MRCA News and Discussion

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 21 Oct 2009 20:38

Interesting information from "AIR FORCE Magazine / October 2009"

The defnition of fghter generations has long been subject to debate. How-ever, most agree that the generations break down along these broad lines:

Generation 1: Jet propulsion (F-80, German Me 262).
Generation 2: Swept wings; range-only radar; infrared missiles (F-86, MiG-15).
Generation 3: Supersonic speed; pulse radar; able to shoot at targets beyond visual range (“Century Series” fghters such as F-105; F-4; MiG-17; MiG-21).
Generation 4: Pulse-doppler radar; high maneuverability; look-down, shoot-down missiles (F-15, F-16, Mirage 2000, MiG-29).
Generation 4+: High agility; sensor fusion; reduced signatures (Eurofghter Typhoon, Su-30, advanced versions of F-16 and F/A-18, Rafale).
Generation 4++: Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or some “active” (waveform canceling) stealth; some supercruise (Su-35, F-15SE).
Generation 5: All-aspect stealth with internal weapons, extreme agility, ull-sensor fusion, integrated avionics, some or full supercruise (F-22, F-35).
Potential Generation 6: extreme stealth; efficient in all flight regimes subsonic to multi-Mach); possible “morphing” capability; smart skins; highly networked; extremely sensitive sensors; optionally manned; directed energy weapons.

Does guru log agree with this PoV?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Oct 2009 20:52

what is left for gen 7? these numbers don't match to each generation. my generation can be different from yours!? imho.. it could be different. for example pak-fa.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 21 Oct 2009 21:00

SaiK wrote:what is left for gen 7?

Can we first decide to buy and develop 4th gen planes?

SaiK wrote:my generation can be different from yours!?

I can see and guess ... it is for sure

SaiK wrote:it could be different. for example pak-fa.

I assume, they were checking major existing planes. The one you are mentioning is under development. BTW, I have highlighted the ones, which are interesting and relative to this thread.

If this information is correct, this makes things more ugly.
Should we buy a product which is less capable and still expensive to avoid putting all eggs in one basket? Then our IAF is going to be fully Russian dependent. As M2000 upgrades are up in the air. Making a decision difficult... indeed.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Oct 2009 21:19

you can definetly be sure, cause the gen 4 itself is 4, 4+, 4++..

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 21 Oct 2009 21:44

So in which gen the propeller driven fighter a/c is accomodated

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Oct 2009 21:49

I think IAF might be interested in additional M2Ks from spares pov ; if Dassault is playing hard ball for the M2K MLU then buying say 10/20 relatively new airframes from UAE is not a bad idea . Given the dwindling number of aircraft and progress on MRCA front this might be a stop gap solution.All in all everything depends on the eagerness with which MoD and IAF pursue this MRCA tender.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 21 Oct 2009 22:01

Kanson wrote:So in which gen the propeller driven fighter a/c is accomodated

I missed the point, what it has to do with MRCA? Anyway, let me guess ... 20th centure 7th gen fighter

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 21 Oct 2009 22:03

No pictures of the MiG-35 flying over Bangalore like the ones that we've seen on BRF of the Super Hornet, F-16 IN and the Rafale ?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Oct 2009 22:16

we only head about its landings here.. did it take off yet? at least it has to fly back, no? /kidding. i am eager to see the pics, especially close ups into cock pits/live.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 21 Oct 2009 22:27

Did anyone see Shankarosky??

Heard he is part of the Mig 35 supply chain and was on hand to provide any help

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Oct 2009 22:28

hey, no flaming shankarosky !

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 21 Oct 2009 22:37

Oops

Ok - will do it in person next time I meet him.

But honestly I half expect him to receive the Mig 35 team.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Oct 2009 22:42

+1/2 expectation to that. ^^

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Oct 2009 23:29

Don't know about Shankarosky but I am willing to bend over backwards full circle to receive Mig-35 team.

rahul_h · Post by **rahul_h** » 22 Oct 2009 00:13

RKumar wrote:Interesting information from "AIR FORCE Magazine / October 2009"

The defnition of fghter generations has long been subject to debate. How-ever, most agree that the generations break down along these broad lines:

