maitya wrote:Harry, welcome back!! It's been quite some time since you posted here. Again welcome back ...





Did they say Boeing 777The next phase of the programme, sources said, will be to develop a more powerful and larger system that can be flown on a bigger platform like an Airbus 319/320 or a Boeing in the 777 series.
As read the patent, the same thought ran over me, because it clearly told me the ECM envelope that enemy has to make/procure to counter the radar based on that Tx/Rx design.Austin wrote:Too bad , so DRDO doesn't have a lawyer , who can review their whole patent application process ?
If the LRDE work revels every thing , isnt that itself a risk as it gives a good idea how things work ?
Malay MTA will be a good platform when its ready , that would take another minimum 5 ~ 8 years.
Arun Ji, why DRDO is not using CSIR's patent cell in Pune? They are good, and they handle all CSIR applications. They used to conduct numerous workshops on patents and train us. This is surprising.Arun_S wrote: All the innovative original work of LRDE went to toliet because that patent reveals full design information and its claims section is very specific, one that prevents some one from making an exact copy of the TR module, but leaves open simple variations that anyone who has been through a US patent process would have obviously covered, as belonging to the patent claim.
One can still file a patent without disclosing the details publicly, only the patent office will know the details. So technically that will take care of your assertion.RonyKJ wrote:Filing a patent would be a stupid thing to do. It just makes it so easy for some one else to build an exactly similar system for themselves. As long as they don't commercially sell it, they wouldn't even be violating the patent. If you really come up with something new, especially in the defence field, the best thing to do is to just keep it under wraps. Don't publish papers on it or file for patents.
Hmmm IMVHO not possible. Whatever you give to patent office (including the correspondence) is public document. We routinely obtain complete prosecution history from the patent office, which includes all documents pertaining to the patent and device our strategy based on Estoppel.disha wrote:One can still file a patent without disclosing the details publicly, only the patent office will know the details. So technically that will take care of your assertion.RonyKJ wrote:Filing a patent would be a stupid thing to do. It just makes it so easy for some one else to build an exactly similar system for themselves. As long as they don't commercially sell it, they wouldn't even be violating the patent. If you really come up with something new, especially in the defence field, the best thing to do is to just keep it under wraps. Don't publish papers on it or file for patents.
Heres a wake up call- there is a project to make an AWACs- 3 of them, and yes, they are due in the next few years, ie near future. Hold them accountable if they mess up, but dont write them off because they had the guts to aim high and be public about their aims.rad wrote:Its nice to hear that the CABS people have made a tx/rx module that is unique .
But it is deffinately not nice to hear tham say that they will have an AWACS in the near future . WHy do these guys keep shooting their mouths of everytime . Its very embarassing and misleading to the public and the nation and down right depressing when they dont perform and give excuses.
Incorrect.From what i gather that has been said , a rotodome is going to be used on an embraer platform.This combination has never been used and entails alot of risky flight testing .We know what happened to the awacs that crashed .
Not with an AESA system in it.The il 76 platform with a rotodome is a proven platform that was tested bythe russians decades ago so that is not a problem .
Israel went for that option because it has retired all other AWACs and its range performance is unknown. CABS AEW&C is the first step to building a larger AWACs, and is per the specifications of the IAF.The EMB 145 does not have the range and height perfomance for an awacs . Thats the reason t he Israeli `s chose the G-550 with a conformal antenna on the sides and antennas on the tail and nose .It can cruise around 50,000 ft . Are the CABS guys trying to reinvent the wheel?.
A 300 km detection range against a low RCS target is quite credible, and will be double the performance of most fighters in the IAFs inventory, and equal to the performance of high powered ground based radars. Furthermore, it will be able to scan at much larger angles.The best soluton would be to go the Israeli way . trying to make an awacs with a 300km detection rang is just a joke and a waste of taxpayers money.
Thanks for the pics, they are great and the antenna detailed config especially,k prasad wrote:I've added some pictures of the AEW&CS radar mockup. Hopefully, that should answer some questions. you can see the images at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20125521@N ... 941498395/
Sorry for the low quality.
Can you ping Rakesh or Jagan and so that BR can archieve those pics.k prasad wrote:I've added some pictures of the AEW&CS radar mockup. Hopefully, that should answer some questions. you can see the images at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20125521@N ... 941498395/
Sorry for the low quality.