Indian AWACS Reloaded: Competition For 6 Aircraft Announced

[sancho]

The reason the IAF have likely pursued additional PHALCONs is that this is a much quicker solution (2-3 years from signing ) to be delivered than the AWACS (India) project which is at least 6-7 years away.

That and because of the EMB DRDO AWACS! They get a perfect hi lo mix, they only need the required number of aircrafts nothing else.

The A-50 is the only example of a cargo a/c being converted into a AWACS

That's not correct mate, nearly all Chinese AWACS are based on transport aircrafts and the new Airbus Phalcon AWACS is based on the C295 too.

The MTA, if it is even big enough and capable of fitting the DRDOs radome, is still a long way away from its first flight and it would make sense to go for an established and proven a/c rather than an unproven and new a/c like the MTA- sounds like a recipe for disaster, one project holding up another and so on and so forth.

MTA is in the size of the ZDK, or the C130 and they all had AWACS versions with rotodome. The C295 Phalcon and E-2s are even smaller and have a rotodome, let alone the fact that the Arivat project was based on a smaller Avro with rotodome, so the size of MTA is not a problem at all. In fact it offers the perfect mix of internal space and flight performance, with the capability to fit a rototdome, which you can see if you compare the specs:

(A50 and MTA range at max payload)

It offers the same cabin size of the A50, just in a shorter version. Has comparable speed and ceilling as most of the possible jet engined platforms, but needs only half the take off distance of commercial airliners, which gives IAF far more airbases as options to operate it (crucial in war times, when air bases gets destroyed!). It also uses only 2 engines compared to the 4 in the A50, which reduces the operational costs as well.

Development of the aircraft is likely to be finished far earlier before DRDO will field the new radar. The First flight is still expected around 2016 and fitting the radome to it isn't a big deal with Russian assistance, unlike with partners that don't have experience wit it. Don't forget that much of it is based on the IL76, or diverted from the IL 476 upgrade, which should make the development far easier.

The main advantage of the MTA will be the freedom India will have, be it to modifications of the aircrafts, or even such a simple thing like ordering additional once at reasonable costs. We have seen how costs of the A50 as well as the Phalcon systems jumped for the follow 2 orders. So when the DRDO system is meant to make us more independent from foreign manufacturers, the platform should be independent too and MTA!

As for commonality the A330 will be a good option considering the IAF will be getting A330 MRTTs and their is a huge Airbus presence in the Indian civil aviation market with India being a MRO base for Airbus in the region as is.

Which needs to be seen, because it's a very large option (around 10m longer, and wider than a A50, it requires longer take off and landing strips and is IFR available?) and very costly per unit either.
Most Germans I talked to, would suggest the A320 as a platform instead, comparable ot the Boeing 737 AWACS. But then again, the MTA is roughly the same size, which would speak for the indigenous choice!
Also keep in mind that by the time DRDO will develop the new radar system, the A350 will be in full production too. It has performance advantages and should be more cost-effective to operate than the A330. All this shows that using A330s as AWACS platforms „only“ because IAF ordered the A330 MRTTs isn't the right way to evaluate the options.

 

[Omega007]

A stupid fellow with low iq and no knowledge of enemy.

Not fit to be on this thread.

U are same as a pakistani who says they can defeat india.

Similarity-stupidity

Like I said,you are not fit for a debate fake heman.You can not even understand simple english,and you jumped to reply here.
Oh and by the way,I know about the disposition of present strengths on both side of the LAC much better than you.And low iq......you gotta be kidding me man!!Everyone here knows about your mental ability,so don't embarrass yourself kido.

Your assessment on the matter though was as inane as his albeit sans jingoism.

My assessment was not insane even a bit.You are certainly welcome to prove me otherwise instead of posting one-liners.At least that much is expected from a "THINK TANK ANALYST"!!

 

[sancho]

G-550 Phalcon is good solution. Its about 4 times cheaper to operate than Il-76, it has higher ceiling and endurance. It also has 360 coverage, the only downside is that front and rear range is lower than side.

The downsides are it's far lower internal capacity, which not only allows less operators, less additional crews to extend operations, less space for techs and systems. The bigger platform allows also a more powerful radar, with longer detection range, which should provide the A50 Phalcon clear advantages over the G550 Phalcon.

 

[Dillinger]

Like I said,you are not fit for a debate fake heman.You can not even understand simple english,and you jumped to reply here.
Oh and by the way,I know about the disposition of present strengths on both side of the LAC much better than you.And low iq......you gotta be kidding me man!!Everyone here knows about your mental ability,so don't embarrass yourself kido.



My assessment was not insane even a bit.You are certainly welcome to prove me otherwise instead of posting one-liners.At least that much is expected from a "THINK TANK ANALYST"!!

Already did, but I will have to request @Oscar to bring it up since he bookmarked it I believe.

 

[Omega007]

Already did, but I will have to request @Oscar to bring it up since he bookmarked it I believe.

Then do that.Which thread by the way if you remember??Because unless I see your pov,I can't give my reasoning.
By the way,most IA officers I talked to were generally in agreement of my view point on this matter that we can not defeat them but they cam be definitely held up if timely and adequate intelligence is provided,which looking at the terrain of TAR doesn't seem quite difficult.

 

[sancho]

You may disagree all you want mate,the reality is you have never been to NE in your entire life.

No I haven't, but that doesn't change the facts of modernisations of techs, weapons, infrastructure and mobility! IA might have been improving their sides since 62, but the Chinese wasn't sleeping either! They did not only showed a higher pace of production of weapons and techs, but also have an edge in quality too. Be it armoured vehicles, light tanks, tank destroyers, artillery, combat helicopters, up to small arms..., they surpass IA in every field and that's what's the main difference! IAF for example still enjoys a technical advantage over PLAAF and can probably field a similar ammount of aircrafts to the airbases in the area. IN even benefits a lot of the geographical advantage, to tackle any PLAN "surface" fleet attack, by numbers and quality. So while IAF and IN can hold their own against the Chinese counterparts, IA is clearly in disadvantage and will be mainly dependent on IAF air support to keep PLA in check.
Btw, I was never in China, but I do keep myself updated about their forces as well, so I guess I am doing my homework.

 

[500]

The downsides are it's far lower internal capacity, which not only allows less operators, less additional crews to extend operations, less space for techs and systems. The bigger platform allows also a more powerful radar, with longer detection range, which should provide the A50 Phalcon clear advantages over the G550 Phalcon.

A-50 has 3 large panels which give 360 grad and G-550 two large panels + 2 small for nose and rear. as i showed on pic it reduces nose and rear detection, but thats about it.

 

[Omega007]

No I haven't, but that doesn't change the facts of modernisations of techs, weapons, infrastructure and mobility! IA might have been improving their sides since 62, but the Chinese wasn't sleeping either! They did not only showed a higher pace of production of weapons and techs, but also have an edge in quality too. Be it armoured vehicles, light tanks, tank destroyers, artillery, combat helicopters, up to small arms..., they surpass IA in every field and that's what's the main difference! IAF for example still enjoys a technical advantage over PLAAF and can probably field a similar ammount of aircrafts to the airbases in the area. IN even benefits a lot of the geographical advantage, to tackle any PLAN "surface" fleet attack, by numbers and quality. So while IAF and IN can hold their own against the Chinese counterparts, IA is clearly in disadvantage and will be mainly dependent on IAF air support to keep PLA in check.
Btw, I was never in China, but I do keep myself updated about their forces as well, so I guess I am doing my homework.

See,I told you that you have no idea of that terrain.I do not meant to disrespect you....you are the last person here in PDF I would do that with!!Bit lets talk about the points you raised.

Yes,they have got better light tanks and APCs.But where are they gonna use them other than a few places in Ladakh sector.It's not what you have but what you can bring to the frontline that's important. I'm telling you,I've been to the NE frontiers and there are few mountain passes that can support the light tanks.
And suppose they bring their light tanks....then what??They will be sitting ducks against ATGM groups stationed on the hill tops.Heck those light tanks' armor can not even give protection against 40mm FSAPDS rounds fired from L 70s!!
And even if they somehow miraculously get through the forward defences,then they would face IA MBTs like T 72M1s and T 90S.Now I don't need to say what would be the outcome.Intact tanks are not at all suitable for mountain warfare.Any future conflict between IA and PLA would be predominantly fought by infantry and it will be bloody and nasty.
Now coming to infantry weapons,PLAGF do not surpass the IA.Both sides are pretty much evenly matched.When I went to the border areas,I saw majority of the IA soldiers were wearing body armors - now while they were not very modern but they do help none the less.Same is not true for the Chinese soldiers.So how can you say that they are better armed.

Besides,contrary to popular belief,IA heavily outnumbers their PLAGF counterparts in NE and in high altitude mountain warfare,it's still all about numbers will continue to remain as such.

Believe it or not,the biggest threat actually comes from vastly superior PLAGF rocket artillery and not the other thingies....atleast that's what I have been told.

 

[sancho]

A-50 has 3 large panels which give 360 grad and G-550 two large panels + 2 small for nose and rear. as i showed on pic it reduces nose and rear detection, but thats about it.

You only showed that the G550 has 360° coverage and that the side arrays offer longer range because they are bigger than the aft and front arrays. That however means nothing wrt to the detection range compared to the A50 arrays, since they latter benefit with far more available power than what the G550 can offer, which translates into longer detection range even to the sides.

 

[sancho]

.It's not what you have but what you can bring to the frontline that's important. I'm telling you,I've been to the NE frontiers and there are few mountain passes that can support the light tanks.

