PAF Vs IAF Command and Control Systems

[Laughing_soldier]

Eh?! what do you mean by this? without C4I there cant be any net centric capability.

I mean C4I is there but old technology. if IAF going for net centric warfare systems C4I is past for them. it is a centralized system and is nothing compared to distributed system like net centric warfare. In C4I structure one particular command get all the information and makes decisions , in net centric warfare all the information shared by all the resources available fast and securely. Like a Kilo submarine sonar detects a ship at certain range outside it torpedo range but can cue the sonar data to any nearby friendly ship or aircraft securely which can utilize that data to engage that enemy sip. All the resources work like in a single network whether it is ship, submarine, aircraft, satellite, radar station etc.

Net centricity means co-ordination of C4I from everywhere to be integrated into one place giving a clear picture to the top heads for decision-making.

No. net centric warfare is not this. This is C4I you are talking about. NCW is not for giving clear picture to the top heads but for sharing by all.

pls read it here.

Network-centric warfare
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Network-centric warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Network-centric warfare, now commonly called network-centric operations, is a new military doctrine or theory of war pioneered by the United States Department of Defense.

It seeks to translate an information advantage, enabled in part by information technology, into a competitive advantage through the robust networking of well informed geographically dispersed forces.This networking, combined with changes in technology, organization, processes, and people - may allow new forms of organizational behavior.

Specifically, the theory contains the following four tenets in its hypotheses:

A robustly networked force improves information sharing;
Information sharing enhances the quality of information and shared situational awareness;
Shared situational awareness enables collaboration and self-synchronization, and enhances sustainability and speed of command; and
These, in turn, dramatically increase mission effectiveness.

 

[SQ8]

I mean C4I is there but old technology. if IAF going for net centric warfare systems C4I is past for them. it is a centralized system and is nothing compared to distributed system like net centric warfare. In C4I structure one particular command get all the information and makes decisions , in net centric warfare all the information shared by all the resources available fast and securely. Like a Kilo submarine sonar detects a ship at certain range outside it torpedo range but can cue the sonar data to any nearby friendly ship or aircraft securely which can utilize that data to engage that enemy sip. All the resources work like in a single network whether it is ship, submarine, aircraft, satellite, radar station etc.




No. net centric warfare is not this. This is C4I you are talking about. NCW is not for giving clear picture to the top heads but for sharing by all.

pls read it here.

Incorrect..
A C4I system is hierarchical..
A major has his own C3I structure.. as does a General..
What differed was the ability of the major to have access to all the information the General was getting.. and the General seeing all that the major sees.
Net centric warfare allows this to happen in the traditional C4I system.

I suggest you read this..

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=69FED526AF7AC0997BD4DF3A35AA1495?doi=10.1.1.4.7450&rep=rep1&type=pdf

and then post instead of bringing in wiki..

 

[Avatar]

The thread itself isn't logical. PAF and IAF cannot be compared head to head when it comes to command control systems. Pakistani airspace is much smaller than Indian airspace, and so is the disparity between the respective force's resources.

All that needs to be said is that PAF is utilizing it's resources in a more cost effective manner than IAF.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Do you know how robust Swedish Command and Control System? Its way Advance than IAF. It doesn't mean if an air space is smaller you're to integrate a like wise system.

 

[SQ8]

Do you know how robust Swedish Command and Control System? Its way Advance than IAF. It doesn't mean if an air space is smaller you're to integrate a like wise system.

The swedish system is just the groundwork.. on it sits a suite of locally designed software that is integrated with the ground terminals for the Saab, links for the ZDK.. the various SAMS and AAA sites.. datalinks from the jets go through the AEW craft.
all of this data.. is viewable in realtime at AHQ..
and sectorwise .. SOC,NOC, etc.. although they can view other sectors..

 

[SR 71 Blackbird]

Do you know how robust Swedish Command and Control System? Its way Advance than IAF. It doesn't mean if an air space is smaller you're to integrate a like wise system.

It's way behind Israeli systems being used by IAF. Sweden can't compete with Israel in radars,Command and Control Systems.

 

[F-16_Falcon]

The thread itself isn't logical. PAF and IAF cannot be compared head to head when it comes to command control systems. Pakistani airspace is much smaller than Indian airspace, and so is the disparity between the respective force's resources.

All that needs to be said is that PAF is utilizing it's resources in a more cost effective manner than IAF.

You better say we have better radars and other systems than IAF. What IAF get for 100 bucks we get it for 10 bucks.

 

[rockstarIN]

Do you know how robust Swedish Command and Control System? Its way Advance than IAF. It doesn't mean if an air space is smaller you're to integrate a like wise system.

Do you know what kind of systems being used by IAF? the kind of radar networks, data link systems, AEW craft systems?

By the way air space does matter. The less area you have, the more you can concentrate.

 

[Ammyy]

You better say we have better radars and other systems than IAF. What IAF get for 100 bucks we get it for 10 bucks.

can youplease enlighten us which radar of yours better than Indian radar which you bought in 10 bucks and we are not able to bought in 100 bucks

 

[SQ8]

It's way behind Israeli systems being used by IAF. Sweden can't compete with Israel in radars,Command and Control Systems.

Yes Im sure.. how much is Elbit paying you??

Each system in its own right is very capable..
The main radars are infact US in origin..
supplemented by swedish low level radars which have undergone an upgrade to bring them on par with the current tech.
And NO.. these systems werent cheap compared to the IAF's either.. we paid good cash for em.

For the actual airspace needed to be monitored.. the PAF's coverage is now more than adequate to handle intruders from the east.
The IAF too...has MORE than it needs now..to tackle the western border.. its another story altogether when it comes to the north and east.

 

[F-16_Falcon]

can youplease enlighten us which radar of yours better than Indian radar which you bought in 10 bucks and we are not able to bought in 100 bucks

i mean same products 10 times cheaper. we have Spada-2000 and other advanced radars from US.

 

[monitor]

i mean same products 10 times cheaper. we have Spada-2000 and other advanced radars from US.

Spada 2000 is not rader in fact medium range air defence system from italy

 

[F-16_Falcon]

Spada 2000 is not rader in fact medium range air defence system from italy

thank you for the information genius!


i know spada-2000 is a air defence system but it needs radar.

 

[rockstarIN]

i mean same products 10 times cheaper. we have Spada-2000 and other advanced radars from US.

You wont get anything 'cheaper' in this market mate. All expensive..

 

[Rafi]

Watch from 2.10 onwards you will see the operational use of Pakistan Net Centric System.

It is a fact that india has nothing like the system shown at 2.10, if you have post it.