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.

IAF Chronicles - A side view of whats going on behind the closed doors in New Delhi

Discussion in 'Defence Analysis' started by PARIKRAMA, Jul 15, 2017.

  1. stephen cohen

    stephen cohen Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    Messages:
    917
    Likes Received:
    1,200
    Country Flag:
    India
    However France was also looking to Collaborate with Germany on a Fifth Gen Plane

    So how will this work out
     
    GuardianRED and PARIKRAMA like this.
  2. PARIKRAMA

    PARIKRAMA Angel or Devil? Staff Member ADMINISTRATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    8,104
    Country Flag:
    India
    They want F35s
    http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-the-preferred-choice-to-replace-its-tornados

    Despite a plan to jointly develop its own fifth generation fighter jet with France, Germany is still very interested in joining the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.

    and

    Though the Germans announced they would be working with the French on a clean-sheet design in July 2017, this aircraft wouldn’t likely arrive until sometime between 2030 and 2040 at the earliest. This is when European consortium Airbus estimated it would be able to deliver on a fifth generation concept in response to an earlier German-Spanish requirement, which it dubbed Future Combat Air System (FCAS), according to a public presentation the company made in 2016.
     
    GuardianRED and stephen cohen like this.
  3. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,278
    Likes Received:
    6,258
    Country Flag:
    France
    http://indiandefence.com/threads/f1...s-and-possibilities.56222/page-98#post-569994
    http://indiandefence.com/threads/f1...-and-possibilities.56222/page-199#post-581643
     
  4. PARIKRAMA

    PARIKRAMA Angel or Devil? Staff Member ADMINISTRATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    8,104
    Country Flag:
    India
    Angel Eyes, Jamy, Abingdonboy and 8 others like this.
  5. Ved Mishra

    Ved Mishra Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    956
    Likes Received:
    256
    Let's pray first that Narendra Modiji gets reelected again in 2019. If that happens all your wishes and mine will be fulfilled.:kiss3:
     
    Angel Eyes, mirage, Jamy and 3 others like this.
  6. somedude

    somedude Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2014
    Messages:
    1,494
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Country Flag:
    Afghanistan
    France is the only European country that cares about sovereignty.

    All others just prefer to be vassals of Washington so that they don't have to take their future in their own hands. They just want to pay rent in the form of buying American aircraft and get catered to. They're lazy basement dwellers who spend all days playing video games while daddy USA does all the work.

    So I believe that France's efforts at trying to get EU countries to collaborate on European projects will not result in anything worthwhile. All Germany wants from such a thing is to get money for German industries. The Germans don't want to make a useful aircraft; they just want jobs for their engineers, and if it's a flying turd it's not a problem for them because they'll operate American aircraft anyway.

    So it's in France's strategic interests to seek partnerships with like-minded countries outside of Europe. European countries are too complacent for serious partnership. India is the best choice. In fact, India is pretty much the only choice. Other countries depend on the USA for their protection, or are seen as potential threats, or do not share France's strategic requirements, or are just too poor to be of any help. India is 1) a friendly democracy, 2) with nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers, 3) who wants to safeguard her sovereignty and 4) is willing to be serious about it. EU countries only have #1, and the only other countries with #2 are the USA, Russia, China, and UK.
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2017
  7. Hellfire

    Hellfire Devil's Advocate Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    2,046
    Likes Received:
    4,966
    Country Flag:
    India
    Either that or some one does read us. ;)

    just suggested to gessler to make a GSQR for unified assault rifle .... maybe the buffoons will read here and take a decision;)

    You can try your hand at ASQR while we are at it :D
     
    Grevion and Bloom 17 like this.
  8. BON PLAN

    BON PLAN Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,960
    Likes Received:
    1,496
    Country Flag:
    France
    I fall in love...... :smitten::France::yes:
     
    DAC O DAC and Angel Eyes like this.
  9. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,198
    Likes Received:
    6,318
    During the 90s. Single engine requirement has existed for over 2 decades now, meant to replace over 400 Mig-21s. Still unfulfilled. The failure of LCA, or you can say, the IAF has no hopes for it, is the reason why an alternative single engine jet was planned.

    This was independent from the MMRCA requirement for twin engine aircraft.

    What Parrikar said is important:
    http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2016/08/gripen-f-16-compete-in-mmrca-re-run.html
    On April 13, 2015, Parrikar stated on Doordarshan TV: “Rafale is not a replacement for MiG-21. LCA [Light Combat Aircraft] Tejas is a replacement for MiG-21. Or, if we build some other fighter under “Make in India”… another single engine [fighter] in India, which is possible, that could be a replacement for the MiG-21.”

    So there are two independent programs TE and SE. But we can only follow through with one due to funds.
     
  10. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,950
    Likes Received:
    5,843
    Country Flag:
    India
    The plan is to take LCA and rafale class requirements to a new MII program since MMRCA failed spectacularly.
     
  11. PARIKRAMA

    PARIKRAMA Angel or Devil? Staff Member ADMINISTRATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    8,104
    Country Flag:
    India
    The public fight is only bcz of IAF insisting a open and transparent commitment of Rafale MII numbering almost 4X times already ordered..

    The IN commitment comes above this...

    Its here the issue lies bcz for government, their dreams of F16+F35 commitment takes priority.

    The main problem of gov being, IAF has learned its lesson of not listening to oral commitment for future Rafales and small candy of 36 fighters right now to agree to gov preference of SE program .. They knw once such a commitment is planned for american both jets , its virtually impossible for any otter jet to get a space in a later stage.. So they have hardened their stand of Rafale MII and complete insistence of commitment now itself over later date oral words..

    Moreover IAF knows that MK2 program would be either delayed or made redundant by continuous churning of SE fighter.. its basic economics that if a line churns out 24 jets a year , it will see minimum 7-8+ years of assured productivity... so numbers will not stop at 114-120 for sure...

    Thus, the only way p;possible for government is when sanctioned strength is raised upto 56+ manned sqds as needed under two front war angle and let both sides (PMO/MOD and IAF) exist peacefully along with indigenous platforms as well.. or else all views and counter views will continue
     
  12. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,950
    Likes Received:
    5,843
    Country Flag:
    India
    The Indian Air Force’s Tyranny Of Arithmetic


    A somewhat curious report emanating from the Indian Air Force, purportedly in response to a request from the Government of India to reconsider its plans to procure a new type of single-engine fighter (SEF) under the “Make in India” initiative with the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft has sparked understandable and justifiable furore. While justifying the need for a new SEF, the report allegedly spoke in highly derogatory terms of the Tejas, even suggesting the MiG-21 was better in some respects.

    The Tejas – Not “Unfit for Indian Skies”

    While such a blatant untruth would not normally dignify a response, the Tejas program has had to endure more than its fair share of unjustified criticism (with justifiable criticism being less forthcoming). For the record, in its current incarnation – the Tejas Mk.1 IOC – the aircraft outperforms and is more combat capable than the MiG-21FL, MiG-21M and the MiG-21bis. In its FOC configuration, it will easily surpass the MiG-21bison in every aspect except level speed.

    There is of course justifiable criticism that the FOC for the Tejas is being excessively delayed. In part, this is apparently due to a shift in testing priorities at the request of the IAF. At their request, outstanding air-to-ground ordnance delivery issues and mid-wing pylon drop tank separation issues were prioritized over gun trials. This, and the request for inflight refueling to be part of FOC has set the process back. The latter issue, it is submitted, should have been left for post-FOC development. In the meantime, the BVR engagement envelope is being expanded. What is deeply regrettable is that to date HAL has shown no drive towards pushing the production of the Tejas at its required rate of 16 aircraft – indeed it hasn’t even attained the lower rate of 8 – per annum. This is having an impact on No.45 sqns ability to achieve operational status.

    What was also unfortunate is that the report gave highly distorted comparisons for range/ endurance and payload for the respective aircraft. The Tejas Mk.1 and the Gripen A are roughly comparable in most aspect except level speed and endurance, it is somewhat inferior to the Gripen C with the latter being a much more mature platform. The F-16 is a larger aircraft with larger payload. Comparisons of endurance are worthless without payload and flight profile data but suffice it to say, the Tejas has demonstrated a flight endurance of between 112-115 minutes on internal fuel already.

    The Tejas Mk.1 in its FOC configuration will therefore be an adequate fighter (certainly not “unfit for Indian skies” as one journalist termed it). Yet it would not be without shortcomings and these are proposed to be addressed in the Mk.1A variant which has the potential deploy an avionics and weapons package significantly superior to the Mk.1. However, once again, delays in avionics selection and testing are the bane of this program to the detriment of both the IAF and the ADA/HAL.