And that's the point! They simply can bring far suitable arms to the frontlines and even beyond, because they have light tanks and tank destroyers that can be used in that area, unlike our heavy MBTs. That's why even IA has stated a requirement of several hundreds light tanks and tank destroyers, but nothing happend since everybody is hoping for FICV and FMBT somewhere in future. They also have superior mobile artillery support, exactly those light or self propelled howitzers that IA is evaluating since decades, but that they don't get because one bribery scam after the other. And what you completely missed, they already training and maturing their capabilities to move troops fast by air dropping light tanks and armored vehicles, which will be even further improved when the Y20 transport aircraft will be available. A capability that IA and IAF lacks completely, since neither do we have propper light tanks, nor a useful number of aircrafts that can transport vehicles.
As I said, they are superior to IA in quality and number of arms and techs + in the capability to transport them and that's what's gives them the edge, while they haven't the same compared to IAF or IN.

 

[Gessler]

A-50 has 3 large panels which give 360 grad and G-550 two large panels + 2 small for nose and rear. as i showed on pic it reduces nose and rear detection, but thats about it.

Is it possible to mount a nose array on the EMB-145I ? Or will the different placement of the main arrays
pose an error problem?

 

[he-man]

Like I said,you are not fit for a debate fake heman.You can not even understand simple english,and you jumped to reply here.
Oh and by the way,I know about the disposition of present strengths on both side of the LAC much better than you.And low iq......you gotta be kidding me man!!Everyone here knows about your mental ability,so don't embarrass yourself kido.



My assessment was not insane even a bit.You are certainly welcome to prove me otherwise instead of posting one-liners.At least that much is expected from a "THINK TANK ANALYST"!!

I don't need to listen to jingoistic,foolish posters like u.

fact of the matter is chinese have an economy thats 4 times us,they are still growing at over 7 pc as against our 4.5 pc.
they manufacture everything related to defence except engines.

so how the hell are u gonna defeat them in a war?convemtional or otherwise,it cannot be done.

the only option we have is to increase capability to such a level that chinese don't dare attack for the fear of collateral damage,and that my friend we have already achieved,for now

just like pakistan cannot compete with china in arms race,same goes for india-china.

and what I talked was an alliance with china after setting of joint brics bank to counter world bank.thats gonna happen whether u believe or not.

indian navy can compete with chinese as of now but what about 10 years from now?

the speed of plan expansion is at least 2 times ours,they have a budget about 4 times ours(at least).

at the best we can hold them in the himalayas due to the advantage we have.
as far as navy and air force goes we cannot.

things may change in future but that would be the scenario around 2020.

they are preparing for a possible bust up with japan and pacific fleet of usa.thats why chinese are churning out one destroyer after another.look at our speed!

indian navy can compete with chinese as of now but what about 10 years from now?

the speed of plan expansion is at least 2 times ours,they have a budget about 4 times ours(at least).

at the best we can hold them in the himalayas due to the advantage we have.
as far as navy and air force goes we cannot.

things may change in future but that would be the scenario around 2020.

they are preparing for a possible bust up with japan and pacific fleet of usa.thats why chinese are churning out one destroyer after another.look at our speed!

 

[he-man]

And that's the point! They simply can bring far suitable arms to the frontlines and even beyond, because they have light tanks and tank destroyers that can be used in that area, unlike our heavy MBTs. That's why even IA has stated a requirement of several hundreds light tanks and tank destroyers, but nothing happend since everybody is hoping for FICV and FMBT somewhere in future. They also have superior mobile artillery support, exactly those light or self propelled howitzers that IA is evaluating since decades, but that they don't get because one bribery scam after the other. And what you completely missed, they already training and maturing their capabilities to move troops fast by air dropping light tanks and armored vehicles, which will be even further improved when the Y20 transport aircraft will be available. A capability that IA and IAF lacks completely, since neither do we have propper light tanks, nor a useful number of aircrafts that can transport vehicles.
As I said, they are superior to IA in quality and number of arms and techs + in the capability to transport them and that's what's gives them the edge, while they haven't the same compared to IAF or IN.

And that's the point! They simply can bring far suitable arms to the frontlines and even beyond, because they have light tanks and tank destroyers that can be used in that area, unlike our heavy MBTs. That's why even IA has stated a requirement of several hundreds light tanks and tank destroyers, but nothing happend since everybody is hoping for FICV and FMBT somewhere in future. They also have superior mobile artillery support, exactly those light or self propelled howitzers that IA is evaluating since decades, but that they don't get because one bribery scam after the other. And what you completely missed, they already training and maturing their capabilities to move troops fast by air dropping light tanks and armored vehicles, which will be even further improved when the Y20 transport aircraft will be available. A capability that IA and IAF lacks completely, since neither do we have propper light tanks, nor a useful number of aircrafts that can transport vehicles.
As I said, they are superior to IA in quality and number of arms and techs + in the capability to transport them and that's what's gives them the edge, while they haven't the same compared to IAF or IN.

as of now chinese navy>indian navy

we have the sole advantage of vikramaditya,thats it.

for air force they have quantity,we have quality which has starting changing too

 

[SQ8]

Already did, but I will have to request @Oscar to bring it up since he bookmarked it I believe.

