Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[Corvus Splendens]

I didn't know that Turkey handed S-400 over to NATO. When did that happen? For the sake of India, I really hope that the version of S-400 sold to Turkey was of a downgraded version, the vanilla type, not the advanced version.

Plenty of chatter in Washington recently to bring Turkey back into the JSF program. Getting their hands on the S-400 system after Turkey bought them was always the plan. War in Ukraine put plans into motion.

In a 22 September report, Greece’s Kathimerini newspaper claimed the US made a detailed proposal to Turkey on the matter over the summer. Under that proposal, Turkey could keep the S-400 systems on its soil but under American control and supervision in the US section of Turkey’s sprawling south-eastern Incirlik Airbase.
In return, Washington would readmit Turkey into the F-35 program and lift sanctions it slapped on Turkey’s defence industry in 2020 under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, CAATSA.

Notably, the purported offer follows a similar proposal allegedly made by Turkey during the same period. According to an August report in Turkey’s Cumhuriyet daily, Ankara suggested it could “put them (the S-400s) in boxes, you (the US) inspect” in return for regaining access to F-35s.

Talks on S-400 seen nearing a compromise | eKathimerini.com

During the summer, the United States submitted a detailed proposal for the resolution of the issue regarding Turkey’s acquisition of the Russian S-400 air-defense system.

www.ekathimerini.com

 

[Spitfire IX]

How close is Turkey in getting its own engine? Turkey is still reliant on western nations for the engine powerplant.

They are running and testing their 6,000lb thrust engine. It is reported that it has been run yielding quite a lot more than 6,000 lb thrust. They are working on a 10,000lb thrust afterburning version. Has it been run yet? I don't know.

I have no idea how far they have got in designing and building their 35,000lb thrust engine. I believe that it is aimed to have it tested in a KAAN testbed in 2028/2029.

 

[Azaad]

They are running and testing their 6,000lb thrust engine. It is reported that it has been run yielding quite a lot more than 6,000 lb thrust. They are working on a 10,000lb thrust afterburning version. Has it been run yet? I don't know.

I have no idea how far they have got in designing and building their 35,000lb thrust engine. I believe that it is aimed to have it tested in a KAAN testbed in 2028/2029.

Good luck to them . China's spent decades & billions of USD & has successfully managed to replicate Russia's TFs with suitable improvements.

India's still struggling to develop a suitable TF to power the Tejas after 4 decades.

Let's see what Johny come lately Turkey manages in a decade & a few billion USD.

 

[Azaad]

View: https://youtu.be/4ddfOnTP3dw?si=PpHRUkKq5P57Dh8K

If you think the IAF is in a bad shape , listen to Clutterji's analysis . It's worse than what was previously thought. Plus the IA after demanding huge CAPEX isn't able to spend all of it . It regularly surrenders almost a third of the amount allocated.

And we're most likely to go head on against the Chinese in around 5 years.

 

[mist_consecutive]

View: https://x.com/mujifren/status/1870672894231298361

 

[Bleh]

Although total number of crashes are down, % caused by human error has increased.

More than 50% of 34 IAF plane crashes in 2017-2022 due to human error, says parliamentary report

Former CDS General Bipin Rawat died in a helicopter crash in December 2021. The IAF’s initial probe had said ‘spatial disorientation’ of pilot was cause behind fatal accident.

theprint.in

 

[mist_consecutive]

Although total number of crashes are down, % caused by human error has increased.

More than 50% of 34 IAF plane crashes in 2017-2022 due to human error, says parliamentary report

Former CDS General Bipin Rawat died in a helicopter crash in December 2021. The IAF’s initial probe had said ‘spatial disorientation’ of pilot was cause behind fatal accident.

theprint.in

Another way of looking at it is, crashes due to technical failure and other issues decreased, which might signal a stronger adherence to SoP and maintenance standards.

Human error % has not decreased either due to standards of training not improving, or that percentage of human error is expected.

