RayRHaving the HAL incom and the polyot doesnt make sense because both are comm suites having uhf/vhf/data transfer features.ow who would require two sets of uhf/vhf comms with different frequencies?
As for phalcons etc are concerned I thought IAF is standardising the fleet with the spectralink??
btw mig 27s , sitara etc have hal incom..so it would make sense to standardis on the hal incom suite?
RayRI thought the IAF had never used Bars radar during foreign exercises.
They were using the Bars in training mode.
RayRThat were dogfights only, the Mirage 2000 has no BVR capability so far, which makes the RCS not really an important issue in these combats. More interesiting would be BVR comparison of the upgraded Mig 29SMT and the Mirage 2000-5.
.
Both of them are BVR capable and were the mainstay of IAF BVR capability before the Bisons and the MKI arrived, armed with the Matra Super 530D and the R 27 respectively.
What I recall is that the Mig 29s ran rings around the M2Ks in wvr situations.
But even at BVR ranges the two aircrafts were comparable the slight lower detection ranges of the N019s over the RDM being offset by the excellent R 27s of the migs.
During Kargil war the Mig 29s gave top cover to M2K strike packages and deterred Paf f 16s at bvr distances.
RayROK, i will try simply to explain my view:
the underside face of the intake is faceted in a curved manner. The outer sides of the intake box are slanted and the interior of the intake itself is full of RAM and very smooth. The leading edges in and around the intake are acknowledged to be RAM covered , and the blending on the intake with the fuselage appears to me, to have been designed not only from an aerodynamic viewpoint, but also so as not to present any harsh edges to the frontal aspect.
Smoother surfaces and use of ram etc are all fine and reduces the RCS from the original RCS but does not mean that the final RCS is low as to provide too much advantage with another similar sized aircraft with smaller intakes. Even Su 30 intakes were treated in similar manner which reduced its RCS quite a bit , doesnot mean that an Su 30 would have a rcs of 2-3 msq fully loaded.
I also think its a bit silly to just say that the intake isn’t stealthy (incidentally i need an explanation of why the Rafale intake is stealthy, cus i am struggling and need help there). That suggests that you think the RCS of the Typhoon in the frontal aspect is high.
The Typhoons intakes have much larger surface area. They are rectangular in shape slight outer slanting notwithstanding.Compared to that Rafale’s intakes are much more rounded and assymetric and smaller shape.Also the Typhoons intakes are in staraightline with the fan blades more or less.Plus the edges of the typhoons intakes appear to be a bit thicker compared to the Rafale where it is much sharper.The upper edge of the typhoon intake is extended anteriorly and ends in a straight border of quite some length which is another radar reflecting surface.
This in turn suggests that you think Eurofighter is lying and that current and potential Typhoon operators are covering up the fact that they have this high frontal RCS on their frontline fighters.
Lets just try to stay on the technical side and not complicate matters.
I am not saying Typhoon has very high frontal RCS but in comparison to the rafale or even the F 18 , i think it is on the higher side.
RayRi have got to agree with this post. The MAJOR rcs reduction redesign effort for Typhoon was focused on the intakes. Anybody who understands how this works can see the effort, work and theory that has been applied to these intakes. They are inherently designed to reduced the radar reflection from and around them, and i also recall the redesign work happening in the 90s.
Conversely from a frontal aspect, i don’t see a lot of RCS reduction work on the Rafale intake shape and structure (i can see its s- duct, but the intake itself is not structurally modified.
Now wait a second there…what RCS reduction work do you see on the Typhoon’s intake?I surely dont see any thing special on them.On the other hand Rafale’s intakes are smaller and looks more stealthier , plus two small intakes placed separately should give smaller RCS figures than a single , large rectangular shaped double intake.
RayRRegarding jet fighters , Russia did not show anything brilliant in the last 25 years . US teens as well as European fighters of the 4th generation (Eagles , Vipers , Tornado ADVs , Hornets , M2000s) have nothing to fear from Fulcrums and SU-27 variants .
Late SU-30 MKIs proved to be quite a fight but nothing outstanding , SU-35s are not better either .In the air , Typhoons and Rafales are different beasts .
Cheers .
Highly controversial statement to say the least.
Su 30 , 34 , 35 can give your mirages , vipers and tornadoes a run for their money , if not outclass them altogether in their respective roles.
As for Rafales and Typhoons…several engagements with su 30 mki has already happened in various exercises. In spite of several restrictions in those exercises , the IAF is not at all disappointed .;)
RayRIndian Navy’s second Submarine Line will witness strong competition
By Cmde Ranjit B Rai (Retd)
THE SECOND LINE
The progress for the approved second line of building submarines, pending since 1999, appears to be moving swiftly now.
In mid-July 2010, the Indian media stated that the programme for the next line six submarines was to be funded at about US $ 8 to 10 billion inclusive of technology transfers and offsets. The Navy had released the relevant RFI on 26 September 2008.
The replies continue to be reviewed by the Indian Navy and the Acquisition Wing of MOD, and most foreign builders have been called for consultations, so that a comprehensive RFP can be issued.
The plans call for import of two, and the construction of four in India, under what is called Project 75-I. An RfP is awaited, and may be issued within this year. In financial terms, this acquisition could nearly be as big as the Indian Air Force’s tender for 126-plus order for Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA).
The responses to the Navy’s 2008 submarine RFI include the five designs tabled below, which in all probability will include options for Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) systems as no leading navy can have submarines that surface often to charge batteries, acting like sitting ducks in today’s technology of detection.
DCNS has offered the Super Scorpene design which is still on paper, with MESMA AIP with a sales pitch that since DCNS is building the Scorpenes in India at MDL, the second line will come out faster and economically. DCNS can also build simultaneously at another yard like HSL. (The French also claim the submarine design can be fitted with a nuclear propulsion package plug on the lines of the French nuclear submarine of the Rubis class).
Navantia is the Spanish submarine builder who was the partner with DCNS in Armaris for the current six Indian Scorpenes project progressing at MDL. Navantia has since broken off from DCNS, and has offered the Spanish S-80 design almost with the same argument of alacrity as the French, with a competitive ethanol based AIP. Navantia is constructing S-80 submarines for the Spanish Navy and has a very advanced open architecture design for fire control suites and also has a tieup with Lockheed Martin of USA, which should allow the Indian Navy to independently select fire control suites, missiles and torpedoes from either source.
Rubin has offered the Amur design which has also been on the cards for long. Many in the Indian naval community wish to see the Navy and MOD adopt a Russian design as Russians have good submarine technology and have proved alternate reliable strategic partners. The Amur designers claim they can fit eight vertical BrahMos missile launchers and Russia holds the BrahMos technology.
Fincantieri/Rubin has offered the S-1000 design. Fincantieri has emerged as a favoured reliable, and economical warship supplier that has delivered fleet tanker INS Deepak, an Oceanographic research vessel ORV Sagar Nidhi, and is a consultant to IN for its ambitious 37,500 ton aircraft carrier project at Cochin Shipyard Ltd.
ThyssenKrupp Marine has offered the HDW Type 214 with the sales pitch that the 214 is the only widely proven design in service and that the Indian Navy operates the earlier adaptation of the 209 class. HDW claims it can deliver submarines timely, as in the past.
About the Arihant…
The initial snags reported in the Arihant’s nuclear reactor operation have been overcome and the arduous harbour trials are reported to be going well at Vishakapatnam.
Lots of info in the full article…
RayRThe Pakistan Air Force and Operation Geronimo
Forwarded by Major A.H. Amin (Pakistan Army, Retired). He received it from a former PAF officer he trusts.
With the latest PAF press briefing whose distorted version appeared today on TV channels and in the electronic edition of various newspapers including The News http://www.thenews.com.pk/NewsDetail.aspx?ID=15235, PAF’s case has been totally messed up and it has been put on the back foot unnecessarily. It was simply bad PR; an would have been far better, with no possibility of laymen’s interpretation and distortion of facts by uninformed journalists about matters technical. Like most of you, I have been following the matter over the past few days and would like to offer the factual story as far as is known, without trying to cover any mistakes or offering lame excuses on behalf of what was, formerly, my parent service.
On the night of 2 May, four near-stealth/low observable MH-60 helicopters ingressed unobserved from Bagram to Abbotabad. (Some US websites displaying animated action include two Chinooks, which, to my mind does not make sense as it nullifies the rationale of the other two low observable MH-60s, unless the Chinooks also had stealth features). The helicopter package was able to exploit the blind areas inherent in radars over hilly/broken terrain, while their own low-observable structure helped no less. (It is not true that PAF radars were being given a rest to conserve their life, as has been reported in The News.) It must, however, be noted that it is the PAF’s AEW Erieyes that are not operated round-the-clock during peacetime, else we would quickly wear them out.
A package of 6-7 support aircraft including EC-130E/H, MC-130, AC-130, E-3 AWACS and, most ominously, a pair of fighters of unknown type (possibly F-15C), were orbiting in FATA area. It was easy to masquerade this package as the usual retinue of half a dozen Predators, Reapers and Global Surveyors that have been flying in the same area – with government approval and PAF clearance – over the last several years. There was, therefore, no question of this support package arousing any suspicion on this particular night.
As the operation got under way, no Pak Army unit was present in the vicinity of the OBL compound. US assessment was that local Army units in Abbotabad would be able to react effectively, not before one hour at the earliest (to take orders and draw their weapons). It was also surmised that armed soldiers at quarter guards, guard rooms, etc would not leave their posts.
When the firing started, local commanders at Abbotabad rushed to the scene and soon informed GHQ, who in turn got in touch with AHQ. The latter immediately scrambled a pair of F-16s but by the time these got to Abbotabad in about 15 minutes, the operation was over and the helicopters had departed. Without any help from ground radar, the F-16s did not know where to look, as they had no idea that the incursion had been from the west. As a matter of fact, an intrusion from the east was uppermost in their minds. The helicopters once again flew low, through radar gaps and were not spotted either by ground radar or the F-16s. The reality dawned too late that we do not have an antidote to a stealth raiding package. USA carrying out such an attack was the biggest surprise for the PAF as well as the Army.
In some ways, it was fortuitous that PAF F-16s did not pick up the helicopters on their radars, or else the nearby patrolling US fighters would have made short work of them with their long range missiles, what with full communications and radar jamming support available to them.
To say that it was a failure of the PAF to react potently is completely incorrect and unfair. It was simply beyond its technical means to handle fifth-generation warfare vs USA. If it is a failure, it is at the national policy level, whereby US was compelled to sideline its much-ballyhooed ally because of trust deficit.
Editor’s comment Editor is quite familiar with the PAF and its capabilities. Everything the officer has said is fair and reasonable. In matters of defense the Pakistan press is much worse than the Indian press, which is quite bad. Editor is not surprised that the Pakistan press has got everything wrong. In case you are thinking but surely PAF/ISPR knew that the press would muck up the story, you have to remember Pakistan military PR is plain terrible.
We cannot explain the MH-47 mystery, except to say the US has very few of the stealth MH-60s, possibly no more than four operational and perhaps a trainer. Its reasonable to assume it would not deploy more than two for the mission as US has global commitments.
Plot of US Helicopters Route
Major AH Amin
(Editor’s note: Maj. Amin has compiled this route based on his contacts and other information such as has appeared in bits and pieces in the Pakistan press. If more information becomes available, this plot might chance. The point where US helicopters stopped for 40-minutes is – if we have understood Brig. Samson (Pakistan Army, Retired) correctly – a place called Kala Dhaka. Brig. Samson says that from oil on the ground at least two helicopters stopped here, and likely refueled.)
From : Orbat.com
RayRDhruv , Mi 35 and Aloutte pictures from Ex Vijayee Bhaba
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-41wCO8c8_MA/Tc1zPnPEkaI/AAAAAAAAF0c/0MreGfnehMc/s1600/DSC02844.JPG
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RVIfng_RpCE/Tc1y5aCiKOI/AAAAAAAAF0U/GjTBITFVq7E/s1600/DSC02845.JPG
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9TQAnoYERZE/Tc1y4zyMUHI/AAAAAAAAF0E/haLpIPm758s/s1600/DSC02832.JPG
RayRalot of F-35 data or that of US aircraft, can easily be found on on publicly made budget documents, acquisition documents, etc. Not everything can be found.. but a pretty good amount. Also lots of things can be found on the manufacturers and sub-manufacturers’ pages in comparison to stuff from China.
Not criticizing China’s lack of transparency, just saying they do things differently.
And I am just saying that lot of assumptions here get passed off as “fact” and lot of implications are drawn based on those “facts” which (as a result) have a very high chance of being erroneous.[see above -1/2 of USN and what not etc.]
FWIW.
RayRWell…you confirmed my suspicions that you dont have any.;)
RayRThe PLAN’s plan (:D) is 1/2 of USN.
you can do the math.
Source?
RayRTalking of helicopters…a very funny story about an IAF Mi 4 pilot in the NE in the 60s..:D
RayR^^How much is the warhead?
Sign In
