anon@9:49 bacche, go understand who has gone to israel and what for and who have come here and what for. you children dont know anything. MFSTAR in india specific config is different from one shown few years back. every bloody year technology changes!
>>the s band aesa T/R modules are from israel and there is nothing from indian side as india is incapable of doing so
bewakoof, s band aesa module production was launched in india two years back onlee. now they are working on x, vhf and other bands. kids man u ppl are, you dont know anything but make such funny claims. and btw, making the tr modules has been mastered long time back by india in 2000 itself, it is the miniaturization and subsequent design iteration till it is proven in near field and far field testing which takes time. no point in launching production like chinese mama when u can reduce size by 20-30% thanks to design modification on testing.
, go understand who has gone to israel and what for and who have come here and what for. you children dont know anything. MFSTAR in india specific config is different from one shown few years back. every bloody year technology changes! ---------------------------------- and what are those indian specifications
the specifications for land based and naval based SAM are almost same everywhere
just like SAMPSON,SMART L radar are common in european countries whether its UK,FRANCE,ITALY,GERMANY,NETHERLANDS all these countries use same radar and similar configuration
and what is india specific in FREGET M2EM radar which china india russia use
what is there in AN/SPY1 PESA radar which spain,s.koreans,japanese,americans,australians use
is AN/SPY1 spanish specific or it is s.korean specific or it is japanese specific or it is american specific or will it be australian specific no its the same radar in all countries
and what else can be india specific in MFSTAR
MFSTAR is just like any other AESA radar will be used for volume search radar on land or on sea
s band aesa module production was launched in india two years back onlee. now they are working on x, vhf and other bands. kids man u ppl are, you dont know anything but make such funny claims. and btw, making the tr modules has been mastered long time back by india in 2000 itself, it is the miniaturization and subsequent design iteration till it is proven in near field and far field testing which takes time. no point in launching production like chinese mama when u can reduce size by 20-30% thanks to design modification on testing. ----------------------------- so what is the result of that mastery,converting those t/r modules in operational is whole different task
till now india has built radars with foreign tech trnafer even now producing older gen radars
all radars which bharat electronis has built are from foreign design whether its rajendra radar rohini radar or other radars being built for air force or navy all are older foreign designs
To Anon@1:24PM: Don't analyse the MF-STAR as just a standalone system. Try to look at it from the angle of what is the overall required sensor-fuzed solution by the end-user. Then try to look at the MF-STAR's configuration for the Project 15A DDG (I had uploaded the photo last year) snd for the IAC (shown very clearly in an illustration during the keel-laying ceremony earlier this year). The very visible array configurations alone for the two respective vessels very clearly indicate the continuing evolution of the MF-STAR family. from that standpoint, Anon@1:10PM is correct.
Mr. Sengupta, I am led to understand there is a shift away from the disassembled status. Sources I've had some contact with indicate an appreciation of those difficulties and a move towards something better. The question should be how far have they reached.
Try to look at it from the angle of what is the overall required sensor-fuzed solution by the end-user. Then try to look at the MF-STAR's configuration for the Project 15A DDG (I had uploaded the photo last year) snd for the IAC (shown very clearly in an illustration during the keel-laying ceremony earlier this year). The very visible array configurations alone for the two respective vessels very clearly indicate the continuing evolution of the MF-STAR family --------------------------------- i am also aware of this
the configuration for land based mfstar and naval mfstar is much different
and even on differnet naval platforms there can be different configuration of same radar
and the question of sensor fusion by end user it not hard for india
see in shivalik class frigates there is sensor fusion of various radars from different countries,EW system,sonars etc already
and main thing is if the source codes and operating software is in hands then it is not difficult to use different sensors and make then compatible to each other ,but it is matter of time only,but it is not difficult to do
To Anon@3:11:00 PM: Sensor fusion and sensor integration are entirely different things. Thus far we have no Sensor fusion capability in India. F35 Sensor fusion software runs over 5 million lines of code, is responsible for over half the cost of the entire F35 development program and also responsible for much of the delays and problems of this project. This is also why we have chosen the much simpler 2 pilot configuration for 5 Gen fighter. Integrating different sensors and making them compatible is easier said than done. There are whole issues of frequency interference not just from other sensors but comm antennas, ship structures, emi interference. Even in developed countries it usually takes longer to resolve integration issues than to build the ship.
F35 Sensor fusion software runs over 5 million lines of code, is responsible for over half the cost of the entire F35 development program and also responsible for much of the delays and problems of this project. -------------------------------- this is more like computing rather than sensor fusion
Dear Prasun , can you give me an update on the Mig-35 development and if Elta-2248 AESA radar technology is being transferred to India as part of Barak-8 LRSAM deal ?
To Anon@6:23:00 PM: Sensor Fusion is a computational concept. It is the combining of sensory data or data derived from sensory data from disparate sources such that the resulting information is in some sense better than would be possible when these sources were used individually. Thats why I said do not confuse between sensor fusion and sensor integration.
To Anon@12:24AM: Like I wrote several times in the recent past, the definitive MiG-35 prototype has yet to be publicly rolled out. Until that happens, as far as I'm concerned, the MiG-35 does not exist in physical form. Regarding the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR, what specific ASEA technology are you referring to? Production/manufacturing, or product support? Asfar as the latter goes, as the MF-STAR is not in service with anyone else, and since India is the launch export customer with a sizeable order, the only deal that makes financial and operational sense is the one that involves the establishment in India of service centres that will complete product-support indigenously. As far as applications software packages for the MF-STAR go, these are being jointly developed (the EW threat libraries and target profiles will be supplied by the Indian end-users to IAI/ELTA). Thus, as a consequence of this, the source-codes will be India-specific and it will be India that will have IPR over all applications software packages and technical data packages relating to systems installation and systems integration.
I think you should start a new thread before the discussion starts wearing off subject. Your blog is so full of information except its hard to find info pertaining to a particular subject that is often dispersed across your blog with bits and pieces hidden in discussions of unrelated subjects. I am not a blogger but there has to be a better way to catalog related information. Least that should save you the effort of answering repeat questions.
Points to note- 1) 9 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet for $1 billion. 2) 6 P-8A Poseidon for $1.8 billion. P8A is an iterative development over the basic P8 that we have ordered. 3) 12 C-130J Hercules for $1.41 billion.
To Anon@2:14PM: Last October I attended a briefing on the Captor AESA radar being developed by EADS, THALES, Indra and Selex. The AESA variant developed for the EF-2000 Typhoon and also be upscaled to go on board the Su-30MKI (snd not on any other variants of the Su-27 or Su-30) since the integration will be a lot simpler and less riskier due to the mission computer being of Indian origin. This has already been proposed by EADS as part of a projected mid-life avionics upgrade programme for the Su-30MKI, the details of which have not yet been firmed up by IAF HQ. But within the next 18 months a firm decision will be taken by the IAF. Interestingly, the physically scaled-down variant of the AESA can go on board the Tejas LCA Mk2 PROVIDED the aircraft's frontal nose section is enlarged with extra internal bulkhead volume. In all probability this design modification will be undertaken for the Tejas Mk2, as the airframe will in any case have to be modified to accommodate modified air intakes and a larger wing area.
morocco bought 24 f16blk52 with apg69(v9)for $ 2.4 billion which included taining, maintaince and ground support equipment and assotiated accessories and spare apg69 v9 radar,new engines
and $ 155 million was extra for weapons
so a f16 blk50/52 cost them $ 100 million per aircraft --------------------------------------- now turkey which already has f16 and trained personnel,infrastructure and has licensed produced f16 at home
turkey bought 30 f16blk52 for (apg69 v9)for the price of $ 1.9 billion recently
now this comes out to be $ 60 million per aircraft which has no aesa compared to $ 40 million for mig35 which has aesa and outclasses all f16 varients when its gets larger aesa radar
now recently vietnam bought 12 su30 aircraft for $ 500 million or $ 40 million for each su30 fitted bigger version of zhuk me radar and this also includes training and ground based infrastucture,and this su30 is better than all f16 varients and still cost less ,
su30 fitted with bigger version zhuk me radar can be compared to f15 slam eagle fitted with apg63(v1) pulse doppler radar for which s.korea paid 100 million US bucks ----------------------------------------------- now f16 block 60 will cost as much as f18e
do we really need these jets at this costly price even when more capable su30,mig35 provides more commonality with exixting sukhoi/mig29 jets at the same time cost less
To Anon@10:10AM: All submarine-fired Club-S missiles are fired when the SSK stays submerged at shallow depths. The fire-control solution and target engagement coordinates for attacking sea-based targets are obtained from LRMR/ASW or MRMR/ASW aircraft or even ASV/ASW helicopters via LINK-2data link. The submarine has a reelable thin-line antenna array for two-way VLF communications, although SATCOM can also be employed. For attacking land targets the target coordinates are obtained on-shore BEFORE the submarine departs for its patrol. There is no ASW variant of the Club. There are only anti-ship and land attack variants.
To Anon@10:12AM: The Su-30MK2s for Vietnam will come for close to US$55 million per unit when one includes the cost of weaponry being ordered. As for comparing any Western combat aircraft with the MiG-35, this is a non-issue as the MiG-35 does not exist. Every time the Zhuk AE has been shown on a MiG-29, it has been on the MiG-29M2. The MiG-35 does not exist as Russia has still not rolled-out any new-built aircraft called the MiG-35. As for comparing the Su-30MK2 and F-15K or even F-16C/D Block 52, the Su-30MK2 will not be able to survive within a network-centric battlespace, while the F-16s and F-15s (all equipped with JTIDS) are able to received real-time imagery and data from J-STARS and AEW & C platforms, thus making the F-16s and F-15s formidable multi-role combat aircraft. Be it the Zhuk-ME or NO-11M Bars, all these radars can be effectively neutralised by airborne barrage jamming and in this scenario the only thing that will save the aircraft will be the operational data link of the type found only in the Su-30MKI, which MAY enable it to receive situational awareness cues from AEW & C platforms. But of course, even data links can be jammed.
To Anon@1:55PM: Yes, initial procurement costs are lower, but what about life-cycle costs? How many more spare engines have to be bought for supporting the life-cycles of the MiG-29 or Su-30? Even the Indonesians and Venezuelans are facing problems with spares supplies, as it routinely takes up to eight months to procure them directly from Russia! I myself have the most recent spares price and availability requirements from both the air forces of these two countries. In contrast, for any Western combat aircraft the spares will be delivered at the most within 12 days. Even when it came to sending crash investigators for the Su-30MKI, the team from Russia should have reached India within 48 hours of the incident, but they came in only after a week!!! What kind of product-support is this? About data links on board MiG-29s or Su-30s, yes they are there but only for communicating with other combat aircraft and receiving data from ground-based radars. Even the Russian A-50 cannot directly communicate with combat aircraft, it has to be re-roured through ground-based data relay centres! That's why the Chinese had to develop their own KJ-2000 AEW & C platform and did away with the junk avionics on the Su-27s and instead decided to install the J-10's avionics on the Su-27s (which is the J-11 now).
To Anon@4:23PM: Why not? Do you think in future aerial hostilities the fight will be restricted to only combat aircraft? Do you think in the event of future hostilities between China and Vietnam the PLA Air Force will deploy only Su-27s and Su-30s against the Vietnamese Su-27s and Su-30s, and leave the A-50E and KJ-2000 AEW & C platforms on the ground? What kind of logic is this? Fighter-to-fighter comparison is not even good for a paper exercise as they don;t mean anything in the real world. That is not how future wars will be fought.
To Anon@5:34PM: The A-50E PHALCON will be far more effective than the G-550 CAEW & CS because of its superior flight endurance and superior mission sensor/mission management suites, especially the ESM suite.
To Anon@8:17AM: Am in Timor Leste now on a business trip.
I hate to cast a dark spell on the national euphoria about the first A-50E PHALCON's arrival, but I would hold my horses for the first six months to see if Russia's Rosoboronexport can live up to its product-support commitments. For it could well be that the Ruskie military-industrial complex could allow history to repeat itself and may be found wanting in terms of adhering to contractual commitments, if if this happens the PHALCONs could well end up spending more time on the ground than in the air! I hope the IAF has made contingency plans for procuring the aircraft-specific spares from Uzbekistan's Tashkent Aircraft Production Organisation (TAPO), which has an IL-76 final assembly line (although the components and complete PS-90A turbofans are still sourced from Russia). My personal platform choice for the PHALCON would have been the Airbus A310-300, which along with the PHALCON mission sensor/management avionics suite was originally jointly proposed by Israel Aerospace Industries way back in 2000 to both Australia (for Project Wedgetail) and India. I just hope that choosing the IL-76 platform does not end up as being an ill-conceived decision.
How many more spare engines have to be bought for supporting the life-cycles of the MiG-29 or Su-30? -------------------------------- you know already very well that how many times engine have been changed on indian mig29,just once and that too because of old engines were smoky and mig29 upgrade cost is way cheaper than mirage2000 upgrade cost or for that matter 24 million US dollars difference
and there will be no need to change engine on su30mki because engiens are excellent compared to older rd33
and why india has spare problem for su30 for which tech was transfer to india ,are we not even capable to produce spares even after tech tranfer then its sham on us
and for remaining fighters why india doesn't ask for spares in huge amount which are always needed
and for when its comes to avionics the new su35bm and avionics on mig29k and mig35 prototype are world class
For it could well be that the Ruskie military-industrial complex could allow history to repeat itself and may be found wanting in terms of adhering to contractual commitments, if if this happens the PHALCONs could well end up spending more time on the ground than in the air! -------------------------------- it shows mere phobia you have about russia
according to u that there are no spares not even for il76 just bullshit
i have seen 6-7 flights of il76 to leh from chandigarh every day and noted it for almost 2 years
and for mki crash there were crashes of f16 in turkey and s.korea no one arrived there from LM
To Anon@12:00PM: FYI for 230 Su-30MKIs the number of AL-31FPs contracted for is 1,700! The TTSL of each AL-31FP is 2,000 hours after which the engine has to be junked! Compare this with the 6,000-hour TTSL of any Western turbofan. For the Su-30MKI the tech-transfer is all about licence-assembly of the aircraft, which means Russia will only teach HAL how to assemble the aircraft and its accessories, and will not teach HAL how to build them within India using locally-sourced raw materials. Go to any HAL facility in Nashik or Koraput or Korwa or Hyderabad and you will be able to find all this out all by yourself. And as for the AL-31FP the entire engine is being imported from Russia, with only final assembly taking place at Koraput from semi-knocked-down kits. As for ...."and for remaining fighters why india doesn't ask for spares in huge amount which are always needed", the answer is very simple: for aircraft like the Mirage 2000, Jaguar and Hawk Mk132 the equipment reliability is four times more what is the case with the Su-30MKI and MiG-29, that's why the spares are not reqd in huge quantities. And whenever spares are reqd for non-Russian aircraft they are easily and quickly available, unlike the Russians who do not have a global supply chain/logistics network. That;s why not only India, but China, Indonesia, malaysia and Venezuela are all always suffering. Regarding the avionics quality of Su-35BM or MiG-29K, I would not say anything now as both these aircraft types have yet to enter operational service and are still untried and untested under actual operational conditions. As for IL-76 product support, whether you call it bullshit or not, the fact remains that China has cancelled its earlier intent to buy 38 IL-76s, India has ditched the IL-78MKI-90 in favour of the A330-200MRTT, and till today Russia has been unable to commission its IL-76 final assembly line at Voronez, something it promised to implement four years ago! I don't have any phobia about Russia-origin equipment, rather I'm petrified and at times totally pissed off! Even after 18 years after the breakup of the USSR the Ruskies have still not mastered the art of through-life integrated logistics support!! As for F-16 crash investigations in Turkey or South Korea, there's no need for anyone from Lockheed Martin to arrive simply because Lockheed Martin has full-time offices (manned by more than 30 staff) in these two countries that are manned 24/7 for responding to just such emergencies.
To Anonymous @Tuesday, May 26, 2009 6:37:00 PM non of the weapons like su30,mig35,smerch,t90,kilos,amurs,s300,s400,brahmos is being sold to Pakistan so india dont care unless it will be used against india
and i hope that Russian wont sell Brahmos to chinese or pakistanis or their friends or it would be a really a bad.......situation
For the record, I've never stated that the AARs for the PAF will be IL-78MKI-90s. The IL-78 AARs for the PAF are refurbished pre-owned IL-76MDs, not brand-new airframes. These IL-76MDs are refurbished in Ukraine, with the AAR kits (minus the refuelling pod) also being pre-owned. The AAR pod has been supplied by China and final hardware installation-cum-integration has taken place in Ukraine. The official PAF designation for the AARs is IL-78, and not IL-78MKI-90.
Prasun K Sengupta why news are saying that Phalcon AWACS are capable of tracking only 60 targets simultaneously ................ In its belly the aircraft holds 12 workstations that control radar, electronic intelligence and surveillance systems and communication equipment capable of tracking 60 targets simultaneously about 400km inside enemy territory both on the ground and in the air.
To Anon@10:06AM: Any AEW & C platform is not required to substitute ground-based airspace surveillance radars and fill up air surveillance gaps. That is not its main role. Its principal role is that of an airborne battle management system that will give early warning of hostile attacks (the enemy at most will not have more than 25 aircraft per strike package, as only the USAF can mount 64-aircraft packages) and at the same time engage in airborne battle management for friendly air campaigns that will typically comprise no more than 16 aircraft in a single package, and which will be given early warning about hostile interceptors. Therefore, although the PHALCON will be able to track 60 aircraft, it will be be able to detect some 200 airborne aircraft at any given time.
To Anon@2:24PM: I very much doubt it. But who knows, maybe the untoward will happen. Everything is possible.
246 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 246 of 246anon@9:49 bacche, go understand who has gone to israel and what for and who have come here and what for. you children dont know anything. MFSTAR in india specific config is different from one shown few years back. every bloody year technology changes!
to prasun
P15B project is too far at least 10 years from now,so better not to talk of that
but it is also true that there is not much differnece between X,S,L band aesa radar
although X band provides higher resolution but on sea conditions S,L band radars also good even against stealthy aircrafts
europeans already have aesa radar tech,followed by russians,americans,israel
but it also depend on willingness of russians to mont aesa radar on naval ships
>>the s band aesa T/R modules are from israel and there is nothing from indian side as india is incapable of doing so
bewakoof, s band aesa module production was launched in india two years back onlee. now they are working on x, vhf and other bands. kids man u ppl are, you dont know anything but make such funny claims. and btw, making the tr modules has been mastered long time back by india in 2000 itself, it is the miniaturization and subsequent design iteration till it is proven in near field and far field testing which takes time. no point in launching production like chinese mama when u can reduce size by 20-30% thanks to design modification on testing.
>>>but it is also true that there is not much differnece between X,S,L band aesa radar
HA HA HA HA HA
when u change the band everything changes, PRF, PPS, exciter, reciever and signal processor
the design is also directly linked to size of each component and heat generation
what comedy is this? who is this maha comedian???? who gives such expert statement
, go understand who has gone to israel and what for and who have come here and what for. you children dont know anything. MFSTAR in india specific config is different from one shown few years back. every bloody year technology changes!
----------------------------------
and what are those indian specifications
the specifications for land based and naval based SAM are almost same everywhere
just like SAMPSON,SMART L radar are common in european countries whether its UK,FRANCE,ITALY,GERMANY,NETHERLANDS all these countries use same radar
and similar configuration
and what is india specific in FREGET M2EM radar which china india russia use
what is there in AN/SPY1 PESA radar which spain,s.koreans,japanese,americans,australians use
is AN/SPY1 spanish specific
or it is s.korean specific
or it is japanese specific
or it is american specific
or will it be australian specific
no its the same radar in all countries
and what else can be india specific in MFSTAR
MFSTAR is just like any other AESA radar will be used for volume search radar on land or on sea
to prasun
please delete those comments which use " abusive" words like fool,idiot etc
even the lower frequency band can provide similar detection ranges but
x band give higher resolution than lower frequency band radars
but it is also true that in sea conditions or on land conditions
S,L,VHF(3D) radars are still very very effective
so at similar detection ranges only advantage of X band radar over lower frequency band radar is resolution
---------------------------------
bewakoof,
---------------------------
go home and call your elders bewakoof
s band aesa module production was launched in india two years back onlee. now they are working on x, vhf and other bands. kids man u ppl are, you dont know anything but make such funny claims. and btw, making the tr modules has been mastered long time back by india in 2000 itself, it is the miniaturization and subsequent design iteration till it is proven in near field and far field testing which takes time. no point in launching production like chinese mama when u can reduce size by 20-30% thanks to design modification on testing.
-----------------------------
so what is the result of that mastery,converting those t/r modules in operational is whole different task
till now india has built radars with foreign tech trnafer even now producing older gen radars
all radars which bharat electronis has built are from foreign design
whether its rajendra radar
rohini radar
or other radars being built for air force or navy all are older foreign designs
and for the same reason air force has balloon mounted radar,and now they want aesa radar from foreign vendor
To Anon@1:24PM: Don't analyse the MF-STAR as just a standalone system. Try to look at it from the angle of what is the overall required sensor-fuzed solution by the end-user. Then try to look at the MF-STAR's configuration for the Project 15A DDG (I had uploaded the photo last year) snd for the IAC (shown very clearly in an illustration during the keel-laying ceremony earlier this year). The very visible array configurations alone for the two respective vessels very clearly indicate the continuing evolution of the MF-STAR family. from that standpoint, Anon@1:10PM is correct.
Mr. Sengupta, I am led to understand there is a shift away from the disassembled status. Sources I've had some contact with indicate an appreciation of those difficulties and a move towards something better. The question should be how far have they reached.
to prasun
Try to look at it from the angle of what is the overall required sensor-fuzed solution by the end-user. Then try to look at the MF-STAR's configuration for the Project 15A DDG (I had uploaded the photo last year) snd for the IAC (shown very clearly in an illustration during the keel-laying ceremony earlier this year). The very visible array configurations alone for the two respective vessels very clearly indicate the continuing evolution of the MF-STAR family
---------------------------------
i am also aware of this
the configuration for land based mfstar and naval mfstar is much different
and even on differnet naval platforms there can be different
configuration of same radar
and the question of sensor fusion by end user it not hard for india
see in shivalik class frigates there is sensor fusion of various radars from different countries,EW system,sonars etc already
and main thing is if the source codes and operating software is in hands then it is not difficult to use different sensors and make then compatible to each other ,but it is matter of time only,but it is not difficult to do
To Anon@3:11:00 PM: Sensor fusion and sensor integration are entirely different things. Thus far we have no Sensor fusion capability in India. F35 Sensor fusion software runs over 5 million lines of code, is responsible for over half the cost of the entire F35 development program and also responsible for much of the delays and problems of this project. This is also why we have chosen the much simpler 2 pilot configuration for 5 Gen fighter.
Integrating different sensors and making them compatible is easier said than done. There are whole issues of frequency interference not just from other sensors but comm antennas, ship structures, emi interference. Even in developed countries it usually takes longer to resolve integration issues than to build the ship.
F35 Sensor fusion software runs over 5 million lines of code, is responsible for over half the cost of the entire F35 development program and also responsible for much of the delays and problems of this project.
--------------------------------
this is more like computing rather than sensor fusion
Dear Prasun , can you give me an update on the Mig-35 development and if Elta-2248 AESA radar technology is being transferred to India as part of Barak-8 LRSAM deal ?
Thanks
To Anon@6:23:00 PM: Sensor Fusion is a computational concept.
It is the combining of sensory data or data derived from sensory data from disparate sources such that the resulting information is in some sense better than would be possible when these sources were used individually.
Thats why I said do not confuse between sensor fusion and sensor integration.
To Anon@12:24AM: Like I wrote several times in the recent past, the definitive MiG-35 prototype has yet to be publicly rolled out. Until that happens, as far as I'm concerned, the MiG-35 does not exist in physical form.
Regarding the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR, what specific ASEA technology are you referring to? Production/manufacturing, or product support? Asfar as the latter goes, as the MF-STAR is not in service with anyone else, and since India is the launch export customer with a sizeable order, the only deal that makes financial and operational sense is the one that involves the establishment in India of service centres that will complete product-support indigenously. As far as applications software packages for the MF-STAR go, these are being jointly developed (the EW threat libraries and target profiles will be supplied by the Indian end-users to IAI/ELTA). Thus, as a consequence of this, the source-codes will be India-specific and it will be India that will have IPR over all applications software packages and technical data packages relating to systems installation and systems integration.
to prasun
any brochures abiout typhoon aesa radar
Time for a new thread, Prasun.
I think you should start a new thread before the discussion starts wearing off subject. Your blog is so full of information except its hard to find info pertaining to a particular subject that is often dispersed across your blog with bits and pieces hidden in discussions of unrelated subjects. I am not a blogger but there has to be a better way to catalog related information. Least that should save you the effort of answering repeat questions.
Check this out.
US DOD FY10 AVIATION BUDGET REQUEST Chart.
Points to note-
1) 9 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet for $1 billion.
2) 6 P-8A Poseidon for $1.8 billion. P8A is an iterative development over the basic P8 that we have ordered.
3) 12 C-130J Hercules for $1.41 billion.
To Anon@2:14PM: Last October I attended a briefing on the Captor AESA radar being developed by EADS, THALES, Indra and Selex. The AESA variant developed for the EF-2000 Typhoon and also be upscaled to go on board the Su-30MKI (snd not on any other variants of the Su-27 or Su-30) since the integration will be a lot simpler and less riskier due to the mission computer being of Indian origin. This has already been proposed by EADS as part of a projected mid-life avionics upgrade programme for the Su-30MKI, the details of which have not yet been firmed up by IAF HQ. But within the next 18 months a firm decision will be taken by the IAF. Interestingly, the physically scaled-down variant of the AESA can go on board the Tejas LCA Mk2 PROVIDED the aircraft's frontal nose section is enlarged with extra internal bulkhead volume. In all probability this design modification will be undertaken for the Tejas Mk2, as the airframe will in any case have to be modified to accommodate modified air intakes and a larger wing area.
to prasun
can u tell me that if a sub fires a club missiles against land target or surface ship from 250km away while itself being submerged in water
then how does it acquires target coordinates and how would submarine know where is its target
and second question
how does the anti submarine varient if club missiles work can u please varify all this
morocco bought 24 f16blk52 with apg69(v9)for
$ 2.4 billion which included taining, maintaince and ground support equipment and assotiated accessories and spare apg69 v9 radar,new engines
and $ 155 million was extra for weapons
so a f16 blk50/52 cost them $ 100 million per aircraft
---------------------------------------
now turkey which already has f16 and trained personnel,infrastructure and has licensed produced f16 at home
turkey bought 30 f16blk52 for (apg69 v9)for the price of $ 1.9 billion recently
now this comes out to be $ 60 million per aircraft which has no aesa compared to $ 40 million for mig35 which has aesa and outclasses all f16 varients when its gets larger aesa radar
now recently vietnam bought 12 su30 aircraft for $ 500 million or $ 40 million for each su30 fitted bigger version of zhuk me radar
and this also includes training and ground based infrastucture,and this su30 is better than all f16 varients and still cost less ,
su30 fitted with bigger version zhuk me radar can be compared to f15 slam eagle fitted with apg63(v1) pulse doppler radar for which s.korea paid 100 million US bucks
-----------------------------------------------
now f16 block 60 will cost as much as f18e
do we really need these jets at this costly price even when more capable su30,mig35 provides more commonality with exixting sukhoi/mig29 jets at the same time cost less
To Anon@10:10AM: All submarine-fired Club-S missiles are fired when the SSK stays submerged at shallow depths. The fire-control solution and target engagement coordinates for attacking sea-based targets are obtained from LRMR/ASW or MRMR/ASW aircraft or even ASV/ASW helicopters via LINK-2data link. The submarine has a reelable thin-line antenna array for two-way VLF communications, although SATCOM can also be employed. For attacking land targets the target coordinates are obtained on-shore BEFORE the submarine departs for its patrol. There is no ASW variant of the Club. There are only anti-ship and land attack variants.
To Anon@10:12AM: The Su-30MK2s for Vietnam will come for close to US$55 million per unit when one includes the cost of weaponry being ordered. As for comparing any Western combat aircraft with the MiG-35, this is a non-issue as the MiG-35 does not exist. Every time the Zhuk AE has been shown on a MiG-29, it has been on the MiG-29M2. The MiG-35 does not exist as Russia has still not rolled-out any new-built aircraft called the MiG-35. As for comparing the Su-30MK2 and F-15K or even F-16C/D Block 52, the Su-30MK2 will not be able to survive within a network-centric battlespace, while the F-16s and F-15s (all equipped with JTIDS) are able to received real-time imagery and data from J-STARS and AEW & C platforms, thus making the F-16s and F-15s formidable multi-role combat aircraft. Be it the Zhuk-ME or NO-11M Bars, all these radars can be effectively neutralised by airborne barrage jamming and in this scenario the only thing that will save the aircraft will be the operational data link of the type found only in the Su-30MKI, which MAY enable it to receive situational awareness cues from AEW & C platforms. But of course, even data links can be jammed.
but again su30mk2 still cheaper than f16,15
and su30mk2 may have russian data link
to prasun
its not appropriate to bring in J-STARS,AWACS in this
fighter to fighter comparision is more appropriate
to prasun
can you describe that what is the difference in AWACS tech in one being supplied to india from israel
and the other one you posted last month
are these two radars of same tech or not
prasun,are you in india right now or somewhere else
To Anon@1:55PM: Yes, initial procurement costs are lower, but what about life-cycle costs? How many more spare engines have to be bought for supporting the life-cycles of the MiG-29 or Su-30? Even the Indonesians and Venezuelans are facing problems with spares supplies, as it routinely takes up to eight months to procure them directly from Russia! I myself have the most recent spares price and availability requirements from both the air forces of these two countries. In contrast, for any Western combat aircraft the spares will be delivered at the most within 12 days. Even when it came to sending crash investigators for the Su-30MKI, the team from Russia should have reached India within 48 hours of the incident, but they came in only after a week!!! What kind of product-support is this?
About data links on board MiG-29s or Su-30s, yes they are there but only for communicating with other combat aircraft and receiving data from ground-based radars. Even the Russian A-50 cannot directly communicate with combat aircraft, it has to be re-roured through ground-based data relay centres! That's why the Chinese had to develop their own KJ-2000 AEW & C platform and did away with the junk avionics on the Su-27s and instead decided to install the J-10's avionics on the Su-27s (which is the J-11 now).
To Anon@4:23PM: Why not? Do you think in future aerial hostilities the fight will be restricted to only combat aircraft? Do you think in the event of future hostilities between China and Vietnam the PLA Air Force will deploy only Su-27s and Su-30s against the Vietnamese Su-27s and Su-30s, and leave the A-50E and KJ-2000 AEW & C platforms on the ground? What kind of logic is this? Fighter-to-fighter comparison is not even good for a paper exercise as they don;t mean anything in the real world. That is not how future wars will be fought.
To Anon@5:34PM: The A-50E PHALCON will be far more effective than the G-550 CAEW & CS because of its superior flight endurance and superior mission sensor/mission management suites, especially the ESM suite.
To Anon@8:17AM: Am in Timor Leste now on a business trip.
I hate to cast a dark spell on the national euphoria about the first A-50E PHALCON's arrival, but I would hold my horses for the first six months to see if Russia's Rosoboronexport can live up to its product-support commitments. For it could well be that the Ruskie military-industrial complex could allow history to repeat itself and may be found wanting in terms of adhering to contractual commitments, if if this happens the PHALCONs could well end up spending more time on the ground than in the air! I hope the IAF has made contingency plans for procuring the aircraft-specific spares from Uzbekistan's Tashkent Aircraft Production Organisation (TAPO), which has an IL-76 final assembly line (although the components and complete PS-90A turbofans are still sourced from Russia). My personal platform choice for the PHALCON would have been the Airbus A310-300, which along with the PHALCON mission sensor/management avionics suite was originally jointly proposed by Israel Aerospace Industries way back in 2000 to both Australia (for Project Wedgetail) and India. I just hope that choosing the IL-76 platform does not end up as being an ill-conceived decision.
How many more spare engines have to be bought for supporting the life-cycles of the MiG-29 or Su-30?
--------------------------------
you know already very well that how many times engine have been changed on indian mig29,just once and that too because of old engines were smoky and mig29 upgrade cost is way cheaper than mirage2000 upgrade cost or for that matter 24 million US dollars difference
and there will be no need to change engine on su30mki because engiens are excellent compared to older rd33
and why india has spare problem for su30 for which tech was transfer to india ,are we not even capable to produce spares even after tech tranfer then its sham on us
and for remaining fighters why india doesn't ask for spares in huge amount which are always needed
and for when its comes to avionics the new su35bm and avionics on mig29k and mig35 prototype are world class
For it could well be that the Ruskie military-industrial complex could allow history to repeat itself and may be found wanting in terms of adhering to contractual commitments, if if this happens the PHALCONs could well end up spending more time on the ground than in the air!
--------------------------------
it shows mere phobia you have about russia
according to u that there are no spares not even for il76 just bullshit
i have seen 6-7 flights of il76 to leh from chandigarh every day
and noted it for almost 2 years
and for mki crash there were crashes of f16 in turkey and s.korea no one arrived there from LM
To Anon@12:00PM: FYI for 230 Su-30MKIs the number of AL-31FPs contracted for is 1,700! The TTSL of each AL-31FP is 2,000 hours after which the engine has to be junked! Compare this with the 6,000-hour TTSL of any Western turbofan. For the Su-30MKI the tech-transfer is all about licence-assembly of the aircraft, which means Russia will only teach HAL how to assemble the aircraft and its accessories, and will not teach HAL how to build them within India using locally-sourced raw materials. Go to any HAL facility in Nashik or Koraput or Korwa or Hyderabad and you will be able to find all this out all by yourself. And as for the AL-31FP the entire engine is being imported from Russia, with only final assembly taking place at Koraput from semi-knocked-down kits.
As for ...."and for remaining fighters why india doesn't ask for spares in huge amount which are always needed", the answer is very simple: for aircraft like the Mirage 2000, Jaguar and Hawk Mk132 the equipment reliability is four times more what is the case with the Su-30MKI and MiG-29, that's why the spares are not reqd in huge quantities. And whenever spares are reqd for non-Russian aircraft they are easily and quickly available, unlike the Russians who do not have a global supply chain/logistics network. That;s why not only India, but China, Indonesia, malaysia and Venezuela are all always suffering. Regarding the avionics quality of Su-35BM or MiG-29K, I would not say anything now as both these aircraft types have yet to enter operational service and are still untried and untested under actual operational conditions.
As for IL-76 product support, whether you call it bullshit or not, the fact remains that China has cancelled its earlier intent to buy 38 IL-76s, India has ditched the IL-78MKI-90 in favour of the A330-200MRTT, and till today Russia has been unable to commission its IL-76 final assembly line at Voronez, something it promised to implement four years ago! I don't have any phobia about Russia-origin equipment, rather I'm petrified and at times totally pissed off! Even after 18 years after the breakup of the USSR the Ruskies have still not mastered the art of through-life integrated logistics support!!
As for F-16 crash investigations in Turkey or South Korea, there's no need for anyone from Lockheed Martin to arrive simply because Lockheed Martin has full-time offices (manned by more than 30 staff) in these two countries that are manned 24/7 for responding to just such emergencies.
may be indians are not happy withe sale of IL-78MKI-90 to paf and decided to punish them?
is it true that pakistani will produce chinese CH-3 armed UAV?
Prasun K Sengupta it true that both shaheen-1 and shaheen-2 uses MRV with terminal guidance like US Pershing-II missile?
Prasun K Sengupta can you give some kind of operating cost comparison of fighter aircraft in MMRCA or some link to that? please
To Anonymous @Tuesday, May 26, 2009 6:37:00 PM
non of the weapons like su30,mig35,smerch,t90,kilos,amurs,s300,s400,brahmos is being sold to Pakistan so india dont care unless it will be used against india
and i hope that Russian wont sell Brahmos to chinese or pakistanis or their friends or it would be a really a bad.......situation
but i think russians are not that Crazy
to anon @ May 27, 2009 12:49:00 AM
but i think russians are not that Crazy
------------------------------
they can get crazy if we don't buy thier equipments
just like americans get crazy when israel,australia,japan,s.korea don't buy their equipemnt
so who wants to loose customer
To Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 4:11:00 AM
Anonymous said...
they can get crazy if we don't buy thier equipments
just like americans get crazy when israel,australia,japan,s.korea don't buy their equipemnt
so who wants to loose customer
--------------------------
thats what i am saying that Russian wont like to loose customer like india
But if they sell to pakistan they will have to know that they will loose orders from india
And CAS of PAF said on differentt times that IL-78 are being fitted with AAR systems in Ukrain but never said that they are second hand from Urkain
So i will go with Prasun K Sengupta
For the record, I've never stated that the AARs for the PAF will be IL-78MKI-90s. The IL-78 AARs for the PAF are refurbished pre-owned IL-76MDs, not brand-new airframes. These IL-76MDs are refurbished in Ukraine, with the AAR kits (minus the refuelling pod) also being pre-owned. The AAR pod has been supplied by China and final hardware installation-cum-integration has taken place in Ukraine. The official PAF designation for the AARs is IL-78, and not IL-78MKI-90.
Prasun K Sengupta why news are saying that Phalcon AWACS are capable of tracking only 60 targets simultaneously
................
In its belly the aircraft holds 12 workstations that control radar, electronic intelligence and surveillance systems and communication equipment capable of tracking 60 targets simultaneously about 400km inside enemy territory both on the ground and in the air.
Prasun UAE is looking to sell its all Mirage 2000-9 fighters, is there any interest from india?
To Anon@10:06AM: Any AEW & C platform is not required to substitute ground-based airspace surveillance radars and fill up air surveillance gaps. That is not its main role. Its principal role is that of an airborne battle management system that will give early warning of hostile attacks (the enemy at most will not have more than 25 aircraft per strike package, as only the USAF can mount 64-aircraft packages) and at the same time engage in airborne battle management for friendly air campaigns that will typically comprise no more than 16 aircraft in a single package, and which will be given early warning about hostile interceptors. Therefore, although the PHALCON will be able to track 60 aircraft, it will be be able to detect some 200 airborne aircraft at any given time.
To Anon@2:24PM: I very much doubt it. But who knows, maybe the untoward will happen. Everything is possible.
Post a Comment