 

[AbRaj]

Good luck to them . China's spent decades & billions of USD & has successfully managed to replicate Russia's TFs with suitable improvements.

India's still struggling to develop a suitable TF to power the Tejas after 4 decades.

Let's see what Johny come lately Turkey manages in a decade & a few billion USD.

Indian timeline can’t be compared with rest of the world. India love to struggle at virtually everything defence related.Here MMRCA ludo is going on since two decades like all other tenders.
Earlier we used to make fun of Chinese rapid development as hoax/copy-paste job.
Don’t know much about Turkey’s jet engine development efforts but they do have solid credentials when it comes to development of defence projects.

 

[Bleh]

Another way of looking at it is, crashes due to technical failure and other issues decreased, which might signal a stronger adherence to SoP and maintenance standards.

Human error % has not decreased either due to standards of training not improving, or that percentage of human error is expected.

Agreed... If other issues decrease then human-error will stay static unless there's drastic change in training. Plus total number of 34 isncluded 9 Mig-21s (old not much of a loss either) & more flying hours/jet due to lower squadron numbers.

The following don't include 97 added Tejas & Su-57 if any. Going beyond mere numerical stats, we'll be fine by 2030 with new more reliable jets & will hiy 40 by '35.



PS: I think we could hit a higher squadron number if only we'd finally considered a replacement for the class filled by Canberra & Mig-25... A pure medium bomber, not mere strike & ground attack. A 50T MTOW platform with 10T payload would be an absolute unit of game changer.

 

[Flanker]

Agreed... If other issues decrease then human-error will stay static unless there's drastic change in training. Plus total number of 34 isncluded 9 Mig-21s (old not much of a loss either) & more flying hours/jet due to lower squadron numbers.

The following don't include 97 added Tejas & Su-57 if any. Going beyond mere numerical stats, we'll be fine by 2030 with new more reliable jets & will hiy 40 by '35.
View attachment 19213View attachment 19214


PS: I think we could hit a higher squadron number if only we'd finally considered a replacement for the class filled by Canberra & Mig-25... A pure medium bomber, not mere strike & ground attack. A 50T MTOW platform with 10T payload would be an absolute unit of game changer.

instead of pure bombers we should modify cargo as CM carriers would be much cheaper to build and operate .We can reuse hs748 and infuture the MTA

 

[Bleh]

instead of pure bombers we should modify cargo as CM carriers would be much cheaper to build and operate .We can reuse hs748 and infuture the MTA

Back in '65 or '71 when SAMs were not as much in presence that was a viable idea. I doubt that'll work anymore in modern times.
Nowadays bombers need to be stealthy and/or high-alt-high-speed. Plus "pure bombers" can spam BVRs from up high in today's integrated battlegrounds. They're not without some A2A offenceve capabilities.

Some squadrons will surely be drones.

220 Tejas alone would be 11-13 squadrons, replacing 3 Mig-21 squadrons. 120-ish MWF for 6 squadrons to replace 6 Jag squadrons.

 

[vin pahadi (kumauni)]

some points:-
(1) :- Algeria made deal of 14 su57 in 2 billion dollars nd get it till 2028.....we hv no option than su 57 in 5 genration. although su75 single engine is better, but it will take 2030 for production ready.

(2) :- we were planning to bought 114 rafale in MRFA deal in 16 billion dollars. but i think it will cost ur near 20-26 billion dollars. so its better to buy a semi 5 genration fighter, instead of 4.5 genration rafale. rafale is near su 35 capabilities (may be better than su 35)...but coz su 57 is far more capable nd advance than su 35, we should not see it a lesser platform. yeah su 57 engine AL51 isnt ready yet, but even its AL 41 engine didnt compromise in its capability, except supercruise.

(3) :- if we go for a videshi fighter in MRFA, its better to buy su 57 in 16 billion dollar. that money can buy near 8×14= 112 su 57 fighters. yeah it increase our aircrat variations number nd maintenance cost. but we r still using 7 type of aircrafts. soon mig 21 will be retired nd we will using 7 different types of fighter including su57. which many types we r using from many years.
With su 57, we can upgrade some su 30 systems nd weapons also, if we cant developed it in our AMCA program (i mean 5 genration stuffs).

(5) :- russian future engine plans is looking more promising than france engine programs.

(6) :- all experienced countries face some kind of problems in their 5 genration foghters. like as:-
1:- f22 raptor - high cost, high maintenance nd low aviability, lack of ground strike capabilities, lack of infrared sensor or EOTS etc.
2:- f 35 - low aviability, many problems in software etc.
3:- su 57 - low thurst engine, no supercruise, no EOTS, less stealthy, slow production etc.
4:- j20 - low thurst engine, no supercruise, less stealthy etc.
so how we r expecting our less experience ADA, drdo etc will provide us perfect or problem less 5 genration AMCA? so its better to go with old plan of buying two 5 genration type fighters. one videshi nd one desi. fortunately su 57 is a heavy weight fighter nd AMCA will be middle weight fighter category. so they will good for us. in rafale case we r buying a 4.5 genration middle weight fighter, just like AMCA middle weight fighter. yeah single engine su75 is far better for us, but its production ready timing is not good.

(4) :- yeah america will do crying nd ungli also...but ask them to offer their F35 in israel price. they will not give that due to our s400 for obvious reasons. so funk u america

 

[DumbPilot]

some points:-
(1) :- Algeria made deal of 14 su57 in 2 billion dollars nd get it till 2028.....we hv no option than su 57 in 5 genration. although su75 single engine is better, but it will take 2030 for production ready.

(2) :- we were planning to bought 114 rafale in MRFA deal in 16 billion dollars. but i think it will cost ur near 20-26 billion dollars. so its better to buy a semi 5 genration fighter, instead of 4.5 genration rafale. rafale is near su 35 capabilities (may be better than su 35)...but coz su 57 is far more capable nd advance than su 35, we should not see it a lesser platform. yeah su 57 engine AL51 isnt ready yet, but even its AL 41 engine didnt compromise in its capability, except supercruise.

(3) :- if we go for a videshi fighter in MRFA, its better to buy su 57 in 16 billion dollar. that money can buy near 8×14= 112 su 57 fighters. yeah it increase our aircrat variations number nd maintenance cost. but we r still using 7 type of aircrafts. soon mig 21 will be retired nd we will using 7 different types of fighter including su57. which many types we r using from many years.
With su 57, we can upgrade some su 30 systems nd weapons also, if we cant developed it in our AMCA program (i mean 5 genration stuffs).

(5) :- russian future engine plans is looking more promising than france engine programs.

(6) :- all experienced countries face some kind of problems in their 5 genration foghters. like as:-
1:- f22 raptor - high cost, high maintenance nd low aviability, lack of ground strike capabilities, lack of infrared sensor or EOTS etc.
2:- f 35 - low aviability, many problems in software etc.
3:- su 57 - low thurst engine, no supercruise, no EOTS, less stealthy, slow production etc.
4:- j20 - low thurst engine, no supercruise, less stealthy etc.
so how we r expecting our less experience ADA, drdo etc will provide us perfect or problem less 5 genration AMCA? so its better to go with old plan of buying two 5 genration type fighters. one videshi nd one desi. fortunately su 57 is a heavy weight fighter nd AMCA will be middle weight fighter category. so they will good for us. in rafale case we r buying a 4.5 genration middle weight fighter, just like AMCA middle weight fighter. yeah single engine su75 is far better for us, but its production ready timing is not good.

(4) :- yeah america will do crying nd ungli also...but ask them to offer their F35 in israel price. they will not give that due to our s400 for obvious reasons. so funk u america

We were in the Su-57 deal for atleast a decade, am sure we pulled out of it in the first place due to good reasons.

