What's new

Indian AWACS thread

Ok, well lets discuss the multiplier effect of Phalcon Awacs in IAF. And is it enough to have just three of them? I heard a long time back that India might consider 3 more units of Phalcon.

Also please advise if IL 78 is a compilant platform for phalcon awacs. and also the drawbacks if any.

I appreciate your prompt response.
Three more was optional, but the last news I read about it said IAF is even thinking about 9 more!
The IL 76 is a good and cheap platform, especially because IAF already uses several of them for transport, refueling and the new engines are better too. The only downside I see is, that it uses 4 engines, which will increase the fuel consumption.
The Boeing 737 AWACS uses only 2 and would be am alternative, because IAF uses the same 737 as Air Force one and IN will use it as P8I. The question would be, how good is the MESA radar array, that also provides 360° detection, but possibly less range to the front and back sides and is it compatible with the Phalcon radar system?

Just from the look, I would keep the A50 Phalcon, because it looks much better than the 737 Wedgetail! ;)
 
.
Three more was optional, but the last news I read about it said IAF is even thinking about 9 more!
The IL 76 is a good and cheap platform, especially because IAF already uses several of them for transport, refueling and the new engines are better too. The only downside I see is, that it uses 4 engines, which will increase the fuel consumption.
The Boeing 737 AWACS uses only 2 and would be am alternative, because IAF uses the same 737 as Air Force one and IN will use it as P8I. The question would be, how good is the MESA radar array, that also provides 360° detection, but possibly less range to the front and back sides and is it compatible with the Phalcon radar system?

Just from the look, I would keep the A50 Phalcon, because it looks much better than the 737 Wedgetail! ;)
It is believed that IAF placed order for 3 more phalcon in 2008. But what would be the platform no idea. India ordered 6 platforms from a brazilian firm for DRDO's own AWACSs....
 
.
Let's not forget that IAF plans on using these three (+, as we don't know how many, or how long, it will take to get more of these Rus/Israel systems in the air) as the main AWACS planes. There are plans to support these main three with a number of different AWACS platforms as well. The DRDO are planning on having three more systems up, and mounted on Brazilian planes Embraer ERJ-145)

I think it's smart to diversify in this regard . . . some areas may not need the larger (more costly, and greater risk) Phalcon systems from Rus/Israel. Alternatively, using more than one AWACS system in the same operational range would have its' own advantages as well.
 
.
Three more was optional, but the last news I read about it said IAF is even thinking about 9 more!
The IL 76 is a good and cheap platform, especially because IAF already uses several of them for transport, refueling and the new engines are better too. The only downside I see is, that it uses 4 engines, which will increase the fuel consumption.
The Boeing 737 AWACS uses only 2 and would be am alternative, because IAF uses the same 737 as Air Force one and IN will use it as P8I. The question would be, how good is the MESA radar array, that also provides 360° detection, but possibly less range to the front and back sides and is it compatible with the Phalcon radar system?

Just from the look, I would keep the A50 Phalcon, because it looks much better than the 737 Wedgetail! ;)

It had been reported last year that IAF is looking at a different platform for the next series of Phalcon (which could happen after the next three or not?). I personally feel that the platform chosen whould ideally be a long range airliner as they have exceptional endurance and high fuel efficiency which makes them excellent AWAC system supports.

One option is the E-767 platform with phalcon system!

Data from 767 AWACS

General characteristics

Crew: Flight:2 Mission:8-10
Length: 159 ft 2 in (48.5 m)
Wingspan: 156 ft 1 in (47.6 m)
Height: 52 ft (15.8 m)
Empty weight: 188,705 lb (85,595 kg)
Loaded weight: 284,110 lb (128,870 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 385,000 lb (175,000 kg)
Powerplant: 2× General Electric CF6-80C2 turbofan, 61,500 lbf (282 kN) each

Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 0.86
Cruise speed: Mach 0.80 (530 mph, 851 km/h)
Range: 5,600 nmi (10,370 km)
Service ceiling: 40,100 ft (12,200 m)
Endurance: 9.25 hours on station at 1,000 nautical-mile radius;
13 hours at 300-nautical mile radius. Extended operations possible with air refueling

08ee751f0718b21ad9b58518996aacb7.jpg
 
.
It had been reported last year that IAF is looking at a different platform for the next series of Phalcon (which could happen after the next three or not?). I personally feel that the platform chosen whould ideally be a long range airliner as they have exceptional endurance and high fuel efficiency which makes them excellent AWAC system supports.

One option is the E-767 platform with phalcon system!

The Boeing 767 platform could be interesting if we also go for KC 767 refuelers, but the problem seems to be the radar!

Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)
Japan 767 AWACS Overview

AWACS rotodomeThe Boeing Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) is the world's standard for airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) systems.

The Japan E- 767 AWACS uses combat-proven mission systems to fill the needs of both airborne surveillance and command and control (C2) functions for tactical and air defense forces.

This surveillance system includes a flexible, multi-mode radar, which enables AWACS to separate maritime and airborne targets from ground and sea clutter returns that limit other present-day radar.

Its radar has a 360-degree view of an area, and at operating altitudes it can detect targets more than 320 kilometers (200 miles) away. AWACS mission equipment can separate, manage and display these targets individually on situational displays.

Boeing: Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) - Japan 767 AWACS Overview


So it has a rotating dome with multi mode radar arrays, whereas the A50 Phalcon has a fixed dome with AESA radar arrays. If the same would have been possible with the US platform, I guess Israel would have offered us that. Also the fact that US prefered the 737 as the platform for their new AWACS system, which offers similar performance as the A50, must have a reason right? It uses a new radar system and the aircraft itself is cheaper compared to the 767, so probably more cost-effective.

Btw I found some specs about the Russian A50 version on the Beriev site, which are interesting:

Aircraft Performance

Maximum take-off weight, kg 190,000
Flight endurance during mission at 1000 km range:
- without refueling, h 4*
- with refueling, h 7*
Detection range for:
- air targets:
bombers, km 650
low-flying fighters up to radio horizon
cruise missiles (S1m2), km 215

detection of non ballistic missiles jets by optical means, km 800*
- water surface targets (S=250m2) up to radio horizon
- ground surface targets:
single target (e.g. tactical missile launcher), km 300*
group target (e.g. column of tanks) 250*
Traking of air targets up to 300
Frequency range:
- electronic intelligence, GHz 0.5-18
- signal intelligence, MHz 50-500
Crew:
- flight crew, persons 5
- mission crew, persons 11


Not sure how reliable this specs are, or how different the Phalcon system will be (although I guess it should be better), but especially the detection range of cruise missiles is interesting (I guess S1m2 means smaller than 1m2), because the Erieye system can detect such missiles only below 200Km. Also an F16 sized fighter with an often quoted RCS of 1,2 m2 must be detected way earlier, not to mention Flanker sized fighters. Combined with the long range MKI and in future FGFA radars, IAF should have a really good early warning capability against air threats.
 
. . .
The Boeing 767 platform could be interesting if we also go for KC 767 refuelers, but the problem seems to be the radar!



Boeing: Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) - Japan 767 AWACS Overview


So it has a rotating dome with multi mode radar arrays, whereas the A50 Phalcon has a fixed dome with AESA radar arrays. If the same would have been possible with the US platform, I guess Israel would have offered us that. Also the fact that US prefered the 737 as the platform for their new AWACS system, which offers similar performance as the A50, must have a reason right? It uses a new radar system and the aircraft itself is cheaper compared to the 767, so probably more cost-effective.

Btw I found some specs about the Russian A50 version on the Beriev site, which are interesting:




Not sure how reliable this specs are, or how different the Phalcon system will be (although I guess it should be better), but especially the detection range of cruise missiles is interesting (I guess S1m2 means smaller than 1m2), because the Erieye system can detect such missiles only below 200Km. Also an F16 sized fighter with an often quoted RCS of 1,2 m2 must be detected way earlier, not to mention Flanker sized fighters. Combined with the long range MKI and in future FGFA radars, IAF should have a really good early warning capability against air threats.

The reason Israel integrated with the A-50 base was our huge Il-76 fleet (hence commonality). Moreover, at that time, we were still apprehensive of the Americans. It has only been recently that they have opened their arms (so to speak:P). It should be noted that it took americans a few years to clear Phalcon for export to India (which shows the level of distrust we had back then and the american priorities).

Coming to the E-3 and issues with 767, the radar system is always subject to change. A-50 also has a rotating radome but was successfully made into the fixed Phalcon integrated platform we see today with the IAF. The issue IMO is the size of the radar. The radome on 767 seems to be smaller than A-50 Phalcon (I could be wrong). If so then the smaller size probably accounts for lesser capabilities. Though the capability of Phalcon system (IAF) has not been specifically disclosed, The shear size of the radar gives an indication of the capabilities.

Big size -> Bigger arrays -> more power consumption -> longer detection range

Let us see what IAF goes for. With the kind of money india has to throw around (as it would seem to be the case), Boeing may even agree to integrate a radome on 777 :P
 
.
The reason Israel integrated with the A-50 base was our huge Il-76 fleet (hence commonality). Moreover, at that time, we were still apprehensive of the Americans. It has only been recently that they have opened their arms (so to speak:P). It should be noted that it took americans a few years to clear Phalcon for export to India (which shows the level of distrust we had back then and the american priorities).

Coming to the E-3 and issues with 767, the radar system is always subject to change. A-50 also has a rotating radome but was successfully made into the fixed Phalcon integrated platform we see today with the IAF. The issue IMO is the size of the radar. The radome on 767 seems to be smaller than A-50 Phalcon (I could be wrong). If so then the smaller size probably accounts for lesser capabilities. Though the capability of Phalcon system (IAF) has not been specifically disclosed, The shear size of the radar gives an indication of the capabilities.

Big size -> Bigger arrays -> more power consumption -> longer detection range

Let us see what IAF goes for. With the kind of money india has to throw around (as it would seem to be the case), Boeing may even agree to integrate a radome on 777 :P


You get me wrong, I meant if it was possible to integrate an AESA radar instead of the multi mode radar in the 767 AWACS, they would have offered it.

Just found another possibility, an Airbus 310 Phalcon:



Wedgetail - Australia's Pocket AWACS
 
. .
Can someone rank the top 3 awacs world has ever witnessed?
That's very hard to say, because most of the infos about the radar systems are secret. I guess the E-3 belongs to the best and many sources said that the early A50 Shemel wasn't comparable to it in terms of performance. Maybe that was the reason why PLAAF wanted the A50 Phalcon, instead of the normal Russian system.
The modernised version seemed to be more comparable to western, but the fact that we go for the more expensive Phalcon system makes clear, that they still have some advantages.

I searched a lot about differences of the Saab 2000 Erieye and our A50 Phalcon and as far as I understanded it, the radar systems itself might not be that much different. It's mainly the platform that makes the difference in performance and capability.
More space for more equipment, more workstations, powerplants, crew comfort, also what kind of radar dome the aircraft has. A50, E-2 and E-3 provides 360° radar detection, with the same performance to all directions. Most of the other Phalcon systems have 360° coverage, but limited at the front and back areas. The Erieye systems offers only 240°, or 300° in the latest version, with blind spots to the front and back area. A50 can be refueled in air, Saab 2000 not, but it has the longer endurance to counter this to some extend.
All these differences makes it hard to compare them and as I said, it's hard to find reliable specs about them too.
 
.
India to get second AWACS on Thursday - Yahoo! India News

Tue, Mar 23 04:07 PM
New Delhi, Mar 23 (PTI) India will receive another Israeli-made Phalcon Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AWACS) on Thursday, giving it the second ''eye in the sky'' for enhanced surveillance that would virtually cover the entire nation. The second AWACS will arrive in Jamnagar in Gujarat and will be deployed in Agra, IAF officials said here today.

With the arrival of the second AWACS, officials said the IAF can keep an eye on both the eastern and western front at the same time. "After the induction of the third system, we would be able to virtually cover the whole nation at one go," they added.

The system, primarily used for detection of incoming hostile cruise missiles and aircraft from hundreds of kilometers away, can also direct air defence fighters during combat operations against enemy jets. It also helps detect troop build up across the borders.

The AWACS are being procured from Israel under a 2003 deal worth USD 1.1 billion. The tripartite deal also involved Russia as three Phalcon radars are to be mounted on Russia-make IL-76 heavylift transport aircraft, of which the first was delivered in May last year.

The AWACS aircraft are operated by the Agra-based 50 squadron and after their induction on May 28 last year, they have been carrying out extensive flying operations with frontline fighters such as the Su-30MKI, Mirage-2000 and the Jaguars. The AWACS also took part in the recently-held major exercise codenamed ''Vayushakti'' and controlled the flight operations of over 100 aircraft participating in the massive Fire-power demonstration.

Known as ''eye in the sky'' for its surveillance and target acquisition capabilities, an AWACS provides IAF the means to keep a tab on enemy aircraft and missiles taking off from across the border, thereby enhancing response time. India and Israel are said to be in advanced negotiations for the purchase of three more Phalcon AWACS, which the IAF proposes to integrate with other air and ground assets.

All six AWACS would be linked with the country''s first military satellite proposed to be launched by the middle of next year.
 
. . . .
Back
Top Bottom