Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[Spitfire IX]

One of the thing that AP Sing told recently is that it is not a matter of budget. The organisation of your own industry dies not allow you to built a large amount of planes. It told exactly that they return money every year because they can't spend it.
He was pretty clear about the inability of HAL to deliver planes on time.
So even If IAF decided to go for 200 Tejas instead of 40 when the initial order was placed in 2005 (20 years ago !) the issue for the Air force should be the same right now.

And if HAL was able to build them, the situation of IAF would have been very different, with no urgent situation and... No need to buy foreign fighters.

So it's just simply doesn't works

I agree. I think that GOI is not sufficiently dumb to fail to have realised that it doesn't work. But GOI seems to prefer retaining a system that does not work rather than

(a) shake HAL up so its performance aligns more closely to the performance of comparable aerospace companies

(b) allow/enable a competitor to HAL. Its performance would likely align more closely to the performance of comparable aerospace companies

(c) ???

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

I prefer we put in cavery in Tejas and make 1000 of them.

I told you what my airforce should do - putter around with what they have and spend 10 billion to buy 300 tejas instead of 10 billion to buy 30 rafales. Quantity is a quality of its own as Russians proved by beating the technologically superior nazis.
i would rather have 10 substandard tejas with caveri than 1 Rafale.

> We'll ALWAYS be outnumbered by China.
> Quantity & quality both are required at their place & time. But if used on front-line then losses on both sides will also be like that. More body bags, ejected/captured pilots. This is a dillema for all nations.
> Do we want to level up with global leaders a.s.a.p. OR remain lagger for eternity?
> If we want our AMCA, UCAVs to succeed, that autmatically puts all 4gen airframes behind.
> Classic delta wing has its limitations in agility. Delta-canard is much better if the avionics is written properly.
> 1 engine is cheaper but also risky w/o redundancy.
> Smaller engine means less payload, ATWR, electricity.
> LCA & all jets like it globally are obsolete "can't spit, can't swallow" kind of thing.
> They can be used for base defence & low risk zones for next few decades, that's all.
> Once we have JV engine, LCA will be history, nobody would talk about it.
> Sweden can turn its Gripen into UCAV any day.



> Hence LCA should be given some geometric treatment, turned into UCAV, optionally manned.

Being most populous country, since 1990s+2000s, we have 10s of 1000s of techies passing out of college every year. it is "now or never" moment to absorb people into setting up supply-chain industry. It is time to correctly utilize Socialist mixed-economy & leave behind obsolete 4gen airframes.

 

[BON PLAN]

can rafale meteor or our other BVR missiles (like astra 1 nd 2) guide by AWACS toward target??? i mean if our AWACS can guide our BVR missiles, they can track nd trace enemy 5 genration aircraft at far more distance than fighter aircraft radars. how many countries hv that capability? any idea.

Between a front Rafale, with radar OFF and a back one with radar ON it is possible. With an AWACS I don't know. I woulf say YES, but no sure of it.

 

[BON PLAN]

During initial MMRCA, almost 100% of the plane should have been built in India. Not only assembly. So I'm surprised to ear that something has been refused from France, like hot part. Do you have a source for that ?

We may imagine that the single crystal blades remained built in France.
But even if we gave the tools to produce the M88 crystal blades, you don't have the full knowledge to study and developp latest gen blades.

 

[BON PLAN]

Nobody has ever shared hot section engine tech with a foreign entity. Not the us, not France. Not russia, nobody.

What about the helo turbine Shakti ?

 

[GaudaNaresh]

> We'll ALWAYS be outnumbered by China.
> Quantity & quality both are required at their place & time. But if used on front-line then losses on both sides will also be like that. More body bags, ejected/captured pilots. This is a dillema for all nations.
> Do we want to level up with global leaders a.s.a.p. OR remain lagger for eternity?
> If we want our AMCA, UCAVs to succeed, that autmatically puts all 4gen airframes behind.
> Classic delta wing has its limitations in agility. Delta-canard is much better if the avionics is written properly.
> 1 engine is cheaper but also risky w/o redundancy.
> Smaller engine means less payload, ATWR, electricity.
> LCA & all jets like it globally are obsolete "can't spit, can't swallow" kind of thing.
> They can be used for base defence & low risk zones for next few decades, that's all.
> Once we have JV engine, LCA will be history, nobody would talk about it.
> Sweden can turn its Gripen into UCAV any day.

View attachment 33358

> Hence LCA should be given some geometric treatment, turned into UCAV, optionally manned.

Being most populous country, since 1990s+2000s, we have 10s of 1000s of techies passing out of college every year. it is "now or never" moment to absorb people into setting up supply-chain industry. It is time to correctly utilize Socialist mixed-economy & leave behind obsolete 4gen airframes.

Delta wing has far higher lift capacity.
Agility is irrelevant in bvr combat.
So your comment is just import lobby nonsense

 

[Kontakt5]

Delta wing has far higher lift capacity.
Agility is irrelevant in bvr combat.
So your comment is just import lobby nonsense

How is agility not relevant when defending in bvr combat. A more agile aircraft can bleed energy off an incoming missile and is more likely to not be hit in the process.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

How is agility not relevant when defending in bvr combat. A more agile aircraft can bleed energy off an incoming missile and is more likely to not be hit in the process.

