Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

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.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4967
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby brar_w » 23 Feb 2015 17:51

I mentioned less than 0.1 square meter for the F-35 because we really don't know what it is. Yet, you ridiculed the idea stating that we might as well say the F-35 is less than 1 sq m.


I did not ridicule you in any way. I provided the only number that have been released and shared with the press. Neither did I make any attempt to pass those numbers along as if they were all aspect or anything but "best" case.

That LOL..statement wasn't a ridicule of what you said, but just that to be on the safe side may as well claim it to be less than 1 sqm. The rest of the RCS data presented by you also has no real supporting evidence of it being either best case, all aspect, worst case or whatever but you still mentioned it. Same goes for the AMCA RCS goal/target, we have no qualitative data on the requirement but given the general lack of information we go with it since it is the little " data " we have.

When you see values that suggest the F-35 and F-22 have a lower RCS than an insect, it raises questions a lot of questions. Namely the methodology as to how testing was done and how it was sold off


That is what has been reported. Of course if you wish to remain skeptical, thats your right and I seriously doubt that any OEM or armed forces branch is going to open up their testing, and share detailed reports just to convince the skeptics.

I usually do not mind having doubt even when some numbers are released as long as that remains the acceptable behavior across products. So for example if some OEM or agency hasn't released their radar performance the same should apply rather than trying to estimate things without much supporting evidence on a particular product.

I was talking about the specification for RCS for advertisement purposes. Typically, much is done in terms of near and far field measurements along with extensive testing prior to IOC.


The best case frontal RCS is something that is actually measured and considered important. Of course it goes without saying that the process of fully measuring and comparing the all aspect RCS is a time-consuming task and in case of the F-35 its taken a few years to fully document.


The various service directorates have existed for decades that cover all aspects of electromagnetic performance. Of course billions have been spent. More often than not, most of these facilities are operated by various contractors to the program offices, and then another set of contractors to monitor progress. Even places like MIT - Lincoln Laboratories is in the game. It's all about the funding flow, defense contractor corporate and middle class welfare. It is a huge and expensive bureaucratic empire. Most of these fellows in these directorates are technically incompetent and you see all sorts of crazy billing like $230/hour for radar engineering expertise from various contractors. Yes, some of it is absolutely essential to learn the technical lesson once, but repeatedly is ridiculous


As I said, you could write a paper with supporting evidence on what is done (document exactly the processes) and then make recommendations based on your own experience and research. I don't have any inclination to do so, nor do I have the sort of access to information that may make it possible to objectively speak of the matter. What little I know, the process has significantly changed over the last 15 or so years and the control has shifted to more in house stuff since the volumes required (testing, re-testing, documenting and followups) has essentially incentivized those sort of actions and changes.

As far as contractors being brought in and being paid XXX $/ hour, you could make the argument for or against, provided you publish a thorough paper on exactly what the protocols are and what they exactly do etc. Its an academic exercise rather than a forum discussion based on personal "stories" or experiences.

kit
BRFite
Posts: 1923
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby kit » 23 Feb 2015 20:39

As regards both stealth planes and submarines there is a new conundrum that might be taken as disruptive . EM signals in the present day are widely dispersed in say for example cell phone towers and bi static radars ..any object that moves will create interference proportional to the size of the object . Enough computing power., passive EM gear and software can detect stealth planes as well as super quiet subs ( in the same logic ) . .. i think a lot of research is going on especially in China and Russia that could as well make american lead in technology obsolete ..Raw computing power was one factor this hasn't progressed much before but no longer the case .But as usual one has to keep up with current threats too while looking at a future that could very well be stealth robotic planes send in swarms by a flying aircraft carrier .. fiction ? ..not so !

kit
BRFite
Posts: 1923
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby kit » 23 Feb 2015 20:42

The military industrial complex needs big PR and convincing arguments too to sell a product in billions btw !! ..truth might be somewhere in between :mrgreen: .. the F35 comes to mind ..too big to fail !

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35193
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby SaiK » 23 Feb 2015 21:01

LPI is always preferable for AWACs.. once algos are written for active tracking and scanning, the signature analysis should easily input for passive tracking, with occasional active mode for closed loop feedback corrections on targets.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4967
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby brar_w » 23 Feb 2015 21:01

kit wrote:As regards both stealth planes and submarines there is a new conundrum that might be taken as disruptive . EM signals in the present day are widely dispersed in say for example cell phone towers and bi static radars ..any object that moves will create interference proportional to the size of the object . Enough computing power., passive EM gear and software can detect stealth planes as well as super quiet subs ( in the same logic ) . .. i think a lot of research is going on especially in China and Russia that could as well make american lead in technology obsolete ..Raw computing power was one factor this hasn't progressed much before but no longer the case .But as usual one has to keep up with current threats too while looking at a future that could very well be stealth robotic planes send in swarms by a flying aircraft carrier .. fiction ? ..not so !


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5098&p=1802740#p1802740

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5979
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Mort Walker » 24 Feb 2015 00:13

brar_w wrote:
I mentioned less than 0.1 square meter for the F-35 because we really don't know what it is. Yet, you ridiculed the idea stating that we might as well say the F-35 is less than 1 sq m.


I did not ridicule you in any way. I provided the only number that have been released and shared with the press. Neither did I make any attempt to pass those numbers along as if they were all aspect or anything but "best" case.

That LOL..statement wasn't a ridicule of what you said, but just that to be on the safe side may as well claim it to be less than 1 sqm. The rest of the RCS data presented by you also has no real supporting evidence of it being either best case, all aspect, worst case or whatever but you still mentioned it. Same goes for the AMCA RCS goal/target, we have no qualitative data on the requirement but given the general lack of information we go with it since it is the little " data " we have.

When you see values that suggest the F-35 and F-22 have a lower RCS than an insect, it raises questions a lot of questions. Namely the methodology as to how testing was done and how it was sold off


That is what has been reported. Of course if you wish to remain skeptical, thats your right and I seriously doubt that any OEM or armed forces branch is going to open up their testing, and share detailed reports just to convince the skeptics.

I usually do not mind having doubt even when some numbers are released as long as that remains the acceptable behavior across products. So for example if some OEM or agency hasn't released their radar performance the same should apply rather than trying to estimate things without much supporting evidence on a particular product.

I was talking about the specification for RCS for advertisement purposes. Typically, much is done in terms of near and far field measurements along with extensive testing prior to IOC.


The best case frontal RCS is something that is actually measured and considered important. Of course it goes without saying that the process of fully measuring and comparing the all aspect RCS is a time-consuming task and in case of the F-35 its taken a few years to fully document.


I wasn't talking about being personally ridiculed, but the idea of not accepting the published "data". No personal offense was taken by me and I'm sorry if sounded harsh to you.

Looking at the physics of RCS, it's dependent on wavelength and given the very low RCS figures being quoted on some stealth aircraft, the order of less than -40 dBsm, is clearly specmanship by LM (F-35) and NG (B-2). No sane radar designer is going to believe this regardless of what has been reported. This isn't my opinion, but comparing RCS to birds and insects.

Before taking manufacturers rating for RCS at face value. I would suggest reading "Modern Radar Systems Analysis" by David K. Barton and "Introduction to Radar Systems" by Merril Skolnik.

Going back to the new DRDO AWACS, it appears that there are enough elements to form a fairly narrow beam beam width and one that can hop a very wide band of frequencies. They may be able to detect stealth aircraft very well by putting out the needed power densities.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4967
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby brar_w » 24 Feb 2015 00:40

Mort Walker wrote:.



I wasn't talking about being personally ridiculed, but the idea of not accepting the published "data". No personal offense was taken by me and I'm sorry if sounded harsh to you.

Looking at the physics of RCS, it's dependent on wavelength and given the very low RCS figures being quoted on some stealth aircraft, the order of less than -40 dBsm, is clearly specmanship by LM (F-35) and NG (B-2). No sane radar designer is going to believe this regardless of what has been reported. This isn't my opinion, but comparing RCS to birds and insects.

Before taking manufacturers rating for RCS at face value. I would suggest reading "Modern Radar Systems Analysis" by David K. Barton and "Introduction to Radar Systems" by Merril Skolnik.

Going back to the new DRDO AWACS, it appears that there are enough elements to form a fairly narrow beam beam width and one that can hop a very wide band of frequencies. They may be able to detect stealth aircraft very well by putting out the needed power densities.


I have absolutely no problem in you taking objection to what has been claimed. You are entitled to it. Yet, you also posted RCS figures of other aircraft..again there is no conclusive proof of those measurements either. The reason I used the 1 sqm reference was that we may as well use that since we have absolutely no conclusive proof that we can share with other forum members on even your RCS figures for the F-35...What is published and recorded is one aspect..anyone can choose to believe or ignore that yet there is absolutely no information to demonstrate any other number is accurate either.

Before taking manufacturers rating for RCS at face value. I would suggest reading "Modern Radar Systems Analysis" by David K. Barton and "Introduction to Radar Systems" by Merril Skolnik.


Again two points:

1) I am not taking these ratings at face value. I am only putting what is open source out there.

2 ) In any of my discussion on this forum about stealth or the aircraft-concerned have I ever used these or any other RCS numbers. This was in fact the first time because i thought its relevant for the sake of discussion to put out there what is known and claimed in the public. Since you came out with a number that is entirely your opinion I felt it may offer some context to share what has been publicly disclosed so far even though it may just skim the surface.

Btw Guess what was open on my desktop when I read your post :)..Was going over some info on bistatic radar projects over the last few decades (Info I later obtained from Willis's book on them)

Image

I'll try to read up Barton's book though my next book on the matter is probably Sullivan's Microwave radar that's been sitting for a while and must go back soon to the friend that lent it to me.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5979
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Mort Walker » 24 Feb 2015 03:39

^^^The RCS of other aircraft are known a little better as they exist with many different operators. Later blocks of the F-16 and Su-30 will of course vary. However, for the most part they fall in-line with expectations and aren't several orders of magnitude off like 0.0001 sq. m. RCS. As I said when people claiming an RCS better than a butterfly raises a lot attention. Some of this is done for sales purposes.

Sullivan is fine, but I would start with Skolnik and if you're an electrical engineer or physicist then try "Microwave Engineering" by David M. Pozar too.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5979
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Mort Walker » 24 Feb 2015 03:52

Deleted.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 25 Feb 2015 16:56

http://www.punemirror.in/pune/civic/Air ... 360575.cms

Air defence brigade has tech on its radar
Pune Mirror | Feb 25, 2015, 02.30 AM IST

Air defence brigade has tech on its radar
Existing radars provide 2D location images, exact position has to be worked out (PICS: NIKHIL GHORPADE)
By: Sandip Dighe

Dehu Road ADB starts training officers, personnel in new 3D radar technology.

Taking into consideration the importance of upgrading defence technology to enhance protection provided to the nation, the city-based Air Defence Brigade (ADB) has recently started imparting training to its officers and personnel around the latest 3D Tactical Control Radar (TCR) surveillance, for detection and identification of aerial agents, soon after the release of the technology. The training aims to get participants familiar with the new tech for better operation preparedness in future.

The 3D TCR can track flying objects up to a range of 90 kilometres and provides a three-dimensional image of an object's exact location. Usually, existing radars provide a two-dimensional image of locations and the exact position has to be worked out.

Speaking to Mirror, Brigadier Saif Ul Islam Khan, brigade commander of ADB Dehu Road, said, "Whenever a new technology like the 3D radar is introduced, our core team receives related literature, comprehensive courses and studies, after which they train their respective units. Accordingly, our officers and personnel have already started taking training around the new radar system at the Army Air Defence College."

ADB on Dehu Road was raised on December 20, 1994 — it was the first formation to come about after the bifurcation of the Air Defence from the Regiment of Artillery, responsible with its units for air defence of the southern skies. The formation is fully equipped to counter modern-day aerial threats, with a variety of guns, missiles and radar systems. The guns systems have different calibres with long engagement ranges, while the air defence missiles provide layers to their protection.

Explaining the radar system in general, an ADB officer said, "The effectiveness and accuracy of firing from guns and missiles is enhanced by tactical and fire control radars, which direct this firing to a target. Smart proximity ammunition with guns enhances their lethality manifold. The radars of our formation are capable of operating even during jamming by the enemy. The entire engagement procedure is controlled by an automated Air Defence Command and control set-up."

Emphasising the importance of the new system, the official added, "The TCR enhances surveillance capability — the system radar will be deployed on ships to provide 360-degree surveillance to detect aircraft, helicopters and incoming anti-ship missiles in the Indian Navy."

An official from the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) told Mirror, "The TCR is a Tatra VVL mounted, mobile standalone medium range, all-weather 3D surveillance radar for detection and identification of aerial targets. Pertinent data can be collected at the Target Data Receiver (TDR), 20 km from the radar. It operates in S-band and is capable of Track-While-Scan (TWS) of airborne targets — up to 90 kms for fighter aircraft and 65 km for UAVs, subject to radar horizon. The antenna is mechanically rotated to provide 360 degree and 50 degree elevation coverage for a height of up to 10 kms."

vipins
BRFite
Posts: 417
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 17:46

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby vipins » 25 Feb 2015 21:53

Aerostats' specs by ADRDE
Zoom

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby member_28640 » 11 Mar 2015 17:30

New radar from Russia which can detect Hypersonic missiles and Stealth aircrafts... :shock:
Clicky!!
It looks like a fancy seeding machine, and can detect small and inconspicuous targets, including hypersonic ones and those made using stealth technology. Nebo-M (Sky-M) is designed for air defence combat missions and to provide radar support to anti-aircraft troops.

Russia has already begun the deployment of aerospace defence forces in the Arctic and the construction of early warning radar stations in the Far North (in Vorkuta). Not so long ago, in the Arctic, the military has deployed new over-the-horizon surface wave radar – the Podsolnukh (Sunflower).

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4967
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby brar_w » 11 Mar 2015 17:46

^ It is an upgraded version of the Nebo SVU VHF AESA exported to Iran.

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby member_28640 » 11 Mar 2015 18:04

Yes saar, but I cant understand how it will have the resolution + processing power to accomodate a scanning rate that can track Hypersonic missiles while keeping a wide Track beam.. I take those capabilities with a pinch of salt

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1278
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby vasu raya » 02 Apr 2015 23:30

This is a rehash of the above article,

New Radars, IRST Strengthen Stealth-Detection Claims

VHF AESA technology has entered production as part of the 55Zh6M Nebo-M multiband radar complex, which passed State tests in 2011 and is in production for Russian air defense forces against a 100-system order. The Nebo-M includes three truck-mounted radar systems, all of them -AESAs: the VHF RLM-M, the RLM-D in L-band (UHF) and the S/X-band RLM-S. (Russian documentation describes them as metric, decimetric and centimetric—that is, each differs from the next by an order of magnitude in frequency.) Each of the radars is equipped with the Orientir location system, comprising three Glonass satellite navigation receivers on a fixed frame, and they are connected via wireless or cable datalink to a ground control vehicle.

