Trainer Aircraft of IAF - PC-7, HTT-40, HJT-36, BAE Hawk

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
On this contention, you are merely parroting the IAF's contention over denial of air capability to IA

Just look at the Kargil experience and try to understand the difference to fighting IS and Taliban in Syria or Afghanistan.

Really? Such as?

1508721455368_19577313-1571365429593568-4867690633363332381-o_orig.jpg
 

Falcon

The Falcon
Professional
Nov 30, 2017
1,805
5,598
Just look at the Kargil experience and try to understand the difference to fighting IS and Taliban in Syria or Afghanistan.

Okay, what about the differences? As far as I can correlate, the non-induction of PAF into the conflict in Kargil and conflict limited to use of Infantry Support Weapons, Personal Weapons and artillery ranging from 105 mm to 155 mm tops is similar to the profile of ISIS and Talibans in Syria and Afghanistan. MANPADS, ATGMs, MBRLs with similar caliber and equally dispersed forces, has more similarities than differences.

What was different in Kargil for Indian operations? Success of airforce strikes is debatable as post-strike BDA has revealed. Most effective strikes were by artillery guns both IFG and 155 mm FH 77B, firing in direct role followed by the 84 mm Carl Gustav (a lesson learned by US who inducted the CG for their forces in Afghanistan).


Now coming to your contention as under:

India is not fighting Taliban or IS, but 2 capable military forces, CAS with slow trainers therefor is a no go.

What, in your opinion, is the probability of the IAF freeing up Mig-27s and Jaguars for support of the IA's offensive thrusts, upon which the whole of Cold Start is based, without undertaking it's own task of achieving air superiority which entails effective SEAD strikes being undertaken by these very aircraft?

Slow trainers? Then why induct the Apache? Or even LCH for 'air-cavalry' type operations?




How does a Rudra, an aircraft conceptualized in mid 2000s, denote a 'credible EW upgrade' as derived from your post as under? Not understood.

Do you mean to say that same upgrades were provided to Mi-17 1V, which was the platform flown in the Kargil War, during the war?

Even our helicopter fleet got credible EW upgrades, to reduce the losses from Kargil war and that was limited to manpads only.
 

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
Okay, what about the differences?...

You are mixing up a lot of things here! First of all, we lost a lot of aircrafts in Kargil, because the enemies had sufficient supply of manpads, that caused IAF later to put a focus on improved countermeasures and EW for their fighter and helicopter fleet. As shown in the pic, Dhruv/Rudra offer a full set of modern EW sensors and counter measures. Even latest F16s, doesn't have MAWS or LWR in their standard configs.

Secondly, combat helicopters are suppose to fly low and use the terrain + countermeasures for their defence. Fighters in CAS roles fligh high with LGBs for example, which makes them more vulnerable to air defences, especially if they are slow.

Also combat helicopters can be supported and operated at forward army bases and alongside armored vehicles, that's why combing MBTs with combat helicopters in supporting roles, is a common tactic today.
Fixed wing aircrafts on the other side, operate on separate bases and with their own missions. Cold start for example would not need CAS, but interdiction strikes to clear the way ahead of the armored vehicles, to provide fast movement forward. Just as IAF would need to provide air superiority too, since without that Coldstart will be stopped very early.

So armed trainers have no use in interdiction strikes, nor in high threat environments with credible air defences and enemy air force in the area. Even in Yemen, where the rebels have limited access to SAMs an manpads, we have seen plenty of losses, which shows the risk. Light attack aircrafts only makes sense in low risk environments like Afghanistan.
 

Falcon

The Falcon
Professional
Nov 30, 2017
1,805
5,598
First of all, we lost a lot of aircrafts in Kargil, because the enemies had sufficient supply of manpads, that caused IAF later to put a focus on improved countermeasures

Let me list out the exact reasons:

01 x Mig 27 - engine flame out.

01 x Mig 21 - shot down after IR countermeasures were overwhelmed with swarm of IR SAMs (6 to 8). That is possible with the best of counter measures.

01 x Mi 17 V1 - shot down because the aircraft was the only aircraft of the 4 aircraft flight that did not have an IR counter measure dispenser. It was taken at the last minute as the original helicopter meant to fly developed a technical snag and the flight was headed for air support for an attack being undertaken by IA troops. Flt Lt Muhilan and Sqn Ldr Pundir were the pilots, the latter, if I recall correctly, having just returned from a sortie in support of troops elsewhere, who volunteered to take this aircraft out, citing his experience and understanding the pressing need of air support by our attacking troops, understood the need for maximum platforms providing for maximum firepower. The other three Aircrafts in the flight, equipped with IR countermeasure dispensation system, were to provide a screen, and they did. Approximately 14 missiles were fired at this helicopter and the two screening it just as it was going in for the fateful pass (as narrated to me by the crew member of one of the surviving aircrafts in the original attack). The swarm was concentrated and the screening aircrafts banked to starboard and port immediately to avoid being hit (even counter measures can not protect you from a dense missile front) by passing missiles. That, unfortunately, left the aircraft behind, the one without the IR counter measure dispensation system, 'open' and the aircraft was struck by a missile.



Secondly, combat helicopters are suppose to fly low and use the terrain + countermeasures for their defence. Fighters in CAS roles fligh high with LGBs for example, which makes them more vulnerable to air defences, especially if they are slow.

Flying low is undertaken by both, please do not create a new concept here.

Also combat helicopters can be supported and operated at forward army bases and alongside armored vehicles, that's why combing MBTs with combat helicopters in supporting roles, is a common tactic today.

Incorrect. The dispersion of armour and air assets is undertaken in a conventional setting when fighting a conventional war. That is war fighting 101.

No forward army bases have MBTs when going in for an attack phase. They are in their respective staging areas.

Fixed wing aircrafts on the other side, operate on separate bases and with their own missions.

I like this one the most. Separate base is also needed for Helicopters. What makes you think otherwise? Are you aware of the Engineering effort needed to land a helicopter in a terrain like, for example, found in vicinity of Jaisalmer? Or for that matter on a snow bound peak? For the former, engineers need to clear the land and prepare a helipad, with watering of the same undertaken frequently (depending on sun and temperature) in order to prevent sand from choking the engines in increased frequency of operations. This, after the helipad is created using duckboards. Similarly, in snow bound area, the helipad is created by 'beating' the snow till it firms up.

The missions of any aircraft dedicated for CAS, will be defined by the Commander, won't it? Or are there separate orders and constraints fed into the MCC and FMS for limiting their employability?

Cold start for example would not need CAS, but interdiction strikes to clear the way ahead of the armored vehicles, to provide fast movement forward.

What is Close Air Support?

Close air support (CAS) is air action by fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft against hostile targets that are in close proximity to friendly forces and requires detailed integration of each air mission with the fire and movement of those forces.

Now, to define the exact role of the Army Aviation, one needs to understand that:

1. Army Aviation is an element of the power projection by the Land Forces.
2 Army Aviation is primarily concerned with potentiating the quantum of force being applied by land forces to achieve defined objectives while adhering to the principles of maneuver, mass, surprise and economy of force to the best of factors as available under operational constraints.
3. Army Aviation permits flexibility and switching of forces for a Commander within his/her battle space.
4. Army Aviation provided both Combat Support (example fire support) and Combat Service Support (example MEDEVAC)

What is Interdiction Mission?

Air attacks on enemy logistics and reinforcements moving towards the front lines, undertaken in depth areas usually.

What is the objective of Cold Start?

Aim is to hold territory as quickly as possible in order to create a stronger negotiating position for the political leadership.

Now if the aim is to hold territory, we will be required to achieve breakthrough within a couple of hours at multiple points. This initial phase of operations will require a significant flexibility and maneuverability in the quantum of force being applied within a theater. For this phase, my dear sir, one requires CAS, as you need to overwhelm the enemy defences in a very short period of time. It is only once you have achieved a breakthrough and consolidated your position that you can afford to unleash your assets for Air interdiction missions.