Generation 1: Jet propulsion (F-80, German Me 262).
Generation 2: Swept wings; range-only radar; infrared missiles (F-86, MiG-15).
Generation 3: Supersonic speed; pulse radar; able to shoot at targets beyond visual range (“Century Series” fghters such as F-105; F-4; MiG-17; MiG-21).
Generation 4: Pulse-doppler radar; high maneuverability; look-down, shoot-down missiles (F-15, F-16, Mirage 2000, MiG-29).
Generation 4+: High agility; sensor fusion; reduced signatures (Eurofghter Typhoon, Su-30, advanced versions of F-16 and F/A-18, Rafale).
Generation 4++: Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or some “active” (waveform canceling) stealth; some supercruise (Su-35, F-15SE).
Generation 5: All-aspect stealth with internal weapons, extreme agility, ull-sensor fusion, integrated avionics, some or full supercruise (F-22, F-35).
Potential Generation 6: extreme stealth; efficient in all flight regimes subsonic to multi-Mach); possible “morphing” capability; smart skins; highly networked; extremely sensitive sensors; optionally manned; directed energy weapons.
Does guru log agree with this PoV?

But i think the most important features of a Potential Generation 6 Fighter could be:

Tat is one more dimension could be added in Air combat i.e. Space or high altitude with speeds matching Missiles(Mach 5+) ability to destroy Space stations , satellites etc. featuring Ramjet technologies

Also, Laser weapons much like in Star wars....... with Hyper manuevarabilty

Experts suggestions and comments Welcome!

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 22 Oct 2009 00:35

news related to the Typhoon. its too late for the MRCA anyway, but still is of great interest and may be of more interest when looked at from the EJ200 for the Tejas point of view (although anything that increases the cost of the EJ200 may not be a good idea, considering just how expensive it is)

Think about thrust vectoring and the image that probably springs to mind is that of an experimental fighter wowing the crowds at an air show, as the pilot pulls off seemingly impossible post-stall manoeuvres in an imaginary dogfight.

This is a pre-conception that Eurofighter Typhoon engine supplier Eurojet is attempting to dispel as it prepares to begin briefing the aircraft's current and prospective customer nations on the real-world benefits it envisages the technology could deliver to their air forces. The message is that thrust vectoring is about more than just agility.

Having demonstrated the mechanics of the concept in extensive benchtests, the engine consortium is trying to secure funds to fly its thrust vectoring nozzle (TVN) on a flight demonstrator. This, it believes, would provide data to back up its claims that TVN could reduce fuel burn on a typical Typhoon mission by up to 5%, as well as increase available thrust in supercruise by up to 7% and take-off thrust by 2%.

"Previously thrust vectoring has always been about things that will make the pilot smile," says Eurojet technical director Matt Price. "That's fantastic, but certainly in this application it's a pretty agile aircraft to begin with. While thrust vectoring still offers operational advantages, we have to look at lifecycle costs as well. The business that we're in is that we have to hit both those things together."

INTEGRATION

The proposal is to integrate a thrust vectoring capability with the twin-engined Typhoon's digital flight-control system so that it effectively functions as an additional control surface.

Eurojet partner ITP of Spain is responsible for the design of the EJ200's TVN, and has attempted to optimise the device for simplicity of operation while adding as little weight as possible (about 40kg/88lb per engine). The TVN is capable of varying the throat and exit areas independently and has a "fail-safe" mode, meaning that in the event of a loss of hydraulic pressure the nozzle closes to a position that enables the engine to deliver full dry thrust if required.

"Recognising that the convergent-divergent nozzle was one of the key competencies ITP started with, it was a very natural thing for them to look into how they could advance - from a technology point of view - their main part of the EJ200," says Price.

"Actually, relative to the existing actuation system, the design in today's nozzle lends itself quite well to not really needing huge changes to get to a thrust vectoring nozzle," he adds. "ITP I think came up with a very good solution on today's engine which means, for example, we don't need to add any more actuators to go into a thrust vectoring nozzle."

Salvador Costa Krämer, Eurofighter product manager for Tranche 3 production, Meteor integration and new business, says thrust vectoring would bring improvements to the capabilities of the Typhoon as an air-to-surface weapons delivery platform.

"There was a very clear [supersonic interceptor] mission for which the aircraft was designed, and these capabilities are already delivered to the customer," he says. "Now we are facing a different ball game, which is to adapt this weapon system platform to a number of new, different roles."

HIGH SPEED

Costa Krämer says that in terms of thrust vectoring, "most operationally significant is the speed that it gives you in supercruise, because obviously the pilots are very keen on low observability at high speed. This is really an immediate operational advantage. This number - 7% more thrust in supercruise - is quite a remarkable achievement."

