Radar thread - specs & discussions

[SaiK]

that was a good info on drdo's l-band 64 element aesa radar. q? is there a direct relationship between bands and the size of these t/r modules., meaning would the x-band ones can be of smaller size? furthermore, is drdo working on the GaN based t/r MMICs? what is the plan for AESA-FCR for LCA?

[vina]

..... the pvt sector is no longer looked down upon as it was during the halycon days of socialist India, where it would take the PM or someone to intervene on behalf of a single firm, for its mere existence.

Hmm.. What a come down from the heady days eh ? The days of flash strikes, " gheraos" and other cool jholawala things that were/are fashionable at JNU. No more excoriating ' reactionaries who exploit the working classes eh ? Good.

The key way to go about it would be not gut the state units- they can serve as competitors and partners, and need to be given more freedom to decide their payscale etc, not protected via barriers.

How will they be different from Air India / IA and the other 'strategic' sectors, which will continue to be supported by govt doles, handouts, and tables stacked in their favor and against other players? How will you avoid cases like a poor farm laborer / worker / servant maid , someone who is never going to fly in his/ her entire life from subsidizing the existence of IA and AI by extracting taxes from them in the name of their welfare ?

Privatise them and put them on an equal footing with other players. Let them swim or sink, dont mollycoddle them and create a reason for their existence via specious reasons such as ' strategic' .

[JCage]

Hmm.. What a come down from the heady days eh ? The days of flash strikes, " gheraos" and other cool jholawala things that were/are fashionable at JNU. No more excoriating ' reactionaries who exploit the working classes eh ? Good.


Definitely- but what was then was then, and no point in crying over spilt milk and what might have been- unless of course, as a cautionary tale of what not to do. Luckily some folks did realize the importance of involving the pvt sector as partners in major programs and we have some good capability and the ability to build upon it further. Interestingly, there are two pvt firms even involved in ammo integration (120mm and 125mm)- vs the OFB, would be interesting to see their record on quality control. Best that more and more "slips under the radar" and gets done, lest the commies and labor unions raise a ruckus.

How will they be different from Air India / IA and the other 'strategic' sectors, which will continue to be supported by govt doles, handouts, and tables stacked in their favor and against other players? How will you avoid cases like a poor farm laborer / worker / servant maid , someone who is never going to fly in his/ her entire life from subsidizing the existence of IA and AI by extracting taxes from them in the name of their welfare ?

You misunderstand. Dont stack the tables in their favour, but dont recklessly privatize either a la the FSU and then cry later on, when your design teams board a/c for NY, LA etc & you decide that gutting a weapons unit and having it seek purely private funding within a day, make fridges etc was not a good step. Begin with a no holds barred incentive program and HRD measures to guage what folks within want, and go for it. Dont beat around the bush and BS about "but what will the agriculture folks feel- wont they be discriminated against"? If need be, use the Govt owned Pvtly managed model to set up units where the above can be implemented on a trial basis, have it "fly under the radar" and let CSIR, DRDO etc have more say on what incentive schemes and measures are required to aggressively recruit talent and maintain it. Of course with a good system of checks and balances- have the end user involved as well throughout. This doesnt mean that we constantly "protect" them at all.

Privatise them and put them on an equal footing with other players.

In the long run, yes albeit with some GOI stake whilst pvtly managed- asmentioned below. Equal footing, most definitely asap.

Let them swim or sink, dont mollycoddle them and create a reason for their existence via specious reasons such as ' strategic' .

Sinking firms wont work until India becomes an economy like the Unkil one or has a good basic setup of firms which can take up tasks across the board,and nor should it be done purely for the sake of pvt vs public- I still see a good chance for any firm, irrespective of who owns it, to run as long as it is competently managed. So have them compete, give them equal resources and let them deliver.
Pure privatization without some measure of Govt stake would be unwise imho- every country worth its salt has some good measure of control, France, Israel, Russia et al. We need to do the same and not throw out the good with the bad.

[Dileep]

that was a good info on drdo's l-band 64 element aesa radar. q? is there a direct relationship between bands and the size of these t/r modules., meaning would the x-band ones can be of smaller size? furthermore, is drdo working on the GaN based t/r MMICs? what is the plan for AESA-FCR for LCA?

