Indian Air Force News & Discussions

[sancho]

Entirely agreed. It has to do with "turf issues". Which have changed some what over the years, but not enough!
Many years ago, the IN decided to set up a Fleet Air Arm. In the face of some real strong opposition. Luckily for the IN, the IAF knew squat about operating Carriers, so they got their wings, to keep it short and simple.
This just has to do with the idea of "if it has wings, its gotta be ours". Luckily, that philosophy is on its way outta the window.

But there is a big difference in IN air arm and the transport helicopters in IAF isn't it? IN has smaller utility helicopters, just like IAF, or IA and in addition to that decicated naval helicopters to be used on their vessels, IAF in this case would be not useful. IF IA and IN now would get dedicated transport helicopter as well, for land based operations, the logistic in terms of spares and maintaince would be split and more complitcated than it is now.
I am for air wings in IA and IN, if they need aircrafts to do specific roles/missions, like the fire support of ground troops with Dhruv WSI, or LCH, or the ASW helicopters on IN and would even add the maritime attack role of IAF fighters to IN, but the transport role as a whole should be centered with IAF.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

But there is a big difference in IN air arm and the transport helicopters in IAF isn't it? IN has smaller utility helicopters, just like IAF, or IA and in addition to that decicated naval helicopters to be used on their vessels, IAF in this case would be not useful. IF IA and IN now would get dedicated transport helicopter as well, for land based operations, the logistic in terms of spares and maintaince would be split and more complitcated than it is now.
I am for air wings in IA and IN, if they need aircrafts to do specific roles/missions, like the fire support of ground troops with Dhruv WSI, or LCH, or the ASW helicopters on IN and would even add the maritime attack role of IAF fighters to IN, but the transport role as a whole should be centered with IAF.

I wrote earlier about a more basic divergence that existed (and still exists to some extent) about philosophies between the three services, rather than the specifics. For many years that was the continual tug-of-war between the IAF and IN regarding an Air Element (not just helicopters). The IAF had no leg to stand on, regarding carrier-borne aircraft; but when it came to MR aircraft, the IAF (successfully) resisted IN control of those assets for many years. Simply because they were land-based. The IAF did not even want the IN to have air-bases ashore of its own for its aircraft arguing that Dabolim was sufficient for hosting the Vikrant's air-wing when Vikrant was not on operational status. Even the first Helicopters embarked on the Vikrant for "Planeguard duties" were 2 IAF Sikorsky choppers flown by IAF pilots. The IN stuck its neck out and slowly wore down the IAF resistance. A point of note, the Alouette III (later Chetak) helicopters were evaluated and selected by the IN for ship-board use; the IAF wisened up and later accepted them, thus starting the longest running saga of helicopters in India and probably else where.

The MR and LR-ASW requrements of the IN were not even understood by the IAF who were content to operate some ancient B-24 Liberators and reconditioned L-1049 Super Connies (retired from Air India) under "Maritime Air Operations". While the IN (not so silently) suffered through all that. Induction of the Il-38s and Tu-142s broke the glass ceiling for the IN once and for all, and they came out of the clutches of the IAF.

So far as the IA is concerned, the beginnings of the IA's aviation wing began with the Auster AOPs of the Artillery. Unfortunately the men at the helm of the IA in those times had no other vision of aircraft in the Army. So the Chetaks and Cheetahs just substituted for the AOPs. After Viet Nam, the Generals woke up to the accessory value of air power which needed to be organic to the Army. However the IAF managed to bamboozle successive MoD Mandarins and Ministers that they had all that was needed. Even then there was some constant disagreements on how efficacious the IAF could be in providing CAS to the Army, and the possible lack of the desired synergy. But that got overlooked or papered over.

Now moving on, there is a need for all concerned (IAF and IA) to understand that Air-power (esp in CAS) has to be organic to the Army's capabilities. And Air-power in this context does not only mean weapon-equipped helicopters or air craft but also Airborne transport capability. And never mind anybodys protestations, these two capabilities must be incoporated in to the IAs forces. At the most, fixed wing air-assets as Santro has opined in his post (to which I initially responded) can remain with the IAF. But to keep tactical CAS and Air-Lift (rotary wing) assets divorced from the IA is sheer stupidity. Santro also (very correctly) opines that let the SAR helicopters remain with the IAF. To that, I will add the VIP communication choppers as well. But that is it.
So far as as logistical and maintenance facilities in the IN and IA are concerned, they have fully matured and capable organisations of their own to manage their own resorces and assets. So even that argument does not hold any water. Todays helicopter gunships are pretty much to be used as an armored spearhead ( a tank) than as some dog-fighting fighter. How many fighter jocks understand the intricacies of Armored Warfare? There is a basic difference there.

Otherwise the churlishly idiotic mind-set of "if it has wings (and flies), its gotta be ours (AirForces)"; will be be perpetuated ad-infinitum.
The PA in contrast, has been foresighted enough to keep its Rotary-Winged air-assets; gunships and transports under its own wing, thus creating a more organic (and potentially more potent) force.

 

[sathya]

Raytheon awarded $23 mln contract to modernise IAF
India AirForce Raytheon Paris Air Show
Posted On: Jun 23, 2011

A file photo.
LE BOURGET, PARIS (PTI): US defence major Raytheon on Wednesday bagged a USD 23 million contract to modernise India's military air traffic management systems which will make IAF air bases capable of handling all types of modern transport and combat jets round-the-clock.

The contract has been awarded to Raytheon by Tata Power Strategic Electronic Systems to provide automated air traffic management systems to the Indian Air Force.

The Tata Power Strategic Electronic Systems is the main contractor of the project. The contract is part of the IAF's Modernisation of Airfield Infrastructure (MAFI) project.

MAFI is being undertaken to make all IAF air bases capable of handling all types of modern transport and fighter aircraft at all times.

Raytheon officials said under the first phase of the programme, 30 airbases across the country will be upgraded to make them capable of handling all types of modern transport and combat jets at all times.

Raytheon Network Centric Systems (NCS) will supply a variant of its globally deployed AutoTrac family of air traffic management systems under the project to make the air traffic systems of the best in the world, Raytheon officials said.

"Raytheon's AutoTrac system will provide the IAF a modern automated systems backbone that will allow for easy and rapid incorporation of new tools and functionality as they become available," said Andy Zogg, vice president, Raytheon NCS Command and Control Systems.

 

[SQ8]

Its not just the Assault Helo's.. the Mi-35's and any future procurement of Helicopters that are bought keeping the Army's need in Mind, should stay with the Army.
Now, when it comes to fixed wing assets.. its better they stay with the IAF. In a word.. Airbases.
The IAF "owns" them, it should therefore have complete control of assets based there.
Just as the USAF operates AC-130's which are primarily a ground support asset.. as are the A-10's.
but due to the composite nature of strike groups.. ala the Indian strike groups. Co-ordination is extremely high.
However, these assets are still tasked by the Force commander and "attached" to that particular land force.
The same seems to be the idea behind the IBG's of India. However, the helo assets are used more frequently.. and should be under low level IA commanders. Where the tasking order does not have to be issued to them via the IAF representative.

 

[Vibs]

Its not just the Assault Helo's.. the Mi-35's and any future procurement of Helicopters that are bought keeping the Army's need in Mind, should stay with the Army.
Now, when it comes to fixed wing assets.. its better they stay with the IAF. In a word.. Airbases.
The IAF "owns" them, it should therefore have complete control of assets based there.
Just as the USAF operates AC-130's which are primarily a ground support asset.. as are the A-10's.
but due to the composite nature of strike groups.. ala the Indian strike groups. Co-ordination is extremely high.
However, these assets are still tasked by the Force commander and "attached" to that particular land force.
The same seems to be the idea behind the IBG's of India. However, the helo assets are used more frequently.. and should be under low level IA commanders. Where the tasking order does not have to be issued to them via the IAF representative.

Good point on the bases being owned by IAF. But Indian Naval aircraft should ideally be treated separately. The IAF can suitably serve the needs of land based operations. However Naval operations are a whole different ball game. With aircraft carriers coming into play as well, there may be a need for a delineation.
As far as helo's are concerned, squadron's under commanding officers of the IA seems to be the ideal solution. Attack helos are like flying armored regiments. Under control of the IA,there will be better co-ordination between helos and ground forces and more effective operations.

 

[angeldemon_007]

Its not just the Assault Helo's.. the Mi-35's and any future procurement of Helicopters that are bought keeping the Army's need in Mind, should stay with the Army.

No you are absolutely right. IAF wanted the monopoly thats why IA never had these assets. IA aviation wing demanded this 3-4 times earlier but because of IAF they couldn't succeed but now IA has made it clear that they want these assets. It is because of this reason that all new tenders have more choppers for army aviation wing. Dhruv (number not conformed but around 150, 60-70 alone in WSI role), 114 LCH and out of 384 LUH, 259 are for IA. There are reports that IA will be placing order for heavy lift helicopters and some are saying heavy attack chopper also.

ow, when it comes to fixed wing assets.. its better they stay with the IAF.

I agree with you but IA has made it clear that they will be purchasing fixed wing aircrafts of the line of C130j or C27j. They won't be purchasing very heavy lift aircraft like C17.

According to me IA aviation wing must induct more and more helicopters so as to increase mobility in far flung areas especially in North East Region.

 

[sathya]

what happened to jagjinatt

jaginatt report plz

 

[SQ8]

No you are absolutely right. IAF wanted the monopoly thats why IA never had these assets. IA aviation wing demanded this 3-4 times earlier but because of IAF they couldn't succeed but now IA has made it clear that they want these assets. It is because of this reason that all new tenders have more choppers for army aviation wing. Dhruv (number not conformed but around 150, 60-70 alone in WSI role), 114 LCH and out of 384 LUH, 259 are for IA. There are reports that IA will be placing order for heavy lift helicopters and some are saying heavy attack chopper also.


I agree with you but IA has made it clear that they will be purchasing fixed wing aircrafts of the line of C130j or C27j. They won't be purchasing very heavy lift aircraft like C17.

According to me IA aviation wing must induct more and more helicopters so as to increase mobility in far flung areas especially in North East Region.

Question is.. Buy induction, do you buy another 100 or so medium lift choppers in addition to the ones the IAF already operates??
Knowing that that most if not all of the IAF's chopper fleet will fly in support of the IA.. is having 300+ medium lift choppers a requirement.. or inter service competition gone out of hand?

I still feel the IA should not directly operate the C-27's or the C-130's.
Leave the fixed wing with the IAF. Keep the IA aviation wing focused on assets that can move with its IBG's... Mi-8 and attack helo's can forward deploy and continue to more with IBG rear.. C-130's cannot.
And let the IAF operate the "fixed" location assets.
Those extra C-27's and 130's can be operated by the IAF on a priority basis for the IA, perhaps with loadmasters from the IA.
But primarily tactical fixed wing airlift should remain an IAF asset.

 

[angeldemon_007]

Question is.. Buy induction, do you buy another 100 or so medium lift choppers in addition to the ones the IAF already operates??

The choppers ordered by IAF are separate. IA aviation wing will be placing separate orders for these helicopters and aircrafts....

Knowing that that most if not all of the IAF's chopper fleet will fly in support of the IA.. is having 300+ medium lift choppers a requirement.. or inter service competition gone out of hand?

I could not understand your point completely. IAF wants that all air assets should be under its control and it has managed to do so but now IA has countered this by saying that however good the coordination is between the 2 services, the result won't still be comparable to what it will be when IA will start operating all kinds of choppers. They have managed to convinced MOD and a lot of money is assigned specifically for IA's aviation wing this time.

I still feel the IA should not directly operate the C-27's or the C-130's.

I also agree the same but its not upto us. IA has shown interest and government is also supporting. I think most of the these fixed wing aircraft fleet will still be operated by IAF but IA aviation wing also be operating some aircrafts so as to ensure the mobility during first assault....
Considering the size of IA, IA aviation wing is very small. IA should be operating around 1000 choppers and steps are being taken and according to sources at-least 600-700 will be inducted by IA during this decade.

 

[SQ8]

The choppers ordered by IAF are separate. IA aviation wing will be placing separate orders for these helicopters and aircrafts....


I could not understand your point completely. IAF wants that all air assets should be under its control and it has managed to do so but now IA has countered this by saying that however good the coordination is between the 2 services, the result won't still be comparable to what it will be when IA will start operating all kinds of choppers. They have managed to convinced MOD and a lot of money is assigned specifically for IA's aviation wing this time.


I also agree the same but its not upto us. IA has shown interest and government is also supporting. I think most of the these fixed wing aircraft fleet will still be operated by IAF but IA aviation wing also be operating some aircrafts so as to ensure the mobility during first assault....
Considering the size of IA, IA aviation wing is very small. IA should be operating around 1000 choppers and steps are being taken and according to sources at-least 600-700 will be inducted by IA during this decade.

