Electronic Warfare: Where does Pakistan stand?
- Thread starter FuturePAF
- Start date
bananarepublic
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2015
- Messages
- 2,424
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Sine Nomine
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2014
- Messages
- 10,067
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
- Location
@Oscar @Bilal Khan 777 sir contribution from both of you Gentlemen would be appreciated.
monitor
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 8,570
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
FuturePAF
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2014
- Messages
- 10,546
- Reaction score
- 24
- Country
- Location
We don't need to know the specific methods and frequencies. Rather I would like to see how far behind, in open literature, Pakistan's efforts are and where it can catch up quickly. ISPR has identified ISR as key to a decisive outcome one way or the other in battle, so in that vein, I would like to expand the question to include what are India's capabilities and what can we do to degrade them.
AZADPAKISTAN2009
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 37,669
- Reaction score
- 68
- Country
- Location
Sums it up catches good music once in a while when breeze in right direction
CriticalThought
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2016
- Messages
- 7,094
- Reaction score
- 13
- Country
- Location
Thank you for posting this. The state of PAF's EW can be understood from the fact that there is no publicized EW doctrine.
I will make a bold statement: any country that doesn't have its own semiconductor fabtech backbone, doesn't really have a meaningful EW capacity.
Given this situation, EW in PAF relies on prepackaged, commercial solutions. The capabilities of PAF are limited by whatever its suppliers offer. And they are at the mercy of manufacturer compromise. If our enemies are able to compromise the OEM, they can completely circumvent our own abilities, while launching a successful attack on us. Every single piece of Western equipment is to be considered potentially compromised. If it works in war, it means the Western nations are happy to let us plat for now.
The situation with Chinese equipment is better. But it is still a matter of applying ready made solutions. In order to orchestrate successful EW - both offence and defence - one needs:
0. Understanding the fundamental nature of electromagnetic radiation itself. The full implications of Maxwell's equations and the practical outcomes when EM energy interacts with modern materials such as meta-materials. I highly doubt there is any deep understanding.
1. Understanding at the atomic level the characteristics of the semi-conductor. What are the response characteristics given incoming spectrum? How much heat will be dissipated at a given output level? How will performance degrade in various conditions? Nations with decades of actual manufacturing experience can make educated guesses about enemy capabilities in these areas. PAF has no such capability.
2. Understanding at the wafer level. What are the peculiarities of a given manufacturing process? Does it lead to bleeding effects in adjacent transistors? How does that compromise overall performance? Bold in 1 above applies.
3. Understanding at the hardware level. How does temperature, moisture, radiation affect the performance of the system? Will the signals on the data bus get scrambled under certain conditions? Are there built in hidden functionalities that are activated when a certain sequence of signals is processed? Bold in 1 above applies.
4. Understanding at the software level. What is the error rate if the detection algorithm? What patterns is it unable to identify? Are there hidden functionalities that are activated when certain sequence if signals is processed? Bold in 1 above strongly applies.
5. Finally there are aircraft maneuvering and mission planning tactics such as flying perpendicular to enemy radar's main lobe, or using obstructions to avoid detection, or using wideband jamming using OEM supplied pods etc. At least the PAF is proficient here.
But the most important is how to wage a war using EW as a tool. When enemy planes are detected in war time, do you send forth a fighter jet? Or do you mount an EW attack to disable its sensors? Why would you choose one option over the other?
Do you understand the enemy's AD measures? Are you able to accurately identify the gaps in AD coverage and take advantage? Are you able to orchestrate an effective AD? At the time of this writing, I do not have much trust, unfortunately. But one hopes that PAF will be able to deliver. The way American drones have been kept away is living testament to PAF's ability, but the general lack of scientific depth within the country puts it on very shaky foundations.
I will make a bold statement: any country that doesn't have its own semiconductor fabtech backbone, doesn't really have a meaningful EW capacity.
Given this situation, EW in PAF relies on prepackaged, commercial solutions. The capabilities of PAF are limited by whatever its suppliers offer. And they are at the mercy of manufacturer compromise. If our enemies are able to compromise the OEM, they can completely circumvent our own abilities, while launching a successful attack on us. Every single piece of Western equipment is to be considered potentially compromised. If it works in war, it means the Western nations are happy to let us plat for now.
The situation with Chinese equipment is better. But it is still a matter of applying ready made solutions. In order to orchestrate successful EW - both offence and defence - one needs:
0. Understanding the fundamental nature of electromagnetic radiation itself. The full implications of Maxwell's equations and the practical outcomes when EM energy interacts with modern materials such as meta-materials. I highly doubt there is any deep understanding.
1. Understanding at the atomic level the characteristics of the semi-conductor. What are the response characteristics given incoming spectrum? How much heat will be dissipated at a given output level? How will performance degrade in various conditions? Nations with decades of actual manufacturing experience can make educated guesses about enemy capabilities in these areas. PAF has no such capability.
2. Understanding at the wafer level. What are the peculiarities of a given manufacturing process? Does it lead to bleeding effects in adjacent transistors? How does that compromise overall performance? Bold in 1 above applies.
3. Understanding at the hardware level. How does temperature, moisture, radiation affect the performance of the system? Will the signals on the data bus get scrambled under certain conditions? Are there built in hidden functionalities that are activated when a certain sequence of signals is processed? Bold in 1 above applies.
4. Understanding at the software level. What is the error rate if the detection algorithm? What patterns is it unable to identify? Are there hidden functionalities that are activated when certain sequence if signals is processed? Bold in 1 above strongly applies.
5. Finally there are aircraft maneuvering and mission planning tactics such as flying perpendicular to enemy radar's main lobe, or using obstructions to avoid detection, or using wideband jamming using OEM supplied pods etc. At least the PAF is proficient here.
But the most important is how to wage a war using EW as a tool. When enemy planes are detected in war time, do you send forth a fighter jet? Or do you mount an EW attack to disable its sensors? Why would you choose one option over the other?
Do you understand the enemy's AD measures? Are you able to accurately identify the gaps in AD coverage and take advantage? Are you able to orchestrate an effective AD? At the time of this writing, I do not have much trust, unfortunately. But one hopes that PAF will be able to deliver. The way American drones have been kept away is living testament to PAF's ability, but the general lack of scientific depth within the country puts it on very shaky foundations.
Bilal Khan 777
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,789
- Reaction score
- 62
- Country
- Location
Pakistan does not use MS OS in Air Def system.
It is not policy. All MQ interdiction missions are with Pakistan's permission
Lot of work being done. Lot of improvement required.
Riz
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 9,162
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
But it was good chance for us to test our capabilities in electronic warfare,
CriticalThought
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2016
- Messages
- 7,094
- Reaction score
- 13
- Country
- Location
Sir kindly check OP in this thread
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/windows-xp-is-a-huge-security-risk.544957/
Qutb-ud-din Aybak
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2015
- Messages
- 6,968
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
this is the field no force will make any info public.
so forget that any of the information on internet is correct.
so forget that any of the information on internet is correct.
Bilal Khan 777
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,789
- Reaction score
- 62
- Country
- Location
proud.pakistani
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 169
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
What do you think PAF will reveal OS they are using? That Windows XP image could be to deceive enemy.
Similar threads
