High tech air defence system SPADA to be integrated into PAF in next few days

[Areesh]

Hi, this is an excellent development and part of an existing deal. The PAF has already set up a maintenance center of this system in Karachi back in 2009.

ASIAN DEFENCE: Spada 2000 plus complex inauguration in Karachi

I also agree with Mr. MastanKhan that the PAF urgently needs a long range high altitude SAM system. They have been rumors they have the HQ-9A, but no concrete evidence. This system has been submitted by China for Turkey's long range SAM requirement. Take care.

We all knew about this news. That sooner or later we will be procuring spada 2000. Now we should induct long range sam. If they have inducted HQ-9 than it is good and it they haven't, they should as soon as possible. We need them.

 

[Zarbe Momin]

I have heard that they are 10 batteries but can someone tell how much systems are there whether a system can work independtly from a battery and total number of missel in this deal.

 

[Super Falcon]

I need help of members over here.

It says detection and tracking range is 60 KM , but the intercept range is 25 KM. This means the radar tracks the inbound bogies from 60 KM onwards but only engages them when the distance is less than or equal to 25 KM. There are many anti radiation missiles with range greater than 25 KM which can home in on the targets very easily. All a inbound bogie has to do is fire the missile and keep out of the 25 KM no escape zone.

Please add your inputs.

you made a good point but paf is not nuts to buy something which dont have any defence against anti radiation missiles this sam system is caable of thats it engagement range can be changed whatever airforce wants 25 to 60 km where ever you can put it can track and engage even when it tracks and locks target at the same time after it looks it dont wait for 25 km it is upon airforce what range they want to put anyway it is not like that what ever india buys it is the state of the art MBDA is major runner of defence products and well known in the world for its amazing weapons

 

[nangyale]

I need help of members over here.

It says detection and tracking range is 60 KM , but the intercept range is 25 KM. This means the radar tracks the inbound bogies from 60 KM onwards but only engages them when the distance is less than or equal to 25 KM. There are many anti radiation missiles with range greater than 25 KM which can home in on the targets very easily. All a inbound bogie has to do is fire the missile and keep out of the 25 KM no escape zone.

Please add your inputs.

It wont be stand alone system, with a range of 25Kms. Most probably it would be deployed with a number of missile batteries and radar stations thus making a cluster. In addition there would be decoys to confuse the attackers.
If a shoulder-mounted missile can bring down Indian Migs in Kargil imagine what an advanced missile system like this could achieve?

 

[Imran Khan]

many Indians come in these Pakistani weapons purchase threads like bugs for trolling flame and derail the thread> i never see in my whole life three Indians come in these type of thread and write good system Cong's Pakistan.damn what a neighbor we have

 

[shehbazi2001]

No air defence asset should be viewed as a separate entity facing an onslaught of enemy aircraft formations. In the era of standoff air to ground missile, why we still deploy anti-aircraft guns with a range of few kilometers? Because it is Layered Air Defence System. There are multiple layers of defence with the fighter aircraft forming the outer-most layer and anti-aircraft guns forming the inner-most layer.

Just study the air defence system of an aircraft carrier and you would come to know the concept of layered air defence.

Still if we consider the SPADA or any other SAM system individually, its not necessary that SAM launch unit would be deployed right over the defended target. It can very well be deployed on the expected route of the attack aircrafts but with the SAM radar still near the defended target. If this distance between SAM launcher and SAM radar is upto 10 km, then an attack aircraft can fall easily into the trap because he would locate the SAM unit through the location of its radar but what he would not know is the exact location of SAM launch unit and his "standoff " plans can very well fail. Intelligence is the key to a successful mission.

Thats why major world air forces spend a lot of resources over Electronic Intelligence and do air space voilations when an attack is imminent to "light-up" the hidden SAM radars and thus locate them. Iraq fell prey to these probing flights in the Gulf war and all the SAM locations were revealed. Thats why you need more FIGHTER AIRCRAFT than SAMs.

In the recent past, India voilated Pakistan airspace and this can again happen when war is on the horizon. Just check the airspace voilations done by India before the start of 1965 Pak-India war. These voilations have many technical purposes and its not just limited to checking the reaction time. If a secret SAM radar is activated upon the report of an intruding aircraft, then the location is revealed before the start of the war. Therefore a full-blown use of SAMs is only good for the duration of war. So you need fighter aircrafts to defend the airspace during peace time and just before the war.