This is precisely coinciding with the phase that shall see the IAF undertake the following missions (just to name a few):

1. SEAD - to be undertaken by the Ground Attack Aircrafts namely Mig 27/Mirage 2000s and Jaguars/Su-30s/Mig 29s
2. SEAD Escort - Su-30s/Mig 29s
3. DCAP - Defensive Counter Air Patrol - for defence against PAF on targets in own territory. Mig 21s/29s
4. Sweep missions - To eliminate as many enemy aircrafts as can Mig 21s/Su 30s/Mig 29s
5. BARCAP - To prevent Enemy aircraft from coming in Mig 29s/Mig 21s
6. Interception - Mig 21s/29s


I am avoiding Mirage 2000 here for obvious reasons right now.


Just as IAF would need to provide air superiority too, since without that Coldstart will be stopped very early.

This statement, read in consonance with what I posted just above, becomes rhetorical.

So armed trainers have no use in interdiction strikes, nor in high threat environments with credible air defences and enemy air force in the area. Even in Yemen, where the rebels have limited access to SAMs an manpads, we have seen plenty of losses, which shows the risk. Light attack aircrafts only makes sense in low risk environments like Afghanistan.

Incorrect. They make all the sense in provision of air support to troops in proximity of enemy troops.
 

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
Flying low is undertaken by both, please do not create a new concept here

Not even close! Especially not when the primary weapon is an LGB, that requires altitue during launch in the first place. You are clearly confused if you think combat helicopters and light attack aircrafts operate in the same way, let alone the same altitude.

Separate base is also needed for Helicopters. What makes you think otherwise?

Wrong, any Base that can operate standard utility helicopters, can also operate Rudra or LCH. IA even specifically sets up combat and utility helicopter squads, to operate alongside the strike corps (the Apaches they get in particular). That is logically not possible with fixed winged aircrafts, that needs longer airstrips.

It is only once you have achieved a breakthrough and consolidated your position that you can afford to unleash your assets for Air interdiction missions.


lol you are in contradiction to your won definitions!

CAS, strikes in close proximity to friendly forces = support to hold positions

Interdiction, strikes against enemy logistics and reinforcements = paving the way for cold start

Btw, the only fighters in the IAF fleet able to do SEAD missions, are the Su 30 and nd upgraded Mig 29.
 

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,124
1,164
India
When Army d
Not even close! Especially not when the primary weapon is an LGB, that requires altitue during launch in the first place. You are clearly confused if you think combat helicopters and light attack aircrafts operate in the same way, let alone the same altitude.



Wrong, any Base that can operate standard utility helicopters, can also operate Rudra or LCH. IA even specifically sets up combat and utility helicopter squads, to operate alongside the strike corps (the Apaches they get in particular). That is logically not possible with fixed winged aircrafts, that needs longer airstrips.



lol you are in contradiction to your won definitions!

CAS, strikes in close proximity to friendly forces = support to hold positions

Interdiction, strikes against enemy logistics and reinforcements = paving the way for cold start

Btw, the only fighters in the IAF fleet able to do SEAD missions, are the Su 30 and nd upgraded Mig 29.

Hi, I know falcon is in armed forces. Who jusr killed his " famous " avatar .

But don't know about your experience wrt forces ...

