Successful Flight Tests For the Active Array Radar Offered by Thales to HAL’s Tejas

[Shahzaz ud din]

Successful Flight Tests For the Active Array Radar Offered by Thales to HAL’s Tejas
October 16, 2017 forceindia 0 Comment
The tests conducted during summer 2017 at the Cazaux air base in France focused on metrological analyses of the radar performance.

Thales has developed an active array radar that meets the specific needs of HAL, to equip the 80 Tejas Mk1A multirole LCA operated by the Indian Air Force. The radar has successfully completed an initial flight test campaign designed to measure its performance level.

In order to meet the needs of the Indian manufacturer HAL, Thales is offering a lightweight, compact active array radar. The latter is a result of Thales’ expertise as regards the development and mastery of active array technologies – as demonstrated by the RBE2 radar installed on Rafale – combined with the operational reliability of this combat-proven technology. The RBE2 radar has actually been operated by the armed forces since 2012.

The tests conducted during summer 2017 at the Cazaux air base in France, on a test bench aircraft, focused on metrological analyses of the radar performance. These test flights proved that the radar is fully operational and perfectly corresponds to the specific requirements of HAL for its combat and air superiority missions. It is therefore ready and able to adapt to the tight schedule imposed by the Mk1A LCA.

Thales radar is an advanced Fire Control Radar (FCR) designed for air-to-air superiority and strike missions, based on fully solid-state Active Electronically Scanning Array (AESA) technology, enabling the radar to achieve long detection ranges, high mission reliability and multi-target tracking capabilities.

“In four months, thanks to our solid, proven experience with the RBE2, we’ve been able to carry out successful flights to test the performance of the key features of the radar which we’re offering for the TEJAS Mk1A light fighter. This is a clear guarantee of its extremely high degree of operational reliability, immediately, and clearly sets us apart from our competitors as regards to this call for tender”, said executive vice-president, Defence Mission Systems activities, Philippe Duhamel.

The Thales radar is compliant with the requirement and provides simultaneous modes of operation supporting multi-mission capabilities for air-to-air, air-to-ground and air-to-sea operation modes, and weapon deployment.



FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestTumblrWhatsAppLinkedInRedditDiggPocketKindle ItGoogle Gmail
Share

 

[Sinnerman108]

Ahem.

So Engine, design and avionics till date.

on the indigenous aircraft.

 

[Gufi]

India must decide what it wants from the Tejas. If it is to just get foreign parts for a localised body it is not worth the investment they have put in it. They should have waited for the locally produced radar and used the same companies to help with problem shooting, even if it was not as economically feasible in the short term. Tejas should have been a morale booster for scientists across the board in Indian Defence industries with the products finally coming together and nearing a proper jet the powers to be suddenly jumped ship and went for foreign products. This should have been done 10 years ago if foreign parts were so easily acceptable.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Ahem.

So Engine, design and avionics till date.

on the indigenous aircraft.

Ahem right back.

There is a DRDO version that has passed ground tests but is being sized for fitment. Calm down, chief; every Indian setback might give you your jollies, but this isn't one. Not yet; just hold on a bit longer. Who knows? you might get lucky.

 

[Tangent123]

Want to see Tejas in numbers in IAF soon.

 

[cerberus]

India must decide what it wants from the Tejas. If it is to just get foreign parts for a localised body it is not worth the investment they have put in it. They should have waited for the locally produced radar and used the same companies to help with problem shooting, even if it was not as economically feasible in the short term. Tejas should have been a morale booster for scientists across the board in Indian Defence industries with the products finally coming together and nearing a proper jet the powers to be suddenly jumped ship and went for foreign products. This should have been done 10 years ago if foreign parts were so easily acceptable.

It was it's performance which India want

Foreign parts or not in the end product will be cutting edge

Ahem right back.

There is a DRDO version that has passed ground tests but is being sized for fitment. Calm down, chief; every Indian setback might give you your jollies, but this isn't one. Not yet; just hold on a bit longer. Who knows? you might get lucky.

I don't understand what's there problems and many in India

Foreign or indegenous at last we want performance in combat

What is use indegenous product if it will be substandard does this excuse will really last when we will face enemies in combat

 

[Joe Shearer]

It was it's performance which India want

Foreign parts or not in the end product will be cutting edge


I don't understand what's there problems and many in India

Foreign or indegenous at last we want performance in combat

What is use indegenous product if it will be substandard does this excuse will really last when we will face enemies in combat

OK, I'm going to be mildly rude.

