India in talks with Russia to upgrade Sukhoi combat jet fleet

India has opened talks with Russia to upgrade its fleet of air superiority Sukhoi Su-30s with a new radar and avionics to make the fighters more lethal than what they already are. The upgrades are likely to begin in 2015.

However, a debate is currently in progress between the two nations on India getting full access to all software and equipment design of the new systems that will be integrated on the upgraded Sukhois, a senior Indian Air Force (IAF) officer told IANS.

"We have begun talks with Russia on modifying the Sukhois and giving them the latest technologies," the officer said of the combat jets that were first inducted by IAF in 1997.

The planes, considered to be in the heavy category of fighter aircraft, are the most advanced the IAF has and is the frontline plane for all forms of airborne warfare.

"The modified Sukhoi will be an entirely new plane in terms of radar and avionics," said the officer, who is in the know of the discussions with Russia.

"We are currently holding a dialogue with Russia for full access to software and design of equipment to be integrated to the aircraft," he added.

India has raised eight of the 14 planned Sukhoi squadrons till now with the ninth squadron planned for raising in Sirsa, Haryana, in December.

Six months from then, India will raise its 10th Sukhoi squadron in the Punjab sector under the Western Air Command.

This will be the third and fourth Su-30MKI squadron of the IAF to be deployed close to the Pakistan border in two years, after Jodhpur in Rajasthan in October 2011 and Halwara in Punjab in September 2012.

It also plans to raise two more squadrons in the eastern sector, adding to the existing two squadrons there.

Besides, four more Sukhoi squadrons will be raised by 2015, completing the entire 272-plane complement of the fleet.

After the raising of these squadrons, India will start upgrading the fleet beginning with the first 50 Sukhois it had inducted in 1997.

India has till now lost three Sukhoi planes in crashes - the first one in April 2009, the second in November 2009 and the third in December 2011. While two IAF pilots were killed in the first accident, two pilots each bailed out to safety in the second and third crashes.

The twin-seater Sukhois are also being modified for carrying the India-Russia joint venture BrahMos supersonic cruise missile.

New Chinese stealth fighter heightens dilemma for Indian Navy - Indian Navy's 45 Russian MiG-29Ks are capable fighters, but they will be outclassed by stealthy J-31 when it enters service

Was last week’s inaugural flight of China’s second stealth fighter linked to the ongoing 18th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party? Was President Hu Jintao demonstrating his relationship with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), a powerful lever for elevating his protégés to the apex Politburo Standing Committee?

Several unanswered questions surround the October 31 debut of the J-31 Shenyang fighter, which the pathologically secretive PLA took unusual pains to publicise.

Having already unveiled the J-20 Chengdu stealth fighter in January 2011, China is the only country that is developing two separate stealth fighters. The US is developing the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, albeit in three versions; Russia is working on a single design, the PAK-FA, to which India has hitched its wagon. Separately, Japan is developing the ATD-X demonstrator.

Other intriguing questions include: Given the J-31’s close resemblance to the US F-35 fighter, has China reverse-engineered it from blueprints that Lockheed Martin had reported stolen in 2009 from the computers of six American aerospace subcontractors? Is the J-31 for export only, which would explain the publicity that the PLA is giving it? Or will the PLA use the J-31 as an air superiority fighter while the larger J-20 strikes ground targets, an allocation of roles that mirrors the employment of the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 by the US Air Force? Or is the F-31 a competitor to the J-20, with the better of the two designs destined to go into production?

But the question that most worries the Indian Navy is: does the sturdy landing gear that experts have spotted on the J-31 indicate that the new fighter will operate from Chinese aircraft carriers, giving the PLA Navy, or PLA(N), an aerial combat capability that would outmuscle India’s in the Indian Ocean?

China is focusing keenly on naval air power. Just a month ago China’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, had joined the PLA(N) fleet. The 58,500-tonne Liaoning — bought as scrap from Ukraine for a floating casino, but then renovated in Dalian shipyard into an operational carrier — is the PLA(N)’s first attempt at learning the complex skills of aircraft carrier operations. This is difficult learning. The US Navy lost some 12,000 aircraft and 8,500 airmen from 1949-1988 in developing its naval aviation skills. But Indian planners believe the Chinese will learn quickly, especially when the Liaoning is joined by more modern aircraft carriers that are already being built in China.

Indian Navy planners tell Business Standard that the PLA(N)’s three-pronged process — learning aircraft carrier operations; building one or two modern carriers; and inducting the J-31 — could take a decade or more. But after that, PLA(N) aircraft carrier battle groups could operate in the Indian Ocean, fielding fighters that are superior to India’s.

The Indian Navy’s 45 Russian MiG-29Ks, purchased for two new aircraft carriers, are capable fighters today, but would certainly be outclassed by the stealthy J-31 whenever it enters service. The navy’s new carriers — the 44,000-tonne INS Vikramaditya that could join the fleet next year; and the unnamed, 40,000-tonne Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC) that will be ready only by 2017 — are both fitted with ski-jumps that are custom-built for the MiG-29K to take off.

If the navy wants a more capable fighter, e.g. the Dassault Rafale, which the Indian Air Force is buying, or the F-35C, which is the naval version of the Joint Strike Fighter, it will need an aircraft carrier with a catapult rather than a ski-jump. If the navy designs its second IAC (a 60,000-tonne vessel that is still being conceptualised) with a catapult on the flight deck, a fifth-generation stealth fighter could soon follow.

The navy has already signaled such an interest. In 2006, and again in 2007, New Delhi asked Lockheed Martin (which runs the F-35 programme) for briefings on the F-35B, a short take off and vertical landing (STOVL) variant that the US Marine Corps will fly off its smaller aircraft carriers called Landing Helicopter Docks. While the F-35B could operate from a ski-jump, the F-35C needs a catapult to propel it off the flight deck.

Will the J-31 push the navy towards more advanced fighters and a second IAC with catapult assisted launch? All options remain on the table. Then naval chief, Admiral Nirmal Verma, speaking in Delhi on August 7 shortly before he retired, did not rule out “having an entirely different carrier with a different complement of aircraft.”

That decision, however, would be a difficult one, keeping in mind that two carriers would already be fielding the MiG-29K, and a new fighter would complicate training and logistics.

“I can’t rule out anything or rule in anything. It is something at the concept stage and it will take a couple of years before we firm up our ideas on this,” said Admiral Verma.

The navy’s eyes will be focused on the Zhuhai Air Show, in China, in mid-November for more details that might emerge about China’s new stealth fighter.

UK to double number of drones in Afghanistan

The UK military reportedly aims to double the size of its armed drone fleet in Afghanistan to ten by purchasing five US-made Reaper drones, which for the first time will be controlled from a UK base. The first five were controlled at US stations.

The Royal Air Force (RAF) announced the expedited purchase of the US-made unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), with operations set to begin in six weeks, AFP reported. The drones will be flown and operated from a tech hub built 18 months ago in the British region of Waddington in Lincolnshire, a leap forward in technological prowess for the UK.

The other five drones the UK operates in Afghanistan were controlled from a US Air Force base in Nevada, and target suspected insurgents in Afghanistan’s southwest province of Helmand.

"The new squadron will have three control terminals at RAF Waddington, and the five aircraft will be based in Afghanistan," an RAF spokesperson told the Guardian. “We will continue to operate the other Reapers from Creech though, in time, we will wind down operations there and bring people back to the UK.”

It is not known whether the drones will remain in Afghanistan following the NATO withdrawal in 2014.

Drone controversy deepens

The use of UAVs in Middle East is a controversial issue, as drones airstrikes frequently kill large numbers of innocent civilians.

Last month’s study from Stanford and New York universities titled ‘Living Under Drones’ claimed that only two percent of drone strike casualties in Pakistan are the top militants targeted in the attacks, and that the large number of collateral civilian deaths have turned Pakistanis against the US.

The “best available information,” according to the study, is that between 2,562 and 3,325 people were killed in Pakistan from June 2004 through mid-September of this year. An estimated 474 to 881 of those killed were civilians, including 176 children.