Because bvr combat literally is you achieve radar lock, you fire missile, you make instant U turn and you bug out.
That is actual bvr combat, not Hollywood Tom cruise shit.
Bvr means beyond visual range. No point in pirouetting like a ballerina when u can't even see wtf is coming at u.
This isn't 1970s simple infrared missile or doppler shift tracker - maneuverability plays near zero role in modern missile evasion.

 

[Spitfire IX]

Releasing funds won't magically solve our design and production problems, but it literally is the first step towards fixing the problems.

I think that is true. Was that why the trainers were late or was there a different reason?

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Delta wing has far higher lift capacity.

> Lift primarily depends on surface area, air density, velocity.



> Wings with same area, the one with wider span generates more lift, means Delta can have more lift than Diamond of same area, but lesser than cropped Delta of same area.



> Different shapes can have same lift. Same area & span but different shape might also have same lift. A trapeze wing & Delta wing with same area & span would have same lift but different drag.

Agility is irrelevant in bvr combat.

Is gun-fight dead?
Does BVR combat give 100% PK (Probability of Kill)?
Why you cherry-picking & left the 2nd half of point comparing to Delta-canard?
Then Rafale after Mirage-2000 should be a mistake, right?
Our MWF with canards after LCA should also be a mistake, right?
These jets should not have CCMs & gun also, right?

So your comment is just import lobby nonsense

I didn't comment to import anyting.
You didn't explain any aeronautical fundamental & call qualified & experienced engineers as non-sense.
If i call you blind supporter of obsolete tech, LCA advertizer, etc does it sound good?
So please think before passing personal comment.
I wonder how "senior" applies to your membership.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

> Lift primarily depends on surface area, air density, velocity.

View attachment 33383

> Wings with same area, the one with wider span generates more lift, means Delta can have more lift than Diamond of same area, but lesser than cropped Delta of same area.

View attachment 33388

> Different shapes can have same lift. Same area & span but different shape might also have same lift. A trapeze wing & Delta wing with same area & span would have same lift but different drag.


Is gun-fight dead?
Does BVR combat give 100% PK (Probability of Kill)?
Why you cherry-picking & left the 2nd half of point comparing to Delta-canard?
Then Rafale after Mirage-2000 should be a mistake, right?
Our MWF with canards after LCA should also be a mistake, right?
These jets should not have CCMs & gun also, right?


I didn't comment to import anyting.
You didn't explain any aeronautical fundamental & call qualified & experienced engineers as non-sense.
If i call you blind supporter of obsolete tech, LCA advertizer, etc does it sound good?
So please think before passing personal comment.
I wonder how "senior" applies to your membership.

If LCA is obsolete, so is the F16. So obsolete tech is good enough.
Gun fighting is dead - we have less than 2% of air combat that has had gun-fighting in last 25 years.
So Delta-wing wins.
It has higher lift capacity, so it carries more missiles - which is far more important than having gun-fighting capability, aka dogflighting.

You should change your name to import-lobby fake-sainik, as i said and you cant refute this simple fact : no import based military has EVER WON a SINGLE WAR against an indegenous military.
So i will take obsolete LCA, thank you very much.

Mr science fail, wings with same area is NOT comparative, since wings with same SPAN have vastly different areas based on wing configuration - radar signature, storage logistics, etc all favour smaller wing span with maximum lift capacity. Which is delta wing- for same fixed wing span, delta wing always generates greater lift, as it has greater area.

regards,
- dude with an MSc in math.

 

[Kontakt5]

Because bvr combat literally is you achieve radar lock, you fire missile, you make instant U turn and you bug out.
That is actual bvr combat, not Hollywood Tom cruise shit.
Bvr means beyond visual range. No point in pirouetting like a ballerina when u can't even see wtf is coming at u.
This isn't 1970s simple infrared missile or doppler shift tracker - maneuverability plays near zero role in modern missile evasion.

Ive heard the audio of the Russian su-34 pilots evading a patriot sam missile, they were pulling many G’s to try and evade the missile, is evading a Sam missile different than a AA missile? And how so.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Ive heard the audio of the Russian su-34 pilots evading a patriot sam missile, they were pulling many G’s to try and evade the missile, is evading a Sam missile different than a AA missile? And how so.

1. Pulling many gs is not benchmark of manueverability. You can get into a flying bathtub that goes mach 2 and makes a 30km radial turn and if you do it at full speed you will be pulling 9gs easy. Pulling Gs is function of angular momentum, not manueverability or turning arc. FYI, you pull the most gs by far if you point your plane straight up between 80 to 90 degree angle and accelerate.

2. Evading SAM vs AA - i have no idea about this, i am not a combat pilot. But i do talk to combat pilots as i have been attending one of the greatest airshows in the world - Abbotsford airshow - for like last 15 years
( this is where i saw the one of a kind An225 miriya and we saw it take off and do a full barrel roll!).

From what i know, less than 2% of arial engagements in the last 25 years globally, have been WVR combat.