my idea is the vast bulk of any countrys airspace does not have military quality accurate long range radar and no low level radar coverage in peacetime. the ATC radars are probably not as sharp on the ball as a SPY1D,S1850 or SMART-L.

where threat is perceived like from drug runners, the US border patrol deployed P3 machines with rotodome radars to catch these small low flyers.

By the end of the eleventh plan period, ie by 2012, the IAF would have inducted some seven DRDO CARs (actually within the next couple of years), equal number of DRDO Indra -II PC radars, plus over a dozen DRDO LLLWRs. The IAF is also tieing its networks with all the ATCs plus adding extra SRE (Surveillance Radar Element) primary radars. Also, within the same time, the initial batches of 19 LLTRs (Low Level Transportable radars), Medium Power radars will be inducted, rest to be license produced at BEL, along with 4 more Aerostats. In the eleventh plan (2007-12) itself, three Phalcons, plus the 2+1 DRDO AEW will also be inducted. The first MRSAM and Akash units are also expected within this time frame, as well as the Spyder SAM units, each of which comes with additional radars.
During this same period, the IAF is planning to operationalize its locally sourced IACCS (Integrated Air Command & Control system), plus the fleetwide datalink project, of which a pilot is currently underway.

Subsequently, from 2012-2017, the IAF will procure more DRDO LLLWRs, and the DRDOs MPR, LLTR projects will continue once the license production tapers off. Also, more Phalcons and DRDO AEW orders are also a possibility.
The remaining MRSAM units will be delivered, as well as Akash SAM production, each group (per airbase) of which comes with a CAR and a Rajendra Battery Level radar.

The datalink project will continue during this period.

The BMD project is expected to reach IAF trial evaluation stage by 2012. So during the 2012-2017 period, if the program is cleared for interim induction, each BMD system will come with an additional AESA DRDO Long Range Tracking Radar, and a DRDO MFCR, which will be multipurpose, for both aircraft surveillance and BMD roles.

In short, huge improvements to the IAF ADGES are underway.

Nick

How?. You’ve posted up a single report that has obvious credibility issues to show us that a single source can lack credibility?. The two articles I was citing both seemed sensible, detailed and credible to me….this was rather why I cited them. Dont understand the point you are trying for here?.

The first report made a lot of claims but with nothing backing them up. The second was not posted by you but by Himanshu in the other thread (typical of you to take credit though!), and the third is what I posted which pointed out that it was not 2400 Km of excess cabling but an incremental increase of some 700 odd to 2400 km. If you wish to believe that theres no difference between an incremental increase and a total increase of 2400 Km, be my guest!! And continue thinking that report by a “yard source” was the be all and end all of journalism!

So your definition of ‘cherry-picking’ is citing credible-sounding sources with no obvious political agenda for obfuscation?. Hmmm ok!.

No obvious political agenda! Sure – in your world perhaps. In reality, as anyone who follows Indian defence matters knows, there are dime a dozen leaked articles with fraudulent claims released to cancel projects and have them replaced with other ones. I could post evidence to the same, but I dont think this discussion even merits the effort, given the general attitude you have been displaying throughout!

Well both articles do cite the figure to be replaced as 2400km. The earlier articles also describe a very specifc cost overrun figure and a Russian source that details worse structural conditions than originally assessed. Then we get back to the known history of the vessel and figure those factors in and it produces, for anyone with an amount of engineering competence, an unfortunate picture. Obviously you may need your dozen sources all undersigned by your Admirals or whatever….thats entirely your issue. I’ve always wondered how the IN does so much to conjure such blind, ignorant, faith in its adherents.

Actually I have always wondered what the RNs record in delivering these things on time and on budget has been to elicit your bombastic and pompous “burra sahib” attitude. If you werent intent on acting so pompous and full of self righteous bile and venom, we might have actually had a sane conversation- as it is, I seem to be talking to someone who is letting his ego and the bump in his trousers do the thinking.

The first article which you so swear by, did not even mention the issue of incremental/additional cabling, but promptly gave the entire cabling figure as an increase. The russian report from the shipyard mentions structural work with candour but no mention of cabling at all. The third report clarifies the first one, and anyone sane can figure out that it may not be an issue of cabling alone…but off you are to slay dragons, glorious knight!!
Let me not stop you, but point you to the nearest windmill!

Well at least we are agreed on the fact that neither of our positions will be changed by this!. I would like to know what your thinking is to the fact that the Russians have reason to leak information that they are over time and budget on this deal?. Surely they would want that information quieted down as much as possible if they ever wished to win other foreign orders? Yet here we are with these stories that can only have come from one place?.

What in whose name, made you think that the Russians leaked this information? Do you even realise how many competing agents are in the fray over any IAF, IA, IN requirement? Everyone has a stake and the Indian MOD has NOT been able to eliminate these competing interests. All it does is impose a ham handed attempt to blacklist the supplier. Shoot, if you start a shipyard tomorrow and petition the right people, you’ll get enough ammo to draft your own made up report with sufficient spin to try for a big deal. A few years back, an entire ammo factory was stopped midway after spending some 10 Million $ and construction well midway- this of course has stalled modernisation something critical being a rather messy first! Understand this, this is a coalition Govt in power at present, and they are VERY sensitive to arms scandals of any kind. The 155mm gun upgrade is also hanging fire thanks to the same. The Russians also play the game, so do the Europeans and everyone else who has a stake. So I really dont know who released the report or why the russians would scuttle their own ship…all I DO Know is that I would take ANY single report from the Indian media on a defence project , skeptically.

The simple fact is Nick that absolutely no-one here has said that this is going to be the vessel that the IN requires – end of story. Many have said that it was ‘the only game in town’ which, by the time the deal was signed, it plainly wasnt. The amount of money spent pre-signing for the Gorshkov would be in no-way significant enough to DEMAND that an extra $800 million PLUS, most significantly, the lifecycle costs to follow need be spent. No military in the world, not even one as arcane and byzantine as that in India, operates in such a fashion. Plenty of evidence for this exists all around the world….RAH-66 Commanche, half a dozen Soviet SSN designs, UK CVA-01 carrier etc… all examples where the strategic situation or the lifecycle costs weighed in against the design and saw them binned late in the programme. You cut your losses and reinvest the saved resources where they need to be. In the IN’s case this is ADS/IAC just as it always was, or rather, should have been.

You simply dont understand the Indian procurement process, and then come up with either cliches about “national pride” or referring to similar epithets…talk sense man!

I dont know how many times I have to tell you this! The Gorshkov had been contracted for, and cleared all the funding paperwork. The IN paperwork and process showed it would be a better deal than trying to do the same inhouse. Going outside and depending on multiple vendors was also a no-no, as the IN would have to run the gauntlet of clearance from the MOD again, never mind trying to herd cats from the PM perspective since it would no longer be Sevmash doing the job but a novice Indian one. So when given a choice of a carrier that is 80% of the way towards their requirements and not 100%- its good enough!! Why the heck would they ditch the entire process and start from scratch, with no guarantee of the next Govt being as amenable to their funding requests, redo the entire work from scratch and have it cleared?

Nick you spent almost that entire post bemoaning the nature of IN procurement and blaming it for the Gorshkov aquisition…how else can it be read than the apologists version of events?. You have accepted that the Gorshkov will NOT do the job its required to do….you are therefore, de facto, accepting that your men do not get the equipment they need to do the job that may be required of them. To this you can just shrug your shoulders and say ‘oh well thats just the way it is’?. I find that astounding for someone who clearly has an interest in the service?!.

Apologists version indeed…somebody takes the effort to explain how and why exactly the IN chose the Gorshkov given its constraints, and all you can do is respond with epithets. Grow the heck up, Jonesy- I dont have all the time in the world to play kiddie games with you.

If you want to have a civil conversation, drop the pompous approach, and learn to debate rationally.

As far as the INs requirements are concerned, the Gorshkov brings far more power than the earlier SHar based ones. Its not perfect by far, but its definitely good enough for their plans. So wheres the question of it NOT doing the job it was meant to, ie allow the IN to play a significant role in a regional conflict, and give its capital ships aircover as and when the PLAN surges forth!
As compared to wanting the best for the IN- I know they are doing what they can to get what they must within their constraints.

Mealy mouthed cr@p!. You’re making excuses for inadequate performance again. The ADS/IAC project started well before Gorshkov appeared on anyones scope. By your token ADS should have had priority funding as it had been in existence longer. The kind of yard partnership deals that saw BAE invest in Elfsis in Greece or DCN invest in the Karachi dockyards for the Agosta90 project could have seen the same thing for India. It could have produced a true interim replacement carrier to allow the continued leverage of the SHAR force you have…and STILL has no direct equivalent in theatre…then move to the IAC in 2011 even if we pretend that the same timetable would be applied to that project without the funds drain of the Gorshkov.

Your ignorance is as staggering as the bile you use to disguise it! The ADS project was stalled at every level, since it revolved around financing the local shipyards AND structural reforms. What part of this DONT you understand?

Yard partnership indeed! The Indian yards are unable to handle their existing projects alone, the GOI is lackadaisical about financing follow on capital ships or using up political capital to resolve labour issues in that time period, and the IN should ditch all the work done on getting the Gorshkov and spend more capital evaluating whether the shipyards can handle both the Indian Gorshkov (no, a better platform!) and the existing work! And this of course will have to be a massive sysintegration work with assorted suppliers for every component from across the world, since unlike the russians the new designers will only provide high level design and construction support! And the Russians will play nice and not renege on the previous deal worked out at the cost of time and money and wait for the IN to make up its mind. Oh, being the nice naive folks that they are, the MiG-29Ks would still be available, so would all the support required of them for various other strategic projects, several of which also hinged upon the Gorshkov deal!

Yet it is the IN which has the most wholly-lopsided force structure of all of them….from what I can make out. You have plenty of surface-warfare ships despite the fact you have a developed naval aviation capacity more appropriate to antiship tasking. Your most significant threat is from advanced SSK’s yet your ASW is marginal for work in the shallows save for what your own SSK’s can offer. You have two different types of circa 300km ranged antiship missiles yet no area defence SAM?!. Touting the IN as the model of balanced force structure evolution may be unwise.

Who says that the IN has a balanced force structure? But it has what it can get from the MOD and local efforts, while it is pushing the rest as much as it can! A limited AD SAM is going to be available from the LRSAM project with IAI, the Barak-II, which is a tripartite agreement between the DRDO, IN and IAI. The ALH is now entering service, with a local fit of ASW dunking sonar, MPAR and ESM plus lightweight torpedoes- all of which have been cleared for production. The IN has also got clearance for floating a tender to acquire a new class of replacements for the excellent Seakings. The LRMP likewise. In the interim additional squadrons of Do228s have come in for littoral surveillance.

OK I’ll say this once more…just becuase you’ve spent 2 or 3 hundred $million on R&E for a project does not, and never should, oblige you to dump another 8 hundred $million in if you do not get the system that suits you. As to the ‘as much possible from one supplier’ line, frankly I find that unfathomable seeings that as a service the IN continually purchases equipment from east and west….which turbines are going into IAC again for example, how many OTO guns are bolted to the pointy ends of IN ships rght now….how many Barak SAM launchers are installed?. Not to mention that, if the concentration was on the Indigenous capability, then that would have to be the most reliable source possible…yourselves!.

Dear Jonesy, the concept of sunk costs is in every economics textbook, in every service officials memory…but in real world acquisitions, especially for a developing country, it does NOT work that way. India has never been overflowing with money for its defence needs either, despite all the brouhaha externally and on the internet about :”gee whee the IN is buying..”. If the IN was to do as you suggest, spend 200 Million on a “concept” and then ditch it…it can also call its entire carrier program quits as the IN is savaged in press and public and parliament as being profligate with public money. India has severe issues with committing funding to ANY defence program. Secondly, coming to the issue of single supplier, the point is that the IN AT THAT POINT OF TIME, was firmly focused on the Gorshkov coming from a single supplier who would manage the entire package. Not the IN alone, which would have to have a shipyard handle this, deal with a dozen suppliers located halfway across the world, and with no guarantee that the Russians would commit to meeting the IN halfway on developing a carrier capable fighter. Today, its different. Today, the IN can take your advise, liberally negotiate half a dozen JVs with worldclass shipyards AND have the funds and political clearance to move forward.

So now you are being an apologist for the poor performance of the Indian shipbuilding industry?. What experience did the Karachi yards have building modern-ish SSK’s before the khalid class boats?. What experience did the Greek yard have turning out top-flight Fast Missile boats like the Super Vita’s?. Answer – none. With the right input….input that was readily available….Indian industry could have benefitted from technology transfer and, probably, a quantum leap in its project management team skills by working in partnership with Bazan or DCN initially on aquiring a real interim carrier/LPH solution and, then, on realising the IAC. That, by 2004, the Gorshkov was still seen as a viable option despite all its shortcomings remains something that, for me, will always beggar belief.

My god, your asinine self righteousness is beyond belief. I tell you that the Indian yards have severe structural and financial problems that preclude them from taking up a project the size of a carrier and that the IN wouldnt rely on them before these were sorted out. And you, call it being an apologist! Have you been abusing hallucinogens of late or have you forgotten your meds, old chap? I’d suggest you drop the former and get started on the latter.

The rest of your stuff is the usual stuff which any noob on the internet can turn out- and of all people you are doing this!! The Karachi Yards …please! Everyone knows how that has been delayed and the IN in contrast, expects a far higher amount of local contribution in its fleet ships! Indian industry would have benefited- sure, sure- and you were in the Indian Govt I presume which clearly informed the IN that it would NOT finance the shipyard reforms since the defence capex budget was already stretched?

That the shipyards themselves were struggling themselves with labour and management problems in the same timeframe! But oh no- all these issues are of no consequence, why by merely mentioning that these issues exist one becomes an apologist. Why, the IN should have gone ahead, signed a couple of agreements with some shipyards for tech and design transfer and everything would have been hunky dory! All these issues would disappear!

Meanwhile, a done deal with Russia which is offering the Gorshkov on competitive terms, with associated weapons package, done after years of effort invested, should be put off while the IN goes and chases a lark!

The IN has finalized the Gorshkov, launched the IAC, had the GOI finally commit to modernizing the shipyards, held the shipyards hands and got them upto some speed on its other critical projects (which are still not enough!!) and is now evaluating private shipyards to join the IN supplier network. IOW, a cautious, time intensive but methodical modernisation of its local procurement network without compromising on its fleet strength and capability! But they’d be fools not to jump headfirst into your suggestion, and promptly ask the Indian shipyards to handle a project of far greater magnitude, and that too when there is no guarantee that the GOI would either support this venture, or that the shipyards would be able to do the job in time!
The fact is that there are multiple constraints in every country which determine the respective services’s options. In this case, the IN made the call according to what it saw as being the best deal.

Check and reply..

According to SIPRI data (till 2005), India has ordered 4180 R-73 missiles from the Russians. 😮
Of which 1580 had been delivered till 2005.
If true, thats a substantial inventory of WVR AAMs.

I agree, as I mentioned, it was really only in reference to the lower costs. The reality is that they would not have the capacity, and there are serious concerns about their yards’ quality control, which has led to some pretty worrying build quality on some of their ships.

Check out the newer ships and build quality is not an issue. Also check out the refurbed Carrier for quality of construction.

What is an issue is that they have their order books full up as is, with existing orders. And that efficiency is not too high either in terms of manpower to ships and time taken. Though the wage differential (conversion) makes them very attractive anyways.

To cut a long story short, in the short term, Poland & Japan (as Swerve mentioned) and Korea are better bets. In a decades time, India might be competitive in warship building, since several private yards are getting into the business. More capacity, more competition (hence greater efficiency from the state yards itself) and more funding, for state yards (economic growth affecting defence expenditure).

Do the MKIs have an internal EW suite or is everything carried on pods? Also, are there any pics of the MKI carrying the el8222?

The MKIs have been shown repeatedly with EW pods carried outside, namely the Elta 8222.

However, there is a plan to move the EW fit inside.

The following aircraft have been seen with the following pods:
Mirage 2000 with Remora
Su-30 K and Su-30 MKI with Elta 8222
MiG-27s too with 8222.

Apart from that the IAF MiG-27 upgrade has them receiving internal SPJs made by BEL to a DRDO design, the DRFM equipped Tempest EW system
The Jaguars upgrades are recieving internal Elta 8222s.

All aircraft bar the Mirage 2000 are recieving the Tarang MK-II integrated RWR from DRDO manufactured by BEL.

The MKIs RWR is combined with a Swedish/South African MAWS to create a multispectral warning suite. DRDO has a program going on with EADS to create a series of new MAWS. These are intended for the IAF fleet as well.

There are currently several local EW programs going on for improved variants of the current jammers. These will be used for future upgrades and programs as well. The LCA for instance is to have an multispectral ECM suite, with an internal SP Jamming system superior to those on any IAF aircraft today.

The Russian media has also stated that Russia has displayed a superior jammer to the Elta 8222, and this would replace the same on the MKIs.

The Jaguars are to receive a dedicated Escort/ defence suppression jammer, for EW work. The IAF is stated to be looking for some 20 pods. That should be good enough for a few squadrons.

The Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 upgrades have been cleared recently. The latter will also see a modernised EW system added to it. Its unclear what the offensive jammer will be. The Mirage 2000s will be brought up to the Dash-5 standard, including the latest ICMS standard for EW.

What about the chinese MKK? do they have internal self-protection or pod mounted?

Pod mounted. I forget the exact designation, perhaps you could ask on the PLAAF thread.

Joey: Whats the status of SIVA. The specs look good. Is it operational or in trials mode?

Should be operational this year.

The SIVA is actually the name of the pod, which is a multipurpose supersonic (ie it can be carried at supersonic speeds) pod. The payload is the HADF-

“High Accuracy Direction Finding” system.

Other payloads could be used as and when the IAF decides it, eg jammers or the like.

There are no dearth of choices, including the locally available deception jammers.

I’d rather they integrated third party missiles to maintain logistics commonality…just imagine the procurement mess!!

Thanks for the pics Flex! Great stuff.

Thanks for the info Harry, and to others who posted.

Sounds like a pretty solid package.

I was going to ask where the Litening pod is carried, but accoring to the drawing, it is carried on the port intake pylon. Is this accurate Harry? What about the Vinten recce pod and the jammer pod? (Does it have a name and/or designation?)

The designation of the jammer is the “Tempest” EW system.

Also, will the upgrade give compatiblity with the R-73 and a helmet sight or will the R-60 still be the standard MiG-27 AAM?

The IAF is currently in the process of making its standard aircraft compatible with its common air to air weaponry, so the R-73E is a definite possibility. The R-60MKs may be retired in the future.

Oh, and I have one more question. What does the IAF use the Jag for as opposed to the MiG-27? They seem to have a very similar mission.

Tactical strike as compared to the Jaguars DPSA (Deep Penetration Strike Aircraft) designation. In real life, since the PAF Airbases are quite close to the Indian border, the distinction blurs somewhat.

But the Jaguars are being tasked for more intensive tasks, as they have two seater variants available, and they are still produced at HAL.

Amongst the tasks planned/ in process for the Jaguar is escort jamming.