Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10034
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Mort Walker »

^^^We don't know how the contract was written. It may have been gamed to give advantage to Airbus and the French. Perhaps this was done to pacify the French? I now doubt the Rafale negotiations will conclude anytime soon. The MMRCA acquisition may simply fade away.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by brar_w »

^^Could be!
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Singha »

Could? ;)

Maitri revival is also a data point...
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

A330 is a good choice looking ahead with a platform life of no less then 25 years but practically 30 years atleast.

They should have gone with the Tanker deal as well for 330 and using number as bargain to reduce price of each platform.
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Gyan »

Israeli were asking USD 1500 million for 2 AWACS based on IL-76 which is a cheaper Platform. How can we do it only for USD 850 Million for 2 AWACS on Airbus 330 platform (including R&D)? I think we need around USD 2 Billion for 2 AWACS based on Airbus 330. Unless the budget of USD 850 Million is only for Airbus 330 platform. In any case, Airbus 330 will easily last for 50-60 years if not more.
member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by member_23694 »

http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/press ... -for-2015/

New Airbus aircraft list prices for 2015

A330-200 229.0
A330-800neo 249.6
A330-200 Freighter 232.2
A330-300 253.7
A330-900neo 284.6
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by pankajs »

Gyan wrote:Israeli were asking USD 1500 million for 2 AWACS based on IL-76 which is a cheaper Platform. How can we do it only for USD 850 Million for 2 AWACS on Airbus 330 platform (including R&D)? I think we need around USD 2 Billion for 2 AWACS based on Airbus 330. Unless the budget of USD 850 Million is only for Airbus 330 platform. In any case, Airbus 330 will easily last for 50-60 years if not more.
I don't know what reports you have read but per google chacha on the 2004 deal

$1.5 billion for 3 platform + Phalcon AWACS. Per the deal details $1.1 billion contract with Israel for the Phalcons and $1.5 billion tripartite contract with Russia including the platform i.e $1.1 billion for 3 Phalcon AWACS system wonlee (Israel component that will make way for Indian component in this latest project).

In the EMB-145 deal, 1800 cr was budgeted for the Indian component including basic R&D and production for 3 systems. The building blocks are already there and the basic R&D already amortized in the last project. Keeping the additional R&D plus production cost for 2 Next Gen system to be the same (1800 cr) that leaves 3300 cr for the platform. Seems in the ballpark wrt the cost of the platform and 5100+ crores seems reasonable for 2 fully loaded AWACS.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Thakur_B »

Gyan wrote:India has gone for the costliest AWACS platform in the world. Yayy way to go!!!
Gyan wrote:Israeli were asking USD 1500 million for 2 AWACS based on IL-76 which is a cheaper Platform. How can we do it only for USD 850 Million for 2 AWACS on Airbus 330 platform (including R&D)?
So what you mean to say is jo extravagance me bhi g**du wo frugality me bhi g**ndu :P
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10034
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Mort Walker »

Going forward with this large AWACS is good news. The experience which will be gained in AWACS development and integration will spawn the growth of domestic industries and manufacturing. I just hope the time frame is not too long and it doesn't go too far out of budget. Even then it is still a big plus.
suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4041
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by suryag »

BOE calculations, if the craft costs at the max 300m$ we are pumping in 250m$ into the local economy wow!!
Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2128
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Picklu »

Why oh why we can not negotiate with Airbus to set up a local assembly line of A330 in desh against the order of say 60 of them for the next 10 or 15 years? Use 10 for AWACs, another 5 for desi JSTAR, 15 for tanker and the remaining as cargo?

Similar no-brainer should be an order for either emp-145 or c-130j local assembly line. Use that for baby awacs, avro and an-32 replacement and all and sundry.

Why oh why?
member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by member_23694 »

^^^^
Some details about Chinese assembly line for A-320 series. Govt. support, potential order size, and the kind of tech transfer.

Parts for 200th aircraft reach Airbus' China assembly line
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/879688.shtml
Sections including the forward and aft fuselage, horizontal and vertical tail, main landing gear doors, inner flaps and engine pylons reached the A320 Family Final Assembly Line China in Tianjin on Tuesday.

Those parts and components were produced at different Airbus sites in Europe and carried by a commercial cargo vessel from Hamburg to Tianjin, Airbus said.
The wings for the A320 Family aircraft assembled at the Tianjin assembly line are locally produced
the engines will arrive at a later date directly from the engine supplier
Airbus' China gamble
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... le-317890/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... 0-aircraft
The company also signed an agreement for an aircraft finishing center in China that will fit out A330 wide-body airliners.
The finishing center is a prerequisite to sell more A330s in China, with Bregier saying the company will take it “step by step.”
http://aviationweek.com/awin/airbus-off ... nter-china
Airbus Offers To Build A330 Center In China
In return for the completion center, Airbus is asking China to commit to buying a large number of A330s
So bottom line, India should combine the private and government orders for Airbus and then negotiate the best deal. Potential exist for sure
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Gyan »

Assuming a price of USD 220 million for Airbus 330, we have to add the cost of modifications to the aircraft plus stock of some spares. Hence, the price of modified Airbus is anybody's guess but I don't see it being less than USD 300 million each. It is possible USD 850 million = Rs. 5300 crore may be only for 2 Airbus aircraft acquisition while Indian Radar systems may be budgeted separately.

I wonder why Gxxdus as subtly put by another poster are ok with IL-76 for costlier Israeli systems but want Airbus for Indian AWACS. The proposed cost for follow on order for 2 Israeli AWACS is USD 1.5 Billion.

Not to forget the price of Basic Emb 145 is USD 15-25 million which we purchased it for USD 70 million each in 2008.

Hence my guess is that each AWACS INDIA would cost around USD 1000 million each.
abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by abhik »

^^^
I think 450-500m is more likely over a reasonable production run. Of course if we had gone in for A320/B737 based system the cost might have been half as much.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

Singha wrote:A33o would have unrefueled endurance around 16 hrs while emb145 around 4. So widespread use of emb145 means buying and tying up more refuelers also.
Close to 8 hours endurance with the EMB145. I posted a link earlier.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

Cybaru wrote:
Singha wrote:A33o would have unrefueled endurance around 16 hrs while emb145 around 4. So widespread use of emb145 means buying and tying up more refuelers also.
Close to 8 hours endurance with the EMB145. I posted a link earlier.
Can you post the link again, please? Thanks.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

rohitvats wrote:
Can you post the link again, please? Thanks.
This was not the original report I had read. The original report I had read talked about EMB on long range missions over the amazon and that their flying time was over 8 hours. Here is another report. Questionable source. Let me see if I can find the other report.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htecm/ ... 40918.aspx
There is already an AEW version of the ERJ chosen by the Brazilian and Greece air forces. Merging the ERJ-145 with the Ericsson Erieye Active phased-array, pulse-doppler, electronically scanned antenna AEW Radar and Command and Control System, the EMB-145 SA (Surveillance Aircraft) can serve in border surveillance and control, search and rescue coordination, airspace management, and signals/communications intelligence. The unrefueled endurance is in excess of 8 hours.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

Some more links:

http://www.spyflight.co.uk/emb145.htm
The Erieye radar is capable of 360 degree detection and tracking of air and sea targets, has a maximum instrumented range of 450km and can detect fighter sized targets in excess of 350kms. Typical endurance is in excess of 8hrs.

http://www.luftfahrtmuseum.com/htmi/itf/em145.htm
Endurance : 9 h

http://www.aer.ita.br/~bmattos/mundo/airliner/145.htm
azilian Air Force designation R-99A. Airborne early warning and remote sensing version of ERJ- 145LR developed for Brazilian government's SIstema de Vigilancia de AMazonia (SIVAM) programme for which Raytheon is prime contractor; initial requirement for five; contract signature March 1997; deliveries for completion by May 2002. Selected on 15 December 1998 by Greek Air Force for its four-aircraft AEW requirement, with delivery from 2002; contract, signed 1 July 1999, valued at US$500 million. Announced late 1996 and features a strengthened fuselage, ventral strakes, more powerful APU, increased fuel capacity (three extra tanks at extreme rear of cabin, plus jettison capability), extending endurance to more than 8 hours; enhanced electrical system, five seats for relief crew and four (with provision for additional two) operators' consoles, including tactical co-ordinator. Flight crew of two.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

Even 12 of this type would be more than sufficient to get round the clock surveillance going. Don't need second crew. Just have a second plane in air to take over with a well rested crew. We are operating within our borders. We are not an expeditionary force yet. A330 is a total overkill. Once it goes up it will need 8 plus Su-30MKI as escort. They will need fuel even if the A330 doesn't. I still hope they work on the A32X platform. Good enough for our needs. We don't need gold plated units. We need more units.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Singha »

With range of 100s of km radar and flying deep within our space our awacs would not need any escort.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by pankajs »

http://www.janes.com/article/37798/indi ... c-aircraft
The system is designed to have 240-degree coverage, five-hour endurance, and a surveillance range of 250-375 km.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRDO_AEW%26CS
An air-to-air refuelling, system enables extended operations at times of need. The endurance of the platform aircraft is about nine hours with one air-to-air refuelling.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

During hostilities, you will!
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

^^^ The range of Brazilian R-99 is given as ~3,000 kilometer. Assuming 200 km to reach station from an airbase a bit in hinterland, that leaves with a balance range of 2,600 kilometers. At 500 kmph cruise speed while on station, the endurance works out to be shade higher than 5 hours.

