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.

General News, Questions And Discussions - Indian Airforce

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Ankit Kumar 001, Oct 23, 2016.

  1. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    4,838
    Country Flag:
    India
    Its not wise to organize an airforce in weight classes or measure its strength in sqd numbers in the era of multi role fighters. But what can we do, plans were made decades ago. Have to fulfill it to move on.

    We are struggling to fill the minimum sqd number of 34. And Yet internet fanboys dream up numbers like this. I'm yet to see a single whitepaper or think tank analysis advocating IAF to go beyond 45 sqd.
     
    Blackjay, Sancho and zebra7 like this.
  2. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,421
    Likes Received:
    5,436
    Once the initial infrastructure is set up, a unit will cost about 20M.

    Overall, the cost for armed UAVs of the Avenger class will be about $15-20B for 600+ units, another $5B for associated infrastructure, very likely to be cheaper than that. And this price is if we import 600+ Avengers. But we have our own programs that will form the bulk of the purchases and will be significantly cheaper.

    150 Avengers, 200-300 Rustom family, 150 IUSAV.

    Armed drones are extremely cheap. It's the specialized drones like Guardian and Triton which are expensive.
     
  3. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,421
    Likes Received:
    5,436
    Well, then, educate yourself.

    http://www.idsa.in/system/files/8_1_2014_IAFEquipmentandForceStructureRequirementst.pdf
     
    LonewolfSandeep likes this.
  4. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    4,838
    Country Flag:
    India
    Thanks for the link.

    Few problems with this kind of analysis :
    • This is pure for and against number comparison. No consideration on how Multi role capabilities change the scenario. He is quoting 1960's recommendations for justification !
    • Where is the financial planning for this kind of absurd numbers. Just to buy this 42 sqd you are spending $60+ billion. Unlike the past were you can churn out hundred of planes taking advantage of low cost. Today a single plane costs $200+ million. Almost every country is minimizing numbers and concentrating on quality.
    • We are taking about 15 years in future. How will the scenario change with the introduction of UCAVs?
    • If you are expecting 10-12 additional sqd who will build it? we are struggling to make 16 light fighters per year here.
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  5. LonewolfSandeep

    LonewolfSandeep Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2017
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    626
    Country Flag:
    India
    Not quite - it assumes all surviving aircraft be multirole in 2032, old one which retained be upgraded further, delay retiring old wherever possible of help maintain numbers.
     
  6. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    4,838
    Country Flag:
    India
    That's not the point. Multi role means a single aircraft can do job of two or three 3rd gen aircraft. Prospective is restricted to filling numbers.
    Look at german, Israeli, british all are 2-3 aircrafts to fill all the roles. French thinks Rafale is good enough for everything! .
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  7. LonewolfSandeep

    LonewolfSandeep Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2017
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    626
    Country Flag:
    India
    No 3rd gen plane in IAF in 2032 - look at upgrades :)
    You see any non multirole aircraft in 2032 of from list of 810 (45 squadrons). I dont.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2017
  8. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    4,838
    Country Flag:
    India
    Dude, reread what i wrote. Its common sense to not have any 3rd gen aircrafts. I never disputed that. Same with 45 sqd figures.
    My problem is with his recommendation of 60+ sqds.
     
  9. LonewolfSandeep

    LonewolfSandeep Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2017
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    626
    Country Flag:
    India
    So you recommend 20 or 25 squad rafales to take on expected 2400-2500 PLAF + whatever extra PAF have in 2032. Even if tech superior plane can kill 3:1 ratio - it doesnt work for India threat requirement. (cant be everywhere at once, will be simply swarmed & taken out - numbers matter.)

    Non valid - none of them have china as hostile neighbour. any war be most likely include Pak & China both.
    example :- This way Chinese planes are less advanced than British & also lesser trained pilots. British with advanced planes should be easily be able to conquer China now. But its opposite if china threaten Britain it will quiver, stock market react too & British quickly back off from whatever conflict point.
    So aircraft quality is not only factor, numbers do play a role, even if slightly lesser capable., aircraft mix plays a role for large powers, puny powers dont need mix.
    Similarly India need numbers & mix of various planes, which it can afford - as economy grows more medium & heavy be preferred.
    Just like Germany or Israel or British cant afford 1000 rafales or 1000 F35, neither can India presently. Its a joke to compare British requirement/threat perception with India.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2017
  10. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    4,838
    Country Flag:
    India
    Please try to understand the context when jumping in discussions. I was giving an example on the how multi role changed the whole scenario not advocating to use only one or two aircrafts.
     
  11. LonewolfSandeep

    LonewolfSandeep Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2017
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    626
    Country Flag:
    India
    non valid for Indian requirement, if India were in South America, we have a totally different requirement. Few high end planes suffice. You forget geography & neighbours strength, numbers, capacity, threat perception.
     
  12. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    4,838
    Country Flag:
    India
    Again, i'm not saying we should restrict to few high end planes. But having a balanced fleet of 42-45 sq. Which is exactly what IAF's plan now.
     
  13. ashkum2278

    ashkum2278 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    186
    Country Flag:
    India
  14. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,887
    Likes Received:
    2,961
    Hopefully not, but it is likely that there will be Jags that remain in service. The last HAL produced Jags came out the production line in 2008, so even wit a minimum service life of 30 years, they would be around till 2038.
    Practically, we might see a shortfall of spares and canibalisations, just as we have seen with Migs, or Sea Harriers, that we kept for too long.
     
  15. LonewolfSandeep

    LonewolfSandeep Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2017
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    626
    Country Flag:
    India
    Would a 42-45 sq in 2032 be sufficient to tackle future threats from combined China & Pak, where china alone is expected to be around 2500, so china+pak could be easily be close to 3000.
    Answer be no (no way 42 suffice).
    Besides I am sure IAF & Indian Strategical Establishment which be much better in fixing & pursing their strategic threats by adequate sq numbers, based on through analysis. (provided economy supports)

    http://www.idsa.in/system/files/8_1_2014_IAFEquipmentandForceStructureRequirementst.pdf And the article produced by Institute of Defence Studies & Analysis is one the best & most comprehensive ones till date.
    If you can create better through enhanced analysis - would love to read it, rather than a comment here & there, without backing facts.
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2017

Share This Page