Mar 2003 invasion of Iraq. Iraqis started lobbing Silkworms from Umm Qusar at Kuwait City and still managed to get thru. Goes to show how difficult it is to intercept cruise missiles despite a full alert status (and these are just Styx copies fired at random).
Sagarika.. that’s the name for the indigenous SLBM/SSBN project, IIRC.
I know the difference. But I have encountered the name Sakariga used specifically for the ADS project by NAFO and some other European sources. (prob quoting NAFO)
I have encountered references to the ADS as project Sakariga. Is this correct?
Russia has some intrinsic problems. They invented Stealth. The Kirov is perfectly stealthy built.
That is a pretty strong statement. They invented stealth? 😮
Indian1973,
Front end typical refers to the antenna and the transciever, backend refers to the tracker and the RDPS (Radar data processor system).
Your front end will determine things like range, and to a certain degree, resolution, your backend is how sophisicated it can process the raw data. Things like track to track/plot to plot co-relation, kalman filtering, gate jump algos for managing intercept/criss cross tracks etc etc, basically tell how you can distinguish targets from background noise (especially for targets with low RCS).
From what I have read from GS, yes, the front end appears to be two separate antenna/transcievers (TWTs?) sharing a common tracker/rdps and i believe, mounted in the same INSEM mast. Trick out man! S-band would give them pretty good long range volume search abilities while the X-band set would be able to give them fanastic and highly accurate instrumented search/targetting capabilities. The major engineering challenge is to put both of them together without major RF interfererence.
Well, everyone mentioned political will. But I think it is also operational requirements. There isn’t any pressing operational requirements for a one trick stealth machine like the F117 to justify building one.
The heavy US investment in stealth technology was driven by the need to find a way to effectively penerate Soviet Union/Warsaw pact airdefense. The planes themselves was never cost-effective since only so few was built in either case. But they had the requirements and the political will / support to execute it.
Not PLAAF, but the factories. There is a lot of excess capacity and the factories more than often stretch their existing product range.
Question, couldnt they obtain SA-7s if they could smuggle weapons regularly?
It would not be a first, the IRA was involved in the plan to build surface to air missiles with IR homing in the 1980s. I think it had to do with Irish-American’s as they had access to the motors.
SHARC
I am sure Bin laden was/is a excellent skipper! I mean what boy hasnt tried to skip stones on water :O
this is just the armed forces getting in on the act in all the frenzy, they would be better served to use the money to employ more “intelligence men” (differs from men with intelligence as the “iraq can bomb us within 40min” claim has proven.)
I don’t see these subs are directly effective against AQ or OBL type terrorists unless they start to camp along the coast.
No, these subs are there (other than a normal SSN type hunterkiller mission) for crawling around NK, China and Iran’s coasts.
I relooked at the photo google posted and it looks like it is very long. So it is possible that there is two plugs, one for the VLS and one for the AIP.
Is it a good idea to build a very large conventional design SSGK? Because it looks like this is a SSG more than just a pure SSK.
I do not comment on aviation matters but as I understand, the WS10A is China’s equal to the AL-31P with some improvements. It is probably more important as PLAAF regards the J11 and the J10 as primary platforms.
For the FC-1, credible domestic alternatives exist (Qinling?) but perhaps for ‘friendship’ reasons as well as the above reasons they can afford outsource the engine to the Russians. It is not that critical to PLAAF as they need the J11 and J10 more now (and thus the engines) and the immediate future than a need to buy more FC-1s.
hmm… two operational areas comes to mind. Crawling around in the Yellow Sea and the Hormuz, ESM and SIGINT gear up.
War on terror, hardly, since terrorists havent shown themselves to be excellent skippers (the last one blew his boat up!). On the other hand, certain ahem… states in those regions have nasty toys and isnt really friendly to their immediate neighbours, even nominal allies.
hey, what happen to the photos?
BTW, the Y-8 AWAC appears to be the AVIC Y8-F200 with registration number B-576L. Wearing the same blue color marking of AVIC.
The coming C7 and the later D version of the AMRAAM will be formidable.
Take it from me the problem is overstated, IMO. If the system is a closed design, it can be tested extensively and most importantly, only essential services run.
You are more likely to encounter harddisk corruptions as a result of using COT harddisk. (something that can be solved by using SSDs)