When INS Vikrant (R11) gave nightmare to Pakistan's Navy!

[Mav3rick]

what damn factual argument are you talking about ? have some shame, when I pointed out that Erieye operational sealing is 3000 ft, your rely was like..radar can be ripped apart, along with all the control command systems, wiring,sensors, etc and put on another platform " which fly at 65000 feet, that is what called clutching at straws..now don't quote me unless you have some valid argument other than that kind of non sense.

Again you are incorrect as you usually are. Erieye has a service ceiling above 65000 feet - FACT! And if need be, it can be dismounted and mounted on a different platform to suit our needs within months. And why the hell are you stuck with Erieye?? There are various OTH methodologies that can be used.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Again you are incorrect as you usually are. Erieye has a service ceiling above 65000 feet - FACT! And if need be, it can be dismounted and mounted on a different platform to suit our needs within months. And why the hell are you stuck with Erieye?? There are various OTH methodologies that can be used.

fact -radar have the range, but can't utilise it because of platform.

 

[Mav3rick]

fact -radar have the range, but can't utilise it because of platform.

And that is the end of discussion??? So basically there is no way for Pakistan to be able to detect CBG at 500kms??

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

And that is the end of discussion??? So basically there is no way for Pakistan to be able to detect CBG at 500kms??

your problem, you tell me.

 

[gslv mk3]

Again you are incorrect as you usually are. Erieye has a service ceiling above 65000 feet - FACT! And if need be, it can be dismounted and mounted on a different platform to suit our needs within months. And why the hell are you stuck with Erieye?? There are various OTH methodologies that can be used.

It is virtually impossible to do that.

 

[Mav3rick]

It is virtually impossible to do that.

It is a piece of cake.

your problem, you tell me.

I did but you threw them all back at me, it's as if you guys believe that Pakistan will continue to sit idle despite the apparent gap in minimum parity.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

It is a piece of cake.



I did but you threw them all back at me, it's as if you guys believe that Pakistan will continue to sit idle despite the apparent gap in minimum parity.

good luck with that.

 

[gslv mk3]

It is a piece of cake.

Even the radar antenna array needs to be very aerodynamic(We lost a HS748,used for our first AEW&C design due to that reason) designed not to mention the changes to the airframe,We brought an Embraer for DRDO AEW&C ,asked Embraer to modify the airframe,the was finalised after numerous wind tunnel tests.

 

[tarrar]

And that's bullcr@p..

There are crazy people in the world.

 

[kbd-raaf]

It is a piece of cake.



I did but you threw them all back at me, it's as if you guys believe that Pakistan will continue to sit idle despite the apparent gap in minimum parity.

Plonking a bigass antenna on top of an aircraft not designed for it is a piece of cake?

Mav3rick pls.

 

[Mav3rick]

Even the radar antenna array needs to be very aerodynamic(We lost a HS748,used for our first AEW&C design due to that reason) designed not to mention the changes to the airframe,We brought an Embraer for DRDO AEW&C ,asked Embraer to modify the airframe,the was finalised after numerous wind tunnel tests.

And eventually, it was achieved.

Plonking a bigass antenna on top of an aircraft not designed for it is a piece of cake?

Mav3rick pls.

Did you think we were gonna put it on a JF-17?????

 

[kbd-raaf]

And eventually, it was achieved.



Did you think we were gonna put it on a JF-17?????

The Embraer AWACS was successfully flown after prolonged testing with one of the world's most succesful aerospace organisations. Nothing in Pakistan comes close.

At work, I evaluated a few different wind tunnel simulation software for use a few months ago. Even a minute difference in the shape of the structure caused a massive difference in the aerodynamics of the same. And bear in mind that no simulation software is perfect.

Honestly, a piece of cake, really.

 

[Mav3rick]

The Embraer AWACS was successfully flown after prolonged testing with one of the world's most succesful aerospace organisations. Nothing in Pakistan comes close.

At work, I evaluated a few different wind tunnel simulation software for use a few months ago. Even a minute difference in the shape of the structure caused a massive difference in the aerodynamics of the same. And bear in mind that no simulation software is perfect.

Honestly, a piece of cake, really.

Perhaps, today, I am not confident enough about the capability of my own country in the department. However, we do have friends who can do things that can leave others dumbfounded.

 

[A G 1046]

Perhaps, today, I am not confident enough about the capability of my own country in the department. However, we do have friends who can do things that can leave others dumbfounded.

two things

1. ASEA on fighters are very different from those on bigger jets both in configaration(setup) & Wattage and thats the main rason no western country is willing to share its secrets with pakistan as they know they will end up with your 'friends'

2. second thing is that its not so simple but then your pakistanies

 

[kbd-raaf]

Perhaps, today, I am not confident enough about the capability of my own country in the department. However, we do have friends who can do things that can leave others dumbfounded.

China too doesn't an organisation with capacity of Embraer.

And even if it did, it wouldn't be economically viable or legally allowed (through the contract with Saab) to do that.

As an engineer, just thinking about such a task boggles the mind. It's not that it can't be done, it can, but only an idiot would actually do it.