Yes, there is a relationship. X band modules are smaller. Why? The features in the modules are related to the wavelength, including the size of the antenna element. Also, the distance between the individual elements is also dependant upon the wavelength and hence smaller.

I don't know the answer to the last two questions. Would be glad to learn myself.

[maitya]

that was a good info on drdo's l-band 64 element aesa radar. q? is there a direct relationship between bands and the size of these t/r modules., meaning would the x-band ones can be of smaller size? furthermore, is drdo working on the GaN based t/r MMICs? what is the plan for AESA-FCR for LCA?

I don't know the answer to the last two questions. Would be glad to learn myself.

IIRC some of the basic differentiators between GaAs and GaN based transistors (both having higher operating frequency tapability and similar noise figures) are as follows :

Code: Select all

Features                           GaAs          GaN     
----------                         ------        -----      
Power Density (at X-Band)          1.5W/mm       10W/mm
DC-to-RF Efficiency (at X-Band)    20%           ~36% and 60% (at L-Band)
Energy Gap at Room Temp            1.90eV        3.4eV
Breakdown E-Field (V/Cm)           6.5*10^5      3.5*10^6

Note that:
1. The Johnson figure of merit takes into account the breakdown voltage and saturated electron drift velocity in defining a measure of value. For GaN, the Johnson figure of merit is 16 times that of silicon and 6 times that of GaAs, and about half that of SiC.
2. The Baliga figure of merit is calculated based on dielectric constant, electron mobility and critical electric field in a measurement that approximates the high-power handling capability. Based on its properties, the Baliga figure for GaN is approximately 100 times that of silicon, 10 times that of GaAs and 8.5 times that of SiC.
3. Higher power densities allow smaller chips to handle the same amount of power, resulting in more chips per wafer, and hence, lower costs per chip. Alternatively, the same-sized device can handle higher power, resulting in lower costs per watt of power and lower systems costs.

Source: GaN High Electron Mobility Transistors (HEMT)

Dileep, excellent data-point ...

[maitya]

Code: Select all

Features                           GaAs          GaN     
----------                         ------        -----      
Power Density (at X-Band)          1.5W/mm       10W/mm
DC-to-RF Efficiency (at X-Band)    20%           ~36% and 60% (at L-Band)
Energy Gap at Room Temp            1.90eV        3.4eV
Breakdown E-Field (V/Cm)           6.5*10^5      3.5*10^6

Betw, in lay-man (like me ) terms, what the above means are as follows:

Power Density: Higher power densities allow smaller chips to handle the same amount of power, resulting in more chips per wafer, and hence, lower costs per chip. Also will result in smaller chips.

DC-to-RF Efficiency: Measure how effieciently RF waves are generated i.e. how less heat is genarated in the process of creating RF waves. Thus higher efficiency implies less thermal mgmt headache and there-in weight penalties.

Energy Gap or Band Gap: Higher the value, allows higher temperature operation (thus requiring less cooling) and higher radiation stability. Also higher the value more closer you're to be classifiead as an insulator.

Break down E-Field: Higher value means higher "tolerance" to higher voltage - thus more resistant to breakdown due to high voltage peaks.

[Willy]

Which radar is the LCA going to use. With AESA the inthing these days the doppler radar that was planned for the LCA seems to be a no no now. Maybe the Blue Vixen or the Elta one.....

[Dileep]

Maitya, I agree modesty is a virtue

I almost flunked the course that dealt with solid state devices, and that was two decades ago. Never looked beyond device parameters after that.

I don't know if GaN is a required technology for the X band AESA, but I don't think so. Even if it did, it would be for the power amp stages. GaAs would do fine for the MMICs on the low power stages. IMO, it doesn't matter if we make the semiconductors in house.

[Cybaru]

--------------------------------------------
Waiting:

Rajendra -III/ CAR for IA via Akash.
More orders for CAR from the IAF
-------------------------------------------

Since this is the first open source reference as far I remember of Rajendras Version III, any ideas on how it is different than the previous avtaars ??

