Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Cross post.
Yet another offshoot of the AAAU.: An AAAU-based maritime patrol radar with 512 TRMs.
This shows how much confidence DRDO, IAF and IN have on the AAAU radar and its derivatives: Netra, new AEW&Cs, Mk1A, Mk2, AMCA and now this.
I am pretty sure Su-30 radar upgrade can be Uttam-derived!
Yet another offshoot of the AAAU.: An AAAU-based maritime patrol radar with 512 TRMs.
This shows how much confidence DRDO, IAF and IN have on the AAAU radar and its derivatives: Netra, new AEW&Cs, Mk1A, Mk2, AMCA and now this.
I am pretty sure Su-30 radar upgrade can be Uttam-derived!
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Much more needed,whether on the same platform ,larger or even both. The cost/capability factors to be carefully examined. There's the famous saying," quantity has a quality of its own".
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
https://theaviationist.com/2021/04/04/t ... abilities/
INTRODUCING.... our newest intelligence, surveillance & reconnaissance aircraft, the ‘Oron’!
Equipped with cutting edge sensors, including an advanced radar system, & AI, the ‘Oron’ will enable the IDF to maintain our intelligence superiority in the face of emerging challenges.
Wonder if this similar to a DRDO platform in development !!
INTRODUCING.... our newest intelligence, surveillance & reconnaissance aircraft, the ‘Oron’!
Equipped with cutting edge sensors, including an advanced radar system, & AI, the ‘Oron’ will enable the IDF to maintain our intelligence superiority in the face of emerging challenges.
Wonder if this similar to a DRDO platform in development !!
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
From Twitter: Ninjamonkey @Aryan_warlord
So one ex @airindiain @Airbus A320 seems to have been transferred to the @IAF_MCC. Most interesting step forward.
9:29 AM · Jul 19, 2021
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Also from Twitter: Maverick@Mave_Intel
Its an Ex-Air India , Airbus-319,will be used as an in-house flying Testbed aircraft for various Airborne Radars lile ,Uttam AESA and AEWACS Programme, Indian Navy's Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft senior suite program
+
This aircraft isn't part of 6 Airframe to be procured for Netra-mk-II project.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
One can only hope that similarly a 747 can be deputed to the jet engine program as test bed.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Actually has very little to do with the AEW/AWACS projectbasant wrote:From Twitter: Ninjamonkey @Aryan_warlord
So one ex @airindiain @Airbus A320 seems to have been transferred to the @IAF_MCC. Most interesting step forward.
Wrongly attributed as a test bed for NETRA MK.2 when in fact it’s to be a FTB for the AMCA avionics suite (much like N757A and the F-22) which is perhaps just as/more significant. A BIG step forward for the AMCA project and surprised to see DRDO/GoI getting this into DRDO hands with such little issue- a good statement of intent IMO.
That said I’m sure this FTB will be used to validate a number of technologies for other DRDO projects that includes NETRA MK.2 and dare I saw AWACS(I)?
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 868
- Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Pictures by gaur_av_iation
https://mobile.twitter.com/gaur_av_iati ... 8850817029
Picture by Praneeth Franklin
https://mobile.twitter.com/gaur_av_iati ... 8850817029
Picture by Praneeth Franklin
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
https://twitter.com/IAF_MCC/status/1434 ... 85730?s=20 ----> Eye to Eye with the Netra!
Eagle Eyes Over the Eagle's Eyrie...Up and Close with the indigenous Netra.
Eagle Eyes Over the Eagle's Eyrie...Up and Close with the indigenous Netra.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
VIDEO
https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/14349 ... 43936?s=20 ---> The first ever contact of DRDO's AEW&C with an Indian Air Force IL-78 tanker.
https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/14349 ... 43936?s=20 ---> The first ever contact of DRDO's AEW&C with an Indian Air Force IL-78 tanker.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Quick question for anyone --
Netra AWACs radar frame's front portion has enough area to put a decent side front facing radar. That will at least increase its coverage from 270 degrees to 270+45=315 degrees. Even the rear can accommodate radar (that will get somewhat obstructed by the tail) but can give so 20-30 degree extra coverage. Why is that option not pursued? The limitation of 270 degree can be mitigated to a large extent.
