MiG 21s to be phased out from 2014

[pack leader]

this is idiocy !!!

someone needs to decide on mmrca right now (preferably Rafael)
plan a:let the original manufacturer build another 100 planes in house fast they will be more then happy
and you would stop killing your own pilots
plan b : order 100 mig 29 (0 logistics investment and a capable plane )


your politicians are scum !!!!

 

[Dovah]

your politicians are scum !!!!

You learn fast, sir.

 

[ace009]

Even more reason to pressurize HAL in building faster manufacturing processes for the LCA.
As for MMRCA, the imperative should be to get ~40 aircraft delivered by 2015-2016.

To buy aircraft in a "fast-track" process, there are very few countries who can deliver it. At present the Gripen NG or the Eurofighter cannot be delivered fast track. Rafale and F-16 maybe. The only aircraft that India can get "fast-track" is the F/A-18, which has an active production line and the company (Boeing) has the manufacturing capacity to make and deliver them in time.

 

[JBH22]

someone needs to decide on mmrca right now (preferably Rafael)
plan a:let the original manufacturer build another 100 planes in house fast they will be more then happy
and you would stop killing your own pilots
plan b : order 100 mig 29 (0 logistics investment and a capable plane )


your politicians are scum !!!!

We could buy MIG-29 M ordered by Syria and planes ordered by Libya this will easily bring in 2 Squadrons.
HAL production capacity should be boosted but then its India who cares this country national security is going to the dogs with incompetent losers. Most importantly why are these losers behind the problem why can't they ever anticipate...

 

[Yusuf]

someone needs to decide on mmrca right now (preferably Rafael)
plan a:let the original manufacturer build another 100 planes in house fast they will be more then happy
and you would stop killing your own pilots
plan b : order 100 mig 29 (0 logistics investment and a capable plane )


your politicians are scum !!!!

Tell us something new about our politicians.
I don't know why our PSU HAL puts its hand in manufacturing everything without having all resources to do so. It is struggling to add more MKIs per year as demanded by the AF. years of ToT has also made no effect as we struggled to make a fighter for such a long time. it's got it's IOC now but after a lot of struggle. I really don't understand what ToT is all about. Just today I read about the new air chief struggling with numbers left in the AF. I also wonder how fast HAL will make the LCA as well. We need numbers and pretty fast.

 

[p2prada]

someone needs to decide on mmrca right now (preferably Rafael)
plan a:let the original manufacturer build another 100 planes in house fast they will be more then happy
and you would stop killing your own pilots
plan b : order 100 mig 29 (0 logistics investment and a capable plane )


your politicians are scum !!!!

Unfortunately none of this would materialize quickly. Our requirements go beyond 100 of each type. The 100 of each type you see today in our Jags and Mig-27s are only a legacy of our past. Future orders will be at 200 and more as in the case of MRCA, MKI and even the future FGFA and AMCA. Orders for Jags and Mig-27s also neared the 200 mark.

The Mig-29smt is good, but if IAF goes for it up and over the MRCA deal, that would mean this procurement will come at the cost of Navy and Army requirements. The Air force has the largest modernization budget of the three forces, so there are no extra funds available for an immediate procurement of 100 aircraft over the MRCA.

SFC or Strategic Forces Command has a requirement for 40 aircraft as well, so that will take first priority over any extra fighters that the IAF may want.

So, plan b is not feasible because the MRCA deal will go ahead as planned even with the possible delays it could bring.

As for Plan a, the MRCA were never meant to replace the Mig-21s. They are being inducted to complement the heavier MKIs. However, it would speed up the process of phasing out the Mig-21s by replacing them with the MKIs. The MRCA would take up some of the role of the MKIs and free up the MKIs for the air dominance role which is similar to the Mig-21's role.

Building Rafales in France would be a lot slower than building Rafales in India because their production lines currently handle only 14 aircraft a year. The IAF brass wants 20 aircraft a year in India itself because this would allow us to build up a decent manufacturing industry and at the same time will prevent the west from holding us on a short leash during sanctions. EF is similar because we will be the biggest manufacturers of the EF among the consortium if the deals goes through. 50 EFs are manufactured a year, adding India would make it 70 and we will be faster because everything will be made in one place.

