Analyzing Indian Air Force Capability

[Contrarian]

No one was comparing anything dude ........ I simply said ..

IAF has not got Interception ability as required against Threats at Present and in near Future........ Read all the Posts

I was implying this in not PAF scenario but it seems we are the only ones you plan and can think of comparing......

CAN IAF Defend its skys from other potential Intruders ...... Keep PAF aside and look for the others .... Its not that you have your IAF for Pakistan only..

Considering that a country needs to strenghten its defences against offensive elements in any given time you need to prepare for That ..

Hence i maintain its not about Comparison, its about IAF being not a good defensive force because lack of Interceptors of High performance and agility.

First of all you need to look at the available ground infrastructure. Along the western border, India has extensive and exhaustive air defence coverage with everything from Aerostat radars to GreenPine radars looking deep in Pakistani airspace. And all the new SAM's are located near the western border. Any air intrusions from the western border are very easily detected.

Such infrastructure eliminates the need of a big interceptor fleet atleast for the western threat.

On the North Eastern front, our defensive infrastructure is absolutely pathetic. THe air coverage is very low, there are gaping holes in the radar coverage and old SAM's are placed there.

Now what you are trying to mention is that IAF is a credible offensive force but not defensive. But the thing is that this is true, only when IAF is conducting an offensive mission, and at that time, its defensive capability is lacking, because during all other times, all the planes in IAF can perform interception. Literally all of the planes.

The Mirage 2000's are now being upgraded to Mirage 2005/9's.
The MiG 29's are being upgraded to MiG 29SMT/2's.
The Jags also have the Darin II upgrade.
The MiG 21 Bisons are already BVR capable.

This is apart from the intended fleet of 230 Su-30MKI's. Su-30MKI is no mean plane and IAF has ordered 230 of them. THis means that the bulk of IAF in the future will consist of Su-30MKI's and MRCA's.

ALL Of the above mentioned planes are there for any interception or air defence needs, so i dont really get the point of IAF being an offensive force and not defensive.

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

What on earth have you been smoking to suggest that India lacks interceptors or an interception capability?!

Defensive wise India has alot of SAMs including S300 types and the SU30MKI is ideally suited for interception missions.

Sort it out newbie!!!

Read the header of the post

Who asked about SAMs.....

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

First of all you need to look at the available ground infrastructure. Along the western border, India has extensive and exhaustive air defence coverage with everything from Aerostat radars to GreenPine radars looking deep in Pakistani airspace. And all the new SAM's are located near the western border. Any air intrusions from the western border are very easily detected.

First of all no Air Defense BS from ground... POST IS FOR IAF CAPABILITIES

On the North Eastern front, our defensive infrastructure is absolutely pathetic. THe air coverage is very low, there are gaping holes in the radar coverage and old SAM's are placed there.

Now what you are trying to mention is that IAF is a credible offensive force but not defensive. But the thing is that this is true, only when IAF is conducting an offensive mission, and at that time, its defensive capability is lacking,

Now you understand what by Posts meant. Its laking when in War scenario you donot only sit and defend.

because during all other times, all the planes in IAF can perform interception. Literally all of the planes.

The Mirage 2000's are now being upgraded to Mirage 2005/9's.
The MiG 29's are being upgraded to MiG 29SMT/2's.
The Jags also have the Darin II upgrade.
The MiG 21 Bisons are already BVR capable.

Agreed, who says they are not, but capabilities are in War scenarios and intrusions are when you are intruding also so you have to defend and attack at the same time.


Considering MKI and MRCA now is not the topic, I said what i said considering the war scenarios dated now and IAF capabilities for defense when while attacking is lacking a lot at this time.

And for this time only donot consider IAF as facing PAF consider your capabilities as a AIR Force defending and Attacking against any Airforce

 

[Energon]

First of all no Air Defense BS from ground... POST IS FOR IAF CAPABILITIES

SAM networks are actually a big part of the IAFs operational scope.

Agreed, who says they are not, but capabilities are in War scenarios and intrusions are when you are intruding also so you have to defend and attack at the same time.