It's one thing to opine about these in an airy fairy fashion without either being a user or part of the support system. If you were either of the two, you would understand the following:

1. As user, you want reliability, and availability. Western equipment is reliable, and available but very expensive. Eastern (Soviet) equipment is very affordable, but there are penalties in reliability, high penalties in availability. By reliability is meant performance in operation; by availability is meant time available for operation.
2. For both of these, the availability of spares is a critical factor. It is not possible to maintain 100% inventory of parts that can be replaced (not all parts or components, or sub-assemblies, or assemblies can be replaced). For your consideration, 100% availability of spares is equivalent to a significant portion of the delivered cost of each unit.
3. Both Western and Eastern sources are very poor in terms of providing spares when needed. Western sources tend to cut off the availability of spares for political reasons at their wish. For several years, the Sea Kings of the Navy sat idle because of the paucity of spares; there were problems with the Jaguar, with Mirages (less), with Hunters earlier. For Eastern sources, while the spirit was willing, the heart was weak; even if they want to, they are not always able to provide spares because either that part might no longer be in production, or they might have a long waiting period to go into production. Their level of preparedness is less than aggressive; the entire manual set for the MiG-21 had to be translated from Russian to English, and there was no assistance from the manufacturer. There were equivalent problems for the Army, with heavy artillery (not the Bofors).
4. Indigenous parts, components, sub-assemblies and assemblies can be procured locally. That makes an embargo impossible.
5. Except for two bad patches, the manufacture of products under factories of the OFB (Ordnance Factories Board) and the manufacture of MiG engines at Koraput, NO indigenous manufacture or overhaul or repair has been wholly unsuccessful; different grades of technology have been handled with different degrees of success, but definitely, their local serviceability was a great boost to availability.
6. The three flagship products have been the Arjun MBT for the Army, the Tejas for the Air Force and the Dhruv and its derivatives for the Air Force. There is no question of any 'sub-standard' manufacture; I do not know what triggered the use of this STUPID phrase. The Army fears the general inefficiency of DRDO, and its design and development activities, and extends this fear to Indian manufacture as well; it is for that reason that they put up such a struggle against the Arjun. All neutral evaluation has given the vehicle very high ratings. The Air Force is its own single worst enemy; the five biggest enemies of the IAF are, in order,

• The IAF
• The IAF
• The IAF
• The PAF
• The PLAAF

If they had not kept fiddling and tinkering with the specs., the Tejas would have been in service nearly a decade earlier, and would today not be burdened by a multitude of unsuitable tasks, including ground attack. For the helicopter, the performance of the Dhruv was so compelling that all opposition looked silly right at the outset, whereas the others went through a painful process of specification creep.

In my candid opinion, your criticism is wholly mistaken and misdirected.

India must decide what it wants from the Tejas. If it is to just get foreign parts for a localised body it is not worth the investment they have put in it. They should have waited for the locally produced radar and used the same companies to help with problem shooting, even if it was not as economically feasible in the short term. Tejas should have been a morale booster for scientists across the board in Indian Defence industries with the products finally coming together and nearing a proper jet the powers to be suddenly jumped ship and went for foreign products. This should have been done 10 years ago if foreign parts were so easily acceptable.

I am persuaded that there is a chortle in your voice as you make this point. AESA is not yet commonly available technology; it is being introduced progressively into all aircraft older than a recent vintage, and into new aircraft. At the time of the design and introduction to service of the Tejas, our LRDE establishment was not able to provide AESA. The lag has since been bridged to a large extent, but it seemed ridiculous to allow the squadron or so that has gone into service to go under-equipped into battle when there are available products that immediately fill the gap. Meanwhile the in-house developed product has been proven in terms of efficacy - it does what is required - and is now undergoing re-configuration to fit into the Tejas air-frame. Clearly not more than two or three squadrons will need these imports. All production beyond that is expected to be dependent upon indigenous sources.

I believe that this was a sensible decision, and should see us through the initial stages and give the Air Force the much-needed confidence in the aircraft to push it to its full capabilities. Without some of the ridiculous role-additions sought, these capabilities are considerable and more than the requirements thought of in the first place.

