Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 20 Sep 2015 13:46

shiv wrote:I think that emotional support for India should not allow misinformation to be posted as truth. The LUH is getting ready. It has not had its first flight yet and it will be at least 4 years if there are no major hurdles discovered as occurred with IJT.

If what you want isn't ready in your time-frame you either shift the time-frame (order extra Dhruvs) or place a stopgap order to be delivered only in the interim. You do not cannabalise your advantage in economies for a foreign product, which is what running two production lines in parallel amounts to.

The first 50 Ka-226 may be justified. The next 150 is a (self-inflicted) gunshot to the foot. Also for the record, we'll be assembling NOT manufacturing.

Of course, if we're sure that HAL's LUH won't have what it takes to be a true peer to the Bell/EC (1000++ orders), where it really counts (not on spreadsheets), then its fine. We can kneecap it without too much regret. Perhaps the Ka-226 will get there spring-boarded by the Indian order.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shiv » 20 Sep 2015 13:49

Viv S wrote:The first 50 Ka-226 may be justified. The next 150 is a (self-inflicted) gunshot to the foot. Also for the record, we'll be assembling NOT manufacturing.

Thank you for your opinion.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 20 Sep 2015 13:54

@srai, I will still take that logic and assumption of yours as absurd, that ka226 and LUH can't coexist. If you have any alternative, please scribble.
Last edited by shaun on 20 Sep 2015 14:08, edited 1 time in total.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 20 Sep 2015 14:05

Viv S wrote:The first 50 Ka-226 may be justified. The next 150 is a (self-inflicted) gunshot to the foot. Also for the record, we'll be assembling NOT manufacturing.

sir, to encourage private participation isn't scale a big necessity, so the order for 200.? the other question is what was Hal doing in its formative years?

Our aerospace industry needs many players, which will help the ecosystem immensely.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19507
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 20 Sep 2015 15:57

Shaun wrote:Please Sir , no need to get "worked out" for "my FUD" as it won't change the policies or decisions of MOD .


Then why are you making these illogical statements without even knowing about the genesis of the competition and the MODs policies and HALs work? Seems to me you are just commenting for the sake of commenting.

India needs to make sure it gets as much stuff as possible but for Ka-226 not from HAL but definitely anywhere else , even if it means screw giri ( I don't know how much HAL would have better that in this case) .Anyway i cited other reasons too , why the JV getting delayed . Now you choose explicitly the 1st point from my post, for that i can't help ,Sir.


Seriously, did you even read what I wrote and the report said? Who said that HAL would be making the Ka-226? All the report said, and I reiterated was that HAL was making its LUH for the category in which both Ka-226 and LUH would be acquired. That is the original plan.

Instead of which you went off on a tear blaming HAL for doing exactly what it was supposed to be doing. That's a perfect case of making assumptions without even examining the facts at hand.

On different note , HAL's Helo division is really doing commendable job in self reliance . With light combat helicopter we have reached new heights . LUH too will see faster induction because of the experience in ALH. Now the target should be for Medium and heavy lift helicopters .But the questions that comes up ,1. When HAL have a big order list for LUH , ALH , LCH , why bid for Ka-226 ?? wasn't Ka-226 JV for adding private capacity in helo building ?? and the reason Kamov was asked to choose it partners .


Again, who is stating that HAL would make the Ka-226? You are very confused about the whole topic, it seems. Before labeling srai's concerns as absurd or not, take a deep breath, and examine the entire issue dispassionately.

HAL's progress in Medium and Heavy choppers can only come if it delivers on other programs, especially given the requirement for Medium and Heavy choppers is limited at best, given our vast holdings of Mi-17s and only Naval requirenments for medium choppers.

In that vein, HAL should be encouraged, empowered to complete the LUH program and the Ka226 orders should be limited to the planned 187 odd.

Srai's concerns in that vein are very germane, not absurd. There is a long history of local programs being dumped in favour of immediate imports which prove to be hard to sustain in the long term, eg Arjun vs T-90.

These concerns can only be alleviated once we see there is a track record of inducting local alternatives over the long term. Lets see.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Gyan » 20 Sep 2015 16:37

Has anybody run economic charts to determine whether inducting another two engined light helo will be more economical than ordering more ALH? We have to compute the saving in fuel costs vs increase in costs for inducting another type with all the associated paraphernalia of spares, ground support, maintenance, repair, overhaul equipment, training etc.