Considering MKI and MRCA now is not the topic, I said what i said considering the war scenarios dated now and IAF capabilities for defense when while attacking is lacking a lot at this time.

And for this time only donot consider IAF as facing PAF consider your capabilities as a AIR Force defending and Attacking against any Airforce

In regards to the interceptors:
Air interception doctrine has two components. Air space control and Point defense. The first requires heavy class and extremely fast air superiority fighters that can stay air borne for long periods of time (examples are F-15, F-14, Panavia Tornado, Su27 Flankers, Mig25, F111) while the latter requires aircrafts with very high climb rates that can be scrambled at short notice (examples are F-16, Saab Draken, Mig 21, Mig 29).


Manufacturers no longer make dedicated interceptors. This is mostly because a lot of the cold war era interceptors like the Su25, F111 Aardvarks and F-14s were far too expensive to maintain and highly limited in scope which didn't make them very cost effective. The other aircrafts on that list were converted into multirole fighters capable of carrying out offensive "strike" missions as well as play strong air superiority roles.
Modern air forces now use multi role or air superiority fighters integrated into a network of Satellites, AWACS and radars for air space defense and SAMs for Point defense.
In that regard, the IAF is probably one of the only pseudo modern air force out there that still uses vintage dedicated interceptors like the Mig21 and the Mig29.

As far as attack is concerned, the IAF seems to be positioned very well with a decent complement of heavy class strike capable multirole aircraft like the Su30MKI and a light class multirole aircraft like the Mirage2000 with the same capabilities (although the Mirages unlike the MKIs probably lack the ability to launch the Brahmos cruise missiles). They also have a significant number of dedicated strike aircrafts like the SEPECAT Jaguars and the Mig 27.

The question is how well will they be able to network all these aircrafts with their ground and space assets? With the recent Israeli spy satellite launch canceled, it certainly puts a damper on these plans.

 

[KENT]

SAM networks are actually a big part of the IAFs operational scope.



In regards to the interceptors:
Air interception doctrine has two components. Air space control and Point defense. The first requires heavy class and extremely fast air superiority fighters that can stay air borne for long periods of time (examples are F-15, F-14, Panavia Tornado, Su27 Flankers, Mig25, F111) while the latter requires aircrafts with very high climb rates that can be scrambled at short notice (examples are F-16, Saab Draken, Mig 21, Mig 29).


Manufacturers no longer make dedicated interceptors. This is mostly because a lot of the cold war era interceptors like the Su25, F111 Aardvarks and F-14s were far too expensive to maintain and highly limited in scope which didn't make them very cost effective. The other aircrafts on that list were converted into multirole fighters capable of carrying out offensive "strike" missions as well as play strong air superiority roles.
Modern air forces now use multi role or air superiority fighters integrated into a network of Satellites, AWACS and radars for air space defense and SAMs for Point defense.
In that regard, the IAF is probably one of the only pseudo modern air force out there that still uses vintage dedicated interceptors like the Mig21 and the Mig29.

As far as attack is concerned, the IAF seems to be positioned very well with a decent complement of heavy class strike capable multirole aircraft like the Su30MKI and a light class multirole aircraft like the Mirage2000 with the same capabilities (although the Mirages unlike the MKIs probably lack the ability to launch the Brahmos cruise missiles). They also have a significant number of dedicated strike aircrafts like the SEPECAT Jaguars and the Mig 27.

The question is how well will they be able to network all these aircrafts with their ground and space assets? With the recent Israeli spy satellite launch canceled, it certainly puts a damper on these plans.

I would also like to add that IAF has also possess some of the decent BVR and WVR capability in the form of R-77,R-60,Matra,R-27,R-73,Drdo Astra under development as well as host other ECM suits.

