Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

[Austin]

First to the Last: 50 years of MiG-21s with the IAF
Author: Air Marshal P Rajkumar & Pushpindar Singh

Available at Lancer http://www.lancerpublishers.com/catalog ... ts_id=1288

[Shrinivasan]

IronFist report in Combat-Aircraft-Monthly uploaded to Scribd.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/139002817/Com ... ist-Report

Njoy

[dipys]

I might have missed it... But Air Forces monthly April issue says we lost a Su-30MKI during prepapration for Iron fist in Rajasthan. Both Pilots ejected. Was this reported in the media. Anyone know the cause, was it the same as the earlier sukhoi crashes??

[sum]

^^ Yup...was reported and discussed on BRF.

IIRC, the cause is still not public

[Austin]

I read that it was a bomb fuse failed leading to explosion of weapon on the aircraft , pilot would be lucky and alert to eject on time , I remember we lost one Jag when the bomb exploded due to some issue with fuse and that time the pilot was not lucky and lost his life.

Added Later

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/313 ... today.html

According to the general practice, the IAF grounds the entire fleet of any aircraft that crashes and re-checks their systems before flying them again. This is not being followed in the Iron-Fist exercise and the IAF offered an explanation for the deviation.

“The problem was with the bomb fuse. There is nothing wrong with the Su-30 MKI aircraft. So it will fly,” an IAF spokesperson told Deccan Herald. Tuesday's crash was the fourth Su-30 accident since 2009.

[Sanku]

I read that it was a bomb fuse failed leading to explosion of weapon on the aircraft

And of course, no one ever will be held responsible.

[Sanku]

Yes it did meet it's goals - it served creditably in India's last war and showed that even back in the 1950s India had the ab inito capability to design something as complex as a state-of-the-art fighter plane.

Well those may be your goals, of success and failure.

I am asking about the goals of the HF 24 program. Lets stick to the topic.

[Austin]

I read that it was a bomb fuse failed leading to explosion of weapon on the aircraft

And of course, no one ever will be held responsible.

IAF would do a court of enquiry for sure but it would be very hard to find out why the fuse failed and exploded , could be a faulty fuse ( Out of Warranty or Manuf Fault Desi/Phoren ) , could be negligence due to ground crew , may also be a case of weapons were not properly mated and went undetected etc could be any number of reason it could be hard to pinpoint ....also the fact that every weapon has certain percentage of failure rate and a chain of events causing the weapon to explode.

The fact these two pilots manage to eject to fly another day is a saving grace the Jags pilot were not so lucky.

[amit]

Yes it did meet it's goals - it served creditably in India's last war and showed that even back in the 1950s India had the ab inito capability to design something as complex as a state-of-the-art fighter plane.

Well those may be your goals, of success and failure.

I am asking about the goals of the HF 24 program. Lets stick to the topic.

As usual downhill skiing when chestnuts are squeezed tightly.

And what exactly were the goals of Marut? Don't give me the bulls**t about ASR requirements. They were patently unrealistic at that point of time (I see you've evaded the question about which planes that were flying then could meet those ASRs). And no project meets ASRs in toto just look at the JSF.

The fact remains that the Marut flew within 6-7 years of the ASR and that by itself was a extremely creditable achievement considering the fact that we had zero infrastructure and zero experience in designing a fighter aircraft.

It was the GoI's (and I think the IAF as well since it did not press the issue) short-sightedness that it refused to invest a moderate sum of money to keep the engine for which the plane was meant in production and even MKIzing it. Contrast this with the kind of money we nowadays spend on virtually Blue Sky projects from Russia. Mind you I'm not saying this approach is wrong but if only we followed the same approach back then, then the Maruts could have been what the MiG21 became.

But even with a crippled engine, it performed creditably and it should have been persisted with more vigour. Instead the IAF went for the easy option and bought foreign maal and let the knowledge gained wither away, so much so that we had to start again from scratch when we started the LCA program.

So let me ask you again. Can you justify your comment: "Oh Marut was a disaster, it flew, but just about that?"

I know you can't but trying nevertheless. Believe me I find it incredible, even though it comes from you, that anyone can say that about an Indian made and designed plane - and that too in the 1950-60s - which actually took part in a war and according to anecdotal evidence gave a good account of itself, even coming back from enemy territory more than onece with one engine shot up.

[Sanku]

And what exactly were the goals of Marut? Don't give me the bulls**t about ASR requirements. .

Thank you. I could not have put it better.

What would I do without you in my opposition Amit.

[amit]

And what exactly were the goals of Marut? Don't give me the bulls**t about ASR requirements. .

Thank you. I could not have put it better.

