IAF will still need 400 light class aircraft in next 2 decade

[anant_s]

thats an ego of iaf

Don't say that buddy. A lot of us agree that LCA Mk 1 is an ad-hoc arrangement and its perhaps LCA Mk 2, that IAF will have a formidable weapon at their hand. After all its their money and they are the best judges.

 

[Archie]

Don't say that buddy. A lot of us agree that LCA Mk 1 is an ad-hoc arrangement and its perhaps LCA Mk 2, that IAF will have a formidable weapon at their hand. After all its their money and they are the best judges.

but here is the question
without inducting LCA in large enough numbers , IAF will remain stuck at 34 Sqds
if you guys look at current induction plans, then we are looking at 14 Su30 MKI, 6 Rafale, 8 FGFA Sqds
thats 28 sqds of twin engine fighters suported by just 2 LCA MK1 and 4 LCA MK2 sqds
IAF will have to order atleast 10-12 MK2 sqds , if LCA has to play a meaningful role in IAF

 

[sancho]

For reasons best known to themselves, IAF has made it clear that they will not order too many LCAs.

The reasons are still the same, it's delayed and has still not reached FOC, with the lastest reports suggesting FOC only by June next year. So without achieving even the basic development goals and operational requirements of IAF, why should they order more?
More over, the 2nd squad will only be inducted by 2019, the time when the production of MK2 is meant to start, which again shows why it doesn't make sense for IAF to order more MK1.

IMO we should keep producing MK1s until the Mk2 is actually ready for production - that would mean about 100 mk1s in service.

We hardly will have the 4 x MK1s by mid next year, that was suppose to be delivered this year, which delays the production of 8 that were initially planned for the next year and only by 2016 the production peak of 16 can be achieved =>

2015 - possibly 8 to 10 fighters
2016 - 16 (total 24 to 26)
2017 - 16 (total 30 to 32)
2018 - 16 (40 + 6 to 8 additional, maybe N-LCA for IN)
2019 - planned production start for MK2


Wrt squad numbers, as often stated the aim was 42 squads till 2022:

Till the end of 2017

6 x sq Bisons
6 x sq Jags
3 x sq M2K
3 x sq Mig 29
13 x sq MKI
1 x sq LCA MK1
1 x sq M-MRCA (made in France)
=> 33 sq

Till the end of 2022

6 x sq Bisons
6 x sq Jags
3 x sq M2K
3 x sq Mig 29
15 x sq MKI
2 x sq LCA MK1
3 x sq LCA MK2
1 x sq M-MRCA (made in France)
3 x sq M-MRCA (made in India)
1 x sq FGFA
=> 43 sq

The Bisons will be phased out from 2022 onwards, while additional LCA, M-MRCA from the initial orders and FGFA squads will be added. Even if LCA MK2 production is delayed, the squadron strength will be close enough to the aim and with at least 3/4 multi role capable fighters, far more capable anyway.

 

[sancho]

Private partnership production lines by HAL.

Its the way it should be.

Which would had made sense if the development would be done and we wouldn't go for M-MRCA, because then the numbers of LCA orders would justify the costs of a 2nd production line. But the simple fact is, LCA is not ready and that's why M-MRCA is still needed and since both will have production lines at HAL, there is no need for additional lines and increased costs.

 

[anant_s]

but here is the question
without inducting LCA in large enough numbers , IAF will remain stuck at 34 Sqds

No i'm not doubting LCA and its capabilities, but the fact remains that LCA Mk 1 will not be inducted in big numbers (40 as projected). At the same time LCA Mk 2 with its proposed advanced features is what IAF is interested in.
We must understand that any fighter fielded by IF will have to stand up to the threat perceived by strategists. A likely scenario is that JF 17 will be the most potent threat on West border (assuming PAF doesn't get any new F 16s). To counter it u will really need a mix of MKIs, Rafales and LCA Mk 2.
FGFA IMHO is to counter Chinese Gen V fighters, don't think FGFA wil be cost effective on Western borders considering the fleet of PAF.

if you guys look at current induction plans, then we are looking at 14 Su30 MKI, 6 Rafale, 8 FGFA Sqds
thats 28 sqds of twin engine fighters suported by just 2 LCA MK1 and 4 LCA MK2 sqds
IAF will have to order atleast 10-12 MK2 sqds , if LCA has to play a meaningful role in IAF

We must also add 69 odd Mig 29s and 60 odd Mirage 2000 (a total of ~7 squadrons) to the above sums, as both have undergone up gradation and should be good for next 15 years easily. However my worry is the exact timeline of induction of FGFA in future and Rafale in near future. Any further delays (especially with rafale) is going to disturb calculations done by planners.

 

[anant_s]

So without achieving even the basic development goals and operational requirements of IAF, why should they order more?

 

[sancho]

However my worry is the exact timeline of induction of FGFA in future and Rafale in near future. Any further delays (especially with rafale) is going to disturb calculations done by planners.

Even if there are delays, we still will be around 38 squads without much effort and that with a multi role capable fleet, so the squad number will be countered by higher capability anyway. LCA MK2 should offer higher risk of delays compared to Rafale, since it's still in development stage only.

FGFA IMHO is to counter Chinese Gen V fighters, don't think FGFA wil be cost effective on Western borders considering the fleet of PAF.

Stealth aircrafts have no cost-effective angle, they are expensive in any way, but promise high capability in return, no matter in which area. FGFA will provide air superiority (counter AWACS for example), deep strike and SEAD advantages, be it against China or Pakistan.

 

[jha]

Unless Kaveri does a magic or, we sign another deal with GE around 50 Mk-II will be built.

 

[GR!FF!N]

alternately they can also go for assembly and testing lines. Several PSUs outsource a lot of work to sub-vendors with their involvement limited to Quality Assurance part only. If government gives incentives, HAL can develop large pool of vendors (i'm sure they would be doing it already in some small measure) to do actual manufacturing. Electronic cards, fabrication, module manufacturing, foundry and casting works etc can be taken up by private companies and then as confidence in them builds up, larger jobs too can be outsourced. this way they'll not only generate employment but also develop competency in local industry to cope up for projected demands and their contribution to future projects.
Also also couldn't help noticing, that with a large fleet of ingeniously designed products, there will be a corresponding demand for spares too, which would further strain the limited capability (as of now) of HAL. if proper thought in long term planning is given right now, with government advocating Make in India concept, this actually could be a golden opportunity to create a domestic manufacturing capability in aviation.


View attachment 151337

RIP Jadavpur University...Dafaq spelling..

 

[anant_s]

RIP Jadavpur University...Dafaq spelling..

 

[Agent_47]

The reasons are still the same, it's delayed and has still not reached FOC, with the lastest reports suggesting FOC only by June next year. So without achieving even the basic development goals and operational requirements of IAF, why should they order more?
More over, the 2nd squad will only be inducted by 2019, the time when the production of MK2 is meant to start, which again shows why it doesn't make sense for IAF to order more MK1.



We hardly will have the 4 x MK1s by mid next year, that was suppose to be delivered this year, which delays the production of 8 that were initially planned for the next year and only by 2016 the production peak of 16 can be achieved =>

2015 - possibly 8 to 10 fighters
2016 - 16 (total 24 to 26)
2017 - 16 (total 30 to 32)
2018 - 16 (40 + 6 to 8 additional, maybe N-LCA for IN)
2019 - planned production start for MK2


Wrt squad numbers, as often stated the aim was 42 squads till 2022:

Till the end of 2017

6 x sq Bisons
6 x sq Jags
3 x sq M2K
3 x sq Mig 29
13 x sq MKI
1 x sq LCA MK1
1 x sq M-MRCA (made in France)
=> 33 sq

Till the end of 2022

6 x sq Bisons
6 x sq Jags
3 x sq M2K
3 x sq Mig 29
15 x sq MKI
2 x sq LCA MK1
3 x sq LCA MK2
1 x sq M-MRCA (made in France)
3 x sq M-MRCA (made in India)
1 x sq FGFA
=> 43 sq

The Bisons will be phased out from 2022 onwards, while additional LCA, M-MRCA from the initial orders and FGFA squads will be added. Even if LCA MK2 production is delayed, the squadron strength will be close enough to the aim and with at least 3/4 multi role capable fighters, far more capable anyway.

Is there any source stating Mig21 will serve after 2022? and Mig 27 not serving after 2017?

 

[sancho]

Unless Kaveri does a magic or, we sign another deal with GE around 50 Mk-II will be built.

That's another issue, since another engine order could also mean more fighters for IN or for example replacing the MK1 squads with new MK2s and selling the MK1s 2nd hand to another country, just as we did with Su 30Ks.
That however doesn't increase the number of LCA squads in IAF and if that will increase is questionable, because of the timeframe when the current order of 6 squads might be completed. One simply has to think how much sense it makes to procure more LCA MK2s beyond 2025 for example, because it will remain limited capable in operational terms, even with later radar or avionics upgrades, while IAF has the option to add more M-MRCAs or FGFAs in the same time too, not to mention armed drones.

Is there any source stating Mig21 will serve after 2022? and Mig 27 not serving after 2017?

ir Chief Marshal NAK Browne, the senior most Indian military commander, today expressed serious concern at the declining fighter fleet of the Indian Air Force...

... "The MiG 21's Bison-fleet will have to continue till 2025," he said.

Depleted fighter fleet is worrisome, says Air Chief

...The 80 odd IAF MiG-27’s in four squadrons are proposed to be phased out by 2017. The aircraft is facing recurring engine problems, which caused the fleet to be grounded after a crash on 24 July 2010. The planes fly with Tumansky R-29B Engines, which have developed defect that cannot be easily resolved...

...
Two squadrons each of MiG-27’s are based in Jodhpur in Rajasthan and Kalaikunda in West Bengal. Mig-27’s are called Bahadur’s in IAF.

40 MiG-27ML’s based in Jodhpur have undergone upgrade with avionics from Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE) and are expected to be phased out after the ones stationed in Kalaikunda.

Indian Air Force MiG–27 aircraft crashes near Uttarlai, Pilot safeFrontier India | Frontier India


The ideal situation would had been, to keep using the upgraded Mig 27 till FGFA comes, but that wasn't possible anymore because of the engine problems, that's why the early retirement and the additional MKI procurement was needed.
The Bisons also ideally should be replaced earlier than between 2022 and 25, but the delays of LCA and M-MRCA leaves IAF with no choice than to keep using them, unless the technical problems get too critical at some point, as they did with the Mig 27UPG.

 

[k7x]

There will be a total shift in composition of iaf once ucavs are inducted.

India will induct them in large numbers...
400 LCA might not be needed.

There will be atleast 10 squads of ucavs after 2035

 

[halupridol]

There will be a total shift in composition of iaf once ucavs are inducted.

India will induct them in large numbers...
400 LCA might not be needed.

There will be atleast 10 squads of ucavs after 2035

n how many fgfa n amca will we have?

 

[surya kiran]

Even if there are delays, we still will be around 38 squads without much effort and that with a multi role capable fleet, so the squad number will be countered by higher capability anyway. LCA MK2 should offer higher risk of delays compared to Rafale, since it's still in development stage only.



Stealth aircrafts have no cost-effective angle, they are expensive in any way, but promise high capability in return, no matter in which area. FGFA will provide air superiority (counter AWACS for example), deep strike and SEAD advantages, be it against China or Pakistan.

The concept of number of squadrons at 42, I think, is really old. With the current scenario of 2 fronts, we will need to seriously re-look at that number. Also, the earlier doctrine was not of aggression. If any doctrinal change requires a more aggressive posture, it will require a proportional increase in the operational strength of squadrons or planes per squadron.