MountainDifference between you and I is I can admit when I do not know something and do not make up things on the fly. If you want a fact, try the fact the IAF has over 30 different aircraft types across its entire fleet. PAF has 10. No amount of spin will get you out of the fact it is probably the most inefficient air force fleet in the world.
To make matters worse, no chance of any additional Rafales
India To Cap Dassault Rafale Orders At 36: Defense Minister
MountainMaybe the Jordanians. Iraq market is cornered by Frogfoots, the Pakistanis will probably ask for subsidies. The Saudis tend to go for sexy fast movers.
The Israelis and the Jordanians would probably use aid too
MountainPAF woukd love these for the current anti-Taliban operations, could probably get them via EDA and pay for upgrades via FMF.
MountainExcept in the late 60s and mid 80s, the IAF has never had the access to the level of funding that it has today (relatively speaking). But assuming the airframe is that durable, when will the PAF be retiring its relatively new Il-78s? Because it too appears to have three different types of aircraft for force multiplier roles – Saab 2000, Y-8, Il-76. [IAF: ERJ-145, Il-76, A-330]
No, funding is limited. Cutting the Rafale buy from 126 to 36 should be ample proof of that.
PAF has approx 10 types of aircraft across fighters, helicopters and transports. IAF has around 30. Does that not tell you everything you need to know?
Seriously, you are still pursuing a line of argument simply to defend your country when practically every IAF chief has also stated the situation is unbearable and needs to be drastically changed.
Not be surprised if the recent SU-30 crash comes down to pilot training. The IAF is desperately short of pilots and engineers. It has such a wide variety of aircraft that almost all suffer from chronic spares shortages and facing the prospect of having to keep MIG-21s flying.
Not a pretty situation, even if LCA II, AMRCA and T-50 ever materialise…
MountainTwo types in the near future: A-50I & ERJ-145I. Two types in the distant future: A-330 & ERJ-145I.
You cannot even be sure of that. IAF operates types for decades. Nothing to indicate the relativeky new Phalcons wont be flying 20 years from now and being part of yet another type in the IAF
MountainNothing is retiring ‘soon’. Nor is the replacement coming ‘soon’. There are over half a dozen Il-76s still serviceable and they’ll be flogged at least to 2020. The A-50s & Il-78s will persist well into the next decade as well. No new Il-76s orders have been reported by the press.
So you are agreeing with me? IAF will operate 3 different types of AWACS?
MountainSo what you are saying is that the IL-76s will definately not be ordered and the remaining 3 retired soon? You know this for certain do you or are you just making things up as you go along here?
Point taken on varied transport fleets.
MountainFor putting the ‘volte farce‘ into ‘volte face’, you can rely on Mountain.
Thanks, although still struggling to what your point is or indeed any contribution you are making to the discussion, other then getting personal.
MountainI suppose it would be a waste of time trying to explain how these fighters came into the IAF, since your real intention is known to us all..anyway..
the Jaguar was chosen based on a requirement for a strike oriented DPSA aircraft for the IAF in the 1970s and replaced the Marut. the MiG-23/27 was offered to India for CAS at friendship prices along with licence manufacture and the offer was accepted since it allowed the IAF to retire obsolete aircraft like the Hunter, Gnat and Ajeet. the MiG-23MF came into the IAF as an interim fighter to tackle the IAF’s F-16 acquisition, and this was the one fighter that really didn’t add much at all and consequently was retired quite early.
the Mirage-2000 was the fighter chosen as a result of PAF’s F-16 deal and then this deal was supposed to grow into a licence manufacture but high cost and the Soviet Union’s offer for much cheaper MiG-29s scuttled the licence manufacture deal.
The LCA has no overlap with these heavier fighters and arose from a requirement for a light weight MiG-21 replacement.
the Su-30MKI is nowhere near the other fighters and qualifies as a heavy fighter that completely changed the IAF’s orbat from a mostly tactical, single mission oriented force to a large number of long range, heavy multi-role fighters. Before it, the Mirage-2000 had some modicum of multi-role capability but even that was quite limited compared to what the MKI brought.
As Rii has explained in multiple posts earlier, geo-politics influenced many of these decisions. What the IAF’s requirements were, what was on offer, for how much and with whom India wanted to strengthen its relations or diversify its suppliers to avoid complete dependence..all these factors decided the mix.
In fact, the dependence on a supplier with whom they had already had a bad experience nearly got the PAF screwed..thanks to their dependence on the F-16 as their premier fighter..we all know how the PAF sat out the Kargil War thanks to the lack of spares and what would’ve happened had a real aerial war broken out between the IAF and the PAF..even with all the mix of fighter types, the IAF would’ve managed to put them into the air..wouldn’t have been so with the PAF, with its main fighter being hobbled. And we have this on record by a former PAF Air Cmde, Kaiser Tufail.
Again, you seem incapable of posting without getting personal BlackArcher.
Yes, I do know the reasons for the different types. As RII put it (rather more eloquently), strategic and diplomatic pushes have taken a priority over having a streamlined force.
Again, happy to explain the PAF position if you really want to drag Pakistan into every IAF thread?
The system PAF has now is very very simple. Two main types that can both do multirole. By 2020 they will have two types from two very different suppliers, with the possiblity of high end stealth type. So 3 fighter types max
They have gone from a Q-5/F-7/F-6/Mirage5/F-16 force to a F-16/JF-17 force by 2020 with the possiblity of a third higher end type down the line.
The IAF have gone from a MIG-21/MIG-23/MIG-29/Mirage2000/Jag force to at at least a 6 possibly 7 type force (even taking into account retiring the MIG-21 wich is now looking like it may serve longer).
Mountainwe’ll see if they remain the sole Rafales to be bought by India
Well with AMCA, LCAII, T-50, more SU-30s, I think this may well turn into a one off purchase with a few small top ups like the Mireage 2000s in the 80s…
Mountainwe’ll see if they remain the sole Rafales to be bought by India
Well with AMCA, LCAII, T-50, more SU-30s, I think this may well turn into a one off purchase with a few small top ups like the Mireage 2000s in the 80s…
MountainAnd how would they do this? Would they retire aircraft ahead of schedule simply to make the books look tidier? Would they cancel FGFA? Would they trash Tejas and AMCA, thereby consigning India to reliance on foreign imports in perpetuity, with all the lack of affordability and sovereignty that implies? Would they cancel MMRCA? This last is the only vaguely defensible option, and the answer, apparently, is a resounding “no!”
It is all well and good to say that India is inefficient and that efficiencies should be sought. But when most of the suggestions for creating this efficiency reveal themselves, on even slight inspection, to be profoundly stupid, you have to question the premises of the argument. Again, take India’s three (or four, if we include IN’s Ka-31s) AEW platforms/projects — an example you brought up yourself — which of these was/is ill-founded?
The comparison with China is perfectly apt, indeed India and China are uniquely comparable. There are no other nations with large military-industrial complexes experiencing such rapid transformations and the corresponding growing pains. Russia is probably the next best point of comparison for each nation, and there too we see a chaotic assortment of platforms and programs.
You could assemble the most august planning staff in the world, with unlimited authority and guaranteed budgets, currency values, political and strategic imperatives some fifteen years in advance, and the result would still be chaotic by anyone else’s standards. India is inefficient, will continue to be inefficient for the forseeable future, and must necessarily be inefficient if she is to realise and balance both short- and long-term objectives whilst mitigating risks along the way.
Well I guess to answer this you have to ask yourself what types are doing exactly the same role?
Between the Mirage2000, MIG-29, Jaguar, MIG-27, SU-30, Rafaele and LCA there is much overlap.
Pretty insane
MountainAs opposed to the dozens of Il-76s its operates today? :rolleyes:
You are now going backwards on yourself. I mentioned the IL-76s then you said they would only have C-17s and C-130s in your post. You are actually making my points for me now as you seem to be losing track of your own argument.
Very simply, with over 5 major transport types, and 3 different AWACs types (you yourself mentioned G550 Phalcon, A330 and Embrear) you are making my point.
The IAF fleet is probably the least cost effective and efficient in terms of the numbers it has and the servicablity and availability of aircraft and crew simply down to the sheer number of types, which is going against a world wide trend of decreasing type numbers. The IAF is actually going in the opposite direction.
MountainYup, more pie in the sky statements. In Vnomads world the IAF’s entire Heavy and Medium transport fleet will consist of just 10 C-17s and 12 C-130s…
Mountain
Sign In
