prasun,its a very good post i give you 100% marks for this but can you clarify what is that 1000km from station,1hour then 6 what does it mean are there russians components in radar systemif chines AWACS is this good then phalcon must be better than this
Great post Prasun. This has come while I have been doing some topographical analysis of the North East.What I have discovered is that we are at a disadvantage with regard to AEW&C coverage because of the height of the Tibetan plateau. The distance to horizon not only depends upon the altitude of the surveillance platform but also the height of the ground above sea level. Hence while Chinese AEW&C can take a deep look into the bowl of North East with Assam just 500ft AMSL, Indian AEW&C flying at the same altitude will have their surveillance range against low flying targets reduced by at least 100km because of 14,000 to 16,000ft altitude of the Tibetan region surrounding Arunachal. Considering that AEW&C have to be deployed at a safe distance from borders( at least beyond HQ9 range), the actual coverage area of enemy territory will be reduced to just 1/3 of a KJ-2000 looking into Arunachal keeping the same stand off distance from the border.The only solution that I see to this problem is to acquire the high flying G550 CAEW which can make up for the topographical disadvantage we are facing. Also it will be better positioned to look down into valleys and avoid blind areas in coverage.
Topographical map with international borders.
the nose bubble appears different in the first two photos.
To Gurpreet Singh: Glad you liked it. The 1,000km distance away from home air base is the station or airspace over which the AEW & CS platform does '0' or 'racetrack' patterns while conducting military air traffic management and airborne battle management missions. The 1 hour is the time taken for the A-50E AEW & CS to each its designated area of operations. Six hours is the unrefuelled endurance or time on station, as none of the PLA Air Force's A-50Es have airborne refuelling capability. All on-board systems are of Russian origin (made by VEGA Radio-Engineering Corp JSC). As far as operational employment of the A-50E/KJ-2000 by the PLAAF goes, two A-50E/KJ-2000s are required to be on station simultaneously and currently their training sorties (since 2002) are restricted to only over southern China and the coastal areas facing the Taiwan Straits. In other words, they will be employed strictly by the Jinan and Nanjing Military Regions and that too for defensive counter-air operations, meaning they will be used for military air traffic management and airborne battle management missions only that that too only over the Taiwan Straits. As such, the PLAAF's fleet of A-50E/KJ-2000 AEW & CS platforms have yet to be employed in support of offensive airpower campaigns or airpowewr projection over hostile airspace. For such operations the PLAAF and PLA Navy are jointly acquiring a fleet of an initial 12 KJ-200 AEW & CS platforms, the first of which was inducted into service by the PLAAF in mid-May.
To Harpreet: Many thanks. Will post the detailed answers you seek in a short while.
Is this AWACS using a rotodom? does the radar array rotate inside the dome? Not AESA?
Yes, the A-50E/KJ-2000 employs a mechanical scanning rotating radar, not AESA. The same is the case with the CATIC/CETC-developed ZDK-03 AEW & CS platform for the PAF. The KJ-200 uses AESA.
Good post but your data regarding KJ-2000 is not correct. KJ-2000 has a AESA and not a mechanical scanning rotating radar - check Janes if you are not sure.
Don't need to check with Jane's or anyone/anything else. Saw both the KJ-2000 and KJ-200 with my own eyes early last November at Zhuhai (before the Airshow China expo officially got underway) and also have CETC's PowerPoint presentations on ALL China-origin AEW & CS. Lastly, the KJ-2000 is the Chinese designation of the A-50E and the uploaded templates above clearly show what's inside the rotodome. One doesn't need Jane's to figure out what's inside the rotodome and how it works.
To Harpreet: Prior to analysing the pros and cons of AEW & CS deployments by either side along the Sino-India border areas, one needs to appreciate the like nature of the air campaigns to be fought over the areas. As far as the PLA is concerned, its force modernisation efforts along the Sino-India border is focussed on what it calls the on-going transformation of its mountain warfare formations into air-mobile and light mechanised 'clenched-fist' forces, i.e. air-assault forces strongly backed up by utility and attack helicopters, as well as by UCAVs. Therefore, the on-going build-up within Tibet (under the leadership of the Chengdu Military Region) concerns mainly the construction of several helicopter air bases and hardened rear-area logistics bases. In addition, the only militarily worthwhile targets to be attacked within China (in the event of limited hostilities) are located in Chengdu and Kunming, where the deployment of HQ-9 and KS-1A SAMs began two years ago. Needless to say, the hierarchical air defence network in both these areas as well as within the Tibetan Plateau is extremely dense and therefore the IAF's operations analysts are of the view that, given the absence of a network of major air bases and forward air bases within the Tibetan Plateau, the PLA, in terms of attacking Indian military targets within Uttarkhand, Sikkim, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, will likely make large-scale use of land-launched tactical ballistic missiles, land-launched cruise missiles and long-range MBRLs for precision conventional strikes. In other words, the PLA Air Force at this point in time cannot be expected to mount offensive air campaigns inside India with manned combat aircraft. On India's part, IAF HQ had, four years ago, proposed an elaborate counter-strike plan which called for the extensive deployment of a 350km-range, solid-fuelled land-mobile variant of the Prithvi, followed by the deployment of a truck-mounted conventionally armed variant of the Shourya TBM with engagement envelopes of between 400km and 700km. Thus, along the Sino-India border areas, what's required is not AEW & C, but an advanced real-time terrain surveillance system like the EL/I-3150 MARS2, and fielding of an extensive BMD network.
to prasun phalcon can't go higher than 10km altitude and tibbet is altmost 6-8 km above sea level and total altitude ofr phalcon is just 1.5 to 2 km only but su30mki fitted with iribs e radar and carrying 6 tons external fuel can go upto 20km altitude and can provide excellent endurance and radar coverage
to prasunso radar and all other processing systems are of russian origin and is it PESA radar in the rodome
To Anon@1:38PM: That may well be, but in any case both the IAF and PLAAF do not expect to lock horns against one another with any kind of manned combat aircraft. To Anon@1:40PM: It is neither AESA nor PESA.
to prasunso its radar is like e 3 sentryand also prasun can u post per hour operating cost of each MRCA contender
and is mi38 was available to india instead of mi17v5
what is that big hump where fuselage and wing combine
are kj 2000 and kj200 different
How many operator consoles are in IL-76 Phalcon?
To Anon@1:52PM: The Mi-38 is not yet approved for marketing by Rosoboronexport as the helicopter is still under development. But the more promising model is Kamov's Ka-92 medium-lift utility helicopter.To Anon@1:57PM: That's where the SATCOMS antenna is located.To Anon@2:01PM: Yes, the KJ-2000 uses the IL-76TD platform while the KJ-200 uses the new Shaanxi Y-9 four-turboprop platform. The KJ-2000 uses a slotted-array antenna inside the rotodome while the KJ-200 has an AESA antenna that looks similar to the Erieye on the Saab 2000.To Anon@3:27AM: 12 for now, but upgradable to 16 if required. BARCO has supplied the AMLCDs for the consoles.
Thanks Prasun, does solid-fuelled Prithvi really exist? Has DRDO ever displayed it?Which projects are going to be affected by the latest ban on 7 defense companies?
which awacs japan has on 767 ??is it same as e3 or its differentand when japan ordered it and when they got it??
So chinese KJ-2000 is nothing but just a russian A-50E?
Prasun K Sengupta said... Yes, the A-50E/KJ-2000 employs a mechanical scanning rotating radar, not AESA. The same is the case with the CATIC/CETC-developed ZDK-03 AEW & CS platform for the PAF. The KJ-200 uses AESA.-------------In an interview of PAF chief in AFM last year he said that PAF has opted for KJ-200 not the Y-8 with rotating radar and have named it as ZDK-03 AEW & CS. It has been said that PAF was not happy with the platform and wanted improvements and now we are seeing improved KJ-200s
Anonymous @ Monday, June 08, 2009 9:22:00 AMKJ-2000 is a Chinese domestic-built Airborne Early Warning and Control system (AWACS) based on the Russian-made Ilyushin IL-76 airframe with electronics and radars domestic built.
To Anonymous @ Monday, June 08, 2009 9:22:00 AMKJ-2000 is AWACS in service with the PLA Air Force (PLAAF), with four examples commissioned between 2006~07. The aircraft was based on the airframe of the Russian-made A-50/IL-76MD, but outfitted with an Chinese indigenous electronically steered phased-array (ESA) radar developed by Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology (also known as 14 Institute). Xi’an Aircraft Corporation (XAC) was responsible for converting existing IL-76MD transport jets for the AWACS role
KJ-2000http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/specialaircraft/kj2000.asp"ACM Ahmed said the Chinese would supply a newly built propeller-driven aircraft with a rotor dome."http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/?p=2113
What is more reliable to you a blog that publish picture from different amateurs or AFM??http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3938427December also saw Pakistan sign a $278 million deal for four Chinese KJ-200/ZDK03 AEW&C aircraft, whose active electronically steered array radar is mounted on a turboprop-powered Y-8F600. It is somewhat similar to the Saab-2000-mounted Ericsson FRS-890 Erieye system on order from Sweden.
Aug 2008, AFM has PAF Chief interview that says that by 2015 PAF will get 4 Y-8 based AWACS using a razor instead of a dish or something like that, which basically means the KJ-200 balance beam rather than the Y-8 dish based AWACS
The PLA-AF's Airborne Early Warning & Control ProgramsImagery clearly shows three sided phased array dielectric radomes, and wingtip ESM fairings, on a rebuilt Il-76 Candid airframe. An APU has been installed in the left main undercarriage fairing. Aft fuselage strakes, absent on the A-50, have been installed. The ram air inlet in the root of the vertical stabiliser of the A-50 is absent, as are the fuselage dielectric blister radomes for the ESM. The KJ-2000 prototypes have been photographed with and without aerial refuelling probes installed.http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-AWACS-Programs.html
"Pakistan sign a $278 million deal for four Chinese KJ-200/ZDK03 AEW&C aircraft"Just $70 million an AEW&C! Chinese toy? What does it do? Flashes lights? Plays music??
To Anon@10:07AM: You're right. In the Sept 2008 issue of AFM the then PAF Chief's interview clearly states that the Y-8F-600 airframe, designated as the ZDK-03, will have the "blade on top, not a rotating dome". The KJ-200 uses the Y-9 airframe, and not the Y-8.
Thanks Prasun K Sengupta for clearing this up
i think that Y-8F-600 = Y-9
hi Prsun, Can you give us some detail comparing KJ-200 and Indian Phalcon radar. Which is superior AWACS and How many total Phalcon Radar Indian Airforce and Indian Navy needs.
To Anonymous @ Monday, June 08, 2009 11:01:00 AMLink that you posted saysDuring the 2005 Beijing International Aviation Expo, Shaanxi revealed more details about the Y-8X, now re-designated Y-9. Compared to the Y-8, the new aircraft features a more spacious cargo cabin, fast loading/uploading system, improved WJ-6C turboprop engines, six-blade propellers, and a “glass cockpit”. http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/airlift/y9.asp
Compare the specs of the two aircraft.Y8F600 is not Y8X or Y9.
Y8X is domestic version of Y8F600 with uses domestic dsigned six-blade propellers & WJ-6C turboprop engines and Y9 is just another name for the Y-8X
To Harpreet: Putting to bulk production the solid-fuelled Prithvi is not a problem as the DRDL has already developed solid-fuel rockets for the PAD-1. Therefore, a single-stage Prithvi using solid propellant and having a range of up to 350km can be produced if reqd. Regarding the blacklisting of foreign OEMs, the picture is not yet clear. For instance, if IMI is blacklisted, then the OFB's Nalanda-based production facility will be in trouble. If IWI is blacklisted then the Zittara carbine's prospects in India will be doomed for the time-being. But what I can't understand is why on earth the OFB should develop a new carbine like 'Amogh' when the Zittara is already available. If Singapore Technologies Engineering or its ST Kinetics subsidiary is blacklisted then its JV with Punj Lloyd for offering the Pegasus 155mm ultra-lightweight howitzer will no longer be made available to the Indian Army. Speaking of more fuck-ups, I also cannot figure out why the Indian Coast Guard has not yet ordered the Dhruv ALH and is now instead examining the offer for ex-US Coast Guard/Eurocopter Dauphins.
Any ways KJ-200 was initially based on the basic Y-8 and PAF was not satisfied so agreement was signed with Chinese company to upgrade the KJ-200 and recently we have seen the pictures of improved kj-200
General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani also showed interest in Y-8 based aircraft with capability like E-8 Joint STARS
hi Prasun da, Can you give us some detail comparing KJ-200 and Indian Phalcon radar. Which is superior AWACS . How many total Phalcon Radar Indian Airforce and Indian Navy needs to defend its border ( Eastern and western) round the clock (24 hrs)
prasun why dont you respond to the ausairpower article POSTED ABOVE? clearly you were wrong about the kj2000 being a msa, since the article shows the differences between A-50 and KJ-2000.
prasun does china have Y-8 based aircraft with capability like E-8 Joint STARS??is there any plan by IAF for same??????????
Prasun any idea about the capability of thishttp://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i218/f1won/j10bs.jpg
did mig-21 ever fired R-77 beyound 18km launch?
I am not asking about if it can but if it ever did
KJ-200 uses radar which is 3meter longer than that of Saab-2000 AEW&C and Y-8/9 offers 10 hours endurance and space for more controllers then 5 as in Saab-2000 AEW&C
JF-17 NG 1. CAC is working with engine suppliers to increase RD93 thrust to 91.1kn, and possible VTC nozzle.2. Current payload is 3.6t, next goal is to increase that to 5 to 6 ton.3. Next variant will include IFR capability and WSO seat.http://www.china-defense.com/forum/uploads/post-521-1244348133.jpghttp://www.china-defense.com/forum/uploads/post-521-1244348176.jpghttp://www.china-defense.com/forum/uploads/post-521-1244348215.jpg
To Anon@1:03PM: What is there to respond to? If the magazine article you quoted was indulging in factual reporting then it would have reproduced illustrations displayed during the last Airshow China 2008 expo early last November in which posters of both CATIC and CETC were displayed showing the design and performance parameters of the KJ-200 and KJ-2000. The mere fact that the article in the magazine uses photos/illustrations available only from Chinese Internet sources clearly reveals the limited access the magazine has to Chinese military R & D developments. The article also presupposes that China successfully acquired data from IAI for developing a triangular AESA array, which again is factually untrue since the PHALCON's contract placed by China with IAI was cancelled prenaturely in mid-2000 and no transfer of intellectual proprietary data to China took place. Lastly, if indeed China had acquired AESA design/production technologies from Israel by now we all would have seen such radars for both China-developed LR-SAMs (like the HQ-9) and on board combat aircraft like the J-10 or J-11BS. But clearly all this has not yet happened. This then brings one to the most interesting question: how exactly did CETC develop the KJ-200's two-face AESA radar? Did it involve any industrial espionage targetted against Ericsson? Or did China acquire the reqd engineering/production data for such AESA radars from existing customers/operators of the Erieye? To Subroto: Well, the PHALCON cannot be compared to the KJ-200 at all since the former is superior in all aspects, ranging from 360-degree coverage (as opposed to the KJ-200's 300-degree coverage), to the PHALCON's superior endurance and higher cruising altitude. Also, the KJ-200 does not have any refuelling capability and has some cabin interior noise cancellation issues to be sorted out. It is also in this area that the PAF has asked China's CATIC to make several improvements for its ZDK-03 platforms. For waging 24-hour offensive air campaigns in a single-front war lasting for some 2 weeks, the IAF will require at least nine PHALCON-type systems and another 12 CAEW & CS-type systems. The Navy requires six CAEW & CS-type systems.
To gurpreet singh @ Saturday, June 06, 2009 6:00:00 PM maximum flight range of the aircraft is 5,000km and the flight endurance is seven hours 40 minutes. At a range of 2,000km, the A-50 can remain on patrol for up to one hour 25 minutes. http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/a50/
to prasunwas there some redesign in A50 aircraft for india to accomodate phalcon and thats why it got latei know for sure even if 767 aew is ordered it will take 50-52 months to be delivered becoz its not in production
PLA Air Defence Radars http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-IADS-Radars.html
look how chinese making radars and how BEL making radars u all come know this difference
what is the range of 737,767 aew compared to A50
To Anon@1:07PM: Yes, the PLAAF operates three modified Tu-154s each of which has a belly-mounted SAR installation. The IAF has already evaluated the offer from IAI for the EL/I-3150 MARS2 system. To Anon@1:31PM: The delay was due to delayed delivery of the IL-76TD airframe from Beriev Aircraft Co due to delayed finalisation by IAF of the cockpit avionics suite. Installation of the PHALCON suite on the IL-76TD was on schedule as IAI had already done this earlier on the IL-76TD prototype that was originally ordered by China but was unable to take delivery of due to premature cancellation of the contract in mid-2000.
TO PRASUNc17 cockpit isn't top notch either it still cluttered
to prasunany info about moss aewacs which iaf used in 1971
To Anon@1:36PM: What the article does not say is that the first two photos of the HT-233 target engagement radar was first published by my magazine TEMPUR way back in 2002 as part of an article I wrote on the KS-1A M-SAM, based on the data supplied to me by CPMIEC. In addition, the SJ-231 is not the radar itself, but the designation for the command-and-control system for the KS-1A. Also, the production variant H-200 radar's antenna has 10 separate sections, and not the seven as shown in the rather dated photo.
To Anon@1:57PM: No Tu-126 Moss AEW & C platform was ever deployed to India. What was used in a limited manner was a flight of two MiG-25s that always flew only at nighttime inside Indian airspace and whose long-range nose-mounted radars were used for aiding IAF Su-7BM interdictors in tactical navigation (using IFR procedures) in pitch-black darkness, especially when the Su-7BMs were returning back to their air bases inside India. The high-flying MiG-25s were thus used as both a night navigation facilitator as well as an ingenious IFF aid that enabled the MiG-25s to communicate via radio with the returning Su-7BMs and the MiG-25s in turn informed the IAF's sector air operations centres by radio of about the expected arrival of the Su-7BMs. This tactic in fact saved several Su-7BMs from friendly AAA. On the other hand, there were quite a few instances of IAF Hunters and Gnats being engaged, even during daytime, by friendly AAA (of both the IAF and Army) as they were headed back to their respective forward air bases. This was also the case in 1965, however at that time assets like the MiG-25 were not made available to the IAF by the Soviets.
Y8F600-http://www.shanfei.com/2005_english/Product/Y8F600.htmCruise altitude is just 8000m, which it must fly at to maintain endurance.Detection range of low flying targets will be 300km (max) from this altitude and will be dramatically reduced in mountanious regions.Saab 2000 is the best turboprop. Surely some comprimises have been made to buy cheaper Chinese AEW&CS.
The Phalcon offered to China was of the 2nd generation of Phalcon developed in the 90s. First gen being the 707 based Phalcon sold to Chile. The current Phalcon system on G550 and IAF IL-76 is the third generation system using Israil's 3rd gen L-band T/R modules and vastly improved processing capability.
Erieye has ~1000 T/R modules in its AESA radar, 5 operator consoles, provides 300 degree coverage and flys at 30,000 feet providing 330km(max) detection range against targets flying at sea level.Phalcon by comparison has 4604 T/R modules, 12-16 operators, 360 degree coverage and flys at 40,000 feet providing 400km(max) detection range against targets flying at sea level.IL-76 Phalcon is comparable to 3 Saab 2000 Eryies both in capability and cost
This is the opinion Pakistani patriots held of Saab 2000 untill a few years ago. Now even the Chinese toys look super to them.http://www.pakdef.info/forum/showthread.php?t=7438
Hi Prasun da,Thanks for your reply.Can you Pls clarify some more points:1) In your previous post you have mentioned that MARS-2 EL/I-3150 (which is indeed a ISR Architecture) landed at Delhi Palam Airport for a demonstration tour and during that time it flew a few ground surveillance tracks along India's western border,north-western border and reaching to Kochi. It means Indian Airforce team also Accompanied with the Israeli crew and got the hand on experience with the technology. Can you give us some details how Indian team found this technology useful.What is the feedback of the Indian Airforce regarding this Technology.2)Why India is not purchasing the latest S-400 air defence system from Russia. It is currently the most advance ballistic missile defence system in the world. It can destroy a incoming 3,500 Km range ballistic missile at a speed of 4.5 m/sec. India which is Surrounded by hundreds of Nuclear tipped Ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, deployment of such ABM is highly necessary.3)During the Scorpene Submarine deal in 2005, India did not sign any further purchase of Mirage 2000-5 MK2 which is completly new advance Multi role fighter aircraft.UAE and Greece brought those aircraft.If India purchase some more Mirage fighter aircraft incorporating with some Israeli sensors during the scorpene deal time, Till now those advance mirage may fill the gap of reducing the no's of Multi-role fighter aircraft of the IAF. It was the same aircraft which has played wonderful role during the high altitude Kargil war. Why India did not purchase additional Mirage when IAF have to maintain its present Mirage squandron force till 2025 - 2030?
To Anon@JUNE 08, 2009 1:21:00 PM:JF-17 is sure flying pretty high on imagination. People are talking of it growing into a Rafael when in ACM Ahmed's own words “We are hoping somewhere in 2009 we should be able to induct them into the PAF with some limited operational capability and expand: from short-range missiles to BVR [beyond visual range]; from normal clean iron bombs, conventional bombs, to smarter bombs; to carrying external pods of various types,”.Lets say we will see when it comes, same for LCA.
to friends the defence industry and MOD is really farcenow MOD has floated 1 billion dollar tender to buy just 16 heavy lift helicopters and this would cost 75 million per helicopter ,now u all just c our govt can't buy a IL78 for 80 million but they can buy a helicopter for the same prices400 is best out there and buying MRSAM from israel is just bullshit and work of middleman and lots of ex armed officers working for foreign firms and making some good $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ ,which they won't be able to earn in india
to prasun and friends when india upgrade their IL76 transport aircrafts they will not have PS 90A engines but instead all new "D30KP BURLAK" engines entering service in 2011 this new engine has larger diameter compared to older D30 engines The basis of this upgrading program is the use of the D-30KU/KP/KU-154 family unified core, as well as a new fan with wide chord blades and new low-pressure compressor. The application of a single-stage wide-chord blade fan instead of a three-stage LPC makes it possible to increase the air flow, the engine bypass ratio, the fuel burn and bring the engine ecological characteristics in compliance with the present ICAO requirements New fan with wide chord blade and new low-pressure compressor which provide:o 6-7 % higher efficiency outputo longer engine lives and foreign objects damage resistanceo higher engine maintainability, fan blade replacement and balancing ‘on wing’* Core and low-pressure turbine derived from serial D-30KP-2 engine * Low emission combustor chamber derived from serial D-30KU-154 engine* Electronic engine overspeed unit derived from serial D-30KU-154 engine* Automatic fuel control system derived from serial D-30KU/KP engine family* Enhanced acoustic linings* Updated thrust reverse--------------------------------here is link for this http://www.npo-saturn.ru/!new/?pid=30picture of engine http://www.npo-saturn.ru/!new/inc/img2.php?q=95&p=/bhome/part2/01/r-motors/npo-saturn.ru/www/!new/upload/editifr/30_1_burlak_175.jpg&s=150
To Anon@JUNE 09, 2009 5:05:00 AM: The problem with Russians is their ability to meet commitments. Even the Americans are slithering after having ordered MI-17 helicopters for Iraqi Army.
as if americans meet comitments
thats about new engine not about commitments anf what commitments russia broke u are talking of
Tragic news- An-32 crashed in North East. Search on.Is any replacement planned for this type in IAF? C-27J Spartan perhaps?
bad newsperhapes these should be replacedhttp://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/air-force-plane-crashes-in-arunachal-pradesh_100202919.htmlIAF An-32 crashes in Arunachal PradeshAn Air Force transport plane with at least 14 people on board crashed on Tuesday in Arunachal Pradesh. Two helicopters have been sent to find out the debris of the plane.According to sources, IAF AN-32 aircraft with eight IAF personnel and six civilians took off from Mechuka in Arunachal Pradesh and went missing shortly after. It was expected to reach Tawang area.The AN-32 plane had flown from Dibrugarh in Assam to Mechuka in Arunachal from where it took off again with the civilians for Jorhat at around 2 pm, after which the aircraft went missing, said IAF spokesman Wing Commander P Sahu.Authorities have issued orders for conducting an investigation into the tragic incident.
has it been shot down by the chicoms?
so what an32 crashed as if c130 never crashed and talking of replacement is just work of 1 or 2 days it takes years anyway those an32 going for upgrade by ukrain
despite knowing that india and russia going to build MRTA this question of acquiring c27j doesn't arise if this question arises then there is be200 aircraft which is multi rolenow i doubt that chicoms might have done it
Crash breakers 2006-2008IAF - Mig-29 : 5Mig 21 : 5 Cheetah SA-315 : 5Kiran HJT-16 : 4Sea Harrier : 3PAF - F-7 : 11Mirage III : 9Cessna T-37 : 3Source: http://www.warbirdsofindia.com/Crashes/count.phpNot all crashes are listed here, only the troubled types.Can someone please add this years figures.
My personal flight experience with the An-32B in the North East over the years indicates that the crash took place under bad-weather conditions and consequently, human error remains the main probable reason, possibly due to aircrew disorientation and controlled flight into terrain (CFIT). The An-32B is a highly rugged platform with twin engines and all that's reqd is an avionics update that should preferably include cost-effective systems like Avidyne's Multi-Hazard Avoidance System and BF Goodrich Aerospace's Skywatch/Stormscope. Hopefully the aircrew were equipped with ELTs to facilitate the search-and-rescue effort.
to prasunbad whether can only be the problem specially when area is hilly
to prasunour admiral was shouting for price hike for gorshkov in 2007 and at 946 million for this ship is pretty cheap knowing that ship is being build inside outSevmash have not got payments from the Indian party for two years and that did not allow expanding works on the ship in full(as per shiv aroor said in his blog).and india still has to pay 246 million more to cover up and make it to 946 millionand as for delay of this ship scorpene sub indction has been delayed for 2 years and total time since scorpene bought to induction now will be over 9 yearshow can a gorshkov class ship can be deliverd in just 5 yearsnow both p15a,p17 are delayed as welland why the hell admiral's tongue is quite over DCN and MDL now
to friends as u all know that india going to include ukrain in its arms inports and russia isn't happy over this because of ukrain being pro western but what advatage ukrain got for being pro western whether someone look at AN 70 aircraft no one in europe bought it and they built their own hell costly and delayed A400 no one came from airbus ,boeing to support antonov aircraft companny to start production of AN124 since then the aircraft production has dried upnoone bought naval ships form ukrain,not even single warship has been built in ukrain since 1991noone bought various kind of misisles from ukrain only pakistan bought t80 tanks which were superior to chines tanks ---------------------------------so what is prospective of india getting an70 transport aircraft and hoe long it will take for delivery if india buys it
an72 was also chasing for indian navy tender to supply patrol aircraft
to prasun you have already posted brochures for various russian naval ships and their radars and other related infois there any brochures regarding which radar will be usedin gorshkov and and what will the configuatiion of operating consoles etc
Could the crashes be a result of neglegace by maintanence staff?? India has many airbases, maybe some bases have incompetant staff, esp remote bases.
To Anon@3:24PM: SEVMASH never said it had never received any payments from India. It had only said that it had not received any payments for the past two years for doing work on INS Vikramaditya. This difference is very important to bear in mind. And this is because India can never make any payments directly to either SEVMASH or RAC-MiG or any other Russian OEM for military hardware. ALL payments made by India for any military deal with Russia MUST go through Rosoboronexport State Corp. This is mandatory. No one can escape from this reqmt. The contract for INS Vikramaditya and MiG-29K/KUBs and Ka-28PL/Ka-31s in January 2004 was inked between the Indian MoD and Rosoboronexport only. Therefore, when SEVMASH is saying that it hasn't received any money for work already done over the past two years, it means SEVMASH has not been paid by Rosoboronexport for reasons best known only to the Russian Defence Ministry. India cannot even give 10 cents to SEVMASH, as it will be illegal and violate the terms of the contract inked between the MoD and Rosoboronexport. Regarding the Scorpene construction by MDL, as you may be aware MDL is sourcing ALL raw materials for the first three Scorpenes diectly from DCNS. Due to this, MDL has to import all this by paying up much more (due to the Euro's appreciation) than what was envisaged in 2005 at the time of contract signature. People are falsely assuming that since the deal is a fixed-price contract, therefore DCNS should not hike the price. What such ill-informed people don't know (as they haven't read the contract documents) is that the dixed-price clauses do not apply to the importation of raw materials and currency volatility. This is clearly stated in the contract.
Top Anon@3:55PM: Yup. I have a PowerPoint presentation from SEVMASH as well as 15 CAD drawings of INS Vikramaditya in its final operational configuration. Got them three years ago.To Anon@4:02PM: That will be highly unlikely as the An-32B is a very forgiving aircraft. I myself experienced this when once at nighttime the aircraft I was on flew through a hailstorm! That whole area in Assam and Arunachal Pradesh is quite treacherous due to rapidly changing wind and weather conditions. A sudden depression or wind-shear is all that's reqd and also statistically speaking, 97% of aircraft emergencies take place immediately after takeoff and just prior to landing. And of this 97%, 80% of them result in fatal crashes because the aircrew is just not well-versed in responding quickly during such emergencies. And this in turn is because the aircrew are not routinely trained to combat such emergencies in flight simulators!!! Therefore, as you may have now realised, the aircew's flight proficiency for handling in-flight emergencies is not consistent, and the aircrew therefore has to rely only on theoretical instructions received long ago (during type conversion)that the aircrew may or may not be able to recall when reqd. And that is the reason why I've been harping endlessly about the reqmt for flight simulators. Not having them tantamounts to criminal negligence!
By the way, does anyone know under what conditions the first two An-32Bs of the IAF mysteriously disappeared over the Arabian Sea in July 1984 while they were on their last leg of the ferry flight (after departing from Muscat, Oman) and were destined for Jamnagar?
Yup. I have a PowerPoint presentation from SEVMASH as well as 15 CAD drawings of INS Vikramaditya in its final operational configuration. Got them three years ago.-------------------------------so when will u post them
to prasun and friendswatch this prety coolhttp://www.google.ca/url?q=http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D9VnTO-2ZBPk&ei=-QQvSqblJouaMrGuxfYJ&sa=X&oi=video_result&resnum=1&ct=thumbnail&usg=AFQjCNGeA11ga9RJNV7DpWbaVEB8Qt44Kg
Prasun, please provide us with the pictures of the CAD drqwngs of the Vikramaditya in its final avataar.Thanks
Lets not read too much into An-32 crash. Its the first crash of this type in the last 10 years. Not bad for a fleet of 100+ aircraft which is the day to day workhorse of the IAF.We should be more concerned about the surprising number of Mig-29 crashes in recent years. 5 since 2006.
Anyone know under what conditions the first two An-32Bs of the IAF mysteriously disappeared over the Arabian Sea in July 1984 while they were on their last leg of the ferry flight (after departing from Muscat, Oman) and were destined for Jamnagar? I'll give you a clue: one US Navy F-14 Tomcat too went down in the same incident. And the crash investigation file is still open till this day at IAF HQ.
due to mid air collision with tomcat?
Prasunda, What's ur take on heavy-attack helis..like Ka-52..You seem to prefer Apache..for our RFP for heavy-attack helis. Is ur preference based on bad record of Russians in spare parts and low-balling price negotiations or concerns about the platform itself. Theoretically, Ka-52 looks formidable,massive firepower,m aneuverable and really fast. Instead of attack-helis..isn't it better for us to go for damn cheap armed-Super Tucanos for close-air support..especially to go after Maoists in jungles and Pakistanis in Kashmir?
Dogfight? What a glorious way for a transport to go down. On second thought...cyclone?
Crash breakers 2006-2008IAF - Mig-29 : 5Mig 21 : 5 Cheetah SA-315 : 5Kiran HJT-16 : 4Sea Harrier : 3PAF - F-7 : 11Mirage III : 9Cessna T-37 : 3Source: http://www.warbirdsofindia.com/Crashes/count.phpNot all crashes are listed here, only the troubled types.Can someone please add this years figures.-----------------------------------8 crashes this year thus far21 Jan 09 - Kiran II at Bidar - Wg Cdr R.S. Dhaliwal (RIP) 06 Mar 09 - NAL Saras at Bangalore - Wg Cdr K. Praveen, Wg Cdr D.K. Shah, Sqn Ldr S. Ilyaraj RIP 25 Mar 09 - Kamov 28 ditches in sea off Goa -3 Crew safe 30 Apr 09 - Sukhoi-30MKI cr Jaisalmer - Wg Cdr P S Narah (RIP). 15 May 09 - MiG-27 cr Jodhpur - Pilot ejected. 27 May 09 - MiG-21 Bison Cr Jodhpur - Pilot ejected.09 June 09 - An-32 - Search on.All random types. No specific villian this year.
Prasun,post 1971 war with Pakistan, US Navy airplanes have known to be shadowing, taking pictures of any IAF/IN new aircraft acquisitions in order to collect information on numbers, types, model of airplanes and possibly passing the info to the Pakistanis. My guess is it was a mid air collision similar to what happened in the late 90's involving a US NAvy P3C and a Chinese Mig off the CHinese coast.
to anon at Wednesday, June 10, 2009 6:06:00 AM all helicopters are equally good,whether its apache,mi28,ka50/52 and all of these heicopters carry almost similar amount of ammo and in almost similar numbers mi28,ka50/52 have big advatage becoz these have similar engines Klimov TV3-117VM turboshafts, which is also used in MI17so our techs are trained for mi17 same can also be used in ka50/52,mi28 as well
for 5 mig29 crashes in last 3 years don't worry ,u must remind urself that in alnoe 2004 in just 3 successive months there were 3 mirage2000 crashed as well and for that matter any fighter can crash any time it depends on "yamraj" if he is against someone not on technicians
To Anon@JUNE 10, 2009 9:34:00 AM:You are only comparing helicopters superficially. There is more to than meets the eye. No other helicopter comes close to Apache Block2/Block3 capability. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/PUB_AH-64D_Versions_lg.jpg
australia bought 24 f18e for 6 billion australian bucks of 4.8 billion US bucks which included trainng,ground based infra,simulators etcnow saab offered 85 gripen for 6 billion US dollars to netherlands which included training,simulator,ground based equipment etc so which deal is betterand which deal india should grab considering gripen NG cost less than 3000 dollars per hour operation
to anon at Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:47:00 AM any electronic/optrical sensors can be added to any combat helicopter and russian helicopters are no exception
To Anons@5:50AM,6:30AM & 8:36AM: The IAF's Board of Enquiry that was constituted to investigate the An-32B crashes could not reach any definitive conclusions and consequently the Navy's Directorate of Naval Intelligence was invited to take part in the investigations, since the Navy's long-range SIGINT/ELINT capabilities significantly outstripped those of the IAF at that time. According to Navy HQ this is what PROBABLY happened: As the two An-32Bs were following a flightpath close to the coastlines of Oman and Baluchistan (but over international airspace), they accidently intruded into a controlled airspace at the mouth of the Persian Gulf in the northern Arabian Sea where a US Navy Carrier Battle Group was conducting routine air exercises (Navy HQ had conclusive evidence of this). Two airborne F-14s were told to check out this 'intrusion' by the as-yet unknown aircraft (since the An-32B was never seen outside the USSR then) and what probably followed was a cat-and-mouse game that led to one F-14 'overshooting' one of the An-32Bs being tailed (probably because the An-32B was trying to shake off the F-14 by deliberately changing its cruising airspeed and altitude, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing). This subsequently led to the F-14 pilot loosing orientation at his 6'o'clock and this in turn resulted in a classic collision course scenario in which one An-32B collided head-on with the rear of the F-14, and both aircraft went to down to the sea. The F-14's aircrew, it seems, could not eject and died. But what remains a mystery till this day is why the second An-32B too crashed. It was also learnt much later that the US Navy had wrapped up its aircraft wreckage recovery operations within a 6-hour period following the crashes, and even offered to conduct such operations on India's behalf, if requested. But it seems at that time India spurned the offer and the US too backed off and refused to share any further data on this incident.To kannan da: I don't know how you've concluded that I prefer any specific bidder for the IAF's attack helicopter reqmt. I have nothing against the Ka-50 or Ka-52 or Mi-28NE, for as long as Rosoboronexport or Oboronprom can guarantee life-long product support through Rosoboronservice India Pvt Ltd. In fact, between the three above-mentioned contenders, I will prefer the tandem-seat Mi-28NE provided it is offered jointly by Rosoboronexport and Israel Aerospace Industries or by Oboronprom and Elbit Systems, which will enable the Mi-28NE to be optimised, like the Su-30MKI, for the unique operational reqmts of the Indian end-user. But mind you, the Mi-28NE is presently equipped with the Klimov TV3-117engines and if this can be replaced by the more powerful and cheaper-to-operate-and-maintain VK-2500 engines, then the modified Mi-28NE's performance will far outstrip that of the Boeing AH-64D Apache or Eurocopter's Tigre.
apache is nothing more than hyped helicopter and u can add as many fancy stuff to a helicopter making it top of the line but again what about the cost???a new fully digital russian helicopter will cost no more than 15-15 million dollars compared to what apache will cost?? over 35 million
are VK-2500 engines better than those TV3-117enginesand for life cycle support there should be no problem for any russian helicpter becoz of similarity of mi17,mi28 n engines ,graer box
spare shortage is main problem for older jets like those mig23 just retired ,mig25 but not for all
to prasun i want know that those mi17v5 india orderd will have vk2500 engine or same older 117tv3 engines
it is being said that an32 crashed because of bad wheather ??and prasun how do u know about an32 collided with f14
Hi Prasun,Can you clarify some points mentioned above by me.(Tuesday, June 09, 2009 1:45:00 AM)Thanks,
To Anon@JUNE 10, 2009 9:36:00 AM: Why it always comes down to Russian vs others. I only inquired about the cause of recent spate of crashes. If you have no technical knowledge then spare this blog of useless "yamraj" comments.The real technology in combat helicopters is not engines, payload but what you have convinently described as electronic/optrical sensors. Some of the individual items in the list are more complex to develop than entire attack helicopters.Helicopters being inheriently more vunerable to fighters are more dependent on things like Situational awareness, AES, Image Fusion etc for survival in MANPADS dense environment.
prasunda,when you are going to post CAD drawing for groshkov
Helicopters being inheriently more vunerable to fighters are more dependent on things like Situational awareness, AES, Image Fusion etc for survival in MANPADS dense environment.-----------------------------all this stuff is already available for m israel to be used on russian built helicopter
Why it always comes down to Russian vs others. I only inquired about the cause of recent spate of crashes. If you have no technical knowledge then spare this blog of useless "yamraj" comments.------------------------------as for an32 crash compare it with c130 crasheshow many f16 crash worldwide everyyear
To Kannan: Knowingly or unknowlingly, you raised a highly pertinent point: close air support and attack helicopters. Firstly, attack helicopters ARE NOT the best platforms for close air support as they are highly vulnerable to MANPADS, especially if up to seven shoulder-launched VSHORAD missiles are launched at the same time to overwhelm the helicopter's defensive aids suite. Secondly, and consequently, attack helicopters are best employed when used to ambush or engage static/moving hostile armoured forces by using combined arms tactics, meaning using attack helicopters, armed aeroscout helicopters, field artillery and mechanised infantry all at the same time through synchronised target engagement procedures. Therefore, consequently, any attack helicopter if used for close air support (as the IAF prefers to use them, quite wrongly), will suffer the same fate as that suffered by the Mi-24s in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Since the attack helicopter has emerged as an integral component of an Army's combined arms team, it should be the Army that owns and operates the attack helicopter, and not the IAF. The IAF, on the other, hand, should concentrate on providing tactical air interdiction support to hinder the logistics/resupply efforts of hostile ground forces and destroy the strategic hardware reserves of hostile ground forces. The Army, on the other hand, could employ UCAVs armed with anti-armour missiles or even 250kg small diameter laser-guided bombs for providing close air support on an on-demand basis. Such UCAVS should also be owned and operated by the Army since only the ground commander best knows the quantum of close air support reqd and where it is most reqd. This is exactly what we're now witnessing in Afghanistan, where UCAVs are being used in increasing nos and are fast replacing fixed-wing combat aircraft and attack helicopters for close air support. Using aircraft like Tucanos or PC-21s for counter-insurgency operations is all right if the areas to be attacked have been totally cleared of civilian inhabitants (as Pakistan has done in the Swat Valley). In J & K, however, this is not politically acceptable and therefore employment of attack helicopters or fixed-wing close air support aircraft will be counter-productive there. The Indisn Army too found this out the hard way in northern Sri Lanka when the IPKF had to frequently request for field artillery support or heliborne artillery support (from the IAF's Mi-25s) in response to isolated and unccordinated mortar attacks launched by the LTTE from areas inhabitated by civilians. This led to several unintended collateral civilian casualties in Jaffna and Wanni, something that could have been avoided had the IPKF been adequately trained and equipped to undertake low-intensity operations in urban terrain. But this was not the case since the IPKF forces inducted under OP Pawan were infantry divisions trained solely for fighting a clearly defined conventional enemy in the mountains and plains, and not under FIBUA or MOUT scenarios. But needless to say, several valuable lessons were learnt then and applied later in J & K when the Rashtriya Rifles formations were raised.
it doesn't mean being of western origin a centain hardware will always be better than russian stuffand for an32 crash its not russian it belong to antonov which is in ukrainall IL76/78,mi8/17,mi35,mi26,an32,su30 have proved themselves in reliabilityu can compare 9 crashes of mirage2000 vs 8 crashes of mig29those bisons and mig27,mig29 are not fly by wire and thats why harder to operate and crash rates r more
Prasun, your argument above only underlines the need to get the most advanced attack helicopter we can lay our hands on. Some of the tech in Apache is of the level of JSF. And strike jets can still do without the best sensor fusion, networking capability, for helicopters it has become essential. No wonder Apache is selling like hot cakes and Israelis are greatest fans of it.As for close air support with UCAVs. First we have to get our army the promised guns.
To Anon@10:07AM: All Mi-17V-5s produced by Kazan Helicopter Plant and Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant since 2007 have VK-2500 engines as standard fit. The recent deliveries of Mi-17V-5s to China and Pakistan already have them and are optimised for hot-and-high operations. The IAF's Mi-17V-5s too will have VK-2500s. To Anon@10:12AM: As I explained yesterday (above), the combination of flying in valleys over mountainous terrain (where wind conditions and visibility are impossible to predict) and an aircrew whose proficiency in responding to weather-induced in-flight emergencies is severely in doubt (due to the total absence of An-32B flight simulators within the IAF) creates a lethal cocktail that will only lead to such fatal and avoidable crashes from time to time. I heard about the An-32B/F-14 collision directly from some senior CENTCOM officials visiting the Dubai Air Show way back in 1991.
What is the status of Mig-29 upgrade?Is something being done to improve safety? given the cost of Mirage2000 upgrade wont it be prudent to sell them off and buy seconded Mig29 and upgrade them.
To Anon@10:16AM: You can view them at: http://picasaweb.google.ru/R.Igor.W/TfZPFJ#To Anon@10:46AM: The Mi-28NE upgraded with Israel-origin mission avionics and defensive aids suite will be as network-centric as any AH-64D Apache Longbow. And what will make such network-centric platforms functional and effective is not the sophistication of the platform itself, but its integration with the end-user's C4I network, field artillery fire direction/ccordination system and battlespace management system. This is better achieved if the attack helicopter platform is acquired in green condition (like the Mi-28NE) and then suitably equipped with the right mix of software-defined mission avionics and defensive aids suite. On the other hand, if the Tigre or AH-1Z or AH-64D are acquired on an as-is where-is basis, then the entire existing network-centric war-waging infrastructure of the Army will have to be reconfigured just for accommodating the AH-1Z or AH-64D.
Concerning the subject of this thread. Interior images of IL-76 Phalcon are posted here-http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/06/exclusive-photos-inside-phalcon.htmlPrasun, can you tell what is the console in the first image?
To Subroto: The EL/I-3150 was brough to India not for the benefit of the IAF or the Army, but for RAW's Aviation Research Centre (ARC). For some stupid reason that defies all logic, only the ARC is authorised by the Govt of India to engage in peacetime airborne border surveillance and photographic/satellite imagery surveillance inside the sovereign territories of India's neighbours. That's why the IAF has acquired the same EL/M-2060P surveillance system (but mounted in a pod) from IAI for the Su-30MKI, BUT they will be used operationally only during wartime. Even the RISAT-2/TecSAR overhead recce satellite is not under the Strategic Forces Command (which really needs such a capability for strategic nuclear targetting), but under the Dehra Dun-located National Technical Research organisation (NTRO). I have no idea how a civilian agency can undertake the kind of military threat appreciation that the armed forces require. This was one of the main reasons why the Pakistani military buildup in the Northern Areas went unnoticed by RAW prior to OP Vijay in early 1999.Regarding the S-400 and BMD for India, Indian BMD-related R & D began way back in late 1998 and thus by the time the S-400 was available for export, too much money and R & D effort had already been sunk into the DRDO-led R & D efforts. Therefore, for logical reasons, it is far more prudent to carry on with the indigenous R & D efforts, especially when technological assistance is available from both Israel and Russia as and when reqd (like the Green Pine LRTR and Russia-origin active radars for terminal guidance). As for additional Mirage 2000 imports from France, yes, they would have been welcome had IAF HQ decided to retire from service the MiG-29B-12s. Now with the MiG-29 upgrade already authorised and underway, there's no available financial allocation for procuring additional Mirage 2000s. To Anon@10:52AM: The MiG-29s to be upgraded will only have the new RD-33-3 engines with FADEC (thereby doing away with the problematic and maintenance-heavy fuel pumps) and a new avionics suite, not the fly-by-wire flight control system (FBW-FCS). This will improve the MiG-29's flight safety features by more than 60%, but not 100%. Personally, I would have preferred to to see the IAF inducting an additional three squadrons of ex-French Air Force Mirage 2000s way back in 2002 and upgrading them to the -5 standard if reqd, and retiring the MiG-29B-12s from service by 2010, and ordering an additional 120 Su-30MKIs (of this only 40 have been ordered) to add to the 230 already on order. I don't understand why the IAF wants to induct a new 4th generation M-MRCA by 2012 and the 5th generation by 2015 when the upgraded Mirage 2000-5s, to-be-upgraded Jaguar IS and upgraded Su-30MKIs (to be available from 2014) can do the job of replacing the decommissioned MiG-23BNs and MiG-27Ms.
To Anon@11:16AM: It is the radio communications frequency management console.
Does Mig-29K have FBW? Sweden is also planning to half its Jas-39 fleet and put the rest on auction. What has come of the French Mirages? Can PAF buy them?
How many Mig-29 nos are in IAF service? We are lost 11 so far. 9 in just last 10 years.http://www.warbirdsofindia.com/Crashes/crpage.php?qacid=71&qafdb=IAF&datesall=ON
Yes, the MiG-29K/KUB has FBW-FCS. Perhaps the Swedish Air Force wants to offload the existing JAS-39s to buyers like Thailand and Croatia while it acquires the newer Gripen NG. I don;t think the PAF will go for ex-French Air Force Mirage 2000-5s as it has already committed itself to the Changdu FC-20 from China. The IAF's MiG-29 upgrade contract was for 67 units. Maybe it is for 65 now.
Did we buy 65+11=76 Mig-29? Thats more like 4 squadrons and not the 3 reported.
Thanks for your clarificationPresent situation is that India did not strike on Pakistan after 26/11 remains only little reason. An offensive air-strike or missile strike on Pakistani terrorist bases will lead to a full scale war and Pakistan will retaliate with their Nuclear weapons. India do not have the same level of operational nuclear delivery platform that Pakistan has (may be we have more modern nuclear warheads). Only Operational Nuclear Platform of the Indian Army is the Pritvi missile and few aircraft like Mirage and Sukhoi of the Indian Airforce. India does not have NBC warfare protection for its troops and Military assests. It did not have effective Ballistic and cruise missile defence system in its place. A first nuclear strike by Pakistan (as per Pakistan Nuclear doctrine) would kill millions of Indian people (including Indian Politicians) and the radiation would kill many more This is only the reason why India did not retaliate even there was enough pressure on Govt. to Strike.What will happen if any other Terrorist incident occurs?Why India is not serious in Modernization of entire Nuclear Warfare?
to friends there is nothing what a mi28n can't do and apache can both 117tv3 and VK2500 are equally good becasue IAF flies its mi8 and mi17 regularly to hilly areas of siachen and eastern sector and desert areas that too without problem and ya some tech in apache is of f3 level and its safe from manpads and thats why iraqis shooting it down with even guns
no othere were no 11 accidents of mi29 only 8 of them have crashedhere is m200 crashes http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3192/2898066429_d8782853e1_o.jpghere is mig29 crashes http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3034/2898136237_bee38b1158_o.jpg
to prasun what is the price of new apache
To Anon@12:29PM: Some surplus airframes are always retained as war wastage reserves for operational squadrons.To Subroto: Why should India have to retaliate militarily especially when Pakistan is beset with a hostile Afghanistan on one hand and raging internal insurgencies in NFWP, FATA and Baluchistan? One cannot combat insurgencies with full-scale conventional warfare. Far better to 'lend moral, financial and political support' to the beleagured Baluchis and the persecuted Shia communities in NWFP and the Northern Areas. And this support need not be covert, but an open declaratory policy. That alone will send the right signals across the border. A tit-for-tat approach will work perfectly well. But for Singh to be called King, he should have the balls to articulate such a policy framework and put it to practice. Afterall India's Parliament passed a resolution long ago to recover Azad Kashmir (POK) and the Northern Areas and therefore, legally and morally, India is entitled to 'liberate' the Shia-dominated Northern Areas from the clutches of the Sunni Punjabis.
I'm posting below the weblinks of some of the available flight safety products whose installation must be made mandatory on board those military fixed-wing and rotary-winged utility aircraft, especially those flying over water or mountainous terrain.www.sarsat.noaa.gov/Phaseout_Brochure.pdfhttp://www.as.l-3com.com/products/stormscope/http://www.as.l-3com.com/products/skywatch/http://www.as.l-3com.com/products/landmark/http://www.as.l-3com.com/products/iris/http://www.as.l-3com.com/products/tacan/http://www.as.l-3com.com/products/ehsi/http://www.avidyne.com/publications/guides/AV819_Choosing_MHAS_Rev01.pdfMy aviation MRO company has already installed such hardware on several single-engined and twin-engined aircraft used by flying training schools (both civilian and military).
to prasun whats the name of ur company and give the website so that we can look at it
Egypt is purchasing 12 AH-64D Block II APACHE Longbow Helicopters and associated equipment, parts, training and support for an estimated cost of $820 million.last i heard italy bought 16 chinooks for 1.2 billion and that includes associated equipment, parts, training and support. This is a horrendous price for a chopper. Why is the IAF leaning towards Apache? This re-tendering has been done just to accommodate Longbow Apache in the competition. Is IAF really serious about spending $70 million on an attack helicopter? Is it worth it?if it is then why not just buy mig35 for 75 million which includes aesa associated equipment, parts, training and support
To Anon@JUNE 10, 2009 1:03:00 PM: Mig-29 rashes of 1999, 2001, 2002 are missing in your link. These were indeed crashes. Check the details in "...more".http://www.warbirdsofindia.com/Crashes/crpage.php?qacid=71&qafdb=IAF&datesall=ON
I don't understand why the IAF wants to induct a new 4th generation M-MRCA by 2012 and the 5th generation by 2015----------------------------That was a false information spread by Day Dreaming Directorate of IAF just to confure the PAF chiefs. IAF HQ knows that 5th generation won't be available by 2015, as HAL is involved in it.
Sorry, don't take my previous comment on 5th Gn fighter seriously. I was just kidding.I have a question (not sure whether you will answer).Will BMD be useful to India, as the flight time from pak to India will be only around 4-7 mins and much of those crucial time will be spent only in confirming the launch.
1. What is preventing the DRDO from reverse engineering the Bofors howitzers and the OFB from mass producing them perhaps as a truck mounted system? Why these continued delays in acquiring such vital systems as field guns. Are we really importing every single 155 mm shell even now? Have we learnt no lessons from Kargil? Its been 10 years since Kargil, all the OFB needed to do was cut open a 155mm shell, copy it part by part and produce it. If we can do 130 mm shells surely we can do 155mm. 2. Can the IAF MiG-29 be converted to naval MiG-29K. If so instead of retiring its fleet the IAF can transfer its MiG-29 to the navy and they can be sent to Russia for conversion and the Navy can save costs by not buying fresh MiGs. 3. Can you explain how the IAF plans to use its planes in future. It is known that the IAF will operate mainly the Su-30 MKI, MMRCA and Tejas. How does the IAF plan to use them in war and in what role. Which plane will do interdictions, which plane will do CAS and so on.
Can the IAF MiG-29 be converted to naval MiG-29K. If so instead of retiring its fleet the IAF can transfer its MiG-29 to the navy and they can be sent to Russia for conversion and the Navy can save costs by not buying fresh MiGs.---------------------------------no they can't be converted to naval version and fresh mig will still be cheaper and will be comparable to rafale,f18 as far as air to air engagement concerned and for ground attack, main problem will be catapult which allows heavier payload but gorky or for that matter ADS doesn't have
I don't understand why the IAF wants to induct a new 4th generation M-MRCA by 2012----------------------------------no MRCA coming in 2012,it will be late 2014 when we first see MRCA and this decision will not be taken late next year which aircraft to buyso from late 2010 it will still take 40-48 months before first fighter arrive but by then PAK FA will be flying
1. If Govt.of India spending so much money on DRDO's R&D on BMD and want a fully develop Indian made BMD and due to this reason do not want to purchase the ready and advance system like the S-400 (LR-SAM) which can knock down a incoming ballistic missile a range of 3,500 KM, then how they have sign the deal with Israel to devlop MR-SAM which is only in the design board now. Indian Airforce has purchased Spyder Low Level Quick Reaction Missiles (SR-SAM) and now Indian Army too wants to purchase it. From where money is coming for these additional purchase and how these are getting cleared by the Armed forces, MOD and CCS?Even ready made MR-SAM is available to India like S-300 VM which can shoot down a 2,500 KM ballistic and cruise missile. Did India test this system before going to co-develop the MR-SAM with Israel?2. India has decided to produce all Six Scorpene submarine in India.As per news, first 3 submarines will be without AIP system and will arm with 50 KM range Exocet SM-39 anti-ship missile. Why first 3 submarines will not have AIP technology and why it is armed with only short range 50 km anti-ship missile where as India already operating 300 km range Klub class / Brahmos Anti ship cruise missiles.Why can’t these missiles be integrated with the scorpene submarine and why not all submarine built with AIP technology when ultimately we are spending a huge amount of money?
prasunji, pls tell us more about the mystery about the An32-tomcat incident....I know u have much more reach and capability to analyse the facts than mere mortals like me...also pls provide a picture of the AMOGH carbine...i am hearing abt it for the first time.
This photo is clearly shows the radome on KJ-200 AWAC is not mechanically rotate.KJ-2000http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/8152/58c8a9c301074c4a.jpgE-3http://www.3af.usafe.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/080402-F-7672L-004.jpgThe triangular shape is in same position in all photos you can find on the net. It's impossible if it's rotate..
====================================="Anonymous said... Is this AWACS using a rotodom? does the radar array rotate inside the dome? Not AESA? Sunday, June 07, 2009 10:21:00 AM Prasun K Sengupta said... Yes, the A-50E/KJ-2000 employs a mechanical scanning rotating radar, not AESA. The same is the case with the CATIC/CETC-developed ZDK-03 AEW & CS platform for the PAF. The KJ-200 uses AESA. Sunday, June 07, 2009 10:25:00 AM "=====================================That's is not true!Y-8/ZDK-03 is not mechanically rotate inside..same as KJ-2000.Look at white stripe on radome. not the same...It's rotating on the outside just like the E-3 sentry AWAC.Y-8/ZDK-03http://cnair.top81.cn/gallery/Y-8AWACS6.jpghttp://moinansari.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/chinese-awac-at-chaklala-airforce-base-rawalpindi.jpg
to anon at Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:07:00 PM most of the deals with israel have been surrounded by controversies as you know barak-1 has failed many times and its speed and range is inferior to tor and aster 15 missiles even then this israeli missile meets requiremnts now coming to MRSAM you already know that 600 crore was paid for royalities and its also true that both su300,s400 are far superior to MRSAM when its comes to BMD and these russian systems already in production but nowdays govt. and middle man don't earn as much as when they do deals with russia compared to same thing they do with israeland fool air chief said IL78 doesn't meet requirement f**k with him?? just bullhitin this way AKULA-2 not supposed to meet requirements and just reject it.
To Anonymous @ Thursday, June 11, 2009 2:11:00 PMJust because Y-8 with radome was pictured don’t mean that PAF will be getting that. PAF was first offered Y-8 with radome but was rejected and then china offered KJ-200 and is developed further to meet the PAF’s requirements and now we have seen the pictures of improved KJ-200 and Sept 2008 issue of AFM the then PAF Chief's interview clearly states that the Y-8F-600 airframe, designated as the ZDK-03.
to friends and prasun,as claimed by honeywell F125IN increases the paylaod carried by 4400lbs or 2 tons it means jaguar already carrying 4.5 ton paylaod can now carry almost 6.5 tons but i don't believe this but how many people believe this please give u r responses and if they have any technical knowledge about this please post that too
to prasuncan you clarify why india dragged negotiations over gorshkov from 1996 to jan 2004 if india had accepted the ship in 1996, the refurbishing at that time must be cheaper and russia had accepted lower price because of its weaker economy but today things are different and cost of materials is sky high and at that time same ship would have cost us less than a billion dollarsso why india criticised why they themselves dragged its negotiations
On the Mig 29 upgrade deal .....it was for 63 aircraft; 1 a/c from No 28 Sqdn at Jamnagar crashed after the deal was signed............that leaves 62. Also 3 sqdns operational.....No 28 (First Supersonics/Jamnagar); No 47 (Black Archers/Adampur) and No 223 (Tridents/Adampur). Reports suggest 6 a/c already in Russia for Upgrade; rest to be upgraded by HAL.
KJ 2000 is not the same as A-50E. No proof has been provided, just info on Russian bird.Seperatley J 11B is in service contrary to earlier reports on this blog.
yes j11b is in service its true
is the y-8 a rotating antenna?if so, what kind of rotary coupler does it use?thanks
Post a Comment