mattThe neglected aspect of a SAC are the intelligence gathering wings. Don’t forget that you need to be able to monitor electromagnetic sources, listen in on communications, fly reconnaissance, probe the near national boundaries while in international airspace for long periods of time watching responses to your activity, covertly blend in with commercial traffic, etc. It’s not all about nuclear options.
As for the COIN aspect, India has their own indigenous trainers they could use close in plus could convert some transports for gunships.
Could the radards and system on board an AWACS be tuned for that kind of work? My reasoning for having the phalcon on the list was kind of for this type of work along with critical job of keeping comunications open between the person who pushes the button and weapons themselves.
They do have trainers and have things like the T-6 but not sure if they are used in the north or in the east where there is significant insurgency or terrorist movement.
mattI can delete my post if required not precious about it. However any weapon system we talk about it is difficult discuss just the technical merit alone, in an abstract non tangible form.
Weapons systems are there because unfortunately we have a real need for them to either gain or defend land or resources. You cannot talk about aircraft without talking about the threats/difficulties they are going to encounter and the utility or obsolescence of those aircraft relative to those threats.
This is a military forum and unfortunately as much as we would like to keep politics out of it, the armed response or counter response are important. Try as we might there may be slight creep over to thought processes of how certain people would or would not respond to a given action. As this is a critical part of the theorising or understanding the utility of any system we talk about.
mattquadbike, how about I’ll try and get myself banned ? 😀
matt, as has been pointed out to you aircraft delivery is much more flexible in terms of deployment and also accurate. for a power that keeps nukes for show a token deployment might be enough, especially when there’s no one to deter in the first place. for one that prepares to deal with very complex scenarios the one size fits all doctrine isn’t very appealing.
Evening, not really sure what has been pointed out, some did voice an opinion (cant remember if it was you), just as i have voiced an opinion, that having a relatively short range relatively vulnerable delivery system was in fact not a waste of money.
I am all for having a deterent, however some of the places India may want to target are either deap in enemy territory and it will be pure luck if a aircraft can get close enough to launch a strike without taking a round trip from south east asia or the target is so close that even the shortest range missile system will take out key hubs.
Also tactical nukes arent really an option for India which has said itself that it will not strike first with a nuclear weapon.
If you want the ability to strike 6000 miles away you dont want to get a rafale and that is my point, a SAC only makes sense if the IAF goes in for long range strike aircraft or bombers such as the Tu 160. I am not totally against an India SAC just do not see the logic of the short range (relatively speaking) aircraft. Topic for another thread though.
I do agree with above post that MMRCA should be cut in favour of more Su-30MKI or Su-35.. Currently MMRCA seems like a way for someone phantom character skim money.
If they have to buy an aircraft I hope it is the gripen..
mattThe final fight was between Eurocopter Fennec and Kamov Ka-226T , the trials are over and the result is awaited , both chopper looks good but I find Ka-226T more versatile.
If both meet the trial parameter the L1 bidder will win.
Cheers mate, I can see what you mean by the Ka-226T being more versatile, hope the IA go for it.
So what is happening about the purchase of 22 apaches, i have been hearing of that on the outskirts of other news but no mention of a attack aircraft competition.
If the IA could I would rather that they get a modernised version of a attack helicopter with troop carrying capability… along with the traditional anti tank type apaches, havoks and alligators..
Does the Indian Army operate its own airwing? Some cheaper to operate tucanos or Ov-x’s could be of use up in the north..
mattUnless India buys Tu-95s or Tu 160s I really do not see the point of a air based stratigic nuclear strike capability for India, its two largest protagonists are on its door step with little or no water between them. A triad just for the sake of calling it a triad makes no sense. With sea lunched IRBM and surface launched missiles it will have a big enough deterent.
What it needs is to spend money on long range nuclear capable cruise missiles (which is what i hope it is trying to do with the various cruise missile programs).
mattIndia’s first modified Embraer ERJ-145 for the indigenous AEW&C program is scheduled for its first flight early in 2011 and the delivery will be made in late 2011.
this modified ERJ-145 will feature better electrical generation and cooling systems as compared to earlier ERJ-145s used for the Brazilian Carabas and Greek Erieye systems, as per Embraer. It will also feature an IFR system with additional internal fuel tanks to allow inflight refuelling to increase range and endurance.
