Kartik wrote:Netra AEW&C
No pics bro.. Reattach?
Kartik wrote:Netra AEW&C
Khalsa wrote:^^^
why is there a disconnect between the maturity of this platform and the number of orders and the requirements of IAF.
someone please break it down to me in simple terms please.
(I understand that it not a proper AWACS like the Indian A-50)
Primarily it is because of radar limitations. The smaller platform won’t allow for a high gain antenna. This would need be an antenna with much greater surface area with more TX/RX modules, be able to generate more RF power and receive low power returns, better angular resolution to form a good beam (think of a focused flash light), and to TX/RX at longer wavelengths.Khalsa wrote:^^^
why is there a disconnect between the maturity of this platform and the number of orders and the requirements of IAF.
someone please break it down to me in simple terms please.
(I understand that it not a proper AWACS like the Indian A-50)
Our biggest problem is the lack of an indigenous transport platform that we can customize to our needs like what the chinis are doing with their Y-8 and Y-7. We need to go out and import a plane (and all of its attendant problems and delays ) for each and every AEW or any other force multiplier.Will wrote: Because the IAF always wants shiny new phoren maal .Embraer being accused of corruption in the first deal hasn't helped. The IAF has asked for the third bird which DRDO wanted to keep for testing. The only reason being that the addition Phalcon purchase has been delayed. If not who wants local products?
probably the IAF wants a new version ., the Globaleye seems to be benchmark ?Vivek K wrote:Boss what came first - the chicken or the egg? When you have a design for an AEWC system ready - what is the point or the economy of scale in producing only 2-3 aircraft? Embraer would gladly supply dozens of the aircraft type. Once all these specialty industries are functioning, one could graduate from the Saras to a HS-748 sized aircraft. But why stop at 2-3?
I assume the IAF wants the AEWCS to carry refueling pods. Gurus, is that really practical, given that no other nation has thought of doing this?SaiK wrote:https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/02 ... anker.html
Indian Air Force Wants Home-Grown AWACS To Double As Tanker
The idea is foolhardy. The only interest it serves is that of Roos. That is because this is one smart way to make sure that you buy nothing. Seems roosi inspired so that if IAF does not buy IL-78, they cannot also buy the Airbus offering.sohamn wrote:While the idea is interesting, I don't think its worth wasting time and money and delaying this indigenous procurement by decades.
Are they serious? Merging two different mission profiles into one? During war, the tankers (IAF has practically none - 6 tankers is a joke) fly in a secure area safely away from the fight. Would one want the AEWC to fly in the refueling corridor? And what about the effect of this on the payload size?Chinmay wrote:I assume the IAF wants the AEWCS to carry refueling pods. Gurus, is that really practical, given that no other nation has thought of doing this?SaiK wrote:https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/02 ... anker.html
Indian Air Force Wants Home-Grown AWACS To Double As Tanker
Sounds interesting. Who would be the neighbor?Katare wrote:“We are weighing the possibility of giving it to a nearby country as a diplomatic gesture. Let us see if it works out,” Christopher says.
This is fking incredibly stupid.
How about Chinachola wrote:Sounds interesting. Who would be the Neighbor?Katare wrote:“We are weighing the possibility of giving it to a nearby country as a diplomatic gesture. Let us see if it works out,” Christopher says.
This is fking incredibly stupid.
It is monumentally stupid.Katare wrote:“We are weighing the possibility of giving it to a nearby country as a diplomatic gesture. Let us see if it works out,” Christopher says.
This is fking incredibly stupid.
Sikkim is a part of India. Are you a Chinese poster in disguise to include Sikkim amongst our neighbors?chola wrote:Sounds interesting. Who would be the neighbor?Katare wrote:“We are weighing the possibility of giving it to a nearby country as a diplomatic gesture. Let us see if it works out,” Christopher says.
This is fking incredibly stupid.
Sikkim?
Nepal?
Afghanistan?
Maldives?
Sri Lanka?
Bangladesh?
Iran?
Burma?
First four would hardly have any use for it and the diplomatic gain would be irrelevant. The bottom sfive would be at risk of having chini engineers comb over it.
Yes, you’ve found me out. I would have said Bhutan but years of commie schooling had kicked in and I wrote Sikkim in spite of my need to conceal my identity.Kartik wrote:Sikkim is a part of India. Are you a Chinese poster in disguise to include Sikkim amongst our neighbors?chola wrote:
Sounds interesting. Who would be the neighbor?
Sikkim?
Nepal?
Afghanistan?
Maldives?
Sri Lanka?
Bangladesh?
Iran?
Burma?
First four would hardly have any use for it and the diplomatic gain would be irrelevant. The bottom sfive would be at risk of having chini engineers comb over it.
Whaa? Sikkim? Wow! Try and beat that for a historic post on BRFchola wrote:Sounds interesting. Who would be the neighbor?Katare wrote:“We are weighing the possibility of giving it to a nearby country as a diplomatic gesture. Let us see if it works out,” Christopher says.
Sikkim?
Eh, all those northeasterners look alike.shiv wrote:Whaa? Sikkim? Wow! Try and beat that for a historic post on BRFchola wrote:
Sounds interesting. Who would be the neighbor?
Sikkim?
A muzzie nation? Anything sent there will find itself swarmed by chini engineers first and paki beggars after.abhik wrote:The neighboring country is probably a middle eastern country, may be Oman.
https://www.thenational.ae/world/beggar ... an-1.10574Oman counts on Chinese billions to build desert boomtown
Beggars flock to Oman from Pakistan
Might as well add Anti Awacs, Anti Ship, Anti Satellite weapon modules to it...Rakesh wrote:Posted by BRF Member Vivek_K
----------------------------------------------------
Are they serious? Merging two different mission profiles into one? During war, the tankers (IAF has practically none - 6 tankers is a joke) fly in a secure area safely away from the fight. Would one want the AEWC to fly in the refueling corridor? And what about the effect of this on the payload size?Chinmay wrote:
I assume the IAF wants the AEWCS to carry refueling pods. Gurus, is that really practical, given that no other nation has thought of doing this?
Well, this is one way to make sure that you buy nothing. Seems roosi inspired so that if IAF does not buy IL-78, they cannot also buy the Airbus offering.
Sure, they have to switch off the radar while refueling the escorts. Switching off the radar on AWACS is a usual defensive process, so nothing new.Cybaru wrote: ALL radars are off during refueling for many many reasons.
I don't know why Srilanka and Oman would need a AWACS, it doesn't make sense considering they have a tiny airforce.Singha wrote:sri lanka perhaps. i dont see bangladesh getting it.
if we are to export arms, we should learn from the best how to blackbox and tamper proof certain parts of it.
The airbus tanker is also a troop carrier cargo /air refueler ..maybe IAF wants a dual capability ..but risky carrying all those electronic stuff with fuel tanks ??Rakesh wrote:Here we go again on this bright idea
Indian Air Force Wants Home-Grown AWACS To Double As Tanker
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/02 ... anker.html
DRDO-Airbus AWACS
Then why have they made such a demand? I think the IAF has simulated these scenarios/tactics thanks especially to their experience with buddy refuelling with the MKI, which too is quite multirole - with nominal refuelling and AEW features. This might also be the reason that they have not made so much noise about urgency of more specialist IFR assets and view the induction of more fuel hungry fighters instead.Cybaru wrote:It ain't happening. Multi tasking for HVAA is a stupid idea.
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/02 ... anker.htmlSpeaking exclusively to Livefist, DRDO chief S. Christopher said, “While we are developing the complete AWACS system based on the Airbus A330 platform, the IAF has asked us to add the refueling capability. This could be for escort aircraft or other situations where such a dual role functionality could be critical. We are in discussions with Airbus regarding this.