India undertaking major rejig of fighter induction to meet threats from Pak, China

[Omega007]

Pretty sneaky of you. But yes, the soft answer that turneth away wrath does work, I have to admit.

Nothing sneaky,that's how my thought process work.I like to think myself as a rather direct and blunt type of a person who can not twist or sugarcoat his words too well ,and expect his peers to be as such.

But why on earth did you mention the use of the MiG 21, in that case?

Where did I do that??I said,IAF needed to replace a lot of Mig 21s in a short span and therefore they would need something that can be easily and cheaply built to make up the numbers.And also because,the LCAs would be of more use against both PLAAF and PAF if equipped properly that the 21s can ever be.I can't see what is so hard to understand in this rather simple statement.

Then why, why, why for pity's sake, did you mention it?

The same as above.

↑


<sigh>
I suppose there's no point in asking the obvious question.

Enough with your games sir,can you kindly elaborate on your statements??It would be really great to get your version and also it would make my task of correcting my thinking easier!!So if you have got the time,can you please amplify your statement??Consider this as my humble request.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

Who knows,perhaps it's a blessing in disguise.I mean why should we spent a hopping 30 billion USD on a souped up fourth generation aircraft design,when we are already in line for getting a next generation one??Why not just use that money to order additional MKIs and (FGFAs when made available)??

More MKIs yes. But I doubt FGFA will be available in time. Before we have any 5th gen fighter inducted China will have its own 5th gen fighter ready and inducted and again the number games continue.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

42 squadrons is taking 16-18 per squadron ~750 aircraft .
This is what they are aiming for by 2027-30.

Super sukhoi-30 = 15 squadrons(Heavy)
Mirage-2000 upgraded = 3 squadrons(Medium)
Mig-29UPG = 4 squadrons(Medium)
Modernized jaguar =6 squadrons(To end service in 2030 approx)

Now have to fill rest of 14 squadrons with LCA,FGFA and Rafale.Mirages and MIg-29s can be replaced from 2030 onwards with FGFA/AMCA.
Assuming 2 rafale squadrons.(36)
7 LCA squadrons(~120 ordered )
3 FGFA(63)

Still need 2 more squadrons of LCA or rafales or FGFA.
I don't think under any circumstance LCA numbers will exceed 200.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Please explain what precisely a short-range light-weight fighter, essentially an interceptor with a limited range, at the opposite with limited armament could have done against Su30 type aircraft.

First of all,I don't believe LCA to be an interceptor,rather it's a light MRCA,with interception being one of its intended roles but not the only one!!It can definitely perform in other roles like CAS and limited air dominance missions(if fitted with all those upgrades I mentioned in my earlier comment) on a local theater.

Not relevant here, because presumably it is not being tasked to hit ground targets on the Tibetan plateau. Here its only role is to block the big boys coming in.

And coming to your other point,as to what this tiny thing can do against a giant like the Su 30,well,if they are supported by other heavy fighters and ground based air defence systems,then I would say a lot!!Because then the PLAAF elements will have to fight all of them at once,which will hopefully exhaust them and eventually blunt their attacks.And besides,due to the altitude of the PLAAF bases in the TAR,the PLAAF planes can only take off with only about 60-65% of their normal payload,which also negates their advantage to a certain degree.

On the contrary, while the PLAAF may face some difficulty facing off diverse threats, so will the IAF face a terrible management task, with Sukhois waiting to pounce, with mobile SAM batteries poised for retaliation, and now, at your prompting, a cloud of small, relatively ineffective (for the role) light planes causing confusion all over the place.

But yes,if the LCAs are to face the PLAAF J 11s alone,with no AWACS or ground support,then I don't think the former can hold their own for long.

Source: India undertaking major rejig of fighter induction to meet threats from Pak, China | Page 3

 

[Omega007]

Not relevant here, because presumably it is not being tasked to hit ground targets on the Tibetan plateau. Here its only role is to block the big boys coming in.

Fair enough.

On the contrary, while the PLAAF may face some difficulty facing off diverse threats, so will the IAF face a terrible management task,

Is it now??Cause the PLAAF is sure taking this very same approach across all of its theaters of operations,including in TAR!!They have deployed at least two types of fighters,namely J 11s and J 10s along with dedicated ground attack air crafts and at least two different types of SAMs like LY 80 and the usual bad boy,the HQ 9 variants,coupled with a plethora of AAA of different calibers and ranges.I don't see why IAF will have to do it any different.But then again,I'm always open to other's views,that's one advantage of coming from a atheistic/agnostic family I suppose and I'll definitely change my line of thinking if you can convince me that I've been thinking in the wrong way.But i'm yet to see your version.

with Sukhois waiting to pounce,

They do not have to wait,they can take the lead if the ones taking the decisions see fit.

with mobile SAM batteries poised for retaliation,

That's how PLAAF is planning to IAF in TAR,at least that's the conclusion one would get to, if one is to study their recent deployments in that region.

and now, at your prompting, a cloud of small, relatively ineffective (for the role) light planes causing confusion all over the place.

Now why do you think they will be ineffective??Do you know that the nose diameter of the LCA is larger than that of medium fighters like Mirage 2000 or Rafales??Which means the former can theoretically house more powerful radar within its nosecone,but of course,only if the developers can somehow cater for the higher power requirements. With the proposed upgrades,the MkII should be able to hold their own against PLAAF J 10s,when backed by other friendly assets.So I don't see any reason why one has to just write them off the list!!

@amardeep mishra ,bro,do you have any info wrt to the average and peak power ratings of the S band and X band TRMMs,developed by LRDE and their assorted power requirements??Thanks in advance.

 

[SQ8]

The biggest worry should be recruitment as well. Right now, the IAF has less pilots per plane (1:0.86). Marry that to the low serviceability of the Sukhoi's (although that 55% is incorrect, its close to the higher 60s now after some serious self introspection). That still means that even with 272 Sukhoi'.. what the IAF can actually field is around 180. How many of these will have pilots constantly available to fly?

What the IAF needs is a revamp of the recruitment policy and realizing that with India's improving economy there will be lesser motivation to Join the IAF regardless of patriotism or not. Its plain.. I want a BMW rather than a Honda mentality.
Essentially, that has to come via better benefits for potential recruits and a wider recruiting policy. The IAF may be getting patriotic recruits, but they are ham fisted and cant keep an aircraft steady, means that they aren't getting enough to be able to meet their quota of qualified people.

As for the Tejas.. the focus still seems to be on the IAF whereas the better approach to give impetus to the program is to run the export potential concurrently. The Rafale will come in fits and starts since it takes more than Modi to break years of babu-raj.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Nothing sneaky,that's how my thought process work.I like to think myself as a rather direct and blunt type of a person who can not twist or sugarcoat his words too well ,and expect his peers to be as such.


Where did I do that??I said, (1) IAF needed to replace a lot of Mig 21s in a short span and therefore they would need something that can be easily and cheaply built to make up the numbers.And also because,the LCAs would be of more use against both PLAAF and PAF if equipped properly that the 21s can ever be.I can't see what is so hard to understand in this rather simple statement.

(2) The same as above.

The confusion arises from your insistence on conflating the mission objectives on the Tibetan front with the replacement task of the MiG 21 (I don't know why you brought up the MiG 27).

Whether the IAF needs to replace all the MiG 21s in a short span or not, the Tejas is still without a clear role in aerial combat against the PLAAF. And the MiG 27 was brought into the conversation for no clear reason.

Enough with your games sir,can you kindly elaborate on your statements??It would be really great to get your version and also it would make my task of correcting my thinking easier!!So if you have got the time,can you please amplify your statement??Consider this as my humble request.

What games? I am simply unable to understand why the replacement for the MiG 21 would find any role in combat against the PLAAF.

You asked for my version. Very simply, it would be the same as yours, minus the Tejas. To elaborate,

1. specifically tasked cruise missile batteries dedicated to the destruction of PLAAF airfields in Tibet;
2. layered SAM-based defenses, with Long Range, Medium Range and Short Range missile batteries combinations guarding anticipated targets for the PLAAF;
3. Combat Air Patrols backed up by AWACS aircraft;
4. Geostationary satellite surveillance of all PLAAF airfields, to spot possible low level raids by the PLAAF;

As you can readily see, there is no role for either the MiG 21 or its functional equivalent, or even slightly tweaked versions. We need aircraft which can play an effective role bringing down the PLAAF planes, not mass-produced Model Ts.

 

[Spectre]

The biggest worry should be recruitment as well. Right now, the IAF has less pilots per plane (1:0.86). Marry that to the low serviceability of the Sukhoi's (although that 55% is incorrect, its close to the higher 60s now after some serious self introspection). That still means that even with 272 Sukhoi'.. what the IAF can actually field is around 180. How many of these will have pilots constantly available to fly?

What the IAF needs is a revamp of the recruitment policy and realizing that with India's improving economy there will be lesser motivation to Join the IAF regardless of patriotism or not. Its plain.. I want a BMW rather than a Honda mentality.
Essentially, that has to come via better benefits for potential recruits and a wider recruiting policy. The IAF may be getting patriotic recruits, but they are ham fisted and cant keep an aircraft steady, means that they aren't getting enough to be able to meet their quota of qualified people.

As for the Tejas.. the focus still seems to be on the IAF whereas the better approach to give impetus to the program is to run the export potential concurrently. The Rafale will come in fits and starts since it takes more than Modi to break years of babu-raj.

You are right - may be screening students at high school for requisite skills will help. Today there are plethora of virtual reality simulators with HOTAS available at relatively cheap cost of 20,000 Rs which can be used en masse for preliminary screening and promising ones can be called for further evaluation?

Of-course all this can only happen when there is some clarity on conscription - which is likely to be very contentious.

The problem is also compounded by the fact that Indian Defense Establishment specially the army is bloated and major chunk of revenue goes towards salary and pensions.

This little anecdote is enlightening:

Hauled on the mat by the commander-in-chief for the poor maintenance of base buildings, he said, “Well Sir, it’s like this. The maintenance money has more or less remained fixed. It is based on an old formula derived many years ago. We have to both pay the maintenance staff as well as the materials out of the total maintenance grant. As you know, the outgo on pay has kept on increasing with doses of allowances and the DA — today I am paying 90 per cent of the grant in pay and allowances, leaving me little to buy the paint. How can I maintain anything?”

 

[MilSpec]

The biggest worry should be recruitment as well. Right now, the IAF has less pilots per plane (1:0.86). Marry that to the low serviceability of the Sukhoi's (although that 55% is incorrect, its close to the higher 60s now after some serious self introspection). That still means that even with 272 Sukhoi'.. what the IAF can actually field is around 180. How many of these will have pilots constantly available to fly?

What the IAF needs is a revamp of the recruitment policy and realizing that with India's improving economy there will be lesser motivation to Join the IAF regardless of patriotism or not. Its plain.. I want a BMW rather than a Honda mentality.
Essentially, that has to come via better benefits for potential recruits and a wider recruiting policy. The IAF may be getting patriotic recruits, but they are ham fisted and cant keep an aircraft steady, means that they aren't getting enough to be able to meet their quota of qualified people.

As for the Tejas.. the focus still seems to be on the IAF whereas the better approach to give impetus to the program is to run the export potential concurrently. The Rafale will come in fits and starts since it takes more than Modi to break years of babu-raj.

there are more worries.

Jaguar refit is going no where - one of the biggest boost would be the F125 Honeywell re-engine project along with the
darin III upgrade for the Jaguar, making it a potent strike platform close to a tornado like ability.

R27B stress fractures sent the DARE III upgrades down the drain, which could have given some breathing room to LCA>

and then there is the LCA... being pro-LCA, I am now having some serious doubts on HAL's lack lustre PDM strategy behind the project. LCA 1P which should have been logical mk1, is running almost 4 years late, purely due to HAL and not ADA this time around. This is extremely worrying factor. Two consecutive HAL products IJT and HTT 36 seems to be dud in accordance to IAF. With Rafale gone, and all hopes pinned on MKI and FGFA, HAL should now be serious in putting some int-cap in LCA, or else I see HAL along with other Labs being in quite a bit of trouble in coming years.

IAF's major problem now is it's prime A/c manufacturing ecosystem going in a very wrong direction...

In that case, that resonates with point 3, and underlines our greater need for very many very reliable light-weight fighter and fighter-bomber aircraft. We don't need high-performance air superiority fighters, we need workhorses that can keep up the pressure over a protracted period of time.

Sir, with the highest due respect, I would disagree to your comment.
Irrespective of the Strike package configurations for FAC, CAS or AI, your strike package will still need platforms configured in air superiority role- (Which may or may not be a Air Sup platform).

Now this is where Multi role aircraft's come in (I am not shifting the goalpost from Air Sup to multirole) What a platform like Mirage2k or a MKI brings to the table is a the capability of the same platform being used as a CAS/AI configuration, along with a dedicated Air supp role, giving your fleet immense flexibility, creating Pilot base that handles all types of missions wit ease, and consolidates mission capabilities within your squadron.

The reason for mentioning Multi-role is because IAF's idea of Multirole a/c has a lot of capital in the philosophy of picking Multi-role capabilities on a Air Superiority platform in instead of the picking a strike a/c with self defense capabilities. Difference between approach behind a Jaguar/27M compared to Mirage 2k and MKI.

One of the most reluctant inductions in the IAF was Jaguar Sepecat, if you look at the original pick - SAAB Viggen, that to fits the description of Air Sup platform masquerading as Multirole strike platform.

This is one of the expectations from the LCA too- to be a through bred, Air Sup Platform capable of holding it's own against any platform in the sky, but have the capability to carry strike operations, as the science behind delivering ground munitions is simpler by nature.

 

[Joe Shearer]

On the contrary, while the PLAAF may face some difficulty facing off diverse threats, so will the IAF face a terrible management task,

Is it now??Cause the PLAAF is sure taking this very same approach across all of its theaters of operations,including in TAR!!They have deployed at least two types of fighters,namely J 11s and J 10s along with dedicated ground attack air crafts and at least two different types of SAMs like LY 80 and the usual bad boy,the HQ 9 variants,coupled with a plethora of AAA of different calibers and ranges.I don't see why IAF will have to do it any different.But then again,I'm always open to other's views,that's one advantage of coming from a atheistic/agnostic family I suppose and I'll definitely change my line of thinking if you can convince me that I've been thinking in the wrong way.But i'm yet to see your version.

Source: India undertaking major rejig of fighter induction to meet threats from Pak, China | Page 4

I don't see why we should make heavy weather of this; the answer seems obvious, the difference between an attacker and a defender. An attacker can afford to be profligate in his attacks; a defender must be parsimonious of resource. Of course the PLAAF will deploy two types of fighters, J11 and J2, tasking one to engage Indian Sukhois, the other to sneak around while the engagement is going on; of course there will be ground attack aircraft, consider the wealth of targets on the plains, and the relative ease of engagement considering that the big aircraft will be engaged in mortal combat. There is no different methodology being proposed,

 

[Genesis]

Fair enough.



Is it now??Cause the PLAAF is sure taking this very same approach across all of its theaters of operations,including in TAR!!They have deployed at least two types of fighters,namely J 11s and J 10s along with dedicated ground attack air crafts and at least two different types of SAMs like LY 80 and the usual bad boy,the HQ 9 variants,coupled with a plethora of AAA of different calibers and ranges.I don't see why IAF will have to do it any different.But then again,I'm always open to other's views,that's one advantage of coming from a atheistic/agnostic family I suppose and I'll definitely change my line of thinking if you can convince me that I've been thinking in the wrong way.But i'm yet to see your version.

They do not have to wait,they can take the lead if the ones taking the decisions see fit.

That's how PLAAF is planning to IAF in TAR,at least that's the conclusion one would get to, if one is to study their recent deployments in that region.

Now why do you think they will be ineffective??Do you know that the nose diameter of the LCA is larger than that of medium fighters like Mirage 2000 or Rafales??Which means the former can theoretically house more powerful radar within its nosecone,but of course,only if the developers can somehow cater for the higher power requirements. With the proposed upgrades,the MkII should be able to hold their own against PLAAF J 10s,when backed by other friendly assets.So I don't see any reason why one has to just write them off the list!!

@amardeep mishra ,bro,do you have any info wrt to the average and peak power ratings of the S band and X band TRMMs,developed by LRDE and their assorted power requirements??Thanks in advance.

While a large part of this discussion is now on China, I would say don't sleep on Pakistan. they are still the ones likely to be the primary focus.

China's role in any war, this is all just hypothetical, is to tie up as much Indian resources as possible, victory if possible. I don't think it is due to cost. Taking land from India is too ambitious and ultimately not our goal anymore, there are multiple signs of that.

I'm assuming any war involving both India and Pakistan will have a ground component, which means air would need to play a major role in that. China can probably tie up more than half of the SU-30s due to availability, and our sizable air force, with a few special mission aircrafts added.

This leaves India short on war fighting assets, at least when talking Pakistan who currently have more than 200 combat aircraft and quite a few special mission aircrafts.


While many Indian members laugh at JF-17, their best feature is they exist and they fly. Tejas would take a long time still to achieve a sizable number, by then Pakistan would have been very familiar with JF-17 and move on to further models.

India's preparation needs to be on Pakistan, for as much as members like to belittle Pakistan, Pakistan is no ASEAN, it's a battle hardened and resourceful military. India spending too much time trying to match China on quality is going to come up short (J-20), but most important, it would be a serious miscalculation of Chinese strategic importance on any Indo Pakistan conflict.

 

[SQ8]

there are more worries.

Jaguar refit is going no where - one of the biggest boost would be the F125 Honeywell re-engine project along with the
darin III upgrade for the Jaguar, making it a potent strike platform close to a tornado like ability.

R27B stress fractures sent the DARE III upgrades down the drain, which could have given some breathing room to LCA>

and then there is the LCA... being pro-LCA, I am now having some serious doubts on HAL's lack lustre PDM strategy behind the project. LCA 1P which should have been logical mk1, is running almost 4 years late, purely due to HAL and not ADA this time around. This is extremely worrying factor. Two consecutive HAL products IJT and HTT 36 seems to be dud in accordance to IAF. With Rafale gone, and all hopes pinned on MKI and FGFA, HAL should now be serious in putting some int-cap in LCA, or else I see HAL along with other Labs being in quite a bit of trouble in coming years.

IAF's major problem now is it's prime A/c manufacturing ecosystem going in a very wrong direction....

The MMRCA was possibly one of the most ridiculous showboating of new found economic clout. Instead of realizing the gravity of the situation and fast tracking the process, the whole shebang was dragged and paraded around like some rich guy selecting what hospital they would like to go to for treatment and playing hard to get. I have never fully expressed how much I considered those responsible for it as utter idiots. Because those paying for it literally are India's warfighters both in the Air, and on the ground that expect support from those in the air.

The LCA is best left as mismanagement at best.

There is a massive disconnect in what is perhaps the IAF policy 2025-2030, The IAF budget allocated for this.. and what is actually being done to achieve most of these targets. The only projects being successful are those which do not get the hype and scrutiny of the babu mentality.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir, with the highest due respect, I would disagree to your comment.
Irrespective of the Strike package configurations for FAC, CAS or AI, your strike package will still need platforms configured in air superiority role- (Which may or may not be a Air Sup platform).

Now this is where Multi role aircraft's come in (I am not shifting the goalpost from Air Sup to multirole) What a platform like Mirage2k or a MKI brings to the table is a the capability of the same platform being used as a CAS/AI configuration, along with a dedicated Air supp role, giving your fleet immense flexibility, creating Pilot base that handles all types of missions wit ease, and consolidates mission capabilities within your squadron.

The reason for mentioning Multi-role is because IAF's idea of Multirole a/c has a lot of capital in the philosophy of picking Multi-role capabilities on a Air Superiority platform in instead of the picking a strike a/c with self defense capabilities. Difference between approach behind a Jaguar/27M compared to Mirage 2k and MKI.

One of the most reluctant inductions in the IAF was Jaguar Sepecat, if you look at the original pick - SAAB Viggen, that to fits the description of Air Sup platform masquerading as Multirole strike platform.

This is one of the expectations from the LCA too- to be a through bred, Air Sup Platform capable of holding it's own against any platform in the sky, but have the capability to carry strike operations, as the science behind delivering ground munitions are simpler by nature.

The MMRCA was possibly one of the most ridiculous showboating of new found economic clout. Instead of realizing the gravity of the situation and fast tracking the process, the whole shebang was dragged and paraded around like some rich guy selecting what hospital they would like to go to for treatment and playing hard to get. I have never fully expressed how much I considered those responsible for it as utter idiots. Because those paying for it literally are India's warfighters both in the Air, and on the ground that expect support from those in the air.

The LCA is best left as mismanagement at best.

There is a massive disconnect in what is perhaps the IAF policy 2025-2030, The IAF budget allocated for this.. and what is actually being done to achieve most of these targets. The only projects being successful are those which do not get the hype and scrutiny of the babu mentality.

It is very difficult explaining this to some ardent souls.

 

[MilSpec]

The MMRCA was possibly one of the most ridiculous showboating of new found economic clout. Instead of realizing the gravity of the situation and fast tracking the process, the whole shebang was dragged and paraded around like some rich guy selecting what hospital they would like to go to for treatment and playing hard to get. I have never fully expressed how much I considered those responsible for it as utter idiots. Because those paying for it literally are India's warfighters both in the Air, and on the ground that expect support from those in the air.

The LCA is best left as mismanagement at best.

There is a massive disconnect in what is perhaps the IAF policy 2025-2030, The IAF budget allocated for this.. and what is actually being done to achieve most of these targets. The only projects being successful are those which do not get the hype and scrutiny of the babu mentality.

If anything listen to what our dear ex-chiefs are saying in the stratpost interview.... you will see where the disconnect is. And on the other hand look at Navy and what it is doing which mr shukla too raised in the same....

It is very difficult explaining this to some ardent souls.

Not sure what you are referring to?

 

[Joe Shearer]

If anything listen to what our dear ex-chiefs are saying in the stratpost interview.... you will see where the disconnect is. And on the other hand look at Navy and what it is doing which mr shukla too raised in the same....


Not sure what you are referring to?

The concept of a multi-role combat aircraft. I think it is not an easy concept to design and build, and it should emphatically not be part of air force policy to depend on these aircraft.

Perhaps we can discuss this Wednesday.