What's new

US to offer F-35 fighters to India

...source codes? What source codes? Much ado has been made of source codes by people who don't fully understand the implications, it is a non issue for mission planning,aircraft configuration,maintenance and operation. The aircraft is sold with support software including a mission planning suite that allows the end user to configure all aspects of aircraft operation for any mission without the need to make changes to the "source code". You really expect each partner nation to maintain a customized version of millions of lines of code just to support a unique requirement? Any need for customization that may arise is handled with plug-ins that allow the end user to extend existing functionality or add new capability.

DBC would like to hear about that "mission planning suite "
and two doubts in specific regarding the procurement of American hardware .

First -
Regarding some of the sensitive COSMEC encrypted technology .
MIDS-LVT which is approved for NATO and allied forces only , how does US exports these tech which are strictly meant for NATO countries . And this MIDS not only goes onboard F35 but F16,F18 as well as part of Link16 data-terminal link . What alternative will US provide to India/Pakistan/Malaysia/Taiwan Asia etc who are in process of acquiring sophisticated tech .

I remember France having same concerns wrt to Rafale export since it had same terminal , but later they developed a separate one .

4770601130_2f805d77e8_b.jpg


i have highlighted the concerned part


Second -
Regarding the mode of radar operations ,
Every country's requirement of operation differs from US .
A f16/f18 radar or RWR will be calibrated according to say Texas or Langley air-base trials . APG79 might be programmed to reject an object at xxxx altitude and will have a ground-clutter mapping of say Colorado . But when it arrives in india it will have to be re programed to reject a xxxx+500 m altitude object and will need clutter map of say Gwalior air-base . Further jets will not be stationary at one air-base , its the policy of InAF to keep rotating the jets btw bases . F16 might not be configured for air-sea mapping or operation while InAF may just want to use them from Andman islands
Everytime systems need to be reconfigured .

- Who would do this ??? Will LM officials be called in everytime even at some sensitive air-force base to perform each recalibration . Or would US hand over those lines of codes that control mode of radar operation .
In addition I have my own concerns regarding that EUMA , until US hands over those API/codes only god knows what runs alongside those codes , and how much sensitive information can be extracted by access to those equipments on-board
 
Why are u indian dancing? F-35 is inferior to PAK-FA, why buy F-35 when PAF-FA is near completion? I remember all indians were trying to prove F-35 inferior in PAK-FA thread. Now they are mad, as F-35 is offered.
 
Why are u indian dancing? F-35 is inferior to PAK-FA, why buy F-35 when PAF-FA is near completion? I remember all indians were trying to prove F-35 inferior in PAK-FA thread. Now they are mad, as F-35 is offered.

Ahem:

F35 Naval version ...for the navy...

PAKFA for Airforce.....

See the difference?


Now, are Indians allowed to feel good your highness?
 
Why are u indian dancing? F-35 is inferior to PAK-FA, why buy F-35 when PAF-FA is near completion? I remember all indians were trying to prove F-35 inferior in PAK-FA thread. Now they are mad, as F-35 is offered.

Cool down, F-35 Is for the Navy..... What better Aircraft than The F-35 can One find for its navy??? Well Its just offered to us, we Have no Intentions and No room for Buying it as of now, Well If India has any plans to Shortlist Fighter Aircrafts for IAC 2 then Surely F-35 would get a chance....
 
Why are u indian dancing? F-35 is inferior to PAK-FA, why buy F-35 when PAF-FA is near completion? I remember all indians were trying to prove F-35 inferior in PAK-FA thread. Now they are mad, as F-35 is offered.

F35 is for navy its a different contract it has nothing to do with MMRCA
 



First -
Regarding some of the sensitive COSMEC encrypted technology .
MIDS-LVT which is approved for NATO and allied forces only , how does US exports these tech which are strictly meant for NATO countries . And this MIDS not only goes onboard F35 but F16,F18 as well as part of Link16 data-terminal link . What alternative will US provide to India/Pakistan/Malaysia/Taiwan Asia etc who are in process of acquiring sophisticated tech .

I remember France having same concerns wrt to Rafale export since it had same terminal , but later they developed a separate one .



Link 16 transmissions are encrypted with TSEC cryptovariable(Time Based Transmission Security) the message itself is encrypted using MSEC cryptovariable.

To receive a transmission from a AWACS or another US/allied aircraft the receiver must have the same TSEC key and to decrypt the message itself the receiver must have the same MSEC key.

On a single TACTICAL DIGITAL INFORMATION LINK network (such as an airbase or aircraft carrier group)MSEC and TSEC crypto keys are generated by a device (computer) with special software. Upto a 1000 keys can be stored on a AN/CYZ-10 DTD device for transfer to the operational unit (aircraft, controller..)

The system hardware is common or compatible between US Army, Navy and USAF and our NATO/non NATO allies, but the algorithm for generating MSEC or TSEC crypto keys is not shared. However, the keys can be shared for joint operations. The article you posted is wrongly worded, "NATO approval" isn't required or sought for the hardware but will be required for sharing MSEC and TSEC keys.
 
Last edited:
Indians should be beware of US trying to outsource their sino-US conflict. Such a move would result in India falling into shambles and total economic melt down. Also US approving F35 sale is highly doubted because its a project top secret and very few member countries are allowed to share.
 
Indians should be beware of US trying to outsource their sino-US conflict. Such a move would result in India falling into shambles and total economic melt down. Also US approving F35 sale is highly doubted because its a project top secret and very few member countries are allowed to share.

Thank you for your thoughtful advise, but

Pakistanis should be beware of China trying to outsource their sino-Indian conflict. Such a move would result in Pakistan falling into shambles and total economic melt down.Also China approving JXX sale is highly doubted because its a project top secret and no country is part of it.
 
Last edited:
america and its nato allies have spent a lot of time and dollers on a project with many flaws

AIR_F-35A_AA-1_4oclock_lg.jpg


F-35 JSF Hit by Serious Design Problems

by Johan Boeder in The Netherlands. Earlier versions of this article have been published in the Dutch press and Defense-Aerospace. DID has worked with the author to create an edited, updated version with full documentation of sources.

On May 3, 2007, during the 19th test flight of the prototype of the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), a serious electrical malfunction occurred in the control of the plane. After an emergency landing the malfunction could be identified as a crucial problem, and it became clear that redesign of critical electronic components was necessary. Producer Lockheed Martin and program officials first announced there was a minor problem, and later on they avoided any further publicity about the problems.

The delay has become serious, however, and rising costs for the JSF program seem to be certain. In Holland, Parliament started a discussion again last week. Understanding the background behind these delays, and the pressures on European governments, is important to any realistic assessment of the F-35’s European strategy – and of the procurement plans in many European defense ministries…

as the aircraft will be used by many countries it hopes to make it a sales table success like the f16

but with a major problem of technology sharing and with its comes its anti wepons which i think the Russia already has!

anti-stealth technology - Google Search

it just wants india to deviate from its joint ventures with Russia.:pop:
 
Link 16 transmissions are encrypted with TSEC cryptovariable(Time Based Transmission Security) the message itself is encrypted using MSEC cryptovariable.

To receive a transmission from a AWACS or another US/allied aircraft the receiver must have the same TSEC key and to decrypt the message itself the receiver must have the same MSEC key.

On a single TACTICAL DIGITAL INFORMATION LINK network (such as an airbase or aircraft carrier group)MSEC and TSEC crypto keys are generated by a device (computer) with special software. Upto a 1000 keys can be stored on a AN/CYZ-10 DTD device for transfer to the operational unit (aircraft, controller..)

The system hardware is common or compatible between US Army, Navy and USAF and our NATO/non NATO allies, but the algorithm for generating MSEC or TSEC crypto keys is not shared. However, the keys can be shared for joint operations. The article you posted is wrongly worded, "NATO approval" isn't required or sought for the hardware but will be required for sharing MSEC and TSEC keys.

Are you sure about the highlighted part - esp the hardware
Low volume terminal ,
because Thales vice president for communications & navigation says something different .
According to Thales , MIDS-LVT is not exportable and has certain hardware specifications for LVTs standardized by group of nations envolved in program for -e.g
MIDS LVT: Low Volume Terminal (Link 16)

and similarly standards for
transmission characteristics and protocols, conventions, and fixed-length or variable length message formats defined by MIL-STD 6016, STANAG 5516 of NATO

The hardware part is not allowed to customers

Same reason why UAE decided to equip its Eurofighter and Apache64 machines with Thales NextW@ve multifunction terminal . Down below is article , i have highlighted some concerned points and details about NextW@ve multifunction terminal.


Paris Air Show 2007

Thales Develops LX16 Tactical Data Link for Non-NATO Countries
Aviation Week & Space Technology
06/18/2007, page 114

Joris Janssen Lok
Paris

Link 16-equivalent data link gives nations option for tactical network

Printed headline: Non-NATO Network

Thales is proposing a tactical data link that gives nations not currently allowed to use the NATO-standard Link 16 the option to acquire a similar capability, which Thales calls LX16.

At least one Asian country is in negotiations to equip all of its armed forces (air, land and maritime) with LX16, say company sources, while declining to identify the customer.

Thales is also receiving "strong interest" in LX16 from several other nations as well as from "aircraft manufacturers who are not in NATO countries and who sell outside NATO."

"Non-NATO air customers often love to get a Link 16 capability, but they can't--so we developed an equivalent tactical data link that uses the same message set, grammar and vocabulary," says Patrice Caine, vice president for communications, navigation and identification activities in Thales Land & Joint Systems.

Once installed, the equipment behind LX16 can be modified "virtually overnight" to support Link 16 proper, Caine suggests. Such an upgrade could be considered if an LX16 user becomes eligible to join the Link 16 user community--for example, when there's a need to participate in Link 16 networks during coalition operations.

The change from an LX16 to a Link 16 configuration can be achieved by adding a MIDS-LVT (Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Low Volume Terminal) to each aircraft, ship or land asset that needs to participate in the Link 16 network.

Thales is also working to make LX16 interoperable with Link 16 without having to add MIDS-LVT terminals to all platforms. That would be a gateway system that allows the LX16 network to interface with Link 16.

According to Caine, "This gateway will basically be a MIDS-LVT and our new NextW@ve multifunction terminal placed together in a support aircraft such as a tanker or a transport aircraft. When airborne, the gateway-equipped aircraft would serve as the node in which the handshake between LX16 and Link 16 is made so that all participants in either network can exchange and share tactical information."

The gateway can also be installed on a naval vessel or in a land-based command center, as long as there is line-of-sight communication with the airborne network participants.

While Link 16 operates in the 960-1215-MHz. frequency range (L-band), Thales's LX16 operates at 300-600 MHz.

LX16 is based on Thales's new NextW@ve software-defined airborne radio technology. The NextW@ve multipurpose terminal, which weighs 6.5 kg. (14.3 lb.), was qualified at the end of 2006 and is now in series production, says Caine. It offers a 250-Kbps. secure mode (with growth potential to 500 Kbps.) and operates across the VHF/UHF frequency band between 30-600 MHz.

"The NextW@ve terminal does for LX16 what MIDS-LVT does for Link 16, except in a lower frequency range," he says.

The basic equipment is the same for both NATO and export programs, although the terminal's programmable security core would be different.

In the export configuration, the NextW@ve multi-purpose terminal (TRA 6036) would support both voice and data link communications. It would be integrated with a TSB 2525 combined interrogator/transponder (for identification friend or foe) and a national secure-mode crypto-computer. LX16 offers high electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) protection through a combination of frequency hopping and encryption, says Caine.

For NATO applications, the NextW@ve terminal (now called TRA 6034) would work with a MIDS-LVT unit (to support Link 16) in combination with a TSB 2521 interrogator/transponder and a Mode 4 crypto-computer.

As such, the NextW@ve terminal--sold, so far, to equip France's next batch of Rafale fighters, Morocco's upgraded Mirage F1s, and Boeing AH-64D Apaches in the United Arab Emirates--is at the heart of a new generation of Thales data links for air and joint operations
.

According to Caine, these are designed to "generate and share the best common operational picture and to raise the operational tempo from sensor-to-shooter by speeding up the observe-orient-decide-act loop."

In a briefing at the company's Guyancourt plant outside Paris, Thales in addition to LX16 presented a new high-rate data link to downlink reconnaissance imagery to ground stations; and a close-air-support data link to improve communication and coordination between strike aircraft and joint terminal attack control (JTAC) teams on the ground.

The high-rate (more than 100 Mbps.) data link for airborne reconnaissance is a point-to-point, NATO-interoperable (Stanag 7085) downlink for imagery (synthetic aperture radar or electro-optical), video (infrared or TV) and/or plots (moving target indication or signals intelligence). It is usually combined with a two-way, omnidirectional, secure UHF-band service link to exchange control and management messages between the ground station and the sensor. The first application of this multi-payload data link technology is in the French air force and navy's Reco-NG airborne reconnaissance system (AW&ST May 7/14, p. 42). It has also been selected for the Neuron UCAV demonstrator program (led by Dassault Aviation) and for NATO's pending Alliance Ground Surveillance program.

For close air support (CAS), Caine hopes the French navy will order NextW@ve for integration into its Thales-supplied Damocles targeting pods. He says the CAS solution offered by Thales allows for the exchange of video and images (typically three compressed high-quality images per second at 100 Kbps.). It also supports the nine-line message format and voice coordination.
 
Last edited:
Are you sure about the highlighted part - esp the hardware

Yes I'm sure, hardware encryption is fallible as was proved with the ENIGMA during world war II. MIDS is installed in a variety of operational equipment including mobile ground units, if hardware encryption is employed and the hardware falls into enemy hands. Then the system can be deciphered the integrity of entire system is lost rendering it worthless as this compromises all allied communication.

As for the LX16 equipment manufactured by Thales, it apparently operates on a different frequency and is incompatible with Link 16 until additional hardware is added. I don't have enough information to comment on what this 'additional hardware' does - perhaps it just increases the operating frequency to NATO standards.
 
i think f-35 is should be for Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC)-II bcoz Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC)-I and INS vikramaditya is already booked for MIG-29k and naval LCA.

i know about IAC (what u called IAC-I) , but have no information about IAC-II. Is it already started. Please provide any source if u have.
 

Back
Top Bottom