apr 2015 03:01

xposting

Guys please consider buying this book
Saurav Jha has been putting a lot of sweat into his articles and a fair bit comes out of his own effort.. we constantly crib about DDM and its fair to support people who do their stuff seriously
A bit of help never hurts

http://www.amazon.in/The-Heat-Dust-Proj ... 9351367495

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Apr 2015 07:00

Aaaah the smell of freedom. An MMRCA/Rafale discussion mukt-Bharat-Rakshak Forum

After a decade is it?

Sorry. OT

partha · Post by **partha** » 19 Apr 2015 11:05

From locked MMRCA thread
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1830614

Sumeet

Good discussion on Rafale at Vikram Chandra's show. Shukla was isolated. Rahul Bedi proves why he has a particular reputation in this forum. I never understand why congress was even invited for this debate. Loved how Vikram screwed congress spokesperson. You guys should watch it.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-bi ... dget_cat_4

With due respects to Col Ajai Shukla, he appears to be taking a contrarian view just for the sake of it. While he has a point about higher costs, cost was not the only reason why Rafale won MMRCA competition. From wiki:

Defense analysts also point out the operational performance of Rafale during the Libyan bombing campaign and in Afghanistan, the existing experience of the Indian Air Force in operating the French Mirage 2000H during the Kargil War and compatibility with Indian, Israeli, and Russian sub-systems as possible reasons. It was also noted that the recent decision to upgrade India's Mirage 2000H fighters will simplify the Indian Air Force’s logistics chain. Historical reasons are also considered by analysts to be a potential reason as France was also the only Western nation not to impose sanctions after India tested five nuclear devices in 1998.

Immediately after the Rafale news broke, he asked "Why not Gripen?". If Modi govt had chosen Gripen, he would has asked "Why not Rafale considering it was selected under MMRCA?". There is no way one can satisfy people like Shukla. That Bedi fellow is saying army is still waiting for carbines and other basic equipment and govt should concentrate on that. If govt had procured carbines, he would have said, IAF is waiting for MMRCA jet and hence govt should work towards getting the jet. Surely there are pros and cons to Modi's decision of buying 36 Rafales directly (that's not the end of story mind you as DM MP said in the interview) but to say that everything is bad about this decision is just being dishonest. MMRCA process started in 2001 and after 14 years, IAF is guaranteed to get a plane in the next two years. Why is that not a positive development? Why don't these analysts honestly review and give both pros and cons?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 19 Apr 2015 11:34

MMRCA process started in 2001 and after 14 years, IAF is guaranteed to get a plane in the next two years.

The IAF is getting new fighters every year, at a pace that will only increase as the Tejas production spools up.

In any event, what's the point of locking the Rafale & MMRCA thread only to have the same discussions on this thread?

The rationale for the 36 Rafales -

- Retiring MiG-21s & MiG-27s -> Cue Tejas comparison

- High endurance fighter -> Cue Su-30MKI comparison

- High tech fighter -> Cue F-35 and/or PAK FA comparison

Rather predictable.

If all that's had to be said on the Rafale has been said, may as well limit the discussion purely to news updates.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 19 Apr 2015 11:35

partha wrote:While he has a point about higher costs, cost was not the only reason why Rafale won MMRCA competition. From wiki:

Those are speculations. The only official reason is that the lifecycle cost came in as less than than EF. Any other reason would have been grounds for a protest.

partha wrote:IAF is guaranteed to get a plane in the next two years.

Well, no contract has been signed yet . . .

(I hear they're 95% done though

)

Viv S wrote:In any event, what's the point of locking the Rafale & MMRCA thread only to have the same discussions on this thread?

To shut up the whiners about locking the other thread. Seriously, they were worse than anything else there. (and yes, now I'm whining about the whiners, super

)

partha · Post by **partha** » 19 Apr 2015 11:54

^
Ok saar, maybe IAF will get the first plane in 4 years and not 2 years. That's still better.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Apr 2015 14:05

Guys, MMRCA thread was locked thanks to the non stop back and forth over all this pointless stuff, now don't drag it into this thread please.

partha · Post by **partha** » 19 Apr 2015 23:46

Sorry about that. Shuklaji's one sided views on Rafale was annoying me ever since the new plan was announced. That NDTV video prompted me to make a post.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 20 Apr 2015 01:45

partha wrote:Sorry about that. Shuklaji's one sided views on Rafale was annoying me ever since the new plan was announced. That NDTV video prompted me to make a post.

