Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 09 Sep 2015 07:25

NRao wrote:I have found mid 1990 papers he has written on not needing supersonic combat planes.

This is the guy used by some to diss the LCA/AMCA and tout foreign toys (not that the professor himself wants them).

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Sep 2015 07:32

The appalling losses suffered by the very seasoned Israeli.AF to Soviet SAMs in the Ramadan War led to a search for RCS reduction

OK, perhaps, I have no evidence related to this topic he mentions.

But, how abut the same IAF took out the Syrian nuke facility using std planes? Look Ma, no stealth.

The other is the intake! Sure the Raptor has splitter plate intakes – which are unhappy stealth wise – but the Raptor was conceived 30 years ago. I had hoped to see diverter less supersonic intakes (DSI). Is no one in ADA looking at the JF 17, the F 35 or the J 20?

Eh?

Does he really respect the Chinese 5th Gen product? China stole that tech from the US.

I very much doubt India has it - cannot say for sure. So, who is leaping without looking?

DSI: Diverterless supersonic inlet

not that the professor himself wants them

Not sure what he wants, but, is he capable to lead such an effort from start to finish? Can he come up with a viable proposal that will be funded? Will he be able to assure/guarantee that it will be done within time and under budget? Any plane. Challo: HTT-60.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Sep 2015 07:43

Here would be my list (as per technological breakthroughs):

Stealth -> RAM, VLO design and signature control
Net-centric Warfare (aka Sensor/Data Fusion) -> fully integrated to the network and collating right information at the right time for decision making (situational awareness, decision support system, data fusion)
HMD -> information right in front of your eyes no matter where you look; point and shoot capability
FBW -> quadruplex digital fly-by-wire
AESA radar
Supercruise -> supersonic persistence
TVC -> super-maneuverability

Future tech:

Unmanned CV
Fly-by-Light (FBL) - triplex fly-by-light electro-optic architecture with fiber optic links for signal and data communications
Distributed architecture with smart sub-systems
Advance smart materials
Advanced Sensors providing 360 degree coverage
Electrical circuits replacing current multimodal circuits (mechanical, hydraulic and pneumatic)
New weaponry -> Lasers, hypersonic
Hypersonic speeds

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Sep 2015 07:49

Interesting:

srai wrote:Here would be my list (as per technological breakthroughs):

Stealth -> RAM, VLO design and signature control

Net-centric Warfare (aka Sensor/Data Fusion) -> fully integrated to the network and collating right information at the right time for decision making (situational awareness, decision support system, data fusion)

HMD -> information right in front of your eyes no matter where you look; point and shoot capability

AESA radar

Supercruise -> supersonic persistence

TVC -> super-maneuverability

You are way, way behind the curve.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Sep 2015 08:04

^^^

The whole "gen" concept loses its differentiation over time. Back in late 1980s and early 1990s, ATFs designed around a radical package comprising of stealth, TVC, supercruise, FBW, AESA and sensor/data fusion could be defined as a "new" generation (aka 5th Gen) for its time. But over two decades that has lost its luster as even 3rd-Gen and 4th-Gen (aka ++) planes will have elements of what defined the 5th-Gen more than two decades earlier.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Sep 2015 08:13

^^^^

You are absolutely right.

Which is why I feel that it is no use hanging on to a definition of A "5th Gen" plane.

Make a list of what the IAF needs and chase those techs. Who cares what others are doing?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 09 Sep 2015 08:27

Agree with Rao sahib and srai.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 09 Sep 2015 08:32

The news about the IJT is terrific. Facing and solving problems is what builds a knowledgebase. Running from them and buying 200 Scorpions when we have only released a 20 LCA offer is - needless to say a sign of India's corrupt soul.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Sep 2015 08:35

I dont know about India's corrupt soul being a valid statement. But $3000/hr for Scorpion flight is just too much.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 09 Sep 2015 08:36

^Do you question that figure? I thought that was the Scorpion's big selling point.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Sep 2015 08:37

NRao wrote:Is there one definition for 5th Gen planes? I do nto think so. He can say what he pleases and he will be right - as all others are.

Nrao this actually makes Das' argument correct.

