What's new

The Pakistan Navy | Transformation from Fledgling Force to a Fighting Machine

S-A-B-E-R->

FULL MEMBER
Mar 9, 2010
1,114
0
455
MuZammiL Dr. s[1]n;4539993 said:
i thought that the sd10-b was the bvr of choice for our P.a.f. ... ?? :what:

how shall P.a.f. integrate the europian exocest on our Jf-17 Lightening thunder ... ? :undecided:

aeronaut or anybody similar should get us a clear answer on this issue here ... :pakistan:
SD 10 is the Primary BVR for JF 17 and AIM 120 C is for F16 as of yet no other BVR is integrated in to these planes. JF 17 is out Aircraft which means we have its source codes and thus we also have the capability to integrate European Exocets on it not that we need to chinese anti ship systems are potent enough.
 

Horus

ADMINISTRATOR
May 3, 2009
39,887
410
96,733
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
Elaborate more on this extraordinary capability of the Pak AWACS fleet which this extremely backward and uneducated, Jahil world has not thought off or attained.

And In case you don't and I know you won't.... as Pak Physics works only in the madarsa book.

AWACS are designed for tracking the targets and not targeting them due to the limited physical ability of large wavelength radars to paint and lock the target.... as good a high frequency and small wavelength radar... which are housed in the nose of military combat aircrafts.

Hence the aircraft has to switch on its radar track and paint the target make a missile lock with its beam and fire the missile in order to kill it... even If you have 100s of AWACS in the air at a time... you would require a single combat plane to make a kill by using its own radar.

I don't understand what has happened to this forum.. but what can we expect from you people.
World is not Jahil, only you are.

'Eye in the Sky' as it can carry out surveillance at about 400-km range under all-weather situations, and to lock on to 60 targets at a time simultaneously.

What is AWACS?
It is capable of locking on to 60 targets simultaneously at 400-km range.
AWACS
AWACS "can" lock onto targets but in order to maintain lock they need to remain in the vicinity which can be dangerous,that is why they are supplemented by fighters. In most cases, the fighters linked with a data link will be vectored to the target after tracking, so that they can achieve a lock using their own radar.

Now stop the long,useless trash talk and get back to the topic.
 

notorious_eagle

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Dec 25, 2008
4,542
31
10,162
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Hence the aircraft has to switch on its radar track and paint the target make a missile lock with its beam and fire the missile in order to kill it... even If you have 100s of AWACS in the air at a time... you would require a single combat plane to make a kill by using its own radar.
Sorry, but @gambit who is an Ex Avionics Officer in USAF has previously explained that modern BVRAAMS can be guided by the radar of an AWAC. The USAF has been practising with this concept for quite some time, B1's firing a big salvo of AIM120's linked up with E3's. Read up son

I don't understand what has happened to this forum.. but what can we expect from you people.
Says the guy who does not do his research and makes outright foolish claims on PDF, i mean how many times do you want to get proved wrong man? I mean have some self respect, learn from your mistakes and move on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DESERT FIGHTER

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 1, 2010
45,985
91
88,994
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Sorry, but @gambit who is an Ex Avionics Officer in USAF has previously explained that modern BVRAAMS can be guided by the radar of an AWAC. The USAF has been practising with this concept for quite some time, B1's firing a big salvo of AIM120's linked up with E3's. Read up son



Says the guy who does not do his research and makes outright foolish claims on PDF, i mean how many times do you want to get proved wrong man? I mean have some self respect, learn from your mistakes and move on.
Sir, hes just a troll.... looking at his posts... the best advice is ignore him....


"Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it."-George Bernard Shaw
 
Last edited by a moderator:

AUSTERLITZ

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 10, 2008
6,030
175
10,143
Country
India
Location
India
Sorry, but @gambit who is an Ex Avionics Officer in USAF has previously explained that modern BVRAAMS can be guided by the radar of an AWAC. The USAF has been practising with this concept for quite some time, B1's firing a big salvo of AIM120's linked up with E3's. Read up son



Says the guy who does not do his research and makes outright foolish claims on PDF, i mean how many times do you want to get proved wrong man? I mean have some self respect, learn from your mistakes and move on.
I think the most problematic thing is by using AWACS for guidance,its highly susceptible to jamming of datalink and then whole plan goes kaput.New AESA radars are supposed to excellent for datalink jamming...i got this from a friend..is this correct @gambit?Or false?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

farhan_9909

PROFESSIONAL
Oct 21, 2009
8,996
10
11,861
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Arab Emirates
until and unless we dont promote our lcoal industries to build ships we cant go beyond the present level of naval force.

Look at iran they are manufacturing upto 1000tons of ships and they are average armed.now there latest project is upto 2000tons

we need to start with 1000-1500tons of indigenously designed and manufactured ship with the engine and the firepower imported and locally developed.

this would be much more cheaper than producing one under license
 

MM_Haider

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 3, 2010
2,235
1
2,519
Country
Pakistan
Location
China
until and unless we dont promote our lcoal industries to build ships we cant go beyond the present level of naval force.

Look at iran they are manufacturing upto 1000tons of ships and they are average armed.now there latest project is upto 2000tons

we need to start with 1000-1500tons of indigenously designed and manufactured ship with the engine and the firepower imported and locally developed.

this would be much more cheaper than producing one under license
we Pakistan is trying hard for this and seeking partnership/ business from other countries in order to make some buck$ to fulfill its own need as in our budget navy is not given the due share. Thats why PN had displayed models of locally manufactured navy gadgets including submarine in IDEX 2013.. PN is actively looking for business orders from other countries to earn something and to buy something!.. here are some pictures which i took!..



















 

Nishan_101

BANNED
Nov 23, 2007
3,853
-18
1,019
we Pakistan is trying hard for this and seeking partnership/ business from other countries in order to make some buck$ to fulfill its own need as in our budget navy is not given the due share. Thats why PN had displayed models of locally manufactured navy gadgets including submarine in IDEX 2013.. PN is actively looking for business orders from other countries to earn something and to buy something!.. here are some pictures which i took!..



















Its amazing to see that PN has been marketing all of the stuff but its not fulfilling local needs and this is surely due to money. I think that Pak Military should be given funds, then I am sure they would have perform even better.

Like PN might have produce about 6-8 or may be 10 Agosta-90Bs in two blocks.
 

gambit

PROFESSIONAL
Apr 28, 2009
25,400
138
23,362
Country
United States
Location
United States
Sorry, but @gambit who is an Ex Avionics Officer in USAF has previously explained that modern BVRAAMS can be guided by the radar of an AWAC. The USAF has been practising with this concept for quite some time, B1's firing a big salvo of AIM120's linked up with E3's.
I think the most problematic thing is by using AWACS for guidance,its highly susceptible to jamming of datalink and then whole plan goes kaput.New AESA radars are supposed to excellent for datalink jamming...i got this from a friend..is this correct @gambit?Or false?
There are two ways to provide 'guidance' to a missile by any external source:

- Data
- Radar

Data guidance or the commonly known 'data linking' is like saying to the missile: Your target is at 10,000 ft altitude and descending, heading east, and speed 300 kts. The missile then recalculate its own flight path to create the best interception point. This may be real time or periodic updates. Usually if the target have any changes, then you must update the missile of those changes. Of course, if the target have many changes, aka 'maneuvers', then those updates are pretty much real time IF your hardware are capable enough.

Radar guidance is like you illuminating the target WITH YOUR OWN RADAR and let the missile uses those reflections to calculate its own intercept.

Neither are 'command guidance', which is effectively you being the equivalent of the drone pilot controlling every aspects of the missile's flight. Command guidance is another form of data linking except that it must be real time with as little lag as possible. Data links are vulnerable to interference, whether that interference is natural like a mountain blocking antenna views of both parties, or artificial like 'jamming' that corrupt the data link. So the counter is to have as sophisticated hardware as possible such as frequency agility or IFF. It depends on the size of your (national) wallet.

An AESA system is proven to be highly resistant to ECM as well as being a formidable ECM platform itself, depending on the software that accompany and matches the hardware. For example, if the array is large enough to create more than two sub-arrays from a parent array, then the software should be able to create one radar array, one communication array, and one ECM array. It is nice to have the software package built to compensate for future upgrades, but the sticky point is how much more because it cost to pay for engineers to write and maintain those codes. So if you are a new entrant into the AESA arena in terms of indigenous development, the lead should be hardware to provide the software group the guidance on where to go and how far. Sub-array partitioning and choreography is not easy. Bad codes will have sub-arrays contaminate each other and render the entire system useless. For example, if the radar sub-array is transmitting, perhaps the communication sub-array should perform only IFF queries instead of two-way conversation, and the ECM sub-array remains silent. Then as the indigenous development gains sophistication, all three sub-arrays can perform their duties simultaneously. This is the beauty of an AESA system and why it is so desirable the world over.

Is it possible to do both target data feed and radar illumination ? Yes.

Who has such capabilities? Guess we just have to find out in a real shooting fight.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MuZammiL Dr. s[1]n

FULL MEMBER
Sep 19, 2010
679
-3
285
SD 10 is the Primary BVR for JF 17 and AIM 120 C is for F16 as of yet no other BVR is integrated in to these planes. JF 17 is out Aircraft which means we have its source codes and thus we also have the capability to integrate European Exocets on it not that we need to chinese anti ship systems are potent enough.
is it going to be the "sd-10 a" Or The "sd-10 b" getting integrated on P.a.F.'s jf-17s ... ?:undecided:

second thing was that : i'm a bit confused about the fact that a europion system can not be integrated on a chinese system or vice versa just like what we used to hear about systems-mismatch between saab eriye a.w.a.c.s. & jf-17s causing data-linking issues ; so my point is can we integrate anything of europion origins to a chinese or for that matter to an indegineous system of PakisTan ... ? :undecided:

it hardly matters if it's already been answered before so the arrogant members refrain from even bothering to reply to the inquired question ... :coffee:
:pakistan:
 

S-A-B-E-R->

FULL MEMBER
Mar 9, 2010
1,114
0
455
MuZammiL Dr. s[1]n;4547147 said:
is it going to be the "sd-10 a" Or The "sd-10 b" getting integrated on P.a.F.'s jf-17s ... ?:undecided:

second thing was that : i'm a bit confused about the fact that a europion system can not be integrated on a chinese system or vice versa just like what we used to hear about systems-mismatch between saab eriye a.w.a.c.s. & jf-17s causing data-linking issues ; so my point is can we integrate anything of europion origins to a chinese or for that matter to an indegineous system of PakisTan ... ? :undecided:

it hardly matters if it's already been answered before so the arrogant members refrain from even bothering to reply to the inquired question ... :coffee:
:pakistan:
Mate remember JF17 was built for PAF and PAF kept in mind the in future the integration of European weapons is a major necessity. Heck a few years back a deal with french was being followed for European avionics. MAR1 is the biggest proof of European weapons being integrated in to JF PAF wants JF to no only have all the weapons OF Mirage but also have the modular nature to integrate any weapon available so do not worry as long as we have jf 17s source codes we r good in integration department. Now eyre is a closed system as should an AWAC be to create a data link with eyre we need similar data link that saab manufacture for gripin now that is a problem cuz Thunder and Grippin are both direct competitors in there weight category.but even this ll be solved the same was F16s are connected with Chinese AWACA by a ground station data link and plane old radio com.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom