BlackArcherIAF’s first C-17 CB-8001
BlackArcherIAF’s first C-17 test flight
IAF’s first C-17 flies!
BlackArcherHmmm …. “target hit” ?? Did I miss something ? :confused:
Even if I know that a hit so close to the target will surely destroy a lot, but to advertise this as “target hit” seems a bitt off.
Deino
but that’s a 1000 pounder bomb..the one in the test must’ve been a dummy with no explosives charge, but a regular 1000 pounder would obliterate the target if it hit anywhere that close.
BlackArcherAirbus A-330 MRTT is L1 in the aerial refueller contest and the MoD will enter into financial negotiations with them soon.
BlackArcherIAF aims to have 15 AWACS and AEWACS systems inducted and operational
Air Force (IAF) will be aiming to induct and operate as many as 15 airborne warning and control systems in the next decade which will include the soon-to-be initiated programme of India Airborne Warning and Control System.
Speaking after an event organised to commemorate the arrival of the Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) System (EMB 145i) here, Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne said, “It’s a very large country and our interests are extending beyond our borders as well, including Car Nicobar islands and those areas so we require that number of platforms.”
Browne said that the new AEW&C systems, mounted on Brazilian Embraer aircraft would be based in the Western Border.
“The AEW&C will be inducted into the Indian Air Force in April 2014,” Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister and Chief of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) V K Saraswat said.
Adding that the first of the three aircraft landed in Bangalore a month ago, he said the second one would land in December while the third aircraft is currently undergoing various certification trials in Brazil.
India already has Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft under development using the Russian IL-76 platform and the Israeli Phalcon Radar and has proposed an indigenously developed programme India AWACS.
Even though the first of the three aircrafts had already been with the Centre for Airborne Systems (CABS), Saraswat said that the challenging part of the work remains to be completed now by the team.
Director of CABS said that there are more than 60 antennas and sensors as well as modifications to install the CABS developed Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA).
Browne also said that the IAF would complete all negotiations with French Defence major Dassault Aviation on the 126 aircraft Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) deal.
He also said that the IAF will soon award the contract to either Airbus A330 Multirole tanker transport (MRTT) or IL-78 aircraft for aerial refuelling tankers.
The breakdown would be most likely:
*5 Phalcon AWACS (3 inducted and operational on the Il-76 platform and 2 more to be ordered-not sure if the Il-76 will remain the platform or not. IAI has offered the Gulfstream G550 instead)
*5 AWACS India (platform not yet decided)
*7 AEWACS (platform EMB-145I)
IMO, not enough to maintain 24/7 vigil over the vast Indian airspace and with 2 borders with major air forces on both sides.
BlackArcherSo the Bison it seems is one of the best dogfighters around. No wonder the IAF did not want to replace them with the less agile Tejas MK1s. Which begs the question what will replace the Bisons in IAF service if the MK2 is delayed. Surely the Mk2 won’t be ready by 2017 for induction when the Bisons are supposed to be retired.
If the contract is signed in 2013 Rafale should be ready by 2016, but in limited numbers and using Rafale/MKI for the roles done by the Bison is going to be an expensive affair.
I think there is still room for a small Swedish fighter,
utter nonsense. you’re comparing a 1970s technology aircraft that has been moderately updated with a near 4th generation fighter that hasn’t yet reached FOC. The fact that it hasn’t yet got FOC is what is preventing the IAF from replacing the Bisons with the Tejas, not your claim that its “less agile”, which is hogwash. The Tejas’ ASRs set performance specs that were on par with the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29, not the MiG-21Bis.
The MiG-21 is not the best dogfighter either. it has flaws that will allow a novice pilot to easily cross its envelope limits and sometimes recovery from such situations can be difficult too. The lack of a FBW that assures carefree handling means that a pilot in a 4th gen fighter is far likelier to be able to better utilize the max permissible performance from his fighter while concentrating on the fight.
In nearly all aspects- weapons payload, range, endurance (thanks to OBOGS), radar, EW equipment, cockpit avionics and general pilot workload, reliability and response of the engine (thanks to FADEC), the Tejas Mk1 whoops a Bison easily. Being nearly as small as the MiG-21Bis and with a shielded engine fan and a high composite content, its RCS will be likelier to be even smaller than that of the Bis and visually as hard to pick up.
All you’re doing is making ridiculous claims to try and bolster a hollow argument for bringing in the Gripen into the IAF.
BlackArcherI think you mean new Honeywell engines.
http://www.honeywellforjaguar.com/—
I wonder how capable those El-2032 radar sets on DARIN 3 will be. Hope they get full A-A functionality.
more than the Elta 2032’s capability (which is quite good), it is the size of the radome on the Jaguar that will restrict its air to air capability. Looking at the Jaguar DARIN 3 mockup at AI-11, it looked like the radome was the size of the Jaguar-IM, which is much smaller than fighters with a serious air to air role.