As far as spy satellite is concerned, IAF is definitely desperate to have one to gain real time images of conflict field and hence it has specifically formed structure in the form of Aerospace command. The concept of Aerospace command was conceived in 2000 and according prominent IAF sources , it will be in the form of Headquarter for space technologies that will provide assistance in linking radar and communication network. Apart from intelligence gathering it will also be pursued in anti - ballistic missile defence. Aerospace command has defiantly beginning to take shape and several parameters in association with are yet to be worked out, and much would be depend upon allocation of budget and kind of authority assigned with to spend that cost-effectively. The goal is to have command be the primary coordinator for linking vie satellite and sensors of Indian several defence forces not only IAF and providing information into the hands of warfighters. Very first move in this direction is Catrosat-1 which was launched on May 5,2005. Catrosat can provide the images of 2.5 meter resolution as well as the span of territory the can be seen in its images is equivalent to 30 kilometers. Others homegrown satellite efforts include is Catrosat-2 which was launched on January 10,2007 as well as 1 meter resolution spacecraft being developed in the form of Risat Microwave remote sensing satellite as well as it is capable of taking images through the dusk and darkness.

In addition to present ASR of Isreal , Since 2002 India was negotiation with Isreal to use latter’s Ofeq-5 satellite, which can cover an are of 500 kilometers and take high-resolution panchromatic pictures of 1.8 meters.

 

[Contrarian]

Well, IAF, IN and IA all are literally desperate to have their own satellites. They currently use a general purpose one. All of them have been clamouring with the government for a while now, for ISRO to give a dedicated satellite to each service.

I guess when each of the three services has their own sat, then the armed forces can really be called net centric, all their platforms and assets connected together.

 

[blain2]

Well, IAF, IN and IA all are literally desperate to have their own satellites. They currently use a general purpose one. All of them have been clamouring with the government for a while now, for ISRO to give a dedicated satellite to each service.

I guess when each of the three services has their own sat, then the armed forces can really be called net centric, all their platforms and assets connected together.

On a technical point, having a satellite alone does not make an arm capable of net-centric warfare. There are more basic things needed than a satellite to get this net-centric capability. Not all network connectivity is via satellite either.

Digitizing the battlefield and connecting the air and ground assets with digital connectivity are key things (and also the most costly and time consuming ones and as a result, most Armies currently have a demo capability where only some units/bdes are equipped with this sort of capability, while the rest of the Armed Forces require upgrading and re-equipping). Satellite intel is one part of the overall C4I capability of an armed force.

 

[Energon]

Theoretically speaking, state of the art network centric warfare is an extremely feasible venture for the Indian armed forces because of the high level of local competence with this technology as well as a massive workforce which can be utilized for such an endeavor. The caveat is that all the meat is in control of the private sector, which up until only a couple of years ago were by and large barred from participating in military projects traditionally reserved for the (now under performing and corruption prone) public sector ventures.

In order to truly garner the benefits of the Indian private sector's newly found world class capabilities, the Government of India is going to have to swallow it's pride, curb it's greed and throw the doors wide open to private companies and adopt a new set up that is similar to what the USA currently has.

 

[Contrarian]

On a technical point, having a satellite alone does not make an arm capable of net-centric warfare. There are more basic things needed than a satellite to get this net-centric capability. Not all network connectivity is via satellite either.

Digitizing the battlefield and connecting the air and ground assets with digital connectivity are key things (and also the most costly and time consuming ones and as a result, most Armies currently have a demo capability where only some units/bdes are equipped with this sort of capability, while the rest of the Armed Forces require upgrading and re-equipping). Satellite intel is one part of the overall C4I capability of an armed force.

Ofcourse, i meant that exactly. Just having a satellite would not mean that the arm is net centric. I just wanted to emphasize that the three services are desperate to get a sat for themselves. Indian armed forces have a LONG way to go before they are truely net centric.

Heck, they are getting serious about it only recently. Would you imagine that IAF got its spares and supply equipment digitally networked only a couple of years back! They were using hand registers, etc to maintain records for these things, leading to a good delay time from when the spares were requested to when they were located and then supplies.

I believe they contracted TCS(Tata Consultancy Services) for the job.

 

[blain2]

Would you imagine that IAF got its spares and supply equipment digitally networked only a couple of years back! They were using hand registers, etc to maintain records for these things, leading to a good delay time from when the spares were requested to when they were located and then supplies.

I believe they contracted TCS(Tata Consultancy Services) for the job.

We had a similar system until the F-16 weapon system was inducted. The Americans had a totally different supply chain methodology and system for FMS F-16s and the spares ordering. For the Mirages and our Chinese hardware, we did the stuff the good old way but in the mid 80's the supply chain and ordering for spares/logistics were moved over to a system based on the F-16 weapon system.

USAF's methodology around logistics provides for an amazing logistical framework to be established. I am sure IAF is getting exposed to this and more interfacing with the western AFs now. To me, this is a bigger advantage than the oft-heard, 1 vs 1 MKI vs. XYZ encounters during exercises and training tours.

 

[blain2]

Theoretically speaking, state of the art network centric warfare is an extremely feasible venture for the Indian armed forces because of the high level of local competence with this technology as well as a massive workforce which can be utilized for such an endeavor. The caveat is that all the meat is in control of the private sector, which up until only a couple of years ago were by and large barred from participating in military projects traditionally reserved for the (now under performing and corruption prone) public sector ventures.

In order to truly garner the benefits of the Indian private sector's newly found world class capabilities, the Government of India is going to have to swallow it's pride, curb it's greed and throw the doors wide open to private companies and adopt a new set up that is similar to what the USA currently has.

This is already happening with outsourcing the work to private sector in India. Can't describe a whole lot more than that. The military is also using private sector for this kind of work. This is going on in both India and Pakistan.

 

[Energon]

This is already happening with outsourcing the work to private sector in India. Can't describe a whole lot more than that. The military is also using private sector for this kind of work. This is going on in both India and Pakistan.

I don't want to turn this into a comparison thread, but the situations in both the countries are very dissimilar. Most industrial complexes in Pakistan are either under the direct control of the military or run by people who have a very close relationship with the military (most if not all of them are ex-officers of the PA). Hence when they collaborate, all the parties are more or less on the same level.

In India however there is a vast gap between the public and the private sectors. Up until a decade and a half ago, all the available funds were diverted to the public sector while the private sector was kept suppressed and forced to play second fiddle. Now the tables have turned, the private sector is rising astronomically leaving the government supported institutions to eat their dust. In order for any collaboration to take place, its going to require a complete paradigm shift... and I don't think the government has matured enough to admit to their inadequacy in comparision to the private players.

 

[blain2]

I don't want to turn this into a comparison thread, but the situations in both the countries are very dissimilar. Most industrial complexes in Pakistan are either under the direct control of the military or run by people who have a very close relationship with the military (most if not all of them are ex-officers of the PA). Hence when they collaborate, all the parties are more or less on the same level.

In India however there is a vast gap between the public and the private sectors. Up until a decade and a half ago, all the available funds were diverted to the public sector while the private sector was kept suppressed and forced to play second fiddle. Now the tables have turned, the private sector is rising astronomically leaving the government supported institutions to eat their dust. In order for any collaboration to take place, its going to require a complete paradigm shift... and I don't think the government has matured enough to admit to their inadequacy in comparision to the private players.

I don't want you to compare. I know first hand some of the work that has been farmed out to the private sector by some entities like the IAF and IA. The IT piece in Pakistan is not under the purview of the military industrial complex alone. That type of work too is being farmed out to the private sector. Both countries do it in a limited manner but on some key projects, they have had to rely on the private/global firms to get the work done because the defence industries lacked the expertise and solutions.

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

I don't want you to compare. I know first hand some of the work that has been farmed out to the private sector by some entities like the IAF and IA. The IT piece in Pakistan is not under the purview of the military industrial complex alone. That type of work too is being farmed out to the private sector. Both countries do it in a limited manner but on some key projects, they have had to rely on the private/global firms to get the work done because the defence industries lacked the expertise and solutions.

But there is a large growth required in Private sector in Pakistan defence industries. The private firms donot invest a lot in these areas as the requirements from Ministry of Defense are non feasable and not flexiable. For growth in private defence sector some insentives should be provided by GoP.

 

[Hunzaghazi]

Everything in IAF is good except the aging Mig-21 vimans.