The Harbin Y-12s are approaching/past 20 years of operational life and so are the true workhorses of the SLAF rotary wing fleet -the 212s. I have not heard plans to replace these assets. Should not the next level of replenishment of the fleet involve these?
As far as I know these aircraft will continue to serve in the SLAF till they become Un-airworthy either through operational mishaps or till the airframes accrue the time to reach their ultimate fatigue life.
Not all the Y-12 and Bell 212 airframes have been with the SLAF for close to 20 years. New aircraft were bought in the late 90's and in the early part of the new millennia.
The Y-12's in general still have considerable fatigue life left in their airframes due to its relatively low-altitude/low-speed flight envelope (Y-12's are generally guaranteed with a structural fatigue life of +30,000 hrs). In addition, because the aircraft are reasonably cheap to operate and maintain with the maintenance engineers in the SLAF having around +10 years experience on the type. There is a good chance this aircraft will continue to see use in the SLAF.
Similarly, the Bell-212 too has considerable fatigue life left in its airframe. This aircraft is extremely popular and rugged. I don't see this aircraft going out of service for quite a long time.
Both aircraft can have their structural fatigue life extended in Sri Lanka with a full aircraft overhaul carried out within the Country. The SLAF is fully capable of overhauling the engine/transmission on the Bell 212 in Sri Lanka. I believe the engines on the Y-12 (Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-27 turboprops) are sent to Singapore to get overhauled after every 800 hrs.
As a result - all pointers indicate to both aircraft types remaining in service for another 5-10 years as a minimum deadline.
Given this life span the SLAF can afford not to upgrade these aircraft, or to even start thinking of upgrading for another 5-6 years.
The current fleet strength of the Y-12 and Bell-212 in the SLAF (8 and 7 squadrons):
Y-12
CR852 -- Y-12 -- active
CR853 -- Y-12 -- active
CR854 -- Y-12 -- active
CR855 -- Y-12 -- active
CR857 -- Y-12 -- active
CR858 -- Y-12 -- active
CR859 -- Y-12 -- active
CR859 was a new aircraft received in 2003.
Bell 212
CH537 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH539 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH540 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH542 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH547 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH548 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH560 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH563 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH565 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH566 -- Bell 212 -- active
CH542, CH547 and CH548 were new aircraft delivered in 2003 from the US.
Also, the longtime need for a dedicated maritime wing to combat the LTTE lifeline has not been addressed?. Should it be? or does Sri Lanka rely on the Indian Navy and Coastguard to do that?
The questions that need to be asked:
What is the exact format of a purposed maritime air wing?
Do you have fixed wing or rotary wing assets or both?
Does the additional capability justify the cost?
Can this role be carried out by the SLAF?
Looking at these question and the possible answers - I don't personally think the SLN needs a dedicated squadron for maritime reconnaissance and attack. The SLAF at present has the beginnings of a complete maritime reconnaissance and attack capability.
The current asset that provides maritime reconnaissance for the SLAF is CR843 - Beech 200 HISAR. This aircraft also provides standard aerial reconnaissance along with a limited airborne early warning capability.
The SLAF should consider acquiring another similar aircraft to bolster this multiple capability.
In addition to the Beech 200 HISAR the SLAF already has another asset that can provide effective maritime reconnaissance, CC660 - Cessna 421 (currently grounded pending an extensive overhaul to its engines/structure and avionics). If the SLAF gets another Beech 200, these 3 aircraft have the necessary capability to provide the SLAF and the Sri Lankan military establishment with all the intelligence it really needs to combat LTTE naval movements inside and just outside your territorial waters.
To be truly effective at least 2 aircraft should be based at China Bay in Trincomalee. Once a threat is detected, the Sri Lankan military now has a multitude of aerial and naval assets that can be used to engage the threat, with these aircraft helping to guide any response.
As you have suggested the Indian naval establishment, and to a certain degree US intelligence services in the US and in South East Asia provide the Sri Lanka Military with considerable intelligence on LTTE naval movements outside your countries territorial waters.
Once a threat is detected, the relevant intelligence is passed on to the relevant authorities in your country. At this point it is entirely up to the Sri Lankan military to act upon the intelligence. In the past this has usually resulted in the deployment of SLN assets to the region of interest or CR843 is deployed to conduct aerial reconnaissance over this region to guide any ships or aircraft.
In addition, it is highly unlikely the Sri Lanka Military will be given a capability to monitor naval actives outside her territorial waters .. lets just say there is a lot of Indian surface and underwater naval activity on the eastern seaboard of Sri Lanka in addition to our assets and Israel assets in that region.
Aerial surveillance from any country apart from India and the US in this region is detrimental to the security of several interested parties.
So is this the maximum payload the HINDs could carry Mr. Mig29?
No..
The Maximum payload configurations:
(1) -- 12 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles;
(2) -- 8 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles + 2 x S-8/S-5 rocket pods;
(3) -- 4 x 80 mm S-8 rocket pods (20 each) + 4 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles;
(4) -- 4 x 57 mm S-5 rocket pods (20 each) + 4 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles;
(5) -- 2 x S-8/S-5 rocket pods + 2 x GSh-23L twin 23-mm MG pods + 4 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles;
(6) -- 4 x GSh-23L twin 23-mm MG pods + 4 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles;
(7) -- 4 x FAB-250 (250 kg) bombs + 4 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles;
(8) -- 2 x FAB-500 (500 kg) bombs + 4 x AT-6 Anti-Tank Missiles;
If they are to carry the AT-6 spirals, how many can one carry? Is it a maximum of 8 with 2x4 missile racks?
The Mi-24 can technically carry x 12 AT-6 missiles, 2 per pylon, if it wanted to.
However the most common configuration is the x 4 missile - 2 on each outer pylon port/starboard.
Or x 8 missiles - 2 on each outer and outboard pylons port/starboard.
Also to my knowledge the S-8 has a max range of 4km. But if the HINDS were hovering at 4kms wouldn't the tigers know (hear it) they've been targetted leading them to run and disperse? Unless of course FAEs were used?
No FAE's were used on this occasion.
It is highly unlikely the Thamil Tiger rebels would have heard the helicopters approaching from 4 km's away. At this range the acoustic signature of an approaching (not in hover) Mi-24 is pretty low and indiscernible..
The major advantage offered by the CoMPASS IV on sensor equipped Mi-24's is that now SLAF HIND pilot's have the capability to engage targets from beyond visual range, where as before they needed to make visual contact with the target before engaging. This practise obviously betrayed the aircrafts position and attacking direction, hence giving the target time to disperse or get their anti-aircraft weaponry set in place to ambush the approaching aircraft. A beyond visual range engagement capability offers the helicopters considerable stealth and safety from anti-aircraft gun and MANPAD fire.
Search All News and Discussions
7 Feb 2007 16:38:09 GMT 
7 Feb 2007 17:56:38 GMT 
7 Feb 2007 19:38:08 GMT 