A 1000 choppers???

even with an average of 300 of them in use all the time.. and each with an average capacity of 20 fully equipped troops.. thats 6000 troops that need to be transported every now and then?? even twenty choppers flying around in a assault group are easy prey for enemy forces.
I think that is too large a number.
The Soviets had 90 motor rifle divisions which would have used airborne assault capability... for which they operated on average 3500+ helos.
India on the other hand.. has not even half of that number.
Considering the North east, kashmir and the south.. the IA maximum airlift needs would be 350 medium helo's .. with attrition replacements.
Which is why the IAF should relinquish a large part of the mi-8 fleet to the IA directly.

With two airborne divisions.. the IAF can provide all the airlift needed.

 

[Vibs]

A 1000 choppers???

even with an average of 300 of them in use all the time.. and each with an average capacity of 20 fully equipped troops.. thats 6000 troops that need to be transported every now and then?? even twenty choppers flying around in a assault group are easy prey for enemy forces.
I think that is too large a number.
Considering the North east, kashmir and the south.. the IA maximum airlift needs would be 450 helo's .. with attrition replacements.
Which is why the IAF should relinquish a large part of the mi-8 fleet to the IA directly.

With two airborne divisions.. the IAF can provide all the airlift needed.

The IA is not looking at choppers for airlift alone.It wants these choppers to be in a tactical attack role along with ground formations. It's like a flying armored squadron.

As per the army’s plans for its aviation wing — mooted in 2007 and to be implemented over a 15-year period ending 2022 — the three strike corps would be beefed up with an aviation brigade comprising two squadrons of 12 attack helicopters each, apart from two squadrons with 15 choppers each for tactical battle reconnaissance and casualty evacuation, top army sources said.
Apart from the 1, 2 and 21 strike Corps, the army will also provide aviation brigades to each of its 10 pivot or defensive corps, but these would essentially be in the nature of tactical lift capabilities, with some offensive elements.
At present, the army relies on two squadrons of Mi-25 and Mi-35 attack helicopters and Mi-17 medium-lift choppers of the IAF for testing its transformational concepts.
Defence ministry officials, when asked about the army’s aviation plans, said the IAF would continue to play a ‘strategic’ role while the army would acquire its air assets for a ‘tactical’ role.
The army, obviously, wants to have ‘full command and control’ over the ‘tactical’ operations of air assets so that it could meet its rapid deployment needs and for combat air support.
The army is already looking at procuring 114 of the indigenously-developed light combat helicopter (LCH), which took to the skies for the first time in March 2010, and 64 of which IAF is buying.
This apart, the army is in the process of acquiring 133 light utility helicopters for $1.9 billion, along with the IAF’s 64 for $960 million, as part of a 197-chopper deal for which Eurocopter’s AS550-C3 Fennec and Russia’s Kamov Ka-226 are in the race. These would replace the 150 Cheetah and Chetak helicopters of 1970s vintage in the army aviation fleet which are extensively used for transportation in high-altitude areas, including the Siachen Glacier.

 

[Markus]

Both IA and IAF operating LCH sounds meaningless on a macro level.

 

[SQ8]

The IA is not looking at choppers for airlift alone.It wants these choppers to be in a tactical attack role along with ground formations. It's like a flying armored squadron.

As per the army’s plans for its aviation wing — mooted in 2007 and to be implemented over a 15-year period ending 2022 — the three strike corps would be beefed up with an aviation brigade comprising two squadrons of 12 attack helicopters each, apart from two squadrons with 15 choppers each for tactical battle reconnaissance and casualty evacuation, top army sources said.
Apart from the 1, 2 and 21 strike Corps, the army will also provide aviation brigades to each of its 10 pivot or defensive corps, but these would essentially be in the nature of tactical lift capabilities, with some offensive elements.
At present, the army relies on two squadrons of Mi-25 and Mi-35 attack helicopters and Mi-17 medium-lift choppers of the IAF for testing its transformational concepts.
Defence ministry officials, when asked about the army’s aviation plans, said the IAF would continue to play a ‘strategic’ role while the army would acquire its air assets for a ‘tactical’ role.
The army, obviously, wants to have ‘full command and control’ over the ‘tactical’ operations of air assets so that it could meet its rapid deployment needs and for combat air support.
The army is already looking at procuring 114 of the indigenously-developed light combat helicopter (LCH), which took to the skies for the first time in March 2010, and 64 of which IAF is buying.
This apart, the army is in the process of acquiring 133 light utility helicopters for $1.9 billion, along with the IAF’s 64 for $960 million, as part of a 197-chopper deal for which Eurocopter’s AS550-C3 Fennec and Russia’s Kamov Ka-226 are in the race. These would replace the 150 Cheetah and Chetak helicopters of 1970s vintage in the army aviation fleet which are extensively used for transportation in high-altitude areas, including the Siachen Glacier.

Still not sure how the IAF intends to use "tactical" craft like the Mi-25 strategically.
Apart from low level radar and C3I strikes ala desert storm..
These craft are best suited for tactical CAS.

Even as a flying armored corps.. you wont have 50+ choppers flying close into a high threat area.. its duck shoot.
The Russian choppers have a speed advantage but that does not give them strategic usefulness.
Vertical envelopment may be a strategic move, but its still the IA's game.

Even with a 150 Dhruv and its derivatives.. the count should still come to 700 choppers at maximum.
with 800 machines between the IA and the IAF.
To me its just a replication of capabilities.. a sort of "He has one so I want one" philosophy.
If I may take a little more liberty.. both the IA and IAF have had the current prosperity India enjoy's go to their heads.
Perhaps it is best that the Bureaucrats take closer looks at their demands??
Back in the 50's to the 70's.. the Americans went gaga with their military spending due to an economic boom.. leading to severe repercussions later.
Whilst us Desi's are generally more sensible with spending.. having cash to spend can lead to getting more than what is required.

A 1000 choppers for a force that is moving more and more into the leaner meaner category.. sounds like overkill for the sake of overkill.
On the other hand.. the IN seems to be showing good restraint when it comes to expenditures and picking out its purchases well.

 

[Vibs]

Still not sure how the IAF intends to use "tactical" craft like the Mi-25 strategically.
Apart from low level radar and C3I strikes ala desert storm..
These craft are best suited for tactical CAS.

Even as a flying armored corps.. you wont have 50+ choppers flying close into a high threat area.. its duck shoot.
The Russian choppers have a speed advantage but that does not give them strategic usefulness.
Vertical envelopment may be a strategic move, but its still the IA's game.

Even with a 150 Dhruv and its derivatives.. the count should still come to 700 choppers at maximum.
with 800 machines between the IA and the IAF.
To me its just a replication of capabilities.. a sort of "He has one so I want one" philosophy.
If I may take a little more liberty.. both the IA and IAF have had the current prosperity India enjoy's go to their heads.
Perhaps it is best that the Bureaucrats take closer looks at their demands??
Back in the 50's to the 70's.. the Americans went gaga with their military spending due to an economic boom.. leading to severe repercussions later.
Whilst us Desi's are generally more sensible with spending.. having cash to spend can lead to getting more than what is required.

A 1000 choppers for a force that is moving more and more into the leaner meaner category.. sounds like overkill for the sake of overkill.
On the other hand.. the IN seems to be showing good restraint when it comes to expenditures and picking out its purchases well.

I believe it has more to do with the cold strike doctrine. As it is the practicality has been questioned due to infrastructure as well as inter-operability of the forces. Having 2 squadrons within the IA will allow it to take decisions and mobilize tactically. So the IA helos seem to be tuned for an offensive role. Infact the IA borrowed IAF helos to test it's strategies during the recently concluded Operation Vijayee Bhava.

IAF could hold the helo's in strategic bases near the front in case of a conventional war to provide support as and when called for. So it's more of a defensive/support role.

 

[SQ8]

I believe it has more to do with the cold strike doctrine. As it is the practicality has been questioned due to infrastructure as well as inter-operability of the forces. Having 2 squadrons within the IA will allow it to take decisions and mobilize tactically. So the IA helos seem to be tuned for an offensive role. Infact the IA borrowed IAF helos to test it's strategies during the recently concluded Operation Vijayee Bhava.

IAF could hold the helo's in strategic bases near the front in case of a conventional war to provide support as and when called for. So it's more of a defensive/support role.

Agreed on the role of the Helo's.. but then why the IAF operating them at all??
Cant these helo's be operated by the IA and based on FARP's?