Know Your 'Rafale'

[brahmastra11]

What does Rafale deal mean for India?-Latitude-Weekend Shows -TIMESNOW.tv - Latest Breaking News, Big News Stories, News Videos

 

[power_monger]

@Ray

till date No agni missiles carry Seeker.But it will start from now.basically Seeker in ballistic missiles will be used in two areas

1) Anti Shipping ballistic missile Likfe Df-21D chinese ballistic missile
2) Anti Satellite missile especially in low orbit,LEO(Ballistic missiles can reach much higher altitude and thus seeker in it can help it to destroy enemey intelligence gathering satellites).

There is a talk of using seekers in ballistic missiles to escape from ballistic missile defense,but with limited maneuovrability of ballistic missiles seeker used for such purpose hardly makes it usefull.ballistic missiles in future will be replaced by tactical missiles as ballistic trajectories become easy kill for BMD's.

MIRV is altogether a different beast. They are quite complex. but Agni is yet to reach that capability. until it reaches that capability,missiles with seeker will still take position of complexity.

 

[Ray]

Russia To Provide "Seeker" Tech For Agni-V ICBM

Moscow to provide 'seeker' tech for Agni-V, capable of hitting target beyond 10,000 km

India is all set to join the select group of nations capable of launching nuclear strikes across continent. With Russia ready to provide the cutting-edge "seeker" technology for India's Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), the country is ready to flaunt its nuclear might in a big way by year end when the ICBM will undergo its maiden launch.

The development of the ICBM had been delayed because no country was ready to provide India the crucial 'seekers' technology, which enables the missile to home in on the target with pinpoint precision. The ICBM will be capable of carrying nuclear payload and has a strike range of 10,000 km.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has indigenously developed the 'seeker' technology for Agni-I, Agni-II and Agni-III intermediate range missiles. But the DRDO was not in a position to develop the next stage technology and efforts to import it had been futile so far.

The breakthrough with Russia for the most critical system of the ICBM came after extensive talks between delegations of the two countries during Defence Minister AK Antony's three-day visit to Moscow earlier this week. The Indian delegation comprised senior missile scientists of the DRDO besides others, and Moscow agreed to help New Delhi for the ICBM project, sources said.

The two sides met to review progress on various defence projects under the India-Russia Inter-Governmental Commission on Military Technical Co-operation set up a decade back. The Defence Ministers of the two countries head this body and meet once a year either in Moscow or New Delhi.

Russia, UK, the US, France and China are the only countries in the world to have ICBMs which can hit a target beyond 10,000 km. India has successfully developed intermediate range ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons and hitting a target less than 4,000 km.

With the successful launch of the Agni-III two years back, the Indian scientists displayed their capability to even develop ICBM. However, their efforts over the last two years or so to go ahead with Angi-V launch could not progress due to non-availability of 'seeker' techology.


"Given discriminatory attitude against India by some advanced countries, including the US vis-à-vis sharing advanced technology over the last two decades, it was tough going for the missile project scientists till Russia agreed to come to India's rescue," officials said.

They said Russia was more than willing to share technical know-how with India for its missile programme and time tested defence relations between the two countries spanning more than four decades again produced positive results, sources said.

In another important development, Russia will also share its advanced GPS system for military purposes with India. The US has been reluctant to do so despite repeated assurances by Washington that it is ready to open its doors for hi-tech.

Incidentally, the other country to provide frontline technology in missiles and avionics is Israel and its sophisticated radars helped the DRDO carry out the successful test of Agni-III, sources pointed out.
https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&r...oIDwBw&usg=AFQjCNGkyqM-z30kByWmin-Jl8pw5w0Rgg

Does indicate that foreign assistance in DRDO projects are inherent and why not?

