Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Five steps to a viable air force

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Agent_47, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. Ankit Kumar 001

    Ankit Kumar 001 Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    4,852
    Country Flag:
    India
    Owner technically, and owner here are quite clear.
     
  2. GuardianRED

    GuardianRED Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    Country Flag:
    India
    No it isn't, you have to make it clear

    If tomorrow the LCA Mk2 and AMCA doesn't work or delayed - Make sure you blame the right Agency - ie in this case it is ADA !!
     
  3. Golden_Rule

    Golden_Rule Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    679
    We are reading about the plan for 43 squadrons for the past 15 years and now plan to accomplish it in the next 15 years.

    Agreed, we should get this and we should get that, mainly the AMCA and the FGFA, but for the immediate need, we MUST fill the (21 x 43) - 600 gap by simply mass producing the LCA MK1As and the Super Sukhois in numbers.
     
  4. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    235
    We don't need to make 1000 page laws to negotiate a beneficial contract. Just some common sense and properly juiced terms with the help of top lawyers will do. After all a contract is an agreement enforceable by law. It is in the absence of contravening laws, a law by itself.

    That is the main problem with India. We have bureaucracy in everything. Even when there is no need to have them. Even when we are faced with a critical deficiencies threatening national security, we can't seem to bypass our own stupid laws. And you want to make more laws:wacko:


    That would be the worst option of all. Mirage 2000 are already obsolete. Forget the next 40 yrs
    -Mechanically Scanned radar
    -50-60 km range 'BVR'

    The best option was negotiating a purchase of 126 Rafale in 2007 itself. When global economy was booming and French were desperate for orders. We could be realistically looking at a fleet of 200 of them by 2020, all made in India.

    FGFA hasnt happened. And whenever it does happens, the point is we would be inducting F-16 when Americans are flying PCA, inducting F-35. Chinese may even have a J-20 follow on besides J-20 itself.
    :facepalm:
     
  5. GuardianRED

    GuardianRED Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    Country Flag:
    India

    The few articles that Ajay Shukla makes some sense ! - yes pls support!

    Especially

    First, the IAF must expedite the long-postponed proposal to upgrade at least four of its six Jaguar ground strike squadrons with more powerful engines, DARIN-3 navigation-attack avionics, airborne electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and capable air-to-air and air-to-ground weaponry. Along with three Mirage 2000 and three MiG-29 squadrons already being upgraded, this would keep 10 squadrons of capable (though not cutting-edge) fighters flying for another 15 years till 2032. The upgraded Jaguars could serve some years beyond that.
     
    Blackjay and Agent_47 like this.
  6. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,832
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    That is simply impossible. Defence exports are some of the most complex laws the US has created. It can't be bypassed without Congressional changes and that took years of work.

    Not us. American laws.

    http://indianexpress.com/article/bu...-partner-changes-export-control-laws-4511813/

    You can put an AESA radar as well as Meteor on it.

    There is already a plan to install a few M-2000s with Uttam.

    That's okay. As long as the high end is taken care of, it won't really matter what the mid and low end really are as long as they have the minimum capabilities that we need. We can fly Combat Hawk also.

    The high end is the principle component and that's the aircraft that will define the course of the air war.
     
  7. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,832
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    Attrition is considered right from the beginning.

    Even if we consider what you said, attrition is happening as we speak. We lost 30 jets in just 3 years. What's being done to replace those 30 jets now? Do you see where I'm going with this? We are already short by hundreds of jets and we are losing a squadron every 2 years.

    By the time we finish negotiations for the tender, we would have lost another 40 jets. So the options for the new jets will already be on the table by then. By the time the options are exercised, we would have lost as many jets again.

    In the past we had 2 or 3 production lines running in parallel, so what I'm saying is not out of the ordinary. Before we had MKI, we had the Mig-21, Mig-27 and Jaguar lines. We should normally have had MKI, LCA and M-2000 lines running in parallel right now. The biggest reason for our current squadron depletion is because of attrition. We have lost hundreds of jets to gravity with no replacements after the Mig-29.

    We have lost nearly 500 Mig-21s in accident.

    That's not how you look at it. Regardless of what you think about the F-16, it is still a better aircraft than the LCA. Put the LCA in the same competition as the F-16 and Gripen, it won't even be a decent competitor.

    LCA Mk1A or Mk2 are not competitors in the MMRCA. So there's no point even inducting 10000 of these jets, the MMRCA requirement will still be there.
     
    Gessler and Lion of Rajputana like this.
  8. Lion of Rajputana

    Lion of Rajputana Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    1,313
    Likes Received:
    1,824
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Holy Shit.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
  9. Ankit Kumar 001

    Ankit Kumar 001 Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    4,852
    Country Flag:
    India
    ADA has its role limited to things, which it very well delivers.

    The MK2 and AMCA won't happen, not because ADA might do a mistake, but because IAF need fighters immediately, PMO sees this as a opportunity to full fill its domestic political goals , and finance ministry has kept the funds lead, all added to the misery of HAL.
     
    surya kiran and Sancho like this.
  10. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,174
    Likes Received:
    3,163
    If this is what IAF needs to do, his examples makes mostly no sense, because getting new engines for a part of the Jag fleet, doesn't stop the other part from being replaced soon, nor will the Darin 3 upgrades be anywhere close to a modern 4th gen MRCA. So you are cutting numbers and quality.

    IAF has already proven it's commitment to LCA by ordering 123 of them, that are technically below their standards. So they have shown more than support to the project and keeping squadron numbers up, while cutting quality again.

    FGFA and AMCA are mid to long term procurements and not really a solution to the squadron number problem. Moreover, 5th gen fighters are far more expensive to operate than current gen fighters, so he can't complain about IAFs high costs and suggest very expensive fighters in numbers as a solution.

    The only real solution to the problem he showed, is adding more MMRCAs ASAP, because they are the only fighters that increases quality of the fleet in a short to medium term, at costs that don't dramatically increases IAFs budget and there are 3 options for that...


    1) diverting INs Mig 29K to IAF - 2 × squads of fighters that already are in India and that the IAF can induct directly into operational service

    2) adding more Rafales, but high costs means limited numbers, which means at least the minimum requirement of 126 should be procured.

    3) If 2 is not possible in the required numbers, the single engine MMRCA is the only solution IAF has left. It's the only option that combines capability, cost-effectivitty and short to mid term inductions
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2017
  11. surya kiran

    surya kiran 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    463
    Country Flag:
    India
    Could someone please tell me, what improvement does the IAF want in the Tejas, due to which it wants the F-16?
     
    Angel Eyes likes this.
  12. surya kiran

    surya kiran 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    463
    Country Flag:
    India
    Disgusting, to say the least.
     
    Angel Eyes likes this.
  13. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    235
    My mistake. Butt is there any reason to believe that once India had initiated negotiations on Shornet/viper that we wouldn't get any clearance we get now? When was MDP proceedings initiated? I don't think it would cause any delays whatsoever. Started in late 2014, the contract could be completed at the same time as Rafale and deliveries even faster.
    No it can't. Frenchies tried and it didn't work. No we can't put Meteor on it either. It's radar is too useless.

    No such thing will happen. And even if all this could happen in some imaginary world, it would still be the worst option and Rafale best.

    No its not okay. Its a disaster. We shouldn't be inducting new Jets that are already DOA upon induction. Our high end won't start happening until 2030 by which time Chinese would have 100's of J-XX. The rest of the world would have already retired their F-16s when we would still be inducting them! Even JF-17 may become a credible opponent to Viper by then.:sick:
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  14. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,832
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    Dealing with the Americans in military technology is not possible if they are holding the cards.

    If anything has to happen, we have to be the ones dangling the carrots, or else everything will happen according to what they want. We can't get stuck in negotiations and then get blackmailed.

    Basically, we can't commit to anything until they make the changes we want them to make. For example, we can't have US personnel walking around in our bases, they are going to have to stop asking for base access. But in order to do that, they have to change their own laws.

    They never tried anything of the sort because they have no need for it. They can easily do it if they want to.

    If we want AESA and Meteor on the M-2000, we can get it done.

    Rafale is a completely separate requirement. I am talking about the SE MII. We wouldn't be asking for F-16 or Gripen if we already had the M-2000 line in India.

    No, that's not how it works. It doesn't matter if we are flying the M-2000, Gripen or F-16. It doesn't matter if the enemy is flying a jet that is as good or better than the F-16 either. What matters is if the enemy has a jet that is equal to or better than the FGFA. That's the only thing that matters.

    After the FGFA has done its job, we only need a mediocre/adequate aircraft that does some basic tasks properly, and we want them in significant numbers. That's why we need a cheap proven aircraft for this role. So even if the JF-17 is equal to the F-16, it doesn't matter because the JF-17 would have been killed by the FGFA long ago and has no relevance to the performance of the F-16. So the F-16 will need capabilities where it can survive against localized air defences or an occasional enemy air threat where it can fire some missiles and then run away if the situation calls for it. The French actually designed the Rafale for this.

    The Gripen is naturally the better aircraft, but if the F-16 is good enough to clear IAF's requirements, is cheaper and comes with more ToT, then it's naturally the better option.

    It's our air dominance aircraft that will decide whether we are going to stay in the fight or not. That's why FGFA is a highly secretive program that the IAF never talks about whereas every idiot with a PC can have a more or less informed opinion about the other jets. That's also why all the speculation about FGFA is simply a waste of time. But FGFA is the reason why a debate between Rafale vs F-16 is a waste of time as well.

    Beyond a minimum number of Rafale, 80 according to the IAF, it won't matter if we are operating Rafale or F-16. So we can easily live with 80 Rafale and 200 F-16 instead of 280 Rafale.
     
    Angel Eyes and proud_indian like this.
  15. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,832
    Likes Received:
    5,822
    Both are independent programs. IAF is not going for the F-16 because LCA is inadequate. IAF is going for the F-16 as well as LCA as two separate requirements.

    If LCA fails, IAF can make up with more F-16s, but the opposite can't be done.
     

Share This Page