dark light

Sign

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 646 through 660 (of 1,400 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Indian Air Force – News & Discussion # 13 #2406007
    Sign
    Participant

    India’s first Super Hercules airlifter dons IAF colours

    Source

    everything is “super” these days ๐Ÿ™‚

    in reply to: Saab 2000 vs EMB 145 #2407229
    Sign
    Participant

    I think that’s a likely reason for India not to consider the Saab 2000.

    Thanks for the very detailed reply, Aspis, that was very helpful and informative.

    I still find the CARABAS system very interesting, but it seems like it’s intended to be used at lower levels, which would make it silly to pair it with an AWACS in my opinion. Better to maybe dual-role the MPA or put it on a SIGINT bird.

    Cheers,

    Logan

    well the operational downtime was something that i heard in a swedish documentary. The CARABAS is just my own thought on the two belly antennas..

    in reply to: Saab 2000 vs EMB 145 #2408396
    Sign
    Participant

    possible carabas antennas can be seen in font of the wings under the body.
    http://aviationweek.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/05/29/ares_saab_2000_erieye_aewc_41.jpg

    in reply to: Saab 2000 vs EMB 145 #2408402
    Sign
    Participant

    the operational downtimes in turns are better with Saab 2000.
    And i think that new systems with Saab 2000 also can be installed with a carabas system, but im not sure. maybe not the case with EMB at the moment.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2409105
    Sign
    Participant

    Aren’t such competitions always decided by politicians?

    No, buy evaluationprograms and economy.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2409107
    Sign
    Participant

    As i said, and many with me, there is nothing bad with gripen TOT. its probably more % than average.. and have a great trackrecord, which mosed of the other doesnt.
    Gripens will be assembled in india thats for sure.

    Lack of deep strike? Gripen NG has the same range as any other in the game.

    And why have a “medium” fighter when you can order more of those big birds? for better deep strike?

    in reply to: The Supersonic Canberra #2409167
    Sign
    Participant

    Why not make it hypersonic while your at it? ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2409172
    Sign
    Participant

    The Gripen is over all a better choice, I just fear for Sweden’s lack of political clout.

    hopefully the best fighter for the IAF i choosen…not for the politicians..

    in reply to: Rafale vs Gripen!! #2409458
    Sign
    Participant

    actually i cant seem to find an open source on it, but i have an old one, and things have changed since then.

    Here are some excerpts from an article published by the Journal of Electronic Defense:

    “Batch 1 Gripens also received the Rockwell Collins (San Juan, CA) (then Kaiser Electronics) head-up display (HUD) and the Ericsson Microwave (Gothenburg, Sweden) PS-05/A radar. The radar was equipped with a parabolic monopulse antenna developed from the UK’s Blue Vixen radar employed by the Sea Harrier FRS.2. The antenna was developed by BAE Systems (then GEC Marconi). Initially, the radar had a range of about 100 km, more or less equal to the Russian MiG-29, the Gripen’s potential opponent. However, the larger MiG-29 has a higher radar cross-section than the Gripen, which enables the latter to detect its adversary earlier and gain tactical advantage. The PS-05/A radar on the Batch 1 aircraft used the Ericsson D-80 processor, enabling it to track up to six airborne targets simultaneously and engage up to four of them with the use of AIM-120B AMRAAM missiles. Batch 1 aircraft avionics were integrated with two mission computers, SC-1 and the SMU, and three Mil-Std 1553B data buses.

    The next 76 single-seat aircraft were built to the Gripen A Batch 2 standard. They were much improved and represented the first fully operational standard. The avionics system received a single (but more capable) Ericsson mission computer. The radar received a new EP-80E processor, increasing the number of targets that could be tracked simultaneously to 10. Now the radar could perform long-range search; track while scan (TWS); multiple priority target tracking; short-range, wide-angle search and track (combat-maneuver mode); single-target track; and raid assessment. In the air-to-ground mode, the radar could perform long-range search; land and naval priority target track; ground mapping; and surface ranging (for the gun and unguided rockets).

    But above all, the Batch 3 is to receive a new Ericsson PS-05/A Mk3 radar, which has just been developed. The radar has a new D-96A high-speed processor with greatly increased computing power. This has enabled some new modes to be incorporated, as well as the ability to track in excess of 20 targets simultaneously (the precise number is classified). The radar range reaches 130-160 km, depending on various factors. In air-to-air search mode, a pilot can select among three patterns of search: 2×120ยบ, 2×60ยบ, or 4×30ยบ. The search rate is 60 degrees per second. An improved radar transmitter and receiver provide good frequency agility and allow variable waveforms: low, medium, and high pulse-repetition frequency (LPRF, MPRF, and HPRF, respectively). The latter mode is used for long-range velocity search (VS) with no ranging, while the MPRF is used for track while scan (TWS). “

    btw. The author of the article- Michal Fiszer- is a retired Polish AF officer..

    mk4 is the general version of C/D gripens as to day, so mayor upgrades from this have been made.

    Have you ever wonder why gripen is the first integrator of Meteor? With your bad performance, this would not be a priority..

    in reply to: Rafale vs Gripen!! #2410065
    Sign
    Participant

    Gripen: 1m2?
    Typhoon: 0.1m2
    Rafale: 0.05m2
    F-35: 0.005 and 0.01 m2 (US/UK and export variants, respectively)
    F-22, F-117, B-2: 0.001-0.005 m2

    NOAR AESA (JAS-39 C/D PLUS, post-2013)

    For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 10~11 km+
    For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 18~20 km+
    For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 56~62 km+
    For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 100~110 km+
    For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 150~165 km+
    For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 178~195 km+

    PS-05A (JAS-39 A/B/C/D)

    For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 5~6 km+
    For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 9~10 km+
    For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 27~32 km+
    For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 48~56 km+
    For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 72~84 km+
    For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 85~100 km+

    ——–End of quotes—————-

    where did you get those numbers?
    Gripen RCS is >0,1m2

    PS-05A should be 120km for 1.0m2

    And NOAR?!? NORA? this does not exist?!

    in reply to: Indian Air Force – News & Discussion # 13 #2411123
    Sign
    Participant

    pics from Exercise Garuda…..

    the mirages looks really tiny in comparison!
    It would be really nice to see Tejas in formation with MKI!
    it must look like david and goliath! ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2411488
    Sign
    Participant

    You have to classify the military tech. there are many different classes.

    for example, tech where a goverment have financed a project.
    This tech have royality issuse but it not in that sense secret.

    Some info is top secret and is related to that specific countries national security. This will never be transfered.

    Then there are company financed tech thats company restricted (as for many civil industries), this is up for grabs in a takeover.

    Mosed of the gripentech is statefinanced and have royality issuse.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2411855
    Sign
    Participant

    Hostile takeovers, is not what i ment, just owners co-op, Wallenberg have a possiblity for expansion and india got a broad military tech, a win-win.

    In this matter Bae still owns alot of swedish firms, like Hagglunds and Bofors.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2411906
    Sign
    Participant

    I dont think wallenberg have any problem with another contributor to the firm. The problem with BAE was the double agenda, which led to a weak owners board.
    With new owners and new ambitions/contributions there will not be a problem, “i think”..

    in reply to: Non-X-band airborne fire control radars? #2412047
    Sign
    Participant

    Erieye – AWACS radar operates in E/F-band (3GHz) using pulse compression, which might give it a range reading accurate enough to guide Meteor or other radar missiles in the terminal approach phase.
    Don’t know, if it’s been used in that manner, but apparently features TWS mode…

    you mean S band?

Viewing 15 posts - 646 through 660 (of 1,400 total)