Army, IAF top brass meet to finetune operational synergy

[Mblaze]

Army, IAF top brass meet to finetune operational synergy

The top brass of the Indian Army and Air Force on Thursday assembled at the Udhampur based Northern Command headquarters to fine tune their ‘operational synergy’ and review the current security situation across the frontiers.

To attend the crucial review meeting, Chief of Army staff General VK Singh arrived here along with Air-Officer Commanding-in-Chief Western Air Command Air Marshal DC Kumaria and DGMO Lt-General AK Choudhary.

Officiating Defence PRO in Jammu SN Acharya said on his arrival at Udhampur the Army Chief was briefed on all security issues by Army Commander Northern Command Lt-Gen KT Parnaik.

Official sources said during the meeting the senior IAF officers shared vital operational inputs with the Army Chief and highlighted the importance of better synergy.

The high-level joint security meeting was also attended by all General Officer Commandings (GOCs) of different divisions and top IAF officers, officiating defence PRO said.

Army, IAF top brass meet to finetune operational synergy

 

[T90TankGuy]

the fact is till recently the IAF were always subservient to the army and were always looked on to provide ground support. its only recently that the army and air force started to talk about synergy in battle .

 

[SQ8]

the fact is till recently the IAF were always subservient to the army and were always looked on to provide ground support. its only recently that the army and air force started to talk about synergy in battle .

These are the forgings of a modern force.
Next would be de-"packaging" assets from each force and allowed them to come under a unified sector command.
Such as North-west, South-west and eastern.
Each command not having anything of its own.. but being able to request units from the Army,AF(and Navy) where applicable for its use.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

These are the forgings of a modern force.
Next would be de-"packaging" assets from each force and allowed them to come under a unified sector command.
Such as North-west, South-west and eastern.
Each command not having anything of its own.. but being able to request units from the Army,AF(and Navy) where applicable for its use.

There is now a conscious move away from the LO (Liasion Officer) level interactions that took place in the past. Which was good in form but inadequate in function. And was the bane of the Armed Forces right upto 1971. Kargil was a change of tack, but only just. Then the experiments in ANC Fortress Command bore fruit and became the basis of changes which have been seen in ever-widening scope in the exercises in recent years. But IMO, Gen.V.K.Singh has been particularly proactive in pursuing these changes, more than any COAS in recent times. That will likely be the lasting legacy of his tenure in office.
If the road-map for the growth of the Army Aviation Corps gets clearly enunciated (as it must), then we will be sure that this trend will be carved in stone.

 

[SQ8]

If the road-map for the growth of the Army Aviation Corps gets clearly enunciated (as it must), then we will be sure that this trend will be carved in stone.

Which is where I think a decision will have to be reached to detach the tactical helo airlift capability from the IAF and hand it over to the IA. The IAF can retain helo's for SAR and Communication flights. But the Army should have ownership of all battlefield transport assets. It will reduce the latency for troop movements and requests.
The Army should not however.. move into fixed wing tactical range transport assets as these should remain with the AF.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Which is where I think a decision will have to be reached to detach the tactical helo airlift capability from the IAF and hand it over to the IA. The IAF can retain helo's for SAR and Communication flights. But the Army should have ownership of all battlefield transport assets. It will reduce the latency for troop movements and requests.
The Army should not however.. move into fixed wing tactical range transport assets as these should remain with the AF.

Indeed, the tactical lift and attack assets (rotary wing) must be with the Army. So that the necessary doctrines and tactics for them can be created and honed by the Army. In fact they are (or ought to be) organic with land-warfare. I'd use the analogy of the attack helicopters being the Cavalry of the Air (Air Panzers). While the Indian Army has had air-assets (latterly rotary wing) for considerable time, they were thought of utility only in AOP and CASEVAC roles. That has changed recently in tune with requirements.

Of course there was the issue of the IAF zealously guarding their air-asset turf vis-a-vis the IA. Just as they had with the IN in the (historical) past. Two far-sighted ACMs of those times accepted (some say buckled down) to the tenacious efforts of past CNS. Though the ground realities were clearer in that matter, it was'nt easy. Some of that problem exists yet, and the IA will still have whittle down some IAF objections wrt rotary winged attack assets.

So far as fixed wing assets are concerned, the IA will do well not take them under their wing, that will cause problems for themselves. In fact, the basic 'thumb-rule' is anything that needs airfields/prepared runways to operate from should remain at arm's length from the IA, i.e. with the IAF.

 

[SQ8]

the basic 'thumb-rule' is anything that needs airfields/prepared runways to operate from should remain at arm's length from the IA, i.e. with the IAF.

Which then takes the Helo's off the IAF's control.
The same should be with the attack helo's. But again.. the final solution would be that the actual commanders in combat own nothing. ANd their assets come from the ownership of the IA,IAF . So an IBG commander would have any air assets he wants, along with whatever div etc he needs. and those will be directly under his command and no one elses.
In the end the devolution of command will ensure that quicker more effective decisions are taken in combat.

 

[peep]

Which then takes the Helo's off the IAF's control.
The same should be with the attack helo's. But again.. the final solution would be that the actual commanders in combat own nothing. ANd their assets come from the ownership of the IA,IAF . So an IBG commander would have any air assets he wants, along with whatever div etc he needs. and those will be directly under his command and no one elses.
In the end the devolution of command will ensure that quicker more effective decisions are taken in combat.

Easy to say and muc difficult to implement. An IBG has to know all nuances of surface conflicts with effective air-support. The entire training syllabus / criteria have to overhauled.