One of the classic drawbacks of VHF is slow scan rate. With the RLM-M, electronic scanning is superimposed on mechanical scanning. The radar can scan a 120-deg. sector mechanically, maintaining continuous track through all but the outer 15-deg. sectors. Within the scan area, the scan is virtually instantaneous, allowing energy to be focused on any possible target. It retains the basic advantages of VHF: NNIRT says that the Chinese DF-15 short-range ballistic missile has a 0.002 m2 RCS in X-band, but is 0.6 m2 in VHF.

The principle behind Nebo-M is the fusion of data from the three radars to create a robust kill chain. The VHF system performs initial detection and cues the UHF radar, which in turn can cue the X-band RLM-S. The Orientir system provides accurate azimuth data (which Glonass/GPS on its own does not support), and makes it possible for the three signals to be combined into a single target picture.


These detection improvements do not mean the end of stealth, in the view of most industry and government sources, but they do underlie current plans and discussions for the future applications of RCS-reduction and other stealth-related technologies. For example, the long debate over the appropriate level of stealth technology for the U.S. Navy’s Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike program has revolved around the development of A2/AD threats. The result is the end of a decades-long misapprehension, widely held in professional as well as public circles, that there is no major difference in stealth performance among various low-observable designs.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1278
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby vasu raya » 02 Apr 2015 23:35

Cross posting

vishvak wrote:Sorry if posted earlier:
Licenced to loop
Aaron spent 12 months making modifications to the helicopter including strengthening the airframe, shifting its center of gravity to make it more maneuverable and modifying the fuel and oil system.

But of all the parts that make up the helicopter, Aaron says the most important is the piece of forged titanium that is the rotor head.
..
The solid titanium rotor head on the Bo105 is the heart of the "rigid rotor" system that allows Aaron to perform aerobatics. .. The main rotor of a helicopter is the most complex part of the aircraft. Most helicopters allow the main rotor blades to either flap up and down or pivot forward and back as they spin. Some allow the blades to do both. The Bo105 doesn't allow either.

"Between the rigid head and the composite rotor blades is the key to how this thing can do what it does," Aaron says.

See the pics too.


are such rotors good enough to support antennas? as the blade tip isn't allowed to exceed Mach 1 and given fighter AESA radars are made to function even at supersonic speeds.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4967
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby brar_w » 03 Apr 2015 01:38

the appropriate level of stealth technology for the U.S. Navy’s Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike program has revolved around the development of A2/AD threats


No it has not. It has revolved around the fact that there is a classified element of the DOD UAV investment that some in the governing class want to get into the Navy Program while the Navy wants to keep the program under 10 Billion USD total (Development and acquisition) so that they can develop the next generation fighter to replace the Super Hornet. The Politicians and the civilian leadership led by the brilliant Bob Work want to leverage sizable investments in autonomy, stealth and sensors (sensor craft) that were developed covertly for the various programs ranging from Quartz, sensor craft to the RQ-180 under the support LRS mission. They want all UAV investments to leaverage the technology development while the Navy wants a relatively simple system.

Latest comments by Randy Forbes who heads the sea power committee basically LET OUT when he said that he cannot speak of the "latest developments" in the program because he doesn't want to land in jail.

This is a crappy job at doing a threat analysis but one doesn't really expect much LO/CLO stuff from a reporter anyway. The Chinese themselves do a better job at explaining their stuff with the papers they present at local Chinese and international conferences.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 786
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Thakur_B » 10 Apr 2015 21:56

As per @vkthakur, 'Atulya' is indeed FCR for Air Defence, just like Karan M speculated when it first popped up.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7460
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 06 Jun 2015 15:11

Would anyone know whether each SA-3 SAM squadron operated by IAF has its own P-12/18 or P-15/19 surveillance radar?

We know that IAF had bought P-12/18 and P-15/19 radars from USSR (as well as P-40) - where these bought as stand-alone radars as part of wider surveillance network? And are SA-3 squadrons fed surveillance data from these stand-alone radars and others like TRS-2215/PSM-Mk2 but themselves don't have dedicated surveillance radars at Squadron level? Thanks.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 06 Jun 2015 17:30

My understanding is that these squadrons have dedicated radars which end up being dual tasked as nodes in the ADGEs network.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18467
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Austin » 06 Jun 2015 19:23

rohitvats wrote:Would anyone know whether each SA-3 SAM squadron operated by IAF has its own P-12/18 or P-15/19 surveillance radar?

We know that IAF had bought P-12/18 and P-15/19 radars from USSR (as well as P-40) - where these bought as stand-alone radars as part of wider surveillance network? And are SA-3 squadrons fed surveillance data from these stand-alone radars and others


From what I know The P-15/19 were like long range tracking/acquisation , survellence radar that would scan the sky for long range targets and would then pass on the data to SA-3 batteries that would do its own sector scanning to narrow down on the area of interest.

It works the same way like 3D CAR would work for Akash Raj combination.

The P-12/18 is a VHF radar operating in metric wavelength , though its a survellence radar that passes target information to SAM and much the same radar that Zoltan Dani used to cue his SA-3 to shoot the F-117

TRS-2215/PSM-Mk2 but themselves don't have dedicated surveillance radars at Squadron level? Thanks.


