Why the IAF keeps its twins in the limelight??

[John Doe]

@ WINDJAMMMER:

We can safely say that this thread will end very prematurely since WJ will not be showing up anymore ( Now that I have replied!).

On topic, this is incredibly poor logic displayed here.

Dual engined aircraft are inherently safer than single engined aircraft. Any one who can identify a plane in a line-up of household appliances should know that.

WJ, have you ever seen single engined passenger jets flying for any airline? Naval carrier operations also usually have twin engined jets, don't they?

And why bring PAF's A-5 in this? It is an old jet, why else will they be phasing it out? And to say that PAF sends its F-16, F-7 Mirage, etc. to air shows; well, what else will they send? Do they have any choice?
The IAF does have a choice. It's participation is actually meaningful. What can I say about sending a F-7 for a photo-op with a F-22? So I think I won't!!!!

Here , improve your knowledge of aircraft. You'll like this article, it has nice and colorful pictures:

Number of F-16 crashes rises - U.S. news - Military - msnbc.com

 

[SQ8]

I request the Admin/Mod to plz issue Infraction for the thread starter as he have posted a well intentional flame, stupid thread and called Indian members fan boys.

And quite a few of you dont behave as that?? hmm??

 

[Veeru]

And quite a few of you dont behave as that?? hmm??

1. It doesn't matter how one behave, if a member is behaving like a fool according to rules we can't call him/her fool or troll so even if someone is behaving like fanboy no one can call them so. Also admin/mods are there to take care of that our duty is just to report it to them.

2. Today a Indian member was issued because he have posted a article from pakistan's own newspaper.

Infraction for Manas: Trolling

Rahat arrested after failing to come up to RAW’s expectations

http://www.defence.pk/forums/hall-shame/95345-infraction-manas-trolling.html

If above thread comes under trolling then what you will call this thread????????

Why don't you plz ban "Windjammer".

thanks

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Going by your logic,
What do you make of this then.

This is just a fly-by of three aircraft.
Or do you call it DACT?

 

[SQ8]

@ WINDJAMMMER:

We can safely say that this thread will end very prematurely since WJ will not be showing up anymore ( Now that I have replied!).

On topic, this is incredibly poor logic displayed here.

Dual engined aircraft are inherently safer than single engined aircraft. Any one who can identify a plane in a line-up of household appliances should know that.

WJ, have you ever seen single engined passenger jets flying for any airline? Naval carrier operations also usually have twin engined jets, don't they?

And why bring PAF's A-5 in this? It is an old jet, why else will they be phasing it out? And to say that PAF sends its F-16, F-7 Mirage, etc. to air shows; well, what else will they send? Do they have any choice?
The IAF does have a choice. It's participation is actually meaningful. What can I say about sending a F-7 for a photo-op with a F-22? So I think I won't!!!!

Here , improve your knowledge of aircraft. You'll like this article, it has nice and colorful pictures:

Number of F-16 crashes rises - U.S. news - Military - msnbc.com

They may be more redundant.. if that is what you mean to say..
Twin engine safety is preferred over the sea.. yet the F-35 is single engined.. the F-8, the Fj fury.. the F9F.. the super etendard.. etc
Twin engines are safer in the case that if one flames out.. you still have one to keep going..
In combat too.. they offer an advantage.. if one of your engines gets taken out.. you still have one that might help you get home..
although on fighters such as the F-6 and jaguar ..with engines spaced closely together.. that may not be such a help.. since its quite likely both engines took the damage. or if one decided to go up in flames..the other wont stay cool for long.

Now.. come to other factors.. twin engines.. more fuel for each engine.. the jet's fuel fraction decreases..
more maintenance.... your turn around time is effected in wartime.
Two pieces to pack.. your jet grows in size.. so does its RCS..and its visibility to the nakes eye.. the F-16 is a lot harder to spot from 7km than the Mig-29.
They burn a LOT more gas.... means for that very gas.. you could get two single engined fighters up..and a lot farther... which is great for peace time flying.. we arent always at war.

If I were buying a fleet of jets for combat, I would want capability for my money. The long term benefits are better. The extra motor, which is of duboius benefit with respect to survivability,will cost money that could be used for a few extra airframes. If we loose a few that might have made it on one motor, we are still ahead. And when we consider logistics, the single-engine comes out ahead.

Now.. coming to overseas exercises.. lets call it simple.. the PAF has generally been more media savvy..
whether it was hiring a brit to do the story on us.. or getting in with the yanks..
The Indian's alignment with the USSR did not help either.. they really did not know media that well.
The IAF has in the past participated in exercises with the EAF..and the RN.. amongst others.. but due to the alignment of most of these participating nations with the eastern bloc.. the flair never got out.. but that does not mean the lessons did not.

Also.. participating in airshows.. etc.. is part of your image..its just PR for the PAF..
we are active participants in the anatolian eagle.. ATLC.. small less announced participations with arab nations and the chinese..
and have quite a few exchange pilots abroad.. some in nations where others dont go.
So our participation is pretty meaningful as well.. thank you very much.
Old aircraft.. does not mean bad pilots. .. and those underestimating the F-7PG.. are really digging their grave.. there is a LOT more to it than meets the eye.. period... F-22,Rafale and EF pilots testify to that.. (im going to see who posts the "i wanna link" post here ).

as far as the increase in crashes go... do intensive flying hours on increasingly aged airframes mean anything to people.. somehow this is bought up when the Mig-21 bison was concerned.. but conveniently forgotten here by some to score points.

 

[SQ8]

1. It doesn't matter how one behave, if a member is behaving like a fool according to rules we can't call him/her fool or troll so even if someone is behaving like fanboy no one can call them so. Also admin/mods are there to take care of that our duty is just to report it to them.

2. Today a Indian member was issued because he have posted a article from pakistan's own newspaper.

Infraction for Manas: Trolling

Rahat arrested after failing to come up to RAW’s expectations

http://www.defence.pk/forums/hall-shame/95345-infraction-manas-trolling.html

If above thread comes under trolling then what you will call this thread????????

Why don't you plz ban "Windjammer".

thanks

Your point being..??
When an Indian member can start a thread wanting to show the IAF fares better in safety than the PAF in the PAF section.. a Pakistani member doing it here is not kosher???

 

[John Doe]

Santro , I agree with everything you say here. Literally everything. But you are not seeing my reply in relation to the thread.

My reply was to the claim by WJ that IAF is scared to fly the single engined aircraft, while PAF is not. Other members have given a lot of additional proof to show how incorrect this claim is.

 

[SQ8]

Santro , I agree with everything you say here. Literally everything. But you are not seeing my reply in relation to the thread.

My reply was to the claim by WJ that IAF is scared to fly the single engined aircraft, while PAF is not. Other members have given a lot of additional proof to show how incorrect this claim is.

I would not use the word scared..
the Hunter.. the vampire.. the Mig-21.. the Hawk..and the LCA.. perhaps the AMCA even etc
I suppose the question Wj would be alluding to..and probably I would after the "flying hours" post in the PAF section was. ..that why does the IAF not bring its single engine jets to view..
well.. I can offer some logic there..
the 90's was a bad decade for the IAF..and the Indian MoD in general..crashes, lots of scandals... etc..
Kargil.. was a face saver..since it allowed the forces to regain the faith of the masses.
since then.. the public's money is being funneled into the forces.. and to show that something is being achieved.. the newest of everything is shown.

Currently.. the IAF operates 7 types of frontline jets..along with trainers and choppers
and flypasts arent all held in Dehli.. as I remember..
So.. to meet the time restrictions for a parade.. you show the Su-30 and jaguar in Dehli for eg.. but leave the Bahadur..and baaz out...which you show in ..say srinagar which doesnt come on the news.. so.. every city gets to see a nice show..and the govt saves money on the celebrations..

The PAF contrastingly.. flying 5 types.. (the mirage types are counted as one).. and the flypast is only held at Islamabad.
So everything gets shown.

 

[majesticpankaj]

Your point being..??
When an Indian member can start a thread wanting to show the IAF fares better in safety than the PAF in the PAF section.. a Pakistani member doing it here is not kosher???

let me elaborate the point to u.. the point is what kind of heading is this.. if u want to have good discussion why are u bullying the person in first place.. lets have a sincere discussion..

 

[John Doe]

@Santro,

Exactly! The Republic Day parade is all about showing the newest and shiniest toys. Plus it is also true that safety is optimised with twin engined jets over so many people and VVIPS.

 

[SQ8]

let me elaborate the point to u.. the point is what kind of heading is this.. if u want to have good discussion why are u bullying the person in first place.. lets have a sincere discussion..

Kahiye Maharaj.. aur kuch??

 

[desiman]

its a operational choice, fighters are used as per what is thought to be required, single engine jets have been used by the IAF whenever needed, nothing sinister about it, i can also ask the same question, why is the PAF so scared to use twin engine aircrafts ? such questions will only yield troll fest rather than logical answers.

 

[majesticpankaj]

Kahiye Maharaj.. aur kuch??

yaa.. thanks

 

[ganimi kawa]

I'm getting a bit confused here! What is the bone of contention?

a. IAF is not using it's single engined jets in the exercises in recent past?

OR

b. Why is IAF opting for more and more twinners?


If, a is the question,


Then the answer is with following points,

1. Apart from Mirage 2k all other single engined jets in the current IAF service are going to be retired in this decade ( a few bis excepted).

2. None of these is supposed to have any upgrade or design modification.

3. LCA will start induction from mid 2011 and from the face of it, this is going to be the only new single engined type in the IAF for quite a long while.

4. Mirage 2k have participated in the International exercises as recent as The Indra Dhanush 2010 with the british forces........And MiG 23 did too.

5. All single engined jets of the IAF do carry out a lot of DACT eith the Singaporean F16s.

Add up 1 to 5 and voila!!


P.S. a few pics from ID 2010. First a m2k and other a MiG 23............

 

[Windjammer]

@ WINDJAMMMER:

We can safely say that this thread will end very prematurely since WJ will not be showing up anymore ( Now that I have replied!).

Do the topics, "Last Air Battle" and "PAF Pioneers CFT" ring any bells ???, well since you really love your self, those threads are very much there for all to view and decide as to who fell flat on his face. !!!

On topic, this is incredibly poor logic displayed here.

Dual engined aircraft are inherently safer than single engined aircraft. Any one who can identify a plane in a line-up of household appliances should know that.

Did you have to resort to your Cubist-Revisionist painting to conclude this. ? as you your self have said,
Dual engined aircraft are inherently safer than single engined aircraft, hence the psyche of my topic that the IAF doesn't have the confidence in the single engine alas relies on the twin engine machines, let me make it easy for you, seven days is equal to one week.

WJ, have you ever seen single engined passenger jets flying for any airline? Naval carrier operations also usually have twin engined jets, don't they?

And let me remind you that the likes of MIG-21 and Mirage (Single engine) were the most widely used aircraft in their hey day and even today the F-16 is the most successful jet fighter in the world.

And why bring PAF's A-5 in this? It is an old jet, why else will they be phasing it out? And to say that PAF sends its F-16, F-7 Mirage, etc. to air shows; well, what else will they send? Do they have any choice?

Even so, the A-5 could have been replaced by another twin engine machine, but it all kicks back to confidence, and the PAF indeed had the choice of just sending the F-16s, it's most reliable aircraft, however the fact remains that it's the IAF which only resorts to the SU-30s.!!!

The IAF does have a choice. It's participation is actually meaningful. What can I say about sending a F-7 for a photo-op with a F-22? So I think I won't!!!!

Well, for whatever reason it doesn't seem to exercise that choice now does it. ?? And since you knowledge only extends to the fact that the PAF aircraft flew all the way to Middle East for a photo session, then I am indeed addressing the Bollywood fan that you often expose.

Here , improve your knowledge of aircraft. You'll like this article, it has nice and colorful pictures:

Number of F-16 crashes rises - U.S. news - Military - msnbc.com

Leaves little to imagination as to who needs enlightening in a little military aviation..... those idiots at Lockheed Martin, SAAB, Dassault and CATIC keep churning out single engine jet fighters little realizing that all passenger airliner have two or more engines. Bravo John Doe.