Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 11 Jan 2012 11:19

indranilroy wrote:I was thinking ... when you can't make it fake it ... so how about a simulator?

P.S. simulating decision making under physical stress might be a challenge though.

It is not like the real thing. I have both been on simulation and on the flight controls. But, a lot of flight hours can be cut down with simulation.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 11 Jan 2012 11:48

Akimalik ji,

When people say docile it is wrt to fighter aircraft ... it is not as docile as a civilian plane ... Which part of its flight envelop looks docile to you? Could ask the NM5 to complete a loop or a roll while having complete authority? Most civilian aircrafts are designed so that they can't enter a flat spin. A trainer has that as a basic requirement, that the plane should be able to enter a flat spin and recover from it. The PC 7 is not a EXTRA 300 but it is used by aerobatic teams around the world.

Here is its specifications which clearly layout its aerobatic capabilities:
http://www.pc7forsale.com/pdf/PC-7%20Tu ... ations.pdf

I am not an expert ... anyways here is my analysis ... It's a low wing aircraft (adds an anhedral effect) with a straight wing join leading to the lowest interference drag ... The wing shape is tapered which is the closest substitute to an elliptical wing and a general shape for high efficiency. For an all out aerobatic plane you would find that the aspect ratio, the dihedral would have been lower, and depending on user preference the aerofoil could be more symmetric.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 11 Jan 2012 14:01

agreed that you cannot simulate real motion induced stress - at best you can inflate and deflate the g-suit and provide motion on-set cues - which coupled with the visual cues are quite effective, but ultimately not the real thing
the benefit of the simulator is in creating mission management stress - above and beyond what you hope to find in real flying
one would assume that a seasoned pilot has already mastered physical stress
ofcourse most missions now days are flown at relatively low g - apart from any WVR

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 11 Jan 2012 14:18

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 443497.cms
I also saw a wildlife video in which an IAF helicopter was used to airlift a Tiger for relocation. So just out of curiosity under what circumstances can IAF be called in for help

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 12 Jan 2012 11:20

Kartik wrote:Tsarkar, you quoted the wrong person.

Indeed, I mis-quoted. However my response was generic and not a riposte to you or Bala, who's statement is quoted.

SagarAg wrote:So just out of curiosity under what circumstances can IAF be called in for help

In a nutshell, any circumstance Civil Authorities deem fit requiring Air, Sea or Military assistance, and validated by respective service's Ops.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 12 Jan 2012 13:02

SagarAg wrote:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 443497.cms
I also saw a wildlife video in which an IAF helicopter was used to airlift a Tiger for relocation. So just out of curiosity under what circumstances can IAF be called in for help

I think the technical term is "aid to civil power".

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 Jan 2012 20:40

the fulcrum upgrade
http://brfrahulm.blogspot.com/2012/01/f ... grade.html

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 15 Jan 2012 21:32

BSF helicopter crashes in Raipur

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 500835.cms

All are safe. Thank God

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Jan 2012 22:40

Rahul M wrote:the fulcrum upgrade
http://brfrahulm.blogspot.com/2012/01/f ... grade.html

Nice write up Rahul , Just one thing the RD-33 Series 3 was a separate deal for Mig-29UPG upgrade costing $250 million. So I think the complete cost of Mig-29UPG deal with all upgrades and new Series 3 engine will be $ 964 million plus $250 million for new engine.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20090821/155878138.html

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 Jan 2012 23:37

thx Austin, I have corrected it.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Jan 2012 01:11

Rahul M wrote:the fulcrum upgrade
http://brfrahulm.blogspot.com/2012/01/f ... grade.html

Rahul, another correction- in this para you mentioned that

It could fire the beyond visual range (BVR) air-to-air missile R-27, a first for IAF, a capability not to be matched by PAF until the post 9/11 largesse from US.

the Mirage-2000 actually entered service before the MiG-29, in 1985 to be precise and came with the Matra Super-530D BVR missile. And, the first BVR missile that the IAF actually used was the R-23R (AA-7 Apex) on the MiG-23MF, which entered service in the IAF on 4 July, 1983 when No.224 Warlords squadron was commissioned with the MiG-23MFs.

Another small correction- the MiG-29UPG gets the Zhuk-M2E radar not the Zhuk-ME. This is an IAF specific variant with some additional modes added.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 16 Jan 2012 12:06

IAF against Army aviation brigades

The Indian Air Force (IAF) has staunchly opposed the Army’s move to constitute aviation brigades, that will comprise a squadron each of attack helicopters, in its various Army corps, saying the move is a violation of the current government policy dating back to 1986.

Well-placed sources told this newspaper, “A government policy document of 1986 clearly lays down the equipment that each service will have. The Army move to constitute aviation brigades with attack helicopters is neither feasible nor in line with current policy. When the IAF is providing all support in terms of attack helicopters, where is the need for this? Besides, the costs are prohibitive. Where is the money for all this?” Sources further added, “If the Army feels that it wants to go ahead with this plan, it should approach the government (for a change in policy). Otherwise, even some of the paramilitary organisations in future can come up with their own wish lists for attack helicopters and other equipment.” The IAF, however, has supported the Navy’s plans for enhancement of its aviation assets, saying the Navy’s case is “justified since it has off-shore assets to guard”. The IAF’s objections to the Army’s move show that the Army-IAF turf war over aviation assets is far from over. It also shows that amid talk of synergy, the Army and IAF are not on the same page on such an important issue which has strategic implications. It may be recalled that the Indian Army had recently validated the concept of “aviation brigades” in its latest battlefield exercise and now wants attack helicopters of its own to provide aerial support to its tanks and advancing troops in a battle scenario. The Army concept of aviation brigades was validated in the recently-held exercise Sudarshan Shakti. As per the Army’s plans, each aviation brigade in future is to constitute three squadrons of helicopters. One squadron will comprise helicopters used for air-lifting heavy equipment, the second will be used for recce purposes while the third squadron in will perform the most crucial task of providing air support to the advancing battle-tanks.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 16 Jan 2012 13:29

The IAF's opposition be sidelined. It's none of IAF's business to go and create such unnecessary issues about what the Army is getting or what the Army need to have. This kind of unnecessary trouble creators be send home immediately.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 Jan 2012 13:48

The IAF will simply have to give way for the integral aviation assets with IA.

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 16 Jan 2012 13:49

"Anything that flies is mine!" Goering's legacy lives on in turf wars the world over.

One solution is assign roles not equipment to services.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jan 2012 14:06

is there *any* top tier army that is not allowed to have its own transport and attack helis ?
usa, germany, france, uk all seem to allow the army this. we have already seen what the organic gunships, transports and army can do in the iraq war mechnized ops and 101st airborne.

people should try to figure out ways to win, not start zero sum games and protecting empires.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2012 14:13

Here is some more details on Mig-29UPG along with some details if this was not posted before

Indian MiG-29 upgrade
More MiG-29UPGs under tests

Latest issue of Take Off Magazine is available for download http://en.take-off.ru/arhiv/637

nash · Post by **nash** » 16 Jan 2012 14:36

I have one Question here:

Is it possible to guide a AAM to its target using 2-way datalink feature of missile and IRST(OLS), without switcing on the radar.

Ignore if it sound silly ...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 16 Jan 2012 14:41

kartik, while the R-23 is technically correct, it was far too limited in range and performance to be considered BVR, more like WVR+. you are of course correct about the induction of M2k in IAF but the deal for mig29 predated the mirage one IIRC.

nash, yes. mica-IR advertises this capability for example.

nash · Post by **nash** » 16 Jan 2012 14:56

Rahul M wrote:kartik, while the R-23 is technically correct, it was far too limited in range and performance to be considered BVR, more like WVR+. you are of course correct about the induction of M2k in IAF but the deal for mig29 predated the mirage one IIRC.

nash, yes. mica-IR advertises this capability for example.