Nothing to apologize for. Its just that this Rafale topic has been beaten to death & then some. At this point, all we can do is judge the Govt by what happens. There are really a lot of missing issues in what has been said/declared & what's not. All I'd say is to judge them on what gets done.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 20 Apr 2015 07:22

Kartik wrote:Great work Vivek! Just one piece of info, could you please add credits to Robban? He was the Swede who came up with those 3 view diagrams of the Tejas Mk1.

Done! I will update the blog with that info today. Thanks for pointing it out.

-Vivek

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Apr 2015 10:15

Suggestion: Why don't we dump this td ,consign it to the archives and start a new one for the Rafale only,as we're doing with the LCA,since the Rafale is a done deal now. Other issues,alternatives,options,etc.,can be discussed in the Indian Mil aviation td.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 20 Apr 2015 19:20

Singha wrote: and have NO turbofan powered UAV project (HALE) ..

The current HALE uav program of DRDO is solar power based with days of endurance.

HAL is working behind the scenes for its own MALE UAV project, possibly powered by the HTFE-25 engine.
http://www.spsmai.com/exclusive/?id=4&q ... UAV-family

The medium altitude long range UAV will be a multirole platform for intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance, data relay and communications, scientific and weather forecasting, in addition to disaster management and relief coordination. The MALE UAV will be in the two tonne class, 15 metres long and with a wingspan of 30 metres, capable of deploying a payload of 500 kg, 50 hours endurance and a top speed of 500 km/h.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Apr 2015 01:28

Amazing is a small word!

Rakesh wrote:Apologies if this has been posted before. Unsure where else to post this, but it seems apt here in light of the Mirage 2000 discussions going on above.

President Confers Vayu Sena Medal to Squadron Leader Kapil Kareem
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 473_1.html

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Apr 2015 08:55

indranilroy wrote:Amazing is a small word!
Rakesh wrote:Apologies if this has been posted before. Unsure where else to post this, but it seems apt here in light of the Mirage 2000 discussions going on above.

President Confers Vayu Sena Medal to Squadron Leader Kapil Kareem
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 473_1.html

http://static.ibnlive.in.com/pix/slides ... kitnew.jpg

Combat is not the scariest thing in fighter flying.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Apr 2015 10:21

HA: will be working forever on something but delivering...what? Here's the latest from the BRF newsroom. The GOI/MOD should immediately identify an alternative with a firang manufacturer in another G-to-G deal for the IJT.The IJT tamasha has gone on for too long now.Will anyone allow "7 deadlines" with even more in the offing?

[quote]Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha on Wednesday expressed concerns over the delays in delivery schedules of 'Tejas' Light Combat Aircraft and intermediate jet trainer ‘Sitara', both being developed indigenously, and their impact on operational capability.

"The Air Chief expressed concerns over the delays in delivery schedules and their impact on operational readiness. He also expressed his concern on the effect of these delays on basic pilot training in the IAF," the IAF said in a statement after the three-day Air Force Commanders' Conference concluded in New Delhi.

On the last day, representatives of Ordinance Factory Board, Bharat Dynamics Ltd and Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd briefed the Air Chief in the presence of Secretary, Defence Production.

The OFB, BDL and HAL teams put on table the constraints on their side and both parties agreed to take the programmes forward through discussions and by working out mutually acceptable solutions, the statement said.

IAF has been banking on Rafale, the indigenously developed Light Combat Aircraft Tejas and the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft deal with Russia to augment its strength.
However, all the three projects are running behind schedule.

Adding to the worry is the continued delay in Sitara intermediate jet trainer programme, which was first sanctioned in 1999.
Sources said the project has been further delayed by few more years after missing seven deadlines for getting initial operational clearance following the formal approval by the Cabinet Committee on Security in March 2005.[quote]

PS:ET says that AW is back in business ...with India,in the "make in India" category.It can now make offers for the various requirements,naval,etc.

arun · Post by **arun** » 23 Apr 2015 20:23

X Posted from the Rafale thread.

Former Director General of the Defence Planning Staff, Premvir Das, writes (laments?) on the Rafale deal in Business Standard:

The sad reality is that the apparently transparent multi-vendor route for military purchases is wholly unsuited to the Indian way of doing business, literally. Experience shows that where we go the single-vendor governmental route, things move faster and with fewer complications. So, opaque as it may seem, until design capabilities are greatly enhanced, this Hobson's choice appears to be the only route to take.

All this may make for dismal reading. On the one hand, we want to manufacture modern military platforms in India; on the other, the essential capabilities required to do so either do not exist or are deficient.

From here:

Rafale deal - truths beyond rhetoric

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Apr 2015 08:44

Nitin A. Gokhale - Manohar Parrikar has demonstrated a rare decisiveness in the defence ministry.

To Plug The Gap In The Sky

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 27 Apr 2015 09:17

IAF's first 2 upgraded Mirage-2000s land in Gwalior

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 27 Apr 2015 18:33

So, where is the IJT that was supposed to fly in 15 days in February ? Anyone spotted it flying ?

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 28 Apr 2015 08:54

Thakur_B wrote:
Singha wrote: and have NO turbofan powered UAV project (HALE) ..
The current HALE uav program of DRDO is solar power based with days of endurance.

HAL is working behind the scenes for its own MALE UAV project, possibly powered by the HTFE-25 engine.
http://www.spsmai.com/exclusive/?id=4&q ... UAV-family
The medium altitude long range UAV will be a multirole platform for intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance, data relay and communications, scientific and weather forecasting, in addition to disaster management and relief coordination. The MALE UAV will be in the two tonne class, 15 metres long and with a wingspan of 30 metres, capable of deploying a payload of 500 kg, 50 hours endurance and a top speed of 500 km/h.

I hope that DRDO HAL go for turboprop and turbofan powered version of Rustom-2 as future UAVs.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Apr 2015 22:09

Late Dec report which talks about IJT design issue

IAF jittery as faulty design grounds HAL jet trainer

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Apr 2015 06:49

Austin wrote:Late Dec report which talks about IJT design issue

IAF jittery as faulty design grounds HAL jet trainer

I did not know that there is an "ideal stall speed" for an aircraft. I thought stall speed varies with a lot of factors including AoA, wing loading and altitude. This article quotes "sources" - so I find that an interesting way to release information. ( as in "Sources say that all Su 30s were grounded last night")

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 30 Apr 2015 06:51

Anybody remember if the last argument over IJT here was an year ago or longer? When did we last spar over the IJT en masse? Just checking how long it has been since the last reported progress.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Apr 2015 08:33

Shreeman wrote:Anybody remember if the last argument over IJT here was an year ago or longer? When did we last spar over the IJT en masse? Just checking how long it has been since the last reported progress.

Last reported progress was 4-6 weeks ago - the number of flights had gone up mysteriously

VijayN · Post by **VijayN** » 30 Apr 2015 09:05

Not sure if this was posted.

India considering Scorpion light attack aircraft (A Textron (US) Company) - an IJT replacement?

http://www.freenewspos.com/en/latest-ne ... -key-deals

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Apr 2015 09:24

Indian parliamentary committee says IAF facing crisis in combat pilot numbers

http://www.janes.com/article/51070/indi ... ot-numbers

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is facing a crisis in fighter pilot numbers that is almost as serious as that facing its combat fleet, India's Parliamentary Committee on Defence declared on 27 April.

In a report tabled in parliament, the 35-member committee revealed that the IAF's current fighter aircraft to pilot ratio was 1:0.81.

This was far less than the authorised figure of 1:1.25 and was responsible for depreciating the force's operational capabilities, the report stated. The sanctioned cockpit to pilot ratio for the IAF's transport aircraft is 1:1.5 and 1:1 for its helicopters.

"Our sanctioned strength for [combat] pilots is less than that of our adversaries," the report said, adding that the Pakistan Air Force's fighter to pilot ratio was 1:2.5.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 30 Apr 2015 09:52

VijayN wrote:Not sure if this was posted.

