Balance Of Air Power In South Asia

[Stephen Cohen]

The usual chest thumping aside, currently the balance of power is actually a healthy one. It does not allow any one side complete freedom to get away with whatever they want in terms of the execution of air operations and achieving complete superiority and that bodes well for regional security.

Frankly speaking, as I have mentioned above, PAF is in a decent trim. IAF has modernized too obviously however neither side has a capability which unnerves the other side too much.

If only you Knew the REAL size and strength of IAF ; and not
the " officially declared figures " ; you would nt say that

 

[blain2]

If only you Knew the REAL size and strength of IAF ; and not
the " officially declared figures " ; you would nt say that

I don't need to say much, those in the know and responsible for threat assessment on our side of the border are quite alright.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

One thing people here are not discussing is quality, independent SAMs. They are a highly effective and a cost effective way of completely nullifying the threat posed by even the most advanced fighter jets. People use the American example of decimating enemies with pure air power but the Americans have only fought super weak opponents in the past 50 years and they havn't been tested against a competent foe. And the IAF is FAR FAR weaker than the USAF whilst the PAF is far more powerful than any airforce the americans have faced the past 50 years.

 

[wiseone2]

If only you Knew the REAL size and strength of IAF ; and not
the " officially declared figures " ; you would nt say that

there is not much in the way of secrets about the IAF strength

 

[DJ_Viper]

Comparing parity of 270 Su-30MKIs with 18 F-16 Block 52 (and 40 odd MLUs) is delusional, and MKI boasts much better Radar and datalink than Block 52.

Rafale will be made in collaboration with Reliance Defence, F-16s will be made with LM along with another Indian conglomerate.

Sir, with all due respect, I've spent some time in this industry. The comparison isn't with 270 SU-30's. India will never put all 270 of those with Pakistan. In case of an escalating conflict and in a region declared "hot" by the West, use of tactical-nukes will evaporate airbases. And India obviously knows that. They need the SU-30's for China a lot more than they need them for Pakistan.

So the comparison is about half of 270 to the F-16's. And believe me, the combination of F-16's with AMRAAMs is pretty deadly. The distance doesn't favor India either, and nor do the superior radars of SU-30's or anything else. Both sides will fire BVRM's pretty much at the same time due to the shared borders and no strategic distance between the two sides.

When India will start to build F-16's IN and get Rafales, then yes, the situation would totally reverse. I don't even see a comparison between the IAF and the PAF at that time, however you look at it. Unless they acquire about 100-150 modern jets, including Stealth (or build their JFT into a Stealthy platform, that would become a huge pain for India as the jet is already very small with reduced RCS, adding Stealthy materials and having that in numbers, locally produced, would cause serious issues for the IAF). Thanks

 

[amardeep mishra]

The problem of HAL was in trying to reinvent the wheel. You are much ahead in the manugfacturing cycle as compared to pakistan. However to say that you could desoign a plane from Engine up was a fallacy of the highest order.

Hi dear @araz
A lot of times this has been pointed out by a lot of folks from other side of the border that HAL tries to re-invent the wheel. It is not entirely true.Let me explain why.First off all,HAL is the "manufacturing" organization(similar to PAC--albeit much bigger in their footprint) and frankly speaking they dont have a rich research experience.Their research portfolio has just begun expanding as they have started filling for industrial patents in an unprecedented manner--this is in sharp contrast to PAC(if we are interested in comparison).For instance back in 2014-2015 HAL filed close to 760 patents. This points to a growing sense of awareness about creation of intellectual property among the HAL leadership.
Now the responsibility of "core aerospace research" rested on
1) ADA(which was created sometimes in early-mid 80s). Incidentally it took best of the best lot from DRDO and ISRO at that time.Kindly note this is a fully autonomous organization under DRDO and comes directly under the purview of defence ministry
2)NAL--the lab that does some really good research in aerodynamics,controls etc. It comes under CSIR. This lab has major contribution in developing the advanced fly by wire with relaxed static stability.
Now your point that india wanted to design everything in-house stems from the political standing of india at that time. To be honest,back in 80s when this program was first mooted,no international vendor was willing to actively cooperate with india in the propulsion field. Same was the case with radars and stuff.Hence all these projects had to be taken up.Now it does seem a bit not-so-pragmatic to take up all the research activities at once--right from engine to radars! I agree,some of these costly ventures couldnt get the desired level of maturity and confidence to be put into the main platform.But it did help in achieving other objectives which perhaps you cant visualize at the moment.Firstly it helped foster an entire eco-system required for undertaking research in lets say aero-engines,radars etc. There are companies that can manufacture single crystal blades in india. Indian metallurgical research too has advanced significantly.
Then there are companies that fabricate T/R modules(again a patent of LRDE-bangalore). LRDE bangalore has been working on phased array radars for almost 3 decades now. Infact the TRMM design is an intellectual property right of LRDE. They have an array of advanced AESA radars in short to medium category-- Ashwin AESA radar(<200kms range),Arudhra,Lstar(300-400kms range)

SO your end result is a short legged plane which is too heavy , does not have enough loitering time to make any difference in a real combat scenario

What you again fail to realize is the fact that LCA is a cranked delta design which means it has much more surface area vis-a-vis JF-17,yet both have almost the same weight!It is this larger surface area that renders it smaller wing loading--although one might argue that as LCA is a delta in the end hence would suffer in STR performance. But then again,what a lot of people miss,is the fact that LCA is a "cranked delta" having two sweep angles.This works pretty much the same manner as the LERX in JF-17. At higher AoAs this double delta helps in creating vortices in a much more controlled manner thereby reducing drag.This has another added advantage and i.e just as in the case of LERX,this double delta helps in stretching the max AoA at which boundary layer separates.
I am sure you'd realize that a plane with lesser drag and higher thrust would dominate in a sustained turn rate performance.Pilots generally go for flaps to enhance their STR performance as it reduces velocity,increases lift(also induced drag). But since there are no provison of flaps in LCA,double delta is what saves it in sheer STR performance. Normally in tight turns,pilots go for max CL with as much thrust available to them!
LCA also happens to have slightly larger internal fuel volume as against JF-17,hence I suspect similar loitering times and combat radii.
LCA is as relevant(if not anymore) in combat scenario as any other light fighter such as your JF-17. But as I explained,IAF wants to base their backbone on a medium weight fighter and not on a light weight fighter. Hence the need for more than 400medium weight fighters.At the end of the day we still need light weight fighters!

 

[Rafael]

Then I am afraid that THOUGH they are aware of the true and the real picture
they are presenting a brave face so as to not let any panic set in
OR simply put misleading the people

The truth is too harsh

Anyway from our side ; since we have to also contend with China
there is No room for complacency

So PAF has got two things in Mind while making their assessments

1 The Chinese will join in and help PAF

2 The presence of nukes and the Global pressures will not let any conflict from
escalating so PAF can end any contest with a face saving " Draw "

Aren't you the same guy who was posting after URI attack that a war is going to start any moment?

Bug off Joker, We do not take you seriously.

 

[araz]

Hi dear @araz
A lot of times this has been pointed out by a lot of folks from other side of the border that HAL tries to re-invent the wheel. It is not entirely true.Let me explain why.First off all,HAL is the "manufacturing" organization(similar to PAC--albeit much bigger in their footprint) and frankly speaking they dont have a rich research experience.Their research portfolio has just begun expanding as they have started filling for industrial patents in an unprecedented manner--this is in sharp contrast to PAC(if we are interested in comparison).For instance back in 2014-2015 HAL filed close to 760 patents. This points to a growing sense of awareness about creation of intellectual property among the HAL leadership.
Now the responsibility of "core aerospace research" rested on
1) ADA(which was created sometimes in early-mid 80s). Incidentally it took best of the best lot from DRDO and ISRO at that time.Kindly note this is a fully autonomous organization under DRDO and comes directly under the purview of defence ministry
2)NAL--the lab that does some really good research in aerodynamics,controls etc. It comes under CSIR. This lab has major contribution in developing the advanced fly by wire with relaxed static stability.
Now your point that india wanted to design everything in-house stems from the political standing of india at that time. To be honest,back in 80s when this program was first mooted,no international vendor was willing to actively cooperate with india in the propulsion field. Same was the case with radars and stuff.Hence all these projects had to be taken up.Now it does seem a bit not-so-pragmatic to take up all the research activities at once--right from engine to radars! I agree,some of these costly ventures couldnt get the desired level of maturity and confidence to be put into the main platform.But it did help in achieving other objectives which perhaps you cant visualize at the moment.Firstly it helped foster an entire eco-system required for undertaking research in lets say aero-engines,radars etc. There are companies that can manufacture single crystal blades in india. Indian metallurgical research too has advanced significantly.
Then there are companies that fabricate T/R modules(again a patent of LRDE-bangalore). LRDE bangalore has been working on phased array radars for almost 3 decades now. Infact the TRMM design is an intellectual property right of LRDE. They have an array of advanced AESA radars in short to medium category-- Ashwin AESA radar(<200kms range),Arudhra,Lstar(300-400kms range)



What you again fail to realize is the fact that LCA is a cranked delta design which means it has much more surface area vis-a-vis JF-17,yet both have almost the same weight!It is this larger surface area that renders it smaller wing loading--although one might argue that as LCA is a delta in the end hence would suffer in STR performance. But then again,what a lot of people miss,is the fact that LCA is a "cranked delta" having two sweep angles.This works pretty much the same manner as the LERX in JF-17. At higher AoAs this double delta helps in creating vortices in a much more controlled manner thereby reducing drag.This has another added advantage and i.e just as in the case of LERX,this double delta helps in stretching the max AoA at which boundary layer separates.
I am sure you'd realize that a plane with lesser drag and higher thrust would dominate in a sustained turn rate performance.Pilots generally go for flaps to enhance their STR performance as it reduces velocity,increases lift(also induced drag). But since there are no provison of flaps in LCA,double delta is what saves it in sheer STR performance. Normally in tight turns,pilots go for max CL with as much thrust available to them!
LCA also happens to have slightly larger internal fuel volume as against JF-17,hence I suspect similar loitering times and combat radii.
LCA is as relevant(if not anymore) in combat scenario as any other light fighter such as your JF-17. But as I explained,IAF wants to base their backbone on a medium weight fighter and not on a light weight fighter. Hence the need for more than 400medium weight fighters.At the end of the day we still need light weight fighters!

Amardeep
Thank you for an enlightening debate. I do learn a lot from.People like you. However the current loitering time of Tejas does not behove well for its future and inspite of what you tell me the loitering time of the two platforms is very different. So firstly how do we reconcile this? Secondly I fully understand how the project is helping you set up a whole gambit of R&D facilities but then you kill the project by acquiring F16 supply line as Tejas will never be able to compete with the 16s. So to an outsider it reaffirms my view that the indian procurement strategy is messed up or someone is telling porky pies to the average joe.
Interesting to hear your view point.
The last thing may well be that we are sidelining the actual thread so if the mods object we may well have to shift posts to some other thread and discuss there.
Regards
A

 

[amardeep mishra]

. However the current loitering time of Tejas does not behove well for its future and inspite of what you tell me the loitering time of the two platforms is very different.

@araz
My dear araz, loitering time depends on two major factors-
1) drag encountered
2),SFC of engine.
Now unless JF17 has significantly lesser drag and superior SFC, it can't have better loitering time.it is pure physics.
From purely engineering perspective, you might argue that LCA being a delta will have higher drag in lower AoA regimes.but I'll quickly point out that the same cranked delta performs much better in terms of drag at high AoAs(thanks to double sweep that generates vortex in a much more controlled manner).
Secondly the SFC of American engine is better than rd93. So there is no distinct "loitering time" advantage of jf17 over LCA.those who claim such a thing don't know a thing about aerospace engineering!

 

[araz]

@araz
My dear araz, loitering time depends on two major factors-
1) drag encountered
2),SFC of engine.
Now unless JF17 has significantly lesser drag and superior SFC, it can't have better loitering time.it is pure physics.
From purely engineering perspective, you might argue that LCA being a delta will have higher drag in lower AoA regimes.but I'll quickly point out that the same cranked delta performs much better in terms of drag at high AoAs(thanks to double sweep that generates vortex in a much more controlled manner).
Secondly the SFC of American engine is better than rd93. So there is no distinct "loitering time" advantage of jf17 over LCA.those who claim such a thing don't know a thing about aerospace engineering!

Iam only going by the numbers published from open sources. Your argument is not supported by what is open source knowledge. As to JFT what the pilots say is that it bleeds less energy when in sustained turn rate as compared to F16s. As far as I have seen Tejas has still not reached that stage where the pilots can maneouvre it aggressively but this is entirely understandable as JFY initially was not being as adventurous in Its routines as it is now. So it seems the. JFt design although not a very complex one suites the purpose it is designed for
A

 

[Zain Malik]

A 2010 CAG reports says 60%, does your air force even disclose these data of operational readiness?

FYKI ,76 out of 76 f16 are ready and operational.

How can a debt ridden Pakistan air force can make peace in Asia . for example take India it is upgrading 270 su-30mki to super sukhois ( better radars and extended life of 40 years ). count no. Goes here 36 rafales . 120 LCA tejas mk1A on order list. India's air chief went to Russia to fast track the fgfa programme and will get 3 prototypes of t50 by 2017 end and the order list for fgfa(t-50) is 200 ( 110 single seat and 80 double seat . and the tender for "make in India" initiative of over 120-130 aircrafts will be made in India specially for IAF (Indian air force) can be f16 or fA18 or gripen E by TOT ( transfer of technology ) and India's indigenous project AMCA ( the fifth generation aircraft programme) would be have its first prototype by 2018 end . the total count of combat ready plane goes to 800- 900 ( excluding navy ) . this all would be available in Indian hands by before 2030 ends. And personally I don't think this is for Pakistan based plan. the plan is coverted towards China . now you decide who will be game changer in asia

not to worry we know how many of there sukhois are actually capable an operable and tejas is not atill ready for combat and FGfa will take five more years to be inducted till then we will have j31

 

[salarsikander]

WHAT THE HELL IS A J31

Does it exist

wil it exist

Do you have means to buy it

It will exist much better than the TEJAS, where your air force is working round the clock to kill the program by importingforeignn, single owned jets. Just like how DHruv was supposed to be mainstay for heli, it will be no longer ( like Tejas) after ka-225 deal

 

[Lord Of Gondor]

It will exist much better than the TEJAS, where your air force is working round the clock to kill the program by importingforeignn, single owned jets. Just like how DHruv was supposed to be mainstay for heli, it will be no longer ( like Tejas) after ka-225 deal

Kill the program?

The order is at 120!
And the Dhruv (and the Rudra) is a much bigger Helicopter than the Ka226T. The latter will replace the HAL Cheetahs which are over 30 years old.

 

[salarsikander]

Kill the program?

The order is at 120!
And the Dhruv (and the Rudra) is a much bigger Helicopter than the Ka226T. The latter will replace the HAL Cheetahs which are over 30 years old.

LOL. The Tejas was supposed to replace all aging migs. And Sadly the Program has been killed !!

I have yet too see any fresh order for Dhurvs . Other than this ka-226. Dhruv is bigger in terms of what ?

 

[Lord Of Gondor]

LOL. The Tejas was supposed to replace all aging migs. And Sadly the Program has been killed !!

I have yet too see any fresh order for Dhurvs . Other than this ka-226. Dhruv is bigger in terms of what ?

All ageing MiGs, nope.
MiG21s, yes.
Tejas cannot be produced in the numbers required, to arrest falling sqn strengths.
So a second line is necessary.(plus it can get high tech manufacturing ecosystem set up here and more jobs etc)
You can google for the orders of the Dhruv.
Currently HAL produces the Dhruv Mark3 and the Rudra.
Dhruv is bigger in size.
MToW of 5500Kg Vs. 3500Kg for the Ka226T.

^HAL Rudra

^HAL Dhruv Mark-3