Range seems to me very weak for an awacs.

The APG-80 has a reported range of 250-300km for fighter-sized targets and upto the radar horizon for ground/naval targets. For a helo-based AEW solution this is fairly high. For comparison, the Ka-31’s E-801 radar can only detect fighter targets at 150-200km.

Anyone have figures for the Searchwater-2000 in the Sea King AEW helos?

Regarding the UAE dispute, I’ve read the issue wasn’t about the Rafale’s unit cost but rather the cost of R&D required to make the modifications the UAE wanted(specifically, altering the air intakes to accommodate a 9t-thrust version of the M88). Dassault wanted these costs to be shared with the UAE, which may have ruffled their feathers.

Rodolfo is correct, these are higher up regiment level radars and are not meant to follow individual batteries around. In the case of Nebo-M I’m pretty sure its operational range is something like 1800km’s so it can be a solid 1000+km’s away from an S-400 and still relay it information.

The first Nebo-M goes operational in 2012 and is undergoing acceptance trials as we speak. The first Protivnik-GE went into service this year.

With the future proliferation of stealth fighters(and thus, interest in detecting them) I wonder if an export version will be made available.

I know there’s an export version of the older Nebo-SVU now, but that’s pretty truncated in its capabilities, or instance having less than 400km range.

^What I wanted was an illustration describing the S-curve in the Eurofighter air intakes and bloodshot was kind enough to provide me one. 😀

The post above is just me nit-picking with a little correction to his reply.;)

I think you will find that there are a greater number of low observability aircraft designs which use vertical intakes than there are those which use side mounted intakes. One obvious example which doesn’t follow the trend you suggest would be the X-32 which as hideous as it was to look at still met the same RCS requirements as the F-35.

Actually, the X-32 had a pretty short linear air duct with most of the engine face visible from the inlet.

As to the rest, the F/A-22, F-35, AMCA, J-20 and the proposed Saab stealth technology demonstrator all have side S-ducts. The remaining 5th gen designs(T-50 and ATDX) use linear ducts with RAM blockers.

The reason is obvious: So that the area between the ducts can serve as the internal weapons bay.

All I know about it is that it exists and that it has two consoles for radar operators, which hints to me that it’ll have a similar system as on the Sea King mk.7 or the Italian AEW Merlin.

No airplane can penetrate a modern air defence with any guarantees of success, which is the raison why stand-off weapons are becoming so widely used, even small military forces are getting cruise missiles, stand-off missiles etc…

Any aircraft can however with the proper support, surprise and confuse an enemy air defence long enough to launch an attack. How successful that attack might be will depend on the quality of the aircraft, the pilots in addition with the political will to take risk to damage your enemy.
The Rafale was certainly designed from the start for such a mission while the Typhoon can profits from the experience gained with the Tornados (maybe even switch ECM pods…) in order to perform such a mission with stand-off weapons of course.

The F 35 is subject to the same rules. It might gain a few more minutes, but eventually and unless it turns away, it would die. In fact not been able to outrun many interceptors today in operation, not been able to carry as many weapons, it would even die quicker. It might however be able to sneak and attack keys command centers, so I would say right now its value is more one of deterrence than actual performance (after all it has never flown an actual combat mission…).

The HQ-9 SAM network probably based on the Russian S-300PM/PMU is likely to be as good. Capable to destroy tactical ballistic missile, I would advise any aircraft to stay clear or fly way above no matter what.

Not to mention China is investing in metric wave radars and other ‘anti-stealth’ measures for its Air Defence network.

I think that is Rubin trying to salvage the situation, the Navy apparently is done with the project.

Maybe they’ll just promote it for export then once they’ve rectified all the problems with the St. Petersberg.

Why do Rubin bother, though? They also designed the Kilo class; they’ll be making money regardless of which model the Navy orders.:confused: