[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Redline6800

Thats my news item

Delighted to hear that. We look forward to more participation by you on our aviation threads. :-)

[Deepsp]

Boeing announces delivery of it's C-17 Globemaster III to Indian Air Force.
This is the last Globemaster III produced by Boeing. Total 276 produced out of which IAF acquired 11.

[skanchan95]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

Perhaps this explains why IAF is not very keen on Jaguar engine upgrade?

I don't think so. The engine upgrade is being shelved purely because of cost reasons. Honeywell jacked up the price for its F125IN engine too much. It has been reported at the cost of engine upgrades to two Jaguars , you can get one basic modern fighter jet!!!

As for the Hawk v/s Jaguar comparison, both were initially conceived as trainers. The Hawk has a remained a trainer with light attack capabilities while the Jaguar evolved into a credible ground attack and maritime strike platform.

The Hawk does not have an internal cannon(which means in the CAS/strike role the centerline pylon might be used to mount a cannon pod), leaving only one pylon on each wing to mount bombs/missile. The Hawk does not have even half the bomb carrying capacity of the Jaguar.

The original NAVWASS & DARIN I IAF Jaguars had two internal cannons(one on each side under the cockpit).From DARIN II upgrade onwards, they deleted the starboard side cannon and the port side cannon was retained.

Besides, a Hawk can never match a Jaguar as a "bomb truck". Here is the Jag in its bomb truck config - 8 X 500 Kg GP bombs . Note, on the inner wing pylons, 2 X 1000 Kg bombs in double ejector racks.




EDIT/NOTE : Thanks to Smartcat for correcting me. ^^Those are 500 kg(1000 lb) bombs on the Jaguar, not 1000 Kgs ones, as written by me earlier.

This DARIN II Jaguar IS is from No. 224 Sqdn "Warlords" - the last IAF squadron raised on the Jaguar in the mid or late 2000s(formerly was a MiG-23MF squadron). Notice "WAR" written on the fuselage (under the starboard wing). Close up on the port side - WARLORDS.

Originally Posted by Deepsp

Boeing announces delivery of it's C-17 Globemaster III to Indian Air Force.
This is the last Globemaster III produced by Boeing. Total 276 produced out of which IAF acquired 11.

With 11 C-17s, IAF is the second largest C-17 Operator in the world, after USAF (which has 200+).

I plan to get CB-8011 (last C-17 delivered to the IAF) decals made for my 1/200 IAF C-17 model

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by skanchan95

With 11 C-17s, IAF is the second largest C-17 Operator in the world, after USAF (which has 200+).

I plan to get CB-8011 (last C-17 delivered to the IAF) decals made for my 1/200 IAF C-17 model
Attachment 1910233

Noob question: is it possible/feasible to use C17s for heavy bombardment or nuke delivery purpose? They have much higher load capacity after all. I understand a plane like this is a sitting duck by itself, but aren’t bombers usually accompanied by air superiority fighters anyway?

US still swears by its fleet of B52 bombers. Can a similar thing be done with the C17?

[skanchan95]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Noob question: is it possible/feasible to use C17s for heavy bombardment or nuke delivery purpose? They have much higher load capacity after all. I understand a plane like this is a sitting duck by itself, but aren’t bombers usually accompanied by air superiority fighters anyway?

US still swears by its fleet of B52 bombers. Can a similar thing be done with the C17?

The US can use its bomber fleet freely because by then it other assets would have completely neutralised enemy air defences. Only then the bombers are sent in.

Use of transports as bombers can only be done freely when there is complete air superiority and the anti-aircraft capabilities(AAA/SAM) have been completely neutralized in the planned area of operations. However, it is extremely impractical to use transport aircraft as bombers in today’s hi-tech and highly mobile air defence environment. Besides that, there is no way for these lumbering giants to accurately deliver such payloads as you push out/drop those bombs from the rear ramp.

Transports have been used as bombers right from WW2 by many countries. India had used transports as bombers(so had Pakistan) in the 1965 and 1971 wars(more so in the 1971 war). The IAF has used An-12 transports and the PAF used their C-130s as bombers. Bombs were dropped/rolled out using cradles from the rear ramp of IAF An-12s and PAF C-130s. These missions were flown usually at night against enemy armoured/troop concentrations and ammo dumps as both sides had limited night interception capabilities.

Inspite of being highly inaccurate, some of these missions flown by these improvised bombers were successful. In the 1971 war, No. 44 Sqdn was the only IAF transport sqdn to be awarded Battle Honours and its enterprising CO, Wg. Cdr. Vasisht was awarded the Maha Vir Chakra. His MVC citation reads:

Wing Commander Vasisht, the Commanding Officer of an operational squadron [No.44 Squadron, Antonov An-12] , led a group of heavy bombers of his squadron to attack an important enemy fuel and ammunition dump at Changa Manga forest on the night of December 3. 1971. In spite of very heavy enemy ground fire. the pressed home the attack, and caused severe damage to the target. Again, on the next night, he led another raid to the same target and succeeded in causing further heavy damage in the face of intense enemy ground fire. On the night of December 5, 1971, he led a formation of his bombers, this time to attack enemy positions in the Haji Pir Pass in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The difficulties and dangers of this operation were due as much to the great volume of ground fire in the target area, as to the hazards of flying his large aircraft and leading his formation at low level through mountainous terrain. In spite of these hazards. Wing Commander Vasisht pressed home the attack and achieved marked success in hitting the enemy's positions. In addition to these, he had led many other missions deep into enemy territory where opposition could be expected from fighter aircraft and anti-aircraft fire. In all these raids Wing Commander Vasisht completed the tasks to him without any loss to our aircraft. He has displayed inspired leadership, exceptional devotion to duly, and conspicuous bravery in repeatedly leading attacks against heavily defended enemy targets, night after night.

In the Vietnam War, BLU-82 Daisy Cutters, those massive 7000 Kg bombs, were dropped with a parachute from the rear ramp of USAF and South Vietnamese C-130s on the North Vietnamese & Viet Cong assets. Sme were even dropped to clear the jungle to make helicopter landing sites and to place artillery guns.

The North Vietnamese on the other hand, used their old An-2s for strike operations. In the late 60s, they used these transport-bombers for a very different sort of mission that aimed to put a remote mountaintop radar station in Laos, which helped direct U.S. air strikes—out of action.

As the North Vietnamese air force was busy defending their land and consisted heavily of MiG interceptors, the North Vietnamese thought of using antiquated An-2s for the job. The North Vietnamese added rocket pods to the plane’s wings, and vertical tubes in the cargo hold for launching mortar rounds.

Four An-2s took part in the raid, but the two designated strike aircraft chose the wrong target—an Air America building.One of the An-2s crashed after taking ground fire.

The remaining three An-2s turned to retreat, but an Air America UH-1 Huey helicopter intercepted the planes in flight. A combination of rotor wash and AK-47 fire from aboard the Huey downed a second An-2—one of the most unusual aerial victories in aerial warfare history!!!!

The Argentine Air Force used their C-130s as a bomber in the 1982 Falklands conflict against the British. One of the most notable partial successes of Argentine C-130s was when a C-130 hit the British tanker British Wye with bombs. The Argentines had mounted bombs on multiple ejector racks between the engines. They had also planned to mount the dreaded AM-39 Exocets anti-ship missiles in a similar fashion, but were advised against it by the Argentine Navy.



The Argentines lost one C-130 bomber to a Royal Navy Sea Harrier, which intercepted it in high seas. Later, after many years, the RN Sea Harrier pilot(Cdr Nigel Ward) who shot down that C-130 had a very emotional talk with the son of one of the ill fated C-130 crew.

About 5-6 years ago in Iron Fist exercise at Pokhran, the IAF demonstrated transport bombing capabilities by using an An-32 as a bomber.

So, yes it can be done, but its accuracy is questionable and it is not really practical in today's scenario.

[Enobarbus]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Noob question: is it possible/feasible to use C17s for heavy bombardment or nuke delivery purpose?

In this day and age, that would be too risky, I guess.

But the IAF used the AN-12 transporter as a bomber in the 1971 war. The AN-12 was a medium range medium haul transporter with four turbo prop engines. It had a pay load of about 16 tonnes.

I had the honour to serve in the 25 Sqn between 1985 to 1995 when we were flying the AN-12s. I heard many stories from the old timers on how the bomb cradles were manufactured overnight in the station workshop. The conveyor motors and winches were removed and the four conveyors were put on free roll mode. Each aircraft carried 32 bombs of 500 KG each. These were placed on cradles which in turn were placed on the conveyors. Once the Aircraft reaches the target area, the cargo doors were opened and the aircraft was flown at a steep incline so that the bombs simply rolled out of the cargo doors. You can imagine the mayhem this must have created. 90 sorties were flown in all.

The legend is that the aicraft first flew from Chandigarh to Jamnagar. They re-fuelled there and took off to fly over the Arabian sea, enter Pakistani airspace and while flying back to India, they released bombs on targets. Often, our fighters would fly out straight into Paki airspace to escort them back.

[AlphaKilo]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Noob question: is it possible/feasible to use C17s for heavy bombardment or nuke delivery purpose? They have much higher load capacity after all. I understand a plane like this is a sitting duck by itself, but aren’t bombers usually accompanied by air superiority fighters anyway?

US still swears by its fleet of B52 bombers. Can a similar thing be done with the C17?

With modifications that should be doable but the question is on the level permissions we need to obtain from Boeing/US MOD etc for the modifications. An-24 have been successfully modified to deliver drop bombs from the cargo bay and was shown during the last OP VayuShakti war games display. I don't know if a IL-76/78 was ever modified to perform these roles. But the primary question remains, why? What is the advantage of doing something like this? We have dedicated nuc-delivery platforms which are much smaller and nimble than a C-17 Globemaster.

[skanchan95]

I forgot to write about the most recent use of a transport aircraft as a bomber.

The 'reborn' Iraqi Air Force used its An-32s as a bomber for bombing ISIS targets.

The Iraqi AF, with Antonov's help, were able to develop a method to attach four bomb racks(two on each side of the fuselage), that was able to carry 250 kg bombs. In addition, a system was installed inside the cargo bay that allowed the crew to roll up to four more 250 kg class bombs right out of the back of the aircraft. A bombardier, using an optical bombsight in one of the plane’s two side-mounted observation windows would aim the weapons in a method not far removed from how bomber crews did so in World War II.

[r_nairtvm]

Originally Posted by skanchan95

I forgot to write about the most recent use of a transport aircraft as a bomber.

The 'reborn' Iraqi Air Force used its An-32s as a bomber for bombing ISIS targets.

[/ATTACH]

Attachment 1910531

Must have drawn inspiration from what IAF did with AN12s in the Karachi Raids in 1971 (?) edition of our saga with the western neighbour, in a way

On this they improved from the conveyor belt to a more accurate delivery mode

Best Regards & Drive Safe

Ram

[ads11]

Originally Posted by Deepsp

Boeing announces delivery of it's C-17 Globemaster III to Indian Air Force.
This is the last Globemaster III produced by Boeing. Total 276 produced out of which IAF acquired 11.

I'm glad it's here but I can't help but wince. A lot of Air Forces must be ruing the decision to wait out Boeing's threats of imminent production closure. Now we've come to the point that there's still demand but no more production. India had a chance to keep the line going by just ordering more like it knew it wanted, but as ever we umm-ed and ah-ed till we got to the stage we are. As long as we look after these, they'll be a huge fillip to our logistical fleet. I feel like the P-8 Poseidon and Apache, the Globemaster and its little brother Hercules are American products that really are worthy of the glowing hyperbole the Americans usually bestow upon them.

Also the bigger our strategic airlift capability, the better, especially in times of natural disaster for example. People need to remember that Napoleon's age old adage on an army marches on its stomach. Logistics has always been the backbone of any fighting force and the real reason I personally feel the Americans have such an edge isn't down to their cutting edge tech. It's a lot to do with the nigh on impeccable and far reaching logistical arm, that allows the US to support their fighting forces anywhere on the planet, at basically any time. If India can replicate that logistical reach and efficiency, our men and women at the frontier regions will probably feel a whole lot more confident that they've got what they need in terms of simple stuff like rations even really.

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

Noob question: is it possible/feasible to use C17s for heavy bombardment or nuke delivery purpose? They have much higher load capacity after all. I understand a plane like this is a sitting duck by itself, but aren’t bombers usually accompanied by air superiority fighters anyway?

US still swears by its fleet of B52 bombers. Can a similar thing be done with the C17?

To add to all the excellent information earlier, I think you're thinking of nukes as still looking like the big old gravity bombs of the earliest days (ie, the kind we picture from cartoons for example). In India's case it seems our primary nuclear delivery system is through ballistic missiles, hence warheads, and speaking of warheads, the standard now for all nuclear nations are MIRVs, Multiple Independent Reentry Vehicles. IE, One "warhead" actually contains multiple independently manoeuvring warheads that approach the target, the idea being it becomes that much harder to defend against.

Besides there's a reason the B52 and the geriatric Chinese Xian H-6 are still relevant and that's as "bomb trucks". Essentially what you're seeing now are A2/AD, Anti Access Area Denial being the defensive posture in fashion right now. So picture an area blanketed with radar coverage and systems like the S-400 creating these overlapping domes through which it becomes difficult for anything to punch through. That's where the sensor fusion and the low observability of platforms like the F-22 or F-35 come in. They can be the tip of the spear that can penetrate that region without necessarily alerting anyone. While they stay in that airspace they can act as a node to vector in targeting information. Information fed all the way back to the quarterback so to speak, ie, our B-52 standing miles off the coast at a stand off range. All it then does is opens up and starts lobbing all sorts of cruise missiles etc from the relative comfort of its distal location and starts bombarding whatever ground installations the F-22/35 vectored in.
So in that sense you can see how the lumbering old giants like the B-52 can still work in tandem with much more modern fighters like the F-22 or F-35. In fact due to the limited number of F-22s the USAF explores using them in tandem with the much more abundant F-15 Strike Eagles as part of Raptor squads, where the armed to the teeth F-15 plays the role of the quarterback armed to the teeth with stand off munitions while the F-22 plays the eyes and ears going in close the ground.

[Redline6800]

The C-17 is a very impressive aircraft no doubt!

Expensive to operate, at approx Rs 40 lakh per flying hour, but then it does carry a helluva lot of payload!

I was fortunate to be present for the 'Major Join' in 2012 for the first IAF C-17 at Boeing's Long Beach facility and be part of a media flight at Aero India.

Even the C-17 simulator facility operated in Delhi by Mahindra is really cool.

Let me see, if I can dig up some pictures.

This is an interesting link on the NASA contribution to the C-17.

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley...eets/C-17.html

[SmartCat]

I think Russia accepting Rupees for defence deals has huge implications for IAF. India has already paid the 1st installment for S-400 system in Rupees.

Bilateral trade in rupee-rouble up 5-fold
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/70918728.cms

This gives Russian weapons systems (including fighter aircraft) a huge advantage over competing systems from other countries.

IAF pilots fly Mikoyan MiG-35 fighter at Russia's MAKS 2019, check out Sukhoi Su-57E
https://zeenews.india.com/world/iaf-...e-2230932.html

[skanchan95]

Chief of the Air Staff ACM BS Dhanoa flew a sortie with Wg Cdr Abhinandan Varthaman at Air Force Station Pathankot today in a MiG-21 trainer aircraft.
This was the last sortie flown by the ACM BS Dhanoa in a fighter aircraft before his retirement.

[skanchan95]

Pics of the first IAF Rafale RB001, a twin seat variant, in full IAF markings






I would really love to see the return of some old style squadron markings on IAF fighters.

[SmartCat]

Any idea why Abhinandan's flight suit looks so different? In actual combat, are those pockets for carrying maps, identification documents etc?