In early October, Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that an overwhelming majority of those killed by US UAV strikes in Pakistan are innocent civilians. Malik asked the US to share its drone technology with Pakistan, claiming his government could do a better job at targeting terrorists than Washington.

"The Americans themselves often don’t know who they’ve hit,” anti-drone activist and filmmaker Carol Grayson told RT. “And this huge discrepancy over the figures… we’re finding out that a lot more civilians are being killed. But these are the people that the Americans don’t tell you about. And they actually class these people as ‘other.’”

The CIA has not responded to these calls for restraint, and recently asked the White House to increase the number of drones it employs, effectively transforming the program into a paramilitary force.

This summer, the UN lashed out against US drone policy, and asked Washington to clarify the legal basis for drone strikes against terror suspects rather than trying to capture them. The body argued that the airstrikes, which frequently kill innocent civilians, may be violating international law.

The US uses drone technology across the Middle East and North Africa, including in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen and Somalia.

In the first nine months of 2011, leading up to the ten-year anniversary of the Afghan War, US-led spy drones operating with NATO conducted nearly 23,000 surveillance missions in Afghanistan. At around 85 flights a day, this figure nearly doubles the rate of such missions from two years previous.

As the Pentagon increases the number of drones used in NATO missions in Afghanistan, insurgent attacks have risen nearly 50 percent since 2009, according to a media brief released in the fall of 2011 by the Afghanistan International Security Assistance force.

The UK has operated UAVs in Afghanistan since 2008 for combat missions and surveillance operations. According to the UK’s Ministry of Defense, Britain’s five drones were flown for 39,628 hours and fired 334 laser-guided missiles and bombs at suspected insurgents.

The Ministry of Defense said that it does not know how many insurgents have died from drone attacks because of the risks involved in verifying who has been hit. The ministry also said that it relies on Afghans to handle complaints of civilians killed by such strikes, and gather statistics.

Heather Barr, a lawyer for Human Rights Watch, believes this system of verification is flawed because it lacks uniformity, and not all Afghans have ready access to NATO military bases where such complaints can be made. For some Afghans, there is “a certain sense of futility in doing so [reporting civilian deaths] anyway,” due to lack of trust in the West, she said.

Russia tightens border with next-gen air defense system

The Russian military will deploy state-of-the-art air defense systems along its southern border by the end of the year, the Defense Ministry announced.

“In accordance with the Southern Military District’s modernization plan, the S-400 ‘Triumph’ will replace S-300PM systems on combat duty before the end of this year to protect Russian airspace,” district spokesperson Col. Igor Gorbul told Interfax-AVN on Monday.

The deployment will consist of Pantsir-S missile and artillery systems, as well as advanced radio equipment, he said.

The S-400 is a next-generation anti-aircraft weapon system capable of firing three different missile types. The system was designed to intercept and destroy jamming planes, radar planes, reconnaissance aircraft, strategic carriers, cruise missiles and medium-range ballistic missiles.

Military analysts reported that the Triumph is capable of tracking more than 100 targets simultaneously at ranges of over 600 kilometers (370 miles), and destroying up to 12 targets at varying distances.

The Almaz Central Design Bureau reported that the fifth air defense regiment will shift to the S-400 system by the end of the year.

The deployment of the S-400 to Russia’s south comes at a time of increasing tensions between Russia and NATO over the latter’s plans to build a missile defense system in Eastern Europe. The US initially pledged to cooperate with Russia on the project, but later retreated on that promise. Several Russian officials have warned that the issue could spark another arms race unless a bilateral agreement is reached.

The Triumph air defense system successfully completed launch tests conducted at the Ashuluk training range in Russia’s Astrakhan region in August.

Turkey endangered lives of Russians on Syria-bound plane – Foreign Ministry

Ankara endangered Russians by diverting a flight from Moscow to Damascus, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said. Moscow expressed anger at not being informed that Russians were involved in the incident, and that their diplomats were denied access to them.

“We are troubled that the lives of the passengers aboard the plane, including 17 Russian citizens were put at risk by this inappropriate act. Turkey did not inform Russia that Russian citizens were among those detained on the plane. We found this out through the press,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Aleksandr Lukashevich said.

The Russian embassy in Turkey demanded access to the Russian citizens and dispatched consular officers and doctors to the Ankara airport. Turkish authorities, however, denied the Russian diplomats access to the passengers, in violation of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The Russian nationals were detained in the airport for eight hours.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has demanded an explanation from Turkish authorities, and that Ankara take steps to prevent future such incidents.

Turkey defended the move by claiming that the plane could have carried “non-civilian cargo.”

“There were no arms and military equipment aboard the civilian aircraft – and could not be,” a source in Russia’s military industry told Interfax news agency.

Russia has maintained its military-technical cooperation with Syria, and that any arms or military equipment sales to Damascus are conducted according to established practice. The current law expressly forbids arms sales facilitated by civilian aircraft.

­

'Air piracy’

­Syrian transport minister Mahoumd Said said that Turkey’s detention of the passenger aircraft is tantamount to “air piracy,” and violates civil aviation treaties, Lebanon’s al-Manar TV channel reported.

Tensions between Turkey and Syria rose after a Syrian shell killed five civilians in the border town of Akcakale last week. Turkey returned fire and said it would retaliate against any future provocation originating in Syria. NATO supported Turkey’s move and pledged to defend the country should the Syrian conflict spill across the border.

Report revives speculations on Azerbaijan-Israel plot against Iran

Israel might resort to Azerbaijan’s strategic geographic position to strike Iran’s atomic sites, Reuters has reported, reviving rumours officially denied by both Israel and Azerbaijan.

­Leaked intelligence from two former Azeri military officers with links to serving personnel and two Russian intelligence sources all told Reuters that Baku and Tel Aviv are considering the Azeri bases for military use against Tehran.

If Tel Aviv is to act without Washington’s support, the Israeli war plan would need to compensate for the handicap of acting alone – notably carrying out long-range reconnaissance, bombardment and rescue missions.

Such a possibility could potentially be drawing near as last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned the UN’s General Assembly that Tehran is only a year away from the "red line" for atomic capacity.

Washington has on numerous occasions stressed that the time for diplomacy and sanctions to deal with Iran has not run out. Israel continues to lobby for a potential military solution to concerns over Iran’s atomic facilities; something that many analysts believe will have dire consequences for the region.

Nevertheless, a member of the Azeri parliament's foreign affairs committee admitted to Reuters that Israel would need Baku’s support if it were to attack Iran as it would face a “refuelling” problem if it goes so far as taking the military option.

“I think their plan includes some use of Azerbaijan access,” Rasim Musabayov added. “We have (bases) fully equipped with modern navigation, anti-aircraft defenses and personnel trained by Americans and if necessary they can be used without any preparations.”

But officials in Azerbaijan’s president office have denied the speculation.

"No third country can use Azerbaijan to perpetrate an attack on Iran,” said Reshad Karimov from President Aliyev's staff.

Yet, in February Israeli defense officials confirmed a 2011 deal to sell to Azerbaijan 60 drones as well as antiaircraft and missile defense systems for some $1.6 billion.

"With these drones, (Israel) can indirectly watch what's happening in Iran, while we protect our borders," Musabayov says.

One of the sources linked to the Azeri military reportedly said: “There is not a single official base of the United States and even less so of Israel on the territory of Azerbaijan. But that is 'officially'. Unofficially they exist, and they may be used.”

The Reuters’ source also claimed that Iran was the main topic of discussion during Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman’s visit in April.

But this spring, Baku firmly denied reports that an agreement has been reached between Azerbaijan and Israel, granting the latter air base access for potential strikes on Iran. A spokesman from the Azeri defense ministry earlier refuted these claims as “absurd and groundless.” Those statements came on the back of a Foreign Policy report that claimed cooperation between Azerbaijan and Israel was "heightening the risks of an Israeli strike on Iran".

Azeri- Iran relation have seen better days. An Azeri-language television channel which is streamed by Tehran portrays president Aliyev as a puppet of Israel and the West. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan sees Iranian hands behind its Islamist opposition and both countries have arrested alleged spies.

“We live in a dangerous neighbourhood,” one presidential aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters. “That’s the most powerful driving force behind our relationship with Israel.”