Thanks guys for your posts :
1) With regard to DRFM : Did some digging on the forum and ans provided by poster Nick previously (Thanks) :
quote : Digital Radio Frequency Memory. A sort of must have for modern jammers to enable immediate deception jamming (realtime). The memory module records the key parameters of the radar pulse, allowing for the techniques generator (a purpose built DSP/mini computer) to modify the signal appropriately and the jammer “plays it back”, so that the opponent radar is spoofed. Ie it thinks the target is at x+1, when it is at X, is flying at Y, when it is actually at Y+1, etc, to make the radar lose lock, or get an inaccurate fix.
Also : On the Indian side, DRFM jammers are widely used, namely the Elta 8222 SPJ which has been seen on IAF Su-30K’s, MKI’s, MiG-21 Bisons, Upg Jaguars & the DARE (DRDO) Tusker which is used on the MiG-27 Upg. A Jaguar squadron reportedly received Support Jammers & the DARE equipped MiG-27s are being used for EW, implying that the EW package is more than just self protection. (It is a combination of an internal and external jammer).
Im unsure as yet whether Erieye will be able to provide active protection for it’s F-16’s
2) With Regard to restrictions on Use : As of i can remeber India has not signed any end user agreements. Indeed i can’t remember officials having the need to inspect anything. No End user agreements have yet been signed for the P-8I i think.
Heres what Ajay Shukla has to say :
This time, too, there is no signed agreement, only an exchange of diplomatic notes in which India accepts and confirms the agreement.
Indian MoD officials pointed to the intrusive inspections the US regularly carries out in Peshawar of night vision equipment supplied to the Pakistan Army. But the US negotiators responded, “This is not what we do with democracies. We trust democracies”.
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/07/india-had-signed-two-earlier-end-user.html
3) On the Kerry Lugar Bill : Quote :
SEC. 203. LIMITATIONS ON CERTAIN ASSISTANCE.
(a) Limitation on Security-related Assistance: For fiscal years 2011 through 2014, no security-related assistance may be provided to Pakistan in a fiscal year until the Secretary of State, under the direction of the President, makes the certification required under subsection (c) for such fiscal year.
(b) Limitation on Arms Transfers: For fiscal years 2012 through 2014, no letter of offer to sell major defence equipment to Pakistan may be issued pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act (22 USC 2751 et seq.) and no license to export major defence equipment to Pakistan may be issued pursuant to such Act in a fiscal year until the Secretary of State, under the direction of the President, makes the certification required under subsection (c) for such fiscal year.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=200156
4) As for the rest I’m a little suprised Rimmer as to your posts : in the interest of brevity i’ll plainly mention info that you already know :
1) Refuellers have been in Indian service since 2004 and the IAF has been practicing buddy refuelling from it’s MKI’s for a while before that. Indeed 6 more refuellers are in the pipeline and the RFP has been sent out. Has the edge really moved.
2) Awacs maintainence : India chose the IL 78 because of fleet commonality with it’s Il 76’s which have been maintained close to 2 decades. I don’t think maintainence will be a real issue. Indeed they all have brand new PS 90 engines. Add to that the 3 DRDO Awacs on Embraer and an additional 3 Phalcons to be ordered. Edge now?
3) AMRAAM Vs R77 etc. Indian experience with BVRAAM for over a decade. Regular exercises in BVR engagements across various continents.
Sign In