Thanks Rahul for Reply.

But can't it would be possible for missile Like R-77,Astra,MICA-RF.
They have dual mode guidance, one is for homing where we don't need radar at all and another is mid course update where INS used.
For INS basically we need a computer and Motion sensing devices.Motion senser take the data regarding target and feed it to computer and then it will update Missile accordingly,currently it is done by Radar.But can't it will be possible by IRST because there also IRST can detect Target position and can be processed and feed to AAM.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2012 14:59

Rahul M wrote:M2k in IAF but the deal for mig29 predated the mirage one IIRC.

No Mirage predates Mig-29 deal think by 3-4 years.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2012 15:05

Rahul M wrote:nash, yes. mica-IR advertises this capability for example.

You would still need the radar for MCG as the target would constantly change its position.

koti · Post by **koti** » 16 Jan 2012 15:13

nash wrote:
Rahul M wrote:kartik, while the R-23 is technically correct, it was far too limited in range and performance to be considered BVR, more like WVR+. you are of course correct about the induction of M2k in IAF but the deal for mig29 predated the mirage one IIRC.

nash, yes. mica-IR advertises this capability for example.
Thanks Rahul for Reply.

But can't it would be possible for missile Like R-77,Astra,MICA-RF.
They have dual mode guidance, one is for homing where we don't need radar at all and another is mid course update where INS used.
For INS basically we need a computer and Motion sensing devices.Motion senser take the data regarding target and feed it to computer and then it will update Missile accordingly,currently it is done by Radar.But can't it will be possible by IRST because there also IRST can detect Target position and can be processed and feed to AAM.

We can extrapolate this capability to whether MICA-IR can use Rafa's radar for guidance.
Though not impossible it sounds complicated to implement.
Anyway, IRST of the AC might be too weak to provide guidance at a distance on its own.

I hope I am in-line of what you intend to say.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 16 Jan 2012 15:38

IAF's go ahead for mig-29 came around the same time mirage-2000. the inductions happened within less than 2 years of each other.

_________________
the missile can be fed target co-ordinates from a separate aircraft, as was demonstrated by IN harriers firing derby.

nash · Post by **nash** » 16 Jan 2012 15:48

koti wrote:
nash wrote:
But can't it would be possible for missile Like R-77,Astra,MICA-RF.
They have dual mode guidance, one is for homing where we don't need radar at all and another is mid course update where INS used.
For INS basically we need a computer and Motion sensing devices.Motion senser take the data regarding target and feed it to computer and then it will update Missile accordingly,currently it is done by Radar.But can't it will be possible by IRST because there also IRST can detect Target position and can be processed and feed to AAM.
We can extrapolate this capability to whether MICA-IR can use Rafa's radar for guidance.
Though not impossible it sounds complicated to implement.
Anyway, IRST of the AC might be too weak to provide guidance at a distance on its own.

I hope I am in-line of what you intend to say.

Yes you are very much in-line...

Homing Device at terminal stage can be IR or RF.My concern is about MCG
And AFAIR OLS used in PAK-FA have range of about 90-100 Km and it has been said it can detect Raptor in that range(no sure).
So can we used that information or co-ordinates of target by OLS as MCG for missile like R-77 and ASTRA?????

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2012 16:06

Rahul M wrote:IAF's go ahead for mig-29 came around the same time mirage-2000. the inductions happened within less than 2 years of each other.

That was the point Kartik was trying to make that M2K got the deal much ahead of Mig-29 , infact the Soviets smartly scuttled M2K Lic Production in return for Lic producing the Mig-29 at barter price.

the missile can be fed target co-ordinates from a separate aircraft, as was demonstrated by IN harriers firing derby.

Which is fine , as long as the seperate aircraft can keep the target under track via its radar ...... you still need a radar to do the job ....cant use IRST to cue BVR engagements.

nash · Post by **nash** » 16 Jan 2012 16:43

Austin wrote:
the missile can be fed target co-ordinates from a separate aircraft, as was demonstrated by IN harriers firing derby.
Which is fine , as long as the seperate aircraft can keep the target under track via its radar ...... you still need a radar to do the job ....cant use IRST to cue BVR engagements.

It might be a new bee question but i have to ask why it is not possible coneptually or point me where i can find the answer.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2012 16:49

Not too bad an acquisition as AM Masand in Vayu told us how the MIG-29 got the btter of the M-2000 every time in air-to-air combat, when they flew against each other in a special exercise.The MIG-29 Fulcrums were developed in response and mainly meant to counter the lighter F-16,while the SU-27 Flankers were meant to comabt the F-15s.After the German re-unification,the Germans retained the MIG-29 for some time as they were impressed with it.An EF pilot/Exec at Aero-India told me,while extolling the virtues of the EF,when asked about the MIG-35s aerobatics,said that "nothing flies like the MIG-35",and that he had also flown the type (MIG-29)and was v.impressed with its capability too.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2012 16:57

nash wrote:it might be a new bee question but i have to ask why it is not possible coneptually or point me where i can find the answer.

Limited FOV ,Range of IRST , Inability to provide missile quality track data at BVR ranges with updates , Lacks true All weather capability .....all of which aircraft radar do not lack.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 16 Jan 2012 17:16

Not too bad an acquisition as AM Masand in Vayu told us how the MIG-29 got the btter of the M-2000 every time in air-to-air combat, when they flew against each other in a special exercise.

Nonsense cannot be everytime (other that maybe when the author was involved)

The M2K guys would beg to differ

Hell the 23 BN guys would beg to differ

There were ways to get the 29

takes nothing away from it - its a awesome fighter but like fighter it also had some weak points to be expploited plus it had no ground attack ability at that time

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 16 Jan 2012 17:28

To date, the first batch of 16 MiG-29K/KUBs has been almost complete, but the customer has requested the delivery of the remaining aircraft of the batch to be put on the back burner until some time closer to the delivery date of the Vikramaditya, from which they are being bought to operate.

More MiG-29K/KUB delivered

Construction of new MiG-29K batch kicks off

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 16 Jan 2012 17:33

Austin wrote: Which is fine , as long as the seperate aircraft can keep the target under track via its radar ...... you still need a radar to do the job ....cant use IRST to cue BVR engagements.

the mirage can't, since it doesn't have one but the new gen IRSTs should be able to.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2012 18:09

Rahul M wrote:the mirage can't, since it doesn't have one but the new gen IRSTs should be able to.

AFAIK only JSF DAS claims to do that and that too in WVR combat.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 16 Jan 2012 20:51

Austin wrote:
Rahul M wrote:the fulcrum upgrade
http://brfrahulm.blogspot.com/2012/01/f ... grade.html
Nice write up Rahul , Just one thing the RD-33 Series 3 was a separate deal for Mig-29UPG upgrade costing $250 million. So I think the complete cost of Mig-29UPG deal with all upgrades and new Series 3 engine will be $ 964 million plus $250 million for new engine.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20090821/155878138.html

The MiG-29’s good operational record prompted India to sign a deal with Russia in 2005—2006 to upgrade all of its MiG-29s for US$888 million. Under the deal, the Indian MiGs were modified to be capable of deploying the R-77RVV-AE (AA-12 'Adder') air-to-air missile, also known as the Amraamski. The missiles had been successfully tested in October 1998 and were integrated into IAF's MiG-29s. IAF has also awarded the MiG Corporation another US$900 million contract to upgrade all of its 69 operational MiG-29s. These upgrades will include a new avionics fit, with the N-109 radar being replaced by a Phazatron Zhuk-M radar. The aircraft is also being equipped to enhance beyond-visual-range combat ability and for air-to-air refuelling to increase endurance.[31] In 2007, Russia also gave India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) a licence to manufacture 120 RD-33 series 3 turbofan engines for the upgrade.[32] The upgrade will also include a new weapon control system, cockpit ergonomics, air-to-air missiles, high-accuracy air-to-ground missiles and "smart" aerial bombs. The first six MiG-29s will be upgraded in Russia while the remaining 63 MiGs will be upgraded at the HAL facility in India. India also awarded a multi-million dollar contract to Israel Aircraft Industries to provide avionics and subsystems for the upgrade.[33]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-29

was just going thro' this page. can somebody confirm the bolded part?? if true, the total upgrade cost would come to US$888M+964M+250M no?? besides what about the indian/israeli/french stuff which are part of the upgrade?? who is paying for them?? India pays separately or the russians pay themselves by procuring and integrating them??
how come french are asking for more for the M2K upgrade if the above is true??

one is piecemeal and another is one go upgrade only.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 17 Jan 2012 06:37

888+960+250 = 2098 million ...cheap ????

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 17 Jan 2012 07:50

Philip wrote:An EF pilot/Exec at Aero-India told me,while extolling the virtues of the EF,when asked about the MIG-35s aerobatics,said that "nothing flies like the MIG-35",and that he had also flown the type (MIG-29)and was v.impressed with its capability too.

I can second that ... and I have told this story before ... I was there on the first day of AI'07 and was fortunate enough to be standing next to a Gripen pilot and a F-16 pilot ... When the Mig-35 did those moves ... people clapped and I stood there completely stunned ... I remember all three of us looking at each other ... all of us had seen that for the first time (I guess) ... and all 3 of us did not believe what we saw ... we couldn't believe an heavier than air object could be suspended in air like that and have complete authority on pitch and roll like that ... I am still in awe of that ... I have seen all the displays by all the MMRCA participants ...nothing comes close

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Jan 2012 08:09

Interesting never heard of $888 million dollar deal before and it says R-77 were integrated with Mig-29 in late 90's

We have yet to see R-77 and Mig-29 pictures yet but the rumours persists. See no reason why IAF should hide it considering the Bison displays it.

The final deal cost imo is $960 million for the upgrade and $250 million for Engine , considering R-77 is in wide use with MKI and Bison they wont need to buy that urgently right now.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jan 2012 08:11

I had heard that a subset of our Mig29 known as Mig29S came from the word go with R77 capability and dual fire control channels (guide out 2 inflight AAM vs 1 on Mig29A). we may or may not have used the R77 on these birds, but the capability may always be in lurk mode, to be used if really needed . perhaps this is what late B.Harry was alluding to.

negi · Post by **negi** » 17 Jan 2012 09:04

I haven't been able to locate the elusive pic of our Mig-29s with a R-77.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 17 Jan 2012 09:26

Rahul M wrote:kartik, while the R-23 is technically correct, it was far too limited in range and performance to be considered BVR, more like WVR+. you are of course correct about the induction of M2k in IAF but the deal for mig29 predated the mirage one IIRC.

nash, yes. mica-IR advertises this capability for example.

Back in the days when the R-23R was inducted, it's max engagement range of ~35 km made it a BVR weapon. There was nothing that surpassed it in the IAF and nor in the PAF (which never got the AIM-7 Sparrow despite rumours to the contrary). On most days in the Indian subcontinent, 4+ km itself would be BVR.

As Air Chief Marshal AY Tipnis (retd) mentioned in this article Ode to the Fair Lady

Fighter pilots give a sigh of relief when the weather-man declares visibility in excess of 4 kms, for it allows unrestricted fighter flying. Four-km visibility and sighs of relief, if not cries of joy! Ha! I have flown in several countries and one can see as far as the eye would allow, sometimes one felt you could see tomorrow! It’s not that this does not occur at home, but the phenomenon is so rare (unless one flies over Ladakh) that nearly every such occasion can be recalled vividly. So what causes poor visibility a near round-the-year painful experience in India? Moisture/salt/ dust-in-suspension, industrial/ vehicular pollution, rural chullah fires or field burning for soil rejuvenation. You name the culprit, we have it. I have touched only on the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

MiG Tipnis