Radar - Specs & Discussions

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 11 Nov 2019 01:17

“When you are weak, people mock you, and when you are strong, the same people admire you,” Reddy said, explaining the DRDO’s mission that destroyed a satellite in the Low Earth Orbit on March 27. Explaining the feat, he said, “With a satellite orbiting at a velocity of 7.8 km per second, a missile travelling at 3.2 km per second, and the total relative velocity of 11 kmps, a 1.2 mtr by 1.3 mtr object was tracked, and was hit at an altitude of 300 km. The hit was just 6 cm away from the geometric centre of the object, post which, India was seen in a different light by other countries.”

https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation ... 57644.html

"That is the first time a low-level radar (INDRA) was developed and we were able to utilise it on our critical areas anD we were able to utilise it on our critical areas and have a decent low-level pickup. In terms of technology, In terms of technology, it was a hugely successful project,he said. The IAF chief termed the indigenous Airborne Early Warning nd Control aircraft developed by DRDO as another major success for the service.
"It is a huge success, we are looking forward for further development of it.
The advantage of indigenous technology is that we are in continuous dialogue and change the specifications and requirements as we go along and get higher performance," ..

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 599900.cms

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4269
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Cain Marko » 11 Nov 2019 13:59

. The IAF chief termed the indigenous Airborne Early Warning nd Control aircraft developed by DRDO as another major success for the service.
"It is a huge success, we are looking forward for further development of it.


Major success but we'll buy a mere 3 birds thank you. Wtf.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 11 Nov 2019 18:48

Hes saying the tech works, but he wants it scaled up.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3844
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby kit » 11 Nov 2019 19:29

Karan M wrote:Hes saying the tech works, but he wants it scaled up.



The IAF I think has always mentioned the DRDO AWACS with 360 coverage as its preferred option, though the Netra had performed extremely well in combat conditions . Looks it hasn't changed its mind.

Also the cost of acquisition is quite high though maybe not at the israeli level ., the requirement is probably in two digits not hundreds!!

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Prasad » 11 Nov 2019 19:57

We need a bigger plane. Everyone wants it but $$?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby tsarkar » 22 Dec 2019 21:17

Karan M wrote:About A2G modes - people keep forgetting the XV-2004 radar. It was used to develop A2S modes (which see the highest clutter) with SAR/ISAR for the Navy's chopper and D0-228 installation mix. Same was leveraged for AEW&CS program, which again was to feature both A2A and A2S modes.

Furthermore, A2G software has been developed for a SAR radar developed for UAV application.

Both XV-2000 and XV-2004 were air to sea radars developed the same time as Tejas MMR and didn’t meet requirements. They never had any A2G modes as the platforms they were designed for never had any A2G roles. IN thereafter chose Elta 2022 that is derived from Elta 2032 fighter radar deployed on Jaguar IM, Sea Harrier and Tejas Mk1 IOC & FOC. Elta 2022A for Do228. Elta 2022U for IN Heron and Searcher UAV. Elta 2022H proposed for Dhruv & Ka28.

https://www.iai.co.il/drupal/sites/defa ... ochure.pdf

IAF & IA use Elta 2054/2055 in their Herons & Searchers.

I also never heard about any UAV SAR radar under development.

I know a project for foliage penetration for Naxal Operations but that is different from Ground Mapping SAR/ISAR radars.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 22 Dec 2019 21:45

I never said SV-2000/XV-2004 were A2G radars. I said A2S - i.e. A2S, Air to Sea. It is of relevance as it allowed LRDE to develop various algorithms for clutter suppression and extracting useful radar information against targets on the sea and versus sea-skimming targets as well.

Its not XV-2000 and XV-2004 but SV-2000 (Super Vision 2000) and XV-2004 (Extra-Vision 2004). Extra stands for the ISAR mode developed for the radar. The number stands for the year program was sanctioned.

Both were not developed at the same time as the Tejas MMR but succeeded it. The SV-2000 was developed first, as a basic system. XV-2004 was a derivative.

SV-2000 did not meet requirements for ISAR, which is why XV-2004 was developed. It is a good system which met quite a few requirements. However, it was not particularly superior to the ELTA 2022 which was already in service and which has become the IN's de-facto surveillance radar. It was proposed for a period of time for fitment onto the Tu-142's along with Brahmos or another AShM (likely re-use the existing fit), but the plan was dropped as the Tu-142s were due for retirement by the P-8I, and the P-8Is came with their own well-integrated radar-weapon fit.

This is the SAR radar. It is intended for UAV carriage.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vRK1L-yzQII/ ... ayload.jpg

It has already been tested on the Dornier FTB, SAR mode/algorithms developed and demonstrated, and weight reduction, fine tuning is currently under way.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prasad » 22 Dec 2019 22:18

Ku Band SAR for UAV and Dornier carriage has been developed. Tons of literature around. As also LRDE presentations during AI Seminar this year. That is the SAR that'll go on the MMMA too.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby tsarkar » 23 Dec 2019 01:38

^^ Thanks for sharing your views, Karan & Prasad.

MMR, SV-2000, XV-2004 are X Band radars. As will be Uttam in all probability. The DRDO Netra Active Antenna Array Unit, while not mentioning the frequency in public domain, gives two fascinating clues here indicating X Bands

http://radarindia.com/Proceedings%20Arc ... 17/157.pdf

The TRM is the basic building block of the AAAU. The center frequency typically used in the fighter radar is around 10 GHz.


QTRM is most suitable for ease of fabrication in X-band since the digital controls can be suitably bunched in SDI (Serial Data-in) and SDO(Serial Data Out) with a common FPGA controlling all 4 TRMs and suitable Nano-D connector can be used


The UAV has Ku Band radar. Ku Band radars like one one being developed for the UAV have higher frequencies than X Band so allow for better resolution.

The Israeli Phalcon is L Band which is absolutely incompatible for ground mapping.

https://www.iai.co.il/drupal/sites/defa ... ochure.pdf

However its more challenging getting resolution from a relatively higher frequency X Band radar compared to Ku and will require immense effort.

Netra doesnt have any Air to Ground modes other than clutter rejection. However, the research results do look promising. Uttam will definitely build on the AAAU research.

Table 2show that the 3D ASLL and RSLL is better in case of monopackTRM, followed by QTRM with Dual RF I/P and then the QTRM with single RF input. The RSLL and ASLL are important in case of fighter radar for Air-to-Ground and Air-to sea modes wherein the target echo competes with the ground/sea clutter return excited by the side lobes of the array.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 23 Dec 2019 10:47

tsarkar wrote:^^ Thanks for sharing your views, Karan & Prasad.

MMR, SV-2000, XV-2004 are X Band radars. As will be Uttam in all probability. The DRDO Netra Active Antenna Array Unit, while not mentioning the frequency in public domain, gives two fascinating clues here indicating X Bands


Netra is S- Band.

Uttam is X-Band. As are Atulya ADFCR's surveillance radar and the QRSAM BMFR. Spreads out the cost for the TRMs.

LSTAR (land based prototype for the AEW & CS) here.

Image

The UAV has Ku Band radar. Ku Band radars like one one being developed for the UAV have higher frequencies than X Band so allow for better resolution.

However its more challenging getting resolution from a relatively higher frequency X Band radar compared to Ku and will require immense effort.


The effort has been underway for quite a while. As I mentioned above, a key issue is of speed - algorithms, and platform stabilization, ability to process data despite a maneuvering platform - all this is much much harder on a fighter, rather on a AEW&CS and chopper. But the people who are doing this are confident they can do it based on their prior work.

Netra doesnt have any Air to Ground modes other than clutter rejection. However, the research results do look promising. Uttam will definitely build on the AAAU research.


Netra was to have Air to Sea modes, however. Refer prior discussions on the radar system and its performance, in particular around 2015-17. In particular, the important modes section and refer the image.

Image

Net, we could build upon the Netra and now the Uttam, ABISS, UAV SAR work to build an A2G dedicated system, and can explore it as a follow on system. Field it on some bizjet or transport for battlefield surveillance.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 23 Dec 2019 11:05

Prasad wrote:Ku Band SAR for UAV and Dornier carriage has been developed. Tons of literature around. As also LRDE presentations during AI Seminar this year. That is the SAR that'll go on the MMMA too.


Great stuff Prasad. I know you had a few pics floating around?

The Ku-band system will go on the Rustom 2.

The MMMA radar will be an X-Band AESA unit derived from all the work on Uttam and the AEW&CS, plus of course the XV-2004 (ISAR mode and ranging, but with even higher rez/accuracy).

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prasad » 23 Dec 2019 11:20

Yeah pictures should be on the ddr twitter handle. Too lazy to dig them out right now.

Netra has a2g modes btw to track flying objects like cruise missiles, low flying aircraft n all. Whats the point of an awacs without a2g modes.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 23 Dec 2019 15:50

Prasad wrote:Yeah pictures should be on the ddr twitter handle. Too lazy to dig them out right now.


:lol: :lol:

Netra has a2g modes btw to track flying objects like cruise missiles, low flying aircraft n all. Whats the point of an awacs without a2g modes.


A2G modes mean SAR, Doppler Ranging, GMTI etc against targets on the ground etc - basically those.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prasad » 23 Dec 2019 16:03

Yeah Netra has all of that.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby tsarkar » 23 Dec 2019 19:06

Prasad wrote:Yeah pictures should be on the ddr twitter handle. Too lazy to dig them out right now.

Netra has a2g modes btw to track flying objects like cruise missiles, low flying aircraft n all. Whats the point of an awacs without a2g modes.


You have a serious misunderstanding regarding A2G modes of fighter & AEW&C radar.

Tracking cruise missile or low flying aircraft against ground clutter or sea clutter is called "look down mode". It was there in RDM4 radar in Mirage 2000 since 1985.

Air to Ground modes in fighter radar typically are -

Air-to-Ground (Imaging and surface target detection up to 120 NM):

High resolution mapping - SAR mode with 3000x3000 image pixels
SMTI over RBM or SAR
SMTT over RBM or SAR
Real Beam Map (RBM)
Air-to-Ground Ranging (AGR)
Beacon (BCN)
Weather (WA)
Terrain Avoidance

Air-to-Sea (detection, tracking and classification up to 200 NM):

Sea Search (SS)
Sea Targets TWS
Sea Target Continuous Track (STCT)
Inverse SAR (ISAR) Sea target Classification
Range Signature (RS) Sea target Classification

https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2032

These modes are used to prepare a ground map using SAR/ISAR when cloud cover is obscuring visibility and spot tanks, trucks, undulating terrain and possible bunker entry and ventilation openings to lob a missile into.

This is what is there in Elta 2032 on Tejas and validated by multiple reports from those who've flown it and this is being developed for Uttam. Both are X Band radar.

If Netra is S Band, then the radar band itself is unsuitable for this mode and wont have it.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prasad » 23 Dec 2019 20:36

I mixed up the names but i'm certain of what I said. Netra has all that. As do the UAV radar and the dornier xav radars.

Karan,
dug it up. There's enough info in those pictures to answer all the questions here. https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 6406591488

Netra does gmti too btw. And all those air to sea modes with isar.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby tsarkar » 24 Dec 2019 00:55

Prasad wrote:I mixed up the names but i'm certain of what I said. Netra has all that. As do the UAV radar and the dornier xav radars.

Karan,
dug it up. There's enough info in those pictures to answer all the questions here. https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 6406591488

Netra does gmti too btw. And all those air to sea modes with isar.


The photo on the twitter link only gives band, power output and material used. It does not mention the A2G modes of Nethra.

Do post links stating Nethra radar has A2G modes. If Nethra does SAR, then what is the resolution and at what range? Can it detect tanks, missile launchers, etc good enough for feeding into fighters & missile seekers?

The UAV is radar Ku band, so it can.

Regarding Dorniers, only Indian Navy and Coast Guard Do228 use Israeli 2022 and can detect ships and boats and limited SAR for ground topology but cant detect trucks vehicles etc. Which is why it carries the EO sight with CCD Day Camera and IIR for night/bad weather. Both Elta Radar and EO sight are visible in the photo below.

https://images.assettype.com/swarajya/2 ... uto=format

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prasad » 24 Dec 2019 09:50

Kashtam. Tsarkar ji, please look at the following tweets too in that link?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 24 Dec 2019 15:12

Prasad, thanks, that link is a goldmine. I had dug out one of the AWACS pics sometime back.

You were right. That link shows the Netra does GMTI! Clearly testbed for some nifty stuff being planned for other programs as the radar is currently planned for A2A and A2S.

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 8805051392

This one shows a SLAR fitment for the CG MMMA - clearly a different unit from the x-Band AESA they showed in other presentations. It looks more like the radar they made for the CG surveillance towers.
https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 6406591488

Ok - last one here, lets move the discussion to some other thread.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby tsarkar » 08 Jan 2020 17:12

Prasad wrote:Kashtam. Tsarkar ji, please look at the following tweets too in that link?

Dear Prasad, my apologies for the late response as I was on vacation in a remote part of India that lacks internet access. I could manage only short posts.

