Pakistan and Italy Agree to enhance defence ties

[salarsikander]

Too bad @MarkusS cant forward his racist view to his govt

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Sir I think you Misinformed In this Matter Any Corporate owner Ship is Stated by Percentage of Share the Firm hold in the Market Selex ES was a subsidiary of Finmeccanica S.p.A. (today Leonardo - Finmeccanica).

Leonardo-Finmeccanica is the leading industrial group in the high-technology sector in Italy and one of the main global players in Aerospace,Defense and security. The company is partially owned by the Italian government through the Ministry of Economic And Finance , which holds 30.204% of Finmeccanirca's shares.

Selex ES Was JV Btw Finmeccanirca & BAE System held by shares of 75% and 25% respectively, with the option for Finmeccanica to later purchase the remaining 25%.

BAE Systems sold its 25% share of SELEX S&AS to Finmeccanica for €400 million in March 2007 Making Finmeccanirca Owner of 100 % shares of Selex ES Making It Its Subsidiary Firm

Likewise MBDA is Just Project Firm Much Like Salex ES Where Mostly Airbus Group & BAE System Call the Shots as they Combine Own 75 % of the Share in the Firm Making Finmeccanica a Minor Partner who Owns only 25 % in this Venture.


Zhuk Family Radar is To Much For JF-17 . Its Best Suited For Twin Engine Jet which Suits its Power Requirement
That's why Zhuk AE is Selected For MKI Super-30 Upgrade.
Vixen 1000e is More than Candidate For JF-17.

I know most of these companies for 30 years, and know the CEOs personally. You think I am misinformed? You should take my statement as your own education, if google hasn't closed your mind already.

What part of "USED TO BE" don't you get? Vixen is not a suitable system for JF17. However, i am sure the technical experts in JF17 are final authority.

Chinese defense forums have posted copies of the image above which claim to cite the J-20’s AESA T/R module count at 1,856, the J-16’s at 1,760, and the J-10B at 1,200 T/R modules. It is likely the J-10B is the first Chinese fighter aircraft to feature an AESA; J-10B units achieved initial operational capability (IOC) in October of 2014. The volume of the J-10s nose cone is not substantially different from that of the F-16 or the Israeli Lavi from which the J-10 is partially based. Therefore, if one were to assume China had reached parity with the United States in packaging technology, the 1,200 T/R module figure would be plausible but slightly high. For comparison, the APG-80 AESA for the F-16C/D Block 60 has 1,000 T/R modules (DSB, 2001). However, it is unlikely that China has been able to reach parity with the United States in terms of packaging technology on their first generation AESA design. Neither Russia nor Israel was able to field 1,000 T/R element arrays within their first generation fighter mounted AESAs for similar nose volumes as the F-16 with the Mig-35 and Israeli F-16 respectively.
Russia’s first fighter mounted AESA radar, the Zhuk-AE, contained 652 T/R modules and was unveiled in 2007. The Israeli ELM-2052 AESA radar, which has been marketed for both the F-16 and the FA-50 – a joint Korean Aerospace Industry and Lockheed Martin F-16 derivative, has roughly 512 T/R modules (Trimble, 2014). The only firm outside of the United States that was able to produce a 1,000 T/R element within one generation was the French avionics firm Thales with its RB2E radar (Avionics Today, 2009). While the relative technological maturity of European, Israeli, and Russian AESAs is not directly indicative of the relative technological maturity of China’s packaging technology, it is an indicator that the first generation AESA produced by China is likely not on par with the US which is generally recognized as having the most technological mature T/R packaging technology (Kopp, 2014).
The prospect of China’s T/R packaging technology being on par with US firms within a single generation of radars is even more dubious when one examines the preference for an incremental technological development within the Chinese aerospace industry. Several Chinese aviation authors have hypothesized that the J-10B serves as a “technological stepping stone” with respect to the development of the more advanced J-20. For example, Feng Cao argues the J-10B and the J-16 AESAs were likely used to test technology related to the J-20’s AESA which would be a second generation Chinese design. By virtue of the larger nose volumes in the J-16 and J-20 airframes, it is highly probable the two aircraft will feature radars with more T/R modules than the J-10B’s radar.
The J-16 utilizes the Su-27BS airframe which has room for a 0.9-1.1 meter aperture in the nose which is on par with the F-15 and F-22 in terms of volume (Kopp, 2012). The 1,500 element N036 Tikhomirov NIIP AESA has a similar aperture size to the electronically scanned array (ESA) Irbis-E radar featured in the Su-35 series of fighters which shares the base Su-27 airframe. If the 1,760 T/R figure is correct it would indicate the Chinese aerospace industry has eclipsed Russian T/R module packaging technology as the N036 is arguably the most advanced Russian fighter mounted AESA. Similarly, the most advanced US fighter mounted AESAs such as the APG-77(V)2 and APG-82(V)1 contain 1,500 T/R modules*. While the prospect of Chinese avionics firms reaching parity with US and Russian firms is more plausible within two generations of designs, the author is skeptical the 1,760 figure is correct given the unsubstantiated nature of the image and the fairly substantial 260 T/R discrepancy between the J-16 radar figure compared to the most advanced US and Russian AESA designs. Therefore, the author speculates it would be more reasonable to assume a figure between 1,200 and 1,500 T/R modules for the J-16 rather than the 1,760 figure.
The tentative designation for the J-20's AESA is the Type 1475. While the nose volume of the J-20 is certainly large, the jet overall is longer and heavier than the F-22, no credible figures for nose volume were available at the time of this publication. As with the J-16 T/R figure, the J-20 figure is substantially greater than that of the most advanced US and Russian designs. Even if the Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology (NRIET) or the China Leihua Electronic Technology Research Institute (607 Institute) was able to develop sufficient packaging technology that would enable 1,856 T/R modules within the J-20's nose, the density of the T/R modules would create significant cooling problems. For example, Phazotron's single greatest difficulty in designing the Zuk-AE was the AESA's thermal management system (Kopp, 2008). Without an effective cooling system, the Type 1475 would not be reliable at peak power output and would cause significant maintenance issues. Furthermore, with such a high number of T/R modules, the Type 1475 would be vulnerable to radar warning receiver (RWR) systems such as the ALR-94 without a very capable low probability intercept (LPI) mode.

*Type 1473 - The maximum detection range figures listed for the Type 1473 are from the EL/M-2032 which is arguably its closest analogue with published performance data (the Israelis supplied EL/M-2032s to China in the early 1990s which was developed into the Type 1473). The tracking and engagement figures for the Type 1473 are provided by Sinodefense.

Good research. Thank you for posting.

 

[Dalit]

Chinese AESA radar is better than Vixen 1000E and on par with Raven ES-05 so if Selex is offering us Vixen 1000E only then we would go for the Chinese AESA radar.
@The Eagle @Quwa @Bilal Khan 777 @Tank131 @Horus

How about mixing it up to also save cost?

That wold be a logistical nightmare, not to mention the separate training and costs involved with it

Not so different and difficult as acquiring an entirely new platform. Without a shadow of a doubt, we direly require beefed up versions of the JF-17. Thankfully, the PAF along with our Chinese partners developed the JF-17 as a flexible modular design. Today, we can import various critical components and add these to an existing air frame without too many difficulties. That is no mean feat.

I firmly believe that the PAF needs to have a few custom made versions of the JF-17. We also need to strike a deal for a Chinese AESA radar and weapons package to diversify. We could pitch the various custom made fighters against each other and learn a great deal about the performance and weaknesses of all the technologies. This would help us to further improve the capabilities of the JF-17.

I would go as far as saying that an acquisition of a new platform can wait a while. JF-17 is top priority and needs all the upgrades ASAP.

 

[weqi]

Why am i feeling that Vixen 1000E for Thunder is getting closer with each passing day?

but i think decision should be made with no delays this system is part of the EFT

 

[_NOBODY_]

but i think decision should be made with no delays this system is part of the EFT

EFT uses CAPTOR-E and I believe this is even better than Raven ES-05.
@Horus @Tank131 @Bilal Khan 777 @Quwa @The Eagle

 

[weqi]

No doubt. Vixen AESA it seems it will be. This is a good development. Ditch the expensive F-16 deal and heavily upgrade the JF-17 capabilities. Negotiate for some ToT in the process. This should have been done long ago. Better late than never.

what about laser guided bombs & targeting pod in JF-17

 

[Dalit]

what about laser guided bombs & targeting pod in JF-17

In my opinion, diversify that too. Some people say that the Chinese pod isn't ready for battlefield action. Even if they weren't, we could help the Chinese in maturing and improving their pods if we put them to the test in areas free of civilians. The keyword is to diversify. It's in our best interest.

 

[The Eagle]

Waiting for details to be out though defence deal is fruit of COAS earlier visit. We have no issues in terms of our relations with Italy and am expecting something good and reliable for our forces inventory/gadgets.

If such deal has to do anything with EFT then IMO, we have good relations with Italy and UK but not with Germans yet though everything could be done with good diplomacy and timely approach. EFT seems way expensive and I don't want to be speculative here however, PAF has evaluated the AC in past and as per few, it was satisfactory and worthy so looking at the development in term of our relations with US especially about FMF release for F-16s, we have to be ready for anything or the worst and need to make wise and in-time decisions.

Rest about AESA, Chinese link will not just be reliable but would come with complete package including EW etc however, few experts had already shared the issues of package sharing by SELEX or others though the professionals and experts at PAF knows better that what to chose for JFT. Waiting for the news to come out in this regards.

@TheGreatOne

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

what about laser guided bombs & targeting pod in JF-17

Why would you buy LGBs when you already produce them in house?

It doesn't seem like that at all.



Wishful thinking. AESA requires an accompanying EW suite which is not available.



Compromise solutions? It all depends on price. Italians and Chinese products are pretty much at par now, since both countries cheat on quality.

Till now, selex has only sold an altimeter for JF17. That seems to be the only item PAF believes selex has to offer.



The AESA is manufactured by Selex UK, what used to be BAE Avionic Systems in the UK. Selex IRST doesnt fit in JF17, and EW is not being offered. MBDA Italia offers it to Pakistan as ASEAN, the agent of MBDA in Pakistan routes everything through Italy.

After the SPADA experience, PAF is very critical of MBDA products. I highly doubt that ASTER or anything ASEAN brings on the table will be considered.



Chinese tech is license produced Russian Zhuk family of AESA systems. Few of them are operational in China. A "complete" selex package may not be opted for by JF17 PMO as there are numerous options available.

I'm not an expert but try INDRA EW suite from Spain ..

 

[Moon]

Too bad @MarkusS cant forward his racist view to his govt

Please don't flame the thread.

On topic, what about AIP from Italy for our submarines from China?, Italy could become a close defense equipment supplier.

 

[Quwa]

These 'agreements' happen all the time, rarely means much from my experience.

That said, @Bilal Khan 777 why is the PAF looking to source the radar and EW suite from the same source? Why couldn't it get the radar from Leonardo (ex-Finmeccanica/ex-Selex) and the EW/ECM suite from some other NATO-compliant vendor, like Spain?

 

[Zarvan]

These 'agreements' happen all the time, rarely means much from my experience.

That said, @Bilal Khan 777 why is the PAF looking to source the radar and EW suite from the same source? Why couldn't it get the radar from Leonardo (ex-Finmeccanica/ex-Selex) and the EW/ECM suite from some other NATO-compliant vendor, like Spain?

Well because many other countries have serious issues selling us weapons. Italy in Europe is the most trust able option

 

[Quwa]

Well because many other countries have serious issues selling us weapons. Italy in Europe is the most trust able option

We'll find out in time.

 

[Zarvan]

We'll find out in time.

We in the past also had got lot of weapons from them including U boats or the smalls submarines and other stuff.

 

[Quwa]

We in the past also had got lot of weapons from them including U boats or the smalls submarines and other stuff.

Things change bro (France?).