The Typhoon is designed to provide the pilot with "care free" engine handling to reduce workload, and this would not change with the introduction of thrust vectoring, says Eurojet engineering director Wolfgang Sterr. The TVN has several degrees of freedom, enabling it to deliver control forces in pitch and yaw, while optimising the throat ("A8") and exit ("A9") areas to suit flight conditions, for example in supersonic cruise where a divergent configuration is required to accelerate the gas flow for increased thrust.

"It is not possible [to do this] for the existing nozzle, which has a fixed schedule between A8 and A9, optimised for certain conditions only," says Sterr. "With the TVN you can reduce the fuel burn and life cycle costs as well, in certain parts of the envelope," he adds.

In the standard EJ200 a cam controls how the throat and exit areas are adjusted relative to each other, but in the TVN the exit can be ovalised and therefore varied independently from the throat, using the same actuators that are required to redirect the thrust. "You get this flexibility almost for free," says Sterr.

The result is better propulsive efficiency, which in turn could reduce fuel burn on a typical mission by "round about 3-5%".

Price adds: "At a given thrust, the engine ends up working less hard, the temperatures go down, and life goes up. That's a really strong life-cycle cost driver. We're very focused on lifecycle cost advantages and aerobatic/aerodynamic effects too. Both are attractive for future customers.

"The neat thing from a gas turbine point of view is that the rest of the engine doesn't see [the thrust vectoring] - you get it for free. It's just the nozzle. The rest of the engine isn't working any harder."

The "balanced beam" design of the TVN enables weight to be minimised as there are "forces working against each other so the actuator forces are quite low", says Sterr.

Benchtesting of the TVN began in the late-1990s and was used to demonstrate more extreme degrees of vectoring than are envisaged for the Typhoon.

"This gives us a lot of confidence that the production variant that we might consider is low-risk," says Price.

Changes to the EJ200 required for thrust vectoring are limited to the introduction of additional software into the digital engine control and monitoring unit (DECMU) and a high-power hydraulic pump for the actuation system.

"Actuator demand is coming from the aircraft flight-control system, and the actuator control is within the DECMU, so obviously there must be an interface," says Robert Osterhuber, EADS Military Air Systems head of flight control and the Eurofighter partner company's project leader for Typhoon thrust vectoring. "This interface is already there, but it needs to be extended," he says.

REDUNDANCY

Osterhuber points out that an extra control surface means additional redundancy in the event of the aircraft sustaining damage during combat. For example, the Typhoon has two pitch effectors (its canards and the wing trailing edge), but the TVNs provide a third.

"If you lose one [pitch effector], you have two surfaces left to take over the required moment," he says. This function would be integrated with the flight-control system and therefore fully automated.

A further safety boost would be increased controllability at low speeds such as during the landing approach, particularly during gust conditions. This improved handling would also enhance the ability of the Typhoon to "bring back" asymmetric weapons loads, or even take-off with a single stand-off weapon such as the MBDA Storm Shadow.

Thrust vectoring could in addition be used to reduce approach speed, opening the door to a potential naval version of the Typhoon, which has attracted the attention of at least one potential export customer, according to Costa Krämer.

A spin-off of using the TVN as a control surface is that thrust vectoring can be used to trim the aircraft and "unload" the flight- control surfaces, thereby reducing drag and/or increasing lift. The conventional control surfaces are meanwhile "liberated" from their role as trim devices and can be used to enhance manoeuvrability.

In supersonic flight, even small flap deflections can cause large amounts of drag.

"If you have thrust vectoring, you can put your aerodynamic surfaces in the best position to give optimum lift and drag, because you do not need to trim the aircraft with aerodynamic surfaces," says Osterhuber.

TRIM-DRAG REDUCTION

The TVN's ability to enable the engine to produce thrust more efficiently, coupled with the trim-drag reduction, results in a "double win", says Eurojet's Price.

He says the software control laws for the TVN are "relatively simple on our side, and we've worked with Robert and his team at EADS to understand how they would work together from a control logic point of view".

EADS has system design responsibility for the Typhoon's flight-control system, while Alenia is responsible for engine integration.

The capability of the TVN would be constrained to avoid the need for structural changes to the airframe or engine, allowing it to be retrofitted to current-standard EJ200s in a "theoretically simple" way, says Price. The engines fitted to Tranche 1 Typhoons would however require a new DECMU.

Thrust vectoring could bring a range of additional benefits to the Typhoon depending on the flight regime. Below around 300kt (555km/h), where the aircraft's flight-control surfaces have limited effect due to low aerodynamic pressure, it can provide enhanced manoeuvrability. At higher speeds, the ability to modify the size and shape of the engine nozzles brings an increase in net thrust.

"There are benefits all over the place," says Eurojet's Sterr. "You can reduce your take-off distances considerably because you are able to rotate the aircraft much earlier with thrust vectoring to generate the lift. You can't generate a moment without thrust vectoring to rotate earlier."

With theoretical studies and benchtests of the TVN completed, Eurojet hopes to get a two-phase flight-test programme under way. Ideally, phase one would involve equipping a twin-engined fighter such as the Typhoon with a single TVN - not integrated with the flight-control system - to validate Eurojet's computer models. The second phase would involve both engines being equipped with TVNs, and full integration with the flight-control system.

Meanwhile, EADS has equipped its Typhoon flight simulator at Manching to mimic the effects of thrust vectoring so that pilots can evaluate the potential benefits.

"We have developed flight-control laws and we have got a modified engine model," says Osterhuber. "We put these together, and we can evaluate now if pilots like it in combat scenarios."

In addition to providing "something tangible for the customer", Price says there are two elements to the simulator project. "First of all it's validating that everything works as expected in terms of the total flight-control system. We can fly missions and see what it does in terms of fuel burn, simulate what the engine is doing and validate the numbers in terms of life-cycle cost saving."

ASTONISHED PILOTS

But, he adds, "the pilot also sees how the aircraft flies with the thrust vectoring system. Some of the pilots have been quite astonished at what the aircraft can do."

Osterhuber says that some pilots have described their experiences in the simulator as "eye watering", adding: "We are nearly at the end of a feasibility study. We are now ready to take our concepts and show potential performance improvements."

Eurojet is putting together financial data with the aim of demonstrating that adoption of thrust vectoring by Eurofighter customer nations would quickly pay for itself.

"We know the benefit is there," says Price. "In terms of route to market we need to be able to quantify that and present it in the right way to the customer.

"The benefits should be able to stand on their own, even if it's a retrofit programme."

Funding to support a flight-test effort would need to come from one or more of the core nations or export customers, and/or industry.

If thrust vectoring is introduced on the Typhoon, it is likely to be part of a wider package of improvements, such as the integration of stand-off weapons or potentially the heavier "E-Scan" active electronically scanned array radar.

"There is a very obvious synergy [with the E-Scan radar] in introducing this little extra weight [for the TVN] in the rear, as then you don't need to redesign your control laws for a new centre of gravity," says Costa Krämer.

It is clear that customers will not pay for thrust-vectoring simply to enable their Typhoons to pull post-stall air show stunts, but with so many other potential benefits available, Eurojet wants to deliver the message to the customer nations in the right way.

"There's a prejudice that we have to break, and we have to make sure we do that in a robust way, and time it both in terms of the market that's out there, and in terms of the information that we can bring," says Price.

article link

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 22 Oct 2009 01:12

India takes Hard Look at U.S. Defense Technology

India takes Hard Look at U.S. Defense Technology
By Saurav Jha
Published : October 20, 2009

U.S. defense contractors see India as a huge market for a number of Niche Products in which the United States is clearly a world leader. Moreover, they do not need to spend time underlining the fact that China already has access to a number of Russian developments, and buying the same may not therefore give India an edge.

On the other hand, the Western embargo on weapons sales to China since the Tiananmen Square crackdown of 1989 has ensured that China will not have anything comparable to the latest U.S. systems to which India is now being granted access, Barring Chinese Espionage of course.

The Indians, however, remain prudent in such matters. They will certainly not jeopardize their longstanding relationship with the Russians, now that both nations have extended their military-technical collaboration till 2021 and are currently engaged in over 200 joint development projects.

Nevertheless, India does require certain technologies from the United States to counter China’s expansionism. For example, both sides have deployed transport aircraft in their joint air force exercises. Included in the U.S. line-up are the C-17 Globemaster III and the C-130J Super Hercules transport aircraft. Interestingly, India has already ordered six of the latter and is seriously considering 10 of the former. Russia has aircraft in these classes, but does not have the U.S. equivalent operational capability.

Indians are also acutely aware that the United States is a world leader in sensors and electronic attack capability. In fact, one of the main reasons why India buys complete U.S. systems is because of this technology inside them, which is probably unmatched elsewhere and can give India an edge over the Chinese.

The deal for eight Boeing P-8I multi-mission maritime aircraft, crucial in antisubmarine warfare, and the earlier purchase of weapon-locating radars from the United States, underlines this fact.

The U.S. lead in defense electronics may also swing the Indian Air Force’s tender for the US$11 billion-plus multirole medium-range combat aircraft in their favor. The IAF has repeatedly said that the Avionics Suite of the Aircraft – which is seen in the Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, UAC’s Mig-35, SAAB Gripen, Lockheed Martin F-16 and the Boeing F-18 aircraft – will be a key determinant in the final selection.

To be considered favorably, the fighter’s nose radar should be active electronically scanned array, the IAF says. Not surprisingly, the United States is a world leader in this technology, and its F-16 and F-18 aircraft field the mature AESA technology.

While AESA technology would be a key consideration in the final selection of a fighter plane for India, the degree to which technology transfer is agreed upon will be just as important. The Indians have made it clear throughout the aircraft selection process that the best technology may not necessarily win unless it is ready to be transferred in its Entirety. This is where U.S. firms have a handicap.

In the past, the U.S. government has refused to share source code for radar even with close allies like the United Kingdom. However, with the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal in place and an End User Monitoring Agreement almost sown up, it seems that the United States could be willing to give up its old habits for the sake of the Indian market and the ensuing regional geopolitics.

The main thing the Indian military establishment remains wary of in engaging with the United States is the propensity of U.S. manufacturers to offer a system to India once an indigenous equivalent has crossed some significant milestones. To be fair, this is a tendency exhibited by other countries as well.

It is here that India’s leadership will be put to the test, as the country’s Defense Research and Development Organization becomes a significant innovator in its own right in years to come.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Oct 2009 01:20

didn't EADS own up/bought some russian institution [klimov/triknomov?] that has shares? why not just use Klimov TVC for EJ200s?

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 22 Oct 2009 04:21

The IAF has repeatedly said that the Avionics Suite of the Aircraft will be a key determinant in the final selection.

Well the SH, Eurofighter, and rafale have an advantage over everyone else.

Generation 4++: Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or some “active” (waveform canceling) stealth; some supercruise (Su-35, F-15SE).

The SU-35 doesn't have an AESA so how can it be classified as a 4++ generation aircraft.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Oct 2009 05:56

Juggi G wrote:India takes Hard Look at U.S. Defense Technology

UPIAsia seems to be hosting quite a few novices?

There are a few nuggets in this article that I would like to know where they came from.

Eg:

In the past, the U.S. government has refused to share source code for radar even with close allies like the United Kingdom. However, with the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal in place and an End User Monitoring Agreement almost sown up, it seems that the United States could be willing to give up its old habits for the sake of the Indian market and the ensuing regional geopolitics.

Evry US vendor has been very clear so far that it all depends on the GOTUS. And, there has not been a clear indicator WRT AESA techs so far. So, I wonder where did he get it from - I suspect it is mere extrapolation - for the time being anyways.

Then there is logic, preceding the earlier quote, this:

The Indians have made it clear throughout the aircraft selection process that the best technology may not necessarily win unless it is ready to be transferred in its entirety. This is where U.S. firms have a handicap.

IF the GOTUS is "it seems that the United States could be willing to give up its old habits" (for which there is no clear indication yet), then how can it be a handicap?

These authors need to provide URLs to authenticate what they say.

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 22 Oct 2009 06:28

I am also impressed by a few potshots he takes..

India takes Hard Look at U.S. Defense Technology

On the other hand, the Western embargo on weapons sales to China since the Tiananmen Square crackdown of 1989 has ensured that China will not have anything comparable to the latest U.S. systems to which India is now being granted access, Barring Chinese Espionage of course.
.....

While AESA technology would be a key consideration in the final selection of a fighter plane for India, the degree to which technology transfer is agreed upon will be just as important. The Indians have made it clear throughout the aircraft selection process that the best technology may not necessarily win unless it is ready to be transferred in its Entirety. This is where U.S. firms have a handicap.
......

The main thing the Indian military establishment remains wary of in engaging with the United States is the propensity of U.S. manufacturers to offer a system to India once an indigenous equivalent has crossed some significant milestones. To be fair, this is a tendency exhibited by other countries as well.

While in few cases, Jha seems to bank on conjectures, in others like above, he shows clarity unlike any DDM.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 Oct 2009 06:36

NRao wrote:
Juggi G wrote:India takes Hard Look at U.S. Defense Technology
UPIAsia seems to be hosting quite a few novices?
.........

he was a member here with the same handle remember ?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Oct 2009 07:07

Is that right? BR -> UPIAsia? So, what do I need to do to get an article published out there?

M Kumar · Post by **M Kumar** » 22 Oct 2009 10:47

No pictures of the MiG-35 flying over Bangalore like the ones that we've seen on BRF of the Super Hornet, F-16 IN and the Rafale ?

Links of pics posted @ BRF please.

M Kumar · Post by **M Kumar** » 22 Oct 2009 10:52

BTW is anyone aware of the reason of loud explosion heard on Tuesday in Bangalore.. Did MiG 35 break sound barrier and cause sonic boom??

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 Oct 2009 11:05

NRao wrote:Is that right? BR -> UPIAsia? So, what do I need to do to get an article published out there?

I have no idea !

it's a good article though, better than any DDM at any rate.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 22 Oct 2009 16:24

b_patel wrote:
Generation 4++: Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or some “active” (waveform canceling) stealth; some supercruise (Su-35, F-15SE).
The SU-35 doesn't have an AESA so how can it be classified as a 4++ generation aircraft.

As per public domain info, all planes offered to India have AESA (With and without ToT and source code). So right question to ask is ... why only S-35 is 4++ and others 4+??

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 22 Oct 2009 17:17

^^Perhaps because of Supercruise. 117S was successfully tested for supercruise.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Oct 2009 17:18

AESA is no magic bullet that will solve all your problem , you can have a small AESA fitted on Jags and that wont get Jags classified as 4++

The Irbis is a power PESA and certainly out matches few AESA out there.

Certainly Russi classified the MKI/MKK/MKM/MKA as 4+ gen fighter , so its logical they would classify the Su-35 as 4++ , though Su-35 do have significant upgrade over 4+ types.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 22 Oct 2009 19:09

Gaur wrote:^^Perhaps because of Supercruise. 117S was successfully tested for supercruise.

Agreed ... +1 point over 4+ (But so does Eurofighter .. then why not that is in 4++??)

Austin wrote:Certainly Russi classified the MKI/MKK/MKM/MKA as 4+ gen fighter , so its logical they would classify the Su-35 as 4++ , though Su-35 do have significant upgrade over 4+ types.

This information is not from Russia, but from USA based AIRFORCE magazin, October edition.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 22 Oct 2009 19:25

as we all know that N019 topaz radar on mig29 weighs 385kg so having 285kg AESA radar should pose no difficulty

here is zhuk ae which has 1000 t/r modules shown on MAKS2005
http://www.missiles.ru/_foto/MAKS-2005_ ... W_8955.jpg
http://www.missiles.ru/_foto/MAKS-2005_17-08/FGM29.jpg
http://www.missiles.ru/_foto/MAKS-2005_ ... 29_tbl.jpg

so why radar was considered heavier and was scaled down to current form fitted to mig35 when it could be easily be fitted to mig35 in the same form shown on MAKS2005

johnny_m · Post by **johnny_m** » 22 Oct 2009 21:10

Baldev ji,

The weight of the AESA mentioned in that slide may not include the additional weight that has to go in for the cooling, a bigger array will need more cooling.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Oct 2009 21:21

civilian tech has definetly advanced than mil.. miniature heat exchangers could be ruggedized for mil use. plus the faster we move to AlGaN, the better would be our future AESA t/r performance.

Rafale and EADS are already into.. Raptor perhaps done it secretely already!. But feel good factor is IITs and DRDOs are all into their phd research.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 22 Oct 2009 21:50

johnny_m wrote:Baldev ji,

The weight of the AESA mentioned in that slide may not include the additional weight that has to go in for the cooling, a bigger array will need more cooling.

this is the total weight of radar otherwise just aesa array and 3 other modules don't weigh 285 kg

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 23 Oct 2009 02:54

Kuwait says it wants Rafale jets, awaiting terms

Kuwait is hoping to buy advanced Rafale combat jets from France and is awaiting terms from Paris, Kuwaiti Defence Minister Sheikh Jaber al-Hamad al-Sabah said on Wednesday.