[NRao]

CY,

pls send email to indicgroup@netscape.net

[Cybaru]

done ...

[maitya]

I almost flunked the course that dealt with solid state devices, and that was two decades ago. Never looked beyond device parameters after that.

Nooooo ... pls, pls, pls don't remind me of those days!! No ...
Let the sleeping dogs lie - PLEASE!!

I don't know if GaN is a required technology for the X band AESA, but I don't think so. Even if it did, it would be for the power amp stages. GaAs would do fine for the MMICs on the low power stages. IMO, it doesn't matter if we make the semiconductors in house.

From the above stats, the GaN based transistors look to be a very good candidate for the PA atleast - most of the high-power/high-heat issues are for the Transmit part only.
But, since they have similar low-noise figure like GaAs, not sure why one'd go for those for the Receiver module (LNA etc.). But then again, I'm not sure how difficult would it be to mix-match transistor types in the combined T/R module ... shouldn't be too much of a issue, I guess - your thoughts, pls!!

[JCage]

Apropos my point earlier:

http://www.hindu.com/2006/04/09/stories ... 811000.htm

al Printer Friendly Page Send this Article to a Friend

DRDO to set up centres of excellence with varsities

Special Correspondent

Aimed at gaining from their expertise in specialised areas

# Some of the centres will be in cutting edge technologies
# To be patterned on existing models

NEW DELHI: The Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) has decided to strengthen its linkages with leading scientific institutions and universities. To gain from their expertise it plans to set up six joint centres of excellence, some of them in cutting edge technologies.

Aimed at helping DRDO's forays in specialised areas, the centres would be in the areas of synthesis of high energy materials (for use as explosives and propellants), polymer electronics, interaction of microwaves (for stealth applications), nano technology-based sensors (for nuclear biological chemical detection), nano opto-electronic devices and life sciences.

Parallel initiative

The centres will be patterned on the existing DRDO-academia models working at Jadavpur University, Kolkata, for technology and at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, for missile-related research activity. These centres would run parallel to the DRDO initiative called `contracts for acquisition of research services' by which a DRDO laboratory can seek the expertise and access the facility of academic institutions. DRDO laboratories are spending nearly Rs. 7 crore annually.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

More, more, more!!!!
Six aint enough!

[JCage]

As to why I was concentrating on radars, heres why:

IAF deposition to the Standing Committee on Defence- 04-05



[quote]The induction that are planned are the medium power radars. A total of
15 + 8 medium power radars are planned. These are low level
transportable radars. A total of 19 is pending presently with the Ministry
of Defence. It is Low Level Light weight radars. We have planned to
induct 39. We have inducted three. We are carrying out trials and once,
these are proved successful, we can induct the rest. CAR is the Central
Acquisition Radars. These are planned to be met indigenously by BEL.
There is a requirement of seven radars. This is Indra-II. Six are being
manufactured indigenously. It is upgraded and a high power radar. It is
THT-55, which is being undertakenâ€

[maitya]

Apropos my point earlier:

http://www.hindu.com/2006/04/09/stories ... 811000.htm

DRDO to set up centres of excellence with varsities

Aimed at helping DRDO's forays in specialised areas, the centres would be in the areas of synthesis of high energy materials (for use as explosives and propellants), polymer electronics, interaction of microwaves (for stealth applications), nano technology-based sensors (for nuclear biological chemical detection), nano opto-electronic devices and life sciences.

More, more, more!!!!
Six aint enough!

What no need for VLSI based center ... where the ASICs etc will come from? This would've been a good place to start with ADVANCED VLSI DESIGN LABORATORY

[Dileep]

What no need for VLSI based center ... where the ASICs etc will come from? This would've been a good place to start with ADVANCED VLSI DESIGN LABORATORY

VLSI is matured technology. You don't need univs to do that.

[Dileep]

But, since they have similar low-noise figure like GaAs, not sure why one'd go for those for the Receiver module (LNA etc.). But then again, I'm not sure how difficult would it be to mix-match transistor types in the combined T/R module ... shouldn't be too much of a issue, I guess - your thoughts, pls

See, what is important is the end result, not the technology used. If GaAs is available, and that serves the purpose, use it. Let another people work on GaN to develop the technology.

But we have made no success in the cutting edge technology. The research places will always jump on the latest and greatest thingie, make a lot of noise, and then sleep on it. Nothing happens then. After a decade, industry will buy same technology from outside and do production.

I never get excited about any such hoopla about cutting edge technology being developed at any of the research centres. Someone is doing justice to their (meagre) funding. That is all. Nothing will come out of it except some "papers". The primary aim of those places is "papers".

[maitya]

What no need for VLSI based center ... where the ASICs etc will come from? This would've been a good place to start with ADVANCED VLSI DESIGN LABORATORY

VLSI is matured technology. You don't need univs to do that.

Ummm ... how about the MMIC devolpment that sometimes may use customized ASICs ...

[Dileep]

VLSI is matured technology. You don't need univs to do that.

Ummm ... how about the MMIC devolpment that sometimes may use customized ASICs ...

MMICs are not VLSI. You are not going to make a processor or DSP o MMIC. They are either analog or simple digital. And I would imagine their design would need direct layout, not standard cell type design methodology.

Take the case of the radars. The digital components there are the switch array for the phase shifter and the D/A converter for the DDS (if used). The rest of the building blocks are analog.

[maitya]

But, since they have similar low-noise figure like GaAs, not sure why one'd go for those for the Receiver module (LNA etc.). But then again, I'm not sure how difficult would it be to mix-match transistor types in the combined T/R module ... shouldn't be too much of a issue, I guess - your thoughts, pls

See, what is important is the end result, not the technology used. If GaAs is available, and that serves the purpose, use it. Let another people work on GaN to develop the technology ...

He he ... meanwhile Raytheon (funded by DARPA) is doing exactly that viz. getting the GaN technology "research out of universities and into the laboratories of its military contractors".

From Page 2 of this same thread ... ofcourse posted by, who else, but N.

They US is so ahead of the rest of the world, that it aint even funny..

Copyright 2005 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe

April 25, 2005

UNDER THE RADAR
WITH FUNDING FROM THE PENTAGON, RAYTHEON ENGINEERS ARE TESTING NEW TECHNOLOGY
THAT COULD GIVE THE COMPANY A HUGE LEAP ON ITS RIVALS

By Robert Weisman, Globe Staff

ANDOVER In the race to develop the military radar of the future, engineers at Raytheon Co. are betting that their pursuit of new technologies will give them an advantage over radar-making rivals.


And the hottest technology in the radar field today may be the gallium nitride semiconductors now being tested in clean rooms at a Raytheon foundry here, under a research project underwritten by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. The agency, known as Darpa, is the research arm of the Pentagon, and it's been working since 2002 to bring gallium nitride research out of universities and into the laboratories of its military contractors. Last month, Darpa awarded Raytheon a three-year, $26.9 million gallium nitride contract with a potential value of $59.4 million if follow-on options are exercised.

"This is the leap ahead in technology, the building blocks for the next generation of radar," said Mark E. Russell, vice president of engineering for Raytheon's Integrated Defense Systems division.

Raytheon researchers think they can get 10 times as much power out of semiconductors designed with gallium nitride, or GaN, as they do from their current semiconductors based on gallium arsenide materials. The semiconductors powering radar, also known as RF transistors, operate on much higher microwave frequencies than the silicon-based semiconductors used in personal computers.

The advances anticipated from gallium nitride properties could enable the military operators of future Raytheon radar systems to track a target 78 percent farther in range with the same accuracy or, for a different mission, reduce the radar antennae size by half while more than doubling the area radar operators can search.

If all goes according to schedule, the first radar prototypes using gallium nitride semiconductors could be deployed by the end of the decade.

Gallium nitride, which is used in the light-emitting diodes in cellphones and other hand-held devices, is also likely to have significant commercial applications in the field of wireless communications.