With above assumptions, a 24 hour coverage over a given sector will require minimum of 4 units. Further, even assuming 80% serviceability, that is 5 aircraft in total. Basically, IAF will need a minimum of 20 of these units to ensure coverage of vital sectors for both offensive and defensive operations.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

when you drop to optimum cruise speed while running patterns, you get longer range and high station time. it's not a mad dash from point a to point b. you get to sector pour yourself a big one and ease off on the accelerator! you have no passengers to drop or pick up. You can even optimize your altitude for operational needs so you don't fight head winds and work with tail winds.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Singha »

Think 2025 beyond. We might need to extend khanish back end awacs support to others east and west or support naval carriers far at sea. Having a er platform helps.

For a neutered sooth asia role emb145 is fine.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

Cybaru wrote:when you drop to optimum cruise speed while running patterns, you get longer range and high station time. it's not a mad dash from point a to point b. you get to sector pour yourself a big one and ease off on the accelerator! you have no passengers to drop or pick up. You can even optimize your altitude for operational needs so you don't fight head winds and work with tail winds.
Which part of your explanation above negates the range limitation of ~3,000 kms? Everything will finally boil down to this single variable - unless, you can prove with some numbers that given the operational profile of a AEW&C system, it will help to increase this range parameter?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Singha »

New abm sensors and need to track 100s of inflight cruise missiles of a enemy strike will post 2025 need the biggest badest combo of power gen and sensor aperture.

Like japan has handed down aaw to akizuki class and freed the kongos for abm, we might give it to il76 and emb145 more of them....

Massive sensor packed hulls will be norm on land and sea. Shooters will be small, fast, vlo.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

rohitvats wrote:
Cybaru wrote:when you drop to optimum cruise speed while running patterns, you get longer range and high station time. it's not a mad dash from point a to point b. you get to sector pour yourself a big one and ease off on the accelerator! you have no passengers to drop or pick up. You can even optimize your altitude for operational needs so you don't fight head winds and work with tail winds.
Which part of your explanation above negates the range limitation of ~3,000 kms? Everything will finally boil down to this single variable - unless, you can prove with some numbers that given the operational profile of a AEW&C system, it will help to increase this range parameter?
It doesn't have to negate range; 3000kms is decent range. Time on station = range / speed. Also higher your speed, higher your burn rate. Slow speed down you get higher on station time.

Think patterns and operational profile. You will get your answer. What patterns will you run? When you are over a airport in a holding pattern, what speeds are you running at? Can you hold those patterns precisely at very high speeds? Granted the patterns aren't in the same level of tightness like over an airport, but I suspect they will be similar.

The optimum speed for 707 based awacs is 360MPH or 0.48 mach. It's top speed is .78/.8 mach.
http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/e-3.htm

I don't think you need numbers to think more about this.
Last edited by Cybaru on 30 Mar 2015 20:50, edited 1 time in total.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

Singha wrote:Think 2025 beyond. We might need to extend khanish back end awacs support to others east and west or support naval carriers far at sea. Having a er platform helps.

For a neutered sooth asia role emb145 is fine.
Possibly, but for now and the next 12 deliveries, the EMB 145 will cover our airspace fine. When we have the resources and the ambitions we can add long range platforms. Our first concern should be get a defensive blanket up there and neutralize any inbound threat.

Our force structure will have to change to support long distances from home. It may evolve to that stage, but buying two large units, without refuelers to support the defensive ring around it to support a good 15 hour mission far away from home is wasteful.

If we do lose a very large platform,
what is the cost of lives,
operational readiness,
how much loss of defensive posture to prevent inbound threats ( we have fewer platforms, how will make up for this loss?) If it's down for maintaince, it has the same issues.
cost required to replace trained men and familiar machines

Some other considerations:
Escort size ( 6- 8 )
Escort time on station.
Escort replacements.
How many Refuelers & how many refuelings to remain on station? ( 15 hour sorties? 2 sets of escorts, each with two refuelings?)
Cost of such an operation. Costs 10 times more to refuel in air than on ground.
How many such operations can you mount in a year?
How many *will* you mount?

Will it be just AWACS or now if you have space will you make it AWACS and JSTARS like?
What happens to fog of war when you lose such a platform. Both IA and IAF will lose effectiveness in a sector.
Operational returns on joint operations: Do they have common sectors? Or do they both have different requirements.

