Airborne Early Warning & Control: News & Discussion

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.
Anurag
BRFite
Posts: 398
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Anurag » 16 Sep 2008 22:09

Not sure if this is one of them...KW-3551

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=752303

viveks
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 17 Nov 2004 06:01

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby viveks » 16 Sep 2008 22:22


sandesh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 02 Dec 2005 14:31
Location: Veraval, GJ
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby sandesh » 17 Sep 2008 07:46

Found the pics. High Res Pics here

More low res pics from the photographer here

shetty
BRFite
Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby shetty » 18 Sep 2008 00:40

Israeli Awacs to miss deadline: Rajat Pandit

The delivery of the much-awaited three Israeli Phalcon Awacs (airborne warning and control systems), which will be major force-multipliers for IAF, has been delayed once again.

Defence ministry sources said the first of the three Awacs, initially slated to be delivered in November 2007 under the $1.1-billion deal signed in March 2004, will now land in India only around January-February 2009.

In the huge project, three Phalcon early-warning radars are being mounted on Russian heavy-lift IL-76 military aircraft under a tripartite agreement among India, Israel and Russia.

"There have been technical hitches in the integration work. But we are pushing the Israeli Aerospace Industries (IAI) to deliver the first Awacs before the end of this year," said a source.

Technical glitches are not the only problem with the project. As reported by TOI earlier, there are allegations of kickbacks swirling around the deal, with reports holding India has been steeply overcharged for the Awacs.

The government, however, has not given much credence to such reports, even though CBI is already investigating kickbacks in the original Rs 1,160-crore Israeli Barak-I anti-missile defence system contract, in which former defence minister George Fernandes, arms dealer Suresh Nanda and others have been named as the accused. This, of course, does not detract from the fact that IAF desperately needs the Phalcon Awacs, much like the Barak system was a crucial requirement for Navy.

Awacs, or "eyes in the sky", will help IAF detect incoming hostile cruise missiles and aircraft much before ground-based radars, apart from directing air defence fighters during combat operations with enemy jets. For instance, an Awacs flying over Amritsar will be able to detect a Pakistani F-16 fighter as soon as it takes off from its Sargodha airbase.

India, incidentally, signed a $210-million deal with Brazilian firm Embraer for three aircraft in July for its own indigenous miniature Awacs project.

The indigenous AEW&C systems being developed by DRDO will be mounted on the three Embraer-145 jets, with the delivery of the first one slated for 2011-2012. The project is worth around Rs 1,800 crore. India, incidentally, is also on course to acquire four more Israeli Aerostat radars, at a cost of around $300 million, to bolster its ability to detect hostile low-flying aircraft, helicopters, spy drones and missiles.

The IAF's case for the new Aerostat radars as a "follow-on" order to the two such EL/M-2083 radars, inducted from Israel in 2004-2005 for $145 million, has finally been cleared by the Defence Acquisitions Council, headed by defence minister A K Antony, now.

After being in a limbo for some time due to the Barak kickbacks case, the defence ministry has decided to go full steam ahead with procurements and projects with Israel, which has notched up arms sales worth around $8 billion to India since the 1999 Kargil conflict. The ministry will, however, take a final clearance from the Cabinet Committee on Security and the "competent financial authority" before the new procurement deals are actually inked.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10086
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby sum » 18 Sep 2008 08:28

2009 now?? :cry:

Guess every new system will have such hitches...Once the flow is established, there shouldnt be a problem with the "follow-on" orders... :twisted:

Drevin
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 21 Sep 2006 12:27

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Drevin » 18 Sep 2008 08:48

I am waiting to see Midas, MKI, Phalcon all in one single "panoramic" picture :twisted: in IAF colors. "Hats off" to Indo-Russian-Israeli strategic friendship.

vishwakarmaa
BRFite
Posts: 385
Joined: 19 Jun 2008 08:47

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby vishwakarmaa » 18 Sep 2008 12:32

Delay in Phalcon delivery - Bugs Shipment from US delayed.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1652
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Sid » 18 Sep 2008 12:42

this can be more to do with politics then just technical glitches (which i find hard to believe). They almost delivered chinkies their phalcons in same time frame.

maybe this was done because current US government is about to change. (wild guess)

current US Gov also canceled their tanker deal due to time constraint this administration has.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 18 Sep 2008 12:45

vishwakarmaa wrote:Delay in Phalcon delivery - Bugs Shipment from US delayed.


Emm the so called Dead Mans Switch , built into the systems Black Box , you can trigger it based on certain events or remotely making the whole system dud or atleast out of action.

Expect US purchased system or for that matter even Israel routed system to come with it.

Nayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2553
Joined: 11 Jun 2006 03:48
Location: Vote for Savita Bhabhi as the next BRF admin.

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Nayak » 18 Sep 2008 13:58


http://www.itexaminer.com/indian-awacs- ... lters.aspx

Indian AWACS deal falters

Plagued by technical delays, corruption

By Peter Larsen @ Thursday, September 18, 2008 7:01 AM




The delivery of three Israeli Phalcon AWACS to the Indian Air Force (IAF) has been delayed until at least 2009.

The airborne warning and control systems, purchased in 2004 for $1.1-billion, were originally slated for integration into the IAF by November 2007.

An anonymous official attributed the delay to "technical hitches in the integration work" and emphasized that New Delhi was pressuring IAI (Israel Aerospace Industries) to deliver the first AWAC before the end of 2008.

The faltering deal has also been plagued by allegations of mismanaged negotiations and overpayment. Indeed, as the IT Examiner previously reported, the AWAC sale was heavily criticised by Maj Gen (Retd) Mrinal Suman. According to the Major General, the Indian government "failed to negotiate full-proof agreements with clearly defined provisions...In almost all contracts, imprecise and flawed provisions led to multiple interpretations during the implementation stage".

In addition, Suman complained that New Delhi chose to shell out a hefty $1.1 billion for the AWACS, despite the fact that Israel had planned to sell the same planes to Beijing for a mere $358 million.

A number of corrupt individuals have also been linked to the purchase of various Israeli armaments, including the Phalcon. To be sure, the CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) is currently investigating kickbacks related to the Rs 1,160-crore Barak-I anti-missile defence system contract. Former defence minister George Fernandes and infamous arms dealer Suresh Nanda have reportedly been implicated in the latest arms scandal. It should be noted that Fernandes was forced to resign his position due to his involvement in a number of tainted defence deals, including the unethical procurement of BAE's hawk trainer.



Despite the above-mentioned delays, New Delhi still considers the warning and control systems to be a critical military asset in any future conflict with Pakistan or China. For example, an AWAC deployed over Amritsar will allow the IAF to immediately detect and counter the launch of Pakistani F-16 fighters from Sargodha airbase.

As such, India will attempt to indigenously develop its own AWAC technology, which will be integrated onto three recently purchased Brazillian Embraer-145 jets. In addition, the government has signed a deal with Russia's state arms exporter, Rosoboronexport, to provide the IAF's AWAC (A-50) aircraft with after sale services. Rosoboronexport is also designing a modernized version of the A-50 plane that will feature an advanced radar system and upgraded PS-90A engines. X

Nitesh
BRFite
Posts: 900
Joined: 23 Mar 2008 22:22
Location: Bangalore
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Nitesh » 23 Sep 2008 18:09

New Delhi, Sep 22 (IANS) A team of Indian defence officials will be visiting Israel to resolve issues leading to the delay in the delivery of the Phalcon airborne warning and control systems (AWACS).The team, which comprises deputy chief of air staff Air Marshal N.A.K. Browne and director general acquisition Shashi Kant Sharma, will go to Israel on a three-day visit beginning Tuesday, a defence official said Monday.

“The team will discuss the issues pertaining to the delivery of Israeli Phalcon AWACS, whose delivery has been delayed,” the defence official said on condition of anonymity.

The first of the three AWACS, being installed by Israel Aircraft Industries on Russian II-78 platforms {messed up here}, was expected to be delivered by October. But certain technical issues have delayed the delivery of the system, termed India’s eye in the sky.

The AWACS will bolster India’s air-surveillance capability multi-fold by enabling early detection of incoming hostile aircraft and directing suitable counter measures.

The $1.1 billion deal for the AWACS was signed in 2004. “Integration and training issues are involved before the AWACS could be inducted,” the official said.

The three aircraft, which were taken from Russia to Israel by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), are being modified in a hangar at Tel Aviv Ben-Gurion international airport.

The Indian Air Force is likely to purchase three more AWACS, {But isn't they have already ordered as mentioned in the air force magazine shared by anand barve} taking the number to six. The delivery is slated to be completed by 2012.
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unc ... 98671.html

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 959
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby K Mehta » 23 Sep 2008 18:46

Nitesh wrote:The three aircraft, which were taken from Russia to Israel by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), are being modified in a hangar at Tel Aviv Ben-Gurion international airport.

So all three airframes have been delivered to Israel?
I request the admins to rename this thread to AWACS and AEW&C news and discussion thread, as that seems more appropriate.

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 23 Sep 2008 18:58

K Mehta wrote:
Nitesh wrote:The three aircraft, which were taken from Russia to Israel by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), are being modified in a hangar at Tel Aviv Ben-Gurion international airport.

I request the admins to rename this thread to AWACS and AEW&C news and discussion thread, as that seems more appropriate.


It´s basically the same thing.
PaulJI explained it pretty well in this post;
AEW&C is a generic term for an aircraft with an early warning radar, which is capable of independent function as an airborne command post. AWACS was the term used by the USAF for the E-3, to distinguish it from earlier AEW-only aircraft. AEW&C = Airborne Early Warning & Control. AWACS = Airborne Warning And Control System. The meaning is identical. Usage is not fixed, but AEW&C is often used for anything that has a control function, not just AEW, but is not the Westinghouse/Northrop Grumman system of the E-3 & B-767 AWACS.

Erieye is the radar, not the aircraft. The Swedish Air Force has Erieye AEW aircraft, capable of functioning as a limited AEW&C. They normally operate as pure AEW, flying radars relaying data to ground stations, but have a couple of operator stations aboard (not usually manned), so that they can still be useful if ground stations are disabled. Brazil put its Erieye radars on a larger aircraft, with 5 permanent on-board operators (& space for reserve crew members), to operate as an AEW&C. This is the version sold to Greece & Mexico (in the same EMB-145 airframe) & Pakistan (in Saab 2000).

The E-2 is generally referred to as an AEW aircraft, but it can do AEW&C, though limited by its small crew - max.three operators. The B-737 Wedgetail is an AEW&C aircraft, with onboard operators, as is the G550 with Elta systems.

Note that Elta calls the Phalcon an AEW&C system.

This is not to say that all AEW&C/AWACS aircraft are identical in capabilities (an E-3 has a longer-range radar, & can control more operations than, a Saab 2000 Erieye), but they do all perform the same role.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Victor » 23 Sep 2008 19:22

This is the worst time to be without an AWACS. IMO, we should rent three A-50s asap, complete with crew if need be, as a stop-gap. Anything is better than no AWACS, specially now that we are expecting post-Olympics fireworks.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Katare » 23 Sep 2008 20:36

Victor wrote:This is the worst time to be without an AWACS. IMO, we should rent three A-50s asap, complete with crew if need be, as a stop-gap. Anything is better than no AWACS, specially now that we are expecting post-Olympics fireworks.


it appears that delay is for just couple of months!

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 959
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby K Mehta » 23 Sep 2008 21:33

Wickberg wrote:It´s basically the same thing.
PaulJI explained it pretty well in this post ....awacs&aewc expln.....

still why not rename the thread? AWACS is supposed to be more capable than aewc and we are getting both, so why not rename it?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17024
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 23 Sep 2008 21:38

KM, AWACS is like the brand name of the US version of AEW&C. we are getting AEW&C, not AWACS.
it's something akin to cadbury and chocolate bar ; during my childhood, many people used to say cadbury when they meant chocolate bar because of the monopoly of cadbury. :wink:

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Victor » 24 Sep 2008 00:09

Katare wrote:..it appears that delay is for just couple of months!

Yes -- at best. But these are the most critical months if our prognostications on BR mean anything.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Katare » 24 Sep 2008 01:21

Yeah, I know but the delay has always been a major problem in all our major defense acquisitions

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 959
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby K Mehta » 25 Sep 2008 16:55

Rahul M wrote:KM, AWACS is like the brand name of the US version of AEW&C. we are getting AEW&C, not AWACS.
it's something akin to cadbury and chocolate bar ; during my childhood, many people used to say cadbury when they meant chocolate bar because of the monopoly of cadbury. :wink:

Then make it an airborne surveillance radar thread, that way we can even put aerostats into this thread :P

asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 260
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby asbchakri » 25 Sep 2008 17:03

K Mehta wrote:
Rahul M wrote:KM, AWACS is like the brand name of the US version of AEW&C. we are getting AEW&C, not AWACS.
it's something akin to cadbury and chocolate bar ; during my childhood, many people used to say cadbury when they meant chocolate bar because of the monopoly of cadbury. :wink:

Then make it an airborne surveillance radar thread, that way we can even put aerostats into this thread :P


Aerostats are not airborne, they are in air but stationary so they will still wont be qualified in this thread :D

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby PaulJI » 25 Sep 2008 23:21

asbchakri wrote:Aerostats are not airborne, they are in air but stationary so they will still wont be qualified in this thread :D

Of course aerostats are airborne! Ask yourself a simple question: what would happen to an aerostat in a vacuum, i.e. if it was not surrounded by air? The answer is obvious, as are its implications. The aerostat is supported (borne = carried, supported) by the air. That's what airborne means.

Aerostats do not have aerodynamic lift, but that is not relevant.

Compare with boats, & other waterborne things. If aerostats are not airborne, then boats can not be considered to be waterborne, which is nonsensical.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2329
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby vivek_ahuja » 25 Sep 2008 23:23

PaulJI wrote:
asbchakri wrote:Aerostats are not airborne, they are in air but stationary so they will still wont be qualified in this thread :D

Of course aerostats are airborne! Ask yourself a simple question: what would happen to an aerostat in a vacuum, i.e. if it was not surrounded by air? The answer is obvious, as are its implications. The aerostat is supported (borne = carried, supported) by the air. That's what airborne means.

Aerostats do not have aerodynamic lift, but that is not relevant.

Compare with boats, & other waterborne things. If aerostats are not airborne, then boats can not be considered to be waterborne, which is nonsensical.


I think he meant it in the reference of it not moving around etc. Like not having issues of range, endurance, manned crews etc that allow us to compare apples to apples.

That sort of thing.

-Vivek

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby PaulJI » 25 Sep 2008 23:48

vivek_ahuja wrote:I think he meant it in the reference of it not moving around etc. Like not having issues of range, endurance, manned crews etc that allow us to compare apples to apples.

That sort of thing.

-Vivek

Yes, they're not mobile. But that isn't what he said. Tricky, though . . . I can't, offhand, think of succinct descriptive terms which distinguish between airborne but not necessarily mobile, & mobile in the air.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2329
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby vivek_ahuja » 25 Sep 2008 23:52

PaulJI wrote:Yes, they're not mobile. But that isn't what he said. Tricky, though . . . I can't, offhand, think of succinct descriptive terms which distinguish between airborne but not necessarily mobile, & mobile in the air.


True. The word airborne is probably not correct in the way it was used. Let's leave it at Aerostat-'ic' :)

-Vivek

sam_kamath
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 23 Sep 2008 22:53

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby sam_kamath » 26 Sep 2008 00:03

vivek_ahuja wrote:
PaulJI wrote:Yes, they're not mobile. But that isn't what he said. Tricky, though . . . I can't, offhand, think of succinct descriptive terms which distinguish between airborne but not necessarily mobile, & mobile in the air.


True. The word airborne is probably not correct in the way it was used. Let's leave it at Aerostat-'ic' :)

-Vivek


Ever heard about the famous Dunlop baloon completely air mobile. there is no rule which says that the deridgable has to be tethered down..what is not airborn here..

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 26 Sep 2008 00:35

sam_kamath wrote:
vivek_ahuja wrote:
PaulJI wrote:Yes, they're not mobile. But that isn't what he said. Tricky, though . . . I can't, offhand, think of succinct descriptive terms which distinguish between airborne but not necessarily mobile, & mobile in the air.


True. The word airborne is probably not correct in the way it was used. Let's leave it at Aerostat-'ic' :)

-Vivek


Ever heard about the famous Dunlop baloon completely air mobile. there is no rule which says that the deridgable has to be tethered down..what is not airborn here..


Why are you even discussing this? Does anyone produces large balloons attached to the ground with a string that has radar and communications equipment on board to act as an AEW&C? I know Sweden toyed with the idea of mini-zeppelins to act as anti-submarine crafts in the 1980´s (like helos) but nothing came out of it. Is India thinking of building AEW&C Zeppelines?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17024
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 26 Sep 2008 00:53

we use the israeli aerostats.

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 26 Sep 2008 02:32

Rahul M wrote:we use the israeli aerostats.

Air-balloons?

What are they doing?

(Don´t tell me AEW&C)

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2329
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby vivek_ahuja » 26 Sep 2008 02:44

Wickberg wrote:
Rahul M wrote:we use the israeli aerostats.

Air-balloons?

What are they doing?

(Don´t tell me AEW&C)


Unmanned Radar mounted balloons to be sure. Works out nicely as a picket fence radar network. Much cheaper than actual aircraft doing continuous patrolling. Sure enough its an early warning radar just like a ground based one would be, trying to use high altitude just like an aircraft based radar would, but not in the sense of a manned AEW&C as we generally term it. This was the classification dilemma for the somewhat silly argument going on above.

-Vivek

sam_kamath
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 23 Sep 2008 22:53

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby sam_kamath » 26 Sep 2008 02:46

vivek_ahuja wrote:
Wickberg wrote:
Rahul M wrote:we use the israeli aerostats.

Air-balloons?

What are they doing?

(Don´t tell me AEW&C)


Unmanned Radar mounted balloons to be sure. Works out nicely as a picket fence radar network. Much cheaper than actual aircraft doing continuous patrolling. Sure enough its an early warning radar just like a ground based one would be, trying to use high altitude just like an aircraft based radar would, but not in the sense of a manned AEW&C as we generally term it. This was the classification dilemma for the somewhat silly argument going on above.

-Vivek

OK if you find it silly kind sir define AEW&C...and moderator uncle would be Ok if you respond to this...

sam_kamath
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 23 Sep 2008 22:53

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby sam_kamath » 26 Sep 2008 02:53

Rahul M wrote:we use the israeli aerostats.

your point being....????

Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Arya Sumantra » 26 Sep 2008 03:14

vivek_ahuja wrote:Unmanned Radar mounted balloons to be sure. Works out nicely as a picket fence radar network. Much cheaper than actual aircraft doing continuous patrolling. Sure enough its an early warning radar just like a ground based one would be, trying to use high altitude just like an aircraft based radar would, but not in the sense of a manned AEW&C as we generally term it. This was the classification dilemma for the somewhat silly argument going on above.

-Vivek


In that case why not use an airship mounted radar atleast it won't be fixed to a place. Airships like the ones they use to show tourists around London and the ones they often use for advertisement

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2329
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby vivek_ahuja » 26 Sep 2008 03:24

Arya Sumantra wrote:In that case why not use an airship mounted radar at least it won't be fixed to a place. Airships like the ones they use to show tourists around London and the ones they often use for advertisement


I had a few observations that I thought I would share:

a) The whole idea of using aerostat (in my opinion at least) is to bypass the endurance limitations of standard aircraft and more importantly the aircrew. Now, even if we were to make the airship remotely operable from the ground, it would still have some fuel limitations for the engines that would have to be looked into. In other words, you don't want to keep bringing this thing down too often. If future technology allows solar powered engines etc then we could overcome this first issue.

b) But the first issue, even if resolved, makes the whole concept more costly. And for all the cost they won't be able to move around as quickly as their conventional aircraft based counterparts would. In other words, the hope that a moving airship could evade the enemy is negligibly higher than that of the static aerostat at higher the cost.

c) Also, the area covered by the aerostat where they are mounted is huge. properly placed, a few of these could cover a significant portion of the border. And since lift is not produced by forward motion for these vehicles, you don't need to move at all if all you want to do is cover a sector of the border etc.

-Vivek

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17024
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 26 Sep 2008 03:34

sam_kamath, given that you are lacking in the most basic of military knowledge and understanding, not to mention civility you will do well to avoid responding to posts not directed at you if you want to prolong your survival on BRF. anyway it doesn't look like you are here for a constructive discussion.
you need to have two more strikes before you are booted out but I can make an exception for a troll and bring it down to one. do tell me if you are interested. :)
put your toe out of the line one more time and you are out.

wickberg, the israeli aerostat uses the el/m 2083 which in turn is a derivative of the pretty decent el/m-2080 green pine, used in the arrow ABM system. its range is around 500 km. mounted high up this is a very potent sensor.

adding to what vivek says, aerostats can be operated for hours on end, 25-30 hrs at a stretch for some systems.
arya, the static airborne radar is actually a good thing ! :)
ADGES would like a permanent coverage of a region w/o too much hassle.
if they want the radar picture of a different region they can just relocate the whole system after bringing the thing back to ground.
think of it as a ground radar that gives the performance of a small AEW.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 26 Sep 2008 10:58

Aerostat radars are extremely good in detecting cruise missiles and launch site of BM, as the radar is tethered on a height and the horizon is almost 150-250km away. Also military always tries to place the radar on a height compared to surrounding territory and aerostat is a very good way to achieve that aim at low cost. Compared to heavy radars fixed on Hill tops, Aerostats are more mobile.

asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 260
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby asbchakri » 26 Sep 2008 12:10

vivek_ahuja wrote:
PaulJI wrote:Yes, they're not mobile. But that isn't what he said. Tricky, though . . . I can't, offhand, think of succinct descriptive terms which distinguish between airborne but not necessarily mobile, & mobile in the air.


True. The word airborne is probably not correct in the way it was used. Let's leave it at Aerostat-'ic' :)

-Vivek


U'r right vivek i think the word airborne is not the correct. :) I said in the context that it was not mobile but just as a Radar, unlike AWACS.

think he meant it in the reference of it not moving around etc. Like not having issues of range, endurance, manned crews etc that allow us to compare apples to apples.

That sort of thing.

-Vivek


This is what i wanted to convey. Thanks Vivek :D

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Shankar » 26 Sep 2008 12:17

The phased array radars on Aerostats can be operated either in a 360 degree search mode or a sector scan mode. ‘‘Aerostat radars, which can stay afloat round-the-clock for four to five weeks at one go, are much cheaper and easier to operate than AWACS. They provide three-dimensional low-altitude coverage.

Moreover, they are not too easy to shoot down. With matching internal and external pressures, Aerostats can withstand several punctures and stay afloat. They can also be reeled in, repaired and then deployed once again.

AWACS and Aerostat radars can act as major force-multipliers by detecting and tracking cruise missiles and low-flying aircraft much earlier than ground-based radars, which can then be targeted by air defense systems.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby Singha » 26 Sep 2008 12:56

are the israeli ones as big as this?
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airde ... HTARS8.jpg

unkil is testing a system JLENS for cruise missile detection and defence

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/jle ... ore-02921/

note the FC radar on one balloon and search radar on another.

not being highly presurized they can remain floating even after many punctures.

inshallah, we should replace our static ground based 3D radars with networks of these
type. more survivable and better low-flyer detection.

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Re: AEW&C News & Discussion

Postby p_saggu » 26 Sep 2008 16:02

Yes Singha-ji
The israeli ones are as big as the one in the picture at La Parguera that you posted. Both the Blimps are ~ 65 m in size. Not much info on the radar specs though.
Yahood-Hunood Aerostat
Image

Amrikhan Aerostat at LaParguera
Image


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Hari Nair, IndraD, LakshmanPST and 80 guests