dark light

Nick_76

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 916 through 930 (of 2,296 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: PAK-FA updated info, anyone? #2506493
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Something interesting about the AESA on MiG-35, since we are talking on similar lines:

    According to someone who spoke with Phazatron at recent AeroIndia:

    X: But your radar is not ready, it has only ~600-700 modules
    Phaza rep: Yes
    X: Will you improve it?
    Phaza rep: Yes
    X: How, when?
    Phaza rep: We will work with your scientists to improve it. They have good manufacturing technology.

    So, actually, Phaza says it is ready to work with DRDO-HAL to improve the radar to the ~ 1000 module, ~ 200 km detect fighter class target, level. Might land them the deal, who knows!!

    in reply to: PAK-FA updated info, anyone? #2506497
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Now an AESA Irbis (lets call it Irbis-A) would be an excellent idea and offer awesome capabilities! Yet another reason why the MMRCA tender should be scrapped and a further 100 or more Su-30MKI’s ordered instead. Indeed an upgrade for the MKI with AESA, AL-41F, Thales TopSight, an upgraded optical system (maybe OLS-35 based) and some other goodies would make for easily the most capable fighter outside the US!:diablo:

    There are only three problems with this-

    Overreliance on Russia
    High operational costs
    The IAFs low-medium-heavy plan

    It was also mentioned that HAL was in talks with SAGEM for FLIR, perhaps to replace the current OLS for the future.

    Pit mentioned this on BR while discussing with JC ,Sumeet, George J.

    in reply to: PAK-FA updated info, anyone? #2506500
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Could you elaborate on your highly significant statement (please)?
    Will NIIP’s AESA equip the follow-on order for 40 Su-30MKIs (as widely reported)? Some 2,000 t/r mods.- wow!!:)

    Irkut is in discussions with the IAF for a range of MLU capabilities- both the Russians and the IAF clam up when the topic comes up, indicating that its more than just “kicking the tires”. Now, the MLU was basically improvements to the Bars/ Irbis, new weapons etc. But this year, NIIP made a presentation at AeroIndia to the IAF, about its AESA radar development, the intent is clear, they want the IAF to probably fund it. Now, if the IAF does choose this for a MLU fit- it would be interesting to say the least.

    Just a brief abstract mentioned..

    “Active Phased Arrays for High-Potential Fighters
    Mr Anatoly I Sinani
    Deputy Director General, NIIP, Russia “

    http://www.aeroindiaseminar.com/06sessionfeb.asp#

    Interestingly enough NIIP is also the lead designer of the PAK-FA radar. ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: IAF News & Discussion Feb-Mar 07 #2506503
    Nick_76
    Participant

    How old is this article Joey? The basic descriptions given in the article indicates it is either atleast a few years old, or the AEW program is in conceptual stage.

    Christopher is talking of the optimization process that led to the development of the AWACs. He cannot get into details of the actual system development and what stage each is at, for obvious reasons beyond detailing the basic specifications of the same. The Transmit recieve modules, radar, mission control system, ESM are all at an advanced stage of development. But you can read between the lines and make out how far along the program is. The avionics diagrams show detailed layouts of the comms, the IFF is on display, the exploded view shows a schema analysis of the radar array, etc etc.

    in reply to: IAF News & Discussion Feb-Mar 07 #2506506
    Nick_76
    Participant

    What LCA prototype is supposed to be equipped with the LWS, MAWS and CMDS? So far, we only see the RWR and perhaps a couple of EW blisters on the nose.

    Also, do the MKIs have the LWS and MAWS? If so, can someone point them out on a pic?

    Also, will the LCA get this IFF?
    http://aeroindia.org/files/images/lca_iff_antennae.jpg

    This is the IFF for the DRDO AWACS.

    in reply to: IAF News & Discussion Feb-Mar 07 #2506509
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Is that LCa’s IFF?, I dont know if there are other payloads in it or not.

    This is the IFF for the AWACS?

    http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/2143/p1010667ox6.jpg

    Someone please confirm..Thanks.

    Joey, read the signboard, and the depiction on the IFF box- this is a large IFF system meant for ships, land based radars and not the AEW & C.
    TRM processor- Transmit receive module processor, Radio Frequency module, Power Supply Module.
    As the PDF itself shows, they have developed a brand new IFF for that- with a linear array and much more power, rated @ KWs.

    in reply to: General Discussion #311393
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Pans Labyrinth– incredible lyrical movie!

    Hellboy animation– the latest movie. Pretty decent.

    Gladiator– Russell Crowe is incredible.

    Currently watching Tears of the Sun..standard hollywood fare..

    in reply to: The Last Film You Saw #1929720
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Pans Labyrinth– incredible lyrical movie!

    Hellboy animation– the latest movie. Pretty decent.

    Gladiator– Russell Crowe is incredible.

    Currently watching Tears of the Sun..standard hollywood fare..

    in reply to: PAK-FA updated info, anyone? #2507276
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Irbis-Shirbis. ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜€ :p NIIP has been busy hardselling AESA designs to the IAF, and probably anticipate giving workshare to DRDO as well.
    The beauty of the Flanker airframe is that it can carry a huge sized AESA set, which can put out a lot of microwave energy.
    Having said that, who knows, the Irbis might well join the IAF, just in time for the KS-172. ๐Ÿ˜‰ :diablo:

    in reply to: Flash Dance/Zaslon hyped to compete with AWG-9? #2507634
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Zare,

    If we go by available sources, it does seem that the figures you have posted correspond to the Zaslon-A, in between the original and the Zaslon M. And the original seems to be up for export.

    For instance:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/1996/07/24/12323/last-of-the-big-migs.html

    The MiG-31M is externally similar to the Foxhound A, but has an improved radar, the NIIP Zaslon M, and a more-capable long-range air-to-air missile (AAM), the Vympel R-37 (AA-X-13), replacing the R-33 (AA-9 Amos), at the core of its enhanced capabilities. A detection range of around 400km (220nm) against a large target with a 20m2 (215ft2) radar cross-section is claimed for the Zaslon M – over double that of the original Zaslon. Six prototype aircraft were manufactured at the Nizhny Novgorod plant, with at least two, aircraft numbers 055 and 056, delivered to the air force’s combat test and evaluation site at Ahktubinsk. The MiG-31M, is believed to have been flown, from Ahktubinsk in 1989-90. In 1994 it was claimed that a test engagement, in which the dual-mode (active/semi-active) R-37 was used, was successfully prosecuted against a target at a range of 300km.

    That would correspond to the 200 Km approx for the 19 Sq Mtr (4th square law, so 19-20 difference is negligible)..

    This also confirms that the MiG-31 E is a downgraded MiG-31 corresponding to the original ..in 1995
    http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/1995/07/12/25398/sokol-flight-tests-export-foxhound.html

    Sokol flight-tests export Foxhound
    12/07/95SOURCE:Flight International
    Douglas Barrie/LONDON

    Alexander Velovich/MOSCOW

    AN EXPORT VARIANT OF the Mikoyan MiG-31 Foxhound heavy fighter, dubbed the MiG-31E, is undergoing flight trials, according to Vladimir Pomolov, general manager of Russia’s Sokol plant, which builds the aircraft.

    Confirming that the export version is being flight-tested, Pomolov adds that, “…it is stuck in the test programme because of a lack of money”.

    The MiG-31E is believed to be based around the MiG-31B Foxhound-A interceptor, already in service with the Russian air-defence forces. Likely changes are downgraded electronic countermeasures and simplified radar-engagement modes.

    The primary air-to-air missile would be the Vympel R-33 (AA-9 Amos) beyond-visual-range semi-active air-to-air missile (AAM).

    The export Foxhound is aimed at China, India and Iran. Unconfirmed reports suggested that China ordered MiG-31s several years ago, although there remains scant evidence of this.

    Mikoyan has also been trying to interest India in the Foxhound to act as a fighter-controller aircraft for its Mikoyan MiG-21 Fishbeds when they are upgraded. Target hand-off from the Foxhound’s S-800 Zaslon phased-array radar to the MiG-21s would be via a datalink. The Indian air force has also been conducting a technical assessment of the Sukhoi Su-30MK to fill the gap in its inventory.

    Pomolov also indicates that the MiG-31M Foxhound upgrade programme is struggling because of a lack of funding. The aircraft is believed to have a considerably improved radar capability, based on the Zaslon-M, along with the Vympel R-37 long-range dual-mode AAM. The Sokol plant has produced at least six prototypes of the MiG-31M.

    One senior Mikoyan official says that the MiG-31M has effectively completed what he describes as its “…final design testing. It is now ready go through its military certification.”

    He says that the Government now needs to decide whether to proceed with the MiG-31M programme to equip Russia’s air-defence forces.

    The MiG-31 M has been cancelled..by 1997.
    http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/1997/08/27/21026/vympel-reveals-previously-classified-air-to-air-missiles.html

    Vympel reveals previously classified air-to-air missiles

    Russian missile design house Vympel unveiled two previously classified air-to-air missiles (AAMs) at the show, the K-37 long-range active-radar-guided AAM and the K-74 infra-red-guided short-range missile.

    The K-74 is a development of Vympel’s R-73 (AA-11 Archer), with the main difference being an improved infra-red (IR)-seeker. Both have the same basic airframe.

    The K-74 seeker has a maximum off-bore-sight angle of 60ยน, compared to 40ยน for the basic R-73. The design bureau adds that, as a consequence of using the improved Arsenal design bureau IR seeker, maximum engagement range is improved by around 30%.

    Along with an improved seeker design for the K-74 (the K designator denotes that it has yet to enter service with the Russian air force), Vympel says that it looked at alternative thrust-vector designs.

