India sets the ball rolling for Rs 13,000 crore IAF deal

[livingdead]

@Abingdonboy... why so serious?

 

[janon]

Why do we need an Avro replacement AND an An-32 replacement? Their payload and specs seem very close to each other. How about replacing both of them with the same aircraft? The MTA project with Russia is supposed to replace the An-32s, is that correct? Clubbed together, there is a need for 160+ aircrafts. Since both the Avros and the An-32s are being upgraded currently, we have enough time to build up a production line for a new aircraft.

Later the MTA can fill in the medium transport requirements, phasing out the Il-76. And the heavy transport role will be fulfilled by the C-17s.

I don't understand why the MTA is envisaged as the replacement for the An-32. The MTA is supposed to have a payload of 20 tonnes, while the An-32 has a payload of 7.5 tonnes. IMO, this RFI should be for replacing the Avros and An-32s together.

Ab majak bhi nahi kar sakte kya?

How many past "deals" actually came on ground in time and without any scam?

Quite a lot. Contrary to popular perception, only a few deals have been tainted by scams. Think about it. How many aircrafts in the IAF inventory presently had any bribery scandals associated with it?

 

[!@#$%^&]

All Hail to recent confrontation with China.

 

[janon]

I have a question

India already have inducted or in the process of induction of C17 globemaster and c130 super herculus transport plane. what is the need of extra transport plane ?

India and Russia already in talks of joint medium transport aircraft project ?

Why so many transport planes ?

What India want to achieve with these different planes ??

Different weight/payload categories. The C-17s carry 70+ tonnes, the Il-76 carries 40 tonnes, the MTA 20 tonnes, the An-32 and Avros carry 7.5 tonnes. The heavier aircrafts are much more expensive to procure, so for the price of 10 C-17s, you can get 200 An-32s.

Besides, if you want to transport 70 tonnes of cargo, one flight by a C-17 is cheaper than 10 flights by An-32. But if you only need to transport 5 tonnes, then one flight of an An-32 is cheaper than one flight of C-17. So one has to calculate the operational expenditure of transporting cargo everyday, and find the right mix of light, medium and heavy transporters required to keep expenses to a minimum. That is the IAF's job (among other things, of course!).

(If you want to buy 50 kg of vegetables from the market, a 4 wheel car would be the cheapest option. When you want to transport 500 kg of furniture, a medium sized truck would be more efficient, than several sorties by a car. If you want to transport 5000 kg of stuff, a very heavy truck would be the cheapest way, rather than driving the car 100 times.)

 

[Yaduveer]

Different weight/payload categories. The C-17s carry 70+ tonnes, the Il-76 carries 40 tonnes, the MTA 20 tonnes, the An-32 and Avros carry 7.5 tonnes. The heavier aircrafts are much more expensive to procure, so for the price of 10 C-17s, you can get 200 An-32s.

Besides, if you want to transport 70 tonnes of cargo, one flight by a C-17 is cheaper than 10 flights by An-32. But if you only need to transport 5 tonnes, then one flight of an An-32 is cheaper than one flight of C-17. So one has to calculate the operational expenditure of transporting cargo everyday, and find the right mix of light, medium and heavy transporters required to keep expenses to a minimum. That is the IAF's job (among other things, of course!).

(If you want to buy 50 kg of vegetables from the market, a 4 wheel car would be the cheapest option. When you want to transport 500 kg of furniture, a medium sized truck would be more efficient, than several sorties by a car. If you want to transport 5000 kg of stuff, a very heavy truck would be the cheapest way, rather than driving the car 100 times.)

Got it ...

but what is strategy behind so much of airlift ?

Are we preparing for war with CHina because in case of Pakistan , we don't need c17 Globemaster.

Do we have other objective other than preparing with China ?

 

[mirage2K]

I hope this time India Doesn't disappoint Russia, Already thing started slipping away

What Russia got to do with this tender...i believe that they have already chosen to go for either C27J Spartans or
CASAC-295..they will be choosing either of the two....They already have a different project with Russia known as the MTA which falls into medium category of lifters

 

[sancho]

how much is Rs 13,000 crore in USD or in Euro?

$2.4 billion US Dollar => €1.8 billion Euros I think.

Crores to Millions Calculator

I don't understand why the MTA is envisaged as the replacement for the An-32. The MTA is supposed to have a payload of 20 tonnes, while the An-32 has a payload of 7.5 tonnes. IMO, this RFI should be for replacing the Avros and An-32s together.

Because you missed that the MTA, just like the AN 32 are tactical aircrafts, meant for paradrops of troops, or cargo, that they even can carry smaller vehicle, pallets or bigger size cargo through the rear ramp. The Avro can't do that is is meant for more basic uttility and transport roles, transporting lighter cargo or troops from one base to another.
That's one reason why the reports about this competition not only include the C295 and C27 (which are more comparable to the AN32), but also the AN 140 as a possible candidate. On BR I read a post that Saab would offer us the productionline of the Saab 2000, which is not in production anymore and that also has no rear ramp either.
However, so far most of the reports are just speculating and without more details on the requirements, or at least the RFI, it will be difficult to see which aircrafts really are on offer.

The payload increase in general is needed, because IAFs requirements in this regard are rising too, the AN 32 payload will be IAFs future lower end, so the medium class payload of MTA is needed for sure, although IAF seems to look more to 18t, rather then 20t like the Russians.

 

[mirage2K]

All Hail to recent confrontation with China.

 

[jha]

Why was RFP issued to LockMart..? C-130..?

 

[mirage2K]

Why was RFP issued to LockMart..? C-130..?

that order is for carrying our Special Operations and para forces...this order is for planes for purely logistical purposes for cargo...

 

[David James]

Its a shame that they replace old with the exact number.

Like old 56 transport aircrafts are being replaced by new 56 transport aircrafts.

It seems like they thinks the situation is same as last 66 years and there is no need to improve as per the situation, growth, economy etc.

And 2 front war etc. etc. are all BS.

 

[janon]

Got it ...

but what is strategy behind so much of airlift ?

Are we preparing for war with CHina because in case of Pakistan , we don't need c17 Globemaster.

Do we have other objective other than preparing with China ?

We have always had this much airlift, and frankly, for a military the size of India's, the airlift capability is very low, compared to western standards. Check out how much airlift capability other big militaries have. The size of our military is one thing, another factor is the number of places that need to be air maintained. How do you think soldiers on Siachen get their daily food and other rations? And our troops in the east near China - they all serve in areas that have no rail or road connectivity, so transport aircrafts have to send supplies to airstrips like the one at daulat beg oldi (which was at the center of all the reacent commotion), and from there, heli lifted or supplied by other ways to the forward posts.

Transport aircrafts don't just work during wartime. They are the workhorse for the military, doing the unglamorous, but vital job of logistic supplies, day in and day out, in peace or in war. We have 1.5 million troops on active duty who have to be fed and clothed and supplied with ammunition and water and other vital stuff. Aircrafts perform that role when road or rail transport is not feasible, or not fast enough.

IAF plans to get 10 (maybe 16) C-17s, to fulfill the very heaviest needs. The USAF has 216 (!) of these beasts on active duty, in addition to 100+ C-5 (much larger than C-17). IAF plans for 12 C-130s, USAF has almost 400 of them. They also have hundreds of smaller airlifters.

Or compare with China, and see how much airlift capability they have. Or compare with European countries, and think about the sizes of their militaries with ours. Our transport fleet and total airlift capability is woefully inadequate, if you compare with any modern militaries.

 

[jiki]

We have always had this much airlift, and frankly, for a military the size of India's, the airlift capability is very low, compared to western standards. Check out how much airlift capability other big militaries have. The size of our military is one thing, another factor is the number of places that need to be air maintained. How do you think soldiers on Siachen get their daily food and other rations? And our troops in the east near China - they all serve in areas that have no rail or road connectivity, so transport aircrafts have to send supplies to airstrips like the one at daulat beg oldi (which was at the center of all the reacent commotion), and from there, heli lifted or supplied by other ways to the forward posts.

Transport aircrafts don't just work during wartime. They are the workhorse for the military, doing the unglamorous, but vital job of logistic supplies, day in and day out, in peace or in war. We have 1.5 million troops on active duty who have to be fed and clothed and supplied with ammunition and water and other vital stuff. Aircrafts perform that role when road or rail transport is not feasible, or not fast enough.

IAF plans to get 10 (maybe 16) C-17s, to fulfill the very heaviest needs. The USAF has 216 (!) of these beasts on active duty, in addition to 100+ C-5 (much larger than C-17). IAF plans for 12 C-130s, USAF has almost 400 of them. They also have hundreds of smaller airlifters.

Or compare with China, and see how much airlift capability they have. Or compare with European countries, and think about the sizes of their militaries with ours. Our transport fleet and total airlift capability is woefully inadequate, if you compare with any modern militaries.

agreed , this is da capability that makes an air force super reachable ,super flexible and super strong.In latest war arena the true strength of an air force measured by how much it capable of supporting its grnd forces and these war horses made for that.Truly airlifters,bombers,cargo planes,c3i air-crafts,awacs,tanker(most imp) are the game changer of any battlefields, by virtue of these one can build a great offensive force be it a grnd one or an air one. These are the backbone of an offensive force structure, not jus the fighter jets.

IMO despite having a 1000s of fighter jets an airforce cannot be a inter continental reachable one without having these, jets are may be good to defend req territory but to attack a strategic target having a long reach these machines comes into picture, so dats why grt air forces(US & RUS...mostly US) had identified their capability a log decades ago and continued to make dem very large and for that they r now rulling the sky of whole world.

Again i would say if IAF is now trying to be a ture global one by 2040/2050 it sud also focus on this branch of air power along with fighter air crafts .Unlike jets where we require a lots of state of the art techs to be developed,it require a robust n reliable aviation industry, which can make these large machine in shortest period of time

 

[Abingdonboy]

Its a shame that they replace old with the exact number.

Like old 56 transport aircrafts are being replaced by new 56 transport aircrafts.

It seems like they thinks the situation is same as last 66 years and there is no need to improve as per the situation, growth, economy etc.

And 2 front war etc. etc. are all BS.

A bit of a moot point mate as the capabilities the likes of the C-27J or C-295 bring to the IAF over and above the Avro are significant. The C-27J-class can airlift more than twice the amount of load as the Avro, the C-27J and C-295 come with rear ramps which make the loads that can be transported by the new a/c much more useful and diverse- troops (who can jump out the back), vehicles, supplies (that can be para dropped) etc, the fact the new a/c are modern designs will mean they will be most likely significantly cheaper to operate, will spend less time AOG and spares will be more forthcoming, safety will substantially increase and the new machines will be able to conduct missions the Avros are unable to do.


It may look like a 1:1 replacement on paper in pure numerical terms but when it comes to capabilities it is more like 3:1 or even 4:1 ie you'd have to have 3-4 Avros to do the same job as a single C-27J/C-295.


Same goes for the fighter arm of the IAF- Mig-21s are being replaced by MKIs, MIG-27s and Jags will be replaced by Rafales- whilst it may look as if SQD numbers remain static, the capabilities of the IAF as a whole are multiplying many times over.



Also it isn't exactly true that the IAF/IN/IA is only going for a 1:1 replacement across the board, in many cases the number of platforms is also increasing as well as the addition of capabilities. Look at the example of LUHs, Heavy lift helos (Chinooks), P-8I etc all more than a 1:1 replacement ratio.


Also let's not rule out follow-on orders that are a given for India, this order could go up significantly in the long run.

 

[mirage2K]

We have always had this much airlift, and frankly, for a military the size of India's, the airlift capability is very low, compared to western standards. Check out how much airlift capability other big militaries have. The size of our military is one thing, another factor is the number of places that need to be air maintained. How do you think soldiers on Siachen get their daily food and other rations? And our troops in the east near China - they all serve in areas that have no rail or road connectivity, so transport aircrafts have to send supplies to airstrips like the one at daulat beg oldi (which was at the center of all the reacent commotion), and from there, heli lifted or supplied by other ways to the forward posts.

Transport aircrafts don't just work during wartime. They are the workhorse for the military, doing the unglamorous, but vital job of logistic supplies, day in and day out, in peace or in war. We have 1.5 million troops on active duty who have to be fed and clothed and supplied with ammunition and water and other vital stuff. Aircrafts perform that role when road or rail transport is not feasible, or not fast enough.

IAF plans to get 10 (maybe 16) C-17s, to fulfill the very heaviest needs. The USAF has 216 (!) of these beasts on active duty, in addition to 100+ C-5 (much larger than C-17). IAF plans for 12 C-130s, USAF has almost 400 of them. They also have hundreds of smaller airlifters.

Or compare with China, and see how much airlift capability they have. Or compare with European countries, and think about the sizes of their militaries with ours. Our transport fleet and total airlift capability is woefully inadequate, if you compare with any modern militaries.

the reason we don't have such a large force of air-lifters as compared to the US is that up till now we had a defensive mindset and didn't need to reach out of our borders and our armed forces had to be serviced inside our borders....the US needs a large force for servicing their global bases which are spread all over the world...but the times are changing and hopefully we will build up our transport fleet piece by piece not only in numbers but also in quality