For high-altitude air defence system, I would again stress that fighter jets equipped with BVR air to air missiles would do the job better than long-range SAMs. High-altitude recce aircrafts can also be shot down with BVR missiles by fighter jets. So an investement in high-tech jets is better than long-range SAMs.

 

[Jigs]

I have heard that they are 10 batteries but can someone tell how much systems are there whether a system can work independtly from a battery and total number of missel in this deal.

A battery should consist of 3 or 4 platforms. Yes a single SPADA system should be able to work alone but i believe you can link 3 or 4 of them to one Radar system unless they all have integrated radar systems.

Example-

A typical Phase-III Hawk battery consists of:

* 1 × PAR: Pulse Acquisition Radar—a search radar with a 20 (+/-2) rpm rotation, for high/medium altitude target detection.
* 1 × CWAR: Continuous Wave Acquisition Radar—a search doppler radar with a 20 (+/-2) rpm rotation, for low altitude target detection.
* 2 × HIPIR: HIgh Power Illuminator doppler Radar—target tracking, illumination and missile guidance.
* 1 × FDC: Fire Distributuon Center
* 1 × IFF: Identification Friend or Foe Transceiver
* 6 × DLN: Digital Launchers with 18 missiles.
* 6 × MEP-816: Generators 60KW (400 Hz) each.
* 12 × M-390: Missile transport pallets with 36 missiles
* 3 × M-501: Missile loading tractors.
* 1 × bucket loader
* 1 × Missile test shop.

 

[Super Falcon]

imran khan agreed with you but indian air defence system is as good as our aspada

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Once the battery lights up---that missile site is dead meat----so the radar range of spada to my feeble knowledge means nothing in the sense that it won't be used to light up the intruder only and only when it is a must---it will be done by the awacs---which would be possibly linked to all the major anti aircraft missile sites---.

Now the question is---can these missiles be launched with a passive lock and feed from the awac or other radar---other than the one attached to spada---.

You missile operators have to be highly trained pros---with kidneys of steel and nerves of teflon---they will never light up the enemy at the very first hint---.

 

[gowthamraj]

This missile is same class as AKASH.

Cong to our neighbours

 

[jha]

No air defence asset should be viewed as a separate entity facing an onslaught of enemy aircraft formations. In the era of standoff air to ground missile, why we still deploy anti-aircraft guns with a range of few kilometers? Because it is Layered Air Defence System. There are multiple layers of defence with the fighter aircraft forming the outer-most layer and anti-aircraft guns forming the inner-most layer.

Just study the air defence system of an aircraft carrier and you would come to know the concept of layered air defence.

Still if we consider the SPADA or any other SAM system individually, its not necessary that SAM launch unit would be deployed right over the defended target. It can very well be deployed on the expected route of the attack aircrafts but with the SAM radar still near the defended target. If this distance between SAM launcher and SAM radar is upto 10 km, then an attack aircraft can fall easily into the trap because he would locate the SAM unit through the location of its radar but what he would not know is the exact location of SAM launch unit and his "standoff " plans can very well fail. Intelligence is the key to a successful mission.

Thats why major world air forces spend a lot of resources over Electronic Intelligence and do air space voilations when an attack is imminent to "light-up" the hidden SAM radars and thus locate them. Iraq fell prey to these probing flights in the Gulf war and all the SAM locations were revealed. Thats why you need more FIGHTER AIRCRAFT than SAMs.

In the recent past, India voilated Pakistan airspace and this can again happen when war is on the horizon. Just check the airspace voilations done by India before the start of 1965 Pak-India war. These voilations have many technical purposes and its not just limited to checking the reaction time. If a secret SAM radar is activated upon the report of an intruding aircraft, then the location is revealed before the start of the war. Therefore a full-blown use of SAMs is only good for the duration of war. So you need fighter aircrafts to defend the airspace during peace time and just before the war.

For high-altitude air defence system, I would again stress that fighter jets equipped with BVR air to air missiles would do the job better than long-range SAMs. High-altitude recce aircrafts can also be shot down with BVR missiles by fighter jets. So an investement in high-tech jets is better than long-range SAMs.

very well said sir...i hope now people stop chanting LRSAM every time they get an opportunity..

