DRDO gets nod to develop ‘eye in sky’

[Agnostic_Indian]

That's not correct, the IL76 is the baseline varient, build by Ilyushin, but the A50 is the AWACS version, build by Beriev:

Beriev A-50 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Beriev Aircraft Company


I stated my opinion in post #7, I have nothing about DRDO going for further developments, but they should provide IAF with the basics for Indias security first.
As plattforms I would take the A330, since we will operate it anyway, but it is possible that we go for a smaller version the A320 for example, or the Boeing 737.
Anyway, too many different types, too many different systems, too late!

awac is very much vulnerable to enemy attack, so how deep inside we can operate that much better, then why don't we go for a bigger and more powerful radar with C17 as a platform ?

 

[sancho]

This can be a MAJOR headache later on.

Yeah, especially if they are meant for the same border regions. The logistical and operational problems are foreseeable, but DRDO is looking at their progress only, not on Indias security.
If we seperate them with 2 plattforms in the northern areas and a 3rd type for the southern borders and coastal areas it would be ok, but that's a long shot that is not logical when you have just 3 x aircrafts operational so far.

 

[sancho]

awac is very much vulnerable to enemy attack, so how deep inside we can operate that much better, then why don't we go for a bigger and more powerful radar with C17 as a platform ?

But that has nothing to do with the plattform, but with the radar range. An AWACS that can detect targets at 500 or 600Km, can be operated further away than one that has a detection range of 300 to 400Km. However, with such a larger area to cover it is not detection range alone that we need, but higher numbers to provide at least 2 AWACS covering the same borderline at the same time, to not provide loopholes. We have 3 and will get 5 more, which is half of what IAF estimates for their needs currently, so why are we waiting for follow orders and waste time on new developments?

 

[SQ8]

Yeah, especially if they are meant for the same border regions. The logistical and operational problems are foreseeable, but DRDO is looking at their progress only, not on Indias security.
If we seperate them with 2 plattforms in the northern areas and a 3rd type for the southern borders and coastal areas it would be ok, but that's a long shot that is not logical when you have just 3 x aircrafts operational so far.

Apparently this problem is not confined to just the AWACS force..
there seems to be a positive trend towards domestication and diversification .. but too much sugar can lead to diabetes ..
if you get my drift.

 

[sancho]

Apparently this problem is not confined to just the AWACS force..
there seems to be a positive trend towards domestication and diversification .. but too much sugar can lead to diabetes ..
if you get my drift.

Domestication and diversifications are not the problem if you do it according a plan and the operational needs of the forces, we currently do it by the needs of the industry and that's mainly a waste of time, money and resources.
Take AMCA as an example, which is not needed for IAF in operational terms, or HALs HTT40 trainer and HALs advanced jet trainer plans, which both are not needed anymore if you already licence produce similar trainers in India. The industry might want to show that they can do it as well, but that is not the important point, but that our forces will get these assets in time.

 

[Abingdonboy]

any guess which platform will we use to develop this??Boeing-707,A-50 or modified A-330???

No way will it be on an A-50 or any Russian-origin a/c. The IAF have already expressed their displeasure with the A-50EIs and the IL-76 before them. If the IAF had their way the follow-on 2 PHALCONS wouldn't be coming on A-50s.

 

[sancho]

No way will it be on an A-50 or any Russian-origin a/c. The IAF have already expressed their displeasure with the A-50EIs and the IL-76 before them. If the IAF had their way the follow-on 2 PHALCONS wouldn't be coming on A-50s.

It's not because it's a bad aircraft, but they might want a more economical one this time, but still operating 3 different aircrafts with 3 different types of radars in the same areas is just a logistical mess and should be avoided.

 

[Abingdonboy]

It's not because it's a bad aircraft, but they might want a more economical one this time, but still operating 3 different aircrafts with 3 different types of radars in the same areas is just a logistical mess and should be avoided.

It's not a bad a/c but it has its flaws and there are much more cabple and economical a/c out there.



And wrt 3 different types what can the IAF do? The PHALCONS are on the A-50s, the CABS/DRDO AWACS is on the EMB-145 due to the size and design of the active antenna array unit but as DRDO look ahead to devloping a heavier, more capble radar with 360" coverage then they are going to have to look at a new a/c- the A-50 is a no go and the EMB-145 is obviously not a possiblity. What options does the IAF have? It wants more capable AWACS than the EMB-145-based AWACS, along the lines of their PHALCONS but are being forced to wait until DRDO can produce the goods.

 

[sancho]

And wrt 3 different types what can the IAF do? The PHALCONS are on the A-50s, the CABS/DRDO AWACS is on the EMB-145 due to the size and design of the active antenna array unit but as DRDO look ahead to devloping a heavier, more capble radar with 360" coverage then they are going to have to look at a new a/c- the A-50 is a no go and the EMB-145 is obviously not a possiblity. What options does the IAF have? It wants more capable AWACS than the EMB-145-based AWACS, along the lines of their PHALCONS but are being forced to wait until DRDO can produce the goods.

Add 7 more EMB 145 DRDO AWACS to the 5 x A50 Phalcons and let DRDO work on upgrades of these system, for example GaN AESA moduls, for more power and longer detection ranges, an array with a wider field of view than the current 120°, or L-Band arrays like G550 Phalcons. These are important capabilities, not 360° radar detection, just like having a constant coverage is important, not having the most capable AWACS, but only in small numbers.
That would be the 2nd step, after developing an own AWACS and not taking the 3rd step with developing the next one already.
And once again Dhruv shows us the best way, further developing into MK2 and 3, re-designing it to Rudra and LCH and not simply going to IMRH, even before the first Dhruvs were inducted. It's amazing how less we learned from that project!

Gn8 mate!

 

[ANPP]

Add 7 more EMB 145 DRDO AWACS to the 5 x A50 Phalcons and let DRDO work on upgrades of these system, for example GaN AESA moduls, for more power and longer detection ranges, an array with a wider field of view than the current 120°, or L-Band arrays like G550 Phalcons. These are important capabilities, not 360° radar detection, just like having a constant coverage is important, not having the most capable AWACS, but only in small numbers.
That would be the 2nd step, after developing an own AWACS and not taking the 3rd step with developing the next one already.
And once again Dhruv shows us the best way, further developing into MK2 and 3, re-designing it to Rudra and LCH and not simply going to IMRH, even before the first Dhruvs were inducted. It's amazing how less we learned from that project!

Gn8 mate!

Aquring a new plane for AWACS won't be a problem.

A50 comes from legacy IL76 plane, which was already in service for regular transport.
Emb 145 chose by DRDO, they are already used in VVIP purpose.
Now if DRDO/IAF chose A330, which serve in IAF as refueler, so no extra maintanace headache of different type of plane.


Field view of radar is intentionally left on 120deg, thats not tech limitation(although it is tech limitation, as effective area of radar is limited in 120deg & range decrease exponentially after that; but it has other advantages).

 

[Dash]

i m just a bachelor now.by the way i see it ,may be my kids would be going to school by the time they'll be available to IAF

Dont worry buddy, they are not for our consumption

 

[sancho]

Aquring a new plane for AWACS won't be a problem.

Of course not, but operating 3 different plattforms in the same role, with 3 different radar types will be.

 

[ANPP]

Of course not, but operating 3 different plattforms in the same role, with 3 different radar types will be.

Radars also needs very low maintenance especially current gen radars.

 

[SatishChandra07]

hope this does not meet fate of LCA, arjun, nirbhay and other long list of failures

 

[GR!FF!N]

hope this does not meet fate of LCA, arjun, nirbhay and other long list of failures

If trolling is your intention,then go ahead.but neither of projects you've mentioned are "Failures"..and Nirbhay??seriously??hight of desperation??