MRCA News and Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 13 Apr 2010 02:14

Henrik wrote:
Carl_T wrote:Is the datalink capability unique to the Gripen out of the MMRCA planes? Is that similar to what the F-35 has, so it can fuse information from different planes together?

Guess where the guys behind the F-35 got the idea? :)


The F-35 as well as the F-22, can use their AESA radars to transmit and receive information as well as intercept datalinks, with the bandwidth employed being staggeringly high.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 13 Apr 2010 02:32

Viv S wrote:The F-35 as well as the F-22, can use their AESA radars to transmit and receive information as well as intercept datalinks, with the bandwidth employed being staggeringly high.

What do you mean by "intercept"?

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Gaur » 13 Apr 2010 02:39

Carl_T wrote: Is supercruise really that important for the MMRCA? I would see it as being important for an air superiority

platform, or for utilizing in deep strikes, but we have the MKI for that.
I do not know what role do you envision for MRCA, but IMO, supercruise is a huge plus regardless of the role the a/c is performing. An aircraft having greater speed would enter any engagement with greater kinematic energy. Be it dictating the terms of engagement to enemy fighter or out maneuvering LRAAMs and SAMs, the aircraft with greater speed will always be in advantage. While engaging in sharp turns to outmaneuver, the a/c looses much of its energy and thus becomes vulnerable. But if it has already greater kinematic energy to begin with, it is a huge advantage. And to achieve that without giving out massive IR signature or guzzling huge amount of fuel would be useful in any scenario. And the other obvious advantage is of course to reach and flee the hostile area quickly.

Is the datalink capability unique to the Gripen out of the MMRCA planes? Is that similar to what the F-35 has, so it can

fuse information from different planes together?

Swedes have always been pioneers in data-linking systems. In fact, Saab Draken was the first a/c in the world to feature operational data link system!
Although Henrik has posted excellent info regarding this, let me post another link which gives some further info.
http://www.vectorsite.net/avgripen.html
The Gripen is fitted with the "Tactical Information Datalink System (TIDLS)", which gives the fighter four high-bandwidth, two-way datalinks with a range of about 500 kilometers and very high resistance to jamming. The datalinks allow the Gripen to engage in
combat using another aircraft's sensors or from targeting data provided by other defense systems. Data acquired from remote sources is fused and displayed on the fighter's main MFD. The link is fully operational when the aircraft is on the ground, allowing a pilot on standby to have high situational awareness of the battle environment.

One Gripen can provide radar sensing for four of its colleagues, allowing a single fighter to track a target, while the others use the data for a stealthy attack. TIDLS also permits multiple fighters to quickly and accurately lock onto a target's track through triangulation from several radars; or allows one fighter to jam a target while another tracks it; or allows multiple fighters to use different radar frequencies collaboratively to "burn through" jamming transmissions.

TIDLS also gives the Gripen transparent access to the SAAB-Ericsson 340B Erieye "mini-AWACs" aircraft, as well as the overall ground command and control system. This system provides Sweden with an impressive defensive capability at a cost that, though still high, is less than that of comparable systems elsewhere.


Carl_T wrote:The Rafale seems like a great plane, but their cost seems to be prohibitive.

I agree. I do not understand how we could afford Eurofighter and Rafale. So,though I am a bit partial towards Rafale (though it could do with more powerful engines), I would not bet too much on it winning the MRCA. I would also like Mig-35 to win (if schedules could somehow become acceptable and Russians would not screw us up on TOT issue). I am also a great fan of gripen and would be really happy if it wins.

Carl_T wrote:While we know the cost for the planes roughly, but I think we also have to factor in the cost for the ToT, and I'm assuming if we pick a mature platform, that cost will be a lot lesser, I don't think Dassault will sell us rights to their hard-earned tech without a really substantial price.


Cant say about that. Considering the nil export figure of Rafale and the magnitude of the order, I would not be too surprised if French do not have a problem with TOT. At least, the Dassault representatives Aero India were very assuring regarding this.

Kavu
BRFite
Posts: 127
Joined: 18 Mar 2010 18:42

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Kavu » 13 Apr 2010 02:56

The Most important Role envisioned for the MRCA by the IAF, is deep strike.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 13 Apr 2010 03:11

Kavu wrote:The Most important Role envisioned for the MRCA by the IAF, is deep strike.

When considering Indias neighbors, none of the MMRCA planes would fit the deep strike role. You'll need a long range stealth fighter/bomber for that. Unless you already have air superiority, in wich case an aerial refueler would do the trick.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 13 Apr 2010 04:04

Henrik wrote:
Viv S wrote:The F-35 as well as the F-22, can use their AESA radars to transmit and receive information as well as intercept datalinks, with the bandwidth employed being staggeringly high.

What do you mean by "intercept"?


This is from an old article(2004)

These tests add communications as yet another role for the AESA radar that is already being pitched as a multifaceted surveillance device, electronic jammer and directed-energy weapon (AW&ST Sept. 5, p. 50). It also means that the F/A-22 aircraft will immediately have a key role in network-centric warfare and in the future could be able to affect enemy communications by collecting their signals and inserting false or confusing data into those networks as the forward-most elements in an information war.

While not part of this test program, Air Force planners expect to use the stealth aircraft's very sensitive and extensive receiver arrays to both gather and exploit electronic and communications intelligence. Some companies are already eyeing worms, viruses and other algorithms as cyber-weapons that can be released by stealthy manned and unmanned aircraft that can penetrate air defenses to monitor enemy electronic activity at close range (AW&ST Oct. 24, p. 49).


They say the capability-- primarily the result of waveform and software modifications, not hardware changes--can be made to virtually any AESA radar.


Researchers have already demonstrated the transfer of a 72-megabyte synthetic aperture radar image in 3.5 sec. at a data rate of 274 Mbps., Carmichael says. By comparison, it would take 48 min. on today's standard Link 16. He says they ultimately demonstrated transmission rates in the laboratory of 548 Mbps. and receive data rates of up to 1 Gbps. through the F/A-22 radar array.


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 2125p2.xml


Inspite of the gap in terms of hardware narrowing, the fact is the rest of the world is still playing catch-up with American AESA radar technology.
Last edited by Viv S on 13 Apr 2010 04:30, edited 1 time in total.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 13 Apr 2010 04:29

Viv S wrote:The F-35 as well as the F-22, can use their AESA radars to transmit and receive information as well as intercept datalinks, with the bandwidth employed being staggeringly high.

This is from an old article(2004)

These tests add communications as yet another role for the AESA radar that is already being pitched as a multifaceted surveillance device, electronic jammer and directed-energy weapon (AW&ST Sept. 5, p. 50). It also means that the F/A-22 aircraft will immediately have a key role in network-centric warfare and in the future could be able to affect enemy communications by collecting their signals and inserting false or confusing data into those networks as the forward-most elements in an information war.

While not part of this test program, Air Force planners expect to use the stealth aircraft's very sensitive and extensive receiver arrays to both gather and exploit electronic and communications intelligence. Some companies are already eyeing worms, viruses and other algorithms as cyber-weapons that can be released by stealthy manned and unmanned aircraft that can penetrate air defenses to monitor enemy electronic activity at close range (AW&ST Oct. 24, p. 49).


They say the capability-- primarily the result of waveform and software modifications, not hardware changes--can be made to virtually any AESA radar.


Researchers have already demonstrated the transfer of a 72-megabyte synthetic aperture radar image in 3.5 sec. at a data rate of 274 Mbps., Carmichael says. By comparison, it would take 48 min. on today's standard Link 16. He says they ultimately demonstrated transmission rates in the laboratory of 548 Mbps. and receive data rates of up to 1 Gbps. through the F/A-22 radar array.


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 2125p2.xml


Inspite of the gap in terms of hardware narrowing, the fact is the rest of the world is still playing catch-up to American AESA radar technology.

As long as you are encrypting your communications with good algorithms and build your system smart from the bottom all the way up, it's extremely hard not to say impossible to understand or insert "confusing" data.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 13 Apr 2010 04:32

Ajatshatru wrote:
When considering Indias neighbors, none of the MMRCA planes would fit the deep strike role. You'll need a long range stealth fighter/bomber for that.


So are you hinting MMRCA contract be cancelled all together and IAF would be better off waiting for induction of PAK-FA, hopefully, from 2016 onwards?


Nope. But I don't think that's the only reason for MMRCA. I also believe that PAK-FA will fill that role beautifully when it's finished.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 13 Apr 2010 06:47

Henrik wrote:
Viv S wrote:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 2125p2.xml


Inspite of the gap in terms of hardware narrowing, the fact is the rest of the world is still playing catch-up to American AESA radar technology.


As long as you are encrypting your communications with good algorithms and build your system smart from the bottom all the way up, it's extremely hard not to say impossible to understand or insert "confusing" data.


The newer (US) (Mil) network has "smarts" built-in. It even has a priority feature. And, of course, much more.

What the US AESA technology provides is a broader variety of tested features. What remains to be seen is how much of that will they part with, NOT ToT, as in code, etc, but feature wise. The "rest" are not even close I would think - better than India, and therefore enough to impress India perhaps.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 13 Apr 2010 10:01

NRao wrote:
The newer (US) (Mil) network has "smarts" built-in. It even has a priority feature. And, of course, much more.



Could you please illustrate more on the "smarts" part. As far as I know breaking 64-bit encrypted code takes about 2-3 hours (atleast) on the fastest super computers (200,000 nodes) to find all possible combination of keys. Forget the memory constraints. I am reporting this from a co-researcher's thesis. I am also aware that some pre-knowledge about the encryption method (context) brings down orders of computation.

So it is very interesting to know the "smarts" that you are talking about. Google didnt spring up anything interesting :x

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 13 Apr 2010 10:18

Mods--> Sorry if this appears OT, but posting nevertheless. Please let me know if you'd rather have this deleted.

Indranil-->
As far as I know breaking 64-bit encrypted code takes about 2-3 hours


You might find this interesting. A group of students at Univ of Michigan seem to have found a way to drastically reduce the time required to crack even 1024 bit systems.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/1024-bit-rsa-encryption-cracked-by-carefully-starving-cpu-of-ele/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+weblogsinc%2Fengadget+%28Engadget%29

Would be interesting to understand how the new 'smarts' stack up against this.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 13 Apr 2010 11:05

Mukesh.Kumar wrote:You might find this interesting. A group of students at Univ of Michigan seem to have found a way to drastically reduce the time required to crack even 1024 bit systems.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/1024-bit-rsa-encryption-cracked-by-carefully-starving-cpu-of-ele/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+weblogsinc%2Fengadget+%28Engadget%29



I was just warned for writing something OT on another thread. I hope I am not writing OT here as I am replying to posts and I dont know which other thread I should post this.

@Mukesh I think you have got the research wrong. They have proven that if you make the error rate much higher at the encryption time (1 per clock cycle is a very very high Mean time to failure even with a 81-node cluster). Anyways, if you manage to do that you might compromise the process of encryption. Even in that case, you would generate the key in 104 hours with 81 nodes. This is the case when you can modify the server, unlike the case where you are decrypting! Also what I told you is when you dont know the method of encryption. THis is the case of two planes communicating and an adversary trying to eavesdrop. He has to decrpyt a perfectly well encrypted message! Besides a planes processing power is much lesser than the cluster they are speaking of and so is the memory to work with!

So I believe my question still stands?

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 13 Apr 2010 11:43

well the Gripen's Datalink wont have any effect on our datalink because we have our own ODL in the works and it will probably find its way into all our fighters. MIDS (LVT) or low volume terminal is far more advanced to the TILDS on Gripen. The TILDS has a range of 300 miles or 480km while MIDS (LVT) has 300NM or 555km is on the Eurofighter, f-18, f-16.

Supercruise, BVR could be useful but not needed because just a little afterburner at high altitude level flight and you'll go super sonic and fire your weapons and attain the same range advantage that a supercruising aircraft gives. Because if you wait till you cruise into super sonic mode, you could loose valuable seconds, just a lil burner and you'll get to mach 1.3 in seconds, besides with a full-load EF or Gripen cant super cruise fast enough, they'll still need burner to attain max. range advantage. If you can cross speeds of mach 1.5 at high altittude you can have your maximum missile range possible. With a full-load these aircraft without burner cant cross mach 1.2 and that too slowly. burner always gets you there faster and thus allows you to take advantage of time.

F-22 is a whole different ball game because with very good load its already crusing at mach 1.5 and can make use of max. launch range everytime.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 13 Apr 2010 14:02

Mukesh.Kumar wrote:Mods--> Sorry if this appears OT, but posting nevertheless. Please let me know if you'd rather have this deleted.

Indranil-->
As far as I know breaking 64-bit encrypted code takes about 2-3 hours


You might find this interesting. A group of students at Univ of Michigan seem to have found a way to drastically reduce the time required to crack even 1024 bit systems.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/1024-bit-rsa-encryption-cracked-by-carefully-starving-cpu-of-ele/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+weblogsinc%2Fengadget+%28Engadget%29

Would be interesting to understand how the new 'smarts' stack up against this.


