Astra BVRAAM

[Kunal Biswas]

Imho, MKI should get same new AESA and electronic suit same as those mounted on Tejas MK1P/A, But only to those MKI which are made in India with modifications on air-frame ..

But still their are serious doubts Russian would allow such ..

 

[scatterStorm]

Imho, MKI should get same new AESA and electronic suit same as those mounted on Tejas MK1P/A, But only to those MKI which are made in India with modifications on air-frame ..

But still their are serious doubts Russian would allow such ..

Little by little, my eyes are opening on why the road to being indigenous is the only way we could ward of the monopoly these arms dealers have on us.

My estimates are by 2050 we could be independent on three key sectors:

1. Missile Tech
2. Aviation Tech and Manufacturing.
3. Naval Tech and Manufacturing.

I am not adding DEW weapons sector as we are still playing with Kali on paper.

Have high hope for AMCA as Tejas didn't disappointed yet, and hope so it never will.

 

[TPFscopes]

===========================================================

 

[kunal1123]

===========================================================

awesome........................................................................................

 

[Guest]

Nice to see an indigenous seeker in ASTRA. But the need of hour is to develop a inhouse X band seeker instead of Ku band for target acquisition. But never the less a great achievement on our part .

Ku is higher frequency so better target resolution and less prone to jamming or countermeasures- even better is MMW seeker-

High frequency seeker however require more power for higher range- X band is good for target acquisition and guidance from fighter aircraft-

 

[Guest]

Imho, MKI should get same new AESA and electronic suit same as those mounted on Tejas MK1P/A, But only to those MKI which are made in India with modifications on air-frame ..

But still their are serious doubts Russian would allow such ..

Best thing would be 5th gen engine from PAK FA program and Israeli 2052 AESA with Indian customization- With missiles like Meteor integrated along with Astra mk 1 and mk 2-

 

[Chinmoy]

Ku is higher frequency so better target resolution and less prone to jamming or countermeasures- even better is MMW seeker-

High frequency seeker however require more power for higher range- X band is good for target acquisition and guidance from fighter aircraft-

Who told you that??? Ku band is least appropriate for targeting. Its frequency band lies in 10 to 12 GHz whereas MmW frequency lies in between 30 to 300 GHz..

 

[scatterStorm]

===========================================================

So finally from paper to prototype, that a good sign, still no high hopes as such projects get overshadowed by bigger and more priority projects. Let's see how it matches up with the likes of BAE systems DEWs. That's the benchmark.

 

[Guest]

Who told you that??? Ku band is least appropriate for targeting. Its frequency band lies in 10 to 12 GHz whereas MmW frequency lies in between 30 to 300 GHz..

Which why MMW is better frequency for picking target at close ranges- now compare that with X-band and Ku-band- usually active-BVRAAMs have Ku-band seeker- but in future they may have MMW-

Small antenna size and requirement of high power makes Ku-band preferred choice in BVRAAM- India already has X-band seeker It was used in PAD interceptor-

 

[Chinmoy]

Which why MMW is better frequency for picking target at close ranges- now compare that with X-band and Ku-band- usually active-BVRAAMs have Ku-band seeker- but in future they may have MMW-

Small antenna size and requirement of high power makes Ku-band preferred choice in BVRAAM- India already has X-band seeker It was used in PAD interceptor-

First of all you have to understand how a BVRAAM works. Modern BVRAAM does have multimode navigation system unlike their old counterparts which relied mainly of SARH.

Now although Ku band does have a higher frequency then X band, but it does some serious drawbacks when it comes to ranging and imaging. Have you ever wondered why X band is much more preferred in western military then the Ku band? Its not like that they have not tested the Ku band for their transmission purpose. The issue with such high frequency band is, the weather condition does play a havoc with them. So military had came up with X band with slight low frequency for targeting purpose as a compromise. Moreover high frequency means high power output and it means higher input. Although with modern day electronics power input is not a matter of great concern, but in case of a AAM, it still is their in top of priority list. You need a workout to power the active homing terminal phase of any AAM. Now a high frequency radar is good for imaging, but on power consumption part, it is a developers nightmare. This is one of the reason why none of the BVRAAM of today relies singularly on RADAR homing from initial stage apart from the stealth factor.

Apart from this, MmW seeker in NAG missile is used as a secondary seeker whereas with its high power output, it could have been a developers dream come true in case of seeker. Do you know the reason why? Just look into the facts and you would come to know why.

 

[Guest]

Now although Ku band does have a higher frequency then X band, but it does some serious drawbacks when it comes to ranging and imaging. Have you ever wondered why X band is much more preferred in western military then the Ku band? Its not like that they have not tested the Ku band for their transmission purpose. The issue with such high frequency band is, the weather condition does play a havoc with them. So military had came up with X band with slight low frequency for targeting purpose as a compromise. Moreover high frequency means high power output and it means higher input. Although with modern day electronics power input is not a matter of great concern, but in case of a AAM, it still is their in top of priority list. You need a workout to power the active homing terminal phase of any AAM. Now a high frequency radar is good for imaging, but on power consumption part, it is a developers nightmare. This is one of the reason why none of the BVRAAM of today relies singularly on RADAR homing from initial stage apart from the stealth factor.

