International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

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.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4554
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Neshant » 28 Aug 2018 12:58


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 31 Aug 2018 19:02

Philip wrote:True, no one will show gheir full hand in peacetime.Even our Akula has none of the exotic sensors seen on Ru Akulas for wake detection, etc., some whose true purpose is still not known.Even the tubes for special decoys and hard- kill systems have been blanked off in our Chakra.However, some of these may come with the second sub.

I think sev. previous AWST and other articles have shown the integrated conformal radars, el-op sensor, etc. for the FGFA.L.The new rengine has been developed and by 2020 the first batch of 12 will have been delivered according to Ru reports.2025 is thr datd when the Franco-German stealth bird is supposed to fly.It looks v.futuristic, a better overall shape than even what is proposed as the US's next stalth bird of the UK's Tempest.


Doing an eyeball analysis of placeholder graphics done up for public consumption will be ill-advised. The two efforts are targeting different capability and maturity dates. The Franco-German program is a study and they are looking to collaborate on a program. This will continue and hopefully, soon there will be a deal and some money to begin working on it and its sub systems. The UK is looking for a partner (most likely) and may end up joining this program or find other avenues. Neither of the three countries can likely afford a NG product on their own without serious compromises elsewhere (other capabilities and systems).

The US, on the other hand, is invested into two next-generation fighters and has serious money to back that up ($10+ Billion over the next 5 years in case of just one of those two efforts). It invested in key enablers such as engines, directed energy research for a fighter aircraft, next-generation sensor technology etc in some cases close to a decade ago and will soon (next 2-3 years) be bench testing some of these things (Next Generation, clean sheet Adaptive engines for example). Other than that these two efforts are happening completely in the dark and things are likely to remain that way for the foreseeable future. The only reasonably good way to follow interest/plans etc is to look at budgets and there is a boatload of money (budget line item snapshot below) being poured into a NG fighter by the USAF which is about 2 years ahead of the US Navy so expect the latter's investment to also pick up.

What’s going on with America’s next fighter designs?

Below is the budget document for the USAF's 6th generation fighter effort. This excludes money spent on the effort prior to Fiscal Year 2017, and also excludes any money spent on the three adaptive engine efforts (ADVENT with GE and RR, AETD and AETP with GE and P&W). If you add all that money to the amount budgeted here you get close to $13 Billion spent/budgeted between 2012/13 and 2023 on "enabling technology development and advanced prototyping". This upfront investment in technology is required because without it you can't get to a new program as enhanced capability does not appear out of thin air but requires years, and in some cases, decades of lead time and investment. You identify low maturity, high value technologies, invest in them, prototype them and mature them to a point where you decide whether they are mature/ready/appropriate enough to roll into a new engineering program. This requires focused investment and some level of risk as quite a few bets you make will not pan out.

Image

Unless the Europeans partners (whichever combination may eventually work out) want to pursue a path similar to the one they followed earlier with the Eurocanards (i.e. package existing mature technology into a new airframe) they cannot avoid having to make similar investments to develop enabling capabilities for next generation systems. No one has yet found a way to bypass hard S&T and R&D investment which is the building block of any future capability be it a more effecient civilian airliner, or an advanced next generation combat aircraft.

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 220
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby pravula » 01 Sep 2018 06:19

^ Welcome back brar.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1443
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 01 Sep 2018 10:41

Manish_P wrote:Good to see you, Brar_w.

Incidentally Karan_m, in a recent post mentioned about the F35, from a POV, being more stealthy than the F22A. And that it's lesser optimal shaping was compensated by the advances in tech of RAM bonding with the airframe (which you had mentioned, in some detail, in one of your earlier posts as well).

I was wondering (purely hypothetically) if in future the US restarts the F22 line, then wouldn't they apply these tech advances to the F22 and then in effect make it even more LO than it currently is (and more LO than the F35)?


Well well..

Lockheed Pitching U.S. Air Force On F-22-F-35 Hybrid Fighter Intended For Japan

Lockheed Martin is reportedly pitching the idea of a new fighter jet that would combine features from its F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to the U.S. Air Force. It is also continuing to offer a similar proposal to the Japanese government and is now reportedly willing to let companies in Japan handle a significant portion of the research and development and production of the aircraft.


Lockheed Martin’s concept would reportedly marry the F-35’s core features, such as its advanced mission computer and extensive, inter-linked sensor suite, with an airframe design derived from that of the F-22. The company would also be able to incorporate lessons learned in stealth coatings and other complex manufacturing processes required for stealthy and other advanced aircraft that it has learned from the F-35 into the design and production of the new aircraft.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 01 Sep 2018 11:12

This has been floating around for a few months now an does not really make much sense in light of what the US Air Force has described via its analysis for future Air Superiority needs. The theme emerging from the analysis has been that they are going to need a Penetrating ISR asset (rumored to be the RQ-180), a Penetrating long range strike aircraft (known to be the B-21), and a Penetrating Airborne Electronic Attack and Counter Air Asset. It is the latter which they rolled into the NGAD tech bucket.

Lockheed likely put something together for Japan and also pitched it to the USAF in the hope that someone will take them up on it. I don't really see it going anywhere since the USAF has now committed itself firmly behind the NGAD effort and has carved out a serious chunk of its R&D expenditure over the next 5 years to pay for tech development. OEMs do these things all the time. God knows how many times Boeing has likely pitched a warmed over F-15 to the USAF without any success.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1443
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 01 Sep 2018 11:57

brar_w wrote:This has been floating around for a few months now an does not really make much sense in light of what the US Air Force has described via its analysis for future Air Superiority needs. .


No, not to the US, for sure

brar_w wrote:Lockheed likely put something together for Japan..


As an alternate to the scrapped indigenous 5th gen F-3..

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3396
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby JayS » 01 Sep 2018 14:30

Good to see you back here brar. :D

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 01 Sep 2018 15:07

sirji is back with a new truckload of detailed documents and mind boggling detail :) I would have loved if you were our project manager than the current sloppy 'good enough' crew.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 01 Sep 2018 19:18

Manish_P wrote:
As an alternate to the scrapped indigenous 5th gen F-3..


I believe Japan sent out an RFI to US and European OEMs (I think it was BAE) to see what options they had. There is no single RFP or a path that they have determined but they are exploring whether to go in for a foreign design, see if they can partner with an foreign OEM and complete their own F3, or look to produce something more mature.

Even in the US, as the Materials Solution Analysis would have/ is being been conducted on the Next Generation Air Dominance, the folks doing it, based on regulations, have to explore alternative approaches that are cheaper and/or lower risk. These approaches could mean buying more of the current aircraft, modifying current aircraft etc etc. If you come out of your Analysis of Alternatives phase looking for investing in a NG system then that means that you have weighed in on all of these options and determined them to not be sufficient to meet your future needs. So unless there is some huge policy shift in the US, and those AOA assumptions are no longer valid, I don't see the USAF looking at this and giving up on the path they are currently on.

This does not mean that the F-22 won't be upgraded. Those plans are well in place. It just means that the future gap that the USAF currently wants to plug would require a different type of capability. But some of the technology (part of that $13 Billion I mentioned above) is likely to roll into the F-22 and F-35 earlier (see below) just because it will be available...much like the F-15 declaring IOC with an AESA radar 5 full years before the F-22A which invested in fighter AESA research in the US.

Image

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1443
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 01 Sep 2018 22:39

brar_w wrote:I believe Japan sent out an RFI to US and European OEMs (I think it was BAE) to see what options they had.


Despite having the F35. Have they not been offered/not taken up the same upgrade path which the US is taking for its F35s? I can understand that their needs/requirements would be different..

brar_w wrote:I don't see the USAF looking at this and giving up on the path they are currently on.


Neither do I

brar_w wrote:This does not mean that the F-22 won't be upgraded. Those plans are well in place. It just means that the future gap that the USAF currently wants to plug would require a different type of capability. But some of the technology (part of that $13 Billion I mentioned above) is likely to roll into the F-22 and F-35 earlier (see below) just because it will be available


Exactly. In the graphic shared by you it only mentions new/upgraded engine (and therefore?) improvements in range and fuel savings for the Raptors. Thanks for sharing it.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 01 Sep 2018 22:50

Despite having the F35. Have they not been offered/not taken up the same upgrade path which the US is taking for its F35s? I can understand that their needs/requirements would be different..


I am sure that is on offer as well. In fact, a modified F-35 (much like the F-16 --> F-2 transition) is probably the most cost-effective path for them. Lockheed has also pitched a modified F-35 C to the US Navy, as part of a lower cost / lower risk option for its FA-XX program.

Exactly. In the graphic shared by you it only mentions new/upgraded engine (and therefore?) improvements in range and fuel savings for the Raptors. Thanks for sharing it.


Yeah it specifically refers to AETP engines as both GE and P&W are currently fabricating the first of the 6 Adaptive engines ((GE XA-100 and P&W XA-101 they are to provide to the USAF for testing) as a potential application for them would be for them (or their derivatives) to retrofit existing 5th generation aircraft. In fact, both the XA-100 and 101 have been sized to be able to directly upgrade the F-35 if that is the post AETP path (or one of the paths) chosen by the USAF.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1443
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 01 Sep 2018 23:34

Understood. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35824
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 02 Sep 2018 09:04

This article is for all who hate F35
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... away-30267

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1224
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby ArjunPandit » 02 Sep 2018 11:51

^^The same site was comparing F22 and J20. I stopped reading afterwards....for a few minutes and read the article....

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 02 Sep 2018 18:33

National Interest is the Sputnik of US National Security media coverage. My sympathies to those who have wasted their time there.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 04 Sep 2018 16:51

abhik wrote:"Top of the food chain are the Japanese. They have a GaN AESA fighter radar and AESA based BVR, started deploying in 2012!"
AFAIK there are no operational GaN AESA fighter radars, happy to be corrected.


The post has contradictory information in the first and second sentences. If no one has operational GaN fighter radar, how does Japan have a GaN AESA fighter radar? The benefits of a Gallium Nitride fighter radar based on current technology do not meet the potential because there is still the issue of heat dissipation which a lot many folks are working on. Until you solve that puzzle you are only going to get incremental gains and not realize the full potential of the new material in terms of performance. Larger radars (grounds, ships etc) don't have such trouble as you have more SWaP to deal with. July's Journal of Electronic Defense (JED) has a good article on this topic.

Japan does not field many cutting-edge AESA radars for large military applications. It is buying GaN AESA radars from the US to support its Missile Defense needs and is likely to do the same to support its AEGIS upgrade needs in the future. If you look at the number of GaN radars in development or operational use, and the size and scope of these projects then you can put the US RF industry at a level that few can reach just given the size, breadth and scale of the programs. L band and S-band GaN radars are already with frontline operators and the first GaN TPY-2 (X-band) is slated for delivery this fall and will be exported as well. The entire Sea based X band radar with its 40,000+ T/R modules will be ugpraded with GaN. Orders for dozens more S-band, C-band, X-band are also in place. Higher frequency GaN devices have been used in communication and data link/SatCom suites for a number of years now and the Next generation Jammer - Mid Band is currently flying and jamming targets at test ranges using its GaN AESA set up. The Low-Band NGJ pod has also flown and covers a different frequency range. The Space Fence and the LRDR are the two largest AESA radar projects in the world and both utilize GaN. A while ago, I compiled a list of current US Gallium Nitride based radar programs..I think it is in the Radar thread...

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2629
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby kit » 04 Sep 2018 22:48

@ Brar_w., the Japanese stealth fighter apparently did test the GaN AESA if i am not wrong it flew with a working model . maybe not "operational"

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 04 Sep 2018 23:55

The Shinshin was a scaled demonstrator so I don't think the tech demonstrator actually had a sensor.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 05 Sep 2018 02:32

First details of the Vanguard Surveillance radar that Northrop Grumman is currently flying. It was down-selected for the USAF's JSTARS sensor replacement which was subsequently cancelled. Now NG will offer it for other programs, perhaps a scaled version for UAV's or bombers. It is a GaN AESA that can operate in X band as well as Ku Band.

Northrop Reveals Modular Vanguard Surveillance Radar Aerospace Daily & Defense Report Sep 04, 2018
Steve Trimble, Lee Hudson


Image

Compared to the S-band SPY-6, Northrop offers the first version of Vanguard with dual-band capability, Pearson says. The Vanguard can track distant targets through weather in X-band, or switch to Ku-band to acquire a higher-resolution image at shorter ranges.
In April 2017, Northrop completed Vanguard’s first flight test. Following the experiment, the company released a statement but did not divulge the sensor’s name.
Northrop launched development of the Vanguard to support multiple applications, but offered it first for the U.S. Air Force’s canceled plan to recapitalize the Northrop E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (J-Stars). Air Force officials initially planned to replace the Boeing 707-based E-8C fleet with a business jet-derived platform, featuring a new battle management command and control (BMC2) suite in the cabin and a wide area surveillance (WAS) radar with SAR and GMTI modes in a belly radome.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 05 Sep 2018 08:20

manned jstar made sense in the days of large massed ground battles - WW2 / ODS scenarios.
with those increasingly unlikely, the long loiter wide area surveillance mission for austere and sparse targets is best handled by 24 hr Ghawk type platforms which exceed the ceiling of manned platforms too.

for India there is still a need. we can think of such side looking radars on a business jet chassis with a ground downlink for command staff. the cancelled UK astor thing.
Image
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raytheon_Sentinel

Indian defence officials requested the purchase of two Raytheon Sentinel aircraft in letter sent from the Indian Ministry of Defence to the U.S. Department of Defense in October 2017. Indian officials noted that the program has priority as many of the Indian Air Force's surveillance programs have been delayed. The Ministry of Defence also created a joint committee with officials and scientists from the Defence Research and Development Organisation and Indian Air Force to facilitate the acquisition program and decide on mission equipment and software.[2

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 05 Sep 2018 08:25

OCT 2017

https://archive.fo/20171019193137/https ... -raytheon/

NEW DELHI ― India has made an official request to purchase two ISTAR aircraft under a government-to-government deal. The move comes within a month of U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis’ visit to India.

A formal letter of request was sent to the U.S. Defense Department earlier this month expressing intent to procure two intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance aircraft via the Foreign Military Sales program, a Ministry of Defense official said.

“This is a priority program, as many of the [Indian Air Force’s] surveillance programs have been delayed,” the MoD official said.
The ISTAR aircraft is a critical requirement and will be operated by the Air Force, the official noted, adding that the deal is estimated to cost $1 billion.

ISTAR aircraft will be supplied by Raytheon of the U.S. on a Gulfstream platform.


The MoD also constituted a joint committee comprising of scientists from the Defence Research and Development Organization, officials from the Air Force, and MoD officials. The aircraft acquisition is expected to be expedited. The committee will finalize the mission software and critical equipment for the ISTAR aircraft.
Raytheon has provided a classified briefing on the ISTAR aircraft program to related agencies in India. Raytheon executives in India were unavailable for comment.

An MoD source told Defense News the ISTAR program is delayed by more than a year “due to dispute between DRDO and IAF over the issue of being designated as prime evaluating authority. IAF had said DRDO is incapable and does not have expertise to evaluate the aircraft; therefore, the service should be the technical evaluator as the aircraft will be operated by them.”

The source added that this matter is now settled and that technical evaluation will take place under the purview of a joint MoD committee, which was set up in August this year.

Commenting on the requirement for ISTAR aircraft, a senior Air Force official said: “It will be a game-changer and very vital in India’s operational and technologically networked environment.”

India-specific ISTAR aircraft for the Air Force will be equipped with active electronically scanned array radar that can scan more than a 30,000-kilometer area in a minute, and analyze data and identify the target in 10 to 15 minutes.

The service intends to operate ISTAR aircraft as its central airborne platform for analytical, communications and sensor-related tasks to achieve real-time targeting capability in the battlefield. The aircraft will eventually be networked with the service’s indigenous air command-and-control system, or IACCS, the Air Force official noted.

Another service official said the aircraft ”will be used against ground targets and for battlefield management, whereas the airborne warning and control system, or AWACS, used by the service are meant for air defense and aerial targets. The service also used aerostat radar systems, which are mini versions of the AWACS and do not help in ground target acquisition. The capabilities of unmanned aerial vehicles used by IAF for surveillance and reconnaissance are limited.”

The IACCS is designed and built on the lines of NATO’s air command-and-control system, which handles air traffic control, surveillance, air mission control, airspace management and force management functions
.
The Air Force also floated a restricted global request for information for the acquisition of ISTAR-capable aircraft in 2013 to Thales of France, Raytheon and Boeing of the U.S., Elta of Israel, and BAE Systems of the United Kingdom; but the case did not progress further, as it was only an expression of interest.

In 2015, the Indian Air Force submitted a formal request to acquire ISTAR aircraft, which was approved by the MoD that same year.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 05 Sep 2018 08:27

2016 was when the deal was postponed. the fight was resolved with joint iaf drdo committee.

to my knowledge drdo has no ongoing project for a large airborne ground surveillance sar/isar radar.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 05 Sep 2018 15:45

Singha, the need for battle management and a large high accuracy/resolution sensor is very much needed. The USAF too was leaning towards a business jet for its eventual JSTAR replacement, and both Northrop Grumman and Raytheon had very capable high-frequency sensors (Northrop's Vanguard was eventually downselected). The problem was not with the concept, but with survivability. The USAF simply could not keep these things up in the air while given the adversaries investment in denial systems. They have instead chosen to keep the sensors, and develop higher fidelity networks and autonomy so that they can execute this import mission cooperatively via distributed net of sensors, and data links. The same will likely be true for the AWACS replacement as in there will likely be none.

for India there is still a need. we can think of such side looking radars on a business jet chassis with a ground downlink for command staff. the cancelled UK astor thing.


UK Astor is not canceled. It is in service. They will likely move the capability to the P-8 in the future so that they can have one aircraft/one crew conducting these missions.

I believe the MOD had moved to get a similar configuration from Raytheon some time back.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1443
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 05 Sep 2018 19:18

So many years and i still can't get over the size of the Sukhoi

Photo from Airliners.net - The Sukhoi is behind the Antonov

Image

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19534
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Philip » 06 Sep 2018 08:34

I know.In the " old days", we could walk arojnd the aircraft during the BLR air shows.The first time the SU-30 was shown, walking underneath the fuselage between the massive engine intakes was a truly heady experience.The sound of a Flanker taking off too simply obliterates any opposition in the " barking" bragging stakes.

A USN F-35C on the carrier the Lincoln suffered an A type major incident when it ingested debris from the refuelling basket into its engine.The F-18 which was refuelling it also suffered lesser damage.The damage was over $2M and a new F-35 engine costs $14M a pop. This appears to be the first major incident to an F-35.What is noteworthy is that unlike a bird strike which has claimed countless aircraft of air forces over decades, the aircraft was able to return and land on the carrier and was not ditched.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 06 Sep 2018 08:52

Good luck there for both the F-35 and F/A-18. The F-35C is doing an integration run with the Carrier and its air wing (prior efforts have focused on carrier suitability and integrating with the carrier while this is integration the entire air wing) onboard the Lincoln as it nears its IOC with the Navy, the last remaining US service to do so.


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 06 Sep 2018 09:19

india has purchased a couple of ground surveillance planes under raw ARC but i think they do sar radar surveillance to monitor infra in tibet and lack the dynamic GMTI and G3 battle commanding operations role of a proper astor/E8.

2 units of bombardier global5000
Image

more of a ELINT snooper and ground mapper for later analysis
https://defenceupdate.in/does-the-india ... py-planes/

The Global 5000s incorporate various multi-mission airborne reconnaissance and surveillance systems, including electro-optical and synthetic aperture radars. Their multi-mission airborne reconnaissance and surveillance systems will be used on missions along India’s borders with China and Pakistan. It is reported that their new equipment will be able to collect electronic and ground intelligence up to 110 miles (180km) inside neighbouring countries’ borders.

They were used for SIGINT and ELINT missions and are fitted with EL/I-3001 Airborne Integrated Signal Intelligence System (AISIS) along with a Synthetic Aperture Radar Antenna for ground scanning based on IAI EL/M-2060 pod ( upto a radius of 400 kilometres ) while EL/M-2055 pod is used for Target Identification on Ground.

It also Equipped with MAWS (Missile Approach Warning System). ECM (Electronic Counter Measure) Suites. Ground Surveillance Equipments and SATCOM (Satellite Communication).The Entire System based on the Bombardier BD-700-1A11 Global 5000 Plane and Custom Modified in Israel

It’s designed to perform long-range, high-endurance missions thus providing tactical and strategic intelligence. The system comprises ELINT (Electronic Intelligence) and COMINT (Communications Intelligence) sensors to search, intercept, measure, locate, analyze, classify and monitor communication and radar transmissions.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 06 Sep 2018 16:27

First artist's rendering of DARPA's "Glide Breaker" effort (via AvWeek) to develop and demonstrate more effective Hypersonic Boost Glide Intercept solutions for Air Defense systems :

Image
Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 07 Sep 2018 16:00

The USMC has deployed the F-35B to the Middle East / CENTCOM AOR aboard the USS Essex:

For the first time, the @USMC’s F-35B with the #Fighting13th entered the @CENTCOM area of responsibility. This aircraft makes our entire #EssexARG team more lethal, increasing our support to #Marines on the ground. The #13thMEU is trained and ready.
@theF35 @3rdmaw

https://twitter.com/Official13thMEU/sta ... 6462130182

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 07 Sep 2018 16:03

at hypersonic speeds, if something from opposite direction is able to bloom out a big cloud of ball bearings, wouldnt it be lethal to the target.
same approach as taking out satellites.

inert ball bearings might do, but khan will develop and depoloy a $10b soln each ball having x-thrusters, multi spectral imager, networking and third party datalink :)

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 07 Sep 2018 16:10

Against strategic systems, the interceptor has to ensure that the payload is also destroyed or neutralized to the maximum possible extent. Body to body contact produces the most amount of energy and is therefore desired if the payloads are say chemical/biological etc. The idea of Glide Breaker is to develop interceptors that offer a reasonable PK against boost-glide threats which because of the speed and the ability to maneuver within the atmosphere at very high speeds pose a significant challenge to the traditional ballistic missile defense systems. Sensors will be very important here because the quality of your sensor data determines your overall missile PK and influences missile seeker design and its cost. This is the reason why the first step is to upgrade the current sensors such as the TPY-2.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1443
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 07 Sep 2018 17:09

Do we have a thread for photos only (IIRC the old BR forums had such a thread) ?

Check out this photo of the MiG 29 of the Polish Air Force firing it's cannon!

(Photo courtesy - Witold Klec-Pilewski @WitoldPilewski)

Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 07 Sep 2018 21:06

holy crap, I thought it was hit by a AAM.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4134
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Karthik S » 07 Sep 2018 21:37

Looking at the smoke first I thought it's left engine was not working.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 930
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Vips » 08 Sep 2018 03:39

Russians should advertise the fact that if the Black smoke gets too much then Pilot always has the option to shut off one engine :rotfl:
Last edited by Vips on 08 Sep 2018 05:17, edited 1 time in total.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 08 Sep 2018 04:58

The an32s from yelehanka that uae hal airport for touch and go landings always trail enough smoke to make it seem like slinking away after a manpad hit

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1443
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 08 Sep 2018 08:14

Karthik S wrote:Looking at the smoke first I thought it's left engine was not working.


Ouch.. that was aimed at below the belt :mrgreen:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21824
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 08 Sep 2018 11:33

‘We are not dupes’: France takes step away from US with fighter program

Image

PARIS — France has linked its search for independence from U.S. export rules with the Franco-German project for a future fighter jet, in a bid to boost foreign sales of the aircraft, the French armed forces minister said.

France’s effort to become less dependent on U.S. components and promote exports were written into the same letter of intent signed in June with Germany for the FCAS project, Florence Parly told AJPAE, the aeronautics and space journalists association, on Sept. 6.

“The exportability of the (Future Combat Air System) is a key element to ensure the economic viability of the program,” she said. “We have to think as upstream as possible to secure this exportability.”

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6563
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 08 Sep 2018 18:14

Final versions of both the modified SABR, and the modified AN/APG-79 have now been fitted on the F/A-18. The former uses a slightly scaled up antenna while retaining the back end commonality with the F-16V's radar suite. The latter (AN/APG-79 V-4) uses the same back end that is mounted on the Super Hornet but an Antenna that is smaller to fit the Classic Hornet's nose. The USMC put out a need for 98 such radars for its fleet of classic Hornets.

SABR -

Image

https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/r ... on-miramar

AN/APG-79V4

Image

Image

Michael Garcia, Raytheon senior director of requirements for secure sensor solutions, told Jane’s on 29 August that the company offered the APG-79(V)4 because the radar’s entire back end is common to the radar in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft. Raytheon, Garcia said, also chose the APG-79(V)4 for its antenna as it is effectively the same shape as the one on the APG-79, but with a smaller overall area with smaller perimeter and diameter. The APG-79 is the AESA radar powering the US Navy’s (USN’s) and Australia’s Super Hornets.

Garcia said the company also scaled down the antenna for power and cooling considerations due to the legacy Hornet’s smaller nose cone. Garcia said Raytheon was considering the RACR, now known as the APG-84, a few years ago, but decided to go with the APG-79(V)4 because software commonality of at least 90% was a programme requirement.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Rakesh » 09 Sep 2018 05:09

Navy's F-35C Suffers 1st Major Mishap, Costing Millions in damages
https://www.military.com/defensetech/20 ... mages.html


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], ssaravanan, Varoon Shekhar and 47 guests