BEA in talks to weaponise Indian Hawks

[Ind4Ever]

Any comparison with A10 and Hawks ?

Why wasn't this included in the original contract

Don't act as if you are a foreigner this is how we do business in India.

 

[Archie]

Why wasn't this included in the original contract

When Hawk Deal was signed in 2004, Nobody thought that the mmrca saga would be running for 10 more years.

Now India's two CAS aircrafts the Mig 27 and Jaguar IS are getting old, with Mig 27 aproaching retirement in 4 years and Jaguars in 10 years.
Rafale was suposed to take the role of CAS from Mig 27, until rafale is inducted or god forbid is not inducted, we need another aircraft to play the role.
IAF has 71 Hawks, that Number will rise to 120 by 2018
Thats a big enough fleet, which if armed, could certainly fill the gap left by retiring of the 80+ Mig 27, Though I will agree that, Jaguars will still be more capable than Hawks, specially after the planned upgrade, which could see the last 3 Jaguar Sqds remain in service in 2030s

 

[sancho]

Any comparison with A10 and Hawks ?

Are you serious?

When Hawk Deal was signed in 2004, Nobody thought that the mmrca saga would be running for 10 more years.

Now India's two CAS aircrafts the Mig 27 and Jaguar IS are getting old, with Mig 27 aproaching retirement in 4 years and Jaguars in 10 years.
Rafale was suposed to take the role of CAS from Mig 27, until rafale is inducted or god forbid is not inducted, we need another aircraft to play the role.
IAF has 71 Hawks, that Number will rise to 120 by 2018
Thats a big enough fleet, which if armed, could certainly fill the gap left by retiring of the 80+ Mig 27, Though I will agree that, Jaguars will still be more capable than Hawks, specially after the planned upgrade, which could see the last 3 Jaguar Sqds remain in service in 2030s

You are missing the important points! First of all, the dedicated strike fighters are not important anymore, since multi role fighters can easily take over their roles and even surpass them. LCA MK1 is better than the Jag already, the Mig 29UPG is far more capable than the Mig 27, the upgraded Mirage and even more so the additional capabilities MKI brings in with the upgrade. So nobody cares about Mig 27s (that already are replaced by MKI anyway), or the little capability the Hawks would add in strike.
Moreover, there is a problem with simple logic about using the Hawks, since they are only using in training squads, meaning only unexperienced pilots use them, while they will be diverted to frontline fighters, as soon they have finished their training. So the Hawks won't have pilots to fly them in war times, since they are not meant to be frontline fighter squads.

 

[Ind4Ever]

Are you serious

Hahaha bhai why do u think we are arming our hawks

 

[Archie]

Are you serious?



You are missing the important points! First of all, the dedicated strike fighters are not important anymore, since multi role fighters can easily take over their roles and even surpass them. LCA MK1 is better than the Jag already, the Mig 29UPG is far more capable than the Mig 27, the upgraded Mirage and even more so the additional capabilities MKI brings in with the upgrade. So nobody cares about Mig 27s (that already are replaced by MKI anyway), or the little capability the Hawks would add in strike.
Moreover, there is a problem with simple logic about using the Hawks, since they are only using in training squads, meaning only unexperienced pilots use them, while they will be diverted to frontline fighters, as soon they have finished their training. So the Hawks won't have pilots to fly them in war times, since they are not meant to be frontline fighter squads.

Its not just about capability, but having the numbers should their be a crysis

 

[sancho]

Its not just about capability, but having the numbers should their be a crysis

Which again is already been dealt by the fact that we now have a fleet of multi role fighters and not a split fleet of dedicated A2A and dedicated A2G fighters. We basically have twice the number of fighters available for strikes now, than in the past with Mig 27s and Jags only. And as said, even if we have the Hawks with weapons, where do we get the pilots? You can't use newbie pilots to do strike roles, now would IAF divert experienced pilots to the Hawks, because it doesn't add any benefits over Jags or even LCA.

 

[Archie]

Which again is already been dealt by the fact that we now have a fleet of multi role fighters and not a split fleet of dedicated A2A and dedicated A2G fighters. We basically have twice the number of fighters available for strikes now, than in the past with Mig 27s and Jags only. And as said, even if we have the Hawks with weapons, where do we get the pilots? You can't use newbie pilots to do strike roles, now would IAF divert experienced pilots to the Hawks, because it doesn't add any benefits over Jags or even LCA.

IAF has been demanding a fleet of atleast 850 Fighters, and we are struggling to maintain 650 at present, with over 250 Aircraft set for retirement in next 10 years, and with our planned inductions, we will barely match that figure.
Hence, IAF is looking at maximising its resources.

Missions like CAS doesnot require fast moving 100 Million USD Jets, and can be done more economically by Hawks. It is for this role, IAF is looking at weapon's upgrade for Hawks.
RAFALEs can perform CAS, far better than Jaguar or Hawks, but it has far important role to fullfill in guarding our eastern frontier against China.

IAF currently has 3000 Pilots, as compared to just 1700+ Aircrafts.
I am sure they can find pilots to fly Hawks in combat role, should their be a crisis

Like I said before, its all about making best use of our resources, By the time the first Rafale enters service, we will have 120+ Hawks in IAF service. These jets could take some of the burden of Mig27 retirement on their shoulders. while allowing for our more capable aircrafts to be deployed elsewhere.

 

[sancho]

Missions like CAS doesnot require fast moving 100 Million USD Jets, and can be done more economically by Hawks.

In Iraq against ISIS, but not in and around India! Guess why IAF needed to divert escort fighters and top cover to Mirage and Jag strike fighters even in Kargil?

It is for this role, IAF is looking at weapon's upgrade for Hawks.

Not really, as said it was a proposal by BAE and MBDA to weaponize the Hawk, not a tender by the IAF. It's like he LAHAT missile that was proposed by IAI, to be fittied on Rudra or Mi17s. Don't confuse any weapon or tech that is being marketed on Aero India or the Defexpo as a requirement of one of our forces. Companies want to make money and therefor they will offer anykind of possible deal.

 

[Echo_419]

Any comparison with A10 and Hawks ?


Don't act as if you are a foreigner this is how we do business in India.

Are you serious?



You are missing the important points! First of all, the dedicated strike fighters are not important anymore, since multi role fighters can easily take over their roles and even surpass them. LCA MK1 is better than the Jag already, the Mig 29UPG is far more capable than the Mig 27, the upgraded Mirage and even more so the additional capabilities MKI brings in with the upgrade. So nobody cares about Mig 27s (that already are replaced by MKI anyway), or the little capability the Hawks would add in strike.
Moreover, there is a problem with simple logic about using the Hawks, since they are only using in training squads, meaning only unexperienced pilots use them, while they will be diverted to frontline fighters, as soon they have finished their training. So the Hawks won't have pilots to fly them in war times, since they are not meant to be frontline fighter squads.

How good is LCA Mk1 compared to hawk as a CAS Aircraft

 

[sancho]

How good is LCA Mk1 compared to hawk as a CAS Aircraft

There is no comparison of the Hawk to any fighter, all the Hawk can is carrying external loads and droping them, but that doesn't make it to able to carry the same loads, have the same radar or avionics capabilities, or even the same countermeasures, since it's only purpose is training pilots.

 

[OrionHunter]

Wow! That's great news as it will augment the present strength of our squadrons by another five! Hawks would be ideal for CAPs and close air support during war.

Good idea!

 

[janon]

In Iraq against ISIS, but not in and around India! Guess why IAF needed to divert escort fighters and top cover to Mirage and Jag strike fighters even in Kargil?

If even our mig-27s and jaguars and even the formidable mirage-2000s need top cover or fighter escort, then what is the problem in providing the same escort to Hawks during CAS?

Fact 1) We are short of the desired squadron strength.
Fact 2) Hundreds of strike aircrafts have to be replaced imminently.
Fact 3) We have aronud 100 hawks, and will soon have some more, all made in house, all cheaper than frontline jets.
Fact 4) These Hawks can be armed if necessary, and when armed, they can provide light strike about as well as the mig-27s and jaguars can, and require only the same support from air superiority fighters.

Simple conclusion : Arm the Hawks and beef up our strike options before retiring hundreds of frontline strike fighters en masse.

 

[sancho]

If even our mig-27s and jaguars and even the formidable mirage-2000s need top cover or fighter escort, then what is the problem in providing the same escort to Hawks during CAS?

Why would you provide cover, for a trainer, when you can do the same for an LCA MK1 or a Jag, that both have far better CAS capabilities? Why would you provide cover for a trainer, when an upgraded Mig 29 can do the strike itself, while being fully able to defend itself? Why would you take away the only benefit of using the a trainer in combat missions, it's low operational costs, by adding costs for fighters that needs to cover it? Not to mention that they don't have any EW / countermeasure capability and you know what happend the last time we used aircrafts with limited capabilities in CAS.

Fact 1) We are short of the desired squadron strength.

COMBAT FIGHTER squadrons, not trainer squadrons and a Hawk is not even close equal a Jag, let alone any of the multi role fighters.

Fact 2) Hundreds of strike aircrafts have to be replaced imminently.

That's a myth! There are currently only 4 squads of Mig 27s left in the fleet and all of them are already under replacement by MKIs (the 2 upgrade squads most likely by the 2 upgraded MKI squads we ordered). The Jags will be even upgraded now, to serve well beyond 2025, so doesn't need replacements either and we are adding multi role fighters that adds to the strike capabilities anyway (3-4 MKI squads till 2019, 2 x LCA MK1 squads till 2019, hopefully 1 x MMRCA squad till 2019). So there is neither a need to replace strike fighters, nor is there a lack of strike capability in the fleet!

The rest as already explained, Hawks in IAF are just meant for training newbie pilots, therefor have no pilots to do strikes roles in war scenarios. Nor are they equipped to act as proper strike fighters, with radar, avionics or EW capabilities. And most importantly, India is not fighting ISIS, Taliban or Terrorists with complete air superiority and minimum threats of air defences!

 

[janon]

Why would you provide cover, for a trainer, when you can do the same for an LCA MK1 or a Jag, that both have far better CAS capabilities?

Because we don't have enough of either. Many of the Jags are going to be retired, a grand total of 0 Tejas are in service, at most 40 will be in service in a few years, and even today, before the retirement of Jags and mig-27s, we are short of squadron strength. If it was a choice between 100 Hawks and 100 LCAs, I would take the LCAs. But the choice is between 100 Hawks and 40 LCAs in future, or 0 Hawks and 40 LCAs in future. With the paucity of numbers, I would choose 100 Hawlks+40 LCAs.

So the choice you have presented is not he choice facing the IAF today.

Why would you provide cover for a trainer, when an upgraded Mig can do the strike itself, while being fully able to defend itself?

Upgraded mig-29 can, but we have only 60 of them. The mig-27s and jags still need cover, and even the mirages did. So what is the harm in providing cover to Hawks when mig-27s retire?

Why would you take away the only benefit of using the a trainer in combat missions, it's low costs, by adding costs for fighters that needs to cover it?

The aircrafts that is will replace also need fighter cover. Until we have enough multirole aircrafts, there is no choice but to provide fighter cover for strike aircrafts. What would be more expensive - a mirage or Jag escorted by Sukhois, or a Hawk escorted by Sukhois? The fighter cover costs the same in both. But the trainer is cheaper than cutting edge aircrafts, for light strike missions, when needed.

Not to mention that they don't have any EW / countermeasure capability and you know what happend the last time we used aircrafts with limited capabilities in CAS.

You mean the helicopter that was shot down by a portable SAM? Sure, but that's not what we are going to do, is it? Unless it is in CI, the hawks will be escorted by Sukhois which can provide EW in the battlespace.

COMBAT FIGHTER squadrons, not trainer squadrons and a Hawk is not even close equal a Jag, let alone any of the multi role fighters.

I know Hawk is not as capable as a jag, but it is more capable than zero jags. In other words, better than nothing. It's not like if we decide not to arm a hundred hawks, we will get a 100 jags in place of those. It's not either or. Many jags and all mig-27s have to retire soon, there is no way around that. We will lack strike capability, that is a fact. The hawks can provide some strike capability for a low cost.

That's a myth! There are currently only 4 squads of Mig 27s left in the fleet and all of them are already under replacement by MKIs (the 2 upgrade squads most likely by the 2 upgraded MKI squads we ordered). The Jags will be even upgraded now, to serve well beyond 2025, so doesn't need replacements either and we are adding multi role fighters that adds to the strike capabilities anyway (3-4 MKI squads till 2019, 2 x LCA MK1 squads till 2019, hopefully 1 x MMRCA squad till 2019). So there is neither a need to replace strike fighters, nor is there a lack of strike capability in the fleet!

There are 80 mig-27s and a few squadrons of very old jaguars that are on the verge of retirement. Not all Jags were upgraded, because it was uneconomical to upgrade the ons nearing the end of their service lives. So there are at least a 100 if not more strikers that need to be replaced. The LCAs can hardly even make up for the mig-21s that need to be replaced, numberwise.

It is not a myth that the IAF is short of combat aircafts. It is true. If you include the 21s, you are looking at 200+ aircrafts that need to be replaced in 5 years.

Giving combat capability to a large fleet of light aircrafts that every combat pilot in the IAF knows like the back of his hand, and therefore would not need additional training or familiarization or support chain, is an extremely valuable way of providing some strike capability quickly and cheaply. It would be foolish not to go for it.

Any comparison with A10 and Hawks ?

Both are planes.

 

[axisofevil]

Why wasn't this included in the original contract

Thats what happens when Congress makes a deal

IAFcan demand all they want but until they learn and implement how the Indian NAVY does business, it will continous problem in that particular wing.