Here is my reply:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 6#p1898276

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Sep 2015 19:46

IAF Jaguar Upgrade - The Basics

The Tribune reported on September 9, 2015 that certain issues "over offset clauses involving HAL" were holding up the contract with Honeywell for upgrade of Jaguar engines; these have now been resolved, paving the way for commercial and technical negotiations to start.
Need for Upgrade
The IAF currently operates around 110 (5 1/2 sqns) Jaguar strike fighters powered by Rolls-Royce Adour-811 turbofan engines. The aircraft, which first entered squadron service in the early 80s, is optimized for strike after low level penetration of contested airspace. At medium altitudes, the Jaguar's maneuverability and acceleration are poor. As a result, the fighter is not suitable for stand-off close air support using Precision Guided Munition (PGM).

The IAF is making a doctrinal shift from specialized aircraft to multi-role aircraft, Based on fatigue analysis, the IAF estimates that Jaguars could remain operational till 2030. As a result, the IAF is keen to upgrade the Jaguar with more powerful engine, fourth-generation cockpit and mission avionics, and self protection suite so that it better fits IAF doctrinal thinking.

Upgraded Jaguars will feature all weather precision attack capability with enhanced weapon load.

Upgrade Features

The planned upgrade includes

More powerful engines
Higher capacity alternators
Multi-mode radar
Glass cockpit with DARIN-3 navigation and attack avionics suite HOTAS controls and improved HUD
Auto Pilot
Helmet mounted Display

An Integrated Defensive Aids Suite (IDAS) is being co-developed by the DRDO’s Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE) and Cassidian (formerly EADS Defense Electronics). The suite includes DRDO developed Tarang radar warning receiver (RWR).

Engine Upgrade
The Honeywell F125IN has a max thrust of 43.8kN. In comparison, the existing Rolls-Royce Adour Mk811 engine has a thrust of 32.5kN.

The IAF is seeking a two phase contract with Honeywell. In Phase 1, Honeywell will modify two Jaguar aircraft to use its F-125IN engines.

During Phase 2, HAL will re-engine the remaining Jaguars using technology transferred by Honeywell.

The contract was estimated to be worth $700 million in 2011.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Sep 2015 21:31

This is long overdue. The Jaguars with the Honeywell engines and Darin III upgrades would be one of the best dedicated strike platforms anywhere in the world today.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Sep 2015 21:40

Arun Menon wrote:^Do you question that figure? I thought that was the Scorpion's big selling point.

My point was thats a huge amount by itself. Hopefully the ijt is less.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Sep 2015 21:46

Scoprion is aimed at a $2500-$3000 price point for the ISR/Light-Strike variant. Given the legacy business jet heritage the engine (more than 10,000 have been produced) costs can be easily found by using data that should be available in plenty. They haven't really deisgned a trainer variant yet but one would imagine that it would exclude a lot of the avionics components that allow it to act as an open architecture ISR and light strike unit. They'll probably also completely seal off the Payload bay and should be able to reduce the weight. Interestingly there has been no significant talk of this so called "Interest" in a trainer variant and it seems that the next iteration of the Scorpion that flies end of next year will be to demonstrate even deeper ISR and strike integration as opposed to stripping all that stuff and basically flying or demonstrating a trainer. I am not sure this entire interest being spoken about in the media is real (vis-à-vis the IAF being interested in it)..

Compared to HAL's IJT, the Scoprion has 2 engines, nearly double the MTOW, more than double the range..so as an IJT it will undoubtedly cost more to operate which is logical since you begin from an ISR and light strike platform...Even though the Scorpion has been designed to fly efficiently I would still guess that it would (in the best case) consume around 30-40% more fuel (even accounting for the more efficient engine on the scorpion) than the IJT per hour given more than 2 times the available thrust. That could be (very crude back of a napkin calculations) as much as a 200 additional gallons of fuel required by the Scorpion per hour.

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 Sep 2015 04:26

brar_w wrote:Scoprion ... They haven't really deisgned a trainer variant yet but one would imagine that it would exclude a lot of the avionics components that allow it to act as an open architecture ISR and light strike unit. They'll probably also completely seal off the Payload bay and should be able to reduce the weight. Interestingly there has been no significant talk of this so called "Interest" in a trainer variant and it seems that the next iteration of the Scorpion that flies end of next year will be to demonstrate even deeper ISR and strike integration as opposed to stripping all that stuff and basically flying or demonstrating a trainer. I am not sure this entire interest being spoken about in the media is real (vis-à-vis the IAF being interested in it)..

...

I think every "light" combat plane is being thrown around, real or not, as having some sort of AJT variant. Gripen has one; LCA has one; JF-17 has one; etc.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 04:46

Thats not driving any focus from the developers. They are busy demonstrating capability for ISR and strike in South America, Maritime recce in the UK and developing a next variant that factors in some of the lessons learnt from the USAF's usage of the aircraft in a large force exercise. You can definitely make it into a trainer but you would have to create a variant that removes much of the stuff that has been added and put it on a diet for there is a lot of weight associated with the capability that they are trying to sell (ISR and light Strike). I just don't see this happening leading me to suspect that the current media reports are a bit fishy. Regardless as a pure IJT it is still going to be "too much of a plane" unless there are plans to put it into different roles and also use it as an IJT.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Sep 2015 04:58

The offer that Carter proposed was a joint development with India and an exclusive line in India for a Scorpion based IJT.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 05:26

NRao wrote:The offer that Carter proposed was a joint development with India and an exclusive line in India for a Scorpion based IJT.

John Carter has had significant contributions to his election campaign from Textron Inc that designed and makes the Scorpion.

One link says US $ 45,000. That is about 30 Lakhs. It should be possible to buy an Indian rep to push Scorpion in Delhi for 5 Lakhs

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Sep 2015 05:27

Reg. The jag upg, considering the airframe has only about 15 years left, will it be such a value addition to start the upgrade at this late hour...my guess is that the upgrade itself might take up to 2025 to finish....

I guess the iaf has little choice but to add incremental value to its existing fleet so as to counter number depletion, perhaps the jags will soldier on till 2035 or more ala fishbeds

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Sep 2015 05:34

Just wondering...If ijt takes much longer to materialize, will iaf restructure is training methods...make do with what is available...pilatus and hawk? Doesn't the raf manage simply with hawks, perhaps iaf might have to do similar jugaad?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 05:36

shiv wrote:
NRao wrote:The offer that Carter proposed was a joint development with India and an exclusive line in India for a Scorpion based IJT.
John Carter has had significant contributions to his election campaign from Textron Inc that designed and makes the Scorpion.

One link says US $ 45,000. That is about 30 Lakhs. It should be possible to buy an Indian rep to push Scorpion in Delhi for 5 Lakhs

NRAO was referring to Ashton Carter the US SecDef, and the news reports that emerged the last time he was in India.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 05:48

brar_w wrote: NRAO was referring to Ashton Carter the US SecDef, and the news reports that emerged the last time he was in India.

Thanks. The link between Ashton Carter and Textron are even more easy to find
Ashton Carter required ethics waiver to join Obama administration

Mr. Carter also reported earning $20,000 in consulting fees from Goldman Sachs, and he received $10,000 from Raytheon for what was described on Mr. Carter’s ethics form as “meeting fee and memoranda.”

In Mr. Carter’s case, the waiver was issued just after his 2009 appointment to the Pentagon, focusing on consulting work he did for defense contractor Textron. According to the waiver, he “provided specific business advice” on a weapons system called the Sensor Fused Weapon. The last year of Defense funding for the weapon system was in fiscal 2007.

It is interesting that India has bought some of those sensor fuzed weapons
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ind ... ass-05100/

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 05:55

He has had a career in the defense and aerospace academia and industry as a scientist, academician and as a consultant working for various customers. As far as appointing him it was one of the better if not the best decisions Obama has made in his two term presidency. The offer was made as there was an exchange of programs that both parties wanted to be discussed under the framework. Things like EMALS, other carrier technology, combat aircraft engines, armor, UAV's etc. That was just a starting point given the discussion and nothing may come of a lot of these programs. Of course India had its own interests that it wants under the framework propulsion technology being at the forefront. Ashton Carter has pretty much no say in the Textron Scorpion as its procurement (or not) for the USAF will be considered much after his departure. It just so happened to be a program that has not yet received any money form the USAF as far as development is concerned and they may be interested in putting some money in as part of a co-development venture. You are making too much into it if you think he is trying to specifically bat for the Scoropion because of some association with Textron whereas his work is likely to be found for most of the top companies. His job is to bat for all defense contractors in the export market (that comes with the position), and the Scorpion has yet to receive even a single $ from either his office or the Pentagon. Its entirely an internally developed product.

