TeerI believe imported target drones have also been used to validate Akash missile system. Having said this IIRC till late nineties the lakshya’s minimum height of flight was around 100m
The Akash can hit much lower than that..
TeerLakshya is a subsonic targeting drone. Also from that report I’m not convinced that it was flown simulating cruise-missile trajectories and not just low-flying aircraft.
You have stated something that needs to be clarified.
A cruise missile trajectory, is actually easier than that flown by experienced combat pilots some of who’ll get down to 100-200 feet (30-60 meters) without an autopilot, heavy load, tough terrain and that too, at decent speed (0.6 M). These guys will even initiate evasive maneuvers and jamming at the first sign of trouble.
A missile on the other hand, relies on height, usually has a bunch of waypoints programmed in, to avoid prominent obstacles and possible SAM positions & the top of the line auto-nav system variants is still carefully kept by the US (they licensed this for the EF & Rafale). Most other systems worldwide, rely on similar or more primitive systems and cannot, over land, perform similarly. Its one of the biggest advantages of the US Precision Weapons industry.
In other words, a cruise missile is depending on the radar horizon, is dumb, it cannot detect it has been fired at and take evasive action, has to depend on the “intelligence” of its original programming & cannot jam its opponent.
The Lakshya, is perfectly capable of a cruise missile trajectory.
So take what this says seriously, as the IAF trial directive combines all the key requirements needed of the Akash:
User trials to verify the consistency in performance of the total weapon system against A. low flying near range target, B. long range high altitude target, C.crossing and D. approaching target and E.ripple firing of two missiles from the same launcher against a low altitude receding target were conducted at ITR, Chandipur during Dec 2007. Akash missile successfully intercepted nine targets in successive launches. Fifth and last trial successfully took place at 2.15pm on 21st Dec at Chandipur on sea in which the Akash missile destroyed an Unmanned Air Vehicle (Lakshya) which was flying a path simulating an air attack.
http://www.akashsam.com/about.htm
The low altitude receding target is the hardest.
The bigger question is why are Cruise Missiles still a challenge. Its because of their trajectory, and the radar horizon.
At 15,000 feet, detecting a target flying at 100 feet has a radar horizon of 300 km. At 10 meters (typical radar placed on elevated mast), you have a horizon of 40 km. So you see, cruise missile swarms can be a big pain if you dont have an AEW system or aerostats in place.
In other words, once you can detect these in time, you can shoot them down, even with radar guided guns. The best method against these swarms are a layered defence. The moment they are launched, everything from MKIs to border guns should open up on them, with the BADZ being the last.
TeerAlso wether through engine issues or structural issues or mixture of both from what is available in public domain on the internet the LCA is restricted to 6/7 gs i.e. below the 9g design limit.
Are there no limits to the false statements you will make in order to win an argument? So that it’s clear, the LCA’s 6G limits relate to the standards for IOC & for MK1! The IAF is ok with them. With this, you have rubbished your credibility, further.
TeerDr.V K Saraswat (Director General of DRDO and Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister)said that there has been interest expressed by some countries in the Nag, Akash and LCA..
Wonder which countries these are..
This is also interesting.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-to-launch-series-of-military-satellites/Article1-610930.aspx
Quotes, not entire article.
India plans to launch a series of indigenously built military satellites with surveillance, imaging and navigation capabilities to keep a watch on its neighbourhood and help guide cruise missiles….
V K Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, said here.
“Each year, you will find one or two satellites going up”
“Mostly, these satellites are dedicated to different defence applications and would have payloads which are for 1. surveillance, 2. imaging, 3. navigation and 4. communication.”
“You should be able to see with very high resolution and precision the movements of troops and things like that (in the neighbourhood),” Saraswat said. “You should be able to see what are the new buildings and new facilities which have come up”.
India would be able to send data and commands through these satellites to cruise missiles. “So it will have tremendous applications”, he said.
………………..
“Now, this road-map has been given to the Department of Space and it is making its own schedule for launching these satellites.
………………..
Saraswat said India has already launched some satellites under this programme.
1. BMD Radar sats & ELINT sats
2. Cartosat type recce sats & imaging sats, both electro-optical & SAR
3. Indian counterpart/backup to Glonass/GPS
4. Telco sats with dedicated transponders for IAF, IA, IN
All these plans were first thought of a decade back, glad to know they are finally being brought into play.
And:
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/article821933.ece
Two software engineering centres to be set up in Bangalore, New Delhi
The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is working on creating a futuristic computing system, including India’s own operating system, said V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister and DRDO Director-General.