So basically it looks to me , you are overlooking someone with actual experience.

~~~~~

I used to read your replies every where in Twitter too.. its almost same thing nowadays since no progress in defence deals..

Can you please change your research into why this deal happened instead of why something didnt happen ?


Knowing your forum credentials , sorry if I overstepped my boundaries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: randomradio

Falcon

The Falcon
Professional
Nov 30, 2017
1,805
5,598
Not even close! Especially not when the primary weapon is an LGB, that requires altitue during launch in the first place. You are clearly confused if you think combat helicopters and light attack aircrafts operate in the same way, let alone the same altitude.

@Sancho

Still stuck at LGB? Is that the only weapon used by a fixed wing?

Your statement:

Secondly, combat helicopters are suppose to fly low and use the terrain + countermeasures for their defence. Fighters in CAS roles fligh high with LGBs for example, which makes them more vulnerable to air defences, especially if they are slow.

Comment: Your contention here is that Fighters in CAS roles fly high and not low.

My reply to the same:

Flying low is undertaken by both, please do not create a new concept here.

I still stand by it :)

How do you use a napalm? From an altitude, is it? Or do you do a low pass with a FW to ensure quick ingress to obviate engagement with a MANPADs which needs distance to 'fire' after being aimed, a neigh impossibility on a low pass. And how about the use of unguided dumb bombs, when using in close proximity to own troops?


Wrong, any Base that can operate standard utility helicopters, can also operate Rudra or LCH. IA even specifically sets up combat and utility helicopter squads, to operate alongside the strike corps (the Apaches they get in particular). That is logically not possible with fixed winged aircrafts, that needs longer airstrips.

Read what I wrote as reply to a statement made by you, and what that statement was conveying. Find any correlation here?

Can you elaborate on this squad concept?

lol you are in contradiction to your won definitions!

LOL. How?

CAS, strikes in close proximity to friendly forces = support to hold positions

Really? And when you are attacking the opposing enemy forces in their defenses, then it is not CAS? Please, do come and take lecture at the CAW. This is indeed a gem of a discovery :D

Our concepts are now being redefined , interesting.


Interdiction, strikes against enemy logistics and reinforcements = paving the way for cold start

So, what of the enemy forces in defenses who need to be knocked off?

You have no idea of how the war is to be fought in cold start, do you? You can always ask :)

Btw, the only fighters in the IAF fleet able to do SEAD missions, are the Su 30 and nd upgraded Mig 29.

Sure, will pass that on to Mig-27s and Jaguars pilots. They are not aware of this fact

Heck, Indian Air Force needs you to come and teach them now, I guess.

When Army d


Hi, I know falcon is in armed forces. Who jusr killed his " famous " avatar .

But don't know about your experience wrt forces ...

So basically it looks to me , you are overlooking someone with actual experience.

It is okay. I like some interaction. ;)

@nair @Ashwin


Will expand on aviation/air warfare if this goes on a bit further. Shall be fun. But albeit information only of public domain
 

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
So basically it looks to me , you are overlooking someone with actual experience.

Experience doesn't change facts or plain logic.
Respect the service of veterans or active professionals, but don't take everything they say for granted. Gain info's from various sources and make up your own mind.

Can you please change your research into why this deal happened instead of why something didnt happen ?

Well the HTT 40 shows exactly, why it's important to understand the whole picture. Otherwise you fall for misconceptions of IAF being guided by import lobbies, or that HTT 40s performance has any meaning for the optional PC 70 procurements. You can't leave out info's out of inconvenience.

Similarly, if you want to understand why IAF is not getting MMRCA or FGFA, you need to look at the available budgets. When you want to understand if IAF benefited from improved defence modernisation, you need to look at signed contracts, not just DAC clearences and so on.

Knowing your forum credentials , sorry if I overstepped my boundaries.

No problem
 

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
Still stuck at LGB? Is that the only weapon used by a fixed wing?

When you claim things, try to understand the basic facts first! And understanding the difference between fixed wing air support and from combat helicopters would be a good start.

Really? And when you are attacking the opposing enemy forces in their defenses, then it is not CAS?

As per your own definition, no! Because the C stands for "close". You might want to read and understand those definitions once again.