Though this is also of note

In October 2011, a report published by The Pioneer raised doubts about DRDO's ability to independently develop the "seeker technology" (guidance technology) eligible for ICBMs, that could enable the missile to traverse long distances in excess of 10,000 km.[13] The same report also asserted Russia's willingness to provide India with help in the field of "seeker technology". The authenticity of the pioneer report is disputed by at least one foreign newspaper, with the counter-claim that the involvement of Russia is probably inflated out of proportion, because if the report about Russian involvement is true, Russia may be suspected of violating the Missile Technology Control Regime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni-VI#cite_note-MCFC-14

Advanced Agni-6 missile with multiple warheads likely by 2017
DRDO technicians in Hyderabad assemble the payload stage of an Agni missile
http://www.business-standard.com/ar...e-warheads-likely-by-2017-113050800034_1.html

Meanwhile, the decision of DRDO to equip the 5,500-km range Agni-V, whose maiden flight is expected soon, with Multiple Independent Re-targettable Vehicle (MIRV) capability has not come a day too soon. For a strategic missile with multiple warheads will greatly enhance its deterrence capability. Each warhead of Agni-V could be assigned to a separate target, separated by hundreds of kilometres. Moreover, DRDO could develop MIRV system by modifying the multiple launch capability developed by ISRO whose four stage Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle(PSLV) has convincingly proved its prowess in launching multiple satellite payloads in one go. Indeed, in April 2008, PSLV had set a sort of record by launching as many as ten satellites simultaneously. - See more at: http://www.vifindia.org/article/2012/january/28/Need-to-Augment-Indian-Missile-Power

 

[power_monger]

@Ray

Frankly speaking the Seeker tech to agni 5 by russia is more air than actual substance.

 

[Ray]

Missile seekers makes the target detection and homing by sensing the Radio Frequency (RF), Infra Red (IR), and/ or visible energy that the target emits or reflects.

Passive IR Seekers (eg THAAD, EKV) deetect IR energy emitted by targets using a focal plane array (FPA), scanning detector, or a single detector with a spinning reticle.
- some IR seekers also use a visible sensor which measures reflected visible light.
- Anti Radiation Missiles (eg HARM) use passive RF seekers that home directly on the radar transmissions from the ground or sea based anti aircraft radar.

Active Seekers (eg PAC 3, Standard Missile) tracks targets with on board radar.

Semi Active Seeker (eg Patriot) detect radar energy reflected from targets tracked and illuminated by the ground or ship based radar.

With command guidance, no seeker is used. Both missile and target are tracked by the ground radar, where guidance commands are computed and uplinked to the missile.

 

[Ray]

@Ray

Frankly speaking the Seeker tech to agni 5 by russia is more air than actual substance.

And why please?

Doesn't suit your purpose and intent.

All reference and links to the news have been obliterated.

Why?

Think rationally and you will realise that it is too sensitive a news to be out in the open. It violates the Missile Technology Control Regime and none would like to be seen to be violating it.

Guess if anyone would let anyone not in the loop know from where the cryogenic rocket engine came from for India and when and how.

It is also well-known that back in 1992 the US had asked President Boris Yeltsin to stop the transfer of Russian cryogenic engines.

 

[power_monger]

And why please?

Doesn't suit your purpose and intent.

All reference and links to the news have been obliterated.

Why?

Think rationally and you will realise that it is too sensitive a news to be out in the open. It violates the Missile Technology Control Regime and none would like to be seen to be violating it.

Guess if anyone would let anyone not in the loop know from where the cryogenic rocket engine came from for India and when and how.

Which seeker is being proposed by russians for Agni 5 and why?

 

[akshay m]

to add

DRDO @DRDO_India · 8 mins 8 minutes ago
Dev of indigenous Radars for our armed forces is among niche areas where DRDO has achieved near total self-reliance.

 

[Ray]

Which seeker is being proposed by russians for Agni 5 and why?

It is a Rhetorical Question being asked in order to make a point, rather than to elicit an answer.

If such an issue which technically violates the Missile Technology Control Regime could be stated in the open public space, then it would have been done so. It has been mentioned in a few papers/ articles, but all of them have vanished thereafter. Try the links and its states webpage not available.

