RimmerConsidering Rimmer has 117 posts inside of a month, mostly in the last Paskistan Air Force thread, you can guess whom the mods will pick to give a vacation. Please, Rimmer, give the forum a rest for a week and then try to rejoin within the intended spirit of the forum.
MadRat. How does posting alot in the PAF thread (I am Pakistani afterall) make me wrong. I have asked. Nay begged users to stay on topic. I will answer posts that are factually wrong, but I thought that was the whole point?
Please show me a post not in the “spirit of the forum”. I will delete it or apologise.
RimmerOr maybe, I already explained my point that as things stand the OCUs have a fairly extensive syllabus which includes basic concepts not addressed at the Hawk level, and which consumes expensive flight hour and resources especially for heavier aircraft (eg MKI) and also for those whose spares come from outside (eg Mirage 2000) and that pooling LIFT and exposing pilots to these concepts earlier would help. And it is upto the IAF to do a cost benefit analysis to determine whether this would work and prior reports suggest they are seriously looking at it.
And it was not a personal attack to clearly point out that your game of one upmanship “you now realise that you cannot back up…etc” was accurately captured by RahulM earlier.
The more you behave in this manner, the more you validate his analysis.
It isnice to know people have the tme to give my personality an analysis.
So, mot of IAF, as you are aware. Will probably consist of fighters in a small class then SU-30.In fact if F-16/Gripen/F-18 are chosen many willbe medium sized fighters. MIG-29/M2K/Jaguar/Gripem (possibly).#
What you in effect saying is have a Hawk training syllybus, have an LCA traning syllybus then have a OCU syllubus. In which case you will have pilots training on medium sized fighters (LCA plus OCU) twice. There actually may be no cost savings at all.
Your initial post on thsi subject was certain this was the best route to go down and now you finally admit in your post
“It is up to IAF to do a cost benefit analysis”.
Would you now admit you may not have got this 100% right?
RimmerDepends – actually, as you are the one guy who avoided all the entire jingoistic chest thumping, let me state this, the IAF is not really that worried about Pakistan. It is more concerned about China, which quite frankly is the new game in town in terms of inductions and capabilities. They know what Pakistan has, will have. They are not happy, but they can manage. I mean its the opponent they have tracked for a long time, and have a fair idea of whats happening.
Whatever the PakAF is getting, India got a long time back or has ordered more in substantial numbers. Till date, I have not seen anything viz the PakAF having any sort of silver bullet (a la the real/mythical/whatever AShBM for example gets reported out of China/US press versus the US Carrier fleet).
To just give a few examples..
7 AN/TPS-77 radars – well sure, and the IAF has a fair stock of Kh-31’s, Harpys, and has now ordered HAROP. Forget SEAD, for even DEAD, the IAF has specific capabilities coming online for accurate real time geolocation.
BVR? Well who got it first and has been exercising in BVR non stop w/the worlds premier AFs and with extensive inhouse tactics and training already refined and developed? A host of different SPJ technologies and systems are already in development and even deployed, so much so that they make smaller aircraft fairly hard to track for decent FCRs.
The PAF is using LGBs in anger today- the IAF did that a decade back in 1999 itself and built up capabilities thereafter.
I mean, I wont even go into what the IAF has already ordered, it dwarfs Pakistan. But what should be clear is the IAF is looking more and more towards the PRC, not Pak as the primary force which is of concern.
Pakistans one deterrent are its nukes, and those too are going to be affected by the ABM project, its AF is not really a deterrent. I really dont get what some posters here keep stating “minimum credible deterrent”, vis a vis the IAF, that equation simply doesnt exist. In all these days, despite all the media pushing and scaremongering for more resources, I have never even seen a ranking IAF officer worried about being deterred by the PAF. China’s growing capabilities are another matter, but the IAF woke up to the PRC quite some time back and new inductions et al are aimed to address that as well.
The IAF is VERY worried about Pakistan.
It is the reason there were no air strikes against any Pakistani targets in military stand offs in Kargil, after Indian Parliament attack and after Mumbai bombings.
Detterence paid off.
By the way, if you are going to state facts please get them right.It was PAF not IAF who had precision guided capability.PAF was using Paveway as early as 1984. This fact was even confirmed in a picture book “Defenders of Pakistan” printed in the 80s. Way before IAF had this capability.
This capability will be enhanced further with JDAM. A capability currently not with the IAF.
Even the US ABM project in Europe, with all its sattiltte back up and radar technology only has 10 interceptors.
Do you really think India will ever be in a position where it can defend aganst 80+ nukew warheads with as little at 4 mins warning time?
Rimmerthe mods can see what I’ve posted on this forum is simply replies to your posts on the IAF– so tell me why do you bring in India and the IAF into this thread ?
it was you who kept raising how India couldn’t influence US arms sales to Pakistan, when nobody else even mentioned it. it was you who raised the F-35 topic, when nobody else raised it.what they can also see on the IAF thread is how you act like you are there for a discussion but simply flame. don’t act like they’re blind and can’t see what you and Insig do on that thread. and nobody has racially abuse you. you and all the posters on the IAF thread belong to what is pretty much the same race, as a matter of fact. you keep raising “race” because you’re desperately trying to get the mods to ban them. thats the fact.
Still another flame post. How about you actually stop posting unless you can argue on a relevant topic. You are right, Mods can read, its also why I alerted them to the past few posts.
RimmerMaybe I am just dumb and need points explaining to me. If disagreeing with things I am told sometimes makes me dumb, maybe it is not such a bad thing.
You have STILL not answered my question of HAWK/LCA yet indulged in a personal attack.
Shall we stick to the topic in hand or do you now realise you cannot back up your argument on the HAWK/LCA/OCU training claim you were making?
Rimmerdon’t bother to appear on the IAF thread under the pretext of talking about this or that when you’re basically flaming and trolling there. then tell others what to do.
Ankush. Please point to any single post of the 120 plus I have posted on this forum that has been off topic.
Every single one of my posts has been bang on topic and I have avoided politics of any kind. Despite me being racially abused by Nirav and Mods having to clear his posts.
I am now going to alert mods as you are determined to ruin this thread. This is getting out of hand.
RimmerAbsolutely, your post demonstrates it.
Good assumption, for once on your part.
A Hawk can simulate BVR, a Tejas will be BVR capable, theres a difference.
Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong point. I quite clearly mentioned a bunch of multirole fighters of which BVR is one component and also mentioned the A2G aspect.
And yes, I am saying some of the load that is currently at the OCU doing the basics what the Hawk does not be transferred to the LIFT.
Your opinion, which I would gladly take with a nice lump of salt, given that the IAF may consider having a pool of fully combat capable trainers across the spectrum more effective than just trainers with limited combat capability.
Saw one intended for the IAF as recent as Jan ’09 and yes, unfortunately for you I do know what I am talking about.
I daresay thats more than what experience you have in either arena.Grow up will you. Playing word games again.
First, comparing India to these AF’s is futile – Indias needs are different, its inventory more varied, its priorities are different. Second, you torpedo your own claims by stating that these Hawks have cockpits more advanced than India’s – only goes to show the capabilities you assume for India’s Hawks may well not be there. Third, again more hyperbole from your end as I really dont see how all three have cockpits more advanced than anything in the IAF as the Su-30 MKI cockpit quite decently compares with what is on the Gripen for eg, and what the IAF is inducting in the coming years may well be the Gripen or the Typhoon, plus it has its FGFA program.All in all, yet another example of ridiculous overblown rhetoric from your end.
Absolutely, your twisting and turning is quite bizarre and tiresome.
Heres another bit of news for you:
Only goes to show India is NOT completely happy with its current Hawks and is looking at alternatives which include alternatives like the T-50 which is quite similar to what is being discussed here.
If you were more focused on the topic rather than engaging in puffery (“have you seen a Hawk cockpit, do you know what you are talking of ) etc. and similar ridiculous chest beating, you would have known this already.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/04/02/324704/india-issues-advanced-trainer-rfi.html
“There is a perception in the Indian air force that its model of the Hawk may not be suitable for the fighters that the service hopes to buy in the coming decades,” says a New Delhi-based analyst, who is also a former Indian air force pilot.
“Of course, part of the problem is that the air force took such a long time to select the Hawk that there always was the danger that the aircraft might become obsolete sooner rather than later. This is especially so when we compare the Hawk 132 to aircraft such as the M-346 and T-50. The Hawk has a role to play in the foreseeable future, but the air force will require more modern advanced jet trainers later on,” the analyst says.
The Hawk has fallen behind the M-346 and T-50 in recent AJT competitions. The M-346 won the United Arab Emirates’ tender in February, edging out the T-50 after a lengthy competition. Both types are still in contention for Singapore’s closely watched tender, with the Hawk having already been eliminated. BAE, however, has consistently reiterated that the Hawk still has a future in several overseas markets, including India.
In a massive reply you managed to cover eberything bar answering the main question.
Please explain (consideing you are th eone suggesting it), how a HAWK/LCA/OCU training programme will be better then a HAWK/OCU programme. If you cannot answer this one question, you entire argument falls flat on its feet.
Unless of course, as you hint. India has been sold duff Hawks.
Rimmerman you’re just so full of it..how much of this is actually anything “indigenous”, we all know. you keep talking about “flame” because you don’t want to discuss anything in its reality.
the same happened when I asked what one single component on the JF-17 is Pakistani for it to be called a Chinese-Pakistani project and you and all your ilk start screaming that I’m flaming.
so thats basically your modus operandi-when you don’t have answers you say we’re flaming, whereas you spend more time on the IAF thread than on the PAF thread, doing precisely what you claim we’re doing- flaming.
Anush. How has your above post contributed anything to the thread. You are just as bad.
RimmerPakistani Khaled?
Pakistani Babur?
Pakistani J-17?like
Pakistani Nukes?
LOL
You really don’t want to go there do you?
Mods? Anyone?
Blatent attmpet to flame here.
RimmerSamsara,
Pakistan matches India in many fields and sometimes is further ahead. Let us not talk about importing belts. See Arjun history and the Pakistani Khaled. Then you have the Babur versus Yakhunt. Then you have the homegrown Pakistani UAV against the Israeli imported IAF drones. Smartly I am avoiding LCA-JF17 developments but you know what the reality is. Same goes to the shooting round the corner guns. POF developed and sells them while India looks for them to buy. And the last item is, as some Indian already said, strangely already developed by Pakistan while China still needs it. So the usual statement that India is advanced in every field. They might be further in some fields. Don’t make your personal opinion sound like the reality.
I have the idea that you are here only to make this turn into flame.
Insig
Time to ignore the flames. This is a PAF thread. The last one was very good and many good points were made and put across.
Some people dont want to see that again, hence now talk of
Chine, Nuke deal. “India can afford and get best” etc etc.
Best ignore and wait for Mods to clean up if they feel need to.
RimmerI think India will be delighted if China is the primary weapon supplier to Pakistan..the generals will probably be doing cartwheels in the MOD when that happens. China has a long long way to go to reach American standards in any area.
Again. Almost pointless post on a PAF thread.
India has the except that the worlds next economic and technological superpower will be a very strong Pakistani ally.
China’s economic and technolgical rise is inevitable. Western leaders acknolwedge this. The only people who do not are probably certain member son this forum.
Example on case. No onereally knows how capable the next Chinese stealth fighter will be.
RimmerAnkush/Samsara
We are now derailing this thread. dont know if this is your intention or not.
Am happy to carry this on on PM?
India would LOVE to get its hands on F-35, it would bypass every MRCA competitor.
If India gets a F-16 version it will have a better radar, all over improvements will be incremental, and as the US has done for the last 60 years, it will offer Pakistan something to counter it.
You are obviously no student of history.
Can we get back to the PAF now?
RimmerCan the Hawk as inducted by the IAF teach BVR.
Can it train pilots in advanced weapon systems delivery and practice.
Does it even have the systems to train pilots for EW techniques and advanced profiles.
Actually – it can do very little in all these areas. All these end up being taught in the respective squadrons, consuming extra time and cost.
Simulations only go so far.
The issue is that when the Hawk was first chosen as the trainer of choice (almost two decades back), the IAF of “then” was far different from the IAF of day. Only a handful of aircraft had anywhere near the capabilities the majority of the IAF fleet now possesses.
The Hawk is a very good system but it has limitations.
Some not all – which is why more advanced designs like the KAi T-50 have been getting such interest in the market. What I am actually referring to, conceptually, is quite similar.
Not really.
The LCA cockpit is far superior with several more advanced (smart MFDs) driven by a superior avionics rig (OAC & then CIP) and comes with far more complex switchology (on the HOTAS & elsewhere), a much more advanced nav attack system linked to superior sensors (eg a FCR) and with a HMCS as well (Elbit Dash).
There is little comparison between it and the Hawks as being inducted by India.
The next AJT currently tendered for may have a marginally better cockpit, but it wont match the cockpit of the Tejas either.
Absolutely.
We dont know that yet.
Thats their choice to make, with their respective requirements and funding.
The IAF makes its choice based on its requirements and does not always do what other AF’s do.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing hey!? 😉
Do you know what OCUs do? Am assuiming you do.
Hawk can actually similuate BVR, but before I go into that let me tell you a few things
1) Not all IAF pilots will go on to BVR. Some will go on to ground attack. You are actually suggesting the HAWK performs the role traditionally performed by OCUs.
2) Going from basic BVR training on Hawk, to BVR on LCA then learning BVR AGAIN in an OCU will be a massive waste of time and resources.
3) Have you seen the Hawk cockpit? Do you actually know what you are talking about here?
4) The comments on the Hawk show a lack of knowledge on this product. India is not just the only new customer. South Africa, RAAF and RAF have all ordered the new versions of the Hawk to train pilots to go straight to Gripen/F-35/Typhoon. These jets have cockpits more advanced then anything in the IAF.
Again, what we have here is another classic example of posters trying to twist things to fit the way they want to see the world…..
RimmerAnything Pakistan can get from the US as aid…India has the option to buy a superior system if she wishes. It does not work the other way.Pretty good lobbying if you ask me.
I beg to differ, US will not allow either Pakistan or India to mainatin a massive qualatitive edge over on other in terms of the equipment it provides.
Case in point. F-16s and F-18s are being offered to India for MRCA comp. Not F-35. Funny isnt it?
IN have even asked for F-35 in a potential tender and it will be refused.
In fact on this very forum, about 5-6 years ago there was ALOT of talk about India being offered F-35. This was never actually offered.
Almost every pice of equipment India is offered Pakistan is. What may constrain Pakistan is two things
1) Pakistan reluctance to adopt new systems they may get sanctioned on
2) Money
In fact I can fill up this thread with technologies the US has denyed India, but then we would get away from the thread topic.
RimmerNope as both countries have different doctrines..it was just an answer to Rimmer on what the Indian lobby does in Washington. Prevent/Delay every Pakistani acquisition..and if they fail on that make sure India has the option to buy a better system.
In the cold light of day, and looking at reality. India has not managed to “Prevent/Delay” anything in terms of weaponry.
Not a very successful lobbying operation considering the weapons we are getting….
Sign In