Sure, will pass that on to Mig-27s and Jaguars pilots. They are not aware of this fact

You mean the phased out Mig 27 and the Jag that doesn't have any ARM? :sneaky:
 

Falcon

The Falcon
Professional
Nov 30, 2017
1,805
5,598
When you claim things, try to understand the basic facts first! And understanding the difference between fixed wing air support and from combat helicopters would be a good start.

As per your own definition, no! Because the C stands for "close". You might want to read and understand those definitions once again.

Too generalistic. Post a rebuttal/refutation, we can carry forward from there.



You mean the phased out Mig 27 and the Jag that doesn't have any ARM? :sneaky:

Will divide the answer into two parts:

1. You are aware of the Mig-27 that is phased out and not those in service still i.e. Mig-27 UPG? (Hint: Jodhpur?) Like I said, will pass on your message to Mig-27 pilots. They shall be pleased.

2. For Jags, I wonder what is AS-37 Martel doing with IAF Jags? Any ideas?
 

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
Too generalistic. Post a rebuttal/refutation, we can carry forward from there.

No thanks, you have confirmed what I said on the reasons why such aircrafts are not useful in high threat environments, your own definitions also confirmed my points on interdiction prior to cold start and the difference to CAS, so informing yourself a bit more to get a better understanding is definitely a good idea.
 

Falcon

The Falcon
Professional
Nov 30, 2017
1,805
5,598
No thanks, you have confirmed what I said on the reasons why such aircrafts are not useful in high threat environments, your own definitions also confirmed my points on interdiction prior to cold start and the difference to CAS, so informing yourself a bit more to get a better understanding is definitely a good idea.


So, let me understand this, you have no rebuttal, your information is sketchy at best (with your obviously being unaware of the fact that Mig-27s UPG continue to serve in India, not having retired as you apparently thought and that ARM missile is very much integrated with Jaguars of Indian Air Force, which apparently, you were unaware of), you have yet to post any perspective on what, as per you, is the difference between CAS and Air Interdiction missions and the applicability of the same with respect to support in Air-Ground operations as envisaged under Indian Army Aviation in the so called Cold Start Doctrine, and I should be informing myself a bit more? (Not that I am ever averse to the same - the idea of learning and indeed, many members here like @Milspec, @_Anonymous_, @Ashwin, @randomradio and @Parthu do post significant tidbits that add to my knowledge every day and have greater insights than me in majority of subjects. )

Interesting.

What I sincerely suggest to you is to follow your own advice as given to @Sathya as undermentioned:

Respect the service of veterans or active professionals, but don't take everything they say for granted. Gain info's from various sources and make up your own mind.

But, with a rider. When you say 'make up your own mind', make sure you do not make up your own facts or tenets of warfare.

Regards
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
9,955
7,612
India
1. You are aware of the Mig-27 that is phased out and not those in service still i.e. Mig-27 UPG? (Hint: Jodhpur?) Like I said, will pass on your message to Mig-27 pilots. They shall be pleased.

He can look at the latest images of Jodhpur from Google Earth and see the Mig-27s for himself, but forget it, he won't do that.

Just a simple google search will tell him Mig-27s are to be phased out in 2025.

The Indian Air Force’s Declining Squadron Strength – Options and Challenges | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses
However, six squadrons of MiG-21Bison and the two MiG-27UPG will be phased out by 2025.

But no he won't do that either. He's just gonna attack you and then bore you to death with asinine comments.
 

R!cK

Team StratFront
Dec 8, 2017
240
530
Dubai, UAE
SAAW SOON: HAL’s Souped-Up Hawk Trainer All Set To Fire Indian Anti-Airfield Weapon
Shiv Aroor Feb 23 2019

In April over the Bay of Bengal, a stubby orange box-shaped weapon will separate from an aircraft flying at 20,000 feet, flip open a pair of angular wings from its sides, and glide over the sea towards a pre-designated spot 80 km away at sea. The weapon, called SAAW — short for Smart Anti-Airfield Weapon — is an in-the-works Indian munition designed to destroy runways at stand-off distances. The aircraft dropping the weapon will be a Hawk-i, on its first ever weapons run. The weapon will by guided to its target by an Israeli Litening laser designator pod on the aircraft.



