India's Air Defence Network


Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Aditya G » 07 Jul 2002 20:41

Ashish_Mishra : <I>Guys, I have a question . Say an IAF Su-30MKI has launched a BVRAAM at an approaching Puki fighter (say) an F-7 .How exactly can the F-7 evade the missile ? </I>

By ejecting! :D

Vikram Rathore
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 42
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Vikram Rathore » 07 Jul 2002 21:56

One popular tactic is to force the launching fighter to break radar lock by performing what is known as the `beam' maneuver ie. the intended target in your case the F-7, moves perpendicular to the attacking plane- since the indicated speed on doppler radar would suddenly become zero ie. a zero rate of closure, the radar would break lock. This was used notably by Iraqi Mig-25s against US F-15s in the Gulf War.

Option two is to use chaff.

Option 3 is opf course to try and outmaneuver the missile- not as tough as it seems esp if the missile is launched at extreme range and may have little fuel/motor power left to turn with an agile fighter.

BVRAAMs are hardly a sure shot- in combat the pK has ranged around 25% or so.....

Peeyoosh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: hong kong

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Peeyoosh » 07 Jul 2002 22:39

The beam manoiuver is not an integral hardware "hole" but a s/'w issue - once it was exploited future editions of the tracking s/w can be programmed to "not ignore" targets where the apparent speed drops to nil, after having registered an initial rate of closure. Doubt it still works!

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Aditya G » 08 Jul 2002 00:32

Is the 'beam' moneuver same as the 'Tailslide' in the Sukhoi? I thought it was exclusive to the flanker

Mohan Raju
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Mohan Raju » 08 Jul 2002 01:23

...since the indicated speed on doppler radar would suddenly become zero ie. a zero rate of closure, the radar would break lock.
This is not true, at least, not as a general rule. It may have happened one time or another, as a result of a software bug in a particular FCR, but in general, a target cannot pull these funny manoeuvers and hope to break lock of an FCR that has a bead on him. In any case, there is a limit to how quickly a plane can manoever in this manner, as the G forces required may kill or disable the pilot. The radial inbound component of target velocity, as seen by the FCR, can change at a certain rate, and no more. The FCR should be able to maintain lock.

Hostile jamming is the main reason that an FCR would lose lock on a target it is tracking. India should plan for (and I am sure has planned for) what to do if PAF equips its planes with self-screening jammers, or even broad-spectrum standoff jammers. These ECM techniques are of proven value in causing an FCR to break lock. Of course, the FCR itself has certain ECCM techniques it can use to try and maintain lock on the target in spite of jamming, and prosecute the engagement to completion (the original question here had to do with a hypothetical missile engagement in progress).

It's all a cat-and-mouse game between the two sides. If PAF employed standoff jamming platforms in any theatre, I'm sure those jammers would quickly become the object of "close attention" by the IAF. However, they (the jammers) may be sufficient to save a few PAF fighters in a few missions. Any PAF A/C flying nuclear-strike missions against India are almost guaranteed to have standoff jammers in support, I would think. Of course, this brings me into a potential clash with N^3 on the question of whether such missions could ever occur, given that TSP is "nook-nood", i.e. N^3 says that TSP is N^2 :) . I will avoid that debate, like the true coward that I am, and leave now. :D

vinod_raman
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 02 Feb 2002 12:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby vinod_raman » 08 Jul 2002 07:40

On 2nd August 1998, a U-2 spy aircraft of the U.S. Air Force flew 200 km into western India to spy on our sensitive nuclear test sites. The intruder was allowed to get away scot-free.

. "We could have shot him in the egress mode," said the officer. "But maybe we wanted to avoid a diplomatic issue

Sources in the Indian Air Force believe that the United States has been smarting under the flak its espionage agencies faced for having been unable to predict(and of course prevent) the Pokharan nuclear tests in May. Since then, aerial and space espionage activity over India is believed to have been stepped up.
Reading from the above article I have couple of questions for the Gurus in the knowhow in BR.

The officer talks about diplomatic issue. Does not any country have the right to bring down spy planes in peace time? Or was it that India did not want to psuh US anymore after the N tests?

How often are these flights taking place? Would not the recent stand off with paki, invited more such sorties from USA? If so wonder what is the reasoning behind the Govt's stand in not bringing down these birds. Just like the US-china incident over the spy plane, I wonder how often these birds come close to Indian coast and how often our pilots intercept them?

Thanks.

davidn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 82
Joined: 30 Jan 2001 12:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby davidn » 08 Jul 2002 10:47

obviously if a foreign aircraft is taken down intruding into india (and it is proven), india will be in the right, so far as the rest of the world is concerned.

BUT
you can hardly expect the US to just say 'damn! well i guess we're done spying for today, come on indian buddies lets go trade', because they wont exactly be happy campers. All sorts of things will get affected simply cause of the US's economic superpower status.

not to say that i think it should have been let go...

Vikram Rathore
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 42
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Vikram Rathore » 08 Jul 2002 11:09

Mohan,

The `beam' maneuver is not the result of a one time s/w bug- it has been praciced and used extensively by air forces around the world. Yes, it is not a simple maneuver, but pilots who have trained for it and know their planes well (eg. Iraqi MiG-25PD pilots) did it several times with success against opposition of the quality of US F-15s. Given the by and large earlier generation radars and lack of AWACS in the Indian subcontinent, I would not discount the role such maneuvers would play in combat.

Aditya Vikram
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 01 Oct 1999 11:31
Location: Chennai,Tamil nadu,India
Contact:

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Aditya Vikram » 08 Jul 2002 17:58

hey guys a stupid question but nonetheless I will ask it!

How good are RWR's say if hypothetically India gets R-77M1 missiles and an SU-30MKI is locking on to F-7PG 120k's away will the RWR's of the F-7 go ringing,I mean how good are PAF RWR's and how far away should the enemy aircraft be when it is locking for your RWR's to go off ringing.

Harry
BRFite
Posts: 365
Joined: 20 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Harry » 08 Jul 2002 18:12

I remember reading somewhere that the mig fired first a russian missile which missed and thereafter followed it with a french missile which hit the atlantique.
There's nothing to remember.You should learn to dismiss such crap at first sight.IIRC,some pea brain who wanted to praise the quality of Israeli weapons that India is getting,over the russian ones,happily fabricated some story about the Mig-21 first firing an "R-73" which missed and then following it up with an (comparitively crap)Magic-II which "scored",on some news website.Such is the quality of suicidal reporting in India!The Atlantique was downed by one single R-60.(and yes,those props do produce lovely heat signatures).

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Rangudu » 08 Jul 2002 20:45

Originally posted by Vikram Rathore:
BVRAAMs are hardly a sure shot- in combat the pK has ranged around 25% or so.....
Interestingly, in the Gulf War, AIM-7 Sparrow had a 28% kill percentage while the AIM-9s had 13% pK.

Tom Cooper
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 29 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Vienna
Contact:

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Tom Cooper » 08 Jul 2002 21:04

Ashish,
that with evasion of BVRAAMs is not that complicated, for several reasons: the most important is to move outside the scan volume of the radar carried by the aircraft which is launching the BVRAAM (which is pretty narrow when guiding SARHAAMs, or supplying the MCG-correction for ARHAAMs), or - if that was impossible - outside the "no-escape zone" of the ARHAAM, which is again not that problematic (foremost because the scan volume of active seeker heads even on most modern ARHAAMs is very narrow).

For better understanding of some basic principles, please, check the following thread of the ACIG.org forum (and excuse me for being too lazy to post the same stuff here again): http://www.acig.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=513&forum=5&start=0

Oh, yes: and, while looking the drawings there, please bear in mind, that the only AAM with lofting trajectory like on that drawing in service so far was the AIM-54. The AIM-120 is currently being modified to fly that way, and - AFAIK - the R-77 might get this capability sometimes.

The matter is, that without lofting trajectory, BVRAAMs are much shorter-ranged than usually claimed.

Vikram,
there are two kinds of "beam" maneuver (or the "beamer"): one is that which you described, and which functions against most of the PD radars in use during the 1970s and 1980s.

The other is slightly more sophisticated, and can be used only at shorter ranges (within less than 10kms on average) against fighters equipped with radars which work in the vertical scan mode as a "dogfighting mode". Such scan has also a very narrow (but high) beam, so any hard turns of the target to the side will break the lock on too.

Another method is sometimes called "burn trough": i.e. the target aircraft, upon detecting the attack by SARH missile, can - if it has such capability - accelerate rapidly and pass by the attacker at high speed. That works especially when the SARHAAM was launched from a shorter range at a nearing target: the envelope of most such missiles narrows very rapidly in such case (example: the clash between two SAAF Mirage F.1AZs and two Cuban-flown Angolan MiG-23s, in September 1987; the R-27 zapped by the target, and exploded behind it, causing only some damage).

In general, the beamer is good if one wants to - after evading - start an own offensive maneuver. Burning trough is at best use by fighter-bombers which want to outrun some enemy which intercepted them, and this maneuver is not over after the merge: subsequently, the targeted aircraft needs to go for the deck and run away at highest possible speed. That creates huge problems especially for PD-radars which function only in the high-PRF mode, or outruns radars functioning in the medium- or low-PRF modes.

One can find more to this topic here:
http://www.acig.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=93&forum=2&8

- and more about the BVR-air combat tactics here:
http://www.acig.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=94&forum=2&1

Chaff and jamming will, of course, always help while doing this all, but are by far no guarantee for anybody's safety: together with hard maneuvering, they are last-ditch measures against missiles which are already approaching.

Regards,
Tom

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby JCage » 08 Jul 2002 21:20

Tom,
A post for you on the other thread reposted here.

---------------------------------
Tom said:
They can trigger the response even if the transponder is on passive (i.e. if it needs a "wake-up call" to respond).
Let me be clearer.
If the transponder *only* responds to an interrogator which supplies the proper authority/codes ,what then?

Net,no reply to an unknown interrogation(which then brings us to peeyoosh's point that security is the determiner of whether the codes are known or not---unless the pakis come up with an airborne decrypter/code generator).... then how does the "unknown transponder" show up on a detection screen if it never responded in the first place? Fascinating stuff,this.

Now,

http://www.acig.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=179&forum=6&start=54

The PAF chief is just saying pakistan has started producing/making IFF systems.Thats all.We've been making our own ones for some time now.Details of the types are in the link.
The LCA one is of course a superior one compared to the 405A mentioned in the thread below.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=000017

Regards,
Nitin

Tom Cooper
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 29 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Vienna
Contact:

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Tom Cooper » 08 Jul 2002 21:37

Originally posted by nitin:
[QB]Tom,
A post for you on the other thread reposted here.

---------------------------------
Tom said:
They can trigger the response even if the transponder is on passive (i.e. if it needs a "wake-up call" to respond).
Let me be clearer.
If the transponder *only* responds to an interrogator which supplies the proper authority/codes ,what then?
Was just searching that one to respond, Nitin.

To be honest: I don't know. The matter of fact is, that the APX-xy series is either constantly upgraded with proper codes (less probable), or is capable of cracking such codes, or whatever else. They simply function, regardless if with SRO-2 or anything newer, that's what I know.

Net, no reply to an unknown interrogation (which then brings us to peeyoosh's point that security is the determiner of whether the codes are known or not---unless the pakis come up with an airborne decrypter/code generator).... then how does the "unknown transponder" show up on a detection screen if it never responded in the first place? Fascinating stuff, this.
It indeed is. I'm regularly hitting the wall with my head for not studying electro-technics or something of that sort, in order to understand these things better, and know how they function.

Now,

http://www.acig.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=179&forum=6&start=54

The PAF chief is just saying pakistan has started producing/making IFF systems.Thats all.We've been making our own ones for some time now.Details of the types are in the link.
That's right: but, apparently, the terminus "IFF-interrogator" is not an unknown in the PAF either. I'd say, that's at least a reason to be carefull.

Regards,
Tom

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby saint » 11 Jul 2002 03:25

Q: Is it possible to integrate satellite - GPS or Camera based locking on the target, with BVRs - say the satellite reflect the exact positions to the missile and in addition the BVRs may posses radars +/ camera + IR, etc. to support dynamic-locking [meaning should be able to differentiate actual target v/s dummies(chaff)]


Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1228
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Sumeet » 11 Jul 2002 06:25

hey guys
Here is an interesting article from the week on indian military tech advances.

http://www.the-week.com/21jul01/events3.htm

This reminds me of the following --

India developing satellite-based navigation system for planes
(Hindustan Times, 24 March 2002)

India is among a select group of nations which are developing their own satellite-based augmentation systems (SBAS) for communication, navigation and guidance of aircraft in their respective airspace and surrounding areas. A technology demonstrator for the Indian SBAS, called IGNOS, is being developed jointly by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and the Airports Authority of India (AAI) and the work on it had started in August last year, Director General Civil Aviation H.S. Khola said. The others developing similar systems are the United States (WAAS), European Union (AGNOS) and Japan (MSAS).

"The Indian project, which would incur an expenditure of Rs.80 crore, has a time-frame of 42 months and once proven, it will be upgraded for initial operational capabilities," Khola said, adding the total project cost for the upgraded and fully operational version would be Rs.450 crore. Pointing towards the inherent limitations of the existing ground-based navigation systems, he said these restricted the operation of aircraft which now have to compulsorily operate on point-to-point routes based on the availability of ground-based navigation aids. Therefore, the advent of satellite-based systems would not only provide safer and economical means of navigation but also enhance the capacity of air traffic systems.

Any comments from expert BR Gurus and members.

Vinay J
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 06 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Vinay J » 11 Jul 2002 08:51

The future belongs to 'Dreamers'!! India's scientists have put us on the map by bringing our dreams to fruition with the LCA, Arjun, IN ships, Prithvi, Agni, etc.

The more they dream the higher they will take us.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1228
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Sumeet » 11 Jul 2002 17:18

Hey guys

Lets discuss what IAF can accomplish in next 20-25 years. Well for significant change one has to see over a period of 20 years. After all acquring various types of technologies and getting aircrafts takes time. Moreover, if we want to look into the future of IAF we should keep in mind how much we will be able to become self sufficient. That is something any IAF well wisher should kep in mind. Believe me we can be world class air-force by 2025.

I) COMBAT AIRCRAFTS -

1) SU30MKI ------------ 190
[ We can improve on the avionics of this aircraft as time passes, so that it can undoubtedly equal any western aircraft avionics. Also, if our budget allows we can produce about 50-100 more.]

2) LCA ------------------ 220
[ Here also avionics can be updated. And more can be produced.]

Note: Guys I have suggested upgradation of Su and LCA just as USA is upgrading its current F-16 and F-18 while it is also acquring F-22 and JSF. In the same way we can upgrade Su-30MKI and LCA as time passes by and also induct modern aircraft like MCA and the 5th Generation Fighter that Indo-Russia collaboration will produce. Money for all this will come provided our economy keeps booming and through marketing products like ALH, Brahmos, Lakshya PTA, LCA, 5th Gen. aircraft [Indo-Russia] to friendly countries.

3) Mirage 2000 ----------- 50
[Later to be replaced by MCA or 5th Gen. Fighter]

4) Jaguar ------------ 100
[Later to be replaced by MCA or 5th Gen. Fighter. Also, Jaguar are currently being upgraded or are being planned to be upgraded.]

5) Mig21-93 ----------- ??[I don't know]
[However, all of these will be replaced by LCA.]

6) Mig27[Ugd] --------------- 140
[Source - ]www.bharat-rakshak.com/MO...rupak.html]

7) Mig25 ---------------- 8
[Either it should be upgraded indigenously or it should be replaced by some other aircraft possibly Mig31 if it serves the same purpose.]

8) Mig29 SMT ------------ 70

9) MCA ----------- ??
[ If India has already acquired adequate technology for 3.5/4th Gen. aircraft by making LCA. Moreover technologies like TVC, Thrust Vectoring, Stealth and others can be mastered as India produces 5th Gen. aircraft in collaboration with Russia. Moreover with TOT for SU30MKI and Sukhoi winning the tender for 5th Gen aircraft india should have sufficient knowledge of all technologies incorporated in SU30MKI and the 5th gen. aircraft with which it can launch its own MCA easily.]

10) 5th Gen. Fighter aircraft. ------- ??

11) Lakshya Pilotless Target Plane ---- ??

12) Nishant UAV ------- ??

I think IAF is planning to acquire both quality and quantity with this kind of future plan.

II) TRANSPORT AIRCRAFTS

1) Ilyushin-Beriev IL-76MD Candid ------ 28

2) Antonov An-32 Cline ----------- 80

3) Dornier Do-228-101 ---------- 41

4) HAL Hs.748M Avro ----------- 32

5) In-flight refueling systems ----- 6
" Defence Minister Jaswant Singh, in a written reply to Parliament in July 2001, said the IAF is acquiring six IL-78/78M in-flight refueling aircraft from Uzbekistan. The price negotiation committee completed its work in February 2001 and the contracts were signed in April 2001. The delivery of the first aircraft is expected in May 2002 followed by one aircraft every six weeks. The price per aircraft has been put at approximately $50 million. "

6) IL-214T Multirole Transport Aircraft.
[www.bharat-rakshak.com/IA...t/MTA.html]

III) TRAINER AIRCRAFT

1) HJT-36 ------------- 150-200
[www.bharat-rakshak.com/IA...JT-36.html]

2) Hawk AJTs ----------- 66

IV) HELICOPTER SPECIFICATIONS

1) Mil Mi-8 -------------- 100
[Being replaced by Mi-17]

2) Mil Mi-17 -------------- 80

3) Mil Mi-25 --------- 20
Mil Mi-35 --------- 40

4) Mil Mi-26 ----------- 10

5) Cheetah ----------- 20
[ Pushpinder Singh Chopra, in a June 2001 AW&ST issue, said a Light Observation Helicopter (LOH) program will replace the Cheetahs that HAL has built for the army and air force. Source BR.]

6) Chetak ------------- 20
[ The HAL Chetak is scheduled to be replaced by HAL's Advanced Light Helicopter ]

V) FORCE MULTIPLIERS

1) Phalcon AWACS ---------- 3
2) Aerostat radars ------- ??

One should not only have a picture of Aircrafts in mind but should also concenterate on missiles that they will carry.

VI) MISSILE ARMOURY

1) Air to Air Missiles
Matra Magic-II
Matra Super 530D
R-23R
R-23T
R-60MK / AA-8 Aphid-C
R-27RE1 / AA-10 Alamo-C
R-27TE1 / AA-10 Alamo-D
R-73RDM2 / AA-11 Archer
R-77RVV-AE / AA-12 Adder
Phython 4
Astra
Brahmos Air Variant

2) Air-to-Surface Missiles
AS-30L
(laser guided)
Matra ARMAT
(anti-radar)
BAe Sea Eagle
(anti-ship)
AM-39 Exocet
(anti-ship)
Max. Range
Kh-25MP
(anti-radar) / AS-12 Kegler
Kh-29L
(laser-guided) / AS-14c Kedge
Kh-29T
(TV-Guided) / AS-14b Kedge
Kh-31A2
(anti-ship) / AS-17 Krypton
Kh-31P2
(anti-radar) / AS-17 Krypton
Kh-59
(anti-radar) / AS-13 Kingbolt
Kh-59M
(anti-ship) / AS-18 Kazoo
3K11 Falanga
(anti-tank) / AT-2C Swatter
9K114 Shturm
(anti-tank) / AT-6 Spiral
9M120 Vikhr-V
(anti-tank) / AT-16
AS-11B
(anti-tank)
Brahmos
(ASSCM)

V) AIR DEFENCE

1) Arrow2 ATBM
2) S-300PMU-1
3) Akash

VI) UPCOMING TECHNOLOGIES

India developing satellite-based navigation system for planes
(Hindustan Times, 24 March 2002)

India is among a select group of nations which are developing their own satellite-based augmentation systems (SBAS) for communication, navigation and guidance of aircraft in their respective airspace and surrounding areas. A technology demonstrator for the Indian SBAS, called IGNOS, is being developed jointly by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and the Airports Authority of India (AAI) and the work on it had started in August last year, Director General Civil Aviation H.S. Khola said. The others developing similar systems are the United States (WAAS), European Union (AGNOS) and Japan (MSAS).

"The Indian project, which would incur an expenditure of Rs.80 crore, has a time-frame of 42 months and once proven, it will be upgraded for initial operational capabilities," Khola said, adding the total project cost for the upgraded and fully operational version would be Rs.450 crore. Pointing towards the inherent limitations of the existing ground-based navigation systems, he said these restricted the operation of aircraft which now have to compulsorily operate on point-to-point routes based on the availability of ground-based navigation aids. Therefore, the advent of satellite-based systems would not only provide safer and economical means of navigation but also enhance the capacity of air traffic systems.