Wonder when the radars and command and control units will be integrated into the aircraft. I presume that the radars etc are already manufactured/assembled?
mattAnyone know what is happening with the Army’s helicopter competitions? Although not as glamorous as a jet fighter in Indias current situtaion you have to wonder if these aircraft are not more significant in fighting terrorists in the north and the rebels in the east.
Who is currently in the competition and who is out?
mattI guess if you look at the destruction meated out by the USAF in vietnam/cambodia by airborne assets with what seemed to be little or no effect (in stopping the logistics chain not total destruction) you have to wonder if air based weaponary alone would do the job, for this reason i would have to put up a list with atleast a few Mi-35’s laden with special operations teams. Retrospectively you have to wonder if the Mi-35 is the worlds only omni role helicopter (lol taking the much agonised over parlance from other thread).
Mi-35
MC 130
AC 130
OV-X
matt46. Substitute F-16 and F/A-18Es for half of the Air Force and Navy’s planned buys of F-35 fighter aircraft.
With a planned total buy of 2,443 aircraft, the F-35 or Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is the Defense Department’s largest weapon procurement program. This option would buy half as many as the 369 planned for the Air Force and the 311 for the Navy, purchasing instead the current generation fighter aircraft, the Air Force F-16 aircraft at one-third of the cost and the Navy F/A18E/F at two-thirds of the cost of the F-35. The unit cost of F-35 aircraft is estimated at about $133 million compared to $40 million for an F-16 and $80 million for an F-18E.The rationale for this change would be that DOD does not need an entire fleet with the stealthy capabilities of the JSF, and could rely instead on upgraded F-16 and F/A-18E aircraft for half of their fleet, a “high-low” mix.
This is estimated to save $2.3 billion in FY2015, and a total of $9.5 billion for FY2011-FY2015. The option might also allow the services to upgrade their tactical air fleets sooner in case the F-35 is delayed because of additional technical problems, since the F-16 and F-18E lines are currently open. In 2009, CBO described a similar option that would have cancelled the F-35 program altogether.
47. Cancel the Marine Corps version of the F-35.
This option would cancel the Marine Corps version of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter because of its technical problems, cost overruns, schedule delays, and the adoption by the services of joint combat support in current wartime operations.This would save $3.9 billion in FY2015 and $17.6 billion for FY2012 – FY2015.
At a total cost of $41 billion, DOD plans to buy 311 F-35Bs for the Marine Corps to replace the Marine Corps AV-8B. In its recent defense review, the United Kingdom decided to cancel its buy of the Marine Corps version of the JSF.
Further, the sophisticated capabilities of the JSF may be less relevant in current scenarios. Under Secretary of the Navy Robert Workman observed that greater use of guided missiles and mortar could end the forward operations that would be performed by the Marine Corps JSF because of vulnerability.
Also, because the Marine Corps version of the JSF has been responsible for most of the technical, cost, and schedule problems, cancelling it could accelerate delivery of the Air Force (F35A) and Navy (F-35C) versions.
Indias economy is developing but this is still really costly, not sure if India could afford F-35s and Pak-Fa’s. which one would be the lo in the hi-lo mix?
mattDRDO Flies Nishant With Structural Health-Monitoring System
Oct 29, 2010
By Anantha Krishnan M.
BENGALURU, IndiaSNIP——
ADE and India’s National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) jointly developed the SHM technology, with assistance from a foreign agency.DRDO says analysis algorithms have been developed to predict the onset of failures, which would be perfected using the data obtained from the Kolar trials. The techniques will avoid routine grounding of the aircraft for inspections, bringing the UAV closer to “on-condition maintenance” by detecting failures before they occur.
“This is a new paradigm of testing for monitoring the health of a flying platform in real-time,” says Dr. Prahlada, DRDO’s chief controller for research and development. “It is a significant development as 80% of the systems were developed in-house.” In addition to UAVs, the SHM technology will be used for manned platforms such as the Light Combat Aircraft, Medium Combat Aircraft and Fifth-Generation Fighter, he says. SHM techniques also are expected to cut down operational costs.
SNIP———-
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?topicName=india&id=news/awx/2010/10/29/awx_10_29_2010_p0-266123.xml&headline=DRDO Flies Nishant With Structural Health-Monitoring System
As impressive as it may sound have to wonder why they went for SHM on the LCA, an aircraft whose entry into service was soo time critical to the IAF.
Indian Air Force Sees Marginal Change At HAL
Oct 28, 2010
By Anantha Krishnan M.
BENGALURU, India
Snip—“The product support has been one major area of concern and there have been very little visible results from HAL,” the official says. However, “on the ground there have been no changes in the last six months, [so] we are adopting a wait-and-watch strategy, considering the slight signs of progress.”
Saddled with internal squabbles and leadership turnover, HAL today has too many projects to handle, IAF officials believe. “Be it the upgrade programs [MiG 21, MiG 27] or the production under license [Hawk, Su-30 MKI], we have expressed our concerns,” the official says.
The IAF has no option but to put up with HAL’s issues, which have become a topic of debate within the Indian media. “It’s not about overnight results,” the official says. “As things stand now, we will have to depend on HAL for serviceability, spares and other issues. We are confident that the promises made by HAL will translate into results.”
The penultimate day of the conference, Oct. 28, saw debates on operational philosophies specific to the IAF’s maritime operations. India’s Defense Secretary Pradeep Kumar and IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal Pradeep Vasant Naik are said to have agreed upon the necessity for greater synergy between the defense ministry and IAF.
“Critical issues related to acquisition, infrastructural development and budget support were discussed during the interaction,” the IAF said in a statement. “The concluding day will have discussions on various maintenance and HR issues.”
Rock and a hard place…
mattIf you want that kind of capability and want to use a laser then you are now moving from a guy with a sword to a knight on a horse with a lance.
I have to go with posters who have pointed out that the USAF has basically asked for the below:
Easiest thing to do (tongue in cheek) would be to modify the current B-2 add AESA antanae top and bottom and a laser generator internally. Would not be able to use the B-2 for bombing runs but that self same capacity to carry all that cargo can be used to carry a heavy CO2/laser generator and also the prisms and mirrors required to aim the laser or bounce it around the B-2 out of various firing holes.
mattUS Lift Restrictions On Hi-Tech Trade In Space and Defence to Support India
(Source: Indian Government; issued Nov. 8, 2010)
SNIP_____
Dr. Singh welcomed the US decision to lift the sanctions on hi-tech trade to India and its support to India in the Nuclear Suppliers Group to boost the civil nuclear cooperation. He said the two sides have agreed to deepen cooperation in defence and other high-end spectrum. Increased US investment in high technology flow, including nuclear energy is welcomed by New Delhi. He said Indian investment has helped increase competitiveness of US economy. Both the sides have decided to broaden strategic dialogue in other areas and initiate joint step in Africa and Afghanistan.President Obama said that they have agreed on the need of all nations to take steps to ensure that there are no safe havens for terrorists. He said that he is happy to play any role to reduce tension between India and Pakistan.
-ends-
This might have some bearing on the MMRCA and what kind of tech transfers boeing and lockhead martin can offer the Indian MOD.
main report found on defense aerospace.
mattJust out of curiosity,
Does anyone know if the US has changed its coms encryption and security yet? Since the EP-3E incident many years ago US, Japanese and possibly NATO coms have been open to evesdropping Chinese intelligence.
I do realise that the Russian Equipment maybe just as prone to being subverted however if the US wants the IAF and IN and IA to be inerportable is it not asking for too much?
The IAF probably has enough troubles keeping current systems safe from espionage i presume.
I was reminded of all this when reading the artical below.
At one point the argument was made against the logic of consolidating aircraft types because of such reasons. Not only would the IAF be in trouble if a single type of engine, used agressively in many IAF aircraft, was to be grounded but it would also come into trouble if widely used electronic systems were compromised. (this in itself is not easy).
Although cost is high there does seem to be an inate strength in diversity.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/01/101101fa_fact_hersh?printable=true
mattIts anything but close to reality, its a guess! In fact, it deliberately tends towards the extreme position just to make the point the IAF has enough on its plate all the way to 2020. See the post.
Sure, good idea, which will be so easy, a “single engine stealth aircraft on Tejas backbone”, it will come in by 2030 and be such a help then! 😮
If mk2 comes into service in 2020 it might as well be cancelled. Skip a generation get help from eads. How will a forty year old unsuccessful design help the IAF in 2020?
mattIf the guess is close to reality then tejas project needs to be axed and pm brought in front of inquest.2020 for service? Can’t be, makes no sense.
Kill tejas and move on in partnership on a single engine stealth aircraft based on tejas backbone.
Sign In
