I believe India is working on evolving and implementing its own standard (ODL)...operational data link for its Air Force. What its current status is, I am unsure on because I haven't followed it closely. Lot of it is kept under wraps since its an ongoing and very critical project as you can imagine.
Yep. it's pretty much OPSEC stuff unless it's part of some announced military sale or something of the sorts. But most of this stuff that comes out in the public domain is minimized info since it's basically the intel of how all the systems communicate. Countries like Egypt and some others have a doctrine of secrecy that they follow to the T. They limit most of the information released to the public like none other and often time, we find out about them through outside sources that might be involved in the development process and have the need to disclose it as part of their advertising or whatever.
There are thus key deficits in this very area that you bring up for the IAF given its multi-platform structure.
Is there really, or is it a common misconception? Who really knows whether operating 1 single system is ultimately better than operating a variety? I know conventional wisdom will suggest that the former is a no-brainer, but there are A LOT of arguments to support the latter, especially in Egypt's case as it depends a lot more on foreign purchases than domestic production and has a unique situation as far as past enemies and potentially new ones. It has to balance its acquisitions between western and eastern systems for a very simple reason, so as not be stuck in a time of war being totally dependent on an entity that would then control its fate. That's essentially the main reason for having various systems acquisitions and yes, that does create a bit of a more complicated training and maintenance program to support all them all, but that's nothing the Egyptian armed forces hasn't been used to since the mid-70s. The other and equally as important reason is the restrictions imposed by western systems, particularly the US. We all know how its foreign sales to ME countries and especially Egypt are contingent on Israel's ability to maintain a superior edge. I think Egypt has had enough of those restrictions. Once peace was establishes with Israel and the remainder of Sinai returned to its rightful owner, the conditions for military support from the US was to forgo any military procurement from Russia and most eastern block countries but while that was a good thing to get all sorts of free things, it came with that price of reduced capabilities. Now it's not much of an issue, even with French components let alone Russian, whereas it used to be in the past.
I assume the same principle as the first outlined one of diversification was applied to India but under different circumstances, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Realizing that possibility during a time of war would be almost fatal. But something like the collapse of a super power is highly unlikely to happen once, let alone again but I believe that was the primary reason for India diversifying its air force to include more western AC. I think another reason -- and rightfully so -- is that western systems, for a long time and with many vital systems are just ahead of Russian ones. This is no knock on the great things coming out of Russia, but there is some degree of truth to that and so diversification, in my strong opinion is an absolute necessity for a country like Egypt and to see how India copes with it is a good comparison.
There is whole gamut of problems, mostly to do with "making do" with the existing older (somewhat disjointed) architecture in C4I for IAF. This limits the true inter-operability of various assets for say a large enough mission (it manifested in the balakot mission)...though there are workarounds, especially if you have the squadron bulk of all types of aircraft needed for a mission profile and evolve doctrine that way. But even that is diminishing in IAF case now as squadron strength diminishes by basic retirement >>>replacement magnitude (driven by age old problems of inept bureaucrats and funding). Its difficult window for IAF opening up right now this decade.
Basically this problem will be a systematic one (with current workarounds and doctrines) till the ODL architecture comes online....and everything is one the same page totally. The Indian Navy has its indigenous common data link and I believe they are far ahead of the IAF in its implementation (given they had a ready solution for specific use in the P-8 MPA)
Something very highly critical like an AWACS (be it the phalcons or the NETRA) I would imagine would not really face this issue, as it would have root architecture to interface with everything under its control etc. Basically it would have been evolved in the first AWACS project implementation that IAF did as "bottom up" and implement that as backwards compatible always (i.e based on your most legacy fighter, attack or bomber that you plan to control with the AWACS).... rather than "top down" acquire (define solely at the AWACS level) and then rework everything to that new standard. So the NETRA should be covered by this.
Very interesting stuff. I'm not surprised that the IAF is/was using C4i until an indigenous system comes along. With the size of that fleet and trying to incorporate it all together with other branches of the armed forces must be a bear! Having a large AWACS network like that with its root architectures and sub-systems like you mentioned means that data links and IFF must all be compatible to it and basically be created under its structure. So any data link system introduced to aircraft must be first and foremost compatible to the systems operated by the AWACS aircraft since they are the main command and control structure. So the Israelis must be quite involved in that.
Just two words:
- Egypt's quest for a communications architecture of its own, that could be moulded to its own purposes and purchases of any equipment, is two decades old. A frankly naive delegation faced this request from a key Air Force team, and did not know that there was actually a solution, sorry, a source for solutions within the Indian military, that could have done all that Egypt wanted then (and now) without working up a sweat;
- The key to the puzzle is WESEE.
I have no clue what you just said. What delegation? The problem is that it's difficult for Egypt to outsource anything that has a certain level of intelligence (especially when it comes to a major system that is operated by the airforce) to a country that is HEAVILY involved with Israel. This is no secret and it's just the way it is which makes dealing with the United States a major conundrum when it comes to things like AWACs and data links and IFF.
As a matter of fact, Egypt and its space adventures (mainly satellites) was kept strongly at bay and from acquiring one until recently with EGYPTSTAT and with the introduction of the Protivnik-GE radar (which is incredible, to say the least) and with those has finally been able to augment its radar & surveillance capabilities to let's just say, a very respectable one now where it can get super high quality imaging and surveillance at real time. That's just one example of how, despite the peace process, there's still an underworld war happening before our eyes and it's essential to guard against leakages of any kind. Hence why unfortunately, it might be very difficult for Egypt to engage India in at least the sensitive intel stuff such as the topic at hand.
Thanks for the tag,
@Nilgiri has answered it above and my knowledge is all from open source and there is very little in the open source regarding this.
The first datalink experience for India on a Fighter was the LAZUR with the induction of the MiG-29, IIRC,and from there on it has built up capabilities across other platforms. Now all the Russian aircraft have datalink that is quite mature, the Su acts as a battle manager with the smaller Bisons for ex. But since tech has advanced rapidly, IAF wants a highly secure Operational Data Link that gives real time SA for all airborne assets and the first step was installing Software Defined Radios.
This will undoubtedly be a part of the "India Specific Enhancements" for the Rafale as well and SDR order for 400 numbers will mean all Su/Tejas will have them, maybe more orders in the future for the others but I am unsure.
Interesting. Being that India has developed the ASTRA with a tremendous range -- and interestingly enough, Egypt is actually interested in that missile as well as the Brahmos -- and so it must have a solid grip of whatever data link it's using to operate that missile as well as all of the others. Even the missiles are from a huge variety of sources. You have Russian, French, Israeli and indigenous ones and probably some western systems as well since the Jaguars fire some type of British or US-made missiles? lol. A lot going on. I'm curious now what the SEPECAT Jaguars use for weapons in the IAF?
IN isn't as diversified as IAF when it comes to inventory. All acquisitions post 2000 are mostly designed indigenously by the Naval Design Bureau and built at local shipyards. Most recently acquired Kolkata & Visakhapatnam Class Destroyers along with Nilgiri & Shivalik class frigates, INS Vikramaditya and under-construction INS Vikrant all have Barak - 1 or 8 SAMs', Brahmos AShCM's, AK-630 CIWS, 76mm OTO Melara SRGM (recent ones have BAE's 62 cal Mk45 Naval Gun due to blacklisting of Finmeccanica), MFSTAR AESA Radar, RBU-6000 Anti-sub rocket launchers, "Kavach" Decoy System. In terms of EW suit, most of these ships use technologies developed by BEL or NSTL like BEL Ellora, NSTL Maareech ATDS, BEL Sanket, BEL Ajanta etc. Even the bow sonar is BEL HUMSA-NG while the destroyers are additionally equipped with Thales LW-08 D-band air search radar which shows the commonality in sub-systems existing among various classes which simplifies integration. The Nirbhay sub-sonic CM and Varunastra heavy weight torpedos after FOC will be integrated across all naval platforms including subs
Again, using naval sub-systems originating from various countries isn't uncommon since it isn't economically feasible to go through the whole R&D process, particularly something you aren't inducting in significant numbers. For instance, OTO Melara's 76mm naval gun is used by over 50 countries including the US.
In terms of datalink, while Link-16/Link-11 systems have been the main Tactical Data Link used by the US and its NATO allies...India has it's own indigenous Data Link developed by BEL and is being utilised onboard warships for tactical information exchange. BEL's Datalink II components have been delivered by BEL to Boeing when we started acquiring the P8Is'.
Netra AWACS use C-band line-of-sight and Ku-band SATCOM datalinks also from BEL/DRDO
I'm not entirely sure of the data link systems used across all of IAF and maybe someone could shed more light on this. While the HAL-developed SDR-2010 has been available since 2011, it was only last year that the IAF commenced efforts on procuring 473 + 3,125 SDRs (including the integral tactical data-link component) for achieving real-time connectivity between all IAF aircraft/helicopters and the IACCCS’ terrestrial and airborne combat and combat-support elements. For its 83 projected Tejas Mk.1A and 36 Dassault Rafales, IAF has specified RAFAEL of Israel’s BNET-AR SDR for installation to be built by Hyderabad-based Astra Microwave Products and Israel's RAFAEL Advanced Defense Systems in Hyderabad
Regarding IAF's diverse fleet, the last of Mig-27s have been retired last year and the Mig-21s will be phased out over the next 2 to 4 years which will be replaced by Tejas Mk-1A's. Though the LCA project has been a bumpy ride, it helped us develop the required test & research facilities along with significant experience it aircraft technologies. No wonder, MWF's design has been freezed at such a quick pace and metal cutting for prototypes is scheduled later this year but might be delayed due to covid and hopefully, first flight by 2025.
The Russian aircraft though the procurement costs are relatively low, they're maintenance intensive and difficulty in procuring spares. The availability rate of Mig-29's and Su-30's was around 60-70% and only recently was improved after GoI's push to work with Russian suppliers for spare parts. No wonder, IAF doesn't intend to procure anymore Russian fighters. I'd expect IAF to go for 2 more squadrons of Rafales as a stop gap until MWF takes shape and AMCA makes significant developmental progress. While EFT is a dead cow and dealing with multiple countries for spares is a nightmare, Gripen was rejected since it's a direct competitor to the LCA and could potentially kill the LCA project. F-18 isn't needed since it's a heavy fighter in the class of Su-30 and we've got over 200 of em. F-16 Blk-70/72 though is a good aircraft, comes with several strings attached and we've seen how US ditched pak and most recently Turkey with the F-35's. We'd be forced to let go our Russian acquisitions, particularly S-400
While EAF is acquiring some, if not almost all
of the available 4th gen fighters out there...focusing on EW and network centric capabilities is crucial to unlock and maximize the potential of these fighters, something which PAF currently has an edge over IAF in this regard.
@Gomig-21 Please post pictures of all your recent Aerial and Naval acquisitions in EAF & EN colors if available. Would truly be a sight to behold if they're all in one frame, particularly the fighter jets
https://www.financialexpress.com/de...nking-to-be-discussed-at-22-dialogue/1790119/
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...i-delivered-to-boeing/articleshow/5921211.cms
https://defenceupdate.in/indian-air...-planes-to-look-deep-into-pakistan-and-china/
http://forceindia.net/cover-story/security-expert/
Hahaha, they are trying to buy every available 4th gen out there, you're right. Supposedly the MiG-29/35 followed by the Su-35S is a prelude to the interest in the Su-57. Now that would be quite fascinating to see and wouldn't surprise any of us at this point. Even though the Rafale was discussed way back in 2009 as well as the Su-35 and we all laughed at the notion loooool! Then 2013 came along and suddenly we're all getting slapped in the face with the Rafale, Mistral LHD and then 50 MiGs and 50 Ka-52s am I missing anything?!