I think the 2215 does the same job in IAF what P-19 does perhaps with much larger target tracking capability and better scan rate due to phased scanning capability with a digital avtar

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7460
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 06 Jun 2015 20:16

Austin wrote: From what I know The P-15/19 were like long range tracking/acquisation , survellence radar that would scan the sky for long range targets and would then pass on the data to SA-3 batteries that would do its own sector scanning to narrow down on the area of interest.

It works the same way like 3D CAR would work for Akash Raj combination.

The P-12/18 is a VHF radar operating in metric wavelength , though its a survellence radar that passes target information to SAM and much the same radar that Zoltan Dani used to cue his SA-3 to shoot the F-117


Austin - Soviet had developed a series of surveillance radars which were not necessarily tied to a particular missile type. The P-12/18 and P-15/19 have been used with entire gamut of SAM systems before advent of SA-10 and its dedicated 64N6 Big Bird Three-Dimensional Surveillance Radar (and associated FCR and low-level acquisition radar).

So, while initially the main surveillance radar was P-12/18, it was followed by P-15/19 series. And each was further accompanies by a height finding radar. P-40 figures here somewhere as the main acquisition radar for SA-4 (it was mobile being mounted on a field tractor).

In our case, as per SIPRI Arms Trade Register, bulk of P-12/18 and P-15/19 were purchased much prior to induction of SA-3 SAM systems in IAF. Around 40 systems by 1965. Same radar systems were purchased later as well in mid-70s and it is during this period that SA-3 came into IAF. However, number of these purchases between P-12/18, P-15/19 and P-40 (some 15 systems) is much less than purported strength of ~30 SAM squadrons in IAF.

Also, given their age and technology level, god knows how many still remain in service. Newer purchases could've gone towards replacement of older ones as well.

Hence, the question whether each SAM squadron has its own surveillance radar or, are these radars part of ADGES/BADZ and feed surveillance picture into SAM squadrons in their area of responsibility.

I think the 2215 does the same job in IAF what P-19 does perhaps with much larger target tracking capability and better scan rate due to phased scanning capability with a digital avtar


TRS-2215 and its Indian derivative, PMS-33 Mk2 are mobile 3D Radars which also serve GCI function. These are much more newer and more capable radars and entered service in 1982 onwards. These I know are part of ADGES. And are being replaced by Israeli EL/M-2084 'Arudhra' radars.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18467
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Austin » 06 Jun 2015 21:00

Dont rely on SIPRI data on purchase on such system they are many times wrong or just tend to exaggerate it.

Having said that the funding of P-19/18/15/12 would never change its likely to provide long range cuing of SAM or AckAck till these system can cue their radars or getting target coordinates and distributing among SAM squadrons

In any case indian SAM environment was never dense , and SOC did a report on it some time back so the low number of these system/radar were designed for VA/VP and key strategic places.

Hence, the question whether each SAM squadron has its own surveillance radar or, are these radars part of ADGES/BADZ and feed surveillance picture into SAM squadrons in their area of responsibility.


Perhaps a combination of P-19/18/15/12 were used , the older VHF being more widely available compared to its more modern P-15/19.... in any case SA-3 radar has its own capable radar for Search and Target Designation so the SA-3 could well afford not to have them.

It would be more interesting to know how the data from these P series radar get translated to SA-3 were these fully automated for its time or part automated/part manual via radio where vectors would be transferred to SAM.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 07 Jun 2015 00:01

Rohit, the data you have seems to be correct. SBMs article though dated, is a good reference for deployment methods and considerations.
It would be interesting to see if IAF purchased 83-DCARs and 37 Rohinis separately or the 37 Rohinis include 8 items for Akash. That would give insight into IAF deployment methods.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7460
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 07 Jun 2015 03:03

Karan M wrote:Rohit, the data you have seems to be correct. SBMs article though dated, is a good reference for deployment methods and considerations. It would be interesting to see if IAF purchased 83-DCARs and 37 Rohinis separately or the 37 Rohinis include 8 items for Akash. That would give insight into IAF deployment methods.


Karan - I've read the article by SBM and it is a primer on understanding the deployment and usage.

However, to understand the whole gamut of radars being developed and ordered, we need to look a bit deeper. ADGES for example consists of three types of radars:

1. High Power Radar (HPR) - this is where our venerable THD-1955 come in. The 2 x EL/M-2083 Aerostat based radars we bought from Israel also fall into this category. IAF initially wanted 3 x HPR on lines of THD-1955 but later went for Aerostat based radars.

BTW - THD in THD-1955 stands for Thomson Houston Design. I spent sh1t-load of time looking for technical information on this radar but no one calls it by this name! It is actually called as Medium Power Radar from Thomson-CSF stable. And was widely used in NATO countries for similar role. Germany replaced them pretty recently.

Presently, no import in this category are planned and I think DRDO is working on a state-of-art 4D Long Range radar in this segment.

2. Medium Power Radars - This is the segment which Israeli EL/M-2084 radars are presently filling by replacing TRS-2215D and our Indian derivative of the same, PSM-33Mk2. 19 of these are on order from Israel and we know DRDO is working on a MPR project of the same name.

3. Low-Level Transportable Radar (LLTR) - Signal Units of IAF known as Transportable Radar Units (TRU) operate the ST-68U '36D6' Tin Shield Radar. Ground Smarter-100 (GS-100) from Thales is the radar chosen for this segment and 19 of these will come from JV between Thales and BEL. Further, DRDO is working on 3D LLTR 'Ashwini' and IAF has already shown interest in purchasing 18 of these systems. Total requirement is said to be for 67 units. :twisted:

Next comes the other two categories -

(1) LLLWR - I think an Israeli radar has been imported in this category while DRDO develops the Aslesha 3D-LLLWR; which I think is about to/has cleared trials.

(2) Rohini Radar - 37 units ordered by IAF. 7 already delivered by 2010 and rest to be delivered before this year end. IMO, Rohini will end up replacing the INDRA-1 and INDRA-2 series of radars in IAF which were used for surveillance of low level threats. Given the flexibility inherent in the system, whether these come as part of SAM Squadron or stand-alone radars, they will ensure gap free surveillance for India.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7460
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 07 Jun 2015 03:19

BTW - if one assumes that IAF will be placing the Israeli EL/M-2084 MPR at each of its air-base and then plots a 250 km radius circles to imitate range of these radars, you get a gap free coverage of western border. With overlapping coverage. And into this, add the HPR (THD-1955), LLTR, Rohini and AWACS!

Here is a sample of plotting only MPR coverage. And this is only for 10 stations on west with Pathankot being one below the topmost red-dot and Bhuj being the one in south.

Image

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby RamaY » 07 Jun 2015 05:32

^saar, can you pls include entire kashmir to get a full picture. both east-west axes meet in that area and we would need double/triple backup there.

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3151
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby deejay » 07 Jun 2015 08:42

^^^ Sir, Kashmir is the mountains sir. Radars located in AF Bases will not have advertised coverage in high mountains. For that this map will need the radar radii of the various mountain top radar sites all along.

Plus, as Rohit said this is just the MPR radar coverage.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2411
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Jun 2015 20:35

Rohit, dunno if you are familiar with this site, might be of some use to you..

http://geimint.blogspot.com/2010/09/ind ... k.html?m=1

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7460
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 07 Jun 2015 22:03

RamaY wrote:^saar, can you pls include entire kashmir to get a full picture. both east-west axes meet in that area and we would need double/triple backup there.


RamaY - for mountainous regions, apart from High and Medium Power Radars, we also require - and are importing/developing - dedicated radars to help address the typical issues. Issues due to folds and valleys in mountains. Further, radars need to mounted as high as possible to address masking issue of mountain ranges.

For example, the High Power Radar in Jammu region is mounted on top of hill at quite high an elevation. Apart from that, we're developing Low-Level Light Weight Radar (LLLWR) 'Aslesha' which can be mounted on high hills/ridge-lines to capture aircraft which are using mountains to mask their movement.

So, a complete radar coverage will need to factor the location of last option as well.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7460
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 07 Jun 2015 22:08

Cain Marko wrote:Rohit, dunno if you are familiar with this site, might be of some use to you..

http://geimint.blogspot.com/2010/09/ind ... k.html?m=1


CM, I'm aware of this site and did go through it as well.

The biggest flaw in this analysis is that it considers only THD-1955 and ST-68U/36D6 'Tin Shield' radars. And his analysis is based on assumption that ST-68U does the major work when it comes to coverage for bases and Ground Control Intercept. He completely misses the TRS-2215D and our derivative, PSM-33MK2 series of radars; these are 3D radars and one of their express purpose was to facilitate Ground Control Intercept function.

And as I have written earlier, ST-68U are with Transportable Radar Units of IAF; these are both co-located with certain bases for base level coverage and GCI as well as moved around to fill gaps in coverage.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2043
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby VinodTK » 21 Jun 2015 03:29

India to plug holes in sky with web of radars
NEW DELHI: India is slowly but steadily building a fully-automated surveillance network to make its airspace, which still has many gaping holes in central and peninsular mainland as well as island territories, as secure as possible in the years ahead.

By progressive integration of all airborne and ground-based civilian and military radars around the country, the aim is to ensure any intrusion by a hostile aircraft, helicopter, drone or micro-light is detected as soon as it takes place.

"This, in turn, will make it possible to swiftly launch counter-measures, which can range from scrambling of fighters to surface-to-air missiles and guns coming into play. This proposed total fusion of sensors and shooters, which is still some distance away, will help minimise the reaction time," said a source.

Towards this end, the IAF has already established five nodes of the automated air defence network with data links or the IACCS (integrated air command and control system) at Barnala (Punjab), Wadsar (Gujarat), Aya Nagar (Delhi), Jodhpur (Rajasthan) and Ambala (Haryana) with help from defence PSU Bharat Electronics.

Under Phase-II of the IACCS, approved by the defence acquisitions council for Rs 7,160 crore, four new major nodes and 10 sub-nodes will now come up. While three nodes will be in eastern, central and southern India, the fourth is meant for the strategically-located Andaman and Nicobar Island archipelago.

"Some will be located in underground complexes to improve survivability in face of enemy attacks. The entire IACCS infrastructure is being upgraded, which include advanced early-warning and jam-resistant radars. The proposed launch of the dedicated IAF-Army satellite will also help in this," said the source.

The wide array of new radars being gradually inducted range from ground-based medium power, low level and light weight radars to "eyes in the skies" in the shape of additional AWACS (airborne warning & control systems) and Aerostat radars.

"The first medium-power radar, for instance, was inducted in Naliya around four years ago," said a source. Interestingly, the plan also includes specialised rugged mountain radars meant for high-altitude areas bordering China, which can pick up even small aircraft from a distance of 300 to 400 km away.

Some civilian radars are already linked to the IAF network, which includes the ones controlled by the Airports Authority of India at Delhi, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Chennai, Kolkata and Bengaluru. "IAF does not control air traffic but the real-time radar picture is available to it," said the source.

There has, however, been an excruciating delay in IACCS, a critical operational requirement first mooted by IAF in 1998. But much like the maritime surveillance network picked up speed after the 26/11 strikes in Mumbai punched holes in the country's coastal security architecture in 2008, the IACCS is now finally getting the attention it deserves.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 21 Jun 2015 04:07

rohitvats wrote:Karan - I've read the article by SBM and it is a primer on understanding the deployment and usage.

However, to understand the whole gamut of radars being developed and ordered, we need to look a bit deeper. ADGES for example consists of three types of radars:

1. High Power Radar (HPR) - this is where our venerable THD-1955 come in. The 2 x EL/M-2083 Aerostat based radars we bought from Israel also fall into this category. IAF initially wanted 3 x HPR on lines of THD-1955 but later went for Aerostat based radars.

BTW - THD in THD-1955 stands for Thomson Houston Design. I spent sh1t-load of time looking for technical information on this radar but no one calls it by this name! It is actually called as Medium Power Radar from Thomson-CSF stable. And was widely used in NATO countries for similar role. Germany replaced them pretty recently.

Presently, no import in this category are planned and I think DRDO is working on a state-of-art 4D Long Range radar in this segment.


Rohit, a RFI went out for these radars are being imported as DRDO seems to be fully caught up in its existing projects including the strategic ones. A pity, as the LRTR type system could be leveraged for exactly these roles.

http://hal-india.com/Common/Uploads/Ten ... 0RADAR.pdf

DRDO has two 4D radars in trials. One is the Rohini follow on and the other is MPR of which IAF has indented 8 but has requirement for 40-50!

2. Medium Power Radars - This is the segment which Israeli EL/M-2084 radars are presently filling by replacing TRS-2215D and our Indian derivative of the same, PSM-33Mk2. 19 of these are on order from Israel and we know DRDO is working on a MPR project of the same name.


Yes. I think the TRS and PSM33 will remain around too for a while. Did you come across any data stating they would be retired

3. Low-Level Transportable Radar (LLTR) - Signal Units of IAF known as Transportable Radar Units (TRU) operate the ST-68U '36D6' Tin Shield Radar. Ground Smarter-100 (GS-100) from Thales is the radar chosen for this segment and 19 of these will come from JV between Thales and BEL. Further, DRDO is working on 3D LLTR 'Ashwini' and IAF has already shown interest in purchasing 18 of these systems. Total requirement is said to be for 67 units. :twisted:


Yes


Next comes the other two categories -

(1) LLLWR - I think an Israeli radar has been imported in this category while DRDO develops the Aslesha 3D-LLLWR; which I think is about to/has cleared trials.


Aslesha is ordered as well, some 20-30 units

(2) Rohini Radar - 37 units ordered by IAF. 7 already delivered by 2010 and rest to be delivered before this year end. IMO, Rohini will end up replacing the INDRA-1 and INDRA-2 series of radars in IAF which were used for surveillance of low level threats. Given the flexibility inherent in the system, whether these come as part of SAM Squadron or stand-alone radars, they will ensure gap free surveillance for India.


IAF classifies Rohini as LLTR as well. The aforementioned AESA radar is nothing but a Rohini upgraded with AESA tech (of course not so straightforward but same layout)

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 21 Jun 2015 04:11

[quote="rohitvats"]BTW - if one assumes that IAF will be placing the Israeli EL/M-2084 MPR at each of its air-base and then plots a 250 km radius circles to imitate range of these radars, you get a gap free coverage of western border. With overlapping coverage. And into this, add the HPR (THD-1955), LLTR, Rohini and AWACS!

Here is a sample of plotting only MPR coverage. And this is only for 10 stations on west with Pathankot being one below the topmost red-dot and Bhuj being the one in south.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-WPy- ... ge_MPR.jpg[/img]
...............................

Rohit
Can't see anything...

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 21 Jun 2015 04:21

BTW - THD in THD-1955 stands for Thomson Houston Design. I spent sh1t-load of time looking for technical information on this radar but no one calls it by this name! It is actually called as Medium Power Radar from Thomson-CSF stable. And was widely used in NATO countries for similar role. Germany replaced them pretty recently.

LOL, i remember going through that very same experience
http://translate.google.co.in/translate ... rev=search

Nominally Medium Power Radar (ie a radar medium power) contradictory is this radar with a pulse output of 20 megawatts is by far the most powerful air defense radar Germany.

The radar antenna reflector has a width of about 16 meters and a height of about six meters, with an area of around 96 square meters and a weight of over 3.8 tonnes. [1]

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 21 Jun 2015 04:22


Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Karan M » 21 Jun 2015 16:49

http://www.asianage.com/india/homegrown ... ations-660

Home » India
Homegrown AEW&C draws nations
May 05, 2015 - B.R. Srikanth |

Bengaluru

Email this page Printer-friendly version

Share

Somewhere in the western sector, an aircraft which could pass off for a business jet except for its extended nose cone and a turret-shaped contraption above the cockpit has been flying scores of sorties before joining the Indian Air Force (IAF)’s fleet, but it has already caught the fancy of several countries — South Africa, Brazil and Indonesia — among others.

The home-grown Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) system, the critical eye-in-the-sky developed by DRDO’s Centre for Airborne Systems (CABS), Bengaluru, is only a step away from induction by the IAF, having flown more than 300 test sorties over different cities. Once airborne, the aircraft can fly continuously for five hours, or double that duration after air-to-air refuelling.

It can track several hundred targets simultaneously in the air and on the ground, some even 350 km away, thus dramatically enhancing the strike capability of IAF’s fighter jets. Add to it the cost advantage: This AEW&C costs half the price paid by the country’s neighbours for a similar system.

...............
Sources in the ministry of defence (MoD) said South Africa, Brazil and Indonesia have written to the Union government enquiring about the AEW&C — not just for military operations but for homeland security and identification of new fish schools as well.

In fact, representatives of Embraer SA, the Brazilian aerospace behemoth which has provided the EMB-145 aircraft for AEW&C project have discussed the possibility of forging a partnership to produce the system and export it during Aero India 2015.

Dr V.S. Arunachalam, former scientific adviser to the defence minister, who initiated this project, says AEW’s induction by the IAF would help in 360 degree coverage, an advantage superior to a thousand ground-based radars. ‘‘Its power will be felt by the adversary because it also has electronic counter-counter measures (ECCM). We had to go through some difficulties, including a crash, but we have an indigenous system which will help open up the land and skies of the enemy,’’ he added.

DRDO has spent about Rs 2,000 crores over a decade for development of three systems, including acquisition of Embraer aircraft, setting up the infrastructure and flight testing. Recently, the defence acquisition council (DAC) headed by defence minister Manohar Parrikar has sanctioned Rs 5,000 crores for the AWACS programme, a more advanced system to be integrated into six wide-bodied aircraft.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5979
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Mort Walker » 21 Jun 2015 17:23

Dr V.S. Arunachalam, former scientific adviser to the defence minister, who initiated this project, says AEW’s induction by the IAF would help in 360 degree coverage, an advantage superior to a thousand ground-based radars. ‘‘Its power will be felt by the adversary because it also has electronic counter-counter measures (ECCM). We had to go through some difficulties, including a crash, but we have an indigenous system which will help open up the land and skies of the enemy,’’ he added.


Having an extensive ground based radar network means that the you can refine the clutter maps and have a good distinction of the target against the clutter. Aside from transmit power, an airborne radar needs moving clutter maps, really refined down to a few meter resolution and if you don't have that, then detecting targets becomes difficult especially if they are moving low and slow. From Dr. Arunchalam's statement, I would assume that high resolution clutter maps, better than 1m resolution, have been provided to this and the AWACS programme. Most likely from various remote sensing satellites launched by ISRO over the last 15 years.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1278
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby vasu raya » 21 Jun 2015 23:05

Israeli "Shavit" system has a ground mapping mode, news was that it was used in the Nepal earthquake aftermath this year, is it the same as generating high resolution clutter maps or more like foliage and few meter ground penetration? on second thoughts if we had the high resolution maps we wouldn't have the C-130J crash as there wouldn't be a need to do manual flying at such low altitudes unless we cannot load the maps onto these American aircraft, Boeing's recent demonstration of terrain avoidance, one of the engineer's mentions that half the challenge was getting the maps from a number of sources into a usable form by the flight control system which is an offline process

Wonder what the fish school detection entails with the desi AEW&C system and how much overlap does it have with the Dorniers?

And then low RCS target detection, last time you mentioned a more sensitive receiver is being designed for the follow on bigger AWACS, how about the now? like the PAKFA/Su-35 wing mounted L band radars even if they could be jammed

one more req. it can do the role of a airborne ATC in situations like the Uttarakhand floods, terrain being all mountains, weather and landslides being against you, lot of low flying chopper traffic

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1387
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Radar - Specs & Discussions

Postby Kersi D » 22 Jun 2015 21:15

Maybe be slightly OT

One unanswered question

DOES INDIA HAVE / HAD SA 10 or SA 12 SAM SYSTEM ?

Many years ago i was told by a reliable source (reliable according to me) that we have some 7-8 system for guarding Mumbai (2 systems), Dilli, Vizag, Hyderabad, ????

Sometime back i had read that we do not have any sch system. However we got the ST 68U EW radars. Since these radars are "close associated" with the SA 10/12 SAMs it was thought that we have the SA 10/12 SAM systems.

I am still as confused, as ever

K


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 15 guests