For us and our needs even with expeditonary aspirations, smaller cheaper platforms will work just fine. IMO the next gen platforms don't need to be as small as EMB145, but anything that can add another 3-4 consoles and provide on station time of 8-10 hours is plenty. (737/319/320).
Last edited by Cybaru on 30 Mar 2015 20:55, edited 3 times in total.
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3118
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by JTull »

Austin wrote:Air International writeup on AeroIndia

Made in India - Piotr Butowski


http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?fi ... 4683356465
The first EMB 145i, registered KW3555, arrived at the DRDO facility on August 22, 2012. Its mission systems have been installed and once flight trials are complete it will be delivered to the IAF in September 2015. The second aircraft, KW3556, will be accepted by the air force by the end of this year. The third aircraft is expected to arrive at Bangalore in the middle of 2015 and will be retained by the CABS for research on upgrades.
3 years from receiving first aircraft to delivery to IAF. So the first A330 delivery could be ready only by 2023. We'll effectively have three 15 year old Phalcons and 2 each of Em-145 AEW and newer Phalcons. It would be a shame if we wasted 8 years.
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10034
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Mort Walker »

Cybaru wrote:
Singha wrote:Think 2025 beyond. We might need to extend khanish back end awacs support to others east and west or support naval carriers far at sea. Having a er platform helps.

For a neutered sooth asia role emb145 is fine.
Possibly, but for now and the next 12 deliveries, the EMB 145 will cover our airspace fine. When we have the resources and the ambitions we can add long range platforms. Our first concern should be get a defensive blanket up there and neutralize any inbound threat.

Our force structure will have to change to support long distances from home. It may evolve to that stage, but buying two large units, without refuelers to support the defensive ring around it to support a good 15 hour mission far away from home is wasteful.
For blanket coverage of India and within 60 KM of international border, a networked ground based long range radar is far more effective. Think of the Green Pine radar system and its derivatives. Domestically developed or purchased at a cost of less than $10 million each. The purpose of an AWACS is to be used as a force multiplier. The Embrarers are too small for that purpose and are really a stop gap measure. Operationally two or more Embrarer AEW&C aircraft may cost more than one A-330 AWACS. An AWACS does not need a constant defensive ring around it nor does it need to be refueled in air if it can complete an 8-10 hour mission. It will be used extensively in time of peace to monitor the movement of civilian and military aircraft in an area of concern. This is the practice of NATO air forces and Japan. An IAF AWACS will be used to track suspicious general aviation cleared to fly into India, from lets say SE Asia, and do something like a Purlia arms drop. Another example will be to monitor military aircraft in and out of Pakistan from China and the middle east. A large A-330 AWACS will give the IAF that capability. Say Pak is planning a surprise attack and moves their military aircraft to Afghanistan or Iran, as it happened in the past, the IAF will now know that.
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2511
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by srin »

Mort Walker wrote:
For blanket coverage of India and within 60 KM of international border, a networked ground based long range radar is far more effective. Think of the Green Pine radar system and its derivatives. Domestically developed or purchased at a cost of less than $10 million each. The purpose of an AWACS is to be used as a force multiplier. The Embrarers are too small for that purpose and are really a stop gap measure. Operationally two or more Embrarer AEW&C aircraft may cost more than one A-330 AWACS. An AWACS does not need a constant defensive ring around it nor does it need to be refueled in air if it can complete an 8-10 hour mission. It will be used extensively in time of peace to monitor the movement of civilian and military aircraft in an area of concern. This is the practice of NATO air forces and Japan. An IAF AWACS will be used to track suspicious general aviation cleared to fly into India, from lets say SE Asia, and do something like a Purlia arms drop. Another example will be to monitor military aircraft in and out of Pakistan from China and the middle east. A large A-330 AWACS will give the IAF that capability. Say Pak is planning a surprise attack and moves their military aircraft to Afghanistan or Iran, as it happened in the past, the IAF will now know that.
I agree with you about ground-based radars arrays - but only for the Western border. If you look at the Eastern border, because of the tall mountains acting as barriers, there is a huge line-of-sight problem. A ground-based radar won't have enough response time against ground hugging strike aircraft or cruise missiles. And there are hundreds of valleys that can let a missile through. At best, you can have Akash squadrons defending airbases as last ditch air defence. But for early warning and to ensure that IAF has time to scramble its own fighters, you really need to have either aerostat (which are vulnerable due to their immobility) or AEW/AWACS.
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10034
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Mort Walker »

^^^Then do what is already being done and place the Green Pine on the mountain sides. A ground based radar or AWACS face the same problem - that is to scramble intercept combat aircraft to position. They both have enough response time since the last time I checked, the speed of light didn't change. :) In fact, ground based radar could have a higher power transmitter and high gain antenna in areas of concern. Having a half dozen high power ground based radar in the NE makes more sense than having 2-3 Embraers always on sorties. The problem with any radar in mountainous areas is that if an aircraft is flying low, ground clutter will be an issue. On an AWACS the problem is more complicated as you have moving clutter maps that have to be optimized with radar performance.

I think we need to understand the doctrine of using an AWACS. It is not just for war time, but equally for peace time.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by kit »

i had asked this question sometime back .. what about a solution like the JORN over the horizon radar for the eastern front ? would it also be limited ?
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2918
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

Mort Walker wrote:
Cybaru wrote: Possibly, but for now and the next 12 deliveries, the EMB 145 will cover our airspace fine. When we have the resources and the ambitions we can add long range platforms. Our first concern should be get a defensive blanket up there and neutralize any inbound threat.

Our force structure will have to change to support long distances from home. It may evolve to that stage, but buying two large units, without refuelers to support the defensive ring around it to support a good 15 hour mission far away from home is wasteful.
For blanket coverage of India and within 60 KM of international border, a networked ground based long range radar is far more effective. Think of the Green Pine radar system and its derivatives. Domestically developed or purchased at a cost of less than $10 million each. The purpose of an AWACS is to be used as a force multiplier. The Embrarers are too small for that purpose and are really a stop gap measure. Operationally two or more Embrarer AEW&C aircraft may cost more than one A-330 AWACS. An AWACS does not need a constant defensive ring around it nor does it need to be refueled in air if it can complete an 8-10 hour mission. It will be used extensively in time of peace to monitor the movement of civilian and military aircraft in an area of concern. This is the practice of NATO air forces and Japan. An IAF AWACS will be used to track suspicious general aviation cleared to fly into India, from lets say SE Asia, and do something like a Purlia arms drop. Another example will be to monitor military aircraft in and out of Pakistan from China and the middle east. A large A-330 AWACS will give the IAF that capability. Say Pak is planning a surprise attack and moves their military aircraft to Afghanistan or Iran, as it happened in the past, the IAF will now know that.

Mort,

Sure, there will be some easy peasy missions like tracking inbound smuggling ops and you won't need escorts. But in a semi-state of war, before the actual hostilities as in Kargil, you will fly with escorts and definately so during war. That means hours of practicing to fly like that in peace time to acquire operational readiness and collabration to work as a team. Larger your team, more practice you will need. Protecting these assets may be the difference between losing or winning.
Last edited by Cybaru on 30 Mar 2015 21:08, edited 1 time in total.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by kit »

but as i see it, a system like that would probably have a force multiplier effect if feasible forcing the other side to adopt a similar system !
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

Cybaru wrote: It doesn't have to negate range; 3000kms is decent range. Time on station = range / speed.

<SNIP>

The optimum speed for 707 based awacs is 360MPH or 0.48 mach. It's top speed is .78/.8 mach. I don't think you need numbers to think more about this.
The logic given above and data-point about 707 actually supports the calculation I gave; on the contrary, I took 500 kmph as cruise speed for our EMB-145 while above speed comes out to be 576 kmph.

So, the 3,000 km range after adjusting for ingress and egress, gives 2,600/500 = 5.2 hours of on station time.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by pankajs »

^
Jane has 5 hrs as the limit for EMB 145 AEW.

EMB 145 AEW or A-330 AWACS both need to be protected in a hostile environment but while EMB endurance is 5 hrs compared to 16 hrs for A-330. Larger radar, larger coverage and additional payloads with a A-330. Plus more operator stations, crew comfort, etc. In-flight refueling will allow additional time on station for both plane.

2 additional Phalcons plus additional EMB 145 AEW in the interim.
Last edited by pankajs on 30 Mar 2015 21:25, edited 1 time in total.
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10034
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by Mort Walker »

kit wrote:i had asked this question sometime back .. what about a solution like the JORN over the horizon radar for the eastern front ? would it also be limited ?
An AWACS is used to track aircraft from a long range. Let's say military aircraft take off from a base in the Tibetan plateau and are on a course for somewhere near Karachi. An AWACS is ideal for just that as it will track position, speed, altitude, size, and to monitor that aircraft's radio transmissions as well. For air defense, a ground based solution is much more extensive and considerably less costly.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Post by pankajs »

We haven't seen any additional orders for EMB 145 AEW because they are still being evaluated! Most likely we will see additional order post the handover and some operational experience with the IAF. That seems to be the pattern with Phalcons too.
Post Reply