It all depends on the encryption type.
AES (Advanced encryption standard) for example is an encryption standard open to anyone..
Assuming that one could build a machine that could recover a DES key in a second (i.e., try 255 keys per second), then it would take that machine approximately 149 thousand-billion (149 trillion) years to crack a 128-bit AES key. To put that into perspective, the universe is believed to be less than 20 billion years old.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/aesq&a.htm

And by that, I'll stop OT'ing and go back to topic.

rohiths
BRFite
Posts: 399
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 21:51

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby rohiths » 13 Apr 2010 15:11

Does Mr. Obama Care About India?

There is a distinct possibility that Lockheed Corporation will be ruled out as a contender for an $8 billion contract for the supply of 126 fighter aircraft for India because of its readiness to provide advanced F-16 jets to Pakistan.

johnny_m
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 16:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby johnny_m » 13 Apr 2010 15:41

Brahmananda wrote:Johnny-m bhai since the US had cleared the sale of EF to saudis, they will have a say on tot for India as well. Amraam isnt the only thing US on the EF to say the least. From the link from airframer, there is a very good list of all the suppliers and US companies are key part of EF supply chain. From carefully looking at all origins of the companies involved i have listed all the critical and non critical parts coming from US on the EF.

EF has a lot of critical US parts including nav and attack computers, Command, Control & Intelligence Systems: Armament control system; Weapons Countermeasures: Decoy dispenser I/F unit, Microwave Components: Integrated microwave assembly for CAPTOR radar, Radio Communications Equipment: Communication audio management unit, Acoustic Horns: Warning horn, Airborne Electrical Power Supplies: Power management & distribution systems and auto-transformer rectifier units, Engine Controls: Engine control system, Air Start Systems: Starting systems for EJ200 engine and microturbo designs, Fuel Tanks & Systems: Supersonic fuel tank, Fuel Nozzles, Shafts & Shaft Assemblies: Power take off shaft, Gears & Assemblies: Gearbox assemblies & gears, Sensors/Transducers: Pitot probe; ice detectors; air data total air temperature sensors etc.
The Saudi deal required US permission for tot in order for domestic assembly of the aircraft.

http://www.airframer.com/aircraft_detai ... er_Typhoon

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/23 ... hter_sale/

Moreover i dont see how things like nav and attack computers, command, control and intelligence systems, integrated microwave systems for the radar etc can be easily sourced from non US suppliers because they are key and are part of what makes the EF so cutting edge.


Yes i have seen those links before, and It was the reason for the debate @ keypubs and the final conclusion was that the critical equipment that were U.S supplied were Link 16/MIDS, India will not be needing those and hence there are no critical U.S tech in the aircraft. The Saudis needed clearance for the same.

Even when the Rafale was offered with 100% ToT the above systems in it were American, they could offer it because it could easily be replaced and India won't be using Link 16 anyway.

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 13 Apr 2010 17:36

there is no final conclusion johnny bhai, till i see proof that shows otherwise, EF does have US critical components, this is also claimed by EF guys and lots of parts come from US and hence will require US clearance especially for assembly, export may not require permission but, i hardly think EF for instance can be exported to Libya etc with out US clearance.

http://typhoon.starstreak.net/Eurofight ... ction.html

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 13 Apr 2010 18:31

indranilroy wrote:Could you please illustrate more on ..................................


Non-Mil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6.

Key: not Mil.

This will make a network a true/real (yeah, others are unreal or fake) "Network centric".

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 13 Apr 2010 18:40

HiQ Receives New Order From Swedish FMV for Gripen Simulator Support

HiQ has received a new order from the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration (FMV). The SEK 14 million order pertains to maintain simulators for training fighter pilots for the JAS 39A Gripen.

“These simulators represents advanced technology at the highest level. We have been working with FMV and our Swedish armed forces for over a decade. Our job is to further develop and integrate systems based on the prevailing training requirements in the best and most cost-effective way,” says Anders Nilsson, MD at HiQ Mälardalen.

The simulators, which are used to train both Swedish and foreign pilots to fly the JAS 39 Gripen, are being developed in parallel with the aircraft.

Sayak
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 14 Oct 2009 06:12

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Sayak » 13 Apr 2010 19:56

Ajatshatru wrote:
There is a distinct possibility that Lockheed Corporation will be ruled out as a contender for an $8 billion contract for the supply of 126 fighter aircraft for India because of its readiness to provide advanced F-16 jets to Pakistan.



F-16 is out and i would give the superbug less than 1% chance at this point.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4068
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby kit » 13 Apr 2010 20:24

All said and done I feel that the Gripen NG with an Israeli AESA would give the best bang for the buck. Period. Down the line if a full TOT does happen., India would be in a better position for the MCA ., utilizing technologies derived from both the LCA and Gripen., and do it indigenously too. .. hopefully mass production tech and tooling that might come with the Gripen can feed into the MCA and future UCAVs as well.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 13 Apr 2010 20:55

It is very crucial that India invest and make the Kaveri more than a success.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 13 Apr 2010 22:58

NRao wrote:
indranilroy wrote:Could you please illustrate more on ..................................


Non-Mil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6.

Key: not Mil.

This will make a network a true/real (yeah, others are unreal or fake) "Network centric".


Didn't get you! What has IPv6 got to do with decryption or real network? Anyways, lets stop here.

I am pretty sure that it is next to impossible even with state-of-art hardware and algorithms to decrypt a message without any apriori knowledge of the message, its context, possible content etc. Besides, if a datalink works on digitally signed messages, insertion of a phoney message without detection to cause byzantine errors is equally unlikely.

Having said that I am not sure whether even modern planes encrypt or sign the data between them during communication. Most of us know that the US drones didnt do that while communicating to the ground control. In that case, ofcourse an adversary can easily create byzantine failures.

OT-Alert on
P.S. Henrik, you are speaking of brute-force algorithms (certainly not state-of-art) on serial uniprocessor machines. Please read my post. I am speaking of dedicated supercomputing time (with 200,000 processing nodes with peta flops) with algorithms which are multiple PhD dissertations.
OT-Alert off

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 13 Apr 2010 23:17

Sayak wrote:F-16 is out and i would give the superbug less than 1% chance at this point.


And are you one of the IAF officers evaluating the aircraft in the MRCA to know that the F-16 is out ? If not, then please add an "IMO" (In My Opinion) since its purely your own opinion and not a fact.

Mahendra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4414
Joined: 11 Aug 2007 17:20
Location: Chronicling Bakistan's Tryst with Dysentery

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Mahendra » 13 Apr 2010 23:35

Kartik wrote:
Sayak wrote:F-16 is out and i would give the superbug less than 1% chance at this point.


And are you one of the IAF officers evaluating the aircraft in the MRCA to know that the F-16 is out ? If not, then please add an "IMO" (In My Opinion) since its purely your own opinion and not a fact.

:rotfl:

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 13 Apr 2010 23:49

indranilroy wrote:OT-Alert on

P.S. Henrik, you are speaking of brute-force algorithms (certainly not state-of-art) on serial uniprocessor machines. Please read my post. I am speaking of dedicated supercomputing time (with 200,000 processing nodes with peta flops) with algorithms which are multiple PhD dissertations.
OT-Alert off


By not brute-forcing it I guess you mean finding weaknesses and exploit them?

The design and strength of all key lengths of the AES algorithm (i.e., 128, 192 and 256) are sufficient to protect classified information up to the SECRET level. TOP SECRET information will require use of either the 192 or 256 key lengths. The implementation of AES in products intended to protect national security systems and/or information must be reviewed and certified by NSA prior to their acquisition and use.


http://www.cnss.gov/Assets/pdf/cnssp_15_fs.pdf

Like I said, it doesn't matter. If you want to take advantage by reading an enemy's datalinks, you want to be able to read the information in real time. And that my friend won't happen anytime soon. Not if it's a well encrypted and thought through system that is..

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 14 Apr 2010 00:50

Henrik wrote:
indranilroy wrote:OT-Alert on

P.S. Henrik, you are speaking of brute-force algorithms (certainly not state-of-art) on serial uniprocessor machines. Please read my post. I am speaking of dedicated supercomputing time (with 200,000 processing nodes with peta flops) with algorithms which are multiple PhD dissertations.
OT-Alert off


By not brute-forcing it I guess you mean finding weaknesses and exploit them?

The design and strength of all key lengths of the AES algorithm (i.e., 128, 192 and 256) are sufficient to protect classified information up to the SECRET level. TOP SECRET information will require use of either the 192 or 256 key lengths. The implementation of AES in products intended to protect national security systems and/or information must be reviewed and certified by NSA prior to their acquisition and use.


http://www.cnss.gov/Assets/pdf/cnssp_15_fs.pdf

Like I said, it doesn't matter. If you want to take advantage by reading an enemy's datalinks, you want to be able to read the information in real time. And that my friend won't happen anytime soon. Not if it's a well encrypted and thought through system that is..


We are on the same page!

Carl_T
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 02:37
Location: anandasya sagare

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Carl_T » 14 Apr 2010 02:16

Gaur wrote:I do not know what role do you envision for MRCA, but IMO, supercruise is a huge plus regardless of the role the a/c is performing. An aircraft having greater speed would enter any engagement with greater kinematic energy. Be it dictating the terms of engagement to enemy fighter or out maneuvering LRAAMs and SAMs, the aircraft with greater speed will always be in advantage. While engaging in sharp turns to outmaneuver, the a/c looses much of its energy and thus becomes vulnerable. But if it has already greater kinematic energy to begin with, it is a huge advantage. And to achieve that without giving out massive IR signature or guzzling huge amount of fuel would be useful in any scenario. And the other obvious advantage is of course to reach and flee the hostile area quickly.
I see, I didn't know supercruise was that important.

At the same time, according to Wiki it appears that the Typhoon can only supercruise in a clean configuration. Will that not mitigate the advantage significantly though? From articles at least, it appears to be an A2A platform, which we have MKI for.

Qualities of the SH aside, I don't know if it is realistic to expect the MoD to put in such a big order with the US.


I agree. I do not understand how we could afford Eurofighter and Rafale. So,though I am a bit partial towards Rafale (though it could do with more powerful engines), I would not bet too much on it winning the MRCA. I would also like Mig-35 to win (if schedules could somehow become acceptable and Russians would not screw us up on TOT issue). I am also a great fan of gripen and would be really happy if it wins.
IMO If they wanted the Mig, I think they would have ordered it straightaway.

I think it will come between the Rafale and the Gripen.


Cant say about that. Considering the nil export figure of Rafale and the magnitude of the order, I would not be too surprised if French do not have a problem with TOT. At least, the Dassault representatives Aero India were very assuring regarding this.
Yes, I suppose that is true since the French might be desperate with this.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Gaur » 14 Apr 2010 03:26

Carl_T wrote:At the same time, according to Wiki it appears that the Typhoon can only supercruise in a clean configuration. Will that not mitigate the advantage significantly though? From articles at least, it appears to be an A2A platform, which we have MKI for.

The Austrian Eurofighter site states that Typhoon can supercruise at 1.5 mach. Considering that no payload info is given, I assume this figure is for a clean Typhoon. Even so, we can safely assume that for a typical air-air loadout, Typhoon will be able to supercruise. Now the question is its ability to perform a sustained supercruise. If it can sustain supercruise for a decent amount of time (which is?), then I consider it a good advantage for it.
Also, even IMO, Typhoon is somewhat lacking in a2g domain (while superb in air-air role). This is why I am personally not the strongest supporter of Eurofighter. However, in future tranches, this limitation will be rectified.
Carl_T wrote:Qualities of the SH aside, I don't know if it is realistic to expect the MoD to put in such a big order with the US.

I am not too sure about this though I hope that sense prevails and MRCA does not go to US. Also, US angle aside, I am not the biggest supporter of SH. It is an excellent a2g platform but as far as a2a role is concerned, there is much left to be desired. It is supposed to have good low speed maneuverability, but if the whole flight envelope is considered, it does not have the best reputation as an agile fighter.

Carl_T wrote:IMO If they wanted the Mig, I think they would have ordered it straightaway.

I think it will come between the Rafale and the Gripen.

IDK, it could have been a chankian move by MOD to gain a better bargaining leverage against Russians.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 14 Apr 2010 03:33

Gaur wrote:The Austrian Eurofighter site states that Typhoon can supercruise at 1.5 mach. Considering that no payload info is given, I assume this figure is for a clean Typhoon. Even so, we can safely assume that for a typical air-air loadout, Typhoon will be able to supercruise. Now the question is its ability to perform a sustained supercruise. If it can sustain supercruise for a decent amount of time (which is?), then I consider it a good advantage for it.
Also, even IMO, Typhoon is somewhat lacking in a2g domain (while superb in air-air role). This is why I am personally not the strongest supporter of Eurofighter. However, in future tranches, this limitation will be rectified.


How's it lacking in the air-to-ground domain?

I am not too sure about this though I hope that sense prevails and MRCA does not go to US. Also, US angle aside, I am not the biggest supporter of SH. It is an excellent a2g platform but as far as a2a role is concerned, there is much left to be desired. It is supposed to have good low speed maneuverability, but if the whole flight envelope is considered, it does not have the best reputation as an agile fighter.


In terms of radar, RCS and cost-effective munitions, the SH has a clear advantage. Also in terms of delivery times and customer support the American have an excellent(er) record.

I think it will come between the Rafale and the Gripen.


I think it will come down to EF and SH... but I guess we all have our favourites. :)

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Gaur » 14 Apr 2010 04:28

Viv S wrote:How's it lacking in the air-to-ground domain?

The max payload of Eurofighter is comparatively low. Also, many a2g ( like shadow storm, brimstone etc) are yet to be integrated. Also Litening 3 was integrated in Tranche 1 block 5, its capability was not fully utilized. That would be corrected in future blocks.
Viv S wrote:In terms of radar, RCS and cost-effective munitions, the SH has a clear advantage. Also in terms of delivery times and customer support the American have an excellent(er) record.

IMHO, the use of lower rcs of SH is overestimated by some. The detection range of radar is not directly proportional to rcs. In fact, detection range is proportional to fourth root of rcs. So, the rcs of an a/c has to be lower by a very large magnitude in order to have significant advantage. So, IMHO, SH will not have any huge advantage because of its relatively lower rcs.
But yes, in regards to radar, munitions and support, Americans have clear advantage. Though one has to wonder how much this advantage is worth considering any possible future sanctions (food for thought-many Indian scientific labs are still black listed in US).

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Viv S » 14 Apr 2010 05:12

Gaur wrote:
Viv S wrote:How's it lacking in the air-to-ground domain?

The max payload of Eurofighter is comparatively low. Also, many a2g ( like shadow storm, brimstone etc) are yet to be integrated. Also Litening 3 was integrated in Tranche 1 block 5, its capability was not fully utilized. That would be corrected in future blocks.


Yes the max payload is lower than the others, but the IAF would prefer to employ the MKI for any mission requiring that much payload.
As I understand it most remaining air-to-ground weapons are in the process of being integrated and that should be done well before the IAF expects deliveries.

http://eurofighter.airpower.at/fertigung-t-b-b.htm

IMHO, the use of lower rcs of SH is overestimated by some. The detection range of radar is not directly proportional to rcs. In fact, detection range is proportional to fourth root of rcs. So, the rcs of an a/c has to be lower by a very large magnitude in order to have significant advantage. So, IMHO, SH will not have any huge advantage because of its relatively lower rcs.


Well seeing as the actual RCS figures are unavailable, I guess that question can't be answered. <shrug>

But yes, in regards to radar, munitions and support, Americans have clear advantage. Though one has to wonder how much this advantage is worth considering any possible future sanctions (food for thought-many Indian scientific labs are still black listed in US).


Well that's one constant refrain one hears about the US. But, if we were to factor in all possible scenarios, there is no way of knowing with certainty that we're immune from sanctions by the EU either. IMHO, we're in a very different position today then we were ten years ago, and in another ten years the difference will be even more stark. While in the short term, US-Pakistan interactions are being cited as evidence of duplicity, in long term we're sticking with the US and will move closer to South-East Asian and East Asian democracies. Today for example if Japan or South Korea or even Brazil were to conduct a nuclear test there would be a lot of irritation and concern expressed globally but no sanctions would be placed. I believe India is well on its way to gaining that sort of economic and diplomatic clout. Also, another important factor is that India has a proven working nuclear deterrent and there is no incentive for further nuclear testing.

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 14 Apr 2010 19:25

USN not in favour of more F-18's.. Production to stop as early as 2013.

Navy officials steadfastly rejected more purchases of Boeing Super Hornets beyond the 515 already planned.

Marine Corps Lieutenant General George Trautman said the intention had always been to begin shutting down the F/A-18 line in fiscal 2013


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN132 ... arketsNews

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 14 Apr 2010 22:03

The SH line will probably stay open a little longer with Denmark now pulling out of JSF and leaning towards the SH. Without export orders, the Rafale line will also close, they have cut production to keep the line open longer.