Every frequency range has their own drawbacks and advantages-

The range, detection capability and jammer burnthrough performance of an antenna can be measured in power aperture product- Where power is the transmitted power by antenna and aperture is the crossection area of antenna-

Now Given the size of antenna on two BVR missile is same- the system which transmits greater power will be natural a better performer when It comes of these three parameters- which why the Ku-band has natural advantage- then comes the programming part- these weather related problem you mentioned can be dealt while coding the seeker- These days seeker coding is so advanced even chaff is not able to fool them forget about rain-

Coming to power consumption part the seeker has to get activated for only a few seconds when the target is near- and even the flight duration of a BVRAMM is not more than 2-3 minutes- a good performance Lithium-ion battery cell would do well-

Apart from this, MmW seeker in NAG missile is used as a secondary seeker whereas with its high power output, it could have been a developers dream come true in case of seeker. Do you know the reason why? Just look into the facts and you would come to know why.

NAG uses IIM and MMW seeker on different missiles as primary seekers- they don't have any space for secondary seeker- even If they had space It would make it even more costly as ATGM-

 

[Khagesh]

Small antenna size and requirement of high power makes Ku-band preferred choice in BVRAAM- India already has X-band Ku-band seeker It was used in PAD interceptor-

From http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in

 

[Guest]

From http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in

Posted below is a photo of the full-scale model of the X-band active radar seeker for the PAD exo-atmospheric interceptor vehicle developed by the DRDO.

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/04/deefexpo-2012-highlights.html

 

[Khagesh]

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/04/deefexpo-2012-highlights.html

It is the same thing about 2 years before. My suspicion is that Prasoon Sen Gupta ended up mis-identifying it, simply presuming that since the world works on X-band seekers so we must also be.

Follows is the status as well as the milestone from DRDO honcho, interviewed by by Saurav Jha, which should clarify:

http://www.news18.com/blogs/india/saurav-jha/defence-5-10879-748587.html
Seeking the future: An interview with Dr G Satheesh Reddy, Director Research Centre Imarat
Saurav Jha http://@SJha1618
First Published: September 12, 2014, 2:58 PM IST
Updated: September 12, 2014, 2:58 PM IST
SauravJha: PGMs of the kind?

Satheesh Reddy:Like the lightweight PGM under development here in RCI at the moment. This PGM has already been test-fired from an unmanned aerial vehicle and a sizeable number can also be carried by a missile like the Prithvi or by an aircraft like the Su-30 MKI. The Prithvi configuration can be used for attacking runways for example.

Continuing on the RF seeker front, RCI is also developing a Ku-band seeker for anti-aircraft applications. This is a scaled down version of an existing active radar seeker developed by us and is a requirement for the Astra. System qualification is expected to commence early next year.

An X-band seeker for anti-ship applications is also being pursued very seriously and trials will be held in the first quarter of 2015.

 

[Chinmoy]

Every frequency range has their own drawbacks and advantages-

The range, detection capability and jammer burnthrough performance of an antenna can be measured in power aperture product- Where power is the transmitted power by antenna and aperture is the crossection area of antenna-

Now Given the size of antenna on two BVR missile is same- the system which transmits greater power will be natural a better performer when It comes of these three parameters- which why the Ku-band has natural advantage- then comes the programming part- these weather related problem you mentioned can be dealt while coding the seeker- These days seeker coding is so advanced even chaff is not able to fool them forget about rain-

Coming to power consumption part the seeker has to get activated for only a few seconds when the target is near- and even the flight duration of a BVRAMM is not more than 2-3 minutes- a good performance Lithium-ion battery cell would do well-




NAG uses IIM and MMW seeker on different missiles as primary seekers- they don't have any space for secondary seeker- even If they had space It would make it even more costly as ATGM-

Now what you have said regarding advantages and drawbacks are extremely well taken. But one thing which we forget about AAM missiles or any Anti Aircraft missile is what are the factors which would act against it and how to overcome it. For any AAM the first challenge is to overcome the RADOME error slope. Now this could be easily overcome to maximum extent in lab. But when you have to take into account the environmental variables, no coding could make it even 95% accurate. For that purpose you need to have to work your way through compromise.

High frequency RADAR are absolutely brilliant for tracking and targeting, but other interesting thing about these is how easy it is to fool them. The 5th gen fighter tech is all about stealth and by stealth I am not only talking about RAM coating. A stealth fighter is more about its geometry then the coating. These are designed to deflect the RADAR wave and all the current 5th gen are effective to an extent in it. Now Ku band with its higher frequency is much more susceptible to these defraction then X band. Same is the case with MmW. Due to its high frequency, its is susceptible to atmospheric attentuation. In war you could control almost everything, but not the environment in which the war would be fought.

Moreover the battery in an AAM does have to power up a whole lot of system including its flight control computer. So every juice of it