Working with Raytheon on the Darpa project is Cree Inc., a Durham, N.C., company that grows the wafer substrates used for the gallium nitride semiconductors Raytheon is testing. Raytheon and Cree engineers are shuttling back and forth between their research sites in Andover and Durham in an effort to meet Darpa deadlines and outstrip Darpa-funded gallium nitride research efforts by two other teams that include a pair of Raytheon radar competitors, Northrop Grumman Corp. and Lockheed Martin Corp. While those efforts have different focuses, and are on different tracks, there is still a sense of competition.

"We certainly feel we're in the lead," said John W. Palmour, cofounder and executive vice president of the advanced devices division at Cree. "We're going to be able to move very fast. Raytheon wants to get gallium nitride inserted in radar very quickly and we want to get it inserted in the base stations of cell towers very quickly."

But the partners still have to overcome a number of technical challenges to improve the reliability of the materials and guarantee the availability of high-quality substrates for gallium nitride semiconductors.

Darpa's research chiefs have identified gallium nitride as a critical material for future military applications not only in radar, but also in air-to-ground, air-to-satellite, and ground-to-ground communications systems, said Mark J. Rosker, program manager in Darpa's microsystems technology office in Arlington, Va. The technology is also useful in electronic warfare that involves protecting signals and jamming enemy signals, Rosker added.

"It's an extremely important technology, and Darpa has recognized that," Rosker said. "It's not every day that you develop a new semiconductor material with this kind of capability. The implications of increasing power by this order of magnitude would be very dramatic."

While academic research in the field has been underway for more than a decade, the ability to add nitrogen to gallium and get a robust material for semiconductors has emerged only in the past five years, Rosker said. Phase one of the Darpa program began in 2002 with a series of grants to research materials. That was followed this spring by a round of phase two and phase three grants to Raytheon and Cree, and the other teams. The new research focuses more heavily on gallium nitride applications, such as devices and integrated circuits.

Researchers working on the Raytheon program, called Wide Bandgap Semiconductors for Radio Frequency, are cutting up wafers and putting the pieces into thousands of modules assembled in large phased arrays in the most high-tech radar systems. In addition to its investment in the Andover foundry, which now produces gallium arsenide semiconductors, Raytheon has spent tens of millions of dollars to match its Darpa funding in a bid to build more powerful radar systems at lower costs. If Raytheon can capitalize on the technology before its rivals do, it can use it as a "discriminator" in Pentagon competitions, Russell said.

Among defense contractors, Raytheon has sought to be a leader in research and development, said Paul Nisbet, aerospace analyst for JSA Research Inc. in Newport, R.I. "I think they've put more into it and gotten more out of it than other companies," Nisbet said. But he said Raytheon has been less successful in exploiting the commercial applications of its military-related research and development projects.

At the Lockheed Martin Radar Systems division in Syracuse, N.Y., researchers are teamed with TriQuint Semiconductor Inc. of Hillsboro, Ore., and BAE Systems of Nashua, N.H., to research gallium nitride semiconductor power amplifiers in radar as well as missile seeker electronics packages. "It's a discriminator for Raytheon if they can get there first, but that's why we're working hard on it," said Doug Reep, vice president for technical operations at the Lockheed Martin radar unit.

Northrop Grumman engineers, meanwhile, are researching higher frequencies for gallium nitride semiconductors at a fabrication plant in Manhattan Beach, Calif., and an electronics site in Baltimore.

"The aim of Darpa is to see how quickly we can make this technology reliable and high-performing," said Rosker.

[Dileep]

We can't get the friggin' MMR working properly, and you want to to GaN research!! Gimme a break!!

And I would like to know how much of the GaAs stuff we use right now is indigeneous. And let us assume I wave my magic wand and make GaN technology available. Can we use it effectively yet?

[JCage]

I think what Maitya is trying to get at is that we need to keep incubating the next gen thing in the labs and elsewhere, while we work at the current stuff..imho AESA has come as a boon to DRDO and allowed it to bypass relying on developing a massive base of high power TWTs alone for making high power radars. Re indigenous content, per literature, its local bar the usual COTS stuff.

You know whats hilarious- check the #, 26.9 Million is more DRDO is budgeting for all the labs. And US spends that for one tech. Sure, we get by cheaply etc, but more money would definitely not hurt...heck, its essential..

[JCage]

If coming out with 4 generations of AESA MMRs was not enough for the Yanks, while the rest of the world works on productionizing their units, they plan to have a GaN prototype running by the end of this decade...

[maitya]

We can't get the friggin' MMR working properly, and you want to to GaN research!! Gimme a break!!

Ok, Okaay ... understand ur frustration!!
Can I go a step beyond and say, we can't get even the PV-2 to drop empty drop-tanks - and all this talk about AESA etc etc ...

And I would like to know how much of the GaAs stuff we use right now is indigeneous?

Not sure ... but DRDO did establish GaAs foundry and later GAETEC (the Gallium Arsenide MMIC facility) at Hyderabad. So most of it should be indigenous, I think.

[Dileep]

think what Maitya is trying to get at is that we need to keep incubating the next gen thing in the labs and elsewhere, while we work at the current stuff

I would admit anywhere that we have a deficiency in dealing with original basic technologies. Having less resources and being miserly in dispensation could be one reason. Outside sources coming in and killing it off at the last moment could be another. Nevertheless, my considered opinion is that the research orgs in our country are paper factories and the purpose of them are to create employable people.

I would bet my @$$ that any GaN tech research wouldn't contribute when we would be using it. We would buy stuff first and then buy fab facilities. Then the guys at the fab (if motivated , or better, if NOT hindered) will become inovative and create new technologies from there.

Bottom line: You are getting meagre funding for radar development. DO NOT give even a paisa to the research orgs. Spend it on the engineers who create the actual stuff. You don't NEED GaN. You can make an AESA radar better than the APG-77 with the the available resources. Show me that, and I will grant you all you need on GaN.

You know what burns me? Reading up on the details on the L Band AESA system (as patented), I can't help but imagining what my (purvaashram) team could have done, under what budget and what timeframe

[JTull]

Has this been posted here before?

‘Indigenous’ aircraft needs foreign lift, for its radar

[karan]

Our development efforts are symbol of our attitudes about everything. A good majority of people in this nation want to get rich, instead of working on getting rich. Big difference there. Maybe someone else who is more deeply involved with "Sarkari Naukri" can shed light on prevailing work ethics. There is a joke making rounds at few places, Indian development efforts are akin to paki efforts in capturing Al-Keeda. Most Jingos are jaded by occasional "successful tests", "PV" to keep money rolling in. Some jingos say, Indian development is done on shoe string budget, while conveniently ignoring the fact that so called "highly skilled manpower" is available at cheap price also. Except few exceptions how many people involved with Indian defence projects actually believe in them. Do they believe they are making a contribution in the security of their nation, or keep their troops safe in combat? Whereas common theme in Big 5 defense constractors is their belief in their nations security and prosperity. There is nothing wrong if they are making money while doing it. DARPA is one of the most dedicated agency of US Govt, populated with very nationalistic, driven people. It is not an easy thing to get your foot in this door.

Name one agency or research insituition in whole of India, whose motto is "working for stronger and prosperous India". How long do we have to keep dumping money in a pit less hole withoug seeing any results.

Every Indian wants to become a Crorepati without putting the efforts of Lakhpati.

[JCage]

This is what I meant by discussion immaturity- one friggin Signal processor has interface issues with a unit designed by another organization, and we have such wails and chest beating and crying...of course, all the other umpteen radars that have been developed and productionized are to be immediately forgotten...sheesh...and at the same time we have others talk about transparency and more information and this and that...when there is little maturity in even discussing the information..the above rant was absolutely useless in terms of either accuracy or even contributing to the discussion.

Come on folks, cant you do better? Is this it? Tomorrow some news comes out about some frigging screw not fitting and then yet another rant about how everyone is a money !@$$%^% so and so?

Could someone look at it in context of the Signal processor being upgraded with newer COTS processors and being redesigned and wonder if thats a problem, or whether its the old 960 one thats being caught up?

Talk sense- it doesnt matter who HAL (and unfortunately Shiv Aroor is wrong, the radar is definitely a HAL project and they are project leaders) or DRDO choose to assist them- the key thing is to get the radar out of the door asap. I mean who the heck cares as to what it takes to get the system out as long as it is out, as long as people act more mature and discuss the facts behind the news and not come up with more about money making and this and that.

And I am yet to hear about the "other stuff" on the Indian Mil aviation thread, where we had a lot of flame & smoke but it all disappeared when asked for details.

---------------------------------------------------


And before we have another wail about SP's- we have designed & productionized SP's for the Rajendra, the Indra 1&2, CAR, LW series, BFSR...as well as made one (and tested it successfully) for the Hs 748 based AEW unit before the program was scrapped..

If the Signal processor is all thats holding up the MMR- it can be fixed. But they should import a few Kopyo-M's and kick off weaponization anyhow. Its not like we are broke nowadays and sanctioned by Thales, IAI, Phaza/NIIP etc..

[karan]

JCage

And before we have another wail about SP's- we have designed & productionized SP's for the Rajendra, the Indra 1&2, CAR, LW series, BFSR...as well as made one (and tested it successfully) for the Hs 748 based AEW unit before the program was scrapped..

Am I reading you right, we have produced something that works and then we scrap the program? I don't know what to say to that. I am so stunned, I have never seen anything like this in my entire life, where a project leader, nation or some agency will scrap a project or part of project that has worked, and was successful. If you are right then it is time to fire project leader. It is so obvious that project leader is incompetent and a complete loser.

[Dileep]

JC, it is a little bit fishy that it takes ages to get the modes right, given that the hardware part is more than matured. And changing processors don't do anything to the interfacing at all. Following is my speculative analysis.

After all these years, and all these test flights on the hack, we are sure that the basic tx, rx and scanning functions are established, and the article says two modes are established. I don't believe there is a problem in the interface. There are two things that can go wrong with it:

1. The beam definition is incorrect. This affects A2G modes heavily. Since it is a slotted array, it lies in the antenna design, not on processors.

2. The S/N ratio is inadequate. There are two sides of it. The RF side (diplexer, LNA etc) and the SAR side. From the mention of the "interface" I gather that the RF people are blaming the SAR people. I assume HAL is doing RF and DRDO, the SAR.

Unfortunately it is very difficult to determine whether it is a problem of beam definition or S/N ratio that gives you insufficient resolution. So, probably there would be blame game between the antenna guys and electronics guys as well.

Yes, they did all those radars, but they are in a different league than the MMR. IMO, the delay is unjustifiable. Did we have the right people doing the right things?

[JCage]

My take is that the Radar shouldnt have gone to HAL at all. It should have been with CABs or LRDE or BEL - who have been working with radars for ages. The LRDE has the SV-2000 out for airborne apps, currently in testing and its met the requirements (now its going on the Dorniers). Sure a MMR is on the higher end of the spectrum, but making a SP for airborne apps (compact) is not out of their abilities. So yes, I agree the report is fishy, especially given that the air to air modes were working sometime back, but then again, the signal processor could have been changed.

Karan,

You are not getting it & theres no point in laying it out either.

[Arun_S]

Dysfunctional monster arise when the Project Executive team forget that following 4 are closely linked and anytime one either breaks the link or considers them unconnected:
1. Responsibility (anything but small failure means removal from position)
2. Authority
3. Control (task/technical/project control that is properly audited by peers/outsiders)
4. Reward (and in some cases Punishment)

The above is true for all levels of pyramid of organization (including top beaurocrats in Raksha Mantralaya).

Unless failure translates to dismissal/censure and success translate to reward, DRDO and HAL will continue to flop.

Indian defense has the choice to run the ship in Russian style or in modern economics driven competitive management.

Pleading how low the Indian engineers/managers are paid when failures happen is not relavent.

[Dileep]

Arun, right on the head of the nail, and the whole six inches inside the plank!!!

Just a nitpick JC, changing signal processors do not affect the interface. I think it is the A2G modes that has problem. A2A is simpler to do, and they already have SAR designs doing that. Even tracking and weapon guiding libraries should be available that could be ported.

