Indian Navy looking to buy Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton HALE UAV?

[500]

Which UAV is this article talking about? status?
IAI offers EADS a role in HALE UAV - 4/20/2004 - Flight Global

As link says that UAV does not exist yet, its a proposition of joint development. Should be bigger than Eitan but smaller than Triton.

Could somebody explain what the benefit is in using the P-8I (Neptune) and MQ-4C drones together? How do they complement each other? Also, can these drones be launched from any IN ship?

Poseidon is primarily anti submarine. It has a huge payload and can carry lots of sonobuoys, mines and torpedoes + anti ship missiles.

Triton has much smaller payload, but it has much longer endurance and altitude, so its primarily for detection and identification of surface vessels.

 

[sancho]

Which UAV is this article talking about? status?
IAI offers EADS a role in HALE UAV - 4/20/2004 - Flight Global

This could had been the proposed design:

It was proposed as a joint development, but EADS / Germany went for the Euro Hawk instead, which is a custom version of the Global Hawk with European systems.
As long as the US will remain with the overall control of the UAVs they export, the Triton is not a useful choice for India. More importantly, it's silly to go for it if we aim on developing the AURA UCAV, which could share many systems with a HALE drone anyway. Sadly IAI so far only offered MALE drones and joint MALE drone developments, otherwise they would had been the best choice, especially for the maritime environment. The sensor capabilities they offer in the MRMR tender belongs to the best as usual.

 

[Penguin]

Of course, a change of status has it's risks and benefits. There is an alliance forming and when that happens someone else comes up with counter strategies. But we did not make the first move - so the alliance is a reactionary step.

no, i meant depending on how the F-35 turn out, and given each country's seperate needs. if I were Oz, i
ld like somthing longer legged for example

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Could somebody explain what the benefit is in using the P-8I (Neptune) and MQ-4C drones together? How do they complement each other? Also, can these drones be launched from any IN ship?

@Capt.Popeye @Penguin @gambit

Here is the best response I can give you on the MQ-4's capabilities and networking systems:

The Navy Has The Ultimate MH370 Search Tool, It's Just Not Operational

While the world is tied up in the mystery of what happened to Malaysian Air Flight 370, testers at Edwards AFB in south central California and at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland are hard at work developing the ultimate tool for solving such a mystery, the Northrop Grumman built MQ-4C Triton.

Michael Ballaban has a great writeup describing the US Navy platforms that are currently working the MH370 search zone, they include a Destroyer and its embarked MH-60R anti-surface and submarine (ASuW/ASW) helicopters (all of which have since been pulled from the search effort), and the P-3 Orion and P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. These are all capable weapon systems, but are less than ideally suited for finding a metaphorical tiny bird floating in a massive lake. For what the US Navy deems broad area maritime surveillance (BAMS) there is no better creation ever fielded by mankind than the emerging MQ-4C Triton.

Based on an enlarged version the semi-autonomous Northrop Grumman's "Global Hawk" Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) design, this high altitude long endurance (HALE) drone has the ability to fly for well over 24 hours at speeds up to 330kts, and while doing so it can survey a whopping 2,700,000 square miles of sea or coastline in a single sortie. In fact, it can scan 2,000 square miles in a single sweep of its radar and it can do that in virtually any direction on a 2 dimensional plane. The aircraft's ability to survey such high volumes of the planet's surface at one time is a product of its operating altitude, close to 55,000ft, and its incredibly powerful and versatile rotating radar array.

The Triton's AN/ZPY-3 MFAS radar is a 360-degree field-of-regard active electronically scanned array radar that operates in the X-band. It was purpose built for maritime surveillance, but it is also capable of shoreline and overland snooping. This radar's unique ability to see in every direction around the aircraft, at great lengths, while simultaneously being able to accurately focus on a single spot of sea or coastline gives the MQ-4C the capability to not only detect surface targets at massive ranges but to investigate them further as well.

Utilizing the MFAS radar in inverse synthetic aperture mode (where the radar takes a map like picture), the Triton can shoot a very high-power and focused beam of radar energy at a small target hundreds of miles away, and actually "see" what that target is. The system can also quickly scan large areas of the sea and instantly take high definition radar pictures only of the contacts (ships) it picks up during such a scan. Triton can then efficiently classify and/or identify these targets using advanced image and radar return recognition software and by reading the ships' transponders using its onboard automatic identification system (AIS). This way the information that an analyst back at the Triton's ground control station, which can be all the way around the world, can instantly see not just the location of all the targets that Triton detected, but also synthetic aperture radar pictures of those targets. Even better, because Triton can classify the targets it detects autonomously, an operator can select filters so that Triton only transmits the target images that the operator instructs the system to send, thus saving bandwidth, time and manpower.

Triton's ability to "distill" much of the data it receives, leaving operators to look at only the most relevant information it collects, fits well into the Global Hawk's "semi-autonomous" command and control concept. This concept is one where "flying" the drone is done by pointing and clicking locations on a map and setting the aircraft speed, altitude and objective via a desktop-like interface. The whole idea is to automate as many functions as possible, thus allowing for better efficiencies in manpower while also shrinking the time it takes to leverage meaningful intelligence.

When a synthetic aperture radar picture, which is impervious to weather conditions, is simply not enough information, the massive Triton, that packs a wingspan the size of a Boeing 757, can do what its Global Hawk cousins cannot, descend down to low level to investigate a target up close and personal.

The Triton was designed with a much more robust lower fuselage that is better able to withstand hail, bird and lightning strikes when compared to the Air Force's RQ-4B, and it also includes anti-icing systems on its wings. These features allow it to drop down to lower altitudes, under inclement weather, to get an closer look a target with its Raytheon built MTS-B multi-spectral electro optical/infrared sensor. This highly capable senor ball has been used on the MQ-9 Reaper Unmanned aircraft for some time, and in its latest form it offers a wide range of infrared sensitivity as well as standard electro-optical visuals. Additionally, the MTS-B can be equipped to provide laser designation, pointer, and range finding abilities. Tied to the Triton's powerful mission computers, this sensor is also capable of automatic tracking and can be slaved to search autonomously for a contact detected by the Triton's powerful MFAS radar.

The Triton's advanced optical suite will allow it to not only transmit pictures of a target in question at standoff and close ranges, but it will also be able to designate targets and provide live streaming overwatch for special operations missions. This ability to investigate a target down to the last mile, literally from detecting a suspicious radar track from hundreds of miles away to reading the name painted on the fantail of a ship, is truly stunning and bridges the conceptual "tactical" gap that has traditionally existed with such high-flying, wide-scanning, strategic surveillance assets.

The Triton is also one hell of a passive listener. The aircraft will be equipped with a modular electronic service measures (ESM) suite that was borrowed from the EP-3 Aeries spy plane. This system can "sniff out" radar signals, even faint ones, and classify them. Additionally, such a system should also be capable of triangulating and geo-locating these signals. This data can be used for strategic purposes by planners who are building an "electronic order of battle" profile of an enemy, or it can be used to keep the Triton, and even other aircraft it broadcasts too (more on that in a moment), outside the range of enemy radars and surface to air missile capabilities. This system can also be used to locate ships at sea, as most of them use at least one type of radar to navigate, whereas larger military vessels usually have many types of powerful radar systems that are easily detectible at great ranges. In this sense, Triton's ESM suit may be just as useful as detecting surface vessels as its advanced radar set.

Although such a system is focused on detecting radar emissions, as the Triton matures it should be able to monitor for other signals, and eventually it will also provide communications surveillance and be able to listen in on telecommunications of various types. What this all means is that the Triton will be as good of a passive detection platform as she is an active one, and should be able to hunt down certain radar or communications emissions emanating from an electromagnetically quiet ocean with fantastic accuracy.

Finally, the MQ-4C possesses the ability to act as a network relay and data fusion center. In other words, it can work as a high-flying mainframe computer server and antenna farm, transmitting and receiving messages from around the theater between weapon systems and/or commanders that are not within line of sight of one another. The MQ-4C can also take what ships, planes, and land based sensors are seeing and broadcasting via various data link systems deployed around the battle-space and fuse that information together into a common "picture." It can then rebroadcast that enhanced picture back to those very same platforms, and/or to commanders around the globe. This capability provides a massively enhanced "active net" over the maritime battlefield and drastically increases interoperability, situational awareness, targeting efficiency and sensor picture clarity of the total force while also providing a resilient alternative to vulnerable satellite communications systems.

So when you need to search for something in the water but have next to no idea where in the better half of a hemisphere it is, your best shot of finding it will be to unleash the Tritons. They can scan more surface area in one sortie than any other platform in the world, while also being able to autonomously investigate any contact of interest using radar, optical, infrared and its advanced signals intelligence listening capability, and if need be it can drop down low and stream live video back to its command and control module. Additionally, the Triton can help coordinate a search with other platforms, sharing target data and relaying messages far over the horizon. Interoperability with the newP-8 Poseidon, which is making its high-profile international debut with the search for MH370, was part of the Triton's original mission goals, and together they are one surface and sub-surface surveying dream-team.

Once the MQ-4C is operational, which should be within a few years, we will look back on the archaic search for MH370 as the last "soda straw," manpower intensive, international scouring of the seas of its kind. In the future, when such a sad occurrence comes to pass, and the orders are given to the US Navy to search for the proverbial needle in a haystack, albeit a watery one, the question will be "where are the Tritons?"

*Also, as far as the MQ-4c being able to be launched from an IN ship... forget about it. This air-frame is massive.

For the MQ-4c

General characteristics

• Crew: Aircraft is unmanned; 4 personnel required per ground station
• Length: 47.6 ft in (14.5 m)
• Wingspan: 130.9 ft in (39.9 m)
• Height: 15.3 ft in (4.6 m)
• Gross weight: 32,250 lb (14,630 kg)
• Powerplant: 1 × Rolls-Royce AE 3007 turbofan, 6,495-8,917 lbf (28.9-39.7 kN)

Performance

• Maximum speed: 357 mph (575 km/h)
• Endurance: 24 hours
• Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,288 m)

That wingspan of 131 feet makes the MQ-4 unable to be launched from a ship. For a comparison, here's the wingspan and several other metrics for the F-14... which itself was huge!

For the F-14

General characteristics

• Crew: 2 (Pilot and Radar Intercept Officer)
• Length: 62 ft 9 in (19.1 m)
• Wingspan:
  • Spread: 64 ft (19.55 m)
  • Swept: 38 ft (11.58 m)
• Height: 16 ft (4.88 m)
• Wing area: 565 ft² (54.5 m²)
• Airfoil: NACA 64A209.65 mod root, 64A208.91 mod tip
• Empty weight: 43,735 lb (19,838 kg)
• Loaded weight: 61,000 lb (27,700 kg)
• Max. takeoff weight: 74,350 lb (33,720 kg)
• Powerplant: 2 × General Electric F110-GE-400 afterburning turbofans
  • Dry thrust: 13,810 lbf (61.4 kN) each
  • Thrust with afterburner: 27,800 lbf (123.7 kN) each
• Maximum fuel capacity: 16,200 lb internal; 20,000 lb with 2x 267 gallon external tanks

 

[illusion8]

no, i meant depending on how the F-35 turn out, and given each country's seperate needs. if I were Oz, i
ld like somthing longer legged for example

Indeed, I think IN would be interested in the naval F35 for its future carriers.

 

[Penguin]

*Also, as far as the MQ-4c being able to be launched from an IN ship... forget about it. This air-frame is massive.

For the MQ-4c

General characteristics

• 
  
  
  • Crew: Aircraft is unmanned; 4 personnel required per ground station
  • Length: 47.6 ft in (14.5 m)
  • Wingspan: 130.9 ft in (39.9 m)
  • Height: 15.3 ft in (4.6 m)
  • Gross weight: 32,250 lb (14,630 kg)
  • Powerplant: 1 × Rolls-Royce AE 3007 turbofan, 6,495-8,917 lbf (28.9-39.7 kN)

Performance

• 
  
  
  • Maximum speed: 357 mph (575 km/h)
  • Endurance: 24 hours
  • Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,288 m)

That wingspan of 131 feet makes the MQ-4 unable to be launched from a ship. For a comparison, here's the wingspan and several other metrics for the F-14... which itself was huge!

By comparison: Lockheed U-2S

General characteristics

• Crew: One
• Length: 63 ft (19.2 m)
• Wingspan: 103 ft (31.4 m)
• Height: 16 ft (4.88 m)
• Max. takeoff weight: 40,000 lb (18,100 kg)
• Powerplant: 1 × General Electric F118-101 turbofan, 19,000 lbf (85 kN)

Performance

• Maximum speed: 434 knots (Mach 0.67, 500 mph, 805 km/h)
• Service ceiling: 70,000+ ft (21,300+ m)
• Flight endurance: 12 hours

and the C-130H
General characteristics

• Crew: five (two pilots, navigator, flight engineer and loadmaster)
• Length: 97 ft 9 in (29.8 m)
• Wingspan: 132 ft 7 in (40.4 m)
• Height: 38 ft 3 in (11.6 m)
• Max. takeoff weight: 155,000 lb (70,300 kg)
• Powerplant: 4 × Allison T56-A-15 turboprops, 4,590 shp (3,430 kW) each)

Performance

• Maximum speed: 320 knots (366 mph, 592 km/h) at 20,000 ft (6,060 m)
• Service ceiling: 33,000 ft (10,060 m) empty;[69] 23,000 ft (7,077 m) with 42,000 pounds (19,090 kilograms)

A Hercy-bird did land and take off from USS Forrestal in October 1963. In so doing, the airplane became the largest and heaviest aircraft to ever land on an aircraft carrier, a record that stands to this day.....From the accumulated test data, the Navy concluded that with the C-130 Hercules, it would be possible to lift 25,000 pounds of cargo 2,500 miles and land it on a carrier. Even so, the idea was considered a bit too risky for the C-130 and the Navy elected to use a smaller COD aircraft.
C-130 Hercules Lands on U.S.S. Forrestal
C-130 Carrier Landing Trials | Code One Magazine

This should give an idea, considering the wingspan of 132 ft of the Herc.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

By comparison: Lockheed U-2S

General characteristics

• Crew: One
• Length: 63 ft (19.2 m)
• Wingspan: 103 ft (31.4 m)
• Height: 16 ft (4.88 m)
• Max. takeoff weight: 40,000 lb (18,100 kg)
• Powerplant: 1 × General Electric F118-101 turbofan, 19,000 lbf (85 kN)

Performance

• Maximum speed: 434 knots (Mach 0.67, 500 mph, 805 km/h)
• Service ceiling: 70,000+ ft (21,300+ m)
• Flight endurance: 12 hours

and the C-130H
General characteristics

• Crew: five (two pilots, navigator, flight engineer and loadmaster)
• Length: 97 ft 9 in (29.8 m)
• Wingspan: 132 ft 7 in (40.4 m)
• Height: 38 ft 3 in (11.6 m)
• Max. takeoff weight: 155,000 lb (70,300 kg)
• Powerplant: 4 × Allison T56-A-15 turboprops, 4,590 shp (3,430 kW) each)

Performance

• Maximum speed: 320 knots (366 mph, 592 km/h) at 20,000 ft (6,060 m)
• Service ceiling: 33,000 ft (10,060 m) empty;[69] 23,000 ft (7,077 m) with 42,000 pounds (19,090 kilograms)

A Hercy-bird did land and take off from USS Forrestal in October 1963. In so doing, the airplane became the largest and heaviest aircraft to ever land on an aircraft carrier, a record that stands to this day.....From the accumulated test data, the Navy concluded that with the C-130 Hercules, it would be possible to lift 25,000 pounds of cargo 2,500 miles and land it on a carrier. Even so, the idea was considered a bit too risky for the C-130 and the Navy elected to use a smaller COD aircraft.
C-130 Hercules Lands on U.S.S. Forrestal

This should give an idea, considering the wingspan of 132 ft of the Herc.

Sure, the concept of using large aircraft has been done before, even as far back as WWII with the B-25, but it will not be used today. Those large aircraft are useless on anything currently in the inventory of the IN, and anything they will have will be so limited by hosting such an aircraft they are better off not putting an air-frame of such size on the carrier in the first place.

The P-2 Neptune was a successful carrier based aircraft at one point too, but it was designed (partially) to be based on carriers while the MQ-4c isn't and thus would need expensive modification to make it fit. It will fit on the deck, but that exposes it to the elements which is bad, forget folding up the wings and putting it below-deck, it's still too big.

The concept of putting a large winged air-frame on a carrier has had its president set, it's just stupid and lessens the capabilities of the aircraft carrier... that and landing such a system is very, very dangerous. At this point, with carriers the size they are, basing an MQ-4c or similarly sized air-frame on a carrier is too risky.

