What's new

Pakistan to get high-tech air defence system

How does beyod the horizon radar really works??. One has to bounce radar waves off something to get a profile. Do these get bounced off Ionosphere or do you use the existing geo-fixed position satellites. I would have thought that unless you have AWACS where you can see a long way off, any land position radar station would be limited by the height of its position. Have they found a way to literally bend radar waves and enable one to see over the horizon??

How else one see a target 120 KM aways unless you are flying at 30,000 feet. In that case there will other problems such as ground clutter ( main draw back of Look-Down/Shoot-Down radars). It will take an extremely high resolution radar to differentiate between a 'Bogey' and a non obtrusive flying object such as private jet 120 KM away. Surely there must be many false alarms. I have heard a lot about AESA radar, what is surprising that they can fix the same in the nose cone of a fighter jet??

This may be a stupid question but I would like to understand it.
 
.
http://www.ee.duke.edu/~jk/SAM%20Group_files/SAM Radar.htm

Read this about OTH radars, the data I said was rought estimate, to differentiate 120 kms away as you said horizon must come into picture, thus I said situational awareness at 120 kms, target is friend or foe confirmation at 60 kms, target track at 30 kms, missile fired at 15 kms.

In simple terms.

And can you please reframe your question about AESA?
 
.
Thanks Joey, as I guessed they take advantage of the Ionosphere.

My point about AESA Radar is that there must be a problem minitiarization AESA to fit it into the nose of a fighter as it would involve a way to dissipate heat in such a small space. Still it is being done. It is less a querry more an exclamation. My knowledge about Radars is very limited and I have the bad habit of thinking aloud.
 
.
as far as i know INdian pilots they are SISSSSSSSy you know (mummy DAddy)..........they may be large in numbers(airplanes)....but their pilots lack in trainnig.........they cannot match with pakistani pilots.............india may be having 1500 planes but may i ask why they still lack in attacking pakistan.......wat i meant to say that they are in large numbers but cannot match with our pilots..............
 
.
as far as i know INdian pilots they are SISSSSSSSy you know (mummy DAddy)..........they may be large in numbers(airplanes)....but their pilots lack in trainnig.........they cannot match with pakistani pilots.............india may be having 1500 planes but may i ask why they still lack in attacking pakistan.......wat i meant to say that they are in large numbers but cannot match with our pilots..............

And is that the reason Our new mirage upgrade deal covers 2 years warranty aka 180 hours per year (360 hours total) of sorties? :coffee:
How many hours of sorties PAF planes performs?

Dont get me wrong, The amount of money we spent behind training behind each pilot right now and the hours they clocks cannot be matched by PAF.

niaz i'll get back to you shortly, h.o.
 
.
Thanks Joey, as I guessed they take advantage of the Ionosphere.
Well yes, but it doesnt always works the perfect way, I was mentioning naval case where only Pfa and Pd factor of your radar determines your safe trip home.

There are number of things to detect things, like,

>> Put your radar as high as possible, a 2m higher mast moves your radar horizon 1 km away.

>> Direct lot of energy towards the target, the more power the better, the more time on target the better. Attenuation of power is caused by waveguides, rotary joints, media change (from electrical to air and vice versa), freespace attenuation (for L-Band less than S-band, for S less than I band). Time on target is defined by rotation speed and pencil beam versus multibeam. A pencil needs to touch a slice of the hemisphere while a multibeam covers the whole slice with multiple fingers.

>> Try to use large antennae, Size is gain, everything you do not receive, can not be processed.

>> Smart processing, increases many things like one will be done in our indigenous AWACS programme.

>> Multiple sensor fusion, as specific radar only samples a very small part of the total spectrum.

My point about AESA Radar is that there must be a problem minitiarization AESA to fit it into the nose of a fighter as it would involve a way to dissipate heat in such a small space. Still it is being done. It is less a querry more an exclamation. My knowledge about Radars is very limited and I have the bad habit of thinking aloud.

Yes miniaturization of fighter AESA is pretty hard, one needs smaller TR modules, needs better processing fab, need better cooling system, need lower power consumption with more output, so yes pretty pretty hard, the reason not even Europe has one and Russias new AESA does not sounds that promising.
 
.
joey said:
>> Direct lot of energy towards the target, the more power the better, the more time on target the better. Attenuation of power is caused by waveguides, rotary joints, media change (from electrical to air and vice versa), freespace attenuation (for L-Band less than S-band, for S less than I band). Time on target is defined by rotation speed and pencil beam versus multibeam. A pencil needs to touch a slice of the hemisphere while a multibeam covers the whole slice with multiple fingers.

The attenuation is caused by the air because the air has particles and hence the Gunn diode microwaves sending particles are attenuated over a certain distance. You must also see the effects of increasing the Microwave power, there will be a lot of interference, the system will crash and by increasing the power there will also be problem with credibility of the radar could show interference as enemy(assuming it is runnig on its maximum stable power). Radars are weird if you increase the power it will degrade the credibility of the system even though its range increases, however, it is better to increase the over all gain of the subsystem which keeps the Radar more stable, and you should also look at the effects of the Radar if it had increased power, what would be the overall reactance and how will it effect it?

A better way to make the radars more capable is by using lots of radars with different frequencies it can be achieved and placing them in such a structure that they have a wide angle covering the area, using a limited bound RCL circuits installed on the Radars, however, using the inductor (L) in only a thick copper cylinder because inductors are very unstable.
 
.
as far as i know INdian pilots they are SISSSSSSSy you know (mummy DAddy)..........they may be large in numbers(airplanes)....but their pilots lack in trainnig.........they cannot match with pakistani pilots.............india may be having 1500 planes but may i ask why they still lack in attacking pakistan.......wat i meant to say that they are in large numbers but cannot match with our pilots..............

Wonderfull analysis...!!!
 
.
The attenuation is caused by the air because the air has particles and hence the Gunn diode microwaves sending particles are attenuated over a certain distance. You must also see the effects of increasing the Microwave power, there will be a lot of interference, the system will crash and by increasing the power there will also be problem with credibility of the radar could show interference as enemy(assuming it is runnig on its maximum stable power). Radars are weird if you increase the power it will degrade the credibility of the system even though its range increases, however, it is better to increase the over all gain of the subsystem which keeps the Radar more stable, and you should also look at the effects of the Radar if it had increased power, what would be the overall reactance and how will it effect it?
Obviously I have given 4 common sets to increase radar performance, What I meant by increasing power has much to do with increase the direction of power towards the target as well.

A better way to make the radars more capable is by using lots of radars with different frequencies it can be achieved and placing them in such a structure that they have a wide angle covering the area, using a limited bound RCL circuits installed on the Radars, however, using the inductor (L) in only a thick copper cylinder because inductors are very unstable.
Yes radar network is possible for ground based SAM installation, but the sensor fusion isnt exactly as easy as it sounds.

Ship borne system dont have that luxury and thus are more more hard, heck you cannot even integrate Fire control and surveillance in one radar like some of latest radars are doing, has some serious drawbacks.
 
.
And is that the reason Our new mirage upgrade deal covers 2 years warranty aka 180 hours per year (360 hours total) of sorties? :coffee:
How many hours of sorties PAF planes performs?

Dont get me wrong, The amount of money we spent behind training behind each pilot right now and the hours they clocks cannot be matched by PAF.

niaz i'll get back to you shortly, h.o.

no my friend iam not............and iam sorry if you took me wrong...........but actually you know only about your country and simply cannot say that......

The amount of money we spent behind training behind each pilot right now and the hours they clocks cannot be matched by PAF

so crooect yourself
 
.
And is that the reason Our new mirage upgrade deal covers 2 years warranty aka 180 hours per year (360 hours total) of sorties? :coffee:
How many hours of sorties PAF planes performs?

Dont get me wrong, The amount of money we spent behind training behind each pilot right now and the hours they clocks cannot be matched by PAF.

niaz i'll get back to you shortly, h.o.

Sorties per aircraft is a difficult number to come up with. Even you can't come up with that # for the IAF aside from looking up some info on the M2K upgrade deal.

In terms of Pilot training, PAF is doing 180 hours/year. I can back that up with a solid source, whereas I also have sources to claim that in many IAF sqns, the number of hours/year is dismally low.

IAF is 3 times the size of PAF so obviously it would be spending more in absolute terms, but I wonder what the two spend per capita. That would tell you something about the level of trainin in the PAF vs IAF. Unfortunately I do not have data around this for either side so your claim about PAF not matching IAF in pilot training is little more than a claim.
 
.
Sorties per aircraft is a difficult number to come up with. Even you can't come up with that # for the IAF aside from looking up some info on the M2K upgrade deal.
Correct, But Mirage sorties of IAF are normally around that figure.

In terms of Pilot training, PAF is doing 180 hours/year.
Thats very good.

I can back that up with a solid source,
No need of that, surely PAF can do it.

whereas I also have sources to claim that in many IAF sqns, the number of hours/year is dismally low.
You dont mean the indian mainstream media sources do you? if not fine.
As far as I know we are clocking pretty high.

IAF is 3 times the size of PAF so obviously it would be spending more in absolute terms, but I wonder what the two spend per capita.
I was talking about capita hours, IIRC IAF clocks over 200 hours per pilot!

Unfortunately I do not have data around this for either side so your claim about PAF not matching IAF in pilot training is little more than a claim.
Training is not necessarily about clocking hours, Does PAF till today has true BVR capabilities? Developing BVR tactics alone takes years! Training is also about the exposure of your pilots, I do hav first hand data from a US exchange pilot in Chennai about Indian pilots, if your interested let me know.

But indeed my claim about IAF pilots being better than PAF cannot be backed up nor can be the contrary backed up, Thus I didnt claimed that but I claimed the amount of money spent for training to different exposure.
 
.
Training is not necessarily about clocking hours, Does PAF till today has true BVR capabilities? Developing BVR tactics alone takes years! Training is also about the exposure of your pilots, I do hav first hand data from a US exchange pilot in Chennai about Indian pilots, if your interested let me know.

But indeed my claim about IAF pilots being better than PAF cannot be backed up nor can be the contrary backed up, Thus I didnt claimed that but I claimed the amount of money spent for training to different exposure.


Really? Training is not about clocking hours?? I am sure the ground/support/engineering crews just sit around doing nothing since they never see an hour of the time clocked by pilots in the air.:what: Or did we forget about the fact that they too have a training program and put some serious effort into it?

Kidding aside, I think you have agreed that there is no specific way in which one can claim that by virtue of spending more, you have a better training program especially when you don't even know where that money is going and actually how much is being spent on specific branches and disciplines within the Air Force.
I was talking about capita hours, IIRC IAF clocks over 200 hours per pilot!

Capita hour is a bogus way of looking at hours. Usually that is done on a fleet wide basis and as such does not show proficiency on a platform basis or even on a Sqn basis. This puts the numbers in doubt even more when you have reports that pilots are flying less than 100 hours in certain sqns of the IAF.
 
. .
the only thing pak can purchase is MANPADS,.............

go for it......

u guys just plan..............tell me when it is inducted......:guns:

Dude quit trolling. And by the way our man pads were enough to bring down those flying coffins of the IAF.
Also get yourself educated before posting crap in everyother thread. Pakistan already has opted for the SPADA 2000 system from italy.

Here is an article for you to increase your knowledge:

http://www.****************/news/publish/airforce/MBDA_Spada_2000_Air_Defence_System_for_Pakistan_Air_Force100013326.php
 
.
Back
Top Bottom