Indian Defence Review

Challenges

With the drawdown of numbers of operational squadrons likely to continue till at least 2025, it is imperative that those in the cockpits of a force with reduced numbers of platforms have the best quality of training on the best equipment that the service can afford. The IAF’s reputation of being in the forefront of military flying training in this part of the world is history now. Five years ago, the debacle of being forced to approach outside entities, possibly foreign agencies, to impart basic flying training for want of a basic trainer aircraft in the inventory, was narrowly averted. The phasing out of the Kiran is not as unexpected as was that of the premature grounding of the HPT 32. As of now, there is no replacement in sight. Very soon the Chetak and Cheetah fleets will also need to be replaced.

The trainer aircraft types should be such that an upward progression in performance, complexity and technology exist as trainee pilots transition from the basic stage upwards right up to the operational aircraft in the squadrons. This is not the case now when trainees are going from the PC 7 backwards to the Kiran of a previous generation and then jumping ahead to the present on the Hawk. In transport training, there may be a need to upgrade the Dornier aircraft’s avionics and instrumentation in order to familiarise the trainees with technological sophistication of the C 295/C 130J/C 17 class of aircraft that they will be exposed to later. The Chetak will have to be replaced as it is older than the Kiran. A light twin-engine helicopter should be a suitable replacement.

Desired Attributes of a Trainer Aircraft

The basic stage of training is an introduction to flight with basic handling exercises and aerobatics. It also serves to assess the potential of trainees and acts as a filter to weed out unsuitable trainees or slow learners. The intermediate stage is where more complex exercises such as cross country flying, night and instrument flying and some military specific exercises such as formation flying and the basics of air-to-ground weapons delivery are taught. The advanced stage is more specific to the particular stream and is on an aircraft type somewhat close to the performance capabilities of operational aircraft.

There is no intermediate trainer available in the country except as a test prototype. The design work on the domestic Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT) started in 1997. It is at least 14 years behind schedule, has unacceptable handling flaws and the design is already obsolescent. The country does not have the required level of expertise in areas of design of aero engines and ejection seat systems. Long before such an aircraft can be developed, found suitable and made available in required numbers, the Kiran fleet would have been phased out. This phasing out is likely within two to three years from now.

The primary aim is to provide high quality training. Propping up a Public Sector Unit and developing expertise in-house are all laudable objectives but not at the expense of stoppage or serious disruption of flying training, which had already caused a crisis in 2009. If this is accepted, one of only two options available is to import a new trainer type. A dubious record has already been set by the time frame taken in the AJT acquisition and even a reasonable period of five years would be too long. The second option is to use the PC 7 Mk 2 in this role as the Stage II or Intermediate Stage trainer in addition to being the Stage I or Basic Stage trainer.

The PC 7 Mk 2 trainer is docile, easy to handle and has the performance capabilities of intermediate stage trainers along with embedded technologies of modern aircraft in areas of instrumentation and avionics. It can handle intermediate training tasks well and has been used for basic and intermediate stage training by other Air Forces. The performance gap between the PC 7 Mk 2 and the Hawk 132 is not so large that another trainer type has to be used for intermediate stage training. In fact, its performance capabilities are comparable to the Kiran Mk 2 and standards of avionics and instrumentation are miles ahead. It is easier to fly than the Kiran as the IAF’s experience of using it for basic training for nearly three years indicates. For the service, it is a known platform and maintenance as well as logistics issues have hopefully been sorted out.

What is needed are more aircraft to cater for the additional task of Stage II training. Operational costs of turboprop aircraft are lower than comparable pure jet aircraft. Adding another aircraft type means additional inventory costs and expenses for training maintenance personnel. The most important factor is that when pupils transition from one type to another around 20 per cent of the flying done on the new type is for familiarisation with its handling characteristics. These flying hours can be saved if the aircraft type remains the same, reducing training time and costs without any adverse impact on quality of training.

Having a two aircraft type, three-stage training programme with the Basic and Intermediate stages flown on the same aircraft type, is the best option. It is a better system than continuing to use the Kiran even if that option was available, which is not the case. It is understood that the IAF has decided to adopt a “Two Aircraft Three Stage” training pattern in the near future. Possibilities of licensed production, if achievable within a short time frame that for a change must be adhered to, can be explored as long as this does not lead to another crisis three years hence. The Dornier 228 should be able to handle Stage III transport training tasks for some time to come with some avionics and system upgrades. If the induction of the C 295 aircraft to replace the HS 748 becomes a reality, further training on a heavier type and for operational tasks can be done on this aircraft once the AN 32 reaches the end of its service life.

A critical area is helicopter training with the Chetak and Cheetah already obsolete in training and utility roles. The Kamov Ka 226 T is slated to be the replacement with large numbers required by all three services and local production envisaged. This helicopter is a modern twin-engine platform with up-to-date avionics and engine control systems and good hot and high performance. It would be a suitable trainer replacement for Stage III helicopter training.

A decision has also to be taken on the training pattern for personnel who are to operate UAVs. Till now, flying branch pilots have been transferred to UAV operations. The service will have to decide on the structure of a UAV cadre, the training and the equipment required for it. Some Air Forces already train more UAV operators than pilots. The IAF had neglected the use of flight simulation for training. It is only recently that realistic flight simulators, procedure trainers and mission simulators have come into the service. With exponential increases of acquisition and operating costs of even basic trainer aircraft, simulators have become essential for pure flying as well as for mission training. In this aspect civil aviation is far ahead. Most of the latest weapons are so expensive that live weapons delivery for training is not feasible and simulation is the only option. Fortunately, advances in electronics have made realistic simulation possible and affordable.

A military can only fight as well as it trains and this has not changed since the days of antiquity. For the IAF, the quality of flying training plays a crucial part in determining its operational capability. Modern trainer aircraft are essential for proper flying training. It is time that this aspect is given the importance that it deserves.