What would I do without you in my opposition Amit.

Well for one you could sell or retire your skiing equipment. You wouldn't have to go downhill so many times and so frequently. And your precious chestnuts wouldn't hurt so much.

As usually you evade the question by indulging in your favourite FUD.

I think someone needs to tell you that you need a certain kind of panache to carry through sarcasm. Keep posting, eventually - I'm an eternal optimist - some of that will rub on to you. It has to considering that you're at the receiving end so many times from so many posters.

[Sanku]

Thank you. I could not have put it better.

What would I do without you in my opposition Amit.

Well for one you could sell or retire your skiing equipment. You wouldn't have to go downhill so many times and so frequently. And your precious chestnuts wouldn't hurt so much.

As usually you evade the question.

I thought it was obvious to the meanest intelligence -- viz, you are talking sheer rot.

You have no first clue of what the requirements were and how HF 24 failed to meet them, however since that is too difficult, you will throw words like

And what exactly were the goals of Marut? Don't give me the bulls**t about ASR requirements. .

Yes, in the world that BRF has become, things like program goals, ASR requirements are bull shit -- and I can only downhill ski from such high places were fantasy scores fiction is supreme and facts are inconsequential.

If you were remotely interested in the real answer btw, its there in the BRF link so you dont have to ask.

[amit]

Sanku ji,


"Oh Marut was a disaster, it flew, but just about that?"


I suppose that line is also in the famous BRF link you're talking about?

Anyway choro enough entertainment for today, got to get back to some serious stuff on the Economy dhaga.

But what would do with our daily Sanku fix? I only wish I had someone like you during our university days.

[Sanku]

Thank you. I could not have put it better.

What would I do without you in my opposition Amit.

Don't flatter yourself! Amit's post contain data, not vague conjecture that is never backed up with analysis.

Again, where is the data that formed your premise that a plane that served the IAF for ___ years is a disaster.
Here, fill in at least that blank so we know you do some research before posting on the forum.

Amit's post contains as much data as your contains objectivity. ASR are bullshit is data for you know doubt, after all what do these people know. Amit and Marten will make up the goals of the HF 24 program 50 years after they were decided by IAF/MoD.

Marut's service in IAF was forced. There were three marut squardans each squardan had 32 a/cs.

Ever stop to wonder why a Marut sq had twice as many planes, when that could have easily outfitted 2 sq dns?

Lets get real shall we.

[amit]

Amit's post contains as much data as your contains objectivity. ASR are bullshit is data for you know doubt, after all what do these people know. Amit and Marten will make up the goals of the HF 24 program 50 years after they were decided by IAF/MoD.

As usual you show your total lack of comprehension skills when it comes to plain English writing (I wonder how good your comprehension skills are in Hindi or whatever is your Mother tongue?).

I said:

Don't give me the bulls**t about ASR requirements. They were patently unrealistic at that point of time (I see you've evaded the question about which planes that were flying then could meet those ASRs). And no project meets ASRs in toto just look at the JSF.

The bulls**t refers to your post(s) not the ASR requirements which I called unrealistic at that point of time. I know you have a bit of problem understanding so let me explain:

patently unrealistic does not equal to bulls**t.

However, when folks think it does then that in its own becomes yet more bulls**t

[Sanku]

By the way I had missed this straight question to me

Let me ask you a counter straight question. Do you think a plane - the first effort by a impoverished, newly independent nation - which actually took part in the 1971 war and received commendation deserves the comment: "Oh Marut was a disaster, it flew, but just about that?"

The Marut program was a disaster, whether it was because of XY or Z, or whether the nation was impoverished or not, the program was a disaster. Turning a objective statement of factual occurrences into a melodrama "nahhhiiiiiiii you can not say this about our young nation" is fine for Kafila like forums, but when you evaluate a program, it was a disaster. Period.

What commendation did the Marut receive by the way? I was not aware of a Services program for commendation of equipment, only for individuals and units.

Pray tell about the gyan that I have missed out on my entire life?

[Sanku]

The bulls**t refers to your post(s) not the ASR requirements which I called unrealistic.

Ah so parsing the words again are we? Paraphrasing?

Yes, yes, to quote ASR which have been decided by Amit ji as unrealistic is bull shit.

When will you people learn that being foul mouthed is no substitute for data? All it shows is your real level.

[amit]

The Marut program was a disaster, whether it was because of XY or Z, or whether the nation was impoverished or not, the program was a disaster.

Gotcha! I was waiting for this FUD.

So the Marut program was a disaster because you say so? Can you back up your assertion? You cannot because the only link you provided actually heaps load of praise on the plane.

Turning a objective statement of factual occurrences into a melodrama...

You and factual?

What commendation did the Marut receive by the way? I was not aware of a Services program for commendation of equipment, only for individuals and units.

Again another example of not reading or not understanding. The article you linked has more than one anecdotal account of how the Marut performed creditability. It even has names. Read again - slowly if that helps - and you shall be gifted with gyan.

Pray tell about the gyan that I have missed out on my entire life?

Dare I hope that this is the first glimmer of understanding? Or is it yet another chimaera shimmering to deceive us?

[amit]

The bulls**t refers to your post(s) not the ASR requirements which I called unrealistic.

Ah so parsing the words again are we? Paraphrasing?

Yes, yes, to quote ASR which have been decided by Amit ji as unrealistic is bull shit.

When will you people learn that being foul mouthed is no substitute for data? All it shows is your real level.

OK more down hilling skiing. Your equipment serves you well. In the interests of other posters, I shall do what I have done many times before. Go ahead Maharaj ji have the last word. You'd get a belly ache if you don't.

"Oh Marut was a disaster, it flew, but just about that?"

[Sanku]

Marten-ji; I am still waiting for you to tell me about how HF 24 met its goals and hence calling my statement of the program being a disaster was Bull shit. Your words I believe?

Amit ji has already decided that I am talking bull shit, since I asked him about initial program goals which included bull shit things like ASR.

I take it you agree with him that ASRs are bullshit since you have commended him for the data points in his post?

[nikhil_p]

Guys it is about perspective.

Yes, we did have a fighter bomber designed during the early 1960's. The design was done by Kurt Tank - A german IIRC. The engine was changed from the original to a lower powered engine. As such the project 'failed' to meet the 'original' expectations (irrespective of it being stupid).

However when inducted into squadron service, the IAF being an SDRE force realised its value as a stable ground attack aircraft in which role it served pretty well. So it was a successful bomber.

So was it a failure or success depends upon which side of the line you are standing and looking at.

[Sanku]

Sanku, all you do is FUD. Provide data, not yap.

YOU said the program was a disaster - i.e. the world is flat.
Amit refuted you. You could not post any counter-points, and started with Nandi-droppings again.
Ergo, you proved only one thing - No Data == Sankugiri.

Sir, ji I provided 3 points.

If you dont have the courage to face up to them. What do I do? I can provide more, but I have no intention of verbal dance of; "does requirement really mean requirement" here.

Theek hai?

[Sanku]

However when inducted into squadron service, the IAF being an SDRE force realised its value as a stable ground attack aircraft in which role it served pretty well. So it was a successful bomber..

Nikhil ji, as you say, it was a inducted as ground attack more because it could not meet its original requirements, and therefore IAF had to find a suitable profile, however it was not really out of choice of IAF, which resisted it.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Histo ... arut1.html

Rather than shelve the entire Marut programme, the Indian Government decided to order 18 pre-production aircraft powered by the Orpheus 703 in late 1962. The pre-production batch was followed by 62 similarly powered production examples, despite the lAF's initial reluctance. The IAF's reluctance stemmed from the fact that Orpheus 703 powered Marut offered only marginal improvement on the Hunter's performance.

(and I personally think the author is being kind since despite having the Maruts in inventory, IAF only used it very sparingly compared to the continued use of Hunters, also Hunters were used in wider variety of roles than the restricted lo-lo attacks Maruts were limited to.)

They kept looking for ways to make things better, since the Maruts being underpowered continued to dog its usability.

The search for a suitable engine continued even after the Maruts went full ops. In September 1966, the MoD announced that flight testing had begun on the third pre-production aircraft (as HF-005) designated Mk.1A with an afterburning Orpheus 703 with an 18% greater boost than the original at 5,720 lb. (2 595 kg). By 1970, two more Maruts, designated Mk.1R, were brought into the afterburner development trials. Unfortunately, the programme suffered a severe setback when, on 10 January 1970, the first of two Mk.1R prototypes (HF-032) being flown by Gp. Cpt. Suranjan Das crashed just after take-off.

[Surya]

So from being a disaster we have a aircraft which is marginally better than the Hunter
Just to back your pet peeve you are now rubbishing anything and everything.

[Lalmohan]

i wonder if lalchix come in hunterwali avatar?

[vic]

I think Sanky clearly demonstrates how the Service Brass thinks!

[Yagnasri]

I remember reading Marut even had taken on Paki fighter (F104???) which is quite advanced at that time and killed it. So it may not be a falure even as a fighter. IAF may not have used it in such role but it does not mean it failed to do the job.

[Mihir]

So from being a disaster we have a aircraft which is marginally better than the Hunter
Just to back your pet peeve you are now rubbishing anything and everything.

My chaiwallah tells me that the Marut's torsion bar broke during testing. They never quite got the issue fixed. The weak torsion bar severely restricted the flight regime, and the Marut remained little more that a Gnat++

Also, the ADEN cannon had a rifled bore and was already obsolete.

[Lalmohan]

marut pilots wore scooter helmets and were typically short and dark
(the scooter helmets were imported from russia)

[amit]

Just imagine. The stupid, incompetent and lazy Babus at HAL in 1955 couldn't even design and manufacture a simple twin engine fighter bomber with Mach 2 speed, a service ceiling of 60,000 feet and a combat radius of 500 miles.

Paah!

Sanku ji has the right instincts. We should have gone straight away to the Russians. According to historians Ruskie pre-school children at that time were designing such planes during their lunch break. And manufacturing them for homework. [Links have been posted before. Go and check them yourself.]


I'm convinced that Sanku ji is - or rather will soon be (urgh I'm always bad with tenses) - an allumnai of this wonderful pre-school system. No wonder he can see the failure while we short and dark rice eating guys can't.

Eat crow folks!

[Sanku]

So from being a disaster we have a aircraft which is marginally better than the Hunter
Just to back your pet peeve you are now rubbishing anything and everything.

Sir, just better than the hunter quote is from BR. I have already mentioned my disagreement.

I do not think it was better than Hunter, IAF basically just sat on them and used them sparingly. 32 a/c per sqdn? Even for the low low role, most of the mud moving was done by Hunters and Su 7 in the 71.

I am not "rubbishing" the a/c, however, in the end, what came out of it? What do you think we got, what are the redeeming features?

[Mukesh.Kumar]

So from being a disaster we have a aircraft which is marginally better than the Hunter
Just to back your pet peeve you are now rubbishing anything and everything.

My chaiwallah tells me that the Marut's torsion bar broke during testing. They never quite got the issue fixed.

My neighborhood furniture polishwala recently told me that apparently the problem was solved only in 1973 when Fevicol launched it's consumer range of glues in tubes. But by then since we had the Mig -21 in our stable, it was too late for the old SDRE Marut.

Sorry, Mods, couldn't resist that one. No more OT posts from now

[Sanku]

Just imagine. The stupid, incompetent and lazy Babus at HAL in 1955 couldn't even design and manufacture a simple twin engine fighter bomber with Mach 2 speed, a service ceiling of 60,000 feet and a combat radius of 500 miles.

Actually if you had "read" the article, instead of just trying to copy paste, you would realize that HAL was not really designing it, it was Kurt Tank.

We should have gone straight away to the Russians. !

Again lack of reading, we did go to the British, and should have stayed there, no doing so caused us to go to everyone later, without any use. Even the very sympathetic commentator on BR says that we should have gone done so..

The design of the HF-24 had been based around the availability of the 8170 lbs. (3705 kg) afterburning Orpheus BOr 12 engine. Unfortunately, the British requirement for this powerplant was discarded and the Indian Govt. declined to underwrite its continued development. In retrospect, this was a very shortsighted decision on the part of the Indian Government. The manufacturer had asked for £13 million as development costs, not a large sum even by the standards of the 1960s. And the Government's decision not to underwrite the costs of the BOr 12 development was to haunt the Marut programme for ever. In the even that the BOr 12 was no longer an option, the design team was forced to adopt the non-afterburning 4850 lbs. (2200 kg) Orpheus 703 for the initial and interim version of the fighter. India now initiated what was to prove a lengthy and frustrating search for an alternative power plant to the Orpheus BOr 12.

And no I am not blaming anyone, so while you might try and project as if I am blaming HAL, it would be about just as honest as your posts calling ASRs bullshit, and then saying that only talking about ASRs was bullshit.

[Lalmohan]

did the marut have ac? it certainly didn't have night vision

[harbans]

From the pics it didn't even have a rear view mirror..

[Mihir]

I've heard that the Marut was designed by a rather short German tank designer. No wonder it all ended in tears.

[Lalmohan]

and to think they made it out of aluminium, instead of maraging steel... no wonder!

[shiv]

I've heard that the Marut was designed by a rather short German tank designer. No wonder it all ended in tears.

He was quite curt Kurt as well.

[amit]

And HAL didn't have the ability to put in a nuclear power plant in the plane. Stupid HAL. No wonder it was a failure. Bah!

[shiv]

and to think they made it out of aluminium, instead of maraging steel... no wonder!

They did not know how to make the wheel same length, so the plane used to sit nose up. And with 3 wheels it looked like an autorickshaw.