Thumbs up for the last line. However pilots will die even if we go for either plan because the 100 Mig-29s or 100 Rafales will still take a minimum of 5 years to produce and we plan on phasing out the Mig-21s in the period. Only 1 squadron will be in service in 2016 according to the article. So, no real difference there.

MMRCA God know how much time they will take . cant we buy 60+ su35 from russia

dont you think su35 will be more effective and provide more power .

dont you think we need more numbers

Why Su-35s? Rather I would be happy if they upgrade the final batch of MKIs and the 40 extra ordered into Su-35 equivalent platforms. We will simply waste money on the Su-35.

There is talk of uprating the AL-31FP by a decent margin as has happened over the course of many years of manufacturing the MKI. Initial AL-31s came with 12.5 tons of engine power and were slowly uprated upto 13.3 or 13.5 tons from what I know.

The MKIs low altitude performance at low speeds will be obviously better than the Su-35, so no point going for the BMs. We are actually going for the Super 30 upgrade which will push us above the current BMs capabilities.

 

[p2prada]

Yusuf bhai, HAL is in the process of starting a major modernization drive. They plan on spending $6Billion in the next decade to increase production capacity in all assembly lines including looking into future requirements.

HAL has achieved the target numbers of 14 for MKI, it is just that IAF wants the MKIs to be built gradually and with gradual deliveries rather than just dumping all 14 aircraft at once at the end of the year. No idea if that is being done though.

The only way to bridge the gap would be to get the 123 LCA orders into a fast track system like the Chinese have done with the JF-17 or else at 8 a year we will take 15 years just to have the 123 aircraft. HAL does not want to increase capacity unless LCA orders are well over 100 instead of the 40 aircraft ordered today. Unfortunately even the first LCA squadron will come well after half of the Bisons are phased out by 2014. So, depleting squadron strength is inevitable.

One way to get out of this would be to simply order 40 more MKIs and have them directly delivered from Russia just like the batch of 40 we ordered from Russia over the 190 units a few years back. Even they make 14 MKIs a year, so 40 would take 3 years. The batch of 40 ordered is nearing it's end, further orders of 40 aircraft will reduce the impact of failing squadron strength by a decent margin. This will push our MKI inventory to 310 aircraft.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

It's 120 Bisons and 100 Mig-27s. The 80 odd Mig-21s left will be phased out this year and the next.

Nothing will replace the lost aircraft until 2022. That's why the IAF is busy upgrading older jets and quickly buying new ones like MRCA. ADA's promises of LCA delivery by 2006 obviously never materialized. LCA delay was the only reason for why the Mig-21s were never replaced. IAF had been asking for 126 Mirage-2000s since 1999, GoI never allowed it because they were hinging on ADA to deliver by 2006. 2004, GoI allowed IAF to launch MRCA tender after Kaveri failed. In 2007 GoI unilaterally upped the ante by allowing Boeing in the competition.

The Bisons were to be replaced starting this years back in 2000. Obviously things don't always go according to plan.

Again, upgrading older jets has nothing what so ever to do with replacing 300 old fighter aircraft's. Upgrading aircraft's does not fill the void in retiring aircraft, those squanders will remain as they are and we need more for replaceing retired aircrafts.

Why do you "tell" people what it is? Do you work in the MoD?

 

[ace009]

Yusuf bhai, HAL is in the process of starting a major modernization drive. They plan on spending $6Billion in the next decade to increase production capacity in all assembly lines including looking into future requirements.

HAL has achieved the target numbers of 14 for MKI, it is just that IAF wants the MKIs to be built gradually and with gradual deliveries rather than just dumping all 14 aircraft at once at the end of the year. No idea if that is being done though.

The only way to bridge the gap would be to get the 123 LCA orders into a fast track system like the Chinese have done with the JF-17 or else at 8 a year we will take 15 years just to have the 123 aircraft. HAL does not want to increase capacity unless LCA orders are well over 100 instead of the 40 aircraft ordered today. Unfortunately even the first LCA squadron will come well after half of the Bisons are phased out by 2014. So, depleting squadron strength is inevitable.

One way to get out of this would be to simply order 40 more MKIs and have them directly delivered from Russia just like the batch of 40 we ordered from Russia over the 190 units a few years back. Even they make 14 MKIs a year, so 40 would take 3 years. The batch of 40 ordered is nearing it's end, further orders of 40 aircraft will reduce the impact of failing squadron strength by a decent margin. This will push our MKI inventory to 310 aircraft.

Now you are talking - LCA induction IS the solution. I am still wondering why HAL is not developing a high capacity manufacturing for the LCA Mk-1, which is still miles ahead of the Mig-21s (even the bisons). Once HAL builds a 25 aircraft per year capacity for the LCA mk-1, they can provide enough replacements for all the Mig-21s and Mig-27s that IAF needs to retire in 5-6 years. Then, once LCA Mk-2 gets FOC, HAL can build a second production line for LCA mk-2 and change the LCA mk-1 line for naval LCA or export models (maybe one after another). After that, the LCA Mk-1 manufacturing line can be mothballed or replaced with an AMCA manufacturing line.

As for the rest - A force structure of 50% LCA and 50% of MKI/ FGFA, MMRCA/ AMCA (total of 50 squadrons with ~1000 combat aircraft) is what IAF should look forward to post 2025.

 

[p2prada]

Now you are talking - LCA induction IS the solution. I am still wondering why HAL is not developing a high capacity manufacturing for the LCA Mk-1, which is still miles ahead of the Mig-21s (even the bisons). Once HAL builds a 25 aircraft per year capacity for the LCA mk-1, they can provide enough replacements for all the Mig-21s and Mig-27s that IAF needs to retire in 5-6 years. Then, once LCA Mk-2 gets FOC, HAL can build a second production line for LCA mk-2 and change the LCA mk-1 line for naval LCA or export models (maybe one after another). After that, the LCA Mk-1 manufacturing line can be mothballed or replaced with an AMCA manufacturing line.

As for the rest - A force structure of 50% LCA and 50% of MKI/ FGFA, MMRCA/ AMCA (total of 50 squadrons with ~1000 combat aircraft) is what IAF should look forward to post 2025.

The last para of my post indicates we need more MKIs instead. LCA is done. IAF may not even look at it beyond the 40 contracted and 83 expected. LCAs will come only 2 years(2018-19) after Mig-21 is phased out(2016-17). That's why officials suggested a mix of MKIs and LCAs to replace the Migs. This is the only reason why HAL will not build more than 8 a year until the 83 aircraft are contracted. After that also, capacity may only be 14 a year. The 83 LCAs alone will take 10 years at 8/year or 5 at 14/year. The LCAs production lines can be replaced with AMCAs by 2030.

A force structure with 50% LCAs was seen in 1996, not in 2011. I would actually prefer a force structure of 50% AMCAs by 2030. The rest would be MKIs, MRCA, LCA and FGFA.

Going for 500+ LCAs would actually make our air force backward in capability. Even USAF is going for medium and heavy aircraft mix.

The LCA Mk1 severely lacks in a lot of capabilities, it cannot be upgraded beyond what it is today. LCA Mk2 is obviously the better bet for a multitude of reasons. So, don't ever expect an Mk1 production line. Even the Navy is going only for Mk2s. No other country will chose Mk1 either. The Mk-1 production line will be expanded to handle Mk2s after the first 20 Mk1s are built by 2014.

 

[sayareakd]

 

[Blackwater]

SU-30 to theek ha but where is LCA and MMRCA ??? I have heard their names. Are they fighters planes?? or names of mythical story???

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Air launched brahmos completed in the center underneath.

 

[ace009]

Nice - question is, can any other aircraft in the IAF inventory (present or near future) carry the Brahmos or is it ONLY for the MKI?

 

[Zebra]

May be FGFA . But not sure .

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Nice - question is, can any other aircraft in the IAF inventory (present or near future) carry the Brahmos or is it ONLY for the MKI?

It seems like SU-30 is the only one presently. Nirbhay air launched is also being prepped to go on Sukhois.

Su-30MKI To Get Indian Nirbhay Cruise Missile | AVIATION WEEK

Su-30MKI To Get Indian Nirbhay Cruise Missile

 

[Zebra]

General characteristics of FGFA.

Crew: 2 (pilot)
Length: 22.0 m (72 ft 2 in)
Wingspan: 14.2 m (46 ft 7 in)
Height: 6.05 m (19 ft 10 in)
Wing area: 78.8 m² (848 ft²)
Empty weight: 18,500 kg (40,786 lb)
Loaded weight: 26,000 kg (57,320 lb)
Useful load: 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 37,000 kg (81,571 lb)
Powerplant: 2 × Saturn-Lyulka AL-41F turbofan
Dry thrust: 96.1 kN (9,800 kgf, 21,605 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 152 kN (15,500 kgf, 34,172 lbf) each

General characteristics of MKI .

Crew: 2
Length: 21.935 m (72.97 ft)
Wingspan: 14.7 m (48.2 ft)
Height: 6.36 m (20.85 ft)
Wing area: 62.0 m² (667 ft²)
Empty weight: 18,400 kg[67] (40,565 lb)
Loaded weight: 24,900 kg (54,895 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 38,800 kg (85,600 lb)
Powerplant: 2 × Lyulka AL-31FP turbofans with thrust vectoring, 131 kN with afterburner (29,400 lbf) each .

SOURCE : wiki .
As per General Charcteristics , I think FGFA may take Brahmos .

 

[LETHALFORCE]

PAKFA will also carry Brahmos in the future. It may even be Brahmos 2??

Defunct Humanity: PAK FA with 'Brahmos'

PAK FA with 'Brahmos'

 

[Zebra]

If we are able to reduce the weight of the missile below two tonnes, we can deploy it on the FGFA and we are looking to do that in future," BrahMos Aerospace chief A Sivathanu Pillai said here.

Source by - rusembassy.in
India to deploy BrahMos cruise missile in fighter planes
-----
India to Intergrate BrahMos cruise missile into 5th Gen FGFA too .
PTI

India is planning to deploy its 290km range supersonic BrahMos cruise missile on the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) being developed with Russia. "If we are able to reduce the weight of the missile below two tonnes, we can deploy it on the FGFA and we are looking to do that in future," BrahMos Aerospace chief A Sivathanu Pillai said here.

http://http://iafnews.nuvodev.com/posts/india-to-intergrate-brahmos-cruise-missile-into-5th-gen-fgfa-too/

 

[ace009]

If we are able to reduce the weight of the missile below two tonnes, we can deploy it on the FGFA and we are looking to do that in future," BrahMos Aerospace chief A Sivathanu Pillai said here.

Source by - rusembassy.in
India to deploy BrahMos cruise missile in fighter planes
-----
India to Intergrate BrahMos cruise missile into 5th Gen FGFA too .
PTI

India is planning to deploy its 290km range supersonic BrahMos cruise missile on the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) being developed with Russia. "If we are able to reduce the weight of the missile below two tonnes, we can deploy it on the FGFA and we are looking to do that in future," BrahMos Aerospace chief A Sivathanu Pillai said here.

http://http://iafnews.nuvodev.com/posts/india-to-intergrate-brahmos-cruise-missile-into-5th-gen-fgfa-too/

IMHO, Brahmos is too large to be put on an indoor bay of the FGFA - which means the only way it can fit on FGFA is on external pylons, increasing the RCS SIGNIFICANTLY. For a $100 million 5th gen stealth aircraft to carry Brahmos for strike mission, thereby reducing it's RCS and exposing itself to enemy fire is not a smart idea. I sincerely hope that IAF does not use the FGFA to carry Brahmos.
Having said that, LCA is too small to carry Brahmos and deliver it to enemy sites - Nirbhay maybe. Which means till the AMCA comes into operation, the best bet, apart from the MKI is the MMRCA to carry Brahmos and Nirbhay. Or maybe the "upgraded" Mirages can carry Brahmos and Nirbhay ...