“We do not have our own operating system. Today, various bodies, including banks and defence establishments, need security. Having our own operating system will help us prevent hacking of our systems.”
Two software engineering centres are being set up for this purpose in Bangalore and New Delhi. “To start with, we will have 25 scientists at each of these centres. We are in touch with institutes such as the Indian Institute of Science, Indian Institute of Technology Madras and the Centre for Development of Telematics, besides universities and industries. We will use available talent.”
TeerTrident,
Thanks! Don’t know how I didnt notice it before.
http://future-weapons.org/images/Mig-27.jpg
Rookh,
There is a pic in that Flickr account with a MiG-29 with 3 tanks, wings and belly.
Oops Kramer has already posted it.
—
Anyone want to take a guess at the jammer question for the Mirage 2000.
TeerSome cool pics from WingCo Chauhan
MiG-21 Rocket Attack (its not a Bison)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueaviation/4862417875/#/photos/torqueaviation/4862417875/lightbox/
Upgraded DARIN 2 Jaguar
http://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueaviation/4737955969/#/photos/torqueaviation/4737955969/lightbox/
Mirage escorting MiG-27 – is that an optical illusion or is there a raised section below the cockpit?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueaviation/4738591002/#/photos/torqueaviation/4738591002/lightbox/
MiG-29 Poster
http://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueaviation/4863014448/sizes/l/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueaviation/4862394701/sizes/l/in/photostream/
TeerIt definitely would be perplexing if India was unhappy with the reliability of the basic airframe. The virtues (or lack thereof, as the case may be) of the original Il-76 are very much a known quantity to them and the new engines will have only improved on that datum. Maybe the disappointment is not so much due to the performance of the hardware but inflated, unrealistic expectations? Or if the issue is not with the aircraft but the AEW system, well then switching to a different platform is hardly going to cure the problem, is it? In either case, attaching the blame to the Il-76 is inappropriate.
While choosing a business jet solution for the next batch would improve endurance, ceiling and cost, the current configuration offers uncompromised 360° coverage and superior command and control. Additionally, there is much to be said for a homogeneous fleet – introducing a new airframe would eat away at the savings in operating cost in one way or the other. If the G550 platform was chosen it would effectively require a dedicated logistics and maintenance chain, while integrating the Phalcon CAEW electronics with anything else incurs development and testing costs.
All in all, IAI may be keen to sell Gulfstreams but from India’s point of view the Il-76 remains the only logical alternative, IMHO.
Well stated. In this case, I think the IAF is fairly happy with the Phalcon as a system, given the Chiefs words. This chap is a very blunt speaker and not one to mince words. So if the Phalcon had issues, he would have made sure that the OEMs knew about it, and made it a point, till each and everything was rectified.
Coming to the other issues, lets look at them – spares etc.
Even today, the IL-76s continue to fly heavily and furthermore, the tankers of the Valorous Mars squadron based out of Agra, have flown on pretty much every out side deployment the IAF has made, and have racked up a phenomenal number of flight hours – I recall an article from a couple of years back which mentioned this. This would hardly be the case, if spares were not available.
While the IAF has been critical of after sales support from the Russian end on occasion, it is not as “sky is falling” as the media makes it out to be, and a far sight better from the early 90’s when things were pretty hard. Now, their only crib is about how many folks they have to approach & do legwork for, to get their orders done in time, as versus having a single point of contact, as in the Soviet days, with a fixed price and less back and forth, negotiation and what not. Thoroughly obsolete aircraft like the MiG-21 F/FL/M/MF will also have issues as its unlikely their spares manufacturers are even around, and these types are being retired.
In short, if things with Russian equipment were so bad, per se, would these have occurred? 59 additional Mi-17 orders, the 250-300 PAK-FA program, the 270 planned Su-30 MKIs, MiG-29 Upgrade…the list goes on. For all the similar claims we saw early on about the MKI, the IAF has ordered more and more of them & I have run out of the number of times it has been praised in some interview or the other.
Now coming to the Business Jet issue, I agree with you again. The A-50 Phalcons key selling point for India is its overwhelming superiority over the turboprop Erieye. The G550 will reduce that advantage, even though it too has some advantages over the rival platform. But up north, the PRC is fielding a combination of IL-76/78 based AEW&C plus balance beam and rotodome ones, and India really needs every edge it can get. Currently, the squadron numbers are still fewer than the allocated 39.5 Squadrons, and this when the PLAAF modernization has meant that serious analysts are asking for fifty squadrons from the earlier 40 odd, to be the new allotment.
Hence, if the IAF still wants a new platform apart from the IL-76 for whatever reason – more sophisticated/modern aircraft, political reasons, intends to spread the risk etc..
I’d hope they go for adapting a larger type than a business jet, and one which is already in Air India inventory to reduce the logistics expense, and consider the long term as well, i.e. that the same type should serve as the platform for both the imported and local AEW&C (after the initial three are produced).
TeerMore authoritative? At least the report posted by Teer quotes a high-ranking service member of the Indian Air Force verbatim. What shady unnamed sources gave Aviationweek their information? For all we know it’s no more than an assumption on their part.
FWIW, the new PS-90 engines should not be the problem, compared to the basic variant on the Il-96 and Tu-204 the powerplant has been downrated for the Il-76 platform which should help longevity. The original version may be falling somewhat short of its reliability goals (Western-style on-condition maintenance) but unless somebody is seriously messing up the old D-30KP will still be nowhere near it.
Agreed. There is a good link on the Il-78 here, which should pretty much be the same as the Phalcon. It includes a description of an interior walkaround which is fairly interesting though the statements on other parts of the article, relying on secondary news reports include a few minor errors.
http://www.dutchaviationsupport.com/Articles/IL-78%2520MIDAS%26Crousaders.pdf
TeerMakes me remember of an IOC/FOC official statements on a different thread, do not know if the wisdom can be universally applied :diablo:
I wonder how those making such statements, can justify their own nearest & dearest acquiring virtually the same platform. Wonder what happens there, perhaps the different colored roundels confer magical reliability. Take a look the country, one after Libya; cant hunt with the hounds and run with the hares. 😉
Teer1.Hey, I am just posting the Aviation Week report. 2. They are a very reputable outfit.3. I am sure the ACM of IAF has his motivations for every statement he may make. 4 Often it is wise not to just swallow the official line….
😉
1. Which relies on anonymous claims & is speculation.
2. Reputation does not translate to infallibility.
3. Illogical statement, as it could be argued that AWST too has motivations for every statement they do or do not make. In fact, what evidence is there that the speculation was not due to some vendor marketing, quoted as a certainty.
4. It would be more wise to go by evident data and not get into conspiracy theories. In this case, when the customer says he is satisfied with the product, it would be wise to note what he says.
TeerNo Teer. It does not settle it. Here is a slightly more authorative source….
Really, so the IAF Chief of Staff is not authoritative, but anonymous claims made in AWST are authoritative.
This is a direct quote from the CAS, and sorry, but I’d take him as far more authoritative than AWST, which does not even quote a source about the Phalcon.
As mentioned, this is what Domain-B, a pretty respectable Aero News source wrote, in September 2010:
“We have already moved the case for two more AWACS,” IAF chief Air Chief Marshal PV Naik had said in July.
“Phalcon AWACS are tremendous force-multipliers. We are having an excellent experience with them. They will get their final operational clearance by October-November,” Naik said.
Lets see whether we have more confirmation, whether the man who leads the Indian Air Force, ACM PV Naik said this, shall we.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-to-get-two-more-AWACS-other-radars-to-make-airspace-impregnable/articleshow/6184271.cms
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/Eyes-in-the-sky-IAF-to-induct-2-more-Awacs/articleshow/6185917.cms
Phalcon AWACS are tremendous force-multipliers. We are having an excellent experience with them. They will get their final operational clearance by October-November,” said ACM Naik.
Not to mention that if the IL-78 is all that bad, then its other operators including Pakistan, were all asleep to have procured it.
Teerhttp://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=66244
CHIEF OF THE AIR STAFF CITATIONS
3004 SQUADRON, AF (which aircraft or is it UAV?)
3004 Sqn was formed on the 20 Sep 2004 at Nalia with the designated task of carrying out intelligence through surveillance and Reconnaissance within the Kutch sector. In the course of its duties the squadron has been a source of real time imagery and intelligence of incursions into the Indian Territory which has been instrumental in countering and checking infiltrations. The sqn has assisted the Indian Army, Navy, Coast Guard and BSF in various missions. The squadron has also successfully flown a single continuous mission of 34 hours duration, a record with no parallel till date.
NO. 27 SQUADRON, AF
Number 27 squadron, the “Flaming Arrows”, was formed at Adampur on 15 Feb 1957. The squadron took part in ‘Operation Vijay’ for the liberation of Goa in 1960 and also took part in the1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak conflicts. The squadron was the first to be deployed at Leh during Op Meghdoot with Hunter aircraft in 1984. It was re-equipped with Jaguars in January 1985 with deep penetration strike and EW roles. It took part in Operation Safed sagar in Kargil sector in Jul 1999. The Sqn was the first to be deployed for Op Parakram on 16 Dec 2001. The Squadron initiated a new era of strategic reach for the IAF by being the first to carry out AAR (air-to-air refuelling) with IL-78 Flight Refueling Aircraft in March 2003.
In Oct 2009, the Squadron participated and excelled in the international exercise, ‘Ex Eastern Bridge’ with the Royal Air Force of Oman (RAFO) at Thumrait Air Force Base in Oman undertaking joint missions with the RAFO Jaguars and F-16 aircraft and achieved 38 out of 40 direct hits. The squadron also flew more missions in the exercise than the two Jaguar squadrons and one F-16 squadron of RAFO while maintaining 100% serviceability.
In Dec 2009, the squadron was deployed at Jaisalmer for Ex-Shock Effect. For the first time in the history of Jaguar aircraft, twenty 1000 lbs bombs were dropped successfully in one detail on the very first day of the exercise. Followed by this, in April 2010, the squadron participated in Ex-Abhyas where it accomplished all the assigned missions with 100% mission launch and serviceability throughout the exercise. The squadron has continuously performed all the assigned tasks with utmost precision, professionalism and dedication bringing laurels to the IAF in all their endeavours.
Teerhttp://www.domain-b.com/defence/air_space/iaf/20100927_phalcon_awacs.html
IAF may induct up to 10 Phalcon AEW&CS
27 September 2010
With the third Phalcon AEW&CS aircraft due to join the Indian Air Force fleet by the end of the year, it is becoming evident that the force may order an additional two of these force multipliers soon. Defence sources say that the IAF may eventually opt for a fleet of ten of these airborne early warning and control systems aircraft.
“We have already moved the case for two more AWACS,” IAF chief Air Chief Marshal PV Naik had said in July.
“Phalcon AWACS are tremendous force-multipliers. We are having an excellent experience with them. They will get their final operational clearance by October-November,” said Naik said.
That should settle what the IAF thinks of its Phalcons. 😉
TeerRe:Arrows, Those press reports would be incorrect. The IAF has been extensively flying the Phalcon AWACS it has, to understand its capabilities & develop a doctrine, which has come out in several interviews by IAF brass. They are tickled pink with it.
The Phalcons are on the IL-78 platform, not the IL-76, and the IL-78 in IAF service have been and are flown extensively.
Incidentally Pakistan has also ordered the same IL-78 tankers, though I dont know whether they have the uprated engines.
Even the IL-76’s are flown extensively, but the IAF is not happy with the amount of prework it has to do to set up a spares pipeline for these aircraft. In Soviet days, the IAF would send a BOM 6 months in advance to just one point of contact & things would be done. Now, it has to engage with the OEM and individual vendors both.
The reason the IAF did not go the Israel/Singapore route the first time around, and why it may not necessarily do so this time as well, is because the Phalcon based AWACS is significantly superior to the G550 in terms of overall radar performance (while the G550 has 360 degree performance, better than that of the Erieye, its performance forward & aft, is 70% of the fuselage mounted L Band Arrays) and Battle Management (the Il-78 Phalcon has 11 stations, the G550, 6), and ergonomics (Il-78 has more space, and more rest stations).
These are tradeoff’s versus the G550’s slightly greater performance in niche areas (a hour or more endurance) & much lesser logistical footprint.
TeerSo the 5 Phalcon systems will be based on 2 different aircraft types?
Not good.
I’d wait till the order is placed to be sure of which platform the Phalcon is on, before deciding on a conclusion its not good.
While the Israelis are hard selling the G550 CAEW, used by the IDFAF & Singapore, http://defense-update.com/features/2008/july08/caew_elta.htm
but another platform already in service with the IAF, like the EMB-145 or a Boeing is entirely possible.
If a Boeing or Airbus is chosen, Air India/Indian Airlines have an existing maintenance setup for many Airbus variants.
In the end, an IL-78 may again be the platform. The IL-78s are newer than the IL-76 & their spares and support will be available for a longer time, once logistics stabilizes (common to all new builds/variants). But they will be more expensive than a much cheaper business jet like the CAEW G550.
Sign In