 

[GodEmperorDoom]

Back in '65 or '71 when SAMs were not as much in presence that was a viable idea. I doubt that'll work anymore in modern times.
Nowadays bombers need to be stealthy and/or high-alt-high-speed. Plus "pure bombers" can spam BVRs from up high in today's integrated battlegrounds. They're not without some A2A offenceve capabilities.

Some squadrons will surely be drones.

220 Tejas alone would be 11-13 squadrons, replacing 3 Mig-21 squadrons. 120-ish MWF for 6 squadrons to replace 6 Jag squadrons.

The goal is to deliver X mass to Y range with cheaper cost. A LRASM has a range of 500-km and the thing about Rapid Dragon is that you don't require extra infrastructure and can store stockpiles deep in Central India and deliver it from a standoff distance.

Also regarding bomber, it's a pure delusion as of now to even think about it and from a logical perspective it is not even worth it. China itself with it's technological superiority is struggling and you are asking DRDO geniuses to do impossible. Regarding Stealth Bomber, it takes atleast 5Billion and in this scenario, you either go in full splurge mode or none. There is no such thing as cost effective bomber. But there is cost effective bombing "mechanism".

India if it were to invest in a bomber, it should either be able to take off from South India and reach Beijing and return back with substantial payload capacity. There is no point in attempting a reduced payload and reduced range akin to B-21 and rather B-2 is the one we need if were to procure one.

 

[Bleh]

There is no such thing as cost effective bomber. But there is cost effective bombing "mechanism".

Not necessarily... Mig-31 is just larger & faster to carry more stuff quicker & further. A 5th gen fighter will still be costlier. No MAWS, no IRST, etc.
Plus Canberra or Vulcun bombers want supposed to be bombing Beijing, ballistic missiles do that. Medium bombers are meant for factorys & ports. Large no of cheaper bombs for large targets.

It doesn't necessarily have to be costlier.

PS: I once saw a canarded platform on DFI that could be a AHCA ir Desi-bomber concept. I'll try to find it.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Back in '65 or '71 when SAMs were not as much in presence that was a viable idea. I doubt that'll work anymore in modern times. Nowadays bombers need to be stealthy and/or high-alt-high-speed.

Not even this high altitude/speed thing works now. The higher you'll fly, the earlier you'd get detected. And as for speed, this speed-as-an-evasion thing was good when only threat were interceptor and SAMs were still in there infancy...no matter how fast you're bomber is, you aren't escaping a telephone pole sized 40N6 chasing you at Mach 4.

The current doctrine of whatever is left to be called as a bomber is to emphasize solely on stealth at the expense of payload. Look at how they almost halved it on B21 as compared to B2. Secondly, it's no more light-medium-heavy bomber thing as payload is insignificant in what's a stealth bomber is supposed to do...make an opening for the follow on strike package.

So just one Ghatak or B21 but extremely stealthy that would be first to go in to take out high value targets.

@Flanker and @GodEmperorDoom what you guys are saying is infact the only logical solution for delivery of high volume attack without having bombers in the future. Sooner or later everyone who has some degree of foresight would have just one single cargo plane platform that can be modified into aerial refueler and cruise missile truck based on mission profile. What's the point of having say a C-17 for transport, an Il-76 for refueling and a B-52 for bombing when you can have a one better platform that can do all three?

we hv no option than su 57 in 5 genration

We've already saved us from this once, no point in going for it again.
In my opinion it's better to buy a jet knowing all its limited capabilities (like Tejas Mk-1A) than to buy one and realise we've been conned (say all the names that rhyme with Shristi, you'd get it)

What I find quite peculiar about everything you mentioned from Su-57 as MRFA to "may be better than Su-35"...was the absolute silence on something like ORCA! Why can't we just scrap this MMRCA nonsense and instead fast-track the development of ORCA!?

so how we r expecting our less experience ADA, drdo etc will provide us perfect or problem less 5 genration AMCA?

There won't be much problem in AMCA
Because we're Indians and from infancy we're taught to work on SMART goals.
They're Americans and Chinese, their ideology revolves around BHAG principles that's why they face more problems during development.

 

[Spitfire IX]

IAF needs new fighters yesterday.

I see 2 problems with Su-75. First, the probability of development going ahead is low. It has generated little interest in the market, Sukhoi revised it to try to generate more interest but it does not appear to have worked. Signs of future sales will be required before Sukhoi will embark on a full development programme. Second, if it does get the go ahead, when would that be and when would it be delivered to IAF?

I think that Su-75 is a non-starter .It would arrive too late to meet IAF's urgent need for more fighters. Even if Su-57 is not too impressive, it is a lot better than nothing new except Mk1A being delivered until the early 2030's.

 

[vin pahadi (kumauni)]

Not even this high altitude/speed thing works now. The higher you'll fly, the earlier you'd get detected. And as for speed, this speed-as-an-evasion thing was good when only threat were interceptor and SAMs were still in there infancy...no matter how fast you're bomber is, you aren't escaping a telephone pole sized 40N6 chasing you at Mach 4.

The current doctrine of whatever is left to be called as a bomber is to emphasize solely on stealth at the expense of payload. Look at how they almost halved it on B21 as compared to B2. Secondly, it's no more light-medium-heavy bomber thing as payload is insignificant in what's a stealth bomber is supposed to do...make an opening for the follow on strike package.

So just one Ghatak or B21 but extremely stealthy that would be first to go in to take out high value targets.

@Flanker and @GodEmperorDoom what you guys are saying is infact the only logical solution for delivery of high volume attack without having bombers in the future. Sooner or later everyone who has some degree of foresight would have just one single cargo plane platform that can be modified into aerial refueler and cruise missile truck based on mission profile. What's the point of having say a C-17 for transport, an Il-76 for refueling and a B-52 for bombing when you can have a one better platform that can do all three?


We've already saved us from this once, no point in going for it again.
In my opinion it's better to buy a jet knowing all its limited capabilities (like Tejas Mk-1A) than to buy one and realise we've been conned (say all the names that rhyme with Shristi, you'd get it)

What I find quite peculiar about everything you mentioned from Su-57 as MRFA to "may be better than Su-35"...was the absolute silence on something like ORCA! Why can't we just scrap this MMRCA nonsense and instead fast-track the development of ORCA!?

There won't be much problem in AMCA
Because we're Indians and from infancy we're taught to work on SMART goals.
They're Americans and Chinese, their ideology revolves around BHAG principles that's why they face more problems during development.

we get out from su 57 joint venture for different reasons.
1:- first thing russia comminted more than 100+ su 57 to buy, later they decided to buy lesser amount. that mean india was paying more in joint development.
2:- india wants f22 raptor nd f35 level of stealth in su 57...but now situation is different, coz china nd pakistan hv/will hv less stealthy 5 genration fighters. so we need a fighter which can counter these fighters, not fighter which can fight with american fighters.
3:- in joint development russia was not ready to give TOT to india nd give india to more share in aircraft manufacturing. that mean russia want a partner, which can help them in money, not in technology.
4:- its main engine AL 51 wasnt ready, now they r close.
here i m not suggesting to joint venture or co produce su 57, that will increase its price nd time also.
now coz our two adversery will soon hv 5 genration, we dont want to counter them with tejas mark 1, 1A or even tejas mark 2. do u prefer tejas mark 2 to counter a 5 genration??? tejas is a good point defense nd CAP missions fighter. it can counter a 4.5 genration fighters. if u read specs nd technology of 5 genration fighters, u dont want to counter them with even good 4.5 genration fighters.
tejas mark 1, 1a nd tejas mark 2 needed to maintain current feet of mig 21, jaguar, mig 29 nd mirage 2000. they r not for counter 5 genration fighters, but to deal with enemy 4 nd 4.5 genration fighters. AMCA will be only ready for production near 2035...we cant afford to live 15 year with out any 5 genration fighters.
look people trash talk about russian fighters due to western media propaganda. may be they r not as good as american ones, but definitely equal or better than european nd chinese fighters. when chinese bought 24 su 35, although they hv many flankers, j 20 nd its rip offs...that tells about su 35 capabilities. yeah u can say china bought that coz they want to copy russian AL 41 engines, but they do that by upgrading their su 27, su 30 nd other chinese flankers engine upgrade with AL41. even that is good enough reason to believe about su 35 capabilities. now if u thinking su57 will be even lesser capable than su 35, than i cant do anything. coz most of systems, structure, avonics etc r upgraded in su 57.
do i hv to tell u about tejas mark 1 nd 1a...how they r lacking in different areas in 4.5 genration fighters. so u r saying all other nation face problems in 5 genration fighters, but our "highly talented" people will deliver a non problematic nd full capability 5 genration AMCA. dont make me laugh bro...
by the way that time defense minister susmita swaraj said..we r getting out of su 57 joint production program. but we can join in future, if russia solve its issue.

 

[jaijaganath]

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1870845465304146101

 

[Ayan Barat]

we get out from su 57 joint venture for different reasons.

Did I ever mention the reason because of which we got out of it?
Against what are you presenting these "different" reasons then?

coz china...will hv less stealthy 5 genration fighters.

How can we so confidently assure ourselves that Chinese 5 gen fighters would be less stealthy? Do we have any paper to gauge the RCS of J-35?

we dont want to counter them with tejas mark 1, 1A or even tejas mark 2. do u prefer tejas mark 2 to counter a 5 genration??? tejas is a good point defense nd CAP missions fighter. it can counter a 4.5 genration fighters. if u read specs nd technology of 5 genration fighters, u dont want to counter them with even good 4.5 genration fighters.
tejas mark 1, 1a nd tejas mark 2 needed to maintain current feet of mig 21, jaguar, mig 29 nd mirage 2000. they r not for counter 5 genration fighters, but to deal with enemy 4 nd 4.5 genration fighters. AMCA will be only ready for production near 2035...we cant afford to live 15 year with out any 5 genration fighters.

I simply said induct ORCA instead of going for a MRFA tender.
By mentioning Jags, Bahadur and 2000s you're simply reinforcing my point of getting a good 4th gen fighter (ORCA in this case) for all non-stealthy role and one 5th gen fighter (AMCA) for stealth role. Instead have three different 4th gen fighter, one partial 5th gen fighter (Su-57) and AMCA.

Having Su-57 at this point would be like wearing a 1974 helmet, it'll give the wearer a false sense of safety...or in this case, true 5th gen features.

look people trash talk about russian fighters due to western media propaganda.

Did I?

when chinese bought 24 su 35, although they hv many flankers, j 20 nd its rip offs...that tells about su 35 capabilities. teah u can say china bought that coz they want to copy russian AL 41 engines, but they do that by upgrading their su 27, su 30 nd other chinese flankers engine upgrade with AL41.

Why exactly would be bring in Su-35? It's just even more absurd than Su-57.
What particularly in Su-35 is so advanced that can't be done by our one Su-30MkI by using upgrades?

now if u thinking su57 will be even lesser capable than su 35, than i cant do anything. coz most of systems, structure, avonics etc r upgraded in su 57.

But do I? Have I mentioned it?

do i hv tell u about tejas mark 1 nd 1a...how they r lacking in different areas in 4.5 genration fighters

There must have been some reason why I mentioned ORCA. Any my exact words were "limited capabilities (like Tejas Mk-1A)" so yeah, you're again countering me by just reinforcing my statement.

so u r saying all other nation face problems in 5 genration fighters, but our "highly talented" people will deliver a non problematic nd full capability 5

Not exactly this but ya, somthing in line.

A more refined version would have been...so you're saying that DRDO/HAL's 5th gen project would have lesser bugs that would need ironing out compared to F-22 or F-35 because these are old, government run, tightly scrutinized, extremely extremely risk aversive agencies as opposed to US MIC which works on unorthodox and groundbreaking technologies like B2

And to which my reply would have been...YEAH!