MM11Your PC example is rather poor I must say. The Zhuk AE in MIG 29 would be like fitting a new processor (along with new board and memmory if required) into an old ATX cabinet.
Processor, board, memory, power supply, graphics card, sound card etc… The list is long as you can see. We don’t speak about replacing a dual core 2 with 2 GHz with a quad core with 2.4 GHz. We speak about a quad core replacing a 386 type. The boards at that time were entirely different as were the interfaces! All the old stuff wouldn’t work on a new board and the other way round!
And By the way on EF. The Radar is not due till the P2E package in 2014, 2 years after the MRCA timeline. The same applies with the storm shadow cruise missile and meteor.
It is new to me that the MMRCA timeline says 2012.
But you should read your own sources anyway!
Read what they say:
Phase2Enhancement (P2E)-…this is now likely to be superseded that can deliver capabilities within 1-2 years…
It’s meanwhile confirmed that P2E is dead. The Eurofighter customers will opt for incremental steps of introducing certain capabilities within shorter time and with lower costs upon customer request! Germany has already allocated funds for AESA and T3 which is supposed to be ordered in a few weeks is likely to include AESA as well. By 2012 an AESA radar could be available for the Typhoon. Maybe not all weapons exactly at that time, but does it matter? Will the IAF use all weapons from day one? Will they operate in all roles from day one? Probabley not.
MM11Any links to backup this claim.
In a similar situation with the F 16. There is a news in the aviation thread that the approval of sales of the AESA radars may see a lot of F 16 customers seeking MLUs with the APG 80.
Well the difference between the F-16 and the MiG-29 is that the F-16s were contineously updated over all the years, while most of the MiG-29s are still the same as they were back in the 1980s. An upgrade to SMT standard would be required, because keeping all the old stuff and just integrating the radar itself doesn’t make much sense, let alone that the radar would have to be extensivley modified to interface with all that old outdated stuff. It couldn’t be used to full potential and there would be a couple of changes required to make the radar working at all. Ever tried to run Windows XP on a 386 PC? Good luck on that ;). Honestly the PC example is simplified but it should show you with an example of daily life that fitting such new stuff into such an old environment is simply not feasable, let alone possible without some major upgrades.
MM11When will people realise that any Radar made for MIG 35 has a huge retrofit market on existing 29 fleet of Russia and other countries :(.
Well there are several problems related to such an upgrade!
1.) There are just very few countries operating newer examples, mainly the Indian Navy with the MiG-29K/KUB which is yet to be introduced. The RuAF will receive the Mig-29SMT aircraft which were originally intended for Algeria, these aircraft aren’t new built but unused. Yemen operates the MiG-29SMT which are upgraded, not new aircraft to my knowledge.
~1600 MiG-29 Fulcrum A/B/C had been produced, with the last aircraft being delivered back in 1996. Many of these aircraft has been withdrawn from service and the number of customers is shrinking. The aircraft are basically 1980s tech, hence outdated. Some customers chose to upgrade their aircraft and extend their life beyond the 2500 h for which they were designed, but even they will outphase the MiG-29 around 2015 at latest.
Many customers just operate a quite small quantity of aircraft which are in a poor condition and these nations don’t even have the resources to fund any upgrades or life extensions at all. Most of the upgrades conducted so far are relative modest.
2.) The Zhuk-AE would require major upgrades to the aircraft’s avionics and maybe even the airframe. It’s probabley not worth the effort and it remains yet to be seen if RAC MiG can sell any further new built aircraft to anyone.
Sukhoi is in a much better position here.
One thing that speaks against the MiG-35 is that India would be the launch customer and it might even remain the sole customer which is not adding to its cost effectiveness. Of course the numbers themself and full ToT might offer India the possibility to operate and upgrade the type autonomously at modest costs. The often mentioned MiG-29 already in service with the IAF is of little help as the type hasn’t much, if anything in common with the new MiG-35 apart its similar (not identical) external appearance.
MM11> 1400 😮 Just how big is the Tiffy’s nose/antenna dia? I can understand size reductions in TRMs but that sounds incredible. IIRC, the F-22, which is a larger a/c has about 1500 trm. Captor antenna (70cm) doesn’t seem to be bigger than Apg-79/73 (71cm). The Zhuk-M is stated around 68cm or even 70 cm.
Under the circumstances, its hard to believe that on a similar sized array, the Captor will have 300 extra TRM! My guess would be close to that of Apg-79 ~ 1100 TRM. They are hoping to get 1064 TRM on the Zhuk iirc.
Btw, does anybody have numbers on the RBE-2 antenna size? IIRC, the RDY was close to 650mm.
USS.
70 cm seems to be an educated guess and might be roughly correct. The Typhoons nose is relative small for such a compact aircraft. There were indeed sources which suggested 1424 TRMs on Captor-E.
Soruce is airpower.at:
die Radarantenne des Eurofighters, welche 1.424 Module enthält
Translated:
“The radar antenna of the Eurofighter contains 1424 TRMs”
The article was related to CAESAR and the future Captor-E.
TRM size is given with:
Length: 64,5mm
Width: 13,5mm
Height: 4,5mm
Weight: 15 g
MM11I believe in a decade India will be U.S most important strategic partner ( I do not mean closest ally, which would be Britain, Nato states etc.). I think there is a strong possibility of us getting the Growler, I am not talking about the Raptor here.
Well has the US ever sold such kind of aircraft to a strategical partner? You see where I’m aiming at ;). I think it’s about time to settle that topic. If you are optimistic about that fine. I have my doubts. In the end we’ll see how the future will develope.
No let me make myself clear. I meant radar source codes, so that we can enhance the radars capabilities in future on our own, integrate weapons etc.
Ok understood and agreed. But please don’t quote something when your reply to that has basically nothing to do with the contents you quote.
MM11MM11
I am in the dark over the Gripen NGs status, but the MIG was being tested with ZHUK-AE (may not be fully populated) The one showcased in the last Aero India in 2007 had 680 modules out of a possible 1064. According to Octobers DTI it can detect (the fully populated one) a fighter sized target at a range of 300 kms.
It was the Zhuk-MAE not the AE. What is the difference? Well the original Zhuk-AE turned out to be way to heavy (450 kg), therefore Phazatron developed the Zhuk-MAE as a first demonstrator weighting in at 285 kg. This radar retains much of the Zhuk-MEs components, which is currently fitted to the MiG-29SMT and the Indian Navys MiG-29K/KUB. Zhuk-MAE offered a detection range of 130-140 km against a 3 sqm target according the manufacturer. Once the technology is more mature and the weight problems are solved the Zhuk-AE will feature a larger antenna and is claimed to provide detection ranges up to 200 km against a 3 sqm target. (A good example to demonstrate the difference in range performance given the antenna size. Hint Captor vs. APG-80).
Saab is working on a demonstrator with the antenna to be sourced from somewhere else (Thales). This demonstrator has yet to be completed and test flown aboard the Gripen Demo aircraft.
BTW it was you who claimed:
The Rafale and Gripen are much closer to getting an AESA.
So if you are not aware, why make such a claim?
The CAESAR demonstrator of the Eurofighter is based on the experience of leading manufacturers in this field from Germany, Spain, Italy and the UK. As said it is a demonstrator not a production aircraft and it was testflown back in February 2006 for the first time onboard a BAC 1-11. It was flown on a Eurofighter back in May 2007. Further trials has been conducted since then. Development continues currently using the BAC 1-11 again and with increase commitment besides the 4 partner nations and increased interest besides potential export customers you might well see a production example ready by around 2012. This roughly matches the timeframe when delivery of T3 aircraft will begin and it will match the IAFs schedule for introducing the MMRCA.
To cut a long story short, Eurofighter isn’t at a disadvantage here in comparison to Saab or MiG.
MM11Yes I am confident. You can argue very well without stooping down so low, so why do that ?
It was not intended to be a personal attack on you, but I have the impression that your ethic backgrounds overrules your objectivness on the matter. A large order or not, the relation ship between India and the US hasn’t been the good until few years back. They are now developing in a positive way, but that doesn’t mean the US is giving away its best technology to India, which is still no close ally, but just on the way to become a strategical partner.
Its neither, the AESA source code issue is the biggest roadblock against U.S fighters, while other manufacturers have practically guaranteed it. I think this may force the U.S hand. I only meant source codes for future integration, and did not mean EA.
The fact that I specifically speak about that capability (EA) and the fact that you reply the way you reply makes the impression that you indeed talk about India requesting EA and that it will get this capability. Everything else was not in question.
MM11Well don’t be surprised to see it in IAF markings either. We will both be here to find out. 🙂
I would indeed be surprised for the numerous reasons stated above. You seem to be a little bit to overconfident, which might be related to your origins.
Again he goes off on EA. I only meant radar source codes.
Yes because I said this:
The point of my post is: if US refused to provide the EA software, other non-US smart guys, who already provide similar systems that use EA software, can step up and provide that capability. Lack of EA software for F-16 or F-18 should not be a disqualifier for India.
and you replied with this:
I think India will be asking for radar source codes, which the U.S may not offer, but France is reportedly ready to offer it with the Rafale.
So you
A) Have another attempt on trying to convince us that the US will sell AESA radars with EA capability
or
B) You simply try to find an excuse
MM11Actually the F15 with AESA is far more capable than the Block 60. I have read something like the F 15s radar had to operational first before the APG 80 sale to UAE.
What ever, it yet confirms my point ;).
Well I think it will especially if the order is nearing 200 aircraft. Also note that 2012 is the date for delivery of the first plane. There is an option for 64 more MRCA after the initial 126, the Growler can be part of that.
I can’t remember when the US has sold any electronic attack/warefare aircraft at all to anyone. Neither the EF-111A, nor the EA-6B were exported. What makes you believe that the US will sell the EA-18G? The US could sell the F-22 in relative great numbers to interested customers such as Japan, which is BTW a much closer ally to the US than India. But they don’t want to sell it for security concerns. The EA-18G while being a variant of the Super Hornet is a special purpose aircraft with highly sensitive technology.
So continue to dream about an EA-18G with IAF markings, but don’t be to disappointed when it won’t happen.
I think India will be asking for radar source codes, which the U.S may not offer, but France is reportedly ready to offer it with the Rafale.
You have to understand that the ToT doesn’t mean the entire knowledge and technologies in all areas of the entire French, US or whatever industry just for the product offered in its configuration! Does France offer EA as part of the Rafale package to India? And even when they do it, it doesn’t mean the US would do so as well.
MM11The difference is that the French Radar is almost operational and America no matter how bad it economy is, spends billions on R&D. The products U.S is offering are already operational.
That is true but the original question and claim was will Eurofighter be able to provide an AESA radar on time for delivery to the IAF, if the type is selected. And just the Eurofighter was ruled out by some here, while neither the Gripen nor the MiG-35 seem to be any further in terms of AESA development.
But it’s the wrong thread anyway, as this is a Rafale news thread and I think we have more than enough threads about the IAFs MMRCA etc.
MM11EA-18G has NOT passed through ITARS as yet, which is managed by the US State Department.
It can’t be offered to anyone just yet. Australia formally requested that the aircraft be examined for it’s export potential, mid last year.
So far, even we haven’t been able to order the aircraft…
Which so far confirms my point of the EA-18G not being that likely to be delivered to India. I’m certain India would be interested in this variant, but I have my doubts the US will sell them such an important platform.
MM11CAESAR is a demonstrator not a production radar. And BTW which components of the RBE2 are retained for the RBE2 AA? In the demonstrators there was just the new array and ACU. So IF a production model would retain that you could call this radar as “based on previous” generation as well :rolleyes:
MM11Actually if you read all posts, I first said EW, he was the one who started saying EA.
The whole thing about EA was not putforward by me, the word was used by that user first not me. I was first and formost reffering to EW capabilities. EA is just one of them, and as you have pointed out that it has not been implemented, I will accept and move on.
He introduced the term and then it spiralled out of control.
Yes I was saying EA first. Why? Because EA is the EW capability linked to AESA radars. So far there have been no reports about other EW tasks being performed by an AESA radar, let alone that anything else would not be possible or feasable. My point was and is that EA is not available for the APG-80, hence this radar has no EW capabilities! Simple thing, but after all this posts you still seem to be confused and don’t get the point. Might have to do with the fact that you neither know what EW means, nor do you understand what EA means.