I went through all the links. The real proof of all the tested and certified capabilities, like the primary radar, is

The primary radar in the AWE&C exhibits capability to detect and generate a near weapons grade accurate track within 15 seconds.


This is what a pilot or SAM operator requires to engage the enemy - a weapons grade accurate track. I'll ignore the "near" adjective for the time being.

Image
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DzrX7gDV4AAsysZ.jpg

Regarding the slide on the ISAR image, it clearly mentions "opportune target" and is a large cargo ship with large cranes, all of which are good metallic reflectors.

https://kaiser-aeronaut.blogspot.com/20 ... 1-war.html

On the night of 8/9 December, at around 2245 hrs, lookouts at Manora suddenly picked up the infamous glow hurtling towards them, then crossing overhead and slamming into the nearby oil tank farms at Keamari.[8] A tremendous fire engulfed the terminal and the whole harbour lit up, visible from miles. Distressingly, fires lit by an earlier air attack on the morning of 4 December had been laboriously put out just a day earlier.

A few minutes after the first attack, another missile hit the anchored British-owned merchant ship Harmatton, causing it to sink in no time. This was immediately followed by a third missile which hit the SS Gulf Star, also anchored, flying the Panamanian flag. It survived the attack with serious damage.[9]

A fourth missile hit PNS Dacca, the Navy’s supply ship which was idling in the harbour for maintenance, having been out at sea for 25 days at a stretch.


The radars on P-15 missiles of 60's vintage fired in 1971 war could discriminate metal oil tanks at Karachi due to their relatively high reflectivity and hit them. So while the P-15 missile radars successfully hit metallic ground objects, we do not classify them as A2G capable radars.

After the first missile attack, the Pakistanis dispersed their fleet among civilian merchant ships. As a consequence civilian ships with larger radar reflectivity like Harmattan, Gulf Star, and the fleet tanker Dacca, were hit. Tankers are similarly large as civilian merchant ships.

Warships are much smaller with most having various degree of reducing returns. Hence the capability showcased is indicative rather than "a near weapons grade accurate track"

Image
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DzrXFANVAAAcuq7.jpg

Regarding the GMTI slide, it mentions moving targets detected on Bangalore Hosur highway at 10-22 km range.

Seriously? Was this a CEMILAC test case? Was this an IAF test case?

I have been to Bangalore often to know that traffic from Bangalore to Hosur, the TN industrial belt, is heavy and dense most times of the day. Its a mass of metal cars, buses & trucks in bumper to bumper traffic with very high ref. Again, a very easy test case. Rest assured, Pakistanis and Chinese wont invade India with bumper to bumper traffic on Hosur road. What GMTI needs is the ability to track a SAM or Ballistic missile or cruise missile launcher moving in rough terrain or foliage with lots of clutter. Hosur road has near to zilch clutter due to surrounding lands being flat industrial/residential areas.

A real life test case would be this -

Image

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noor_(missile)

While its a Iranian missile launcher for a Chinese missile (whose paint scheme hasnt been changed), the launcher is similar to what Pakistan uses. Check the collapsible cover that disguises it as a civil truck. These missiles were used to attack the Saudi Aramco facility. The missiles were fired from Iran, not Yemen.

Lastly, these slides also indicate the root cause of the IAF vs DRDO divide in the past.

What the services need is -
a near weapons grade accurate track within 15 seconds


While what DRDO gives is -
Moving Targets detected along Bangalore-Hosur highway Range Coverage 10 - 22 km


That is also the chasm between a certified FOC product and an experimental product. Hopefully that is now a thing of the past.

I will maintain that X, Ku & Ka Bands are better suited for A2G modes. While the capability will certainly come in Uttam, it doesnt exist today.

The best A2G radar example today is the BrahMos seekers.

http://brahmos.com/pressRelease.php?id=55

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2271
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby manjgu » 08 Jan 2020 21:41

tsarkar wrote:
Prasad wrote:Kashtam.
Lastly, these slides also indicate the root cause of the IAF vs DRDO divide in the past.

What the services need is -


While what DRDO gives is -



?id=55


on the above comment...the weapons grade accurate track is referring to a aerial target ? how is it connected to moving target detected on hosur highway. Are not these 2 different capabilities?? maybe the aerial target track tech is well developed and other capability ( mobing target) is still evolving?

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2271
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby manjgu » 08 Jan 2020 21:44

GMTI real life test scenario...how does GMTI tech identify if a truck has hidden missile launchers or is it Aggarwal Packers/movers??

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby tsarkar » 13 Jan 2020 19:29

manjgu wrote:the weapons grade accurate track is referring to a aerial target ?

Yes
manjgu wrote:maybe the aerial target track tech is well developed and other capability ( mobing target) is still evolving?

Correct

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 13 Jan 2020 19:35

manjgu wrote:GMTI real life test scenario...how does GMTI tech identify if a truck has hidden missile launchers or is it Aggarwal Packers/movers??

If its a single/few truck offroad, in a place where its in position with ideal trajectory to attack own forces, then the probability of a missile truck is higher. Communication equipment, power generators nearby are also indicators.

GMTI tracks moving vehicles in the ground hidden in clutter / rough terrain. Aggarwal Packers/movers has no business there.

Check Col Vinayak Bhat's blog & twitter feed on how analysis is done.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2271
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby manjgu » 13 Jan 2020 21:28

thanks..will look up to the blog mentioned. I was wondering why u said 'what the services need' and 'what DRDO offers' ...was it in a mocking/disparaging tone??

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8568
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby brar_w » 13 Jan 2020 21:34

tsarkar wrote:I will maintain that X, Ku & Ka Bands are better suited for A2G modes.


You are correct. And the most modern ones actually combine X and Ku band to bring together the best properties of operating at both those frequencies. Lower frequency sensors are more efficient, and easier to put together not to mention significantly cheaper to build and sustain. If they could do the same job just as good folks would be lapping them up for such missions where resolution and capability is of paramount importance.

Ashokk
BRFite
Posts: 581
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Ashokk » 28 Jan 2020 15:09

Bengaluru: IISc builds tiny radar to pierce walls
Image
BENGALURU: Researchers at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) here have developed a through-the-wall radar built on a chip smaller than a grain of rice.
The team was led by Gaurab Banerjee, associate professor in the department of electrical communication engineering.
The radar, developed using Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor (CMOS) technology, has a single transmitter, three receivers and an advanced frequency synthesiser capable of generating radar signals. The size enables mass production at low cost.
"Such radars can have wide-ranging applications in the defence sector, as well as areas such as healthcare, transportation and agriculture," an IISc statement said. "Only a handful of countries have the ability to put the entire electronics of a radar on a chip," Banerjee said.
Compared to conventional radars, TWR helps to not only sense the presence of individuals behind a wall but also classify their actions and postures. This makes it suitable for surveillance and detection of humans and objects in urban environments, and for search and rescue operations in military situations or natural disasters.
The TWR imaging has always been a challenging radar design problem, Banerjee said, adding: "The signal can get significantly damped while passing through walls. To overcome this, radio waves consisting a large number of frequencies need to be used, which can complicate the design."
He said: "These radars also use a more complex signal, known as a chirp, which requires customised electronics such as a microwave transmitter, a receiver and a frequency synthesiser."
The IISc team has managed to squeeze all these components into a single chip. They used new architectural and circuit design techniques to overcome challenges specific to radars.
"The same techniques that have enabled smaller and cheaper smartphones can be used for a radar system," Banerjee said.

Healthcare application
Although the chip was originally developed for airport security applications, the scientists are exploring applications in healthcare too, to monitor the health of elderly people.
"A centrally-placed TWR system can scan the house, and construct a model when a person is standing or sitting down. If there is a sudden change in gait due to a fall, it can trigger an alarm," Banerjee said, adding that it can also monitor breathing and respiration rates and assess the severity of a fall.
The research was funded by the IMPRINT programme of the government of India, with additional financial from the ministry of human resource development and the Defence Research and Development Organisation. Bharat Electronics Limited, a defence PSU, has been an active partner in this project.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8736
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Rakesh » 07 Feb 2020 23:26

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/122 ... 85441?s=20 ---> Here's an update on the 'Uttam' Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) mean for the LCA-Tejas/MWF family. Hear it from the horse's mouth itself. Delhi Defence Review speaks to Uttam Project Director D. Seshagiri.


Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4269
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Cain Marko » 08 Feb 2020 09:35

Karan M wrote:Hes saying the tech works, but he wants it scaled up.

If the tech works, and you are short of capacity, adding a few more would be a win win? What about scaled up production?

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1817
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby wig » 01 Mar 2020 19:39

https://www.timesnownews.com/india/arti ... nia/559596

India bags US$ 40 million defence deal to supply 4 radar systems to Armenia
excerpts
India beat Russia and Poland to bag a $40 million defence deal to supply locally-built weapon locating radars to Armenia in Europe.

The radar system is developed by the state-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation’s (DRDO’s) Electronics and Radar Development Establisment (LRDE) Bengaluru-based laboratory and manufactured by Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL).

and
“The deal is for supplying four Swathi Weapon Locating Radars developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and manufactured by the Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) to Armenia in Europe,"

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 01 Mar 2020 19:56

tsarkar wrote:Lastly, these slides also indicate the root cause of the IAF vs DRDO divide in the past.

What the services need is -
a near weapons grade accurate track within 15 seconds


While what DRDO gives is -
Moving Targets detected along Bangalore-Hosur highway Range Coverage 10 - 22 km


That is also the chasm between a certified FOC product and an experimental product. Hopefully that is now a thing of the past.


This is a complete misreading of what the radar is supposed to do and deliver. The AEW&CS is *not* supposed to provide weapons quality tracks in the Wide Area GMTI mode of all things. This is a WA mode which merely evaluates movement as the image clearly shows. Furthermore, it is a surveillance radar, it does not by itself create or generate weapons quality tracks or allow the IAF or anyone to use that to guide weapons in. That it does is merely an indication of the maturity it has achieved and the capability available now within India that we are able to squeeze so much information out of a S band radar which is why they flag it. But by itself, it is a surveillance not a fire control radar.

The radar is merely meant to detect & provide an indication of a target rich environment using the WA GMTI mode. The mode indicates whether moving targets have broken out of cover and are heading someplace. After that, the SAR mode, other aircraft, drones will be deployed for confirmation and for weapons guidance or release, they will use optical means or STT modes, precision GMTI mode will be an entirely different mode and involve a compromise elsewhere!

Wide Area GMTI - threat awareness
Correlate with SAR
Use that to determine threat level and response! You can then choose between Localized GMTI, with different levels of resolution, Spot SAR, STT.

Wide Area GMTI is *not* weapons guidance! No AF worth its salt would confuse the two either. The image clearly shows WA GMTI.

Second:
Regarding the slide on the ISAR image, it clearly mentions "opportune target" and is a large cargo ship with large cranes, all of which are good metallic reflectors.


Opportune target merely means they were lucky they found something to test against, not a preplanned one.
The average naval ship is also a fairly good reflector. Similar performance was achieved against them as well. This is an ISAR image and specific for naval targets where the periodicity of returns vs wave motion allows for the technique to be used. Land targets have the radar utilize SAR/MTI.

Third:
Seriously? Was this a CEMILAC test case? Was this an IAF test case?

I have been to Bangalore often to know that traffic from Bangalore to Hosur, the TN industrial belt, is heavy and dense most times of the day. Its a mass of metal cars, buses & trucks in bumper to bumper traffic with very high ref. Again, a very easy test case. Rest assured, Pakistanis and Chinese wont invade India with bumper to bumper traffic on Hosur road. What GMTI needs is the ability to track a SAM or Ballistic missile or cruise missile launcher moving in rough terrain or foliage with lots of clutter. Hosur road has near to zilch clutter due to surrounding lands being flat industrial/residential areas.


The test case above is a good one. Its very similar to what the US JSTARs type platforms achieved in the first GW.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death

Also, exactly what the WA GMTI mode on a JSTARS achieves.

Image

Compare with:

Image

The purpose of WA GMTI is the *M* whether there is moving traffic, *not* to generate any weapons track information. That the radar was able to parse between individual targets is a plus.

During conflict, this capability is particularly targeted against armored columns and heavy traffic so as to alert and guide attackers in.

How this works is using a combination of GMTI and SAR to a) Detect where targets are moving/coming from/going to indicating a possible threat emergent b) Using high rez SAR snapshots to then decide targeting information.

You dont expect a surveillance radar to create weapons quality tracks on each of the trucks OR detail the difference between trucks using a WA GMTI mode!

You can lock onto individual targets using a precision targeting mode, but that is *not* the job of a surveillance radar on an AEW&CS testbed which is merely being used to proof the concept.

The fact they have demonstrated this on the AEW&CS is a plus, but unlikely to be the primary focus of the program at all.

You can mix and match GMTI /Surface MTI by overlaying it over a high rez SAR image or a lower rez DBS one. But this is usually handed over to fighters and drones for weapons quality work. Even then for positive IFF, you would likely correlate with optics for high value targets, something like Litening for instance or use automated cues to try and figure out what is what.

Image

APG-81, SAR (1:40)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wIwAOupjMeM

Net, MTI by itself is not a weapons quality tracking system. Definitely not Wide Area MTI which is what the image shows.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Prasad » 01 Mar 2020 21:51

Weapons grade gmti has been exhibited on other plataforms.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 01 Mar 2020 22:21

Karan,

You have posted in a round about way the premise I made in the first place.

The entire discussion started on whether indigenously developed ground mapping radar capability existed in the first place.

You & Prasad said yes, and as supporting evidence Prasad submitted DDR twitter post stating DRDO Nethra AEW&C S Band radar detected traffic on Hosur road.

I pointed out S Band is absolutely incompatible with ground mapping for resolution reasons and DRDO Nethra AEW&C doesnt do any Air to Ground work in service. This is practical operational knowledge and not brochuritis.

Ground Mapping is done in X, Ku & Ka Bands.

FWIW JStars example cited by you is X Band.

Now you come and make a post the gist of which is AEW&CS isnt supposed to do ground mapping.

Karan M wrote:This is a complete misreading of what the radar is supposed to do and deliver. The AEW&CS is *not* supposed to provide weapons quality tracks in the Wide Area GMTI mode of all things.


Fact of the matter is the radar is completely unsuitable to do ground mapping. And the earlier evidence provided by Prasad and you was misleading.

Karan M wrote:That it does is merely an indication of the maturity it has achieved and the capability available now within India that we are able to squeeze so much information out of a S band radar which is why they flag it.


It was just a lab test result that cannot be deployed operationally. While its a good lab achievement, to present it in an international air show is naivety.

That specific slide is similar to recent reports of gold being discovered in UP. As the Geological Survey of India clarified, there are trace gold deposits in that area that are not economically viable to mine
Last edited by tsarkar on 01 Mar 2020 22:25, edited 2 times in total.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 01 Mar 2020 22:22

Prasad wrote:Weapons grade gmti has been exhibited on other plataforms.

Which platform? Need to be specific here.

The difference between us and Pakistanis/Chinese is that we blow our trumpet with tangible stuff while they blow their trumpets with photoshopped stuff.

I personally would be very diligent to ensure we dont stoop to Pakistanis/Chinese standards.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 01 Mar 2020 23:47

tsarkar wrote:Karan,

You have posted in a round about way the premise I made in the first place.

The entire discussion started on whether indigenously developed ground mapping radar capability existed in the first place.

You & Prasad said yes, and as supporting evidence Prasad submitted DDR twitter post stating DRDO Nethra AEW&C S Band radar detected traffic on Hosur road.

I pointed out S Band is absolutely incompatible with ground mapping for resolution reasons and DRDO Nethra AEW&C doesnt do any Air to Ground work in service. This is practical operational knowledge and not brochuritis.

Ground Mapping is done in X, Ku & Ka Bands.

FWIW JStars example cited by you is X Band.

Now you come and make a post the gist of which is AEW&CS isnt supposed to do ground mapping.


TSarkar sirji, from your posts, you didn't seem to understand the context of the discussion at all.

1. While X, Ku, Ka offer greater precision, a S Band radar can be used as a development tool. The same way many modes on Uttam are derived from work done on the AEW&CS. A L-Band radar is usually used for surveillance as we have with the BMD network, but the Israelis use it for fire control as well for their Arrow ATBM, though we chose to complement it with a S-Band system and the Americans have moved onto X-band which the Israelis acquired later as well. In short, the band argument can always be worked around with and countries have often deployed interim capability in intermediate bands.

2. Second, my argument's gist was never that "as AEW&CS isn't supposed to do ground mapping, it can't implement the above modes". I pointed out it is a surveillance radar for the IAF, and as such ground mapping is not its primary aim. But it can and has implemented the above modes as a useful test-bed and as such is fairly useful, as is.

3. Your claim that a surveillance radar should offer weapons quality tracks in Wide Area GMTI mode is incorrect. See the images again - the S Band AEW&CS testbed is validating the GMTI modes as developed on platforms like the JSTARs.

4. Wide Area GMTI mode is a surveillance mode intended to detect movement.

5. X-Band Wide Area GMTI is also not meant to provide weapons quality tracks unless it's a high power AESA which interleaves modes and hence can do precision MTI work and interleave that with its wide array MTI. Plus a wide area surveillance mode merely indicates movement! You will have to couple it with SAR to figure out what it is that you are attacking. Please go back and see what the EL/M-2032 and APG-81 developers say.

Fact of the matter is the radar is completely unsuitable to do ground mapping. And the earlier evidence provided by Prasad and you was misleading.


No, fact of the matter is that you mixed up the mode in which the radar was operating in and stated that the IAF wanted "weapons quality tracks" from a surveillance radar and it doesn't have any A2G modes when the image clearly shows that the radar does operate in an A2G surveillance mode as a testbed, and its Wide Area GMTI which is not meant to provide a weapons quality track at all, but is a wide area surveillance mode.

You are still mixing up modes. " The primary radar in the AWE&C exhibits capability to detect and generate a near weapons grade accurate track within 15 seconds." This refers to air to air modes - its called high performance tracking in the air to air mode! See below.

Image

How can you even apply that to a wide area surveillance mode in air to ground? In fact its something you have extrapolated from your incorrect understanding of how the system is meant to perform.

The evidence provided by Prasad was also spot on. He demonstrated the AEW&CS is indeed being used as a developmental test bed to develop A2G modes and has developed the GMTI mode & demonstrated an A2S mode, i.e. ISAR.

What you have done though is mix up these modes and associate them with a fire control function "weapons quality tracks" which a surveillance radar, is fundamentally not meant for, irrespective of the band it operates in. The AEW&CS as it stands achieves something close to that in A2A, which the developers are proud of, but they never claimed it was going to do that in A2G. The IAF never asked for it either.

If the AEW&CS was designed as a MFR with a fire control function, then irrespective of the band, they would have worked on several optimizations including aperture size, beam-width and other functions to achieve that aim, depending on the weapon the radar was meant to guide and if its seeker was able to acquire targets in the required scan area!

It was just a lab test result that cannot be deployed operationally. While its a good lab achievement, to present it in an international air show is naivety.


This is again wrong, as its very clear, its not a "lab test result" but one from an actual flying test-bed with targets clearly detected and parsed as the display shows, same as that done on the J-STARs.

Second, after conversing first hand with the developers, its very clear that they are using the AEW&CS as a testbed to develop these modes and deploy them on other platforms.

And the above video with the Uttam Project Director reiterates that aspect.

His word counts for far more than speculation.

He and his LRDE/IAF team are well aware of what to present at an airshow as their peers who also track their progress understand what they are doing, and why. In fact it would be naive to assume the IAF has not vetted each and every thing they demonstrate.

That specific slide is similar to recent reports of gold being discovered in UP. As the Geological Survey of India clarified, there are trace gold deposits in that area that are not economically viable to mine


This comment is too pointless for me to even rebut.

Fact is the radar mode above exists, has been demonstrated as LRDE demonstrated and is being fine-tuned for operational deployment on multiple platforms.

No amount of confusion on this aspect can dismiss it away. A GMTI mode exists. It works, and can be ported and developed further on other platforms irrespective of claims it is not some mode it was never meant to be anyhow.

The Netra is an invaluable tool for LRDE to develop and finetune modes for both Uttam as well as its upcoming Multi-Mission aircraft program for the Coast Guard and Navy. Many of the algorithms and techniques are directly applicable and can be ported over after suitable modification.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2317
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby VinodTK » 12 Mar 2020 22:38



Security Scan: SWATHI - Weapon Locating Radar

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19433
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 13 Mar 2020 04:37

Beautiful program, two folks who have been deeply involved in the progress and you can see their pride. My sincere felicitations to both of them!

SidSoma
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 100
Joined: 16 Feb 2018 15:09

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby SidSoma » 13 Mar 2020 11:26

There have been reports of Turkey using its AWAC&S to provide track and guidance data to Missiles using L Band radar. Is something similar possible with Phalcon and Netra. If yes, will we see this new capability with either the Derby (with Phalcon) or with Astra (with Netra) ??

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2631
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby abhik » 13 Mar 2020 20:33

^^^
Which Turkish missiles and which AWAC&S saar?

mody
BRFite
Posts: 641
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby mody » 14 Mar 2020 15:12

Fantastic RSTV security scan program, about the Swathi radar. The Indra-I radar was not really upto the mark, but the lesson to be learnt is that you have to persevere with indigenous development and the results will eventually show. Hopefully over the next 5-6 years, we will be on par with the best in the world, for all types of radars.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chaitanya, Lisa, Rakesh, ravikr and 70 guests