Politicians and Bureaucrats will constantly make offers to sell or co-develop something that they thing will be beneficial to there own interests and where there is opportunity to pool resources. The DTTI provides a framework for a dialogue to exist and take place where both sides lay on the table the projects they wish to jointly develop. Not all these projects will bear fruit, in fact majority will not. I doubt the IAF will operate the Scorpion as an IJT for example whereas the F414 engine has a better chance, EMALS is a pie in the sky technology that would signal a considerable maturity in the bi-lateral relationship.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 06:23

brar_w wrote: You are making too much into it if you think he is trying to specifically bat for the Scoropion because of some association with

That is your opinion. Thank you for your endorsement of the credentials of a representative of your government, but it remains your opinion.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 06:23

Of course it is, and yours is yours

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 06:28

brar_w wrote:Of course it is, and yours is yours

Correct. Which is why I wonder at your need to tell me that "I am making too much" of something. You are reaching judgement on both me and Ashton Carter. Why do you need to do that? What is your beef in this? It is also my opinion that you may not be totally neutral here and have this need to protect Ashton Carter's credentials along with the reputation of all things American.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 06:29

Which is why I wonder at your need to tell me that "I am making too much" of something. You are reaching judgement on both me and Ashton Carter

It is my opinion that you may not be totally neutral here and have this need to protect Ashton Carter's credentials along with the reputation of all things American

Yeah, I am on the payroll as well

Seriously, I was just trying to provide some context. This entire talk of SCORPION and a host of other stuff that may have been discussed back in June is not really going anywhere. Just because one nation offers something does not mean it is being taken seriously by either side. Same applies to EMALS, and other technology. These are just starting points of a process, some will not go off the initial proposals because there is no use for them, they are not mutually beneficial etc while others will fizzle out somewhere in the negotiations..Very few will make it through and we may see some co-development or technology sharing on a very small number of them. The Framework is barely a few months old. To claim that this particular aircraft is being seriously considered (when nothing in that internal R&D program points to it being morphed for the said mission) and then claiming that because the current SecDef consulted for Textron at some point is the reason behind this offer is rather amusing to me, hence I opined about it. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that the Scoprion is going to show up in the iAF as an IJT. The company developing it is adding more capability in sensors and payload to make it better at ISR and strike both capabilities that would make it poorer in the IJT role. Anyone looking at what seems to be happening with hat program could see that they are taking the IAF DTTI (IJT) offer so seriously as a company that they are morphing the design farther away form the optimum configuration for such a role. This pretty much tells anyone looking into this from a neutral angle that the company itself doesn't regard the mission or the particular chances in the particular market as being very good. They are busy trying to design something based on what their current demonstrations have taught them and as I have said those changes will take the design farther away (as if it wasn't already) from a suitable IJT mission. Offers will be made all the time, in fact it was reported just a few weeks ago that there was an offer made to sell F-16s at a very low price. Does that mean the F-16 is going to be in the IAF soon?

Anyhow, just ignore what I wrote...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 06:30

brar_w wrote: Yeah, I am on the payroll as well

Thank you. It shows in your posts. It is no longer just my opinion now.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 06:48

shiv wrote:
brar_w wrote: Yeah, I am on the payroll as well
Thank you. It shows in your posts. It is no longer just my opinion now.

You do realize that I was joking right?? Lets look at my argument here -

- Scorpion is not a serious contender. Media is making too much of it..
- The Scorpion would cost more to operate than a dedicated IJT made by HAL or anyone else because it is designed for a longer range, double the MTOW, has two engines with 2x the overall thrust (hence higher fuel consumption)..things that make it well suited for the role it is designed for but not so much as an IJT that these articles claim the IAF is considering it for..
- The Scorpion offer was made in June but nothing is coming out of it, just as nothing is going to come out of a majority of the things discussed under the DTTI. Its a platform to discuss potentially mutually beneficial programs, not all will however be actually mutually beneficial and the MOD is likely to only take those where it sees a benefit of circumventing the general tender process (such as those areas where there could be TOT such as Engines, or EMALS)..The Scorpion is unlikely to meet those parameters, and in fact ignored for it to be a DTTI project the USAF has to invest in the co-development first which it hasn't and won't until at least 2018.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Sep 2015 06:54

shiv wrote:Thanks. The link between Ashton Carter and Textron are even more easy to find
Ashton Carter required ethics waiver to join Obama administration

It is interesting that India has bought some of those sensor fuzed weapons
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ind ... ass-05100/

The insinuation doesn't make any sense. Why should he need some extraneous financial 'motivation' to push an US system for sale to India? Now if Textron had been making 'campaign contributions' to our 'Defense Secretary' i.e A.K Antony, it would be a matter of concern.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Sep 2015 06:55

The insinuation doesn't make any sense

+1.

What Ash Carter did is normal - as long as one declares and pays their taxes. What you see in open source is nothing compared to what one needs to go through - especially at his level - getting a clearance.

This reaction is more cultural.

Added l8r:

Nothing in those articles are abnormal behavior. IF at all Ash Carter is relatively docile compared to others. One of the articles says so.

Mr. Carter’s earnings from the defense industry pale compared to other appointees, such as Air Force Secretary Deborah James, who was earning more than $500,000 per-year as an executive at defense contractor SAIC when she was nominated last year.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 07:14

Viv S wrote: Now if Textron had been making 'campaign contributions' to our 'Defense Secretary' i.e A.K Antony, it would be a matter of concern.

That is exactly the problem. Campaign contributions in the US are public. In India there is no such thing as "campaign contribution". It is all slush funds.

In this case (Carter/Textron) it may or may not mean anything much - but I had an epiphany that was linked to several observations I made.

In fact there are some really great new trainer aircraft that are already in service including the M346 and that Russian Yak something. Scorpion was hardly the plane that came to mind when it comes to importing jet trainers.

Suddenly on BRF we have people enthusiastically endorsing the Scorpion - not because they are paid, but because the name "Scorpion" has been brought to media attention in India by Carter. Don't know how much Carter is serving his masters if any at Textron, but the Indian media have surely been paid to attend the press conferences and pick up brochures from US press briefings.

So in the "public eye" of BRF we suddenly find that the Scorpion is being discussed/dissed/promoted without any hint of the others whose governments have not jumped in and paid our media and other reps to push their wares. Some of these trainers seem to be great aircraft. Anyone looked at the M 346 or the Yak 130? If I get paid I will promote either or both.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Sep 2015 07:18

>>Suddenly on BRF we have people enthusiastically endorsing the Scorpion

I think most are panning it and heaving a sigh of relief the IJT is back on track!!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Sep 2015 07:19

That IS Ash Carter's job.

IF India wants to reject it that is the prerogative of India.

The game is being played as expected.

Including BRiets. They too have biases.

So, what is wrong?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 07:21

Neither the M346 or Yak 130 are required since there is the Hawk which is essentially the same class of trainer already in the IAF and one that is being made by HAL. Similarly neither the 346 or the Yak130 are comparable to the HAL Sitara IJT as a quick look at the specifications would reveal (nor is the scorpion).

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 07:28

NRao wrote:That IS Ash Carter's job.

IF India wants to reject it that is the prerogative of India.

The game is being played as expected.

Including BRiets. They too have biases.

So, what is wrong?

As far as I am concerned it may well be Carter's job to promote something as you say. He has promoted the Scorpion. Has he or Textron reps paid anyone in India? We don't know for sure. I am simply raising the flag and asking if any India is getting paid to help Carter done his patriotic job for America. Whether you think this act of mine is wrong or right is your problem - but I will now keep my eyes and ears open for the manner in which diplomats do their jobs" in India and whether there could be a connection between Indian purchases of high ticket items and diplomats "doing their jobs"

Carter has represented Textron about Sensor fuzed bombs and India has bought them Is there a connection? I don't know, but I have certainly made a connection between Carter, Textron, India, Indian Air Force, Scorpion and Sensor fuzed bombs. i don't know if all this means anything but I will never forget to check if some of these things come up later. Carter is a temporary phenomenon. There will be someone else "doing his job" for GodBlessAmerica in future whom I will look at with interest.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 07:30

Carter has represented Textron about Sensor fuzed bombs and India has bought them Is there a connection?

A quick search of the FMS website would reveal that the deal was reported at a time when he was not in the Pentagon.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Sep 2015 07:31

brar_w wrote:
Carter has represented Textron about Sensor fuzed bombs and India has bought them Is there a connection?
A quick search of the FMS website would reveal that the deal was signed at a time when he was not in the Pentagon.

This means diddly squat.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2015 07:33

So where is there a connection between Carter, Textron and a quid pro quo in selling the said weapon, when the FMS notification was made while he held no office or had any authority? Or are you implying a connection between Textron and certain politicians or babus in India?