BTW it never spiraled out of countrol besides me, but out of your reach.
However I strongly believe that the Growler will be part of any SH deal to India. This was a different argument where he was arguing about better fighter types not being exported, may be he misunderstood me in that case I have made it clear now.
I didn’t misunderstood you, I told you that certain technologies and capabilities are not sold to other customers. The UAE operates the blk 60 which is more advanced than the blk 50+/52+ in USAF service, but only because the US has superior systems (F-22). If the blk 50+/52+ would be the most capable and advanced fighter in US service, the US wouldn’t have exported the blk 60! They just approved such a sale as a more capable and advanced type (F-22) was available!
@Scooter
Hardly, and the F-16E is the latest technology unless would count 5th Generation Types like the Raptor or Lightning.
But we have to count that in, because if the F-22 wouldn’t exist the US would have sold the blk 60 to the UAE without introducing something superior;) and that is the point!
@djcross
APG-80, like its cousins APG-77 and APG-81, uses digital traffic between its TR modules and processor. As digital gear, it can be programmed to perform many functions, including DRFM. I don’t know if that software was developed for UAE, but it is being developed for APG-77 and APG-81. A company such as Elta, a maker of DRFM systems, could undoubtedly generate the code needed to give APG-80 DRFM or other EA capability.
5th February 2009 03:03
The question isn’t if the APG-80 is capable of EA in theory, but if the US would sell the APG-80 with that capability to customers like the UAE or India…
MM11I did not claim that, I said it works with the EW suite.
You claimed the APG-80 provides an Electronic Attack capability which is untrue. Working with the EWS isn’t featuring an EA capability. It’s as simple as that.
Since you don’t know that it won’t be sold its his word against urs.
Is EA-18G proposed to India by Boeing? Does any official source claim India is even considering this version? Is any official source claiming the US congress will agree on an export of this version to India? You seem not to be aware of the fact that not everything is sold to anyone!
You are delusional the SU 30 MKI featured a better radar than any Russia had in service then. FGFA will be = > PAK FA in capabilities. Things sold to India are usually = their Russian counterparts.
Also note that the Mirage 2000-9 sold to UAE is better than any Mirage in French service the same with Block 60 F 16s sold to UAE being better than any Viper in U.S service.
The US has the F-22 which is way more advanced than the F-16 blk 60. So no they don’t sell their very best and latest stuff to everyone. The Russians indeed sold partitially more advanced stuff to export customers, that doesn’t mean they could have done better. Why exporting the RVV-AE instead of the R-77, why all those Zhuk-AE, Irbis-E variants? E stands for export and these systems are usually downgraded versions or less capable versions. The Russians usually don’t sell their very best stuff, meaning they could create more capable systems, but they won’t sell them to keep an edge, very much like the americans. Electronic Attack is at the moment something still under development, the US hopes to gain a noticable edge by that, they won’t sell it just to satisfy an export customer, not now.
Do you know if it wont be available with export versions for certian if not please stop stating it.
I know it hasn’t been exported (hint F-16 blk 60 with APG-80) and there is NO indication that it will be exported! So until export is confirmed, I suggest that you don’t claim such stuff as given fact when it is in reality nothing else than a wet dream of you.
I am glad I could be of annoyance:)
What a poor creature
MM11It works in conjuction with the EW suite for Jamming and EW.
That doesn’t mean the radar jams on its own.
It will be a part of it, especially with Russia its given (taken for granted, a country which develops its fifth gen ac with us won’t have a problem with giving us EA capability) and the others will have to matchup and I think they will also offer it.
India will get a different version of the PAK FA, do you seriously believe that the Russians will sell all of their best stuff? They never really had done this, all export versions of Russian weapons were downgraded.
There is a strong possibility of this and many users here think the same ( see scoots post)
I’m not interested what “users” think and especially not what Scooter thinks.
WIKI EW and you will find that EA is part of it.
Of course it is part of EW, but EW doesn’t automatically mean EA. Why? Because EA is not available to every EW suite”.
Honestly your ignorance is annoying. I suggest you start to learn a bit about the fundamentals, rather than repeating stuff you read/hear somewhere, but which you don’t comprehend.
Sign In
