Zero

This is exactly my point. I can post alot of info about weapon yeild sizes and missile numbers and work on MIRV. Yet as you say, best left undiscussed, the same way any discussion about shooting down all of Pakistans nuke arsenal is pointless………

Rimmer,

Pakistani or not, discussing shooting down a nuke arsenal is not really pointless. This is an international headache. While it is not possible to launch as salvo you had mentioned, which caught my attention. Using a nuclear weapon is a taboo and shooting down one ain’t. Today countries are spending a lot of money not on launching a weapon, but, methods to shoot down one.

India is spending a lot on such research and it has verified lot of technology with tests.

India launching a nuclear missile on Pakistan is a as much as the current level of BMD Pakistan has fielded. That means “none.’ India has a NFU policy.

The possibility of Pakistan launching one nuclear missile is equivalent of India able to stop one. I mean, both are a shot in the dark. Incrementally, India will deploy a basic BMD. That means the shot in the dark possibility of Pakistanis launching a nuclear missile “might” remain the same or even more retarded (due to US and other events in Pakistan). Where as Indian basic BMD capability and the possible chance of US/israel/Russian involvement in development of BMD (they are offering Patriots etc) will increase the chances of rouge launch getting shot down.

And, don’t look at this as a US/Israeli/Indian/Russian conspiracy. Its only logical that prevention of nuclear strike is an international priority. Secondly, Indian nukes are in civilian government control. Indian Armed forces are involved in security, maintainence and upkeep of the arsenal subsets. We don’t talk about nuclear weapons as an offensive capability. We call it just deterrence.

I just wanted to make few points. I hope you will understand.

I can understand the ABM debate against a nation with just a few missiles, however a mass attack by Pakistani cruise and ballastic missiles, from multipule locations?

How do you define mass attack by Pakistan? How many missiles Pakistanis have?

Rahul M,

That still does not prove that stage 3 training requires weapons training. AFIK, Stage 3 is type conversion. Its basically for going supersonic and specific. AJT is for advanced, but, subsonic training.

MOFTU was used as stage 3 in absence of a AJT.

BTW both AJT and type converter have weapons training capabilities. You can even arm a BJT. But, IAF requires it or not is not clear.

yes, very clearly it exists. in the absence of a proper AJT/LIFT aircraft, IAF compromised with MOFTU.

it has the Hawk now but is clearly disappointed with it. many future air forces will be moving towards supersonic jet trainers, viz. korean T-50 (which is generating interest from many AFs including the israeli AF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-50_Golden_Eagle#Operators), hongdu L-15 etc. I’m sure PAF would have gone for L-15 if it could afford it. who knows it may well want a few in the future. some people would have been singing a very different tune then ! :dev2:

of course, the USAF has been using supersonic jet trainers for a long time now, the T-38 which itself was derived from an aircraft of the LCA’s weight class, the F-5. the USAF fighter pilots train on the T-38 (AJT stage) and then go on to the AT-38 for weapons training (similar to LIFT stage)

so, yes I do think the need exists.

—————
coming to the IAF in particular, current fighter pilot training looks like

HPT-32 –> HJT-16 –> Hawk/MOFTU (there aren’t enough hawks AFAIK) –> Conversion training in sqdns

the future would ideally look like
HTT-40/some other turbo trainer –> HJT-36 –> Hawk/LCA derived trainer –> LCA LIFT(filling in for MOFTU) –> Conversion training in sqdns

The question rephrased.

Fighter conversion type is definitely required. I wanted to ask if the LIFT part is needed or not. Any one knows what is the broad Stage III requirements? Does it include weapons practice? MOFTU was equipped with MiG-21 FL’s which were fighter aircrafts.

Ok, it has weapons.

Insig, Rahul M,

I got it looking at the picture.

Thanks anyway.

According to you. In real life, there will still be a jump when a trainee moves from the Hawk to a fighter squadron and needs to get fully ops on tactics and equipment which he would not have had access to, on the Hawk.

From AJT to fighter type training you mean. LCA trainer version closes the gap. If you mean a squadron or two of LCA Trainers with basic weapons capability, then you are right. For 200 odd LCA’s, you will require a squardron or two of trainers alone.

Its all about cost and benefit at the end of the day.

The IAF will have to look into the savings in spares burn & time viz training ramp up versus the initial acquisition costs of additional Tejas.

Right now, it will be more expensive as the Tejas logistics have not been set up and the definitive MK2 variant is not out.

Once the MK2 comes out, this kind of approach may end up being adopted – I have seen at least two discussions on something around this sort of stuff.

Now, there are two potential objections – one every aircraft consumes manpower (which people often ignore in most discussions) & the IAF may actually prefer a higher number of marginally more capable single seaters than trainers – the second seat cuts into range basically and MMH for dual seaters is a bit higher.

Second, simulators could actually pick up a bit of the training lag vis a vis Hawk guys going to much more advanced aircraft.

But simulators are not exactly cheap either and nor do they always provide the exact level of training that is required.

Also, as I recall, the IAF needs new trainers beyond the additional RFP mentioned so far. I’ll try and dig up the numbers but I dont have my notes with me about what the original estimates were.

What I meant was that there is no explicit requirement from IAF for fighter capability in the trainer. Or it could be weapon simulation capability. It may arise later or not is not known.

The IAF is ordering the MK1 for more than familiarization – that may have been the original plan, but they need the combat punch now, with aircraft retiring. Hence the second squadron is now intended to be a full combat unit.

Any combat sqn of Tejas without mk2 specs is not for waging war. Technically it can though.