Same is also confirmed -
India to have space-based air navigation by 2007
(Hindustan Times, 29 April 2002)

ADA unveils plans for stealth aircraft
(Deccan Herald, 30 April 2002)

Following its success with the design & development of the indigenously-built Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) is seriously considering the development of even more mean-machine - the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA). The MCA, which will be a natural progression to the LCA and whose prime design driver would be stealth, will be the fifth-generation deep penetration strike aircraft, boasting several more advanced features from the LCA, ADA Project Director (LCA), Kota Harinarayana said. According to Harinarayana, the ADA is currently holding discussions with the Indian Air Force (IAF) on the basic requirement contours that should go into designing and developing the MCA. Presenting his paper on the successor to the LCA at the SIATI seminar on 'Future Aircraft and Systems' he said the development of MCA as the successor to the fourth-generation multi-role LCA, was expected to take around 15 to 20 years span.

Observing that the country was open for joint co-production of the aircraft that is being designed to replace the present Jaguar and Mirage 2000 aircraft of IAF, Harinarayana said the MCA would use technology and expertise that has been gained from developing the LCA by ADA. The single seat twin-engine MCA, would be powered by indigenous Kaveri engine and use smart structures and antenna, integrated modular avionics, tail-less technology and an active lomar flow control, designed for long range offensive operations, he pointed out. Apart from having a weapon carrying capacity of 1000 kg laser guided missiles, medium range missiles, close combat missile, the MCA would have a serpentine fuel tank, to carry additional fuel in its body, he disclosed. The MCA's advanced integrated avionics would be based on shared processing architecture and reduce number of computers to two or three, while LCA has nearly 28 computers on board. The development of the fifth generation aircraft has become imperative in the wake of US developing the F-22 and JSF besides British Aerospace, the French and other defence aircraft majors in Europe also engaged in similar missions. "We will not repeat the mistake what we did after HF-24 and we will not lag behind in technology," he averred.

To me it seems that this plan will materialize over the next 25 years to give us a world class Air Force.

What do u guys think ?

Regards
Sumeet.

George J

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby George J » 11 Jul 2002 21:26

A desi friend of mine did something of this sort for her (yeah a her) Ph.D project in one of the US univs. Dont really know what she did but it involved similar funda about cameras tracking eye movements on a screen.......it was pretty geeky and the only think i remember is her screaming at me for eating 'sonpapdi' over her keyboard. And she have one of them VR gloves too. Pretty cool.....though i preferred the sonpapdi.

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby saint » 11 Jul 2002 22:22

George, I have my Canon EOS camera that focuses on objects based on where my eye looks/focuses. Its marvelous. 've been using it for the past 4 years.

In the case of targeting missiles, wonder how the eye controls translates the distance on the focused target when they are very far [infinity!] - I guess i am dumb, since if it is beyond visual range, then it can never be used. If it is in visual range, then what is the visual range????

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby Rangudu » 14 Jul 2002 07:41

India taking keen interest in Russian Air Defence System

India is showing keen interest in the sophisticated Russian air defence missile system BUK-M1, sources told PTI on the sidelines of a key arms exhibition here.

An eight-member Indian military delegation at the just concluded Russian Expo Arms-2002 here in the middle-range of Ural mountains dividing Asia and Europe was led by the Director of Army Air Defence Lt General Naresh Chand, sources said.

The BUK-M1 surface-to-air medium-range missile system is designed to engage state-of-the art and perspective strategic and theatre-range aircraft, operation in intensive clutter and jamming environment, and to fight against LANCE-type theatre ballistic missiles, HARM anti-radar missiles, other high precision elements of air- and land-based weapons, and to engage surface- and land-based radar targets, Russian military experts say.

Talking to PTI in Nizhny Tagil, Indian military sources declined to confirm the report, however, they added that New Delhi would be interested in filling the void in air defence to complement indigenous programmes like Akash.


George J

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby George J » 15 Jul 2002 21:57

Originally posted by Sai_NT:
George, I have my Canon EOS camera that focuses on objects based on where my eye looks/focuses. Its marvelous. 've been using it for the past 4 years.
Yeah i was eating 'sonpapdi' alright....but trust me what she did is waaaaaaaay beyond what an Japanese camera does. Its mind boggling, it works...and i dont really know if i can tell you more on a public forum without first consulting her, so till then i can only tell you about the sonpapdi and it was good.

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: India's Air Defence Network

Postby saint » 15 Jul 2002 22:26

George, I understand your sonpapdi imbroglio.. also being in that, there are things we can discuss like something beyond current capabilities - er.. Advantages of Neutrino Communication .. of course that would be clear stealth!!! ;)


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests