mattE-2C HAWKEYE AIRBORNE EARLY WARNING AIRCRAFT, USA
The primary role of the E-2C Hawkeye aircraft supplied by Northrop Grumman is as an all weather airborne early warning aircraft to the naval task force. From an operating altitude above 25,000 feet, the Hawkeye warns the naval task force of approaching air threats and provides threat identification and positional data to fighter aircraft such as F-14 Tomcats. Secondary roles include strike command and control, surveillance, guidance of search and rescue missions and as a relay to extend the range of communications.
The E-2C became operational in 1973. Block II aircraft, with improved engine and radar, entered service in 1992, with final delivery in 2001. As well as the United States Navy, E-2C aircraft are in service with the navies of Egypt, Israel, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan and, in 1998, the French Navy took delivery of two aircraft for the new Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier. Deliveries have totalled more than 140 for the USN and more than 30 for other nations.
The aircraft is operated by a crew of five with the pilot and co-pilot on the flight deck and the combat information centre officer, air control officer and radar operator stations located in the rear fuselage directly beneath the rotodome.
DESIGN
The fuselage is designed for carrier operations and is fitted with a nose-tow catapult attachment for accelerated carrier take-off, an A-frame arrester hook for engagement of the arresting gear and a tail bumper to withstand impact or scraping on the runway. For storage in the hangar, the wings fold hydraulically to lie flat to the fuselage. The fuselage is of light metal construction and parts of the tailplane are of composite structure in order to reduce radar signature.
From 2004, US Navy Hawkeyes are being fitted with two Hamilton Sundstrand NP2000 digitally-controlled, eight-bladed propellers to replace mechanically-controlled, four-bladed propellers. The new propellers provide less vibration and less noise. Initial carrier certification of the new propellers was carried out on USS John F Kennedy in November 2003.
MISSION SYSTEMS
The large 24ft diameter circular antenna radome above the rear fuselage gives the E-2C its distinctive profile. The radome houses the AN/APA-171 antenna supplied by Randtron Systems, which rotates at 5 to 6 revolutions per minute.
The Lockheed Martin AN/APS-145 radar is capable of tracking more than 2,000 targets and controlling the interception of 40 hostile targets. One radar sweep covers 6 million cubic miles. The radar’s total radiation aperture control antenna reduces sidelobes and is robust against electronic countermeasures. It is capable of detecting aircraft at ranges greater than 550km.
The mission computer is equipped with an enhanced high-speed parallel processor. The Lockheed Martin AN/UYQ-70 advanced display system and computer peripherals provide the operators with multicolour displays, map overlays, zoom facilities and auxiliary data displays.
NAVIGATION AND COMMUNICATIONS
A global positioning system and a Northrop Grumman (formerly Litton) AN/ASN-92 CAINS (Carrier Aircraft Inertial Navigation System) are the main components of the aircraft’s navigation suite. The aircraft is also equipped with the AN/ASN- 50 heading and attitude reference system, an AN/ARA-50 UHF automatic direction finder from Rockwell Collins, an AN/ASW-25B automatic carrier landing system and a Honeywell AN/APN-171(V) radar altimeter.
The communications suite includes an AN/ARC-158 UHF data link, an AN/ARQ-34 HF datalink and a Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS) which provides secure voice and data communications.
ENGINES
The E-2C was originally fitted with two Allison T56-A-425 turboprop engines, but since the introduction of E-2C Group I variants, T56A-427 engines have been fitted. With the new engines, the E-2C can cruise on station for more than four hours, up to 200 miles from base.
HAWKEYE 2000
Major upgrade programmes are continuing to the end of the service life in 2015. The first of the next generation standard, the Hawkeye 2000, was delivered in October 2001, with 21 on order for the USN, one aircraft destined for the French Navy under a foreign military sales (FMS) agreement and two for Taiwan. USN aircraft will achieve Initial Operating Capability (IOC) in 2004. Northrop Grumman is also to upgrade a number of USN aircraft to Hawkeye 2000 configuration. Egypt is to upgrade its five E-2C Hawkeye to Hawkeye 2000 standard and will receive one additional upgraded E-2C. The first upgraded aircraft was delivered in March 2003. The Japanese Air Self Defense Force is also upgrading its 13 Hawkeye aircraft. The United Arab Emirates has requested five refurbished aircraft, upgraded to Hawkeye 2000 standard.
Hawkeye 2000 features a Raytheon mission computer upgrade (MCU), Lockheed Martin Advanced Control Indicator Set (ACIS), co-operative engagement capability (CEC), satellite communications, new navigation and flight control systems. The MCU is based on open architecture COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) technology, with increased memory and faster processing. The CEC consists of processor, data distribution system and antenna and will enable Hawkeye 2000 to perform real-time battle management, fusing and distributing information from sources such as satellite and shipborne radar.
ADVANCED HAWKEYE
The next-generation, RMP/Advanced Hawkeye, will have, as well a new radar, theatre missile defence capabilities, multisensor integration and a tactical cockpit. Lockheed Martin Naval Electronics & Surveillance Systems are developing a new solid-state, electronically steered UHF radar under the E-2C Radar Modernization Program (RMP). Northrop Grumman will supply the transmitter, Raytheon the receiver and L-3 Communications Randtron the UHF antenna.
The new radar began flight testing in July 2002 the Advanced Hawkeye equipped with the radar, which will replace all 75 USN E-2C aircraft. The aircraft began full System Development and Demonstration (SDD) in August 2003 and is due to enter service in 2011.
From this link
mattI stand corrected. 🙂
U.N. Deadlock Continues On Two Terrorism Treaties
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
By Jim Wurst
U.N. Wire
UNITED NATIONS — The General Assembly yesterday decided to continue work next year on two incomplete terrorism treaties, confirming that the deadlock in negotiations has not been broken.
The two draft treaties — a comprehensive convention and one against nuclear terrorism — have been under negotiations for almost 10 years. Most articles of the drafts are completed, but finalization has been held up over how broadly the label “terrorist” can be applied to self-determination movements and national armed forces.
The assembly adopted the resolution, recommended by its Legal Committee, by consensus without debate. The resolution “strongly condemns all acts … of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, wherever and by whomsoever committed.” It also cites the numerous conventions and Security Council resolutions on combating terrorism, and calls for further negotiations on the two drafts next year, but nothing in the resolution advances the debate over the treaties.
After the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks on the United States, and the subsequent Security Council Resolution 1373 that committed countries to combat terrorism, diplomats thought there was a political momentum to break the logjam and complete the treaties, thus creating a network of 14 conventions dealing with various aspects of terrorism. But that did not happen.
“We had great hopes” in the autumn of 2001 for the two texts, said U.N. Legal Counsel Hans Corell at a news conference early this fall. “There were intense negotiations,” he said. “From a legal point of view, I think they have the solution, basically it is the question of the definition of terrorism … but then something happened, the political climate suddenly changed.”
“If you study the question more closely, you will end up in the Middle East,” said Corell, a reference to the deteriorating situation between Israel and the Palestinians at that time.
In October of this year, a subcommittee of the Legal Committee resumed work on the two texts. The chairman of the subcommittee, Ambassador Rohan Perera of Sri Lanka, reported to the committee that “substantial differences persisted” over the comprehensive text.
Yesterday, Carlos Fernando Diaz Paniagua, a counselor at the Costa Rican mission, who chaired the meetings over the draft said, “We are making slow but steady progress.” He told U.N. Wire, “The problem is finding a balanced solution on the role of armed forces and self-determination movements.”
The division is the long-standing problem of how — or if — to distinguish between “freedom fighters” and “terrorists.” Common examples are the Palestinians and Kashmiris, the legitimacy of whose violent actions has been divisive for years.
There are 12 so-called “sectoral” terrorism treaties that outlaw specific acts, including hijacking an airplane and laundering money, that avoid defining terrorism since in these treaties terrorism is defined by the act. Since the text of the draft convention is meant to cover all aspects of the problem, the burden of a definition has fallen on these negotiators.
A related issue is of one of scope, meaning which individuals and groups of people will be subject to the treaty. The specific problem is whether the actions of armed forces could ever be defined as terrorism, or if their actions are already covered by other instruments of international humanitarian law.
Diaz Paniagua said the essential question is, “In what incidents can armed forces acting outside of the territory of the national jurisdiction and acting in a manner not in conformity with international law … [commit] acts of terrorism?”
The remaining substantive issue in the second draft treaty, on the “suppression of acts of nuclear terrorism,” is also the question of how to govern the actions of national armed forces. Definition is not an issue in this case since, like the other sectoral treaties, the act defines the terrorist. Applying the scope of the treaty to armed forces brings into question when, if ever, the use of nuclear weapons is legitimate.
While the nuclear draft uses the same language as the comprehensive convention about the treaty not applying to armed forces “inasmuch as they are governed by other rules of international law,” the issue is more complicated since, as arms control experts argue, there is little in international law that specifically regulates the use of nuclear weapons.
The committee spent little time on this draft. Delegates said that once the question of scope is settled in the comprehensive treaty, the same solution can be applied to the nuclear draft. Another proposal before the committee mentioned in the resolution is the idea of holding a “high-level conference under the auspices of the United Nations to formulate a joint organized response of the international community.” No progress was made on this idea either, delegates said.
The subcommittee will meet again in June 2004.
mattPentagon Contract Announcement
(Source: US Defense Department; issued Jan. 22, 2004)
Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Bethpage, N.Y., is being awarded a $576,451,250 modification to convert a previously awarded undefinitized contract action (N00019-03-C-0044) to a definitized multiyear contract for the fiscal year 2004-2007 procurement of three Hawkeye 2000 E-2C (HE2K) aircraft and five trainer E-2C, as well as all associated support equipment, aircraft components, long-lead material items, integrated logistics support, logistics support, training, sustaining engineering, spare and repair parts, incorporation of engineering change proposals, repair and/or modification of government furnished property, and all associated publications and technical, financial and administrative data.
In addition, one HE2K and one E-2C trainer will undergo system development and demonstration (SDD) modification.
Work will be performed in St. Augustine, Fla., and is expected to be completed in September 2009. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year.
The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md. is the contracting activity.
mattSo why dont you post on US, UK, Franch and GREEK AF’s.
no one has stoped you from posting new threads.
matthuh??
Do you even know their is a technical definition of terror?
Why are you posting ? all your post just seem to be crys of “WOLF” your not even debating anything. just making accusations and inuendo’s. If you cant debate a point why not just leave it for some one who can.
mattOriginally posted by PLA
Well, since there is no definition of terror…
Erm their is.. where have you been for soo many years?
mattBush wants ‘lasting partnership’ with India
IANS[ SUNDAY, JANUARY 25, 2004 01:29:21 PM ]
WASHINGTON : US President George W Bush has greeted India on the occasion of its Republic Day, pledging to build a “lasting partnership” between Washington and New Delhi .
“We are grateful for India ‘s support in the global coalition against terrorism, and together we can continue to advance peace, freedom and opportunity for all people,” he said in a message to the Indian American Associations of National Capital Area, which organised the 55th Indian R-Day celebrations in Beltsville , Maryland , near here.
Bush said for many years the US and India “have been committed to transforming relationships between our nations”.
He said the anniversary of India ‘s R-Day provided an opportunity to recognise the many important contributions that “Indian Americans have made to our society”.
“These proud citizens have enriched our culture through their industry and talent, and contributed to the diversity that reflects our founding ideals.”
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in his message recalled the “deep-rooted association” that non-resident Indians have with their mother country and said their contribution to American society and the catalytic role they were playing in strengthening India-US relations were a matter of “great joy and satisfaction to all of us”.
The Indian American Associations of National Capital Area is an umbrella organisation of several Indian associations in the greater Washington area that collectively celebrated Republic Day.
Leading Congressman from Maryland Steny Hoyer, a Democrat from Maryland , and co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans Joe Wilson , a Republican from South Carolina , who were present on the occasion, made brief remarks, vowing to work towards improving Indo-US relations and also noted the contribution of Indian Americans to the enrichment of American life.
They paid tribute to the Indian American community for its strong family values, respect for tradition, hard work, commitment and professional excellence.
Several US lawmakers, including House of Representatives Speaker J Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois , also sent their good wishes on the eve of India ‘s R-Day.
Hastert also lauded the role of Indian Americans, saying their contributions to the US have proven to be invaluable.
Republican Frank Pallone, a Democrat from New Jersey and founder member of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans, said: “I know that this 55th year of the Indian Republic will witness an even stronger India that lives up to its great commitment to democracy.”
Senator Paul Sarbanes, a Republican from Maryland , calling the celebrations of India ‘s R-Day a “historic event”, said: “I look forward to our continued close working relationship on issues concerning the two great democracies of America and India “.
mattwow! thats a nice tool to have in any inventory.
mattno not economic arguements please 🙁
mattyou could recycle it but their is only so many times you could do it if you use conventional power, ION drive or a drive similar to the one proposed for the orion project.
I hope the US gets on with this Idea, its a good way to use up all the nukes they would have to destroy acording to that treaty with Russia maybe the Russians could co-operate and give some nukes to the program too. 🙂
Oh a link to the Orion project.
matthi aditya thank you for the reply. I looked through that comanche claw thing, it was just to get an Indian Engineer security clearance it seems to work on the comanche program but if u look at some of the others its pretty interesing like APU for LCA, bradley fighting vehicles for India etc etc, it seems the US is more proactive in trying to sell weapons to India then i had previously imagined.
mattOriginally posted by PLA
Besharmaji… Starting personalization doesn’t make Indian products better nor your opinion more wise. Which part is hypocrite? Not being pro Indian? Well, we talked about kids… Can we keep this topic open or are Indians champs in ruining Pakistani or Indian topics… Sorry that was a conclusion.
sounds more like a rhetorical question or a question then a conclusion..
mattOriginally posted by plawolf
[Byeah, we’re talking abt an a/c. the FC-1 was designed with exports as its main objective – unique in modern aviation history IIRC. [/B]
gripen
Almost every aircraft ever built
Mig 21
mattSo are you always full of such cheerfull and happy thoughts?
must be great fun at your partys..
but anyways..
mattOriginally posted by PLA
Arjun is a tank. But I like your humour. You know how to handle little kids. 😀
Well actually.. Kids do rock more fun then grown up sometimes specially their propensity to tell the truth.
And the Arjun is in production and the chasis will be used on the SPG’s
Sign In