    Three thrust-vector configurations were considered: the twin inceptors fitted to the basic R-73, an all-moving nozzle, and four independent inceptors.

    While the four-inceptor design proved to be the lightest, it was also the least robust, and the all-moving nozzle suffered from hot-gas leakage through the spherical seal. Vympel opted to continue with the approach initially used on the R-73.

    Work on the K-74 is understood to have begun in the mid-1980s. Vympel is also offering an upgrade which would take the K-74’s improved IR seeker and marry it to an air-force inventory of R-73 airframes.

    Vympel also displayed an R-73 with a laser fuze, and says that this variant is already in service with the Russian air force.

    While the K-74 is likely eventually to enter the air force inventory, the future of Vympel’s other debut weapon is in greater doubt.

    The K-37 is the successor to the R-33 (AA-9 Amos) and was intended to provide the primary AAM armament of the upgraded Mikoyan MiG-31M Foxhound B. It is also likely to have been intended as the main armament of the intended successor to the MiG-31M, Mikoyan’s Project 701. The MiG-31M, however, has effectively been cancelled.

    Vympel and MAPO MIG are looking at retrofitting the K-37 to the variants of MiG-31 now in the Russian air-defence forces inventory. The design bureau says that no approach to the defence ministry will be made until after the planned integration of the air-defence forces with the air force has taken place.

    The K-37 differs from the R-33 in having an active-radar seeker, rather than a semi-active one. The K-37 is also described by Vympel as a statically unstable aerodynamic design – the R-33 was stable.

    Opting for a statically unstable design required a considerably more sophisticated flight-control system, but it means that the missile is considerably more manoeuvrable than the R-33.

    The Bars derived changes for the MiG-31s in Russian AF, in 2002.
    http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2002/04/16/146149/launch-client-for-mig-29ub.html

    16/04/02
    SOURCE:Flight International
    Launch client for MiG-29UB

    RSK MiG and the Sokol factory are claiming to have secured a launch customer for their MiG-29UB operational trainer upgrade. They have also received funding to upgrade Russian air force MiG-31 Foxhound long-range interceptors.

    The MiG-31BM will be a multirole aircraft. The upgrade introduces a glass cockpit, and improved navigation and weapons systems, allowing use of the radar-guided, medium-range Vympel RVV-AE (R-77/AA-12 Adder) air-to-air missile, Zvezda Kh-31 air-to-ground weapon and other guided munitions.

    Pankov says “more than half of the [MiG-31’s] avionics” will be replaced while the Zaslon radar will be equipped with a new receiver and processor.

    Hope this helps..

    in reply to: Flash Dance/Zaslon hyped to compete with AWG-9? #2507650
    Nick_76
    Participant

    According to what I have read:

    Zaslon M— 400 km against a 20 Sq Mtr target (detection)
    Hit a target at 300 km with a R-37, so lock on range is the usual ~0.75 of detection range
    Can track 24 targets, and has a 1.4m dia antenna compared to Zaslon’s 1.1 Mtr one

    Zaslon AM is the one chosen for upgrades, its basically retains the current 1.1 m antenna and introduces a new Baguet processor from NIIP and some Bars derivative technology.

    in reply to: Flash Dance/Zaslon hyped to compete with AWG-9? #2507654
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Zare, quick question…

    “Second, i wrote the confirmed data of detection, and tracking, for both bomber-sized and fighter sized targets. 300 km for 16m2 RCS detection, 200 km for 16m2 RCS tracking (lock-on), latter applying to head-on aspect. Data for the SBI-16 radar of MiG-31 Izdelye 01/01DZ, official numbers.”
    Do you have a particular source for this? Try as I might, I cant seem to get the numbers.
    Is this from a hardcover source?

    Thanks.

    in reply to: S-400 Battery Components #1797427
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Thanks mate- thats exactly the kind of analysis I was looking for.

    Is the S-300VM as good as the S-300PMU-2 against aircraft?

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile [ News/Discussion] #1797435
    Nick_76
    Participant

    Thanks SOC, and please look into the question on the other thread as well.

    Of course. Pakistani control of a radar that can look into Iranian airspace would be very dangerous… while arming the military dictatorship of Pakistan, the only nuclear armed Islamic state in the region with modern fighters and support is safe and will promote peace and understanding in the region.

    Of course if Russia offered to sell them popsical sticks the US State department will show how dangerous these sticks are and how they can be used to make WMD… :rolleyes:

    ๐Ÿ˜€ ๐Ÿ˜€ ๐Ÿ˜€

    Garry mate, I think you have what it takes to join the CIA.

    in reply to: S-400 Battery Components #1797470
    Nick_76
    Participant

    SOC, you are in trouble mate…I am going to bug you with S-300 questions now..:D

    Which do you rate as better, the S-300 PMU-2 or the S-300 VM (Antey 2500)?

    Could you list out the differences and pros/cons?!

Viewing 15 posts - 916 through 930 (of 2,296 total)