With over 100 British-origin BAE Systems Hawk Mk.132 jet trainers in service with the Indian Air Force and Indian Navy, the Hawk-i is an internally funded program by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL, which has license built most of the Hawks in Bengaluru) to offer the military an upgrade and weaponisation solution for the Hawk, transforming it from a trainer of pilot cadets in peacetime into a jet that can be deployed on certain combat missions during conflict. The program is in the process of weaponising the Hawk-i with bombs, air-to-air missiles and stand-off strike weapons like the DRDO’s SAAW that will be test-fired this summer. The SAAW, incidentally, is on display for the first time at the ongoing Aero India show in Bengaluru.



The Hawk-i program began in 2014 and is centered around replacing the baseline Hawk’s British mission computer with an Indian one, allowing its developers the flexibility to sling on weapons of choice and give the aircraft the ‘brains’ it needs to fire those weapons in the absence of a primary radar. To give pilots of the Hawk-i a point and shoot capability, they fly with Israeli Elbit Dash V helmets. Livefist learns that weapon algorithms from the DARIN II and III upgrades effected on the IAF’s Jaguar fleet have been used in the Hawk-i’s upgraded code that also uses an Indian-developed operating system and an even more modern cockpit.

The idea is that when the IAF’s Hawks receive the Hawk-i upgrade, they’ll be able to join the battle if a war breaks out, and not have to sit on the ground. Since their straight wings don’t permit fighter-type speed to get away from a sticky situation, the Hawk-i is being kitted out for light strike missions at stand-off distances, including bridge interdiction and close air support. But Hawks turn and climb very nimbly, therefore making their weaponised avatar suitable for operations close to the border or Line of Control for ‘hit and run’ missions. The SAAW/Litening pod test from the Kalaikunda air base in April will be the first of many flights to prove the Hawk for small offensive missions as a smart bomber.

Other weapons options on the Hawk-i will include high speed low drag bombs, sensor fused weapons (like the Textron CBU-105 operational now on IAF Jaguars) and laser guided bombs. Apart from the Litening laser designation pod, the platform will also be able to deploy an electro-optical tactical reconnaissance pod or an active phased array self protection jammer pod.

Other add-ons in the Hawk-i program include a virtual training simulator and a 3D digital map generator to keep new generations of pilots abreast with the latest flying aids.

While the Indian Air Force is yet to contract for the Hawk-i program, HAL is pressing on with proving the Hawk-i’s qualities convinced that an upgrade down the line is inevitable — and the fact that it is a fully Indian effort will be impossible to ignore. The way the Hawk-i program works is also entirely new for HAL, a state-owned firm that has almost overwhelmingly worked in response to firm orders or irreversible interest from its military customers. The rationale is that when the IAF is finally ready to pull the trigger on the upgrade, HAL will have everything ready to go with no delays and minimum risk.

The IAF has wanted to give its Hawks teeth for a while now. Livefist reported in 2017 that the IAF showed interest in integrating the MBDA Brimstone strike weapon and ASRAAM heat-seeking missile onto its Hawks. Earlier that year, at the Aero India 2017 show, HAL’s newly unveiled Hawk-i was seen sporting ASRAAM missiles on its wingtips — a crucial piece of weaponry that will allow the Hawk to conduct strike missions while also having the ability to defend itself against other aircraft. Livefist recently reported on the IAF’s plans to standardise the ASRAAM across other combat aircraft types in its fleet.

The Hawk-i was first unveiled just around the time that HAL and BAE Systems announced the Advanced Hawk, a platform revealed first here on Livefist in 2017. While both platforms seek to take the Hawk’s capabilities to the realm of offensive missions, the latter gives the Hawk better flying qualities with jointly designed mechanical changes to its wings, more thrust from its engine and a more modern cockpit. While the Advanced Hawk is being pitched as an additional procurement to take on fighter-like training (with weapons, if necessary), the Hawk-i is an upgrade package that specifically involves a new Indian nervous system that permits electronic warfare and weapons flexibility.

In a separate development at the ongoing Aero India show, HAL also announced that it was proposing a supersonic trainer based on the LCA Tejas airframe, as a possible bridge between the Hawk and fast jets.

https://www.livefistdefence.com/201...-set-to-fire-indian-anti-airfield-weapon.html
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Falcon and Himanshu

Gautam

Team StratFront
Feb 16, 2019
11,999
8,148
Tripura, NE, India
Why ? There is no need for the IJT as training regime of the IAF has moved on
Not sure as to why. But as far as I can tell, reviving the IJT is an internally funded project by HAL much like reviving the HTT 40. So why not ? HAL gets some experience, which is always helpful and we get another domestic product to cheer for. Maybe in time the IAF/IN will need it and HAL, for the firsts time ever, will have a product ready to fly on time.