Netra AWACs radar frame's front portion has enough area to put a decent side front facing radar. That will at least increase its coverage from 270 degrees to 270+45=315 degrees. Even the rear can accommodate radar (that will get somewhat obstructed by the tail) but can give so 20-30 degree extra coverage. Why is that option not pursued? The limitation of 270 degree can be mitigated to a large extent.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Power requirements / flight characteristics....??fanne wrote:Quick question for anyone --
Netra AWACs radar frame's front portion has enough area to put a decent side front facing radar. That will at least increase its coverage from 270 degrees to 270+45=315 degrees. Even the rear can accommodate radar (that will get somewhat obstructed by the tail) but can give so 20-30 degree extra coverage. Why is that option not pursued? The limitation of 270 degree can be mitigated to a large extent.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
The form does not need to change. The front can host the radar elements as the side holds the radar element.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
fanne, 270 degree coverage on Netra - assuming that is what is reported - is more than sufficient.
Netra worked beautifully - in conjunction with other systems - at Balakot.
Netra worked beautifully - in conjunction with other systems - at Balakot.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
sure, not to say that it is not working great. But like Phalcon's (360 degree coverage), it can go more than 270 degrees to say 300-320 degrees (if not 360). It removes yet one more shortcoming (not a decisive shortcoming, most of the time, the plane will fly with its side facing the enemy, only on turns and ingress it will need a forward/backward radar). Perhaps the price of 1 phalcon, 3-4 Netras can be had almost of equal capability (less endurance but higher availability).
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Will increasing the radar coverage affect other flight characteristics or degrade performance? There has to be an optimal balance.
I am all in for wider coverage, if all other factors remain the same. But is that possible?
Adding a front facing radar - as you are suggesting - will add how much weight? It will degrade range by how much?
I am all in for wider coverage, if all other factors remain the same. But is that possible?
Adding a front facing radar - as you are suggesting - will add how much weight? It will degrade range by how much?
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
why would it degrade anything - The radar goes behind the flat facing forward side (please look at the image few post above), no need to change the dimension or shape, just a flat panel on how you would place TRM module on a flat surface for Tejas). Extra cooling will be required (weight increase), but that radar is only fired when the plane is making turns (it will be mostly doing 8 patterns, exposing it sides to the enemy airspace and surveilling them), and the power from the side panels can be reduced (as they do not look into enemy territory anymore). The software will have to be upgraded to handle the tracks from side mounted TRM module being handed over to front panel while turning, and when the turn is complete, then hand it over to the side panel. At that point the front panel can again go silent or occasionally used for front sphere surveillance.
The more I read, the more i am convinced, it is the size that is dictating how many can go, there is no room for anything more.
The more I read, the more i am convinced, it is the size that is dictating how many can go, there is no room for anything more.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Fanne, how much weight increase are we looking at? By the way, my questions is based on the assumption that you want Netra on an Embraer platform. That equation changes when you move to a more capable platform i.e. A320 for example.
Where is Mort Walker when you need him?
Where is Mort Walker when you need him?
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Regarding A-320 based Netra, whatever weight increase from Radar and electronics will be compensated by no luggage/ cargo for humans, and far lesser humans as there will be no passengers and passenger Luggage
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Gone walkabout in Aussie slang!!!Rakesh wrote:
Where is Mort Walker when you need him?
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Don't need front facing or rear facing radar
(usual flight path between bengal - Kashmir leg of AEW)
- Flight of AEW will always be on friendly territory
- far away from enemy ground based sam
- always in cover of friendly long range multi band ground based radar - no surprises plus will have fighter cover in wartime
- need to look deep and far where ground based radar cannot look to give first look first strike / defense picture, add what we can't see.
- ground based radar gives it enough cover so it can focus on areas of deep interest
- all power to one side of radar for deeper look, other side of array can be shut
- small corrections to flight can give you coverage in areas of interest in need for tactical maneuvers
- nose and tail radar adds will change flight dynamics and range
- does it add any new operational gain? gain payoff is too small to bother
- have phalcon for sectors where 360 may be required
(usual flight path between bengal - Kashmir leg of AEW)
- Flight of AEW will always be on friendly territory
- far away from enemy ground based sam
- always in cover of friendly long range multi band ground based radar - no surprises plus will have fighter cover in wartime
- need to look deep and far where ground based radar cannot look to give first look first strike / defense picture, add what we can't see.
- ground based radar gives it enough cover so it can focus on areas of deep interest
- all power to one side of radar for deeper look, other side of array can be shut
- small corrections to flight can give you coverage in areas of interest in need for tactical maneuvers
- nose and tail radar adds will change flight dynamics and range
- does it add any new operational gain? gain payoff is too small to bother
- have phalcon for sectors where 360 may be required
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
<OT>Aussie? I thought it was British slang.ks_sachin wrote:Gone walkabout in Aussie slang!!!Rakesh wrote:
Where is Mort Walker when you need him?
Heard it some decades ago, on 'Yes, Minister', if I am not mistaken..
Ah well, at least my memory is not failing me, in my declining years..
</OT>
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Thank you CybaruCybaru wrote: - nose and tail radar adds will change flight dynamics and range
- does it add any new operational gain? gain payoff is too small to bother
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
These are from November 2017. Is this some new milestone?Rakesh wrote:VIDEO https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/14349 ... 43936?s=20 ---> The first ever contact of DRDO's AEW&C with an Indian Air Force IL-78 tanker.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5359
- Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Heh heh. Since we are speculating here.... What is we put a monster x band fcr in the front/nose. Can we hook up some 400-600km AAMs underbelly/wing and make this a mijjile carrier too? Just sayin'fanne wrote:sure, not to say that it is not working great. But like Phalcon's (360 degree coverage), it can go more than 270 degrees to say 300-320 degrees (if not 360). It removes yet one more shortcoming (not a decisive shortcoming, most of the time, the plane will fly with its side facing the enemy, only on turns and ingress it will need a forward/backward radar). Perhaps the price of 1 phalcon, 3-4 Netras can be had almost of equal capability (less endurance but higher availability).
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 20198?s=20 ---> CCS has also cleared six A319/320 based DRDO AEW&CS Project.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
My purpose of front facing radar was not for kite flying. One of the reason touted by IAF for preferring Phalcon type radar over Netra was that it had limited FOV - 240 degrees vs 360 degrees. Most AWACS by nations that can afford and build their own is of 360 degree coverage. There must be tactical advantage of the same. I was just looking at the Netra pic above (the front aspect) and wondering, if having more FOV is such a big advantage, it can be accommodated here. What has stopped it - perhaps space or maybe performance penalty. I doubt it is that it offers no to marginal gain.
Anyways we have what we have. Till we get 360 degrees rotating radar, these rectangular once have to do it.
Anyways we have what we have. Till we get 360 degrees rotating radar, these rectangular once have to do it.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
A319/320 AWACS will have a radar in the nose. We don't know if it is going to be S band or X band.
We also don't know if it will have a rear facing radar. Although this will not be that critical compared to the front facing.
Hope DRDO packs in as much as possible in A319/320.
Another point. The platform has to be either A319 or A321. AI doesn't have that many A320. A319 is small, A321 is bigger than A320. It makes sense to go with A321. A321(146ft) vs A320(123ft)
We also don't know if it will have a rear facing radar. Although this will not be that critical compared to the front facing.
Hope DRDO packs in as much as possible in A319/320.
Another point. The platform has to be either A319 or A321. AI doesn't have that many A320. A319 is small, A321 is bigger than A320. It makes sense to go with A321. A321(146ft) vs A320(123ft)
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Any other report confirming this? I couldn't find the news anywhere else.Prem wrote:https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 20198?s=20 ---> CCS has also cleared six A319/320 based DRDO AEW&CS Project.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 638
- Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
- Location: Gujarat
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
It is from ANI.
https://www.sify.com/news/ccs-clears-tw ... fihea.html
https://www.sify.com/news/ccs-clears-tw ... fihea.html
From India Today : https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/c ... 2021-09-08New Delhi [India], September 8 (ANI): In a major boost for the Indian Air Force, the central government has cleared two mega projects including the six new made in India airborne early warning and control aircraft (AEW&C) and 56 C-295 aircraft, forty of which are to be built in India by Airbus with TATA.
-AnkitThe six AEW&C aircraft cleared by the Cabinet Committee on Security would be built on the Airbus 319 aircraft to be provided by the state-owned Air India, top sources told India Today TV. Sources said that the six aircraft, to be built by the DRDO, will further improve Air Force's surveillance capabilities along borders with China and Pakistan.
AEW&C Block 2 aircraft are to be developed by the DRDO under a Rs 11,000 crore project. The six aircraft would be modified to fly with a radar that will give 360-degree surveillance capability to the defence forces. The project to build the AEW&C system on existing aircraft from the Air India fleet may also mean that India may not buy the six Airbus 330 transport aircraft planned to be acquired earlier from the European firm.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
There are antenna size and radar frequency dynamics at play here. I believe Netra is using an S band antenna. There is limited space on the front of the radar housing and even if you were to add a completely different sensor (higher frequency front facing radar) it will have significantly lower efficiency, will consume proportionally greater power, will require integration and will likely not get the performance they are looking for. That space is also likely not empty and is likely being occupied by a whole host of other sub-systems that support the overall system. You see the platforms of this size even the newest SAAB design, they all employ the same balance beam configuration with two side antennas. There is good reason for that given some of the other radar trades made on the platform. The larger Airbus platform will allow more design flexibility. Perhaps they'll mount the three faced dome based configuration.fanne wrote:The form does not need to change. The front can host the radar elements as the side holds the radar element.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
I have a nube question.
When I look at the Netra radar. Externally I see a great deal of similarity with the Erieye.
It's ability to search ability is also broadly similar to that set.
In light of that I have to ask. Is it really fundamentally different from that set. Or Netra is using that as it's base and is a totally re-designed and upgraded over the Swedish set?
When I look at the Netra radar. Externally I see a great deal of similarity with the Erieye.
It's ability to search ability is also broadly similar to that set.
In light of that I have to ask. Is it really fundamentally different from that set. Or Netra is using that as it's base and is a totally re-designed and upgraded over the Swedish set?
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
I don't understand the question. The Netra's radar is indigenously designed. We did not have any access to the Erieye's radar. How do we use that as a base?Pratyush wrote: In light of that I have to ask. Is it really fundamentally different from that set. Or Netra is using that as it's base and is a totally re-designed and upgraded over the Swedish set?
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
I guess that answers my nube question.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Basic design of the new radar dome of Netra Mk-IIAWACS and its wind tunnel tests on A-330. It has been replaced by A-319 which is shorter.
The work has been going on for 5 years.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
The radar meant for A330 was 4 panel, GaN based S band radar. Nice meaty radar. Alas.
Wonder what are they going to do with the radar. May be use it for the C295 platform.
On the A319, my hope is that the nose radar would be as big as the one on G550. A rear facing radar like the on G550 may be doable. Guess the problem will be the engine on the rear.
With the use of GaN, it may be possible to have a smaller TRM count on the nose radar, but with higher power output.
Wonder what are they going to do with the radar. May be use it for the C295 platform.
On the A319, my hope is that the nose radar would be as big as the one on G550. A rear facing radar like the on G550 may be doable. Guess the problem will be the engine on the rear.
With the use of GaN, it may be possible to have a smaller TRM count on the nose radar, but with higher power output.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
This is unlikely to be the radar on the new A319s. They will use a Netra style Balance Beam setup.jamwal wrote:
Basic design of the new radar dome of Netra Mk-IIAWACS and its wind tunnel tests on A-330. It has been replaced by A-319 which is shorter.
The work has been going on for 5 years.
Re: Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion
Why would they choose to use a balance beam setup, when the objective is to get 360 degree coverage? They have already built the dome and done enough tests on it.Karan M wrote: This is unlikely to be the radar on the new A319s. They will use a Netra style Balance Beam setup.
Is mounting a bit smaller dome on A319 would be that much difficult? Anyway they are going to mount a balance beam, so why not a dome??