MoD approves Indian Army's demand for 'mini air force'

[sancho]

I generally wanted to get this straight, in a related thread my supposition did not evoke the kind of interest which I expected..

What I want to know is why it is a good idea for Army to have its very own air wing, I heard from many seniors here that it is a good thing but want to know why.. Guys please help me out, I would prefer people to respond only if they know about this..

In case of the combat helicopters it is pretty simple, these helicopter provide fire support for IA ground troops, or tank battalions, so if IA have them under their own control, they can plan and organise movements or support easier and faster.

 

[Splurgenxs]

I generally wanted to get this straight, in a related thread my supposition did not evoke the kind of interest which I expected..

What I want to know is why it is a good idea for Army to have its very own air wing, I heard from many seniors here that it is a good thing but want to know why.. Guys please help me out, I would prefer people to respond only if they know about this..

Its not a one day decision, apparently it started with increased success of dhruv squadron as an arm of the army for RR operations in J&K and other areas.

Over a few years the Amry has goten themselves some great pilots field hardened and ready to go.
Response times have gone much higher.

the next step is natural tht they would want heavy lift capabilities for stuff like artys and bmps.

In case of the combat helicopters it is pretty simple, these helicopter provide fire support for IA ground troops, or tank battalions, so if IA have them under their own control, they can plan and organise movements or support easier and faster.

thats not actually a good thing , ull double the investment and training on these pilots.

And the ultimate goa l is a network central fastrack inter tri-comand interaction and execution, this can be a short term workaround but is definitely not something we should look towards in the long run.

as far as ferry dutes are concerned ,they are laborious and sometime Air comand doesn't understand the ugency in medical situations,so we can keep it there.

 

[Black Widow]

Looks more like a compromise to me, than a really bold move by MoD. Operationally, they should have given at least 1/3rd of the Mi 17s to IA as well, for troop transportation, but I guess IAF would have made a big problem out of it, if they had lost both, fire support and transportation. But it's not the end for sure, the next battle will be if the Mi 35 will be replaced and if yes by which helicopter and who will get it. IAF so far made the competition for the replacement, but if they don't operate the them anymore, the competition could be cancelled and IA might start new evaluations.
Also, the article doesn't say anything about IAFs future role wrt combat helicopters. Do they still need them, do they have to buy foreign once or stick with Rudra and LCH? So a lot more potential for wars.



The article said that IA will get helicopters only for tactical battle reconnaissance and casualty evacuation. The early role will be done by LUHs, the latter by already available Dhruv helicopters, troop transport, or medium lift roles are not mentioned, which means these fields will remain as part of IAFs roles.

Sorry I read in different perspective. Thanks for providing clarity...

 

[SamantK]

In case of the combat helicopters it is pretty simple, these helicopter provide fire support for IA ground troops, or tank battalions, so if IA have them under their own control, they can plan and organise movements or support easier and faster.

Well AFAIK dint the IAF pilots work under the Army to operate the helis something like a deputation, so how does your argument stand?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Well AFAIK dint the IAF pilots work under the Army to operate the helis something like a deputation, so how does your argument stand?

No, nobody was on deputation to IA. The Army's choppers were/are flown by Army pilots from the Army Aviation Corps. That had started out as branch of Arty, when they had only an AOP role. Now its independent with its own DG of Lt.Gen. rank.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

In case of the combat helicopters it is pretty simple, these helicopter provide fire support for IA ground troops, or tank battalions, so if IA have them under their own control, they can plan and organise movements or support easier and faster.

Plus the tactics to use these assets can be incorporated right from the training stage for max efficiency. An IAF pilots' concepts will necessarily be more oriented to IAF doctrines.
As an example, the Airborne MR and ASW capabilities of the IN leapt up exponentially when IN got control of the required air assets from the IAF. Simply because the Naval Air Crew were actualising what they were trained from Day 1 to achieve. In the expression used in Naval Aviation, they were "feet wet" from first principles.

 

[MUHARIB]

Jaguar would indeed be a good asset to the IA and add a Sqdrn of A-10s to it, DAMN!!

 

[SamantK]

No, nobody was on deputation to IA. The Army's choppers were/are flown by Army pilots from the Army Aviation Corps. That had started out as branch of Arty, when they had only an AOP role. Now its independent with its own DG of Lt.Gen. rank.

But i heard there were some IA assets operated by IAF guys and i always thought they had to be on deputation.

Thanks for the Info, Capt!

 

[sancho]

Well AFAIK dint the IAF pilots work under the Army to operate the helis something like a deputation, so how does your argument stand?

Under armys command, but they have to request IAF to operate them, only smaller utitility helicopters currently really belongs to IA airwing.

 

[SamantK]

Under armys command, but they have to request IAF to operate them, only smaller utitility helicopters currently really belongs to IA airwing.

Ok that does not sound very nice ..

I hope such issues will cease to exist when we have a joint chief..

 

[Capt.Popeye]

But i heard there were some IA assets operated by IAF guys and i always thought they had to be on deputation.

Thanks for the Info, Capt!

Specifically, those were/are the Mi-25/35 Hind gunships which were bought out of the IA budget but operated by IAF. No deputation involved, only consultation.

 

[Damadji]

Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine

 

[INDIAISM]

i'll give jaguar to army if it is in my hand.

I will Give mixture of Jaguar and Tejas Mk2 to Defensive Corp and nothing less the FGFA or Rafale for Strike Corp....

Btw it looks like India will go for 14 more Apache 64D Longbow....A squad each for each strike corp

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine, Cold Start doctrine

What happened now, getting 'hot flushes'?

 

[Abingdonboy]

I don't know if that will be wise in the long run. But this is just the beginning, the thin end of the wedge.
Years ago, IN had a real struggle to set up a capable Fleet Air Arm in the face of IAF opposition. Esp. when it came to gaining control of LRMR and LRASW air assets. So another mile-stone will be passed.

Absolutely, the fact that the IN is o inducting assets like 4.5++ gen fighters and P-8Is and even looking towards their own AARs and AWACS without even a flicker of interest by IAF is beyond amazing! This was a feat not even the RN could pull- Nimrod MPAs right up ant till the end of their service remained well and truly in the hands of the RAF aswell as a sizable proportion of the ACC Harriers which always seemed like a stupid idea to me!

I think this shows how far the IA AAC has to go but I think we are defeintly seeing the start of somthing dramatic and I am very hopeful the AAC will get there.

I generally wanted to get this straight, in a related thread my supposition did not evoke the kind of interest which I expected..

What I want to know is why it is a good idea for Army to have its very own air wing, I heard from many seniors here that it is a good thing but want to know why.. Guys please help me out, I would prefer people to respond only if they know about this..

Well it comes down to inter-operability, now whilst one may work towards a more coordinated envirment wrt all wigs of the miliatary in reality as they are 3 sperate forces with significant differences there is always going to be certain isseus when it comes to working and liasing with each other not to mention planning, training etc


The IA having its own assets means it can better utilise airpower both in war and peacetime as training will be done "in-house". There is also an elemant of rivalry/differcens that can never be ruled out, don't get me wrong these are die-hard proffesionals but rivalries eixist in most militaries between the different arms and services and it can have a effect on operations. The IA feels that having pilots who are armymen and who have served on the ground make for much better pilots in the air when serving their fellow soldiers and are much more army/CAS geared than maybe an IAF pilot.





-----------




It seems to me that the next big question is the Apache, ow there is an argument that they can be used in strategic ops like SEAD so should remain under IAF control they would be much better served in IA hands- owning assets with AAC pilots flying them and AAC mainting/supporting them. Whispers I have heard seem to suggest this is the IA's next goa (along with a medium helo wing ie Mil-17s) and either they get them off the IAF or they go for their own- duplication of services!




+did anyone else notic the fact that each of the IA commands will also get 5 fixed wing platforms? This is pretty big news in itself!