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 14 Apr 2010 22:21

was looking at the the thrust improvements the new GE EPE would bring to the SH.

current version dry thrust 67 KN, Reheat 98KN or 134KN dry and 196KN reheat
EPE version 81KN dry, 119 KN reheat or 162 KN dry and 238 KN reheat.

can the math gurus please calculate the increased t/w ratio from the engine upgrade?

the current figures are in the link below, dont know if they are correct calculations but they look accurate
http://img240.imageshack.us/i/twcompareul0.gif/

the thrust per aircraft goes from 44000 lbs or 22000lbs per engine to 26600 lbs per engine or 53200 lbs per aircraft

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 14 Apr 2010 22:31

shukla wrote:USN not in favour of more F-18's.. Production to stop as early as 2013.

Navy officials steadfastly rejected more purchases of Boeing Super Hornets beyond the 515 already planned.

Marine Corps Lieutenant General George Trautman said the intention had always been to begin shutting down the F/A-18 line in fiscal 2013


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN132 ... arketsNews


With MRCAs being manufactured (for the most part) in India such closings should not matter. In fact, if the host country shuts their major resources and India manufactures them it just may be more economical for the host country to buy some "parts" from India.

Besides "life cycle cost", I doubt, envisions open/closed lines in the host nation.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4506
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 14 Apr 2010 23:07

I doubt that we will manufacture everything 100% in India regardless of which aircraft we buy. Probably around 20-30% of the stuff will still be imported and assembled, especially related to avionics , FCS etc. I even doubt whether we will manufacture the engines 100% in india

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 14 Apr 2010 23:19

Brahmananda wrote:The SH line will probably stay open a little longer with Denmark now pulling out of JSF and leaning towards the SH. Without export orders, the Rafale line will also close, they have cut production to keep the line open longer.

I wouldn't count on it, it's to much politics. The lobbying arm of Washington reaches a long way..

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Apr 2010 01:44

HAL is the winner of the Boeing Supplier of the Year award for the category "Alliance Award"

Boeing Names 14 Companies 2009 Suppliers of the Year SEATTLE, April 13 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --

The Boeing Company (NYSE: BA) tonight honored 14 companies as winners of its 2009 Supplier of the Year award.

The winners, chosen from among the company's more than 12,000 active suppliers worldwide, are located in Germany, India, Japan and the United States. They were judged on quality, delivery performance, cost, environmental initiatives, customer service and technical expertise.
Four are small businesses as defined by the U.S. government.

The winners, and the categories, are:

AZX International Corp. (Huntington Beach, Calif.) – Aerospace support
Bridgestone Corp. (Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan) – Electro, hydraulic and mechanical standards
Cytec Engineered Materials Inc. (Greenville, Texas) – Common aerospace commodities
Deharde-Maschinenbau H. Hoffmann GmbH (Varel, Germany) – International
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (Daytona Beach, Fla.) – Academia
Frontier Electronics Systems Corp. (Stillwater, Okla.) – Avionics
GE Commercial Engine Operations (Evendale, Ohio) – Propulsion
GM Nameplate Inc. (Seattle) – Interiors
Hamilton Sundstrand, Electric Systems – 787 Team (Rockford, Ill.) – The Pathfinder Award, a new award recognizing outstanding efforts and significant strides in performance
Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (Bangalore, India) – The Alliance Award, a new award recognizing unique capabilities and services that are instrumental to a new Boeing product

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 15 Apr 2010 03:49

Henrik wrote:
Brahmananda wrote:The SH line will probably stay open a little longer with Denmark now pulling out of JSF and leaning towards the SH. Without export orders, the Rafale line will also close, they have cut production to keep the line open longer.

I wouldn't count on it, it's to much politics. The lobbying arm of Washington reaches a long way..


Lockheed will try to market the f-35 but with so many delays production slots hard to find for quick deliveries, the Danes will end up going for SH, besides their decision wont come till late 2011 just in time to stop the SH line from closing if it already hasnt scooped up the mrca. What makes the SH attractive is that its combat proven, rugged, comes with new engines with better FOD capability, enhaced durabilty ( so far excellent engine reliablity no crashes due to engine failure or technical failure), avionics, upgradable and the obvious proof is that no other aircraft has been upgraded more since 2001 when it entired operational service, kick ass production rate of over 40 aircraft per year, delivery slots available, very rapid delivery and can play all roles you can extract from a 4.5 gen fighter, from awacs, tanking to A2A, A2G and A2S, advanced recon etc. so i wouldnt be suprised if it won Brazil, Denmark, Greece and India as well.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 72 guests