P-2 Neptune

General characteristics

• Crew: 7–9
• Length: 91 ft 8 in (27.94 m)
• Wingspan: 103 ft 10 in (31.65 m)
• Height: 29 ft 4 in (8.94 m)
• Wing area: 1,000 ft² (92.9 m²)
• Empty weight: 49,935 lb (22,650 kg)
• Max. takeoff weight: 79,895 lb (35,240 kg)
• Powerplant:
  • 2 × Westinghouse J34-WE-34 turbojet, 3,400 lbf (15.1 kN) each
  • 2 × Wright R-3350-32W Cyclone Turbo-compound radial engine, 3,700 hp (2,759 kW) wet each
    • Propellers: 4 bladed propeller, 1 per engine

Oh, and since you mentioned the U-2, here's a photo of one on the USS America in 1969

And one landing on USS Ranger

Also on USS America

I'll let the caption in the top left explain this one for me

@Penguin - it's not as if the precedent is unheard of, it's just not the best idea or use of a system like the MQ-4C... I think we can both agree on that.

 

[Penguin]

USS Independence; USS Kitty Hawk; USS Constellation; USS Ranger in mothballs at Bremerton with USS Nimitz
on the right

Even fully loaded, the U-2 managed to takeoff in only 321 ft (98 m) without use of the ship's catapults. The U-2's slow approach speed and high excess power provided plenty of margin for error. Unfortunately, actually landing proved more difficult. Lockheed and the Navy modified three U-2A airframes with stronger landing gear, an arresting hook, and wing spoilers to decrease the lift during landing. These new aircraft became known as the U-2G.


Problem with these large span airframes is that you can't store them, and they take up your deck. But.... I could see a mid-ocean carrier landing, in order to take on fuel for another 24 hours....good way to take care of any global coverage gaps.

 

[Chanakya's_Chant]

Its official! Indian Navy is looking for some six to eight Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton - An agreement or announcement to this effect is likely when U.S. President Barack Obama visits India as the chief guest for the Republic Day ceremony in January.
​

Deal for high altitude UAVs likely

The file photo shows a RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle. File photo: Reuters

An agreement or announcement to this effect is likely when U.S. President Barack Obama visits India as the chief guest for the Republic Day ceremony next month, sources informed The Hindu.​

India and the U.S. are negotiating a deal for the purchase of high altitude, long endurance (HALE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV).​

An agreement or announcement to this effect is likely when U.S. President Barack Obama visits India as the chief guest for the Republic Day ceremony next month, sources informed The Hindu.

Though the variant and the numbers are not known, it has been learnt that the UAV in question is most likely the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk, a non-combat drone and the largest unmanned aircraft system built by the U.S.

Global Hawk is a HALE Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) with extraordinary intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, providing near-real time, high resolution imagery of large geographical areas both during the day and night, in all types of weather.

The Global Hawk has an endurance of over 24 hours and can operate at an altitude of 60,000 feet. The U.S. has extensively deployed it in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It has further been upgraded as the MQ-4C Triton maritime surveillance platform for the U.S. Navy.

Deal for high altitude UAVs likely - The Hindu

Navy seeks US UAVs for ocean surveillance​

The Indian Navy has earlier shown interest in acquiring six to eight of the maritime variants of the US high altitude, long endurance (HALE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) for extended ocean surveillance. The drones have been upgraded as the MQ-4C Triton maritime surveillance platform for the U.S. Navy, providing real-time intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance over vast ocean and coastal regions.

The Global Hawk has been deployed by the U.S. in Japan, and the U.S. this week approved the sale of four Global Hawks to South Korea. Australia and Japan too have expressed interest in these drones, though Australia later backed out because of the high price.

If the deal goes through, it will be a huge force multiplier for the Indian military in carrying out round-the-clock surveillance of terrorist movements across the border or tracking suspicious vessels in the open seas. Apart from the UAVs, both sides are also working to conclude final negotiations of the $2.5 billion helicopter deal for 22 Apache attack helicopters and 15 Chinook heavy lift helicopters, sources said.

Navy seeks US UAVs for ocean surveillance - The Hindu

 

[holysaturn]

IN should wait before going forward with such "concurrent engineering" big ticket purchases when the tests are yet to be completed and operational readiness declared, I am afraid it might go the F-35 way. The development cycle of this platform has been problematic with a number of performance shortfalls and operating costs are way more than manned aircraft.A larger manned platform with similar sensors will cost less and will be more capable. A falcon or gulfstream ISR platform would be affordable.