Mr. Shukla, your intentions are correct in assuming that IAF needs a next generation strike fighter for close air support. But your protagonist for the same the Lockheed Martin F-35 is delusional, especially since the USAF itself will rely on A-10 for the role well into 2030, which is of an erstwhile generation.
The Last time IAF went for a ground attack plane, it chose the Saab Viggen. Got screwed by the Americans and was left with crappy choice called the Jaguar which was not much more than HF-24 marut follow on would have been, yet IAF went for the foreign plane. These didn't do much for us in Kargil, did they?
I understand the mirage2000 had to undergo ad hoc arrangements to do guided bombing, but never again had to resort to carpet bombing, Since the 7 twin-seaters were fitted with litening targetting pods with each twin seater accompanying 5 single-seaters to illuminate targets. it got the job done. Had it been adopted for the circumstance previously, it would have faced no problem to resort immediately to bombing.But procuring Mirage2000 ain't gonna happen.
Are the circumstances still revelent?
Brigadier Gurmeet Kanwal, Director, CLAWS felt that there was an 80-90 per cent chance that future conflicts, if any, would break out in the mountains as a corollary of the ongoing border disputes. He felt that gaining and occupying territory and evicting the enemy from the territory occupied by them are important military objectives in future wars and only an air land battle with massive asymmetry of firepower in our favour would achieve the desired military objectives.
As of now we do have an answer atleast the start of a defining one,The threat driving the competition is a two-front war with Pakistan and China. With both states having nuclear weapons a deep-penetration strike is virtually ruled-out as per Brig Kanwal of CLAWS (Centre for Land Warfare Studies) since it would risk over-flying an enemy’s secret nuclear installations. He further says that there is an 80 percent to 90 percent probability that the next war will break out in the mountains and at least a 60 percent probability that the next war will remain limited to the mountains. In this scenario, the requirement of extended range is minimal.
Bangalore-based Aeronautics Development Establishment (ADE) has developed the guidance-kit for 1000-pound LGBs and these are designed to improve the accuracy of air-to-ground bombing by IAF
AS I've quoted the facts, I'll quote my theory, I'll fabricate my theory around Tejas mk1 Airframe & capability,IAF base with Tejas is 500 km from the front lines, the HAL Tejas Mk-1 itself has 8 hard pionts, one for for litening target designator leaves 7 for weapons station, India has developed a 1000 lb bomb, LCA Tejas's Combat load is >8,400 lbs, assuming that we fight on the borders, we have for the aircraft a ferry range of 1500 km in mk1 configuration, at full fuel 3000 litres, no external fuel tanks there can be 6 LGB on 3 pylons(multi-rack), 2 R-77 or Astra missiles on wing tip pylons 1,8 and 2 R-73 or Python 5 on 2,7, If 5 aircraft in this configuration including a Twin-seater for the commander role make up a strike unit, it would ensure a good ground strike as well as air-defence role, when they retun fleet air-defence maintained by Su-30mki will keep Chinese J-10 / J-11 at their distance from chasing Tejas squadron into Indian territory.
Direcly in competition with F-35, the Tejas in the mode I propose has 3 times as much ground Strike weapons compared to two bombs on F-35, the twin-seater could have a reconnasance/jammer pod in place of a LGB pylon to pick up forward command posts of PLA/Paki army to be obliterated in a follow on Strike with Tejas from different set of 5 aircraft from the same squadron carrying kh-59ME from a stand-off distance and in a heavier air defence configuration.
Unlike the F-35 which relies on stealth to the Hilt. Tejas has a Balanced approach to defence using Stealth and surorise elements like Visual stealth on account of smaller size, RAM coating and Variety of Missiles in the inventory.While the F-35 relies exclusively on american weapons which we have to import for every plane we import for life-time.
Finally cost, U too concede that F-35 will have to carry extrnal stores to be effective, which compromises stealth and puts it back in Tejas league. Since its stealth is compromised, attriction even in 3:1 would cost us dear if we went for F-35 than for Tejas. Not to mention all the weapons we need to import from the USA, it would still cost us royalty money if we licence produce it in contrast to astra or the 1000lbs LGB.
Hope U respond
No comments:
Post a Comment