    However, one has to ask why the comparison of the Tejas Mk.1 with the Gripen C/ E or the F-16 Block 70? The Tejas is still at an early stage of its evolution – compare it with those aircraft at a similar stage of theirs and you will see aircraft that were without BVR capability and far more maintenance intensive that their later, more capable iterations. The IAF has done itself no favours with its less than honest comparison.

    The development and evolution of an aircraft takes the involvement of the user as a partner. To date, one senses the IAF to be a somewhat reluctant partner in the development of the Tejas. By comparison, the IAF had no problems inducting the MiG-21F when equipped with only 2 AAMs, no gun and an extraordinarily limited range and thereafter investing in its evolution. It had no issue with inducting the Mirage 2000 when the latter’s Super 530D missiles and Belouga submunition ordnance were not yet ready and it practically created the Sukhoi Su-30MKI from the modest Su-30K, which was not much more than a two-seat Su-27. So why not facilitate the evolution of the Tejas with a similar spirit of partnership and encouragement?

    Why a new Single Engine Fighter?

    So, with the Mk.1A promising to be a good aircraft and the Tejas Mk.1 an adequate one, why is there a need for a new SEF? The answer lies in the tyranny of arithmetic.

    The strength of the Indian Air Force peaked approximately 39.5 combat squadrons, with four MiG-23MF/-BN and six MiG-27ML squadrons forming the core of the strike assets and some seventeen MiG-21 FL/M/MF/bis squadrons forming the bulk of the air defence units. These were, at the time, complemented by the Jaguar, Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 squadrons, which added a high-technology cutting edge to an otherwise mediocre force. Since then, the MiG-21 and MiG-27 squadrons have been in decline and the MiG-23 phased out completely. The IAF today, has some 34 squadrons – 3 of which (1 each MiG-21M, MiG-21bis and non-upgraded MiG-27) – are to be phased out soon and can be considered removed from effective strength of the IAF.

    While the major force induction since the “peak” of IAF strength has been the Su-30MKI, the quest to replace the MiG-21/-23/-27 has been somewhat problematic. The Tejas was never intended to be a replacement for the MiG-23/-27 family. It is a light single-engine type as opposed to the MiG-23/-27 which were medium single-engine aircraft. It was always expected to replace a portion of the MiG-21 fleet rather than any other class of aircraft.

    Therefore, to expect the much smaller Tejas to fill a void for which it was not designed is perhaps expecting too much. Use of twin engine aircraft such as the Rafale for the tactical roles to which the MiG-23/-27 family was assigned is possible but would represent a somewhat expensive solution. In these circumstances, the IAF’s rationale for a new class of medium SFE comes into being. Plans to acquire a force of 126+63 Dassault Rafales have not come to pass and as such, new aircraft are needed. The unfortunate fact is that the Tejas, even in its Mk.1A version, will still be somewhat limited in terms of its payload and its range/ endurance. With the Mk.2 version neither funded nor being pushed, the Mk.1A will be an adequate but not necessarily ideal aircraft for filling certain roles that require greater range and payloads.

    The Challenge: The Tyranny of Force Arithmetic

    The IAF desires a strength of some 42 combat squadrons by the period 2027-32 to meet the contingencies of a two-front war. If we take the effective strength of the IAF to be 31 squadrons (the three remaining MiG-21M/bis and MiG-27 sqns being discarded), there is an immediate requirement for 11 more to meet its desired force levels by 2027. To date, three more Su-30MKI and two Dassault Rafale squadrons are on order with two squadrons of Tejas MK.1 fighters supplementing them. All this will add some seven squadrons to the IAF. However, six squadrons of MiG-21Bison and the two MiG-27UPG will be phased out by 2025. If no new aircraft are ordered, it is possible that the IAF would be left with 30 combat squadrons by 2025 – an overall deficiency of 12 squadrons when set against its desired strength. Subsequently, one Jaguar squadron is due to be retired by 2027, which would mean an overall deficiency of 13 squadrons.

    Options: The Tyranny of Production Arithmetic

    There is no way for production of the Tejas – even if it were to reach 16 aircraft per annum – to replace those thirteen squadrons. If the IAF is not desirous of accepting more Tejas Mk.1 squadrons– although a compelling argument could be made for the acceptance of three more to replace the non-upgraded MiG-27s and MiG-21M/bis – it means that it wishes to wait for the Mk.1A. This is yet to have its avionics selected – much less fly. This process must, of course be expedited but experience suggests that no more than 4 Mk.1A sqns are feasible by 2027. The suggestion of establishing production lines in the private sector has much merit but given the strategic partnerships already formed, this option may run into some difficulty.

    This leaves a gap of nine squadrons to be filled. These numbers suggest that the SFE – some five squadrons worth – are an important path towards reaching the IAF’s desired strength by the stipulated date. Therefore, as much as the Tejas should be supported, the IAF cannot do without the SFE option to meet its targeted fleet strength. Once again, the practicality of production means that even if SFE production were to start between 2021 and 2022, no more than five squadrons could be produced by 2027.

    Therefore, even the combined Tejas/ SFE effort would still leave the IAF short by at least four squadrons. It is here that the proposed twin-engine procurement comes into its own. This competition, it is submitted is superfluous and time consuming. The IAF has already indicated its desire for more Rafale squadrons and as such, additional aircraft could be ordered to fill this four squadron deficiency without the bureaucratic rigmarole of renewed trials.

    The Solution: Adopt Multiple courses of procurement.

    There is no single option that would satisfy the desire for the IAF to not only improve the quality of aircraft but also increase squadron strength. At present, the IAF and the government seem intent on adopting a three-phase solution involving the Tejas, the new SFE and a new twin-engine aircraft. Unfortunately, attempts to short-circuit or remove one of these options will not produce the desired results. It is therefore suggested that the way forward is:

    • Full support for the Tejas Mk.1A project has to be forthcoming on the part of all stakeholders – Government, ADA, HAL and IAF. This would deliver four squadrons to the IAF by 2025, with the prospect of additional aircraft if the Tejas Mk.2 is funded and developed through the necessary redesign of the airframe. A lack of focus and priority has been the bane of the Tejas project in recent years rather than technical shortcomings in the aircraft or technological hurdles. HAL’s somewhat lackadaisical approach to the production of Tejas Mk.1 has to end and partnership with ADA and the IAF intensified.
    • Forego the selection of a new twin-engine fighter under a “Make in India” initiative. The selection of the Rafale should stand and, subject to the price and technology transfer package being satisfactory, the induction of additional Rafale aircraft beyond the existing 36 should be considered as a priority. A separate twin-engine project, unless there are severe problems with the Rafale, is a time-consuming luxury with little benefit to India.
    • The Government of India through the Ministry of Defence and the IAF needs to take steps towards initiating the procurement of a single-engine type through the Strategic Partnership route. However, care must be taken for this program to feed into the Tejas Mk.2 project. Linkage between the SFE and the Tejas cannot be allowed to become competitive with the former undermining the latter. Rather it must become complimentary with expertise aiding in expediting the Tejas Mk.2, partnering with the ADA and HAL as needed. To date, this iteration of the SFE program has not been emphasized.
    It is understandable that the Government of India would desire the most cost-effective approach. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to achieve the results that the IAF desires. However, in putting forward its views, the IAF would do well to remember that gratuitous and fallacious attacks on the Tejas program do its image no good at all. The Tejas project has come too far and achieved too much to be cancelled at this stage and certainly not on the basis of highly suspect comparisons.

    Yet, while criticizing the IAF for its Tejas bashing is entirely justifiable, the truth is unless there is some dramatic progress in respect of the Mk.1A and an acceleration of Mk.1 production, there is no effective way for the Tejas to make up the squadron shortfall that the IAF is facing. In those circumstances, the Tejas, the SEF program and additional Rafales are all needed for the IAF to reach its sanctioned strength by 2027.



    https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/11/column-the-indian-air-forces-tyranny-of-arithmetic.html

    @PARIKRAMA @randomradio @vstol jockey @Picdelamirand-oil @Hellfire @BON PLAN @nair @randomradio @Gessler @halloweene @Abingdonboy
     
  13. PARIKRAMA

    PARIKRAMA Angel or Devil? Staff Member ADMINISTRATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    8,104
    Country Flag:
    India
    As we discussed offline bro, the game is very clear..you know the numbers .. and associated ballpark costs..

    i replied this befiore i saw this posted here
    http://indiandefence.com/threads/ia...-doors-in-new-delhi.62642/page-58#post-606688

    Now consider this from another context as well
    http://www.livemint.com/Politics/3b...-India-US-to-have-worlds-greatest-armies.html

    The important para from above Indo USA article
    It tells you the story what i had been discussing for months... One side the strategic shift and other side investments.. needed for economic growth and for MII program success..
     
    GuardianRED, Gessler, Jamy and 2 others like this.
  14. Hellfire

    Hellfire Devil's Advocate Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    2,046
    Likes Received:
    4,966
    Country Flag:
    India

    Again an example of stating facts to suit narrative.



    The author is right. There is no cause to be 'derogatory' since 220 LCAs (200Fighters + 20 Trainers) were supposed to be inducted by 1994 and we still have not, in author's infinite wisdom, reached 1994!!!


    Agreed. Since time is infinite in Hindu mythology, for incompetence the Hindu thought will obviously be mainstreamed.


    There is a phrase 'wake up and smell the coffee' and then there is a phrase "wake up and smell the fart". This is one of the most interesting Brain Farts of the author.

    He is enthusiastically pointing out the fact that the Tejas Mk1 IO is more capable than Mig-21!!! What a benchmark!

    I am impressed by this author. That the aircraft is more capable than the aircraft it was supposed to replace 25 years back is an achievement, really makes me 'aware; of the credentials of this author :D


    Oh really, excessively do you say?

    How about a generation delayed?


    Another brain fart.
    Insufferable idiots abound.

    ASQR were formulated and issued in Oct 1985. Where did this 'shifting in testing priorities' occur? Has anyone really understood the whole game of the collective failure of GoI and the DPSUs in shirking off blame for present crisis in the IAF's strength?

    For those who claim to be aware that IAF wants 42 Squadrons, that is 'best case' scenario in near to short term. As per the Air Force 2020 plan, IAF was aiming to be a 52-55 Squadron force to meet the challenges as per directives issued by GoI by the year 2020. Right now, we will hit a nadir of 29 effective strength shortly!

    Who is responsible? If the excuse is of lack of know how and scientific base, then people should just shut up and answer queries as under:

    1. Where did the two decade experience of the HAL in designing and fielding the HF-24 Fighter disappear?
    2. How is it that the experience of HF-24, which flew till 1982 when it was phased out, was not utilized and the most important lesson of obsolescence of the fighter even upon it's induction in 1964, was easily ignored?>
    3. Why does IAF have to ignore the adage 'once bitten and twice shy' in name of indigenization? (Please recall that IAF was hesitant to induct HF-24 as it was inferior to the Hunters already with IAF).


    Coming back, so, as per the author's higher intellect, IAF was supposed to freeze the ASR from 1985 till 2000s mid? I like this idea!! Lends credence to my speculative jest earlier that as per author 1994 is yet to come :)


    And what is strange here? That no more is WVR being envisaged as a priority area and indeed IAF is training extensively to work in and dominate in BVR and fight at stand off ranges? Strange



    Already delayed, and as well induct and delay active deployment. Just change the Title from "Production Delay" to "Delayed Active Deployment" .. Talk about QA and Compliance :)




    And he laments that? What does he want? Removal of canopy and issue of personalized cross bow/catapault to hit the other pilot in a dogfight?


    The tokenism of sense here.

    Blasphemy, as per the author ;)

    How dare they compare two projects launched at roughly the same time? India is much smaller than the Giant Sweden!!!!! India came out of suppression and gained independence, Sweden progressed at lightening speed in World War 2!!!!:facepalm:


    And all the while, mind you, we must remain in the ASR of 1985. Shame on IAF for upgrading. HAL has entered into a secret agreement with China and Pakistan wherein PLAAF and PAF will not be able to field any good aircraft till Tejas is inducted.:rockroll:


    What one needs to ask is are you an ass?


    HAL's Motto while dealing with IAF - Making an Idiot of you and the Nation since 1956 (when Marut was being planned)...

    suffice to say, I would have used more apt word instead of Idiot here:haha:

    I am getting a headache!!!! Mig21 F 1961 onwards!!!!!!:frust:


    I give up..
    This is how I gave up on livefist a decade back ...
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2017
    Art90, madmax613, Bloom 17 and 5 others like this.
  15. shaktimaan

    shaktimaan Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2016
    Messages:
    586
    Likes Received:
    540
    Country Flag:
    India

    DCOAS AM Bhaduria talking about tejas,AMCA and Marut. He said IAF is in full support of Tejas and phasing out Marut was biggest mistake but the video is old (2016) :p
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 15, 2017
    Angel Eyes and PARIKRAMA like this.

Share This Page