 

[ANG]

Hi Mr. MastanKhan, has a very good point. The operators should be very well trained. The USAF launched dummy/decoys in the first Gulf War and Iraqi operators lauched their missiles in haste. They gave away their positions, their radar frequencies, and most of all used missiles that could not be resupplied. The rest is history. I remember reading this in Time magazine. Take care.

 

[IceCold]

Not able to figure out how can this missile would be able to neutralize aircraft with standoff weapon with such a medium range?

The exact range of such systems are always classified because of the nature of these systems. For all we know the system can very well engage targets far beyond the range of 25kms and the radar would track even further then the declared range of 60kms.

 

[AVIAN]

No air defence asset should be viewed as a separate entity facing an onslaught of enemy aircraft formations. In the era of standoff air to ground missile, why we still deploy anti-aircraft guns with a range of few kilometers? Because it is Layered Air Defence System. There are multiple layers of defence with the fighter aircraft forming the outer-most layer and anti-aircraft guns forming the inner-most layer.

Just study the air defence system of an aircraft carrier and you would come to know the concept of layered air defence.

Still if we consider the SPADA or any other SAM system individually, its not necessary that SAM launch unit would be deployed right over the defended target. It can very well be deployed on the expected route of the attack aircrafts but with the SAM radar still near the defended target. If this distance between SAM launcher and SAM radar is upto 10 km, then an attack aircraft can fall easily into the trap because he would locate the SAM unit through the location of its radar but what he would not know is the exact location of SAM launch unit and his "standoff " plans can very well fail. Intelligence is the key to a successful mission.

Thats why major world air forces spend a lot of resources over Electronic Intelligence and do air space voilations when an attack is imminent to "light-up" the hidden SAM radars and thus locate them. Iraq fell prey to these probing flights in the Gulf war and all the SAM locations were revealed. Thats why you need more FIGHTER AIRCRAFT than SAMs.

In the recent past, India voilated Pakistan airspace and this can again happen when war is on the horizon. Just check the airspace voilations done by India before the start of 1965 Pak-India war. These voilations have many technical purposes and its not just limited to checking the reaction time. If a secret SAM radar is activated upon the report of an intruding aircraft, then the location is revealed before the start of the war. Therefore a full-blown use of SAMs is only good for the duration of war. So you need fighter aircrafts to defend the airspace during peace time and just before the war.

May I know what was the recent past when IAF intruded Pakistani Airspace for my kind information. On the top of that you are using some unknown story telling dates back to 1965 to justify your purpose, since you don't have any link to prove such intrusions and hence straight added story telling of 1965 war as a disclaimer in order to save yourself from giving any link. Instead of making blind accusation to prove your point, it may have helped yourself of doing little bet of hard work on resource finding.

If IAF wants to get radar signatures of Pakistani radar and communication sites then it can do the same even with remaining in its own airspace, since Pakistani radars are long range enough to find air traffic activity well within Indian airspace, it doesn't need any intrusion the way you are propogating.

For high-altitude air defence system, I would again stress that fighter jets equipped with BVR air to air missiles would do the job better than long-range SAMs. High-altitude recce aircrafts can also be shot down with BVR missiles by fighter jets. So an investement in high-tech jets is better than long-range SAMs.

Purpose of any Long range SAM's is Airspace denial and in contrast for Fighter jets is Airspace control. To get rid of intruders through fighter jet, there is a proper mission planning and scramble time and identification is of utmost important. Contrary to this, SAM can be placed everywhere owing to its mobile nature supported by integration of the same with array's of radar as you have mentioned. This SAM's are best suited for High Altitude interception in this modern era supported by both Active and Passive guidance system. But Pakistan doesn't have enough budget to purchase the same and place them in huge number and hence you seems to be advocating use of fighter jet for the same.

 

[AVIAN]

The exact range of such systems are always classified because of the nature of these systems. For all we know the system can very well engage targets far beyond the range of 25kms and the radar would track even further then the declared range of 60kms.

Oh please, I am educated enough to figure out how to make diference between classified and open data. There is no need to make unnecessary story telling.