Pakistan's Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircrafts

[EagleEyes]

Does anyone have information regarding our AEW&C system? The Erieye that Pakistan is getting. Is it side looking airborne radar (SLAR) from Ericsson Microwave Systems?

If that is true then Erieye radar will provide 360 degree coverage with optimum performance of the radar over the 150° azimuthal sectors on each side of the aircraft.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/s100b_argus/

 

[Kaiser]

Does anyone have information regarding our AEW&C system? The Erieye that Pakistan is getting. Is it side looking airborne radar (SLAR) from Ericsson Microwave Systems?

If that is true then Erieye radar will provide 360 degree coverage with optimum performance of the radar over the 150° azimuthal sectors on each side of the aircraft.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/s100b_argus/

We are currently going for 7 eireye awacs all of which are to be data-link to each and every single one of PAF's future fighters (jf-17, J-10,f-16) PAF is also closely evaluating the chinese AWAC which is also pretty advanced

 

[Neo]

Does anyone have information regarding our AEW&C system? The Erieye that Pakistan is getting. Is it side looking airborne radar (SLAR) from Ericsson Microwave Systems?

If that is true then Erieye radar will provide 360 degree coverage with optimum performance of the radar over the 150° azimuthal sectors on each side of the aircraft.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/s100b_argus/

Yes, Erieye will be fitted with SLAR.
I think I posted an article about it somewhere.
I'll try to find it.

 

[Kaiser]

Pakistan was even offered a naval awac system from the US but was turned down. I think our 12 p3c orions, gaurded by 7 F-16's and 8 jf-17, and 1 eireye system would be a pretty credible deterent to the IN and its naval arm

We might even be looking at extra heli's to go along the Z-9

 

[Neo]

Pakistan was even offered a naval awac system from the US but was turned down. I think our 12 p3c orions, gaurded by 7 F-16's and 8 jf-17, and 1 eireye system would be a pretty credible deterent to the IN and its naval arm

We might even be looking at extra heli's to go along the Z-9

PAF lacks a dedicated maritime fighter and PN's naval air arm is too small to pose a credible deterent or even threat to IN.
I'm sure Erieye will boost our defence and intercept abilities but we need something to counter Indian Harriers and Mig-29K.

 

[Kaiser]

PAF lacks a dedicated maritime fighter and PN's naval air arm is too small to pose a credible deterent or even threat to IN.
I'm sure Erieye will boost our defence and intercept abilities but we need something to counter Indian Harriers and Mig-29K.

The harriers arnt a big of a threat

Remember how in in the falklands conflict the argentinan naval airarm had less than 5 fighters (mirage 5) but where able to take on the royal navy and almost won?

Pakistan naval air arm has a similar strategy know that we have JF-17 on its way we can atleast give 12-20 thunders to the navy and 10 F-16 with 1 eireye

Also our p3c orion instructors where trained in the US on various tactics such as the launch volly of upto 20 harpoons aimed at different ships. This strategy is currently being perfected at a small scale.

 

[Chukkar]

I believe that the Major difference between MKK and MKI is TVC. MKI is also equipped with a mix of French, Russian and Israeli avionics and systems.

Not just TVC, but the overall avionics structure and the key sensors are different. The MKI has an open architecture and the Bars radar, with key advantages over the MKKs slotted array radar, and lastly, its EW suite- RWR/ MAWS/ SPJ is much better than what the MKK has. The MKI has a better OLS/IRST as well, and HAL/UOMZ are currently in talks with Sagem to improve it further. Both the MKK and MKI have similar datalinks, but the MKI has additional secure radios-INCOM series.
Overall, the MKI is a much more capable aircraft than the MKK.

 

[Keysersoze]

The harriers arnt a big of a threat

Remember how in in the falklands conflict the argentinan naval airarm had less than 5 fighters (mirage 5) but where able to take on the royal navy and almost won?

I think you will find that most of the Argentinian sorties were flown from land bases. If you look at any of the many film clips (or photo's) plus the aircraft were Etendards not mirages (either that or skyhawks)

Also the Argentinians lost 72 aircraft in 1100 sorties. against 14 aircraft in 2528 sorties.

Quote restored.

 

[Neo]

Correct me if I'm wrong but Argentinian airforce was flying A-4's, Super Etandard's and Pucara's (local lightweight trainer/fighter) at that time, none of them a match for the superior British Harriers.

 

[Keysersoze]

The Pucara was actually a ground attack aircraft (and a good one by all accounts)Hence a special forces raid on pebble island to destroy a number of them at the airbase there.

However you are correct regarding the other aircraft.(despite the excellent efforts of the argentinian pilots whose efforts were notable.)
It should be noted though that The Harriers were given another advantage in the form of a delivery of the lastest version of the sidewinder missile (covertly by America) just before the task force reached the Falklands.

The interesting thing was, that the Argentinians were afraid to commit their aircraft carrier and it never played a part. PAF and PN only have to keep the enemy at a distance (In the naval conflict) and not actually have to destroy them in order to win that battle.

 

[Keysersoze]

well i have a interesting pic of the inside of a erieye.

points to note.......only one workstation......that may reduce endurance....

 

[blain2]

well i have a interesting pic of the inside of a erieye.

points to note.......only one workstation......that may reduce endurance....

Most of the information on this thread is fairly dated. The delay in Pakistani procurement for the Erieye has been for quite a few reasons. The platforms that PAF is to acquire is actually quite different from the ones that even HAF has. Many of the mods that PAF has asked for are also going into Swedish AF's own Erieye platforms retroactively. This includes additional operator consoles (to completely remove the GCI from the picture) and an enhanced fore and aft coverage.

Additionally the platform that PAF has chosen has an endurance of 8 hours which coupled with 5-6 airframes gives more than enough coverage to the PAF for its mission requirements.

Those (in the initial pages of this thread) claiming that Phalcon is so much better since it can jam Erieye etc., are quite clueless. Most of the time IAF Phalcons and PAF Erieyes will see each other at such ranges where even jamming would yield only limited results. Swedes have far more experience than the Israelis and many of the NATO airforces in alternate linking technologies in the face of EW/Jamming. This and quite a few other reasons make Erieye an extremely effective platform (the numbers alone on the PAF side have an inherent benefit in terms of providing PAF with 1:2 redundancy and lessening stress on the airframe/engine etc.). With IFR, loiter times would be enhanced even more when needed.

So while India may have gone for the top-end in terms of extreme detection range etc., the new Generation of Erieye is going to be an extremely potent platform in the Indo-Pak context.

 

[melb4aust]

Undoubtly!!!

Well i was going through couple of articles on google related to Pakistani awacs program. I found that the J-10's which pakistan is acquiring from china cant be linked with Eireye. Because both nations are not willing to share each others technology and dont wanna release each others secrets i.e(Sweden Eireye : China J-10 programs), to do the modifications to link J-10's as both system requires heavy wear and tear..

And thats why Chinese awacs system was in pakistan lately. To link J-10's with china's own awacs. One more thing Our Air chief has also mentioned that, though the link between J-10 and Eireye is not possible but we will use some sort of a bridge to counter that. He used the terminology word "Bridge", I wonder what's that word Bridge means and how it will work?

 

[niaz]

The harriers arnt a big of a threat

Remember how in in the falklands conflict the argentinan naval airarm had less than 5 fighters (mirage 5) but where able to take on the royal navy and almost won?

Pakistan naval air arm has a similar strategy know that we have JF-17 on its way we can atleast give 12-20 thunders to the navy and 10 F-16 with 1 eireye

Also our p3c orion instructors where trained in the US on various tactics such as the launch volly of upto 20 harpoons aimed at different ships. This strategy is currently being perfected at a small scale.

Sorry that I came across just now. Just to correct the facts. Argentinians had 3 Squadrons of Mirage 111 and its Israeli versions the Desher. They had only 5 "Super Etendards". It was only Super Etendards that could carry "Exocest" missiles. They also had a large number of A-4s.

Most of the attacks were by iron bombs using A-4 Skyhawks; no match for Naval Harriers. Mirages were used mostly as fighter escorts. Royal Navy sunk nearly half the Argentinian Airforce and lost/damage 8 capital ships including a troop transport vessel of her own. Two of the kills were by Exocest, rest thru normal bombing.

At that time there was no air strip in the Falklands where jets could land. Local air support was by Pucaras. All Argentinian jets were flying from 4 hundred miles away and thus not able to get into a sustained dog fight with 40 or so Harriers of the Royal Navy. Still it was a close run thing and only an "Iron Lady" of Margret Thatchers nerve could persevere.

Jury is still out as to whether Falkland war was worth it. War was actually won once UK atomic submarine sunk 'Gen Belgrano' sinking 300 or so Argentinian sailors. Argetinians lost heart. Argentina had 2 diesel electric submarines and also an aircraft carrier '25 of May' but Navy never did any thing. As a matter of fact it was only the Airforce that fought from the Argentinian side. Land war was also a minor event.

 

[Munir]

The reason why Exocets were not 100% killnig was the fact that Argentinian pilots did use them very fast and in the first period of the war. They did not have huge stocks. They shot Exocet asap as they saw a blip. Not that good for your kill ratio. Same reason PAF had a low kill ratio with their F16 and AIM9... One has to learn how to use the weapon effectively.