dark light

BlackArcher

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 3,242 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Military Aviation News #2103612
    BlackArcher
    Participant
    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2103614
    BlackArcher
    Participant
    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2103649
    BlackArcher
    Participant
    BlackArcher
    Participant

    Greg Waldron reports from LIMA 2019.

    The IAF is indeed very happy with the LCA Tejas and that becomes apparent in this interview. By the way, those 2 jets were not limited to 6 gs. They were pulling 360 degree turns in 21 seconds at 17.14 deg/s sustained turn rate. Unlikely if a 6 g software restriction was still in place.

    Analysis- How LIMA deployment marked new high for India’s Tejas

    Group Captain Samrath Dhankhar of the Indian air force has earned a place in aviation history, as the commanding officer of its 45 Sqn (“The Flying Daggers”): the first to operate the Hindustan Aeronautics Tejas Mk1 fighter.

    In another historical footnote, he and a fellow pilot brought two examples of the combat aircraft to the Langkawi InternationalMaritime and Aerospace (LIMA) exhibition in Malaysia. This was the first deployment of the indigenous-developed type to Southeast Asia, and also the first time that an air force pilot had flown the type at a foreign air show.

    Ostensibly the visit was made in support of Kuala Lumpur’s nascent requirement for a light combat aircraft. Yet it also underlined India’s increased confidence to show off the locally-made fighter to the world.

    ““We’re here to promote, but not to compete,” Dhankhar told FlightGlobal during the show. “The competition will be for the OEM to handle.”

    The two jets’ journey to Langkawi from an air base near the city of Coimbatore took them northwards along the subcontinent’s east coast to another base near Kolkata. Although the optimum altitude for this transit was 33,000ft, the two-ship formation flew at 27,500ft, because separation rules at this altitude are more relaxed.

    After that stop, the pair flew to Yangon in Myanmar and then onwards to Langkawi. A support aircraft flew ahead of the formation to provide logistical support and to greet the fighters on their arrival. At the show, the team found itself operating from a small tent next to the flightline. This was a big change from February’s Aero India event near Bengaluru, where the same team operated from the sprawling Yelahanka air base.

    Prior to operating the Tejas, Dhankhar spent most of his career in the cockpit of the Mikoyan MiG-21 “Bison”; a heavily upgraded version of the Cold War stalwart and still a major asset in the Indian air force. He has also spent some time in the Sukhoi Su-30MKI, although he has not flown it operationally.

    “The Tejas is far better in terms of manoeuvrability, as well as the systems on board,” he says. “In every sense it is better. It is clearly demarcated as a different generation.”

    Showing off this manoeuvrability was the aim of Dhankhar’s display routine, which he also performed during the Aero India show. This is designed to highlight the jet’s fly-by-wire capability through key manoeuvres such as the main radius turn and negative-g turn – the latter being rarely performed.

    The Tejas Mk1 is powered by a single GE Aviation F404-IN20 engine with an afterburner. The examples operated by 45 Sqn are in the initial operational clearance (IOC) configuration. Follow-on jets will be in the final operational clearance (FOC) standard.

    So far, 45 Sqn has received 12 IOC-specification aircraft, with another four to be delivered soon. Next year it will realise its full strength of 20 jets, when it receives four two-seat examples in the FOC configuration.

    The main difference between the two standards is software. FOC-model aircraft will be cleared to 8g, while current IOC examples are limited to 6g. In addition, FOC aircraft will be equipped for air-to-air refuelling. Once deliveries of FOC aircraft begin, existing IOC jets will be upgraded to the enhanced configuration.

    Dhankhar is clearly pleased with the Tejas. He praises its agility and says the type’s g onset rates are “very comfortable”. He also believes that the type’s control laws have been well implemented.

    “It responds to your inputs in the entire envelope very well,” he says. “It’s not as if you need to be at certain speeds to get the maximum out of it. At any speed it gives you whatever you demand.”

    He also appreciates the safety factors built into the jet, in that it is impossible to depart from the approved flight envelope limits. This makes the aircraft “very, very safe,” he says. “This is a very positive thing, but at the same time this can be marginally negative because at times, if I would like to exceed the aircraft’s limits, I can’t do that,” he adds.

    On the aircraft’s human-machine interface, he feels that everything is exactly where a pilot will expect to find it, with an intuitive layout that eases cockpit familiarisation. Apart from the master arm switch, virtually everything necessary to operate the aircraft is located on the throttle or control column, in line with modern hands on throttle and stick design methodology.

    Although Dhankhar’s aerial display, performed with white smoke trailing from wing-mounted pods, was as powerful as any modern fighter performance, he stresses that air shows are not his main line of work.

    “My primary job is to exploit the aircraft operationally. Displays as such are a side role for me. If it is required I’ll do it, but otherwise the OEM does it on its own… I’m not a display specialist, but I’m capable of doing it,” he says.”

    As an example of this operational focus, Dhankhar notes that he has had the opportunity to fire or drop every weapon the Tejas has been cleared to carry: both air-to-air and ground-attack munitions. He feels the accuracy is excellent, and that the HMI makes it very easy to employ all weapons across the envelope. He believes that the Tejas’s helmet-mounted cueing system, which allows the pilot to target weapons without pointing the aircraft’s nose at the target, offers far greater freedom than the MiG-21, and is “much more advanced as compared with the Su-30”.

    Given the advanced state of technologies such as beyond visual-range (BVR) missiles and helmet-mounted cueing, intuitively this would mean that a fighter’s manoeuvrability would become less of a priority. Dhankhar, however, says that a jet’s ability to perform aggressive manoeuvres remains a crucial consideration, because sooner or later a “merge” will occur and a pilot will find themselves in close quarters with enemy aircraft.

    “There are situations where you need theg,” he says. “Most of the time you can rely on sensors and BVR weapons, and you do not need to engage in close combat. But you should not be a sitting duck in case somebody closes in for some reason. Merges do take place despite whatever type of sensors you have. There are times when the criticality of the mission is high, and you need to take certain risks. In those missions you tend to go further, and the merges take place. If you are capable in terms of pulling moreg, you may turn these situations to your advantage. That is what I feel as a fighter pilot.”

    “Because of the jet’s architecture it’s very easy to upgrade,” says Dhankhar. “Having flown this aircraft, I can say it has a great future.”

    Next time someone wants an operational IAF pilot’s perspective on the LCA Tejas, here it is. We have been saying for some time now that the IAF is very pleased with the LCA Tejas and it has proven to be a very capable weapons platform. It is reported by all test pilots as being very easy to fly and the FCS has been consistently rated “excellent” by all pilots that have flown it. Now we have it from the second CO of a LCA Tejas squadron as well.

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    I don’t know why we are bothering to convince anyone publicly, the people who need to know have their estimates if pak say no one killed – good for them. Next time, we should drop 10x more while our bombs will kill only ants or trees. Also Adapt Air Force RoE, if we can lock any object- it should be fired at as we are not able to kill – neither terrorist, PA nor their planes. We have to try harder. Additionally we will encourage Afg and Iran – so that one martial race can fight another martial race.

    while we do this, Pak can continue support terrorist groups with arms, training and money against all their neighbors as they don’t have balls to fight directly.

    Yes, well, fighting directly isn’t really where they’ve proven themselves. The loss of East Pakistan and the surrender of 90,000 troops still rankles very deeply in the Pakistani Army and establishment. But using terror as a means to achieve their goals is where they excel.

    And the Balakot strikes were for that- to show that India will no longer sit and watch idly when the next big terror strike backed by Pakistan occurs. Goal achieved.

    Another side goal, make Pakistan step up its defence spending even more. Given the current state of their economy, the strategic goal could be to make the Pakistani state divert even more of its already very scarce resources to defence. With just 2 months worth of forex reserves, high inflation and subsidies likely being cut, and an IMF loan as a lifeline, it is actually in Pakistan’s interest to seek peace, not India’s.

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    On an aside, the venom of Indian citizens attacks on Lara Seligman’s twitter after she posted the news story was disheartening to read. She is a reporter, writing about information she received. The notion that the USG or Lockheed is behind a false report is absurd. The US isn’t trying to sell F-16’s to Pakistan, US foreign policy isn’t advocating a reproachment with Pakistan, the US and Pakistan are not allies and have suspended many previous defense arrangements. The US is courting India, Lockheed is trying to sell the F-16 to India, can someone explain how the US being complicit in Pakistan lying about losing an F-16 helps the US or Lockheed in regard to India?

    That’s one reason I doubt you will see any official statements from the US state dept. or any other agency in regards to this incident. The above vague comments from DoD and State is about all I’d expect. We are not looking to cut off our nose to spite our face in regards to closer ties with India over positive/negative publicity regarding US weapon system that was designed in the 1970’s.

    Well, she can come out and defend herself can’t she? Who exactly were her sources and she can then disprove the US Defence Department. Else, retract that story since she cannot back it up with evidence, the likes of which you and others expect from the Indian Govt.

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    Ever been to a village in Kashmir or India or Pakistan? Enlighten us as to what you think the reference to the “Sikh” pilot meant? IIRC I clarified it on the day this was previously brought up, but you may have forgotten.

    Bearded. Basically the idea that if he was Indian and bearded, then he was Sikh.

    Its a common misconception. Had he been Indian, the Pakistani state would’ve even paraded him in hospital or even his dead body to prove its point.

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    It’s wonderful to see how people always bring OBL into into this. Well, only a few weeks back a new book claimed that Mullah Omar had stayed in Afghanistan throughout this period, and only a few clicks away from an American base. The book is currently being translated into English, but it would be interesting to see American, Indian and Afghanistan’s response who always claimed he was in Quetta. Let’s wait for the official response from these countries (there may be none now that Mullah Omar is dead), but it would be interesting.

    Yes, we do because it finally proved to the world the truth about the Pakistani state’s perfidy. They were lying through their teeth, sheltering the MOST WANTED TERRORIST ON EARTH. Even while pretending to be fighting a war on terror.

    Those who had any doubts about the nature of the Pakistani state saw those doubts vanish that day.

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    There was no investigation ‘like that’, just a routine end user management check. Good word play though.

    Rubbish. The US DoD and Pentagon would know if any such “routine end user management” was done. The fact that they denied it happened basically rubbishes that report. “Unidentified sources”. We in India are very familiar with such unidentified sources. Mostly figments of the journo’s mind.

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    [USER=”30740″]BlackArcher[/USER] – I don’t understnad why so many Indian posters such as yourself keep repeating the discrepancies in statements from the Pakistani PM about the number of pilots in custody. It’s fog of war, initial reports and statements in events like this are more often inaccurate, incomplete. The vast majority of Indian media and government statements over the incident are based entirely on circumstantial evidence: claimed eyewitness chute counts, number of pilots in custody, etc. These are of dubious value.

    There is is no way to ignore the total lack of physical evidence or to reconcile the statement of Varthaman that he had be “looking for a target” when downed. He never said he shot down an F-16. India would have been able to verify the downed wreckage even in Pakistan which the use of Sat imagery, to our knowledge they have none, now we have reports of all F-16’s accounted for.

    Barring any hard evidence produced by India in the future, I think this issue is pretty much settled. Modi Gov. pushed a narrative for political purposes, the IAF “believes” it has some radar tracking data which might support a downed F-16, but, again fog of war.

    These are NOT of dubious value, given that the F-16 crash happened on the POK side of the border and not on the Indian side. Eye-witness accounts on BOTH sides of the border stated multiple parachutes were seen coming down, between 2 and 3 is the figure all eye-witnesses reported. Eye-witness accounts on the PoK side talked about multiple pilots being caught by locals and one was beaten up. Not 1 eye-witness account, but multiple. Were they all just fibbing?

    The Pakistan side went with that story to claim another IAF jet AND another IAF pilot were in their custody and one was hospitalized. Are you saying that they were just cooking up statements as they saw fit?? the Prime Minister of Pakistan, no less?? India reported one jet lost immediately and claimed one jet shot down as well, immediately, based on what they were seeing on their radar screens, what R/T logs and transcripts they had in their possession and what Indian Army forward units reported seeing. They weren’t trying to win some internet contest. IAF Mirage-2000s had after all just a day ago gone nearly 60-70 kms into Pakistan and dropped their weapons and returned safely, so they had met their original objective.

    And wasn’t a Pakistani narrative about no F-16 being used disproven with the AMRAAM parts? They claimed no F-16s were involved, which was proven to be false and now they are hinting that F-16s were involved “since the entire PAF was in the air”. Yeah right.

    If you have any historical perspective, you’d know that this is not the first time that Pakistan has claimed things that were subsequently proven false. They claimed that the Balakot strike didn’t hit any buildings. They could have easily let local and foreign journalists visit the site and the building and view it from inside. They never allowed that, cordoning off the area from locals and journalists.

    Kargil was a case where they claimed for a very long time that no Pakistan Army regulars were involved, despite the Indian side having ample evidence. They refused to even take back the bodies of their dead soldiers and they were buried by the Indian Army with honors. Only much later was it acknowledged that the Northern Light Infantry lost hundreds of their regular soldiers. They wouldn’t even acknowledge the deaths of their own soldiers, men who laid down their lives fighting for Pakistan. A shame but true.

    Having had the wreckage on the POK side means that Pakistan could easily control access to it, just as it was done for Balakot. Locals don’t have access to the site then basically images don’t get out.

    And how can one forget about Osama Bin Laden and how long he was living a couple of kms away from what is basically Pakistan Army’s Westpoint Academy? Did they not deny his presence in Pakistan for all those years? Do you seriously believe that the Pakistan Army, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Pakistan Govt. had no clue that he was there all those years?? When did they acknowledge his presence? After his capture and killing was over.

    I’m sorry but I won’t take what the Pakistan establishment says at face value.

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2104964
    BlackArcher
    Participant

    J-10C batch 03:

    Larger-
    https://i.imgur.com/g0zzRnL.jpg

    That nose looks plain weird!

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    PAF F-16 was shot down, says IAF, refutes US journal report

    New Delhi:
    The Indian Air Force today said it had proof that a Pakistani F-16 fighter jet was shot down in the February dogfight, as American news publication Foreign Policy contradicted India quoting unnamed US defence officials. “Two senior US defense officials with direct knowledge of the situation told Foreign Policy that U.S. personnel recently counted Islamabad’s F-16s and found none missing,” the publication says in a report published on Thursday.

    In a statement, the Air Force said: “The Indian Forces have confirmed sighting ejections at two different places on that day. The two sightings were at places separated by at least 8-10 km. One was an IAF MiG 21 Bison and other a PAF aircraft. Electronic signatures gathered by us indicate that the PAF aircraft was a F-16.”

    The government had said that in an aerial duel on February 27 – a day after India sent fighter jets to Pakistan’s Balakot to strike a terror training camp – Indian Air Force pilot Abhinandan Varthaman had engaged with one of the Pakistani fighter jets that tried to target Indian military facilities and shot it down before he was hit and forced to eject. Abhinandan Varthaman landed across the Line of Control and was in Pakistani custody for three days before he was returned to India amid attempts to de-escalate the crisis between the two sides.

    The Air Force said radio intercepts proved that two pilots had ejected, not just one.

    Journalists were shown the radar tracks of the air battle that took place across the LoC near Jhangar, which lies between Rajouri and Nowshera.

    The radar tracks recorded by airborne warning and control aircraft show the presence of an F-16 aircraft in the vicinity of Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman’s MiG-21 Bison. In the very next frame of the AWACS picture, eight seconds later, the symbol for the PAF F-16 aircraft is missing indicating what IAF sources say is a shootdown of the jet.

    IAF controllers monitoring the air battle on the AWACS aircraft were also monitoring the radio communication between pilots in the Pakistan F-16 formation. They say communication from one F-16 aircraft abruptly ended which they believe is further confirmation that one Pakistan Air Force jet did not return. However, journalists were not showcased a recording of the audio communication that was taking place on security grounds.

    ..

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    No.19 Sherdils squadron flies ex RJAF F-16s. Not the ones supplied by the US. So will the Pentagon come out and do a count of all F-16s in PAF inventory including those supplied by non US states like Jordan?

    link

    Obviously, America will not find any F-16s it has supplied to Pakistan ‘missing in action’. But has it also accounted for any second hand F-16s transferred to Pakistan via third parties? And can we see an official statement from the Pentagon on this rather than unnamed types?

    BlackArcher
    Participant

    So it’s settled then. IAF lost Mig-21 and Su-30 and PAF lost F-16 :angel:.

    ​​​​​​Mr. Austin will not approve of unmanned FP sources, but will happily binge on social media sources :very_drunk:.

    BS. No Su-30MKI was shot down.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2105145
    BlackArcher
    Participant
Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 3,242 total)