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.
Cain Marko wrote:Can some guru please answer my last question... What happened to the 2 additional phalcon order?
there were initial reports of orders and then nothing, and then reports of Russia hiking up prices of the ILs way too much for MoD liking, safe to assume that idea is dead.
The Phalcons are indeed on the way out to be replaced by DRDO AWACS, possibly in suitable numbers.
the DRDO AWACS requires power much more than "two engines could handle ", there was indeed some discussion to put in a third engine to provide enough power ! ., i do not think the turboprops can handle the requirement, happy to be corrected !
The turboprops cannot provide the amount of power, that is required to generate ranges in excess of 500KM.
If the radar is been built on GaN, a S band TRM can pump out 110W. A 2000 TRM radar can do 220KW! On paper atleast, with efficiency, cooling requirement etc not allowing 100% output.
You get great range, great resolution, phenomenal tracking numbers.. but the platform needs to provide the power.
I think Netra's one panel alone has 1000 TRM. A330 is going to be 4 panels.
the DRDO AWACS requires power much more than "two engines could handle ", there was indeed some discussion to put in a third engine to provide enough power ! ., i do not think the turboprops can handle the requirement, happy to be corrected !
Unless all engines out there have the exact same capacity, this is a pretty meaningless statement.
I think there was a reference from Dr Christopher where he mentioned a third engine (sort of an APU) would be put in to address the additional power demand for an AWACS. Made me glad because that meant we really wanted to put in a heavy duty radar on the system.
We should be aiming for much better performance than the Phalcon to be honest, if its S-Band, because the higher band would be more susceptible to the stealth shaping of a standard X-S band optimized design and hence to make up for any offset in range. If a GaN based Global Eye can brag its achieving conventional AEW&CS ranges against a LO target, we should aim for even better.
How would they put a third engine? Must be a good reason they are trying to use an aircraft engine but have anyone tried using a diesel generator instead. It should provide better efficiency and higher power.
Not aure if anyone makes an aerospace grade diesel generator of that size.
Karan M wrote:I think there was a reference from Dr Christopher where he mentioned a third engine (sort of an APU) would be put in to address the additional power demand for an AWACS.
I think it was in AI2017, CABS had shown a video/model of a 330 with another one of its actual engine placed inside the cabin for additional power.
Karan M wrote:I think there was a reference from Dr Christopher where he mentioned a third engine (sort of an APU) would be put in to address the additional power demand for an AWACS.
I think it was in AI2017, CABS had shown a video/model of a 330 with another one of its actual engine placed inside the cabin for additional power.
It would be an APU, not an actual aircraft engine of the kind that flies the plane.
Katare wrote:How would they put a third engine? Must be a good reason they are trying to use an aircraft engine but have anyone tried using a diesel generator instead. It should provide better efficiency and higher power.
Not aure if anyone makes an aerospace grade diesel generator of that size.
Large APU that "kicks in" when the avionics are on full power draw would be my guess.
Karan M wrote:I think there was a reference from Dr Christopher where he mentioned a third engine (sort of an APU) would be put in to address the additional power demand for an AWACS.
I think it was in AI2017, CABS had shown a video/model of a 330 with another one of its actual engine placed inside the cabin for additional power.
If you can find that link out, it would be great. A real engine in an enclosed aircraft is very unlikely (for all the obvious reasons) but that image could have been of a large APU?
Karan M wrote:
If you can find that link out, it would be great. A real engine in an enclosed aircraft is very unlikely (for all the obvious reasons) but that image could have been of a large APU?
Bart S wrote:
It would be an APU, not an actual aircraft engine of the kind that flies the plane.
It most certainly wasn't an APU. The aft position of the aircraft was walled up and the engine placed inside it. I thought it was just for representative purposes so left it at that. Will try and find it in my archive drive if it's there.
Katare wrote:How would they put a third engine? Must be a good reason they are trying to use an aircraft engine but have anyone tried using a diesel generator instead. It should provide better efficiency and higher power.
Not aure if anyone makes an aerospace grade diesel generator of that size.
Isn't Jet fuel ensure commonality and slightly cheaper with kerosene charectics and why put a internal combustion engine when everything else is jet powered.
The Nethra has two radar faces (or is it just one?) and the proposed AWACS will have 3 radar faces in a triangle.
The ERJ 145 has 79.34 kn of installed power while the A330 has 632 kn of installed power. Roughly 8x.
Assuming we use 3 x Nethra radar and despite additional fuselage weight of A330 and fuel load, it seems improbable 8x growth in power wont be able to handle it.
Airlines and airliners carry huge amounts of commercial cargo in addition to passengers - that is how your amazon and flipkart packages are delivered quickly. The Nethra radar will easily fit into the cargo weight of A330
Engine inside fuselage is preposterous aerodynamically and an APU fits snugly without having to wall off a section.
- The option of 2 Phalcons is not happening
- there is a plan of total 6 A330 bsed AWACS in three phases spanning over a decade. First one out in 7yrs from date of signing contract. Airbus itself has lead time of 4yrs for Airframe delivery.
- 5 more Netra are being pushed for by the CAS himself.
Given the max angle that the beams need is 90 degrees, instead of 120, can two faces generate over lapping beams (at same phase) to increase range & resolution?
A330-version is at least a decade away. Contract signing will take its usual time. Then 4-years for Airbus to deliver followed by 3 or more years for DRDO integration. Some more time for IAF acceptance and squadron formation.
Looks like Netra's performance at Balakote turned the tide.
A 5 Netra order above and beyond the current would give the IAF 8 Netra's - fairly sufficient to handle the entire PAF threat, leaving the Phalcons for the PLAAF.
JTull wrote:Even Netra airframes will have 2 years' leadtime once price negotiations are concluded and orders placed!
36-months is the usual standard from contract signing to first lot delivery. But unlike A-330, Netras have a straight path to operation. R&D, user acceptance, training & tactics, and supporting infrastructure already in place with the first 3 induction.
Isn't Embraer still on the blacklist? Will the MoD suddenly see the light and remove them from it because it is a critical need? I wouldn't hold my breath.
nachiket wrote:Isn't Embraer still on the blacklist? Will the MoD suddenly see the light and remove them from it because it is a critical need? I wouldn't hold my breath.
I thought so too but we cut off our nose to spite our face in the HDW scandal. Maybe someone talked sense into this way of punishing ourselves double when there is malfeasance?
Kartik wrote:5 more Netra AEW&Cs being pushed by Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria?! Is he a God send or what?!
Maybe that person is the new ACM! In Amreeki parlance -- Bhaduria is the MAN.
Given the antecedents of the Embraer fiasco, I'm sure if the govt wants they can even use it politically and make it worth. That we haven't bought any awacs or mrtt in the last 5 years despite having a govt which is predisposed to listen tells you enough about our procurement.
Cain Marko wrote:Can some guru please answer my last question... What happened to the 2 additional phalcon order?
there were initial reports of orders and then nothing, and then reports of Russia hiking up prices of the ILs way too much for MoD liking, safe to assume that idea is dead.
The Phalcons are indeed on the way out to be replaced by DRDO AWACS, possibly in suitable numbers.
Thank you Kitji. I wonder if they will totally abandon those a50 based phalcons...
Absolutely no reason to believe it will move an inch forward with all the Embraer blacklisting/corruption fiasco. Any new platform and all the tendering/airframe modification etc will start afresh and we know how soon it will conclude.
TLDR, the only chance was right at the start where we should have got hold of 5-8 airframes modified one shot and finished it. Any re-ordering is always <50% chance of going through
The report about extra costs was in 2017 and were for the new heavily upgraded IL-76-MD-90s built in Russia not Uzbek assembled like earlier Sov era birds.New engines, glass cockpit, extra 10t payload, extra range anf only a 3- man crew.
They cost just $40-45M a pop, 1/3rd. that of an A-330! Why the A-330 was earlief rejected.The anti-Ru lobby has been hard at work as on price they're unbeatable even for extra tankers, where repeatedly western birds were shot down as being more expensive. So in a clever move the specs were changed, like the VVIP helos, to a 2-engined bird only. This ruled out the upgraded IL-78s.
However, using the C-295s as a Netra platform is a good idea as we need increased numbers to cover our vast airspace right from the west coast to Rajasthan, Punjab, Kashmir, Ladakh, HP, U'khand the border with Nepal and the entire N-east. Coastal surveillance and islands another mattrr.
The 2 extra Phalcons must be acquired, 3 preferably with at least a dozen C-295 Netras, all with refuelling capacity.
If reports are true will help imlrove coverage, but being slower than the EMBs be more vulnerable.
Last edited by Philip on 03 Dec 2019 19:21, edited 3 times in total.
JTull wrote:idrw has chimed in with it's speculation that C295 could be the platform for 5 new Netras.
I hope this is true. It works well for the eventual induction of the C295 as MII. The Embraer can't be the long term solution even without the scandal.
When that happens we can get even more Netras with an Indian produced platform to supplement the more expensive A330 AWACS.