India considering Scorpion light attack aircraft (A Textron (US) Company) - an IJT replacement?

http://www.freenewspos.com/en/latest-ne ... -key-deals

This is a joke, right? Scorpion? Doesnt anybody know what that is.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Apr 2015 10:13

VijayN wrote:Not sure if this was posted.

India considering Scorpion light attack aircraft (A Textron (US) Company) - an IJT replacement?

http://www.freenewspos.com/en/latest-ne ... -key-deals

Paid "news"

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 30 Apr 2015 10:35

Austin wrote:Indian parliamentary committee says IAF facing crisis in combat pilot numbers

http://www.janes.com/article/51070/indi ... ot-numbers

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is facing a crisis in fighter pilot numbers that is almost as serious as that facing its combat fleet, India's Parliamentary Committee on Defence declared on 27 April.

In a report tabled in parliament, the 35-member committee revealed that the IAF's current fighter aircraft to pilot ratio was 1:0.81.

Do we need to import pilots with the planes? Will that increase the price per unit? What about long term "accusation" cost if they crash the planes? Who will we accuse?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Apr 2015 11:03

Look the IJT has been in crisis ever since it crashed on the runway at a previous Aero-India.The performance problems,stall speed,spin,tail,etc. There is no guarantee that it will emerge in a fit state for series production within the next few years.Therefore,a new IJT has to be acquired from abroad.

In a mag,there was an item that sev. air forces were replacing their PC-7s with Grob basic trainers.The advanced version,the PC-21 has been designed to simulate a jet trainer and can be configured to resemble the flight characteristics of various aircraft. Alternatively,we must acquire another IJT replacement asap. The shortage of pilots is amazing,even more important that shortage of aircraft,as even if we had the numbers,who would fly them? The current GOI ahs an enormous amount of work to do to rectify the dereliction of duty of AKA,Snake-Oil Singh and Soniaji.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 30 Apr 2015 11:29

Philip wrote:Look the IJT has been in crisis ever since it crashed on the runway at a previous Aero-India.The performance problems,stall speed,spin,tail,etc. There is no guarantee that it will emerge in a fit state for series production within the next few years.Therefore,a new IJT has to be acquired from abroad.

US, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Israel, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Australia and Russia manage without an IJT. Just why is it a must for the India? If required build more Hawks as a stop-gap, or even better transfer the ones earmarked for the IAF display team (hoping killing off that asinine idea).

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Apr 2015 11:33

+108
we have enough hawks now...increase the hawk hrs for basic training and grab all the ones for display team as well. poor country cannot afford such luxuries.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Apr 2015 11:55

It's why I mentioned the PC-21 which is not a jet,but according to many analysts/pilots does away with the need for an IJT. There are also newer AJTs,with superior performance to the hawk.We were almost the last country to have bought it,decades after many others.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 30 Apr 2015 12:15

Philip wrote:It's why I mentioned the PC-21 which is not a jet,but according to many analysts/pilots does away with the need for an IJT.

Its an import nonetheless and should be avoided where domestic built (if not developed) alternatives are available (which they are).

There are also newer AJTs,with superior performance to the hawk.We were almost the last country to have bought it,decades after many others.

South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Oman and the UK in the last decade. And so what if newer AJTs have superior performance? The quality of pilots produced isn't significantly affected (the real training begins only after the pilot is posted to an operational squadron). Its not worth screwing up logistics by inducting a new type of AJT. (Be honest, you were thinking of the Yak-130 while typing that weren't you?

)

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Apr 2015 12:49

M-345/6 for one,Textron Scorpion,Yak-130 (light attack cap),Korean TAI T-50, have a contest,evaluate all. Till then but extras of what we already have .

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 30 Apr 2015 13:19

Philip wrote:M-345/6 for one,Textron Scorpion,Yak-130 (light attack cap),Korean TAI T-50, have a contest,evaluate all. Till then but extras of what we already have .

Our Hawks have at least a couple of decades of service life remaining. Even if we flog them hard, we still have more than enough time to start our own AJT project instead of creating yet another import tender.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 30 Apr 2015 15:54

If the IAF removes the intermediate jet training stage and increase the Hrs on both the basic training and advanced training to compensate. Will the trainee pilot suffer in his competence.

Considering the point that the modern Turbo prop trainer with the IAF is a much more high performance machine. Whose performance will have an overlap with the performance of an IJT, in some flight regimes. Compared to the older piston engine basic trainer being used by the IAF.

While the Hawk can be used in place of the IJT, for flight regimes that require higher performance envelops.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 May 2015 19:23

RIP IJT ,will its epitaph be "stung to death"?

http://www.janes.com/article/51099/cart ... plan[quote]
Carter to offer Scorpion to India under joint development plan

Rahul Bedi, New Delhi and James Hardy, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

30 April 2015
Industry sources in India say the US may offer the Textron Airland Scorpion to Delhi under the DTTI. Source: Textron

US defence secretary Ashton Carter's two-day visit to India in early June is expected to raise the levels of bilateral strategic and defence co-operation between the two countries, senior Indian military officials have told IHS Jane's .

Carter will sign a 10-year India-US Defence Framework Agreement and fast-track the Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI), under which the two countries will co-develop and co-produce military equipment in India.

Industry sources said that under the DTTI, which Carter initiated as deputy defence secretary in 2012, the US was expected to offer the Textron AirLand Scorpion light-attack and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft currently being developed to the Indian Air Force (IAF).

Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, who is believed to have expressed interest in the Scorpion, believes the twin-seat platform can double as an intermediate jet trainer (IJT). The IAF badly needs an IJT due to delays to the Sitara (Star) platform, which Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has been developing since 2005.

At the 2014 Farnborough Airshow, Textron officials told IHS Jane's that the Scorpion would cost less than USD20 million to procure and around USD3,000 per hour to operate. The company has also outlined a sales target of 2,000 platforms to international operators over the coming years. It did not respond to requests for comment on the potential deal with India.

Approved during President Barack Obama's Delhi visit in January, the defence framework agreement extends the scope of joint military exercises and inter-operability, intelligence sharing, counter-terrorism, and maritime co-operation.

It also expands the frequency of reciprocal visits by senior military and defence personnel.

"We are looking to do more in terms of [military] exercises and joint training and interoperability with our Indian counterparts," US Ambassador to India Richard Rahul Verma said at the first US-India Think Tank Summit in Delhi on 28 April.

"Hopefully we will provide more in terms of increasing India's indigenous capability to make defence products," he said in reference to Carter's visit.

Verma said the two sides were "tracking" 77 different initiatives that had emerged from Obama's visit. "We have re-energised or launched 30 new initiatives, 30 different dialogues," he said without elaborating.

Officials said that during his visit, Carter was also expected to review progress in the four 'pathfinder' technologies that the US had agreed to transfer to India under the DTTI.

These include the know-how to co-develop and jointly manufacture AeroVironment RQ-11 Raven battlefield unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and roll-on/roll-off ISR modules for the IAF's 11 Lockheed Martin C-130J-30 transport aircraft.

Two additional technologies - to develop and build mobile electric hybrid power systems (MEHPS) and integrated Protection Ensemble Increment-2 clothing for protection against nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare - are also being transferred.

The two technical working groups set up earlier in 2015 to jointly develop aircraft engines and electromagnetic aircraft launch systems (EMALS) for aircraft carriers will also be reviewed during the defence secretary's visit.

Meanwhile, Carter is expected to push India to sign a USD2.5 billion contract for 22 Boeing AH-64E Apache and 15 Boeing CH-47F Chinook helicopters for the IAF, negotiations for which were completed in late 2013.

On 1 April, Boeing agreed to hold the price for both platforms for three months until 30 June, but is believed to have informed the IAF that it would be unable to do so thereafter. Industry sources said this was the ninth instance that Boeing had agreed to keep the deal going at the same price.

Under India's Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP), any change in the price of a negotiated contract requires it to be re-tendered.
[/quote]

Whatever happens with the Scorpion,for heaven's sake,finalise the two deals with Boeing! Babu bungling was the cause for the second batch of 3 Talwars offered at the same price as the first going abegging. Is "babudom" holding out its hands under the table for yet another price escalation as it did with the Scorpene subs and hoped for with the Rafale too?