Suddenly Ive lost all my bookmarks.. what was this one about?

 

[Omega007]

And that's the point! They simply can bring far suitable arms to the frontlines and even beyond, because they have light tanks and tank destroyers that can be used in that area, unlike our heavy MBTs. That's why even IA has stated a requirement of several hundreds light tanks and tank destroyers, but nothing happend since everybody is hoping for FICV and FMBT somewhere in future. They also have superior mobile artillery support, exactly those light or self propelled howitzers that IA is evaluating since decades, but that they don't get because one bribery scam after the other. And what you completely missed, they already training and maturing their capabilities to move troops fast by air dropping light tanks and armored vehicles, which will be even further improved when the Y20 transport aircraft will be available. A capability that IA and IAF lacks completely, since neither do we have propper light tanks, nor a useful number of aircrafts that can transport vehicles.
As I said, they are superior to IA in quality and number of arms and techs + in the capability to transport them and that's what's gives them the edge, while they haven't the same compared to IAF or IN.

Do you have a comprehension problem boss??Air dropping light tanks where....where exactly they are gonna drop them??Above the hill tops??Or the valleys??You think those light tanks could possibly face and emerge victorious against MBTs??And what tank destroyers??Tank destroyers are things of past.If they do bring those heavy vehicles over the narrow mountain passes,then god help them (if there is one really).

What far suitable armaments - be more specific and name them.

And who says there is no MBTs in those regions??I have seen T 72CIAs and BMP 2s deployed there in quite large numbers,mostly for fighting local battles and not to mount an offensive.

Besides,what's a heavy MBT??Where did you pull that out from boss??

As far as artillery goes,I'm sorry to say you are again wrong.IA is looking for only towed howitzers for mountain areas,no self propelled or mounted guns.Yes,PLA can bring their SP Arty forward to a certain point,but LAC and TAR are not the same thing - the TAR is a pleatu and can support heavy SF guns but not the LAC.And for arty support in LAC,PLA still relies predominantly on their license manufactured D 30 122mm towed howitzers which are already outranged by our 105mm LFGs.
Besides,our gun positions are situated in reverse slopes where as they are on the open and featureless Tibetan pleatu....now go figure out whose gonna get the tactical advantage in that situation.

Besides,most important fact is IA Eastern Command outnumbers them very heavily in the NE.The 1962 era stone-mud sanghars have been replaced with concrete and corrugated steel structures,inter-connected by communication trenches.You think those kind of in-depth static defensive fortifications are very easy to overcome??And that too on such high altitude and treacherous terrain??Then why couldn't the IA manage to breach the Ichogil canals and Pakistanis the DCBs in 1971 even with all their tank supports??

I don't need to listen to jingoistic,foolish posters like u.

fact of the matter is chinese have an economy thats 4 times us,they are still growing at over 7 pc as against our 4.5 pc.
they manufacture everything related to defence except engines.

so how the hell are u gonna defeat them in a war?convemtional or otherwise,it cannot be done.

the only option we have is to increase capability to such a level that chinese don't dare attack for the fear of collateral damage,and that my friend we have already achieved,for now

just like pakistan cannot compete with china in arms race,same goes for india-china.

and what I talked was an alliance with china after setting of joint brics bank to counter world bank.thats gonna happen whether u believe or not.

indian navy can compete with chinese as of now but what about 10 years from now?

the speed of plan expansion is at least 2 times ours,they have a budget about 4 times ours(at least).

at the best we can hold them in the himalayas due to the advantage we have.
as far as navy and air force goes we cannot.

things may change in future but that would be the scenario around 2020.

they are preparing for a possible bust up with japan and pacific fleet of usa.thats why chinese are churning out one destroyer after another.look at our speed!

indian navy can compete with chinese as of now but what about 10 years from now?

the speed of plan expansion is at least 2 times ours,they have a budget about 4 times ours(at least).

at the best we can hold them in the himalayas due to the advantage we have.
as far as navy and air force goes we cannot.

things may change in future but that would be the scenario around 2020.

they are preparing for a possible bust up with japan and pacific fleet of usa.thats why chinese are churning out one destroyer after another.look at our speed!

Utter as much as your heart pleases.No one takes your posts seriously here....you should've figured it out by now with your supposed high iq brain.
To be honest,I've a limit to endure bs,so I'm not gonna reply to your posts.From now on,you are on my ignore list.