So after Brazil it's Kuwait now. I guess this might broaden up the smile of Rafale fans here.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 23 Oct 2009 03:14

makes no use, until it can up the smile of frenchies themselves. they normally refuse to smile at all., and for them losing a $12b order is nothing against, keeping the technology upto themselves. its the french pride!

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Oct 2009 09:23

The new IR sensor type dual-band Focal Plane Array (FPA) sees the image of the target rather than a blur of heat is much more sensitive than previous sensors. A missile intercepted a UAV IAI Searcher 9km. The target was too small for the human eye and emit little heat to raise the IR sensors common. The target was detected by the radar of the fighter who scored the sensor of the missile. In Python 4 the range was limited by the sensor and not by the propulsion of the missile. The new sensor and method LOAL ended with this limitation.

The INS uses fiber optic gyros of IAI Tamam for navigation through the course. The INS is allowing cover 360 in order LOAL. The target data are entered into the INS and indicates the point where the sensor must be connected to self-help search. Serfs low pressure can work longer. The active time of 40 Python 4 seconds increased to 90 seconds in Python 5.
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... 1mrzf58HfA

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 23 Oct 2009 09:29

http://translate.google.co.in/translate ... B%26sa%3DG

RVV-MD on offer with mig-35
Missiles, air-to-air short-range and short-range air combat Highly RVV-MD.
. Provides defeat aerial targets (fighters, attack planes, bombers, planes and helicopters BTA) at any time, from any direction, against the background of land, with the active counter enemy. Has increased noise immunity, including the optical interference. Intended to arm fighters, attack planes and helicopter gunships.
. The guidance - vserakursnoe passive infrared homing (Dual Band GCI) with a combined gas dynamics control.
. The propulsion system - single-mode solid-propellant motor. . Fuses - laser proximity sensor target (for RVV-MDL), a radar proximity target sensor (for RVV-MD).. Warhead - rod type.
. Suspension missiles at aircraft carrier, providing essential power in the joint flight, militant start and accidental discharges by means of rail-air launcher M-72-1D (P-72-1BD2).
. Possible adaptation to the foreign media production technology developed by now.

Key performance characteristics

Range start:
Maximum in the PPP km - 0,3
- Minimum of LPP, km - up to 40
Angles targeting, hail - ± 60
Deflection angle coordinator GSN, hail - ± 75
The height of the targeted goals km - 0,02 - 20
Overloading the targeted goals, g - up to 12
Start weight, kg - 106
Weight of warhead, kg - 8
м Dimensions, m
Length - 2, 92
Diameter - 0,17
- Wingspan - 0,51
- Swing rudders - 0,385

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Oct 2009 09:34

MICA seeker
http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/aam/micaad4a.jpg
http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/ ... aad4av.jpg

AD4A seeker used by MICA active radar and the family of SAMs ASTER

MICA uses the head of an active search Pulse-Doppler AD4A of 12-18 GHz (J band) which has high transmit power and large deflection. She is so home-on-jam (HOH) while referring to the energy of interference from the target.The manufacturer also provides great capacity for counter-countermeasures.

The radar was developed by Dassault Electronique (now Thales) and GEC-Marconi Dynamics (now Alenia Marconi Systems, part of MBDA). The radar consists of 10 subunits that includes scanning antenna, multiple receiver, high power transmitter, synthesizer and wide spectrum processor board. The architecture uses 77 integrated circuits 37 different types. The total weight including the ceramic radome is less than 12kg.

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... TY-NLVzCwQ

METEOR missile

http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/aam/meteor4a.jpg
The Meteor will use an improved version of the radar AD4 MICA.

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... 65s_E8BpbQ

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 23 Oct 2009 09:49

R73

http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/ ... rcher5.jpg
The infrared sensor (IR) Mayak-80 (MK-80) uses detectors antimoniate Indian cooled Nitrogen. MK-80 only accepts mode launch LOBLER (locking before the launch). The guidance to the point of interception is done by methods of proportional navigation. The automatic pilot is produced by Avionika MNPK Moscow.

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... 8B5o5d16dA

R27

Version R-27T (Alamo guiding infrared (IR) is shooting only locking before the launch (LOBLER). The infrared sensor of Arsenal Ukrainian 36T was developed in the 80 to R-27T. The most current sensors are used in R-27TE (Alamo D). The sensor covers an angle of + / -55 degrees and can be targeted by the radar and the IRST Mig-29 and Su-27, but is not used with a helmet-mounted sight (HMS).

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... FVS8OwhunQ