Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 09 Feb 2010 01:39

Natt wrote: Well to the first part I can say that Russia and US are the only two with an ACTIVE system. Rest all including India are still developing the tech and unless the weapon is inducted in the armed forces we cannot officially claim we have it. Although I dont think China has actually inducted the ABM but just tested it much like India,rather, DRDO did last year.
All ABM have similar basic mechanism of tracking,homing and destroying the enemy missile. The difference is the altitude at which they intercept, Endo or exo.
Hope that helps.

Is the Israeli ABM system not operational?

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 09 Feb 2010 01:46

If the military is facing a future shortage of officers due to lower intake why do they not train more enlisted men as officers? I may be wrong but I imagine a number of enlisted soldiers would want to earn a commission.

I've read a lot of articles saying how today's youth tend to opt for the private sector, but in smaller towns and rural areas plenty of youth look to join the military, why not select more officers from there instead of looking for young men who would rather become engineers?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 159367.cms

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2010 08:25

Klaus wrote:^^^ Sir, I am just presenting a hypothetical scenario wherein the CBG is on an operation far from home shores (no shores based assistance available) and the carrier has to be temporarily shutdown due to issues with the powerplant, in this case will the SSN be able to take charge of the CBG till the carrier is back to full function or will this task be assigned to one of the destroyers instead?

We are just discussing contingencies in case of technical snags, nothing else!

Depends on which is carrying more rope. The one with more rope will tie it to the carrier and tow it back to base.

koti · Post by **koti** » 11 Feb 2010 00:17

Carl_T wrote:
Natt wrote: Well to the first part I can say that Russia and US are the only two with an ACTIVE system. Rest all including India are still developing the tech and unless the weapon is inducted in the armed forces we cannot officially claim we have it. Although I dont think China has actually inducted the ABM but just tested it much like India,rather, DRDO did last year.
All ABM have similar basic mechanism of tracking,homing and destroying the enemy missile. The difference is the altitude at which they intercept, Endo or exo.
Hope that helps.
Is the Israeli ABM system not operational?

The Arrow is pretty much active. But most of the critical components of it are derivatives of the Patriot system. Maybe Natt referred to that.

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 11 Feb 2010 01:05

Exactly, arrow can hardly be called an israeli system since firstly it was a jointly developed and funded by IAI and Boeing. Most systems including the very important radar (green pine) is absolutely american. Even then it went through some hard times of many failed tests and many successful tests being simulations. Not taking anything away from israel, their most recent development of arrow being an exoatmospheric interceptor (arrow 3) is still not operational and is supposed to be operational by 2012.
Having said all that, Yes, I correct myself, Arrow is an Operational system.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 11 Feb 2010 11:06

I had thought the Phalcon AWACS didn't have a rotodome, but on this picture...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... C02611.jpg

Am I mistaken?

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 11 Feb 2010 12:45

Carl_T wrote:I had thought the Phalcon AWACS didn't have a radome, but on this picture...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... C02611.jpg

Am I mistaken?

It surely dosent have a rotodome if thats what you meant.
A radome for AESA may be used on aircraft for general protection and reducing the drag.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 11 Feb 2010 13:13

Yes, so is that not the Phalcon in the pic?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 11 Feb 2010 14:53

Yes its a PHALCON

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 11 Feb 2010 15:13

You pulled a fast one Carl..you first said " I thought it dint have a radome"...now you edited to say "...ROTODOME"... uh what is that you wanna ask again? you forgot in my previous post..i quoted you... u give it all away there..

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 11 Feb 2010 21:58

Natt wrote:You pulled a fast one Carl..you first said " I thought it dint have a radome"...now you edited to say "...ROTODOME"... uh what is that you wanna ask again? you forgot in my previous post..i quoted you... u give it all away there..

Yes I edited it, I am a newbie. What is the round thing on top of the AWACS plane called? I had thought Phalcon didn't have it.

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 12 Feb 2010 00:13

Radome= Radar+Dome. A structural cover of a radar. Generally made up a substance which doesnt interfere with radio waves. Radome is generally used on a phased array radar since they have moving parts.
Rotodome= Rotating+ Dome. Its a radome which rotates. The earlier AWACS which used a structure similar looking to what sits atop our IAF AWACS (used by US) were phased array radar so they had to be rotated in 360 deg to cover all around.
The Phalcon and present gen AWACS are AESA radar so they dont have to be physically rotated to give an all around coverage.
A stationary AESA radar will not need a "radome" since it doesnt have any externally moving parts.
Now Phalcon, is an AESA, looks like what the previous rotodomes used to look like. It uses a Radome (inspite being an AESA) is beacuse it has to fly atop the plane (protection) and helps reduce drag.

A Radome.... http://i1016.photobucket.com/albums/af2 ... 010083.jpg
An E-3 awacs with "rotodome"..see it rotates.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2smJAHTF ... re=related

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 12 Feb 2010 00:17

You are correct in a way that previously phalcon system has also been incorporated as pods or within the structure of the plane without having that disc like structure atop the fuselage.
eg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... sahvit.jpg

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 12 Feb 2010 01:08

I see, so it is only when mounted on the Ilyushin plane for the IAF that it is placed in a radome, and in the Israeli AF, it was incorporated into the plane?

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 12 Feb 2010 01:36

Natt wrote:Radome= Radar+Dome. A structural cover of a radar. Generally made up a substance which doesnt interfere with radio waves. Radome is generally used on a phased array radar since they have moving parts.
Rotodome= Rotating+ Dome. Its a radome which rotates. The earlier AWACS which used a structure similar looking to what sits atop our IAF AWACS (used by US) were phased array radar so they had to be rotated in 360 deg to cover all around.
The Phalcon and present gen AWACS are AESA radar so they dont have to be physically rotated to give an all around coverage.
A stationary AESA radar will not need a "radome" since it doesnt have any externally moving parts.
Now Phalcon, is an AESA, looks like what the previous rotodomes used to look like. It uses a Radome (inspite being an AESA) is beacuse it has to fly atop the plane (protection) and helps reduce drag.

Nattji, some tiny errors:

1) Phased Arrays don't really have moving parts, since they can be electronically scanned (especially the AESAs)

2) Every single radar, especially if it is airborne needs a radome. Radome is for protection against the elements, and to give aerodynamics. If u notice, even a lot of ground based radars have radomes for protective covering. Thus, even AESAs need radomes.

3) Rotodome - the radome does not rotate. The radar array within it rotates. Hence the name.

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 12 Feb 2010 03:08

k prasad wrote:
Natt wrote:Radome= Radar+Dome. A structural cover of a radar. Generally made up a substance which doesnt interfere with radio waves. Radome is generally used on a phased array radar since they have moving parts.
Rotodome= Rotating+ Dome. Its a radome which rotates. The earlier AWACS which used a structure similar looking to what sits atop our IAF AWACS (used by US) were phased array radar so they had to be rotated in 360 deg to cover all around.
The Phalcon and present gen AWACS are AESA radar so they dont have to be physically rotated to give an all around coverage.
A stationary AESA radar will not need a "radome" since it doesnt have any externally moving parts.
Now Phalcon, is an AESA, looks like what the previous rotodomes used to look like. It uses a Radome (inspite being an AESA) is beacuse it has to fly atop the plane (protection) and helps reduce drag.
Nattji, some tiny errors:

1) Phased Arrays don't really have moving parts, since they can be electronically scanned (especially the AESAs)

2) Every single radar, especially if it is airborne needs a radome. Radome is for protection against the elements, and to give aerodynamics. If u notice, even a lot of ground based radars have radomes for protective covering. Thus, even AESAs need radomes.

3) Rotodome - the radome does not rotate. The radar array within it rotates. Hence the name.

Thanks for the correction. let me explain.
By moving parts I meant moving antennas, like you said AESA doesnt move, but the previous gen radars had to be physically moving, remember seeing radars going yes-yes no-no movement, thats what I meant.
I Agree with your 2nd point, moving radars need radome, but some stationary radars do not have radome.
Please help me understand your 3rd point. The AWACS on E-3 (i posted a video link in previous post) is a rotating structure. The whole thing can be seen rotating. If only the internal assembly is rotating, should we see the radome rotate too?

Here you will see a similar radar, with and without radome. Just to support my theory that not ALL radars have/need radome.
http://www.lswilson.ca/FPS-30_%27Sentin ... r_info.jpg

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 12 Feb 2010 03:20

Carl_T wrote:I see, so it is only when mounted on the Ilyushin plane for the IAF that it is placed in a radome, and in the Israeli AF, it was incorporated into the plane?

No and like Prasad correctly mentions, the radome s function is solely to protect against the elements, any type of radar will use a radome if required be it on the ground,stationary/moving or in the air. The israeli used the radome in the form of the fuselage structure modifications and we are using it in a disc shape, thats it.
There s a clarification required on rotodome that me and prasad are working upon. lets see what concludes.

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 12 Feb 2010 10:25

Natt wrote:
k prasad wrote: Nattji, some tiny errors:

1) Phased Arrays don't really have moving parts, since they can be electronically scanned (especially the AESAs)

2) Every single radar, especially if it is airborne needs a radome. Radome is for protection against the elements, and to give aerodynamics. If u notice, even a lot of ground based radars have radomes for protective covering. Thus, even AESAs need radomes.

3) Rotodome - the radome does not rotate. The radar array within it rotates. Hence the name.
Thanks for the correction. let me explain.
By moving parts I meant moving antennas, like you said AESA doesnt move, but the previous gen radars had to be physically moving, remember seeing radars going yes-yes no-no movement, thats what I meant.
I Agree with your 2nd point, moving radars need radome, but some stationary radars do not have radome.
Please help me understand your 3rd point. The AWACS on E-3 (i posted a video link in previous post) is a rotating structure. The whole thing can be seen rotating. If only the internal assembly is rotating, should we see the radome rotate too?

Here you will see a similar radar, with and without radome. Just to support my theory that not ALL radars have/need radome.
http://www.lswilson.ca/FPS-30_%27Sentin ... r_info.jpg

Yes sirjee... you are right about some land based radars not having radomes. Especially with the dipole dish type, non-array antenna that you showed in that pic. The use of phased-arrays and the more complex radars today means that they'll need protection from even tiny changes in environment. However, this is done by the packaging itself, which acts as the protection. Thus, there won't be a radome, but the antenna will be protected. In general, almost all radars today, except for the more primitive kinds will have some kind of protective cover, not necessarily a radome.

Oh, and the radome need not rotate. But if it is easier to clad the radar before and make the whole unit rotate, then no problem. I think that was common in the rotodome era. But its not necessary that the radome rotate.

The advantage of a complete rotating assembly of course is that the mechanical design becomes much simpler & lighter, and also that you only need to design the radome only for the section in front of the antenna aperture, & not all 360 degrees.

In general, radome design is actually quite tough, especially when it is an an aircraft, where the design might not be purely conical or spherical, which makes the analysis of the radome extremely complicated.

The radome material must be strong & rigid, but light as well. Along with that, it must have a very low attenuation to EM radiation, with almost zero phase change (more important, given phased arrays). And certainly, zero reflectivity, else, the return from the radome will completely wash out any signal return. This calls for extremely rigorous materials and filter design, plus, a lot of impedence matching work.

Then, even this small filter response (assuming the radome as a filter that changes the signal) must be analyzed and compensated for. Plus, it must be lightning resistant, and not hold charge (which again affects the radar's performance). Lots of analysis involved. Then, it must be corrosion resistant and not degrade with time, since it can't even be painted over.

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 12 Feb 2010 12:09

Very informative, thanks.

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 12 Feb 2010 12:28

http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/Articl ... e=2&mode=1

M20 pistol

They mean to say, Chinese made Tokarev TT 30 pistols are being used by NE insurgents?

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 12 Feb 2010 13:48

I think its common knowledge that China supports extremism in NE. Officially, Norinco, the PLA's state manufacturer is the only one producing this type today. Of course the great paki weapons bazaar too.
Its a great topic for discussion though, the whole thing that how these extremists who supposedly hide in forests and are hunted by law arrange such massive funding and logistics to run such a big operation and for so long. Money is required for every second of existence from food, clothes, weapons, communications, propaganda paraphernalia,recruitment and what not...

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 12 Feb 2010 14:16

Also in that picture, a few guns look similar to american m series with telescoping butt stock and all. If anyone has seen the CNN short documentary on the khyber pass gun bazaar these were the kinda guns they were showing off to the american reporters.

NehraA · Post by **NehraA** » 13 Feb 2010 01:16

Carl_T wrote:If the military is facing a future shortage of officers due to lower intake why do they not train more enlisted men as officers? I may be wrong but I imagine a number of enlisted soldiers would want to earn a commission.

I've read a lot of articles saying how today's youth tend to opt for the private sector, but in smaller towns and rural areas plenty of youth look to join the military, why not select more officers from there instead of looking for young men who would rather become engineers?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 159367.cms

personally i feel either the problem is with the government(there are rumors that pranab babu doesnt want to fill the 10k or more vacant posts bcuz it will inc d deficiet) or the SSB ,now consider dis.....for 10+2 TES(a scheme under which a person who has got 70% or above agg. in physics, chem & maths in +2, and is below 19 and a half years can apply)...the person is called directly for a SSB interview.....now there are only 85 seats for this and there are more than 10k candidates(much more than 10k) from all over india so even if they cant fill the 85 vacancies, then there is either some promlem with the society at large or ,the SSB being is overburdened(recieving abt 300 candidates in a day ) and cant acurately judge such huge numbers. This is the same for other entries like UGS, DE, etc and also NDA. I personally have been going through the final merit list of NDA candidates who have cleared SSB and medical for the past year, this list exceeds 500 names (there are 300 seats in NDA) still we get to hear that there are seats going vacant in NDA,etc.
....going of topic a bit but i hope the jingoes havnt missed http://www.tubaah.com/details.php?video_id=125536 . from the preview i can say that rocky & mayur have missed out the best part the "bada khana".

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 15 Feb 2010 13:05

Our defense forces believe in quality more than quantity. (Rightly so in my view)

sum · Post by **sum** » 15 Feb 2010 13:08

Was passing by Manesar yesterday and saw many Tatra/MAZ( not sure which) parked near NSG base camp(on the road near main gate) with tarps covering their payload.

Arent the Tatra/MAZ trucks used mainly for our AD duties? So, were the trucks actually having SA-6/Pechora's?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 Feb 2010 17:12

If the military is facing a future shortage of officers due to lower intake why do they not train more enlisted men as officers? I may be wrong but I imagine a number of enlisted soldiers would want to earn a commission.

there already is such a scheme, called ACC IIRC.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 16 Feb 2010 00:39

Natt wrote:Our defense forces believe in quality more than quantity. (Rightly so in my view)

Quality vs Quantity is philosophical debate rather than a strategic one. It is possible to win when you have an overwhelming amount of either of those.

To quote Stalin: "Quantity has its own quality" !

From an Indian perspective, objectively, you can't claim Qualitative superiority vis a vis Pakistan or China in terms of officer technical quality, so adequate Quantity is also a need to offset the deficiencies in quality.

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 16 Feb 2010 21:46

http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/Articl ... e=1&mode=1

How many of the vehicles are in use by our armed forces? The Axe was rejected or put on hold, AFAIK, and I remember seeing the Marksman in some pictures. What is the status of the rest of the vehicles?

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 17 Feb 2010 00:35

Brando wrote:
Natt wrote:Our defense forces believe in quality more than quantity. (Rightly so in my view)
Quality vs Quantity is philosophical debate rather than a strategic one. It is possible to win when you have an overwhelming amount of either of those.

To quote Stalin: "Quantity has its own quality" !

From an Indian perspective, objectively, you can't claim Qualitative superiority vis a vis Pakistan or China in terms of officer technical quality, so adequate Quantity is also a need to offset the deficiencies in quality.

As far as quality is concerned, one below par officer will mean one below average company( brigade/battalion). Leader will determine his subordinates.
And for quantity goes, one officer is as good a fighter as a jawan (in terms of shooting off bullets), his value is in his use of brain, tactics and commanding ability. If these are not up to the mark his men are sure to falter.
That is why I believe, in case of officers, a few good men are better than a feckless swarm.
Also, in numbers we are way ahead of pakistan in all departments, men and machine alike.
China surely is a bigger military than us and we need to upgrade all areas, including filling up our vacancies.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 17 Feb 2010 05:20

I have a pooch.

Refer the pic of a Pratt & Whitney J58 engine on full afterburner below

Why does that circular disc pattern with a bright yellow-orange center appear in the exhaust plume?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 17 Feb 2010 05:23

^^
This is called "Shock Diamond".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 17 Feb 2010 05:26

^^Thank you. That was a quick reply.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 17 Feb 2010 06:09

NehraA wrote:
Carl_T wrote:If the military is facing a future shortage of officers due to lower intake why do they not train more enlisted men as officers? I may be wrong but I imagine a number of enlisted soldiers would want to earn a commission.

I've read a lot of articles saying how today's youth tend to opt for the private sector, but in smaller towns and rural areas plenty of youth look to join the military, why not select more officers from there instead of looking for young men who would rather become engineers?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 159367.cms

personally i feel either the problem is with the government(there are rumors that pranab babu doesnt want to fill the 10k or more vacant posts bcuz it will inc d deficiet) or the SSB ,now consider dis.....for 10+2 TES(a scheme under which a person who has got 70% or above agg. in physics, chem & maths in +2, and is below 19 and a half years can apply)...the person is called directly for a SSB interview.....now there are only 85 seats for this and there are more than 10k candidates(much more than 10k) from all over india so even if they cant fill the 85 vacancies, then there is either some promlem with the society at large or ,the SSB being is overburdened(recieving abt 300 candidates in a day ) and cant acurately judge such huge numbers. This is the same for other entries like UGS, DE, etc and also NDA. I personally have been going through the final merit list of NDA candidates who have cleared SSB and medical for the past year, this list exceeds 500 names (there are 300 seats in NDA) still we get to hear that there are seats going vacant in NDA,etc.
....going of topic a bit but i hope the jingoes havnt missed http://www.tubaah.com/details.php?video_id=125536 . from the preview i can say that rocky & mayur have missed out the best part the "bada khana".

Perhaps I misunderstood your point, but what is the difficulty in filling 85 seats with 10,000 applicants? Do you mean to say it is due to cost pressures? It is somewhat hard to believe that training officers is cost-prohibitive considering labour is not that expensive compared to other nations.

NehraA · Post by **NehraA** » 17 Feb 2010 13:44

Carl_T wrote:

Perhaps I misunderstood your point, but what is the difficulty in filling 85 seats with 10,000 applicants? Do you mean to say it is due to cost pressures? It is somewhat hard to believe that training officers is cost-prohibitive considering labour is not that expensive compared to other nations.

i was just trying to indicate ,that going by the numbers there doesnt seem to be an urgency on the part of the govt to fill up these posts.

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 19 Feb 2010 01:00

Gurus please help,
In this picture http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 766165.JPG

1. Isn't the name patch supposed to be on right side and the unit patch on the left?
2. Is there any rule about this or just an informal norm?

negi · Post by **negi** » 19 Feb 2010 02:02

No the name patch is on the left side itself (at least in IN) , btw that is Captain Surendra Ahuja the first IN aviator to have been qualified to fly the US T-45C Goshahawk from a USN carrier and again the first IN aviator to fly the Mig-29K.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Feb 2010 08:46

Natt wrote:Gurus please help,
In this picture http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 766165.JPG

1. Isn't the name patch supposed to be on right side and the unit patch on the left?
2. Is there any rule about this or just an informal norm?

Dress No 1 and 3

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Feb 2010 08:49

NAME TALLY

Matt finish white plastic, 8 cm by 2 cm, with a 1 mm black border. Letters 5 mm high, Hindi on top and English below. A brass hook and pin arrangement, fixed at the back top edge, for securing. The hook is to be fixed at the top edge, and not in the middle, to prevent the tally tilting down when worn.

CLOTH NAME TAB

Cloth name tabs, 12 cm by 3 cm, with the name in 1 cm high letters in Roman script in black. To be stitched 1.5 cm above the right pocket on overall and light blue shirt .

The above is from Indian Navy Information Resource and Facilitation Centre.

Natt · Post by **Natt** » 19 Feb 2010 11:15

ook..so that does mean the name tally/patch is supposed to be worn on the right side.. Was my statement correct?

negi · Post by **negi** » 19 Feb 2010 11:57

Need to check IN SHAR pilot fatigues for I have seen Capt. Surendra Ahuja having his name 'TALLY' on the left breast on more than one occasion ( fwiw USN pilots too have it on the left breast pockets ).