Besides, the Jag will primarily use the radar for its A2G modes and the A2A modes will simply offer the Jaguar a respectable self-protection capability. I hope the 2032 radar has a terrain following mode that can be very useful for the Jaguar. IAF pilots used to practice very low flying on the Jags, just flying over power transmission lines. Terrain following/terrain avoidance are features that any pilot whose mission may include low level ingress will appreciate.
BlackArcherINS Tarkash, the 5th Talwar class frigate and the second from the follow on order for 3, has been commissioned into IN service. 🙂
BlackArcherGoI to sell 10% stake in HAL to cover the fiscal deficit. that’s like selling your family jewels to keep the house running, so its for the wrong reasons..
Many were hoping that a larger stake would be sold, but we never know..eventually HAL may become a Maruti-Suzuki, where the GoI initially divested a small portion of its stake (25% in Maruti’s case) but later on completely divested its stake. GoI will still definitely retain majority stake in HAL since it has strategic implications, but the stake will probably go down to 51% or so in the future.
The cabinet agreed to sell a 10 percent stake in state-owned aircraft maker Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), a senior minister said on Thursday.
Science and Technology Minister, Jaipal Reddy, did not clarify on the timeline of the divestment or on the price the government expects to receive on the stake sale.
The government plans to sell stakes in 15 state-run firms by the end of March next year and looks to raise Rs 30,000 crore from the sales to help plug a yawning gap in the fiscal budget.
The Congress Govt’s weak handling of the current economic situation and the roll back on some economic measures clearly indicates that they’re just pushing this issue of the fiscal deficit into the future..when someone else will have to take some unpopular measures to rein it in.
BlackArcher🙂 I meant a thread specifically for the topics JSR brought up here,
but sure, there’s probably an efficiency argument for just having a JSR thread,
and since he seems so comfortable at moving between and substituting one debate for another, why not?
I think that after a while everyone cottons on to the fact that its futile to discuss with JSR.
I learnt early on (and so have others) from reading his posts, that its a complete waste of time to engage in ANY discussion with him, because it invariably becomes “Russia is great, Russia is rich, only Russian equipment good, only Russians competent and smart” type rubbish from him. Belittling everything else, and tom-tomming everything Russian or changing his tune and arguments midway through is what he does..the best way to deal with that is ignore him and his comments.
Opening a new thread for him is a waste of bandwidth IMO.
BlackArcherEither you’re relying on information which is not in the article linked to, or you’re the one who’s confused. See –
A clear reference to AW being alleged to have used a middleman in the LUH competition, not the VVIP competition.
Again, the Indian MoD is asking for details of the allegations about the LUH competition.
An entirely separate issue, relating to an AW executive receiving payments from suppliers. No allegation there of AW bribing anyone in India, except from the individual concerned, who has been sacked for being personally corrupt. One has to wonder how reliable he is as a witness. He has a strong incentive to try to deflect attention from his own misdeeds.
that article is confusing the two issues. Agusta Westland did not pay that man, in fact they brought the charge that the Brigadier asked for commission for inside information. Why would they be black-listed when they are not even a contender in that LUH competition any more and exposed the offer themselves? They want more information on this allegation since the same Brigadier may have offered the other 2 contenders his services and they may have used other such middlemen as well, and if that happens to be proven, the deal is over and re-tendered or maybe HAL’s LUH will get all the orders.
What is going to cause Agusta Westland problems are accusations that there were malpractices in the AW-101 deal and general irregularities that the MoD wanted information on.
India orders probe into AW-101 copter
The Defence Minister Shri AK Antony today directed his ministry officials to get a fresh report from the Indian Embassy in Rome following a media report alleging malpractices in the procurement of 12 helicopters for the VVIP Communication Squadrons of the Indian Air Force from Ms. AgustaWestland.
And Agusta Westland’s own statement refers to the press reports about middlemen in the VVIP chopper deal and how they (specific names are mentioned) were not used
AgustaWestland, a Finmeccanica company, firmly denies the recent press news reporting alleged use of agents or intermediaries by the company in its contractual relationships with the Indian MoD and/or with any other Governmental body involved in the procurement of its products. Such press news are completely baseless and untrue.
AgustaWestland never appointed, formally or informally, Guido Haschke or Mr. Christian Michel as its agents and/or intermediaries in the VVIP programme. Therefore the company never paid any commission to them.AgustaWestland is astonished that such press news report about a memorandum which is unknown, directly or indirectly to the company and is related to a programme different from the VVIP one. Even more AgustaWestland has been excluded from that tender as non-compliant with the bid requirements.
AgustaWestland confirms its relationships with the Indian MoD have always been conducted through the official channel, in line with all applicable rules.
It is true that the company has been informed on the preliminary investigations by the Public Prosecutors of the Court of Naples declared incompetent by the Procuratore Generale of the Italian Supreme Court of Justice (Corte di Cassazione) as requested by the Company. Such investigations are anyway at preliminary stage in which, in accordance with the Italian Law, there is no participation by Company’s lawyers. AgustaWestland is sure that the ongoing legal proceeding will ascertain that the conduct of AgustaWestland has always been fully compliant with all applicable Italian and Indian rules.
Praveen Bakshi, the CEO of Aeromatrix, a company that Swiss businessman Guido Haschke is a director at, has issued the following statement today:
With regards to the various news reports published in the print media and electronic media, I Praveen Bakshi seek to clarify that there is no involvement of mine or of the company Aeromatrix of which I am the principal officer, with any defence dealings and particularly that of the VVIP helicopter purchase by the Govt of India.I manage the day to day affairs of Aeromatrix which is involved in provision of virtual engineering support services. The company which started with 50 employees today has about 70 employees on its roles. All business transactions of the company with its customers are completely accounted for and transparent.
its clear that the concerns are related to the AW-101 VVIP deal, not the LUH deal, which they aren’t a part of anymore.
BlackArcherNo – it’s alleged that an IAF Brigadier solicited a bribe from Agusta Westland. Would you say that someone is alleged to have paid a criminal when he was the victim of an attempted robbery?
India should start severely punishing officers & officials who seek bribes, & giving preference to suppliers which expose bribe seekers, instead of constantly attacking suppliers & doing nothing about the corruption within the ranks of the buyers.
You’re confusing the two issues where Agusta Westland are involved. The first is the LUH issue, where they themselves claimed that an Indian Army Brigadier had offered to give them inside info on the tender in return for $5 million. They refused, and in any case, didn’t make the cut. They are not being considered for black-listing for this case.
There is the separate case of the 12 VVIP AW-101s that were ordered from Agusta Westland, where allegations of bribes paid by them to influence the deal were made in ITALY. India’s govt demanded that they be given documents pertaining to the investigation and if there is any proof from the Italian investigation that Agusta Westland indeed did pay bribes to secure that deal, they will be in trouble.
So this really isn’t a case of Agusta Westland being punished unfairly. They were forthright in exposing that IA Brigadier and he should not just be court martialed but also jailed. But that may not absolve them of wrong-doing in the AW-101 sale if they indeed did bribe someone to get that deal.
But yes, it would help if there were guarantees made to companies that in return for exposing bureaucrats and armed services officers soliciting bribes, they would stand to benefit (as opposed to be being punished by other corrupt people in the MoD and the services) then it will overall help India a lot. this black-listing business has derailed several of IA’s programs already and is shortly going to delay other DRDO projects as well (related to the Tatra truck).
BlackArcherIAF has to work within a budget, if they get rid of one type of helicopter for a cheaper alternative costs are going to be lower as long as the new platform is used in the same fashion as the old one and maintains number parity. Since CH-47 is not cheap to operate if IAF starts using their more numerous fleet more often in roles previously performed by smaller and more economical platforms or decides to deploy them overseas the cost is going to surge and surpass without effort the associated spending of maintaining Mi-26s for specific operations.
Costs vs capability- that is what you’re not taking into account. If the Chinook is used in more roles than that Mi-26 was (and we can be sure that this will be the case since it is a tactical heavy lift helo), it will obviously be costlier to operate that fleet when compared to what the IAF is spending today to keep the Mi-26 fleet operational. But that is no surprise considering how the Mi-26 is too big a stone to kill most birds and is therefore gets used sparingly as opposed to the Mi-8/17.
But the gains will be in other missions where previously more Mi-8/17s had to be used and a single larger helo would’ve sufficed.
The IAF has plans for an adequately large numbers of Mi-17s and won’t start using the Chinook for missions that the Mi-17 can perform, just like in some cases the Dhruv is adequate and the Mi-17 is not needed.
BlackArcherIf operating costs are the main reason for this deal any savings achieved with CH-47 introduction are going to vanish with any deployment overseas, in the short run logistics and in the long run field maintenance.
Flying a Mi-26s through Asia and go on a hunt for spares to an aircraft graveyard may not be cheap and quick but sending a CH-47 to Pennsylvania by airmail or buying spares from Boeing at a bargain price are neither easy tasks.
Believe me, any Air Force would much rather pay a little more but see to it that spares are well stocked and available as and when required, rather than have to go scavenging for spares that may not be made anymore..and even those spares would get price exorbitantly for what may well be sub-standard quality.
Wasn’t that what MiG once famously accused the IAF of doing and as a result contributing to their attrition rate? Going to CIS countries looking for spares to keep their MiG-21 fleet flying?
Boeing will guarantee a certain operational availability and a contract will be signed that will hold them to it. The same has been done for the C-17 fleet as well..the IAF will be happier to have the heavy lift choppers available when needed, as opposed to being hangar queens.
BlackArcherNow if Boeing were entering the Chinook against the Mi-17 for a medium lift helo contract…
Then Boeing would most likely lose. the Mi-17V5 is a workhorse..its reliable, has modern avionics that allow day/night/bad weather operations and has even better capability at hot and high conditions than earlier Mi-17s. Plus it can be armed whereas the Chinook has no such capability.
And the IAF from all reports is very happy with them with repeat orders being placed..and when you also take into account the much cheaper cost to acquire the Mi-17V5 as opposed to the Chinook, it will take such a contract easily.
Sign In