I think the system is found to be not sensitive and resolute enough, and the guys are blaming each other. My personal experience is that a lot of my time as a manager went into resolving blame games. Happens when you don't have a process oriented development methodology.

IMO, get some reasonably good radar and get the darned plane out of the door.

[JCage]

I was actually wondering whether the redesigned SP has an issue or the original one, if we'd remember, there was news of the entire RC/SP being combined into one unit. Plus reports of a redesign of the older SP using more modern components (and I'd wager the ASICs etc also were slated for change or redesign/ improvement). Of course, all this is partly WAG (wise @ss guesswork).

[Dileep]

The computers either work or don't work. So, if the DP can support one mode, it can support all others. It may end up re painting the SAR raster slower than expected, but that would be pretty much it. Normally processor systems are way overdesigned, and even if they aren't so, the problem would be glaringly obvious and rectified.

The weak link is the S/N ratio at the input of the ADC, which is NOT part of the processor system. That side is very easy to blame ach other, and unless the boss is a Guru who knows both sides, he will be helpless to resolve the blame game.

The time spent on this project is unforgiveably long. You can design a computer and ADC several times over during this time. And by my experience, "interface problem" is the classic indication of blame game.

[maitya]

JCage

And before we have another wail about SP's- we have designed & productionized SP's for the Rajendra, the Indra 1&2, CAR, LW series, BFSR...as well as made one (and tested it successfully) for the Hs 748 based AEW unit before the program was scrapped..

Am I reading you right, we have produced something that works and then we scrap the program? I don't know what to say to that. I am so stunned, I have never seen anything like this in my entire life, where a project leader, nation or some agency will scrap a project or part of project that has worked, and was successful. If you are right then it is time to fire project leader. It is so obvious that project leader is incompetent and a complete loser.

JC, lemme give it a shot!!
karan, where are you from - Mars or somewhere else?
You seem to know a lot about Indian defence R&D (also quite a lot about DARPA etc.) but are ignorant of the simple fact that the Indian AEW effort was scrapped after almost the entire team perished in the HS-748 prototype crash in late 90's.
What JCage is trying to say is that the SP for that AEW program was designed successfully and was being tested while this crash happened and the entire AEW program was scrapped!! No doubt this experience would have been percolatd to other Radar effort mentioned above.

Enough of a hint, and now try to do some searching and satisfy yourself ...

[maitya]

The S/N ratio is inadequate. There are two sides of it. The RF side (diplexer, LNA etc) and the SAR side. From the mention of the "interface" I gather that the RF people are blaming the SAR people. I assume HAL is doing RF and DRDO, the SAR.

Dileep didn't understand this issue of blame game ...
The "cumulative" S/N ratio for the RF side (the chief contrbutors, IIRC, are the Tranmitter, Duplxer and LNA etc.) should be pretty well known by now - after all they've got the A/A mode working, right?
Now if the SAR mode "cumulative" S/N ratio is unacceptably low then isn't it pretty straight forward to conclude that the PSP is contribution too much of a noise ... thus requiring a new design.
JMT, of course ...

JC - Now, we do have some experience with Airborne PSPs right? From the Vetrival project - wherein the LRDE first refused to design/develop the SP in the time frame provided (plus the non-availability of the specs from the NIIP folks also contributed) but, later (not sure where I read this - don't have a source), they did develop one for the Bars!!
If that's true, then I fail to understand why it's becoming so difficult to design one for MMR!!

[JCage]

From Pit at AFM:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpo ... ostcount=1

The Irbis seems to be one beast of a system. And we had all those reports of KS-172's with DRDO (which Prasun apparently ripped off). Kind of makes sense now, doesnt it?

[maitya]

From Pit at AFM:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpo ... ostcount=1

The Irbis seems to be one beast of a system.

He Hey ... from the above article ... It ensures max detection range of RCS 3m2 target at 350-400km and of 0.01 m2 RCS target at 90km.
Not sure why all this claim of "detection" is always quoted ... the tracking range is what anybody would be interested in ...

[JCage]

A rule of thumb- decrease it to 50% (min estimate) to 70%..
Thats the usual tracking range for most radars..