Should we not try to reduce the costs of ALH itself with deeper indigenization? For instance, we have still not started producing Shakti engine even though ToT was done in 2010.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shiv » 20 Sep 2015 17:15

Gyan wrote:Has anybody run economic charts to determine whether inducting another two engined light helo will be more economical than ordering more ALH? We have to compute the saving in fuel costs vs increase in costs for inducting another type with all the associated paraphernalia of spares, ground support, maintenance, repair, overhaul equipment, training etc.

Should we not try to reduce the costs of ALH itself with deeper indigenization? For instance, we have still not started producing Shakti engine even though ToT was done in 2010.

The unknown factor here are the small helipads/forest clearings of the Northeast and North where size matters. Note that "lack of tail rotor" is touted as an advantage for the Ka 226 because it can land in areas just a little bigger than the main rotor. Other helos have a tail rotor that must necessarily be placed beyond the main rotor. You might have read this terrific story about rescue of a downed IAF pilot and the rotor of the rescue helo being damaged by trees
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Histo ... -Nose.html

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19507
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 20 Sep 2015 17:19

Russian equipment works and usually works ok, apart from the occasional Smerch or T-90. The problem is more often than not, the abysmal spares support. The Russians seem to suffer from a collective group amnesia regarding the need to support their systems with proper spares pipeline and TOT for MRO etc.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 20 Sep 2015 18:08

Karan saab , Is HAL in the fray to make JV with Kamov for making Ka226 ??? If Hal starts building Ka-226 then it will surely replicate the same story ( albeit in a different way )of Arjun and T-90 from CVRDE. If a foreign company would have built T-90 in partnership with a private Indian partner , i don't know how would you have reacted then ??

Now although both the Helis are in the light category , Ka-226 got some advantages because of its design which will translate to operational advantage as mentioned in shiv saab's post. Srai's fear is unwarranted and thus illogical. He thinks that Ka-226 will kill LUH with some assumption that includes IAF distrusting HAL .

So Coming to the point ,JV with Private enterprise to build KA-226 is the need of the hour.
These are my POV.
1. Our defense forces need Helis in Light category , Ka-226 brings some operational advantages due to its design
2. Need a parallel manufacturing facility other than HAL
3. Need to bring the private sector industries in to manufacturing and make in India effort
4. Ka-226 can cater to our domestic civil use and also export.
5. It will encourage other domestic private players
6. More competition in the market

Now things to remember , HAL is a government entity , so it can influence on GOI to clinch the JV in its favor . Political parties who are against BJP will always come up with slogan likes " Bjp is for Reliance and Adani " , jeopardizing any private JV . so the odds are in favor of reliance - kamov JV.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19507
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 20 Sep 2015 18:27

Shaun wrote:Karan saab , Is HAL in the fray to make JV with Kamov for making Ka226 ??? If Hal starts building Ka-226 then it will surely replicate the same story ( albeit in a different way )of Arjun and T-90 from CVRDE. If a foreign company would have built T-90 in partnership with a private Indian partner , i don't know how would you have reacted then ??


Seriously, you are engaged in arguing about something nobody is postulating? Where in heck is anybody talking of HAL making the Ka-226?? What a needless sidetrack!
As regards any foreign company building T-90, the T-90 was a flawed product from day 1. Hopefully the Ka-226 will not turn out likewise. The bigger issue is that the existence of the T-90 itself was used to claim the Arjun was unnecessary.
All folks have said is the LUH program at HAL needs to be supported and that program should be our future, not the Ka-226 alone, which at the end of the day is an import and will be merely CKD/SKD screwdriver assembly at some private firm, and whilst useful in terms of giving the private sector some fillip, has zero contributions to import substitution or Indian design capability.

Now although both the Helis are in the light category , Ka-226 got some advantages because of its design which will translate to operational advantage as mentioned in shiv saab's post. Srai's fear is unwarranted and thus illogical. He thinks that Ka-226 will kill LUH with some assumption that includes IAF distrusting HAL .


There is a long history of the IAF distrusting HAL (with some merit), and also of the IAF ignoring indigenous development to the point it affects programs (LCA being a perfect example). SRai's fears or concerns are hence germane, but time will tell what will happen and a lot depends on HALs ability to deliver.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 20 Sep 2015 18:33


shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 20 Sep 2015 18:46

Karan M wrote:All folks have said is the LUH program at HAL needs to be supported and that program should be our future, not the Ka-226 alone, which at the end of the day is an import and will be merely CKD/SKD screwdriver assembly at some private firm, and whilst useful in terms of giving the private sector some fillip, has zero contributions to import substitution or Indian design capability.


Just tell me, if "screw driver giri" is all the word you can come up with for private sector , do you really think HAL and only HAL is the only solution for our future needs ?? And if not , what is that you suggest , to make India an aero space power ??

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2309
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Vivek K » 20 Sep 2015 18:50

Karan, Russian equipment likes to stay in hangars a lot. And the Russians have demonstrated themselves to be poor in after sales support with spares. As a result, any Russian sale should be coupled with double the normal inventory of spares. That is if we are not looking to buy Hangar Queens.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 20 Sep 2015 18:54

By your logic , we should have scrapped all Mi-17 helo deals , r8 ??

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2309
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Vivek K » 20 Sep 2015 19:13

Ideally if there were Indian developments in that class - of course! In the absence of locally developed systems, and the IAF finding Mi17 to be a good platform, they should have bought them with double the inventory of spares or be a large enough operator to allow cannibalization.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 20 Sep 2015 19:29

Then more head ache for you , MI-17 might see production in India itself !!

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2309
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Vivek K » 20 Sep 2015 20:29

Not for me but for India as a progressive nation.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 20 Sep 2015 21:04

shiv wrote:Thank you for your opinion.

You're very welcome. However, that the Ka-226 order will have a very small localisation component was reported by the media - nothing to do with me.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 20 Sep 2015 21:08

Gyan wrote:Has anybody run economic charts to determine whether inducting another two engined light helo will be more economical than ordering more ALH? We have to compute the saving in fuel costs vs increase in costs for inducting another type with all the associated paraphernalia of spares, ground support, maintenance, repair, overhaul equipment, training etc.

Should we not try to reduce the costs of ALH itself with deeper indigenization? For instance, we have still not started producing Shakti engine even though ToT was done in 2010.

Precisely. The Dhruv is in already in production with a mature support/supply ecosystem and proven performance. Direct operating costs may be higher but its a cheap price to pay for indigenisation, especially in the wake of the collapse in oil prices.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19507
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 20 Sep 2015 22:41

Disagree about the A2A part. That is useful. Rest is germane.

http://iadnews.in/2015/09/deliberate-ca ... f71xZceGYA
Deliberate capability degradation of P-8I meant for India and why it matters-a classic case of ‘Strings Attached’

STRINGS ATTACHED-DELIBERATE CAPABILITY DEGRADATION OF P-8I MEANT FOR INDIA

When it comes to the procurement of defense and allied hardware from the States the reason as to why the Indian military establishment have been so skeptical all along is well illustrated by the follow example.

As we all know, IN acquired 8 P-8I Poseidon from Boeing to serve in the capacity of medium MPA,ASuw ,to augment the existing fleet of Tu-142MK and IL-38SD in the light of increasing PLAN forays into the IOR and to shore up our maritime ISR capabilities in response to a marked increase in their tempo of operations in the Arabian sea particularly in the vicinity of Strait of Hormuz.

Now as with all other goodies from Uncle Sam’s stable,the P-8I also comes with ‘strings attached’.

The original Raytheon APY-10 has been modified to the I standard for us, I here standing for India to comply with Washington’s export restrictions.
The following modifications have been carried out over the baseline model.Modifications is too mild a term to use here,rather deliberate degradation is more of the correct term.

1.Modification of Radar navigator to remove accumulated carrier phase and revert to earlier, less sophisticated navigator
2.Removal of Precision Targeting capability
3.Removal of UHR ISAR capability
4.Removal of 1 and 3 foot SAR capability
5.Limiting the performance to meet 30 meter SAR geo-location accuracy.

Removal of precision Targetting means the poseidon woult neither be able to provide midcourse guidance cues to ashm launched by it or by other air or surface platforms and engage in over the horizon-OTH targetting wherein you provide track info of enough fidelity to a missile launched from over the horizon so assist it in acquiring its target in its terminal phase. Long range ashm shots would be all but impossible without OTHT info since the earth’s curvature limits the field of view and volume of air space/ground area scanned by any ground based radar.

Removal of ultra high inverse synthetic radar imagery mode translates to an incapability to positively ID amd discern platforms in a high clutter and target rich environment such as in littorals and to break out individual contacts in a densely packed formation.

Without sub metric SAR resolution,you simply wont be able to conduct IMINT from a long standoff range which is necessary to keep you outside the hostile Lrsam engagement zone or conversely you wont generate radar imagery of sufficient resolution and packing in enough details so as to satisfy the end user’s imint requirements since low to mid res IMINT can also be performed by non trad Istar assets such as Litening equipped jets. And this coupled with the 30 metre geo location condition renders you incapable of conducting man in the loop standoff precision strikes over land

On the other hand they have included an air to air detection and tracking capability, something which isnt that much of a value addition for a MPA.
To put things in perspective, this is like a car enthusiast with a thing for no nonsense high end performance who goes on to buy a F10 gen BMW M5 and finds out that the twin scroll Honeywell turbochargers are missing from the 4.4 Ltr
V8 powerplant thus putting a cap on the torque and no of horses generated resulting in a not so impressive acceleration and a reduced top speed. Not at all a desirable thing for a person who always puts a premium on performance. Instead the folks at BMW have decided to fit higher caliber Brembo discs to the front wheels and now the Beemer comes to n absolute standstill, from say 100 kmph at a considerable less distance than what it used to do earlier.And the irony being this reduction in breaking distance is now being highlighted by the OEM as a capability enhancement.

And this is where Russia has proved its mettle and proved time and again that they are indeed a time tested and strategic ally by providing us with state of the art
equipments and other exotic technologies which conform to the same standards as their in service ones contrary to what America has been doing with us.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 20 Sep 2015 23:03

^^^^^

1) The APY-10 on th eP-8I, though carrying the same designation, is an international model - thus NOT the same as the one for the USN. A known fact

2) The one on the P-8I, as far as I recall, was built to Indian specs. So, is someone missing some feature now?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19507
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 20 Sep 2015 23:15

Neither of which counters the basic point w/the article. Downgraded model with key features removed. We'd have been better off putting the EL/M-2022 on the darn plane.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 21 Sep 2015 01:36

Who's Purbayan Roy? I can't seem to find anything about him.

Only other piece I can find by him is -

Sorry state of IAF

Things cant get any worse or can they?

Or,Sometimes things do happen and theres just no justification.

First up, theres the great national melodrama which goes by the name of’Indian Mmrca competition’now being played out at South block with MoD and IAF being the hosts. Negotiations have dragged on since 2012 and still the contract signature remains elusive.

Next up is our homegrown desi bird. Right from its inception,the entire project has been plagued by delays,timeline slippages,cost overruns and inability to meet Asqr and so on and so forth. The shoddy management of the programme by the various stakeholders and their frequent skirmishes over specs, final configuration &various titbits further served to heighten the already deplorable state of affairs. To the uninitiated it would seem the Tejas programme bears a striking resemblance to the concept of limit in Calculus. x as in f(x) tends to a particular point but it can never get to the point howsoever close it gets. In a similar fashion, our Lca has been inching towards its FOC since 2013 and still the final clearence is nowhere in sight.

Then theres more in the pipeline.
To top it all up another one bites the dust and now the score on the board for this year is an impressive 7,a figure which is all but impossible for our peers and contemporaries to match howsoever hard they may try

2 Bahadur,2 Bison, 1 Mki,1 Jag IS and a Hawk for 2015
And the best part is there are still 4 more months ’16 and with some luck we may hit the dozen figure.

Anyone willing to bet on what type is going to go down next month. My money is on the Flogger.

If things continue to pan out in this manner, then pretty soon there will be no Indian Airforce. Rather it will be “All air and no Force.”

Written by-Purbayan Roy


Less of a professionally written editorial, more of an angry blogpost.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8753
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 21 Sep 2015 02:00

There is nothing in his post that is inaccurate other than the views on A2A radar mode. That is a radar mode that does not exist on the USN P-8A's. What the IN gets in the P-8I is what they analyzed when the program was presented to them. As Karan said, there is always (was in the past, and would exist in the future) to get a better upfront sensor if it is deemed important enough after everything is taken as a whole (cost and capability).

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... clnk&gl=us

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 21 Sep 2015 02:11

Neither of which counters the basic point w/the article. Downgraded model with key features removed. We'd have been better off putting the EL/M-2022 on the darn plane


Raytheon, 2012:

Although it shares a common designation with the radar being used in the U.S. Navy’s P-8A Poseidon, the Indian APY-10 incorporates new modes. “The Indian government had different requirements [from the U.S. Navy],” said Tim Carey, Raytheon’s vice president, ISR systems. “It’s specifically customized for their needs.”

One of the two principal elements of the adaptation is the addition of an interleaved weather/surface search radar mode, which allows the flight crew to access weather-avoidance information while the radar is also performing its surveillance mission.

A second requirement is for an air-to-air capability to exploit the aircraft’s typically high operating altitudes. “India is interested in the air picture from high altitude,” said Carey. “We’ve adapted the waveform to give that capability.” Details of the kind of air-to-air capability that can be achieved have not been revealed. Adapting the APY-10 for its extra duties has involved changes in the data- and signal-processors, and some alterations to the actual antenna. Mounted in the lower nose of the P-8, the radar has a forward scan over a 240-deg sector.


The fact that the IN is buying more, is proof enough that IN was aware of the status of the radar. Which is why asked in my previous post if anyone is missing any feature now. In 2015 the abilities of that radar should not have been a surprise to the IN.

Now if thsi author wanted to put that stuff in open source - nothing wrong with that.

And if it were "deliberate", then why is the IN buying more of an incomplete system knowing it may not meet recs?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8753
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 21 Sep 2015 02:33

The fact that the IN is buying more, is proof enough that IN was aware of the status of the radar. Which is why asked in my previous post if anyone is missing any feature now. In 2015 the abilities of that radar should not have been a surprise to the IN.


The changes made to the APY-10 have been highlighted in the Raytheon testing document in my earlier post (from which the blog post takes its data). The development occurred after India purchased the aircraft, and subsequently the FMS contract funded the development and the nearly 470 hours of P-8I specific test flying that also involved air-to air radar testing in Texas. There is performance degradation in areas cited in the article which sources the document linked above. At the time the offer was made the exact changes would have been communicated along with requests from the IN side to order capability that did not exist (or were not planned) in the baseline Poseidon such as the said radar mode and MAD. The capability in terms of systems and architecture is mutually agreed upon after factoring in what the developer/seller is willing to part ways with, and what capability the operator/customer wants over and above the baseline capability. In such case the IN and MOD engaged different industry partners for the MAD, and sought extra capability that required testing over and above the baseline P-8 program.

Now if thsi author wanted to put that stuff in open source - nothing wrong with that.


It is in the open source and has been for quite some time now. I have posted the cached version of the document above. I have seen the original raytheon document earlier as well and it was freely available at the time.

And if it were "deliberate", then why is the IN buying more of an incomplete system knowing it may not meet recs?


It isn't deliberate as in deception. It was something that had to have been (as is common practice) communicated at the time of offer because the changes associated in clearing the radar for Indian FMS sale were paid through the FMS contract itself. You hash these things out before you sign a contract, just as you get your specific stuff as a customer before the time of signing such as data links.

As to why the IN is interested in more? The aircraft and the capability it offers would be taken as a whole and if the IN thinks more add value to its capabilities then they would seek more and its up to the MOD to make the cost and capability decision


Meanwhile, I still haven't figured out what this sensor is on an IN P-8I

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7019&start=960#p1872282
Last edited by brar_w on 21 Sep 2015 03:03, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 21 Sep 2015 02:55

Oh, I get it.

So, it isn't deliberate as in deception. But it is deliberate enough when it comes to the procurement of defense and allied hardware from the States the reason as to why the Indian military establishment have been so skeptical all along. Or an Elta.

Works for me.

Lets move on.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8753
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 21 Sep 2015 03:00

But it is deliberate enough when it comes to the procurement of defense and allied hardware from the States the reason as to why the Indian military establishment have been so skeptical all along. Or an Elta.


Yes, its a different capability. This is why I do not expect very high end systems especially where there are competitive alternatives available to be procured by India until the bi-lateral relationship rises to a level where there is significantly greater access to technology. The author is correct about the Indo-Russian relationship, it is based on years of mutually beneficial military cooperation and the level of trust and maturity is quite different from the Indo-US relationship which will take many years to get to that level - and hopefully, India wouldnt require it to get to that level because it would bring its own capability up to a point where it doesn't matter...i.e. the reduction in reliance on russian kit is offset by indian kit as opposed to american, french, british or Israeli kit etc.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4680
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby srai » 21 Sep 2015 06:03

Karan M wrote:Neither of which counters the basic point w/the article. Downgraded model with key features removed. We'd have been better off putting the EL/M-2022 on the darn plane.


Don't the Russian also downgrade their equipment for export? They usually have a special designation for export. Although not clear on what they restrict/downgrade.

But the American are much more restrictive in this area and have a much more tightly bound legal contract that comes with in-base inspections, temper-proof black box seals and others like additions/upgrade restrictions. This applies to even their most trusted allies like UK and Israel.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shiv » 21 Sep 2015 06:36

Indian Navy's MiG-29K fighter performs Short Take Off and Arrestor Landing at INS Hansa
In a bid to test the features of MiG-29K fighter jet, a Short Take Off and Arrestor Recovery operation was conducted at the Naval Air Station INS Hansa in Goa.

This was demonstrated to the Consultative Committee of Ministry of Defence (MoD). Members of the Consultative Committee of MoD were shown the latest facilities and infrastructure made for MiG-29K. A demonstration of a take off from the Shore Based Test Facility as also an Arrestor Recovery was shown to the MPs.

Image

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2309
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Vivek K » 21 Sep 2015 07:40

What is that box on the bottom right corner of Hakimji's photograph! Definitely a no-no so close to runway centerline.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shiv » 21 Sep 2015 08:04

Vivek K wrote:What is that box on the bottom right corner of Hakimji's photograph! Definitely a no-no so close to runway centerline.

This is not a full runway at all. It is a mock-aircraft carrier deck (INS Hansa). Carrier decks have restricted space by definition with the island forming a huge box next to the runway. . Note the carrier style hydraulically operated chocks holding the MiG 29 back until it reached full power after which they drop down to release the plane.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 21 Sep 2015 08:16

brar_w wrote:Meanwhile, I still haven't figured out what this sensor is on an IN P-8I

https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewt ... 0#p1872282


"It is unclear what this pod’s exact purpose is, but it is worth a guess (we have reached out to Boeing but are still awaiting a response). It could very well be a modular communications intelligence gathering package that will allow the P-8 to pick up some of the slack for the USAF’s RC-135 and U-2 (in Senior Spear configuration) fleets, as well as the Navy’s own secretive EP-3 Aries cadre among other smaller platforms. Such a capability will allow the P-8 to eavesdrop on potential foes communications in a way in which linguists can translate those intercepts in real-time or in near real-time. Using satellite communications, there is a possibility that those linguists may not be on the jet at all, and could even be halfway around the globe. Another possibility is that this system is the P-8’s version of a “network gateway” system that will give it similar bolt-on capabilities as other aircraft equipped with Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) suites. BACN is flying on the EQ-4, E-11A and NASA’s WB-57s, even the KC-135 can deploy simpler and less capable ‘roll-on, roll-off’ unit that accomplishes some of BACN’s basic mission. BACN is one of America’s most powerful force multipliers. It creates an active net over the entire battlefield, far over the horizon, and even at ground level. It also allows different weapon systems that carry various types of data-links, which transmit on their own waveform, to have their situational awareness “pictures” fused into one single common shared picture of battlespace. This single, fused picture is then rebroadcast by BACN on all those same waveforms."

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Austin » 21 Sep 2015 08:45

Karan M wrote:Disagree about the A2A part. That is useful. Rest is germane.

http://iadnews.in/2015/09/deliberate-ca ... f71xZceGYA
Deliberate capability degradation of P-8I meant for India and why it matters-a classic case of ‘Strings Attached’


If true the downgrade seems to be wide and comprehensive , remind me of cold war days where the export model was referred to "M" model where M was moniker for Monkey Model.

The only way out form this mess is for IN is to build its own home built ASW fleet based on 737/320 platform where they have complete control of every thing in there , if IN puts the right resources we can have our own ASW aircraft in a decade.

Dont expect any country to sell highly sensitive stuff as ASW platform with all bells and whistles much less US

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Austin » 21 Sep 2015 09:07

But the American are much more restrictive in this area and have a much more tightly bound legal contract that comes with in-base inspections, temper-proof black box seals and others like additions/upgrade restrictions. This applies to even their most trusted allies like UK and Israel.


Every country downgrades stuff for Military export , The key incentive is to maintain the technology lead and for Opsec reason i.e compro on export model wont compromise their inservice model but the downgrade would varry from country to country , countries like France , Israel and Russia would not mind giving most of the stuff as is or just let india build their own stuff from base derivative with complete control over SW and User Interface codes ( so called source code that we demand )

While countries like US wont bother much and their downgrade would be more comprehensive and codes more proprietary for export model to non-NATO country

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 21 Sep 2015 09:33

^^^
After operating MPAs of Russian origin , IN have gone for incremental capabilities available in market . P8i does have facility to plug in different sensors . IN have wisely chosen its asset and might go for more Posedions.

Anyway coming to the SAR capability of P-8I is equipped with APS-143 OceanEye aft radar ,"it is Telephonics’ top-performing maritime surveillance radar. Onboard a wide array of fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft worldwide, this multi-mode radar system offers a broad set of maritime long-range target search, detection and tracking modes in high-sea states. Complete with an optional integrated Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) interrogator, the APS-143C(V)3 OceanEye features Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar (ISAR) and overland Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imaging, weather avoidance and Search and Rescue Transponder (SART) beacon modes"

Advantages : 1.Long-range maritime search and air-surveillance modes with fully integrated IFF interrogator provide target detections out to 200 NM
2. SAR imaging at 1 m resolution, with extended imaging ranges beyond 60 NM, including integrated range zoom
3.ISAR imaging at 1 m with range profiling mode
http://www.mahindratelephonics.com/pdf/products/38038%20APS-143CV3%20Product%20Brochure.pdf

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Austin » 21 Sep 2015 10:01

They should have gone for P-8A like system minus the communication and data links which need to be Indian for obvious reason , in any case we just know about the Sensor downgrade but thinking what about weapons like export model torpedoes and sonobouys any information on that ?

IIRC even the Pakis in 90's were complaining of getting dumped down P-3C orion from US :lol:

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shaun » 21 Sep 2015 10:09

Austin saab , actually my understanding is specs down grade in APY-10 is some what minimized by APS-143 ( which i guess is licence manufactured by mahindras ) . Down grade is bound to happen and specially in radars and sensors , now it is upto the customer whether he is getting a capability which he don't have or whether he can upgrade it to his standards .

alexis
BRFite
Posts: 468
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby alexis » 21 Sep 2015 10:11

Why is everyone so flustered on P-8I? It meets our requirements; plain and simple. Why are we bothered about what is in P-8A? It is a different model and would definitely see further upgrades which may or may not be available to us.

I am sure that when we export Tejas, we will not provide the best model to others, either.

If we want the best capability in any area, we have to make our own or enter into a JV like Brahmos.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Singha » 21 Sep 2015 10:18

it is well known all along that US does not want those P8s to be moving in close to TSP or targeting their shore infra. thats why the SLAM ( a land attack derivative of harpoon ) is not on the sale table for us, though others have been sold it. same goes the SAR/ISAR modes.

so far we have done precious little to operationalize even the small XV2000 radar , let alone a powerful maritime search radar. until such time we are at the mercy of downgraded models.

even the IL38 May upg had certain downgrades. but unlike P8 or other american hw, these things are not clearly spelt out in russia/euro deals. hence its all cool as we dont know such intricate details 8)

>>minus the communication and data links which need to be Indian for obvious reason

my understanding is thats already the case via BEL. note that russia also will not under any circumstances give away its hard fought submarine and ship signature databases that permit automatic match and tag. thats upto us to pull our pants up, lay sosus arrays, tail foreign assets and build our own database.
Image


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests