IAF needs 39 squadrons for 2-front war, has only 34'

[Jayanta]

MK-1 is in the production as we speak. There is a link in LCA sticky. Do check that.

MK-2 is in near future. I don't think there is anything that will possibly go wrong now. And we are speaking about the time line 2022. So it wouldn't be an issue.

Tejas aircraft deficient in at least 100 technical parameters: Experts

SP-1 to SP-40 – Planned to fly by late 2013. The SP-1 and SP-2 were to be delivered by March 2012 and handed over to No. 45 Squadron (Flying Daggers) that will be based initially in Bangalore, Karnataka.

 

[Sergi]

Tejas aircraft deficient in at least 100 technical parameters: Experts

You point ???
Many of the points in this article are already answered here. So be specific.

 

[sancho]

@sancho:

If MKI production ends in 2018/19 and production for FGFA/PMF begins in 2022, guess how many years will it require for having a fully operational fleet of say atleast 5 sqdns? I am sure 2022 is not realistic!

Mate, you are still mixing up many things, first of all, I never stated that 5 squads will be available till then, but that the 1st squad will be available, because the production starts earlier:

"The first prototype of the FGFA is scheduled to arrive in India by 2014 after which it will undergo extensive trials at the Ojhar air base (Maharashtra)...we are hopeful that the aircraft would be ready for induction by 2022," IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne said here.

FGFA to Reach India in 2014


So by the time the current order of LCA will be finished, IAF will also have the option to go for Rafale (production of 126 aimed to end in 2021), FGFA and drones (Rustom H), with only the Jaguars left without a replacement yet.
If the current orders of a total of 188 x LCAs in all varients will be supplied for both forces, it definitely is a good production number, so all that will count then, is the threat perception of IAF that will decide if more LCA orders for Indian forces will come and as I said, I don't see it as of now for operational reasons.

My estimate is FGFA is not becoming an operation force multiplier anytime before 2025-28. thats 16 more years

That's not correct, because not the numbers of FGFA counts, but the leap of capability it provides! As soon as the first FGFA squad in inducted and fully capable for A2G roles, these fighters will take over any prime strike role, simply by the fact that the stealth capability offers huge advantages in this role and why they will be a complete game changer!
In A2A they will add only to the huge MKI and Rafale fleets at the begining and until sufficient numbers will be available to take over the prime A2A role too.

The advantage that LCA mk2 hopefully will bring to the table is quite larger than a reaper. Even in CAS, it will be not helpless against other aircrafts, if push comes to shove it it can payback every cent it costs in combat.
Compare the payload of a reaper and LCA mk2.

Which is not imporant, because these are 2nd day CAS roles, in areas that are cleared from air defence, with FGFA, MKI and Rafale in air superiority roles anyway, so be it LCA or a reaper, the CAS capability and cost-effectivity will be the cruicial point.
Any preemptive strikes will be done by FGFA, Rafale and MKI until AURA will be available, then even Rafale and MKI will loose some of their roles, but LCA will be much more limited and way earlier. Again, only in IAF service!

Wrt to payload comparison:

LCA

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lto9RRogL...85208_103329156428208_427670_1424765632_n.jpg

A Reaper drone can carry loads up to...

- 1500lb on each of the inner 2 hardpoints (for example 2 x 1000lb Sudarshan LGBs)
- 600lb on each of the midwing hardpoints (for example 2 x AASM 250 PGMs)
- 200lb on each of the external hardpoints (for example 2 x HELINA ATGMs)

All this in addition to the surveillance capabilites, to roughly twice the endurance and at lower costs!

 

[sancho]

So isn't it contradiction ???
AFAIK there is no talk or even rumor about such JV.
Our forces never said anything about UCAV requirement it's DRDO only.
Still you are seeing such drones by 2022.

Not at all, but you have to differ between Rustom H and AURA!
The one is an armed surveillance drone, the other a stealth aircraft for strikes. The earlier as said, is already under development and IAF already stated that they want an armed version of it too, as counterparts to US reapers.
AURA UCAV development on the other side has just started and might be available only in 2025, but that doesn't matter here, since it doesn share roles with LCA, but will complement FGFA. The armed Rustom H is the key here, which offers the mentioned advantages over LCA in normal CAS roles. Btw, just recently there were news about us rejecting a JV for new Heron drones:

India rejects Israel joint UAV development offer - report - Globes

Thirdly How do you think IAF is gong to achieve 42/44 Sqdns by 2022 ??? Please don't count drones.

2 x LCA MK1
4 x LCA MK2
7 x Rafale
17 x MKI
3 x M2K-5 UPG
3 x Mig 29 UPG
6 x Jaguar UPG

=> 42 squadrons by 2022

Not counted the first FGFA squad that is planned for the same time too, but basically would replace one of the Mig 29 squads anyway, so numbers wouldn't neccesarily change.
Also the 6 x Jaguar squads will have no operational capability by then, since deep strikes will be taken over by Rafale and MKI, while CAS would be done by LCA, M2K, Mig 29 and most likely by armed drones. That's why I always say, that the hype about the squadron number is just a paper problem, not an operational one!

Yes that's correct. Last time when we talk about GE-414 order ( 99 + 100 )you said that 80 MK-2 for IAF and reaming NLCA with testing protos.

Exactly and that's what I said here too, but the discussion then was about engines, which includes once for N-LCA. Here our discussion is about follow orders for IAFs MK2s. According to HALs latest figures they will produce 80 x MK2 for IAF and 60 x for IN (+prototypes), so we already know that more than the early 99 x GE engines are needed for the current orders, but that still could be Kaveri K10s and doesn't mean IAF will go for more MK2s.

 

[MilSpec]

Mate, you are still mixing up many things, first of all, I never stated that 5 squads will be available till then, but that the 1st squad will be available, because the production starts earlier:

Guess how much time does a production aircraft needs to reach tactical operationalization, MKI were in IAF inventory in 1997.



FGFA to Reach India in 2014[/QUOTE]

So by the time the current order of LCA will be finished, IAF will also have the option to go for Rafale (production of 126 aimed to end in 2021), FGFA and drones (Rustom H), with only the Jaguars left without a replacement yet.
If the current orders of a total of 188 x LCAs in all varients will be supplied for both forces, it definitely is a good production number, so all that will count then, is the threat perception of IAF that will decide if more LCA orders for Indian forces will come and as I said, I don't see it as of now for operational reasons.

My estimate is , LCA mk2 , a single engined smaller aircraft, will be cheaper, and will have a faster productions rate and will cost 1/3rd of rafale's and 1/5th of Pakfa and almost 1/2 of MKI, apart from that, operating costs of LCA will much cheaper than all the twin engines.

Thrdat's not correct, because not the numbers of FGFA counts, but the leap of capability it provides! As soon as the first FGFA squad in inducted and fully capable for A2G roles, these fighters will take over any prime strike role, simply by the fact that the stealth capability offers huge advantages in this role and why they will be a complete game changer!
In A2A they will add only to the huge MKI and Rafale fleets at the begining and until sufficient numbers will be available to take over the prime A2A role too.

as soon as first sqdn of FGFA/PMF it will take almost 3-4 years for the training, tactics and deployment of FGFA/PMF

Which is not imporant, because these are 2nd day CAS roles, in areas that are cleared from air defence, with FGFA, MKI and Rafale in air superiority roles anyway, so be it LCA or a reaper, the CAS capability and cost-effectivity will be the cruicial point.
Any preemptive strikes will be done by FGFA, Rafale and MKI until AURA will be available, then even Rafale and MKI will loose some of their roles, but LCA will be much more limited and way earlier. Again, only in IAF service!

[/QUOTE]
I have no Idea what 2nd day CAS is. If your IBG's are to move under CAS and Forward air support, expect ack ack at every nook and corner, flying a prop plane under any flak is the dumbest move. Please do realize, by the time IBG's or armored corp starts mobilizing , you are not going to have air superiority, flying a defenseless auro, rustom, reaper, predator, any drone will be fool hardy.

Wrt to payload comparison:

LCA

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lto9RRogL...85208_103329156428208_427670_1424765632_n.jpg

A Reaper drone can carry loads up to...

- 1500lb on each of the inner 2 hardpoints (for example 2 x 1000lb Sudarshan LGBs)
- 600lb on each of the midwing hardpoints (for example 2 x AASM 250 PGMs)
- 200lb on each of the external hardpoints (for example 2 x HELINA ATGMs)

All this in addition to the surveillance capabilites, to roughly twice the endurance and at lower costs!

pointless in comparing apples and oranges.

 

[sancho]

Guess how much time does a production aircraft needs to reach tactical operationalization, MKI were in IAF inventory in 1997.

Su 30Ks came in the late 90s and were directly inducted, MKIs early 2000s and didn't took that long either, but as I said, the main game changer will be stealth, not matter if we have 10 or 100 of them.

My estimate is , LCA mk2 , a single engined smaller aircraft, will be cheaper

That's a no-brainer, but also less capable than the others. The point however was, that armed drones are both, more capable in CAS and cheaper.

If your IBG's are to move under CAS and Forward air support, expect ack ack at every nook and corner, flying a prop plane under any flak is the dumbest move.

Nobody moves ground forces to an area, that is not cleard by pre-emptive strikes to pave the way and to support slow moving ground forces, a slower combat helicopter at low altitude and armed drones at high altitudes are the best choices at all. Especially since the latter can provide continuous support over hours, directly above the battle group, unlike a fast moving fighter.
And as I said, even in later stages of a war, fighters would be used for air superiority roles when LCAs or drones will be used for strike, just like the A10 was in Iraq wars.

pointless in comparing apples and oranges.

You asked me for the comparison, so you have to take the facts, no matter if you like it or not.

 

[MilSpec]

That's a no-brainer, but also less capable than the others. The point however was, that armed drones are both, more capable in CAS and cheaper.

Cheaper yes, More capable NO! LCA mk2 can take on CAP and CAS roles, no drone in the world will be able to do that, hence makes more sence in using LCA's for that role. mk2 will have better payload, better defences, better situational awareness to deal with contingencies that an drone on CAP will never have.

Nobody moves ground forces to an area, that is not cleard by pre-emptive strikes to pave the way and to support slow moving ground forces, a slower combat helicopter at low altitude and armed drones at high altitudes are the best choices at all. Especially since the latter can provide continuous support over hours, directly above the battle group, unlike a fast moving fighter.
And as I said, even in later stages of a war, fighters would be used for air superiority roles when LCAs or drones will be used for strike, just like the A10 was in Iraq wars.

India is not US and pakistan is not iraq!

As far as fast moving IBG's are concerned, they would need active CAS when they face resistance, thats when available air assests would be pressed into CAS fire mission, that has to be done by multirole a/c's, even you agree toi that, what better a/c than LCA mk2 to do so. Why employ rafales, MKI's mig 29's m2k's or fgfa's for CAS when they could be better utilized for Sead, air interdiction or air superioirity where all of them excel. If Ibgs come under fire from opposing contingent of mechanised infantry, drone will be toast, but a supersonic multirole a/c with pgm, and a2g missiles will jammers and ecm will be more handy, and if opposition does muster thier own CAS platform into service, Mk2 can take care of aerial threat aswell.

2 x LCA MK1
4 x LCA MK2
7 x Rafale
17 x MKI
3 x M2K-5 UPG
3 x Mig 29 UPG
6 x Jaguar UPG

=> 42 squadrons by 2022

2sqdns of M2k not three,

 

[sancho]

India is not US and pakistan is not iraq!

Of course not, but modern warfare remains the same. Cruise missile and pre-emptive strikes first, A2A combats, followed by ground forces supported by combat helicopters and CAS aircrafts. The order would remain the same even in a new war for us.

Why employ rafales, MKI's mig 29's m2k's or fgfa's for CAS when they could be better utilized for Sead, air interdiction or air superioirity where all of them excel.

Because they can carry more or better weapons, or can remain longer over the battlefield for example, just like an armed drone, but again, you don't to CAS, when SEAD is not already done.

but a supersonic multirole a/c

You still sticking on the speed point, to give LCA any advantage in this role, but speed is no requirement for CAS! Neither the A10, the Su 25, the Harrier, the armed C130 versions, combat helicopters or now armed drones are fast, but they offer capabilities that are more suitable for CAS roles than supersonic speed. Be it low speed or low level maneuverability, higher weapon carriage, higher loiter time over the battlefield, specialised weapons, or additional armor protection, which all improves effectivity.
LCA as a multi role fighter can do CAS of course, but has none of these features, because it was never aimed to be very good in CAS, just to have strike as a secondary capability.

The chance that an IBG would be attackd by mechanised infrantry is infact lower with a drone over them, than with fighters in CAS roles. You simply can use it's optronics, ground radars way more effectively, even operated by the ground forces itself, to the area of their interest and that for half a day or longer. A supersonic fighter instead, will only be called, when the attack already happend and support is needed, otherwise it follows it's CAP route, but wouldn't remain above the IBG all the time and as shown, they can carry at least the same, if not more weapons than LCA here.

2sqdns of M2k not three

Can't post the link here, but check BR's Aircraft Fleet Strength please, M2Ks are splitted in squadron no 1, 7 and 9.

 

[MilSpec]

Of course not, but modern warfare remains the same. Cruise missile and pre-emptive strikes first, A2A combats, followed by ground forces supported by combat helicopters and CAS aircrafts. The order would remain the same even in a new war for us.

Second string CAS platforms like A10, reapers or spookies are employed only after gaining complete air superiority. If you can gain complete air superiority before ground force mobilisation in our theatre of coflict, then sure go beserk with your drones, but without Air superiority it will be utmost foolish to contemplate using prop driven drones. It is as simple as that!

You are not gaining air sup if half of your strike air assets are blocked for CAP and CAS.

hence use MK2 in larger numbers.

Because they can carry more or better weapons, or can remain longer over the battlefield for example, just like an armed drone, but again, you don't to CAS, when SEAD is not already done.

AI/Strike>SEAD>CAS>, the difference here is the window of opportunity between sead and ground mobilization/CAS is extremely short, hence arises the need to have maximum strength in numbers to achieve both target with overwhelming

You still sticking on the speed point, to give LCA any advantage in this role, but speed is no requirement for CAS! Neither the A10, the Su 25, the Harrier, the armed C130 versions, combat helicopters or now armed drones are fast, but they offer capabilities that are more suitable for CAS roles than supersonic speed. Be it low speed or low level maneuverability, higher weapon carriage, higher loiter time over the battlefield, specialised weapons, or additional armor protection, which all improves effectivity.
LCA as a multi role fighter can do CAS of course, but has none of these features, because it was never aimed to be very good in CAS, just to have strike as a secondary capability.

Correction, my contention is LCA will be able to carry out CAS along with CAP, none of the drones have the ability to defend the IBG's from areal threat or even cruise missiles, What Mk2 brings to the table is exceptional defensive capabilities along with offensive CAS. True that loitering time is essential for CAS platform, but with precision optics, extremely narrow theater of conflict the the trade-off is legit.

The chance that an IBG would be attackd by mechanised infrantry is infact lower with a drone over them, than with fighters in CAS roles. You simply can use it's optronics, ground radars way more effectively, even operated by the ground forces itself, to the area of their interest and that for half a day or longer. A supersonic fighter instead, will only be called, when the attack already happend and support is needed, otherwise it follows it's CAP route, but wouldn't remain above the IBG all the time and as shown, they can carry at least the same, if not more weapons than LCA here.

Well, you are absolutely correct, Dedicated surveillance and attack drones should indeed accompany Ibg's for FAC and fire support, But not at the cost of effective air cover/CAS advantage that MK2 would bring to the table.

Even for worst case scenario for LCA, Say if not a single Mk2/mk1 is ever deployed in any role in western theatre, atleast 16 sqdns should fly around the clock CAP's at the eastern border. or would you like even that to be handled by rafales and Pmf/Fgfa's?

 

[danger007]

Not at all, but you have to differ between Rustom H and AURA!
The one is an armed surveillance drone, the other a stealth aircraft for strikes. The earlier as said, is already under development and IAF already stated that they want an armed version of it too, as counterparts to US reapers.
AURA UCAV development on the other side has just started and might be available only in 2025, but that doesn't matter here, since it doesn share roles with LCA, but will complement FGFA. The armed Rustom H is the key here, which offers the mentioned advantages over LCA in normal CAS roles. Btw, just recently there were news about us rejecting a JV for new Heron drones:

India rejects Israel joint UAV development offer - report - Globes




2 x LCA MK1
4 x LCA MK2
7 x Rafale
17 x MKI
3 x M2K-5 UPG
3 x Mig 29 UPG
6 x Jaguar UPG

=> 42 squadrons by 2022

Not counted the first FGFA squad that is planned for the same time too, but basically would replace one of the Mig 29 squads anyway, so numbers wouldn't neccesarily change.
Also the 6 x Jaguar squads will have no operational capability by then, since deep strikes will be taken over by Rafale and MKI, while CAS would be done by LCA, M2K, Mig 29 and most likely by armed drones. That's why I always say, that the hype about the squadron number is just a paper problem, not an operational one!




Exactly and that's what I said here too, but the discussion then was about engines, which includes once for N-LCA. Here our discussion is about follow orders for IAFs MK2s. According to HALs latest figures they will produce 80 x MK2 for IAF and 60 x for IN (+prototypes), so we already know that more than the early 99 x GE engines are needed for the current orders, but that still could be Kaveri K10s and doesn't mean IAF will go for more MK2s.

Sancho how can we get 17 MKI sqdrns? with 21 jets per squadron. we can barely get 13 maximum... so it is possible?

 

[Sergi]

@danger007 : MKIs Sqdn is of 16 aircrafts and NOT 21. So 16*17=272.

 

[danger007]

@danger007 : MKIs Sqdn is of 16 aircrafts and NOT 21. So 16*17=272.

go to the first page... @sandy posted the list and how many jets per sqd.. thank you anyways...#

 

[Sergi]

go to the first page... @sandy posted the list and how many jets per sqd.. thank you anyways...#

Go to next few pages too
You are welcome anyways

I think sandy sir posted form wiki. We don't have 170 MKIs at the moment. But we do have 8 operational Sqdns

 

[sancho]

Second string CAS platforms like A10, reapers or spookies are employed only after gaining complete air superiority.

No, CAS fighters for example are used in early stages too, covered by Air superiority fighters and in Kosovo war for example, drones were used in early stages for recon roles, where fighters with recon pods were too vulnerable against air defences and even if 1 or 2 drone were shot down, it didn't bother much, since no pilot was lost and the cost was reasonable. Today with armed drones this will be even more the case, as I already told you, IAF has procured numbers of Israeli suicide drones for pre-emtive strikes, with armed Heron or Rustom H, difficult SEAD or CAS roles would be done in early stages as well, instead of risking a fighter, or a helicopter.
You can also take Kargil as an example, where partial air superiority was achieved and in this area armed drones or C130s would have been much more effective than the fast Mig 27s, or even an LCA.
Of course there won't be total air superiority in our cases, but that only increases the reasons to use drones / or weapons instead of fighters and where superiority is achieved, drones will have the explained operational and cost advantages over LCA.
You can also read this article about the RAF Reaper drones in comparison to Tornados, which even are dedicated strike fighters and still the advantage of drones gets evident:

UK's Reaper flying hunter-killer fleet 'to double' ? The Register

Correction, my contention is LCA will be able to carry out CAS along with CAP

Not possible with the MK1s and maybe not even for the MK2 (although that depends on the increased fuel capacity), since all hardpoints are occupied and no BVR missiles can be carrier in strike config. So any LCA in CAS role, requires another LCA in escort role to cover it, which makes it more useful to use LCA for CAP only, while drones are used for CAS. That's why I said that they will remain useful in interception roles, but will loose major parts of CAS to drones.

Again take Kargil as an example:

A typical bombing mission would involve 4 Mirages from 7 Squadron loaded with dumb bombs leaving a base in Punjab together with a two seat Mirage loaded with a LGB and Laser Designating pod. This 5 ship would rendezvous with 3 aircraft of 1 Squadron carrying Beyond Visual Range Weapons (Super 530D), operating out of another base. This rendezvous point would change on a mission to mission basis and once joined up, one escort aircraft would return. Once over Jammu and Kashmir they would be joined by Mig29’s giving top cover.

Source: The Mirage 2000 in Kargil BR


8 Mirage and some Mig 29 for a CAS mission back than and also consider the time that they needed to recon the right targets and plan the mission before the strikes.
Today with modern fighters and armed drones, you would use half the numbers of fighters, since upgraded M2K-5s for example could used a strike load and still carry a useful number of AAMs, while drones offer live recon and even weapon guidance for the LGBs and if they are armed, they can even take out the targets on their own. All this, while the Migs still would provide top cover / CAP.

Even for worst case scenario for LCA, Say if not a single Mk2/mk1 is ever deployed in any role in western theatre, atleast 16 sqdns should fly around the clock CAP's at the eastern border. or would you like even that to be handled by rafales and Pmf/Fgfa's?

They will handle it anyway, since they remain to be the main air superiority fighters, but interceptions and CAP on the eastern front of course will be done by Mig 29s and LCAs. I also expect MK2s to be available at the eastern front too, since IAF will surely maintain their combo tactics with MKI and a fighter with low RCS.
However, the most capable fighters will always get preference and for the 2nd they when cost-effectivity comes in to the game, in CAS drones are the better choice in all accounts.

 

[sancho]

Sancho how can we get 17 MKI sqdrns? with 21 jets per squadron. we can barely get 13 maximum... so it is possible?

It's not 21 but 16 per squadron, MKIs are all twin seaters, so no additional 2 x twin seaters / trainers are needed and as Sergi said, that's 17 x squadrons.

The IAF intends to make the Su-30 MKI its frontline fighter aircraft in the future. The target for the IAF is to raise 17 Sukhoi squadrons by 2018 when it would have inducted 272 aircraft.

IAF