Pak P-3 Orion vs India P-8I

[Myth_buster_1]

Comparing the old P3 with a brand new state of the art P8 is like comparing the F16 TO JSF F35..

ie the new P8 that are about to enter service are BRAND NEW state of the ART 21ST CENTURY maritime planes.

A $2 billion cost to india says it all

huh? Does P-8 has stealth? nope...
the comparison is more like P-3C update 3=F-16 block 15 MLU M3 vs P-8= FA-18 E/F...

 

[garibnawaz]

seriously you could have done a little bit more research before you could have been so confident with your statement.

I didnot made a statement. I shared the knowledge that I have. Since I was not sure I asked the fellow members to enlight me more. Thats why we come on forums to gain knowledge.

Since you have been kind enough to share that knowledge Thank You.

GB

P.S: - I can't believe I am saying Thank You to Growler.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

I didnot made a statement. I shared the knowledge that I have. Since I was not sure I asked the fellow members to enlight me more. Thats why we come on forums to gain knowledge.

Since you have been kind enough to share that knowledge Thank You.

GB

P.S: - I can't believe I am saying Thank You to Growler.

Thank you

PS: thank you


anyways..

these videos should sum up our upgraded P-3 update III and P-3AEW

wow check out the glass cockpit in the second video.

 

[gubbi]

huh? Does P-8 has stealth?

The more important question you need to ask is: can it supercruise and hover?

btw, nice info in your previous post.

 

[Gabbar]

P-8 Posiden is better than P-3. P-8 is succesor to P-3 and US is also going to replace it's 103 P-3s. India was offered P-3 as well but that offer was rejected.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

P-8 Posiden is better than P-3. P-8 is succesor to P-3 and US is also going to replace it's 103 P-3s. India was offered P-3 as well but that offer was rejected.

No.. P-3 is much better just kidding..
on a serious note. P-8 is in fact next generation MPA however P-3 has been upgraded with up to date systems... currently their are about 50 P-3C Update III which are one of the best variant of the orions.
and one should not forget that at the end of the day Pakistan has smaller coastal area then india...

 

[s90]

I was just thinking that can our ACLM Raad target a destroyer or a submarine?

 

[Patriot]

No, it does not have anti shipping seeker like our Harm and Exocet Missiles and i think we also have C-802 anti shipping cruise missiles.

 

[Arsalan]

yes and even the under development naval version will be a land atack missile,,
we are not developing anything like an AShM!

regards!

 

[Myth_buster_1]

No, it does not have anti shipping seeker like our Harm and Exocet Missiles and i think we also have C-802 anti shipping cruise missiles.

sir g one correction. the HARM you are talking about is anti-radiation AGM and does not have a anti-ship seeker. however anti-radiation AGM can home in surface vessel's radar emitting radiation..

 

[gambit]

I was just thinking that can our ACLM Raad target a destroyer or a submarine?

No, it does not have anti shipping seeker like our Harm and Exocet Missiles and i think we also have C-802 anti shipping cruise missiles.

yes and even the under development naval version will be a land atack missile,,
we are not developing anything like an AShM!

regards!

sir g one correction. the HARM you are talking about is anti-radiation AGM and does not have a anti-ship seeker. however anti-radiation AGM can home in surface vessel's radar emitting radiation..

I am going to clear up some misconceptions about anti-ship missiles.

First...Radar is line-of-sight (LoS), therefore, the higher the elevation the greater distance the view, visual or electronic.

Horizon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

# For observers on the ground with eye-level at h = 5 ft 7 in (5.583 ft), the horizon is at a distance of 2.89 miles.

# For observers standing on a hill or tower 100 ft in height, the horizon is at a distance of 12.25 miles.

Second...Breaking the horizon or horizon break, whatever the phrasing, it is meant to describe the INSTANT the sensor detect an anomaly other than the constant line of the horizon. An analogy is driving on the road looking ahead at the bland horizon line between the ground and the sky, then after one millimeter or one meter or one hundred meters or one km, the driver's eyes picked up an outline of a building. That instant is informally called 'horizon break'.

What if the driver is instructed to 'home in' on the largest object, visually speaking, he finds? That mean the moment he detect an outline of a hill, or a tree or a building (note the 'OR' operator), he will steer towards that object. What if at horizon break, he detect an outline of a hill and a building (note the 'AND' operator)? What are his instructions? None? Then he will continue on a 'null' course, meaning he will steer towards neither as both objects effectively cancelled each other out.

Remember that radar is line-of-sight. The higher the elevation, the more likely that the missile will see multiple targets, if there are within its field-of-view (FoV). But the missile is traveling at several hundreds km/h, perhaps even supersonic, and that leave the missile's target processor extremely little time, as in seconds, to make any decision upon multiple targets detection. The lower the elevation, the more likely the missile can see only one target at horizon break, making the decision process easier. The higher the elevation, the odds increases that the missile can be detected by the ship's radar, alerting the defenders to take defensive measures, whatever those might be. The lower the elevation, the odds decreases that the missile can be detected by the ship, but then the missile faced with the original problem of much shorter response time upon detection of an anomaly which is 'ship'.

Radar RCS is highly influenced by target aspect angle to the radar, meaning that to a radar, broadside is much larger than head-on. Ship, car, aircraft or a ***, all objects will have different RCS depending how each is presented (aspect angle) to the radar. So if an anti-ship missile at 10 meters elevation suddenly on horizon break detect two targets, one that is several decibels smaller than the other, how does it know which is a capital ship like an aircraft carrier and one is a supply ship? What if the smaller target is the aicraft carrier in a head-on aspect angle to the missile's radar? What if the larger RCS is a chaff bloom? Fuel is finite so programmed maneuvers reduces launch distance and the ability of a missile to ATTEMPT to reacquire a target in the event of a miss, so how much maneuvers should there be? One meter off by any defensive method and the victory belongs to the ship.

There is a problem unique to water regarding radar. Multipaths propagation exists when the radar transmission is largely horizontal to a surface, earth or water. Basically, the radar wave signal deflects off the surface...

Multipath propagation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In radar processing, multipath causes ghost targets to appear, deceiving the radar receiver. These ghosts are particularly bothersome since they move and behave like the normal targets (which they echo), and so the receiver has difficulty in isolating the correct target echo. These problems can be overcome by incorporating a ground map of the radar's surroundings and eliminating all echoes which appear to originate below ground or above a certain height.

Water can cause the target, even as large as an aircraft carrier, to appear to be below the surface. An early problem with ship radars at detecting low altitude anti-ship missiles is 'nodding' where the antenna, upon receiving commands from the radar computer, attempt to track a false underwater moving target, actually 'nods' itself in the up-down motion.

There are four distinct multipaths to explain the image in the above link:

1- Direct/direct. This is where the radar transmission and target echo has direct paths between sensor and target.

2- Direct/indirect. This is where the transmission has a direct path from sensor to target but part of the target echo deflects off a surface, earth or water, before heading back to the sensor.

3- Indirect/direct. This is where part of the transmission deflects off a surface, earth or water, impact the target, and part of the target echo take the direct path back to the sensor.

4- Indirect/indirect. This is where part of the transmission deflects off a surface, earth or water, impact the target, and part of the target echo deflects off that same surface before heading back to the sensor.

Keep in mind that because this is a wave that spreads over distance that created those paths. Target echo behaves the same. All four conditions occurs at once. The lower the transmission elevation, aka flight altitude, the more difficult it will be for the overall radar system. Larger ship radar systems can incorporate multiple radars at different angles and sophisticated algorithms to compensate. Small missiles do not have that space luxury, making a missile's radar system far less capable at dealing with multipath propagation.

Douglas Sea States also matters...

Douglas Sea Scale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Douglas Sea Scale is a scale which measures the height of the waves and also measures the swell of the sea. The scale is very simple to follow. The Douglas Sea Scale is expressed in one of 10 degrees.

It is embarassing to have one's missile swatted out of the air by a wave if it is not programmed to compensate for higher sea state. However, higher flight altitude by the missile increases the odds of detection by the ship.

These are basic issues for any missile designer to address. From these basic issues there are competing claims about superiority of one missile over the other on target discrimination, radar performance, speed, etc...etc...Seduction/distraction chaff falls under 'target discrimination'. But once the reader understand that these basic issues cannot be eliminated, only dealt with in some ways, he can look at those competing claims with a more critical eye. A larger missile does not automatically equal to a more sophisticated missile in terms of avionics, may be just a larger explosive load. A faster missile can just simply mean the designer decided to use speed to reduce or perhaps even deny the defenders response time.

Clear as mud?

 

[SBD-3]

P-8 Posiden is better than P-3. P-8 is succesor to P-3 and US is also going to replace it's 103 P-3s. India was offered P-3 as well but that offer was rejected.

What I can think that why PN is going for P-3 are
1)Obviously more economical
2)Past experience
3)Small coastline
4)Operational History

 

[ejaz007]

Both systems belong to a different generation. No point in comparing them technically. The only thing that can be compared is their role and use.

 

[SBD-3]

Both systems belong to a different generation. No point in comparing them technically. The only thing that can be compared is their role and use.

Both seem to possess the same role

 

[Arsalan]

Both seem to possess the same role

and both satsify the need of there operators, P3 are good wiht PN, atleast for time being!!

regards!