 

[UKBengali]

@Joe Shearer

From my perspective, the problem with India is that it is not willing to wait a little longer to allow it's own systems to be ready. If the Indian AESA radar is nearly ready, it seems not necessary to use a French one in the meantime. After all what can a few dozen AESA equipped LCA do for the IAF that has several hundred fighter jets.

 

[Gufi]

I am persuaded that there is a chortle in your voice as you make this point. AESA is not yet commonly available technology; it is being introduced progressively into all aircraft older than a recent vintage, and into new aircraft. At the time of the design and introduction to service of the Tejas, our LRDE establishment was not able to provide AESA. The lag has since been bridged to a large extent, but it seemed ridiculous to allow the squadron or so that has gone into service to go under-equipped into battle when there are available products that immediately fill the gap. Meanwhile the in-house developed product has been proven in terms of efficacy - it does what is required - and is now undergoing re-configuration to fit into the Tejas air-frame. Clearly not more than two or three squadrons will need these imports. All production beyond that is expected to be dependent upon indigenous sources.

No, actually it is befuddlement at the level of indecisiveness that has gone on with this plane and things in general. The same money spent today for off the shelf procuring would have been diverted two years ago to the project with foreign help to complete it on time. Also, without being rude there is something wrong with the IAF especially and the Indian army also, both should have learnt from the Indian navy. They managed to get a stealthy design out recently, but did not stop building waiting for said design. What could have been 3 years of non AESA planes replaced later with said radars, could have saved billions because it seems now India will pay for a single jet engine also with a local option at home ready.
Whether it is the private sector or DRDO no one can cope with the IAF and its changing demands. Seems like a nagging wife which never is happy.

 

[Joe Shearer]

No, actually it is befuddlement at the level of indecisiveness that has gone on with this plane and things in general. The same money spent today for off the shelf procuring would have been diverted two years ago to the project with foreign help to complete it on time. Also, without being rude there is something wrong with the IAF especially and the Indian army also, both should have learnt from the Indian navy. They managed to get a stealthy design out recently, but did not stop building waiting for said design. What could have been 3 years of non AESA planes replaced later with said radars, could have saved billions because it seems now India will pay for a single jet engine also with a local option at home ready.
Whether it is the private sector or DRDO no one can cope with the IAF and its changing demands. Seems like a nagging wife which never is happy.

You have made some valuable points, although they are hard to hear. Karwa sach. More later. Thanks for the balanced intervention.

@gslv mk3

Would you like to join us on this discussion? Your inputs would be useful.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You have made some valuable points, although they are hard to hear. Karwa sach. More later. Thanks for the balanced intervention.

@gslv mk3

No, actually it is befuddlement at the level of indecisiveness that has gone on with this plane and things in general. The same money spent today for off the shelf procuring would have been diverted two years ago to the project with foreign help to complete it on time. Also, without being rude there is something wrong with the IAF especially and the Indian army also, both should have learnt from the Indian navy. They managed to get a stealthy design out recently, but did not stop building waiting for said design. What could have been 3 years of non AESA planes replaced later with said radars, could have saved billions because it seems now India will pay for a single jet engine also with a local option at home ready.
Whether it is the private sector or DRDO no one can cope with the IAF and its changing demands. Seems like a nagging wife which never is happy.

I happen to agree completely with you. It is incremental design that we need, not specification creep. What happens in our services' interactions with their design and development counterparts is that the services float a set of specifications (the QRs), the designers accept it and start working on it, and then, midway through, or even earlier, the QRs change, leading to havoc in the design bureaux. If the services requirements stayed fixed for at least an initial production run, we would be able to make steady progress, instead of a stop-go kind of jerky movement, with long periods of inaction interspersed with unbearable pressure to beat the clock, or even to downright turn back the calendar.

The case of the Tejas is one of the worst examples. The heartbreaking result of the repeated changes in specifications has been to demoralise an entire generation of designers. It was not so with the Soviets, or, for that matter, with the Chinese. Both those sets of people worked with what was designed, and pointed out shortcomings and improvements wanted, for better successive generations of product, and included these improvements in completely new specifications, ensuring that the entire service was on a contemporary footing at the time of specifying the requirements.

Thank you for your incisive observations.