You were categorically being emphatic that the missile programme and other programmes are all indigenous. I have indicated that there has been foreign collaboration in many cases.

I am not mindless jingoist. I am a pragmatist. If I don't have something, I will take help, openly without any shame and develop my skills thereof. I would have no embarrassment to acknowledge the help and not pull wool to satiate my false, contrived and undeserved ego boost.

Why Russia will help?

She requires money. She requires goodwill. And India has been a steadfast friend and Putin requires friends in the international geopolitical and geostrategic arena.

 

[Ray]

DRDO @DRDO_India · 8 mins 8 minutes ago
Dev of indigenous Radars for our armed forces is among niche areas where DRDO has achieved near total self-reliance.

Near is the keyword.

We overuse and overplay the word indigenous.

Notwithstanding, the work achieved by Indian scientists and technicians, even if with a little help from friends, is fabulous and noteworthy. We should commend them for that.

 

[power_monger]

It is a Rhetorical Question being asked in order to make a point, rather than to elicit an answer.

If such an issue which technically violates the Missile Technology Control Regime could be stated in the open public space, then it would have been done so. It has been mentioned in a few papers/ articles, but all of them have vanished thereafter. Try the links and its states webpage not available.

You were categorically being emphatic that the missile programme and other programmes are all indigenous. I have indicated that there has been foreign collaboration in many cases.

I am not mindless jingoist. I am a pragmatist. If I don't have something, I will take help, openly without any shame and develop my skills thereof. I would have no embarrassment to acknowledge the help and not pull wool to satiate my false, contrived and undeserved ego boost.

Why Russia will help?

She requires money. She requires goodwill. And India has been a steadfast friend and Putin requires friends in the international geopolitical and geostrategic arena.

AFAIK there is no seeker used in Agni 5.Seeker is a important part of missile which does not go un-noticed. Like i said,i would appreciate more technical details on any such seeker proposal?

how is a RF seeker or say IIR seeker usefull in ballistic missiles(apart from anti shipping missiles)? Missiles can have very little CEP even without seekers.

'very high accuracy Ring Laser Gyro based Inertial Navigation System (RINS) and the most modern and accurate Micro Navigation System (MINS) ensured the Missile reach the target point within few meters of accuracy. The high speed onboard computer and fault tolerant software along with robust and reliable bus guided the Missile flawlessly.'


All the sub-systems of a jet fighter like f-35 does not come from america only. Does it make less american? How does it matter where sub-systems are designed and developed? Isn't the end product is what which matters right? Just because DRDO has taken consultation from Russia or some subsystems have come from other countries does not make it non-indegenious.

 

[Ray]

AFAIK there is no seeker used in Agni 5.Seeker is a important part of missile which does not go un-noticed. Like i said,i would appreciate more technical details on any such seeker proposal?

Doesn't go unnoticed!

You are naive.

Heard of Abdul Qadeer Khan?

How many in the world knew what tricks he was playing?

how is a RF seeker or say IIR seeker usefull in ballistic missiles(apart from anti shipping missiles)? Missiles can have very little CEP even without seekers.

I have given you all the types of seeker and their employment.

Now, if you can't put 2 and 2 together, what can I do?

'very high accuracy Ring Laser Gyro based Inertial Navigation System (RINS) and the most modern and accurate Micro Navigation System (MINS) ensured the Missile reach the target point within few meters of accuracy. The high speed onboard computer and fault tolerant software along with robust and reliable bus guided the Missile flawlessly.'

Another, what Maitra state - strawman.

All the sub-systems of a jet fighter like f-35 does not come from america only. Does it make less american? How does it matter where sub-systems are designed and developed? Isn't the end product is what which matters right? Just because DRDO has taken consultation from Russia or some subsystems have come from other countries does not make it non-indegenious.

Technology is what makes the nomenclature.

Major technology is the answer as to where it comes from, even if outsources.

Nuts and bolts from outside does not make it foreign.

But engines from outside or major subsystems do.

You are wasting time by grinding your nose to the mill just to prove a point.

I have no more time to waste or redundant stuff.

My car is of American make, but I believe every part is made in India.

Would that be also called indigenous in its truest sense?

 

[power_monger]

My car is of American make, but I believe every part is made in India.

Would that be also called indigenous in its truest sense?

Car would still be american because, You have to design the car for better aerodynamics,design the placements of hundread of independent subsystems for better reliability and performance..Many such things go on.None of the Components which goes in a honda car is developed by Honda. yet it is called Honda car. No one calls it a Tata car.

Unfortunatly i do not think you have experience of developing a product and understand its complexities.I rest my argument here.I repeat,Seeker on Agni is just your fragment of imagination to defame DRDO. you will never be able to prove it had one because it never had it in first place. Hopefully you learn about seekers and put better arguments in coming days.

 

[Ray]

Car would still be american because, You have to design the car for better aerodynamics,design the placements of hundread of independent subsystems for better reliability and performance..Many such things go on.None of the Components which goes in a honda car is developed by Honda. yet it is called Honda car. No one calls it a Tata car.

Unfortunatly i do not think you have experience of developing a product and understand its complexities.I rest my argument here.I repeat,Seeker on Agni is just your fragment of imagination to defame DRDO. you will never be able to prove it had one because it never had it in first place. Hopefully you learn about seekers and put better arguments in coming days.

Puerile and pathetic.

 

[ersakthivel]

Modi's Rafale deal in France "reminds" one of how tinpot dictators would carry fat chequebooks during trips abroad | idrw.org

if only the GOI puts the ambassador in an obsolete mig-27 and send him on a mission to bomb Tibet he would know the importance of this 36 buy in the context of the never ending saga.

it is such BS sprouted by seasoned diplomats makes us really suspect the quality of entire IFS cadre.

 

[PaliwalWarrior]

@ersakthivel, HAL should put its own money into Tejas line. Why? Because thats what every manufacturer does. In addition HAL should pay a royalty to ADA. Why? Because ADA holds the IPR.

HAL is NOT building Tejas for free. HAL gets paid for the aircrafts. HAL can always calculate Tejas price in such way that it takes all factors into consideration like cost of setting up factory and royalty cost. This is the only way HAL can become a respectable manufacturer.

Who says HAL does not have orders? HAL is building prototypes for which HAL gets paid. HAL also has orders for 40 IAF and 6 Navy production units. Counting prototypes and production units, the orders in hand may be around 55. This is not at all bad. In addition, 100 units of Mark-2 are assured. You cannot say that 150+ orders for a fighter aircraft is bad business proposition.

I think MOD is working on something to speed up production of LCA Tejas.

I doubt orders in one go is such a serious issue. orders can come in tranches.

in this way ... that you speak of

the contractor HAL (dasault) etc works on fixed nos of orders fixed rate of return system

why id french airforce forced to buy 11 rafale a year from dasault even f they dont want ?

because of such contracts

give HAL a contract of 11 /year minimum and then ask it to invest and give them an asured IRR od 12% and penalise them for late delivery

 

[PaliwalWarrior]

Even M2000 in IAF has servicability rates approaching 90%.

why was the whole M2000 fleet of all 49 in IAF was completely gounded with availability 0% for a few months ?

 

[Lions Of Punjab]

Two new Rafale squadrons are fine, but IAF's dwindling fighters a worry: Former Air Marshal Gogoi


Prime Minister Narendra Modi might have pulled a rabbit out off his hat while visiting France, when he decided to buy 36 Rafale fighter aircraft in fly-away condition for the Indian Air Force.

At a time when the country is facing an alarming shortfall in fighting squadrons – the IAF has been left with only 34 squadrons against a sanctioned strength of 42 – this is welcome relief, even though it means the old UPA deal for 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) is now dead.

To find out the pros and cons of the NDA's Rafale deal, Firstpost spoke to former Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, South Western Air Command, Air Marshal Anjan Kumar Gogoi, in an email interview. Edited excerpts:

With the $20 billion deal for 126 Rafale fighter jets with Dassault Aviation hitting a dead end, how is the off-the-shelf purchase of 36 jets going to help the Indian Air Force?

The Rafale deal has been stuck for years. Thirty-six aircraft being inducted into the IAF is good news for the IAF. It will certainly give a big boost to the present IAF capability. The timeframe for the induction is critical. The earlier it happens, the better. But what is practically possible is a big question.

A study conducted by IHS Jane's Aerospace and Defense Consulting found that the cost per flight hour for Rafale is $16,500. If expenses are a worry weren't these costs kept in mind earlier?

The IAF did a commendable job of professionally evaluating the contesting fighter aircraft and selecting the Rafale. I fully endorse this selection, including the lifecycle cost assessment. The figures that you quote about the operating cost of the Rafale were taken into account while making the 'lifecycle cost' assessment.

While the sudden decision to buy two squadrons in fly-away condition won the government applause, the truth is the rigorous selection process through which Rafale was selected was also negated. Being a former air warrior do you find this decision professionally good?

It is based on the assessment which I had mentioned above that the government of India now has decided to procure the 36 Rafale aircraft through a different route – government-to-government agreement instead of the normal tendering route. This change in the process of procurement can only be answered by the Ministry of Defence.

With no transfer-of-technology happening, won't it be difficult to maintain these aircraft?

Maintenance of an aircraft and transfer of technology are two separate aspects. Yes, by inducting the 36 aircraft through "off-the-shelf" procurement there would be no transfer of technology. Other aspects like 'Make in India' as well as 'offsets' would also have to be worked out when the contract is signed. This aspect also can only be explained by the Ministry of Defence.

Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar recently said that the Rafale jets were never meant to replace the ageing MiG 21s and the MiG 27s. Is it a new development or was this line of thinking always there?

I do not remember the exact types of aircraft the Rafale was supposed to replace (when you make a case for new procurement this is specified in the proposal). But the LCA Tejas was supposed to replace the MiG 21s.

There was a Reuters report recently saying that Sweden's Saab and the US Lockheed Martin might pitch in with their Gripen and F-16 respectively as replacements for the ageing MiG fleets. Should the IAF go for foreign shopping or allow the LCA Tejas to take its own sweet time?

I am not aware of the Reuters report that you are referring to. But I believe that the Tejas aircraft would be a good replacement for the MiG 21s. We need to support the Tejas programme so that the aircraft is operationalised at the earliest. There is very little left (though long overdue) to fully operationalise the Tejas.

Is India now completely dependent on the Sukhoi Su-30s when it comes to guarding the skies. Will increasing the Sukhoi squadrons considerably provide us with some kind of deterrent against enemies?

The Su-30 MKI is a fantastic aircraft but a generation behind the Rafale in technology. The Su-30 MKI is fully capable of not only guarding our skies but also delivering a very good punch to the enemy. It is truly a multi-role aircraft — maintenance-intensive but a true deterrent in the real sense.

Instead of focusing largely on getting its 4th Generation fighter aircraft fleet okay, should India get more serious on developing its 5th generation fighter aircraft programme in collaboration with Russia?

The Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) is a developmental aircraft and is still a few years away even for the Russian Air Force. The IAF is quite involved in its development and I am sure when operationalised, the FGFA would serve the IAF well. But that is still, in my opinion, five to 10 years away.

In 2011-12, 12 (5 MiGs), in 2012-13, four (two MiGs), in 2013-14, six (four MiGs) and in 2014-15 up to 25 February, six (03 MiGs) crashed, killing 11 personnel. Despite such heavy loss of men and machine why is there no synergy between the Ministry of Defence and the IAF?

This is a very old and often repeated question. Yes, in the recent past the MiG 21 has had a history of accidents. But there are many factors which contribute to this statistic. A lot has been said and written on this topic. Personally I can vouch for the MiG 21 as a safe and very capable aircraft having flown the MiG 21 for over 2,500 hours (all accidents free)!

Diminishing strength of fighter aircraft squadrons is a real concern for the IAF. But that is where management of resources and well thought out deployment plans to meet the twin contingencies as well as other sub/non-conventional threats come to the fore. I am sure the IAF has ingenious plans to meet these eventualities. But there is a limit to what can be achieved with dwindling resources! Hence the urgency to induct new types of aircraft like the Rafale.

What is the biggest impediment to modernising the IAF? Is it lack of political will, lack of funds or something else?

Modernising the IAF cannot be viewed or done in isolation. IAF as an instrument of national security must be in sync with other instruments of national security. Procurement of aircraft and systems for modernisation of the IAF is only one aspect of modernisation. There are other aspects like improvement of infrastructure (airfields, maintenance and logistic infrastructure and training). The IAF has progressed and achieved a lot and so has the country. Having been part of many multinational exercises and operations with all major air forces of the world I would like to assure you that the IAF is second to none in professionalism and operational capability. I do not believe that there is lack of funds or political will in modernising the IAF. However, the process is slow because at times there is lack of synergy among various departments and agencies responsible for modernising the IAF.

Two new Rafale squadrons are fine, but IAF’s dwindling fighters a worry: Former Air Marshal Gogoi | idrw.org

 

[Lions Of Punjab]

Two new Rafale squadrons are fine, but IAF's dwindling fighters a worry: Former Air Marshal Gogoi


Prime Minister Narendra Modi might have pulled a rabbit out off his hat while visiting France, when he decided to buy 36 Rafale fighter aircraft in fly-away condition for the Indian Air Force.

At a time when the country is facing an alarming shortfall in fighting squadrons – the IAF has been left with only 34 squadrons against a sanctioned strength of 42 – this is welcome relief, even though it means the old UPA deal for 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) is now dead.

To find out the pros and cons of the NDA's Rafale deal, Firstpost spoke to former Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, South Western Air Command, Air Marshal Anjan Kumar Gogoi, in an email interview. Edited excerpts:

With the $20 billion deal for 126 Rafale fighter jets with Dassault Aviation hitting a dead end, how is the off-the-shelf purchase of 36 jets going to help the Indian Air Force?

The Rafale deal has been stuck for years. Thirty-six aircraft being inducted into the IAF is good news for the IAF. It will certainly give a big boost to the present IAF capability. The timeframe for the induction is critical. The earlier it happens, the better. But what is practically possible is a big question.

A study conducted by IHS Jane's Aerospace and Defense Consulting found that the cost per flight hour for Rafale is $16,500. If expenses are a worry weren't these costs kept in mind earlier?

The IAF did a commendable job of professionally evaluating the contesting fighter aircraft and selecting the Rafale. I fully endorse this selection, including the lifecycle cost assessment. The figures that you quote about the operating cost of the Rafale were taken into account while making the 'lifecycle cost' assessment.

While the sudden decision to buy two squadrons in fly-away condition won the government applause, the truth is the rigorous selection process through which Rafale was selected was also negated. Being a former air warrior do you find this decision professionally good?

It is based on the assessment which I had mentioned above that the government of India now has decided to procure the 36 Rafale aircraft through a different route – government-to-government agreement instead of the normal tendering route. This change in the process of procurement can only be answered by the Ministry of Defence.

With no transfer-of-technology happening, won't it be difficult to maintain these aircraft?

Maintenance of an aircraft and transfer of technology are two separate aspects. Yes, by inducting the 36 aircraft through "off-the-shelf" procurement there would be no transfer of technology. Other aspects like 'Make in India' as well as 'offsets' would also have to be worked out when the contract is signed. This aspect also can only be explained by the Ministry of Defence.

Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar recently said that the Rafale jets were never meant to replace the ageing MiG 21s and the MiG 27s. Is it a new development or was this line of thinking always there?

I do not remember the exact types of aircraft the Rafale was supposed to replace (when you make a case for new procurement this is specified in the proposal). But the LCA Tejas was supposed to replace the MiG 21s.

There was a Reuters report recently saying that Sweden's Saab and the US Lockheed Martin might pitch in with their Gripen and F-16 respectively as replacements for the ageing MiG fleets. Should the IAF go for foreign shopping or allow the LCA Tejas to take its own sweet time?

I am not aware of the Reuters report that you are referring to. But I believe that the Tejas aircraft would be a good replacement for the MiG 21s. We need to support the Tejas programme so that the aircraft is operationalised at the earliest. There is very little left (though long overdue) to fully operationalise the Tejas.

Is India now completely dependent on the Sukhoi Su-30s when it comes to guarding the skies. Will increasing the Sukhoi squadrons considerably provide us with some kind of deterrent against enemies?

The Su-30 MKI is a fantastic aircraft but a generation behind the Rafale in technology. The Su-30 MKI is fully capable of not only guarding our skies but also delivering a very good punch to the enemy. It is truly a multi-role aircraft — maintenance-intensive but a true deterrent in the real sense.

Instead of focusing largely on getting its 4th Generation fighter aircraft fleet okay, should India get more serious on developing its 5th generation fighter aircraft programme in collaboration with Russia?

The Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) is a developmental aircraft and is still a few years away even for the Russian Air Force. The IAF is quite involved in its development and I am sure when operationalised, the FGFA would serve the IAF well. But that is still, in my opinion, five to 10 years away.

In 2011-12, 12 (5 MiGs), in 2012-13, four (two MiGs), in 2013-14, six (four MiGs) and in 2014-15 up to 25 February, six (03 MiGs) crashed, killing 11 personnel. Despite such heavy loss of men and machine why is there no synergy between the Ministry of Defence and the IAF?

This is a very old and often repeated question. Yes, in the recent past the MiG 21 has had a history of accidents. But there are many factors which contribute to this statistic. A lot has been said and written on this topic. Personally I can vouch for the MiG 21 as a safe and very capable aircraft having flown the MiG 21 for over 2,500 hours (all accidents free)!

Diminishing strength of fighter aircraft squadrons is a real concern for the IAF. But that is where management of resources and well thought out deployment plans to meet the twin contingencies as well as other sub/non-conventional threats come to the fore. I am sure the IAF has ingenious plans to meet these eventualities. But there is a limit to what can be achieved with dwindling resources! Hence the urgency to induct new types of aircraft like the Rafale.

What is the biggest impediment to modernising the IAF? Is it lack of political will, lack of funds or something else?

Modernising the IAF cannot be viewed or done in isolation. IAF as an instrument of national security must be in sync with other instruments of national security. Procurement of aircraft and systems for modernisation of the IAF is only one aspect of modernisation. There are other aspects like improvement of infrastructure (airfields, maintenance and logistic infrastructure and training). The IAF has progressed and achieved a lot and so has the country. Having been part of many multinational exercises and operations with all major air forces of the world I would like to assure you that the IAF is second to none in professionalism and operational capability. I do not believe that there is lack of funds or political will in modernising the IAF. However, the process is slow because at times there is lack of synergy among various departments and agencies responsible for modernising the IAF.

Two new Rafale squadrons are fine, but IAF’s dwindling fighters a worry: Former Air Marshal Gogoi | idrw.org

 

[PaliwalWarrior]

When we have 4 km range Konkurs, then why have another 4 kms range NAG?

Where is there the issue of technology?

I am afraid I don't buy your contention - It is preferable to let DRDO prove a 4km missile before it can try to build a 7km missile for the simple reason that India has no loose change to play a doting grandfather to any organisation, including the Army or DRDO. Also, when one has a 4km missile, there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

Further, you must understand that technology changes fast and so do the adversary's weapon inventory. Therefore, does that mean that we remain static and not respond to changing scenarios and technology?

Do people have the old mobile phone still or are they with the touch screen and other stuff like Bluetooth and all that?

Why have they changed and responded to technological change?

sir

konkurs are wire guided i think


in NAG we are seeking fire & forget & self guidance capability