So the EFT doesn't really surprise any of us TBH being that it's part of a $9 billion deal that would include all those jet trainers and 6 FREMM frigates.
But fascinating stuff that you mentioned in your post. It's one thing to have operational ability within all aircraft, it's another to have it across the entire battlefield elements including the navy and certain integral ground units. The size and level of the Indian armed forces and the level of modern systems it utilizes (including an aircraft carrier) can only suggest that they've figured it out pretty well and have a pretty damn good grip on things, even to the point where they can simply switch from whatever indigenous system they have and plug right into link-16 for interoperability with US forces when exercising with them, then switching right back without giving up any intel. I think that is quite remarkable.
Guess the EAF IFF must have been upgraded from Analogue to digital by now so no problem with the new Mig-35 or SU-35s..
Yep, most definitely. The interesting part as we all know from discussing it before on this thread is that the EAF doesn't use the conventional IFF system that's designed by the US and built for link-16 and used on the F-16 because of one very obvious reason. The EAF F-16s don't carry any of the standard IFF antennas, except for the last batch of Block 52+ that have the "brid shredders" but none other do. I also think that they just came with the Block 52s because it's simply part of the assembly process and to eliminate them is more work than to just leave them on.
We also know from this fact below, that the IFF system used by the EAF to integrate all its aircraft under one system was designed and installed way back in the early-mid 80s when the first F-16 arrived in Cairo.
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Background. The APX-101(V) was built to NATO Mk XII IFF standard. Following its first foreign sale to Norway in 1986, the APX-101(V) was used on all F-15 and F-16 aircraft sold via Foreign Military Sales (FMS) until 1990. Egypt is the only exception, using a Soviet IFF system operating on a frequency of 675 MHz (0.6 GHz). Historically, F-16s destined for Egypt had their APX-101(V)s removed and replaced by another Teledyne unit, the TEC-60, which was jointly designed by Egypt and Teledyne. The same set is believed to have been installed in Egypt’s MiG-21s, Su-7s, F-4s and Mirage 5s. In 1990, the APX-111(V), a combined interrogator/ transponder (CIT), began to replace the APX-101(V) on the F-16. Since then, other new transponders (APX-113/114(V), APX-117/118(V)) have replaced the APX-101(V) in many platforms. The Air Force Materiel Command published a Sources Sought notice in July 2003 for potential sources with the expertise, capability, facilities, and experience to meet the requirements for depot repair of the RT-1063C/APX-101(V) IFF transponder.
https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=400
Typically you would see some form of antenna to act as IFF sensors as in the "bird shredders" which are very visible on F-16. But if the system is also used on F-15s, then there's a different type of antenna for that aircraft that is much less visible since we don't really see it as we do with these on the F-16s.
So maybe there's a different and less visible antenna system that this Teledyne/Egyptian created IFF system uses and has most likely matured and been upgraded since its inception to where it's shared within the entire EAF fleet of aircraft.
for the rest the Ci5 can take care of communication and data sharing between all those varieties of fighter aircrafts through link-16 for the Western fighters and near instantaneous too through Land radars and satellites for the Migs and SUs and between them and the western platforms..
It could very well be Ci5, but I guess we just don't know for sure. But, knowing that they created a sole system for IFF, one can only imagine they've done something to have the most compatible data link system for the variety of aircraft in the fleet to the point where they have no problem introducing any new aircraft, be it the Su-35 or EFT. And then you have the fusion system on the Rafales which is a whole other ballgame altogether.
Nope. It was just put out there as a potential deal with Italy that included the frigates which were the primary attraction from the start because of the fallout with the French FREMM. So we don't really know but it could suddenly materialize and slap us all right in the face, like many of the other recent deals.
