Hitesh wrote:What is the radar range on comparable fighter planes such as MiG-21s, F-16s, Mirages 2000s, FC-1, Mirages IIIs and IVs, and J-39 Griffen?
If the LCA radar range is drastically shorter than the rest of the above, I can easily understand why the IAF termed it as a three leg cheetah and may not want the LCA at all. What's the use of flying a plane which can't even see the enemy first before they spot you? Sure it may be ameliorated with the use of AWACS but I don't see GoI pony up the dough to buy 28-32 AWACs and 100 tankers to keep those planes flying and vector the LCAs. I understand IAF's great desire to avoid and hesitancy of going into a gunfight with a knife and one hand tied behind your back.
What kind of a question is that? All Brochure-claimed values can easily be googled, isn't it?
And after googling it, one can draw their own conclusions and start empathizing with IAF wrt their justification of calling LCA 3-5-20-or-whatever legged cheetah etc.
But why this escape-route-verbiage "
if the LCA radar range is drastically shorter ... etc"?
Are you not 400% (a la the mushak next door) convinced about IAF capability in correctly judging operational usefulness of these platforms vis-a-vis LCA, wrt radar ranges and then accurately counting the number of legs of a cheetah (flying or otherwise) and informing us/you about the same.
C'mon say it -
LCA is as useless as a 3-legged cheetah as it doesn't have a radar whose range is comparable to the platforms it's either going to replace (MiG-21) or likely to face Mirage-IIIs/F-16 (betw which version A/B/Block-32/Block-60 which one).
=============================================
However, a few "small fry" queries comes to mind - betw:
1)
Which range (
detection or tracking) and against
what radar-cross-section (5 sqm, 3sqm, 0.1sqm, 0.001sqm)? You know the radar range equation, right and what factors influence radar-range etc
2) What happens if somebody simply
replaces a PD set with a AESA equipped one as apart of MLU etc?
3) How
important are A-G modes and how much one is ready to sacrifice the A-A modes get SAR, TFM, ISAR, MTI etc capability?
4) What about the
capability of being able to implement newer modes (called continuous improvement) for the life of the platform?
As against being saddled with a "black box" which wouldn't even allow integrating another supplier BVR missiles/armament etc? How about stuff like programmable ECM and ECCM? How about the radar itself doubling up as a secure-datalink with other friendly platforms flying around?
5) How are the
aperture size-constrained by the platform itself and what is the relationship between radar ranges and the aperture size?
How applicable are the brochure claims in real life scenarios wrt having to "optimise" aperture size etc for fitment of it in the radome of the operating platform?
What exactly is that value for a MiG-21 nosecone and why did we have to run to mother Russia to modify the radome to allow fitment of a Kopyo version? Should we not have gone a variant of Zhuk itself (actually Kopyo-I was derived from Zhuk program anyway).
6) How
important is MTBO of the shiny-brochure claimed sets? Is it ok to be forced to fly around with the radar switched-off, as something has malfunctioned and needs repair?
Or one needs to ensure there are 3-4 radar sets/aircraft available at all times, given the MTBO figures of some of these shiny-brochure-radars?
What was the MTBO of Kopyo, surely IAF was going ga-ga over it, when it got first implemented in the Bisons? Surely they didn't have to pay anything extra if there were some "minor dip" in the MTBO figure of it, isn't it?
7) And most importantly, what should be the
multiplicative factor of the BVR AAM ranges that the platform is supposed to be carrying, for arriving at the "enough" radar range value?
"Enough" to allow a reasonably well-trained-pilot to make up their mind before they actually fire the required missiles?
etc etc etc.
=============================================
But since you ask, and presumably read this far, pls note the shiny brochure of Kopyo-I, is informing me that it, when integrated with a 21-93 (also called Bison), has a
detection range of 57Km for a 5sqm target (all aspect).
Pls do compare that figure, with the one that the first couple of the 20 LCA SPs would sport? And while you are at it, do compare what will happen when the Kevlar radome will get replaced with a Quartz one (from Cobham) keeping the radar same as before?
just on the radar range alone. just talking about LOBL onlee. may be only marginally better for launching, but superior on detecting and locking ahead... so a split second extra advantage with 2052s.
time lines".