Abhimanyu’19 crashes involving MiG 21 fighter jets in last five years’
Without being biased, I’m posting publicly available and verified data on the crash statistics of 2 jets :-
1) F-16 losses in USAF : 272 crashes between 1975 to 2003. Or 9.9 per year.
2) MiG-21 losses in IAF : 61 crashes between January 1998 to July 2003. Or > 10 per year. If data prior to 1998 is included, the rate would be even higher.
Consider this :- F-16s in USAF definitely have been flown more much rigorously in 2 continents, than has the MiG-21 in IAF service. Besides, the F-16 has seen much more battle than the MiG-21. Also, all MiGs in general in IAF (lets bar the MiG-25) too have a much higher crash rate together than just 1 fighter type in USAF.
This is just a presentation of stats. No opinion and no fault-finding.
I think we must give our MiGs one final salute to their fine service rendered in peacetime & war, from Himalayas to the deserts, and gradually reduce dependence on them. And order more Tejas Mk.1s.
AbhimanyuPosting again :-
It is extremely unfortunate that the IAF has selected 2 fighter jets that are close to the existing Su-30 MKI in range-payload specifications (especially Rafale C and Typhoon Tranche 3). This s a colossal and unprecedented waste of money.
It is a given that a Russian jet of the same size and weight class has inferior payload specs than its equivalent western counterpart. We have already seen this with Su-30 vis-a-vis F-15 Strike Eagle, and MiG-29 vis-a-vis F-16. Both the Su-30 and MiG-29 despite being significantly heavier and larger than their counterparts, have inferior range-payload specs.
We can thus extrapolate that were the Russian jet industry to make a fighter of the class of F-15 Strike Eagle, then using the same typical Tsagi design (that defines the Fulcrum, Flanker and even the PAK-FA), they’ll have to come up with a mini-bomber weighing 22 tons empty.
Hence, between a MiG-35 and an F-16, any country will definitely choose the F-16 and between Su-30 and F-15, the F-15 will be preferred. Now Typhoon and Rafale have gone a step further than their US counterparts. They are of the weight class of the F-16, but their range-payload spec approaches that of the F-15 ! (and also, Gripen-NG nearly matches the F-16, even though its a good 2.8 tons lighter). This is due to high composite usage. All this means that Rafale or Typhoon’s addition in the IAF would be a totally redundant, useless and criminal wastage of money.
This would also needlessly increase the hassles of maintaining a new fighter type, even though Su-30s would’ve done the job equally well at the same cost of operation.
Now the IAF’s fleet consists of mostly Russian fighter jets including an overwhelming number of Su-30 and MiG-29 together. So, its sense of weight-class is totally skewed and gone awry. This MRCA saga shows that classifying a fighter jet’s ability on as lipid a parameter as its weight is sheer nonsense.
AbhimanyuIt is extremely unfortunate that the IAF has selected 2 fighter jets that are close to the existing Su-30 MKI in range-payload specifications. This s a colossal and unprecedented waste of money.
It is a given that a Russian jet of the same size and weight class has inferior payload specs than its equivalent western counterpart. We have already seen this with Su-30 vis-a-vis F-15 Strike Eagle, and MiG-29 vis-a-vis F-16. Both the Su-30 and MiG-29 despite being significantly heavier and larger than their counterparts, have inferior range-payload specs.
We can thus extrapolate that were the Russian jet industry to make a fighter of the class of F-15 Strike Eagle, then using the same typical Tsagi design (that defines the Fulcrum, Flanker and even the PAK-FA), they’ll have to come up with a mini-bomber weighing 22 tons empty.
Hence, between a MiG-35 and an F-16, any country will definitely choose the F-16 and between Su-30 and F-15, the F-15 will be preferred. Now Typhoon and Rafale have gone a step further than their US counterparts. They are of the weight class of the F-16, but their range-payload spec approaches that of the F-15 ! (and also, Gripen-NG nearly matches the F-16, even though its a good 2.8 tons lighter). This is due to high composite usage. All this means that Rafale or Typhoon’s addition in the IAF would be a totally redundant, useless and criminal wastage of money.
This would also needlessly increase the hassles of maintaining a new fighter type, even though Su-30s would’ve done the job equally well at the same cost of operation.
Now the IAF’s fleet consists of mostly Russian fighter jets including an overwhelming number of Su-30 and MiG-29 together. So, its sense of weight-class is totally skewed and gone awry. This MRCA saga shows that classifying a fighter jet’s ability on as lipid a parameter as its weight is sheer nonsense.
AbhimanyuUgh.:mad: This is jingoism taken to new levels. The Tejas mk.2 is a paper plane that is yet to reach even the prototype stage. Even after it is inducted full-scale weapons integration and testing(the LCA mk.1 still isnn’t cleared to carry PGMs, for instance) will take at least till 2020. I trust the IAF’s decision to induct a state-of-the-art fighter that they need TODAY instead of having endless faith in ‘indigenous’ promises from a company that has a long history of not keeping them.
Arey, you must bother to keep yourself informed on latest events. Mk.1 has already extensively tested munitions. You can read this and also and this. You think Tejas is like that JF-17, which is inducted into squadrons, without even full PGM tests and without its sole BVR missile tests ? Tejas’ IoC is just 6 months away and a stringent IAF can’t induct it just like that.
And you surely have been fed on a diet of newspaper propaganda on Tejas for years, and have not bothered to read up on an unbiased history. The IAF has been very negligent of the Tejas and irresponsible. Had it co-operated with ADA, a squadron would’ve been in service by now. Since already discussed before, no need to repeat again.
The stuff about the F-16’s ‘future’, if true, probably refers to the fact that it has limited upgrade potential after decades of creating new versions. I’d say the same applies to the MiG-35 as well.
That’s true and add the F-18 to that list too.
Austin, this whole MRCA thing has mostly been a waste of time and money. If you’ve followed the history of this deal(and I believe you have) the IAF originally just wanted a quick purchase of 120 Mirage-2000-5s back in 2005. The MoD under Antony found this single-vendor preference unacceptable when so many other fighters were available and instead issued an open tender to every major fighter manufacturer for the sake of a ‘competitve’ deal. Thus began the MMRCA.
Incorrect. The 126 Mirage-2000-V were proposed 10 years ago soon after the Kargil war. For 5 years upto 2005, the government and IAF slept soundly, by which time Dassault closed down its Mirage line not anticipating further orders.
In 2005 Pranab Mukherjee was the defence minister. In his tenure, F-16, Gripen, Rafale, Mig-35 and F-18 were allowed to compete with total disregard to their fighter class. And the IAF dutifully gave it an acronym of MRCA (Medium Range Combat Aircraft) ! This, when none of the jets were “medium” by any standard. Gripen is close to Tejas. F-18 approaches Su-30 in performance levels. Same goes for the other two Eurobirds. MiG-35 is from another planet altogether, with its bizzare specs. And the IAF invited an adversary’s primary fighter too, the F-16.
AbhimanyuWhat I found interesting was the note that the Mig-35 was the worst performer.
Why ? You didn’t know already ? It was indeed the worst of the lot, and here atleast IAF arrived at the right conclusion.
As per the video, the IAF report also said that the F-16 has NO future and has rejected it outright.
Anyone catch the Pirates of the Caribbean theme playing at around 2:06 in the video? 😀
Sensational and crony Indian media. And Times Group is India’s very own Fox News.
What I’m afraid of is that the ‘leak’ scares AK Antony and his clueless MoD into scrapping the MMRCA tender. Especially if the ‘losers’ start levelling accusations of bribery.
I sincerely hope that happens, and the MRCA order is cancelled. By the middle of the next decade, the the Tejas Mk.2 would have been introduced and IAF will already be looking at 5th gen fighters and UCAVs, instead of 40 year old souped-up F-teens and MiGs.
So these combining factors can make the IAF realize the futility of MRCAs.
——————–
If the news report of Rafale & Typhoon being the finalists is true, then Typhoon will win.
Reasons :-
1) Eurojet is already in the race for Tejas Mk.2’s engine tender. Since the GE-414 contenders are out (F-18 and Gripen), logistics commonality dictates that Typhoon be chosen. Logistics commonality and ease of maintenance will follow across squadrons.
2) Typhoon is from a consortium of countries, from whom political risk is highly diversified. So no single country can dictate terms later on, or renege from its contract. So its a very very very safe bet.
This is in sharp contrast to how we burnt our fingers with Russia, and almost got caught in US’s CISMOA trap. IAF learnt its lessons really quick this time around.
From point 1), we can also conclude that Eurojet will win the tender for Tejas Mk.2. GE-414 is out.
AbhimanyuIndian Navy Harrier Upgrade “Imprudent”, Partiality Shown To Israeli Firms: Indian Audit Watchdog
Israel has a stranglehold on Indian armed forces. The Harrier upgrade is just the recent example. From UCAVs to Spyder to Barak – II/8/NG for the Army and Air-Force, the whole scheme smells of scam.
AbhimanyuThe concept of light-medium-heavy is solely by the IAF. No other Air Force follows this paradigm. They follow deep-strike & multirole.
Su-30 and MiG-29 were developed in parallel out of a common Tsagi design. Su-30 was developed as a deep striker, whereas MiG-29 was developed as a compact air-superiority fighter.
Similarly, the F-16 came after the USAF thought that a large F-15 shouldn’t do smaller strikes and patrolling from Hanoi to Ho Chi Minh next-door.
The French and British built bombers (Jags) and air-sup fighters (early Mirages). The former has been abandoned and the latter evolved to F-16-like fighters, which are now moving to F-15-ish standards. Yes, its true. A Rafale and Typhoon may be of the weight and thrust class of an F-16, but their range-payload specs come close to an F-15. Thats because they are much advanced designs than the 70s F-16, and use superior composites and other materials. So they have range-payload specs close to F-15, but operating costs of F-16. A 2-in-1 combo.
Now the IAF, fed on a diet of exclusively Soviet jets and a sprinkling of Mirages, is thoroughly confused as to what it wants. The Tejas set out to be a MiG-21, but can now easily challenge the IAF’s MiG-29 and Mirage-2000 fleets. The IAF also (rightly) bought many Su-30 deep-strikers.
It can’t buy Rafales and Typhoons, because they’ll come close to Su-30 in range-payload specs. It can’t buy F-18 also for the same reason. It can’t buy F-16 because PAF also operates it, and Tejas Mk.2 will approach its capability. Gripen-NG will probably be exceeded by Tejas Mk.2, so that’s also out. And MiG-35 is the world’s worst fighter jet — An F-18 with a Gripen’s range-payload.
The right approach will be to read a bit of history of the evolution of fighter jets, and decide that the Su-30 must be complemented by Tejas Mk.2. There is NO need of an MRCA.
AbhimanyuC 130J will offer a lot even without those kit. What missing are some communication/encryption equipment and mil grade GPS. Can easily substitute with our own secure communication stuff and mil grade GLONASS(which India has access to)/ Normal GPS kit.
I agree with the above. Also in 2 years (by the time the C-130Js begin arriving) even the GAGAN will be launched by ISRO, which may be used too.
This was a very small price to pay for our independence from bound & gagged contracts like CISMOA. The US offered the security kit in the C-130J as a bait. Its good India didn’t bite it.
Also, the C-130 J is just an augmentation for a troop carrier in addition to our 14 Il-76. So even without the kits, it can still perform its primary duty along with the Il-76s.
IAF’s current tactics for communication for Il-76 will simply be extended to these too.
Abhimanyu“Arey, I don’t remember the fleet strengths of small shiekhdoms like UAE and Qatar. Why don’t you fill in all the details for us, if you know ?”
Yet you still deem it fit to base your arguments on their fleet strengths, whilst now admitting you dont really know what you are talking about.
See why you have become a joke?
Look, you’re flagellating the same old argument here. Its quite understandable after the JF-17 fiasco, where you claimed one thing and I just pointed out what the latest website update said.
Like I said earlier, if you claim to know a lot about tiny UAE and even tinier Qatar, why don’t you enlighten us all ? After all, Pakistan too was interested in purchasing Qatari Mirages — the very same ones that were offered to India. You’d know that wouldn’t you, coz its a potential PAF purchase. And UAE gifted some 5 or 6 Mirages earlier to PAF, didn’t it ? As usual PAF got them free of cost (along with a few tankers of aviation fuel as bonus).
AbhimanyuIt is hard to take your arguments seriously sometimes. Especially when they are littered with mistakes.
When did Qatar have 40 Mirage 2000s?
Arey, I don’t remember the fleet strengths of small shiekhdoms like UAE and Qatar. Why don’t you fill in all the details for us, if you know ?
You are preaching to the choir. There are several folk who noted that the Tejas MK1 could be a very useful addition in the A2G role, but for better or for worse, the IAF wants an all singing, all dancing LCA that can do everything, including being the best at air to air. So that means only 2 squadrons of MK1 will be ordered (for now) till the MK2 comes (another five to begin with). There are chances that more MK1 could be ordered if the MMRCA is delayed further. But that saga is now apparently on track.
Having said that, the old aircraft, probability stuff really does not factor that much because the newest MiG-27s were upgraded, and with the avionics upgrades, and other improvements, its attack profile can be varied considerably. The pilot effectiveness has also increased by an amazing amount. He has a state of the art RLG-INS suite and encrypted comms, new ECS keeping him tolerably cool and an effective EW suite to defend him. Can carry long range optical sensors for recce and strike, can designate LGBs himself or have them designated via third party.
In IAF exercises, the MiG-27 Upg has lobbed Israeli LGB with UAV designation. Consider the ramifications, given the number of UAV inductions and the Upg of 2 Sq completed. These aircraft are all night capable, and also have a secondary EW role – in other words, these are not the 80’s era, lic produced MiG-27s in terms of capability.
They are very useful platforms and offer the IAF substantial flexibility and combat punch.
It is true that the upgraded MiG-27s are quite superior to any fighter jets in PAF inventory, barring thier teens (F-16 and JF-17).
But I think structural fatigue is indeed a genuine concern in all of IAF’s older jets.
You are somewhat mistaken here. It is a common practise to do life extensions by testing a sample representative specimen to destruction & in conjunction with simulations and then replace airframe components, remanufacture items to add several years to the earlier presumed TL. This capability has been established at NAL and successfully employed for MiG-21s and even other aircraft. It is used when original airframe design and materials data is not available from the OEM. However, in the case of upgrades such as the MiG-29 and Mirage 2000, the deal includes the OEM determining this data at their expense and applying that expertise back to the aircraft.
Upgrades are a very cost effective way of making expensive combat assets remain relevant.
NAL has indeed been involved in structural upgrades (in fact, it has formed a chunk of their work throughout its existence). But I think the frequency of crashes is still quite high (despite the unimaginably high flight-hours).
What you dont understand is that “these MiGs” (ie why hang onto MiGs) are a substantial portion of our inventory and can be upgraded to remain combat effective for a long portion of time, till effective local replacements are available.
The above is not denied, but their structural age puts them at risk.
What the IAF can do is, as new jets are introduced — like 42 Su-30 MKI and Tejas Mk.1 are introduced is to stagger the retirement of jets i.e. gradually reduce their flying hours. Or gradually shift them to less taxing locations like Bengal and Sulur in Tamil Nadu.
This way, the fleet strength won’t go down immediately and the probability of crashes will also reduce.
Abhimanyu1) Not a good idea to me. Would be very expensive unless Rafale won the MMRCA selection process on its own merit
France actually suggests it as a sort of an alternative to the MRCA.
2) Would this not be tied to Rafale being ordered by UAE?
Yes, it is a 3 way proposal between France, Qatar (not UAE) and India.
3) I see every reason to order more Tejas Mk1. Increasing the number to 80 or 100
a) it would raise IAF fighter numbers
b) it would be relatively inexpensive – the aircraft is relatively low cost and costs associated with type introduction would not rise much
c) it could be used to cannibalise flight hours from other types
d) the amount of foreign exchange involved would be relatively low
e) it would save lives compared with types with a higher attrition rate
All the above points are very well known but IAF has a determined hostility towards ADA (all mentioned in the book “The Tejas Story“, by Air Marshall Phillip Rajkumar, who headed the Tejas project for the longest time). Its not that they have complaints against the machine per se.
AbhimanyuCorrection. UAE have not offered ANYONE there Mirage 2000. They have not even signed for any new jets yet.
That’s Qatar actually. My bad.
such as ?
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE….you get it.
There is no reason to overreact regarding the MiG-27. Its a fine aircraft which has served the IAF well in the low level strike role, and its higher attrition figures reflect what is demanded of it and its pilots.
See, nowhere is the yeoman service of the MiG-27 questioned. We all know its Kargil exploits. But its high time for it to go now, because its quite old and the PROBABILITY of its breaking down in mid-air (in whichever profile) is still quite greater than that of a brand new fighter jet like Tejas (even after all the MLUs etc.) Ultimately a new jet is a new jet, and old is old. Also, Tejas will be easier to fly and will give immense relief to the pilots.
You mentioned that its required to be flown in a strict lo-lo profile by IAF pilots, where a single mistake can cause an accident. But advanced jets like Tejas can take this demanding flight profile much better on virtue of its superior structurals as well as superior Flight-control technology. Its shocking that IAF intends to fly Soviet-era MiG-21s upto 2025 and MiG-27s upto 2015, whereas it has no concrete plan to augment fleet strength other than the bumbling decade-long MRCA saga, and a knee-jerk purchase of 42 more Su-30 MKIs.
The Qatari offer of 40 Mirage-2000-V seems more interesting now, given that 5 more years have passed since India refused them citing a high price. The French offer of 40 Rafales can be explored too. These two can be executed very fast, given that they’re ready to be delivered.
And might I add augmenting the orders of Tejas Mk.1 If HAL is so gung-ho about licence assembling MRCA, PAK-FA, light choppers, MASACA and CIBACA from all over the world, they can as well manufacture 2 more squadrons of Tejas Mk.1 too in addition to the 48 on order. Shouldn’t be a problem for them.
—–
Avionics upgrades are done to upgrade a jet’s fighting capability. However, no amount of structural MLUs can bring it close to a new jet. Old can’t become as-good-as-new. But the IAF thinks otherwise. True, in the 1990s and in this decade they went for a massive upgradation programme of MiG-21, 27 and Jags which was very useful, given that there was a cash crunch to buy new jets and we were under sanctions for a good part since the past 2 decades. But when quick and better alternatives are available NOW, why hang on to MiGs ?
AbhimanyuIndia steals limelight at Farnborough air show
FARNBOROUGH: Embarked on a spree of defence and commercial aviation deals, India was clearly in the limelight at the Farnborough International Air Show 2010 and the coming months may see increased efforts by foreign firms to woo the country.
Western firms are seeing India as the biggest spender among emerging economies.
The above must be called the biggest SHAME of India at Farnborough. 63 years after independence, we are not at Farnborough to sell fighter jets, choppers and trainers, but instead to spend money to buy the same.
Many many years ago, sheikhs and royals from middle-eastern oil republics too used to hog the limelight at such air-shows. Vice-presidents of BAe, Boeing and the like used to circle around them like flies waiting to snap on a billion dollar order.
When I see our officials there, something similar conjures up. Although its HAL seeking licence contracts, so a bit of respite is there. The Oil republics didn’t even licence produce.
Crash posers over MiG-27 future
An extremely tragic event, and a sorry state of affairs of the MiG-27s in the IAF’s fleet. These ought to be replaced ASAP with any jet — whether imported, or Tejas.
I think there is a very strong case to do ONE OR MORE of the following 3 steps :-
1) Accept the French offer of 40 Rafales.
2) Accept the UAE offer of 40 Mirage-2000-V.
3) Increase the orders of Tejas Mk.1 by 2 more squadrons atleast. From 48 presently, to 72.
Any one or more of the above will immediately drop the albatross called MiG from the IAF’s neck. These MiG-27s must retire peacefully in front of college buildings before they kill any more.
AbhimanyuIt is the Paf’s perogerative to explain the reason for the decision. They choose not to, then so be it as they are not bound to do so anyway and neither is it the High Commission’s remit.
True, they’re not bound to, but since the High Commission made a public announcement that did not materialize, its protocol to give a public explanation too. Till that time, its saga at Farnborough will remain a mystery.
AbhimanyuO — I get it — you take anything posted by a ‘Pakistani’ poster as the gospel truth – the fact that there are no official sources to back up what he says makes no difference?? A ‘Pakistani’ poster says that the birds are not flying at the show because the last minute insurance was so high – so it has to be true – right?
It was on PakDef also. Even after the Farnborough website put JF-17 under the static list (and I posted it here), the pshamim person and others were claiming otherwise that JF-17 is going to fly. Even the Pak High Commission iisued a contradictory statement that it is going to fly. I remember Arrows telling me he’d go with the Pak High Commission instead, and gleefully pointed out a rider in the Farnborough’s site, that said flight schedules may change. But that didn’t happen and JF-17 remained static.
On that understanding – as a ‘Pakistani’ poster – I’d like to tell you that the JF-17 never flew at the Show as PAF chose to not fly it. Now remember you can’t dispute this or ask for any sources – you just have to believe and repost it as a fact — because I’m a ‘Pakistani’ poster!!
If PAF did not choose to fly it, then why is the Pak High Commission silent ? As I’ve said twice earlier it has some explaining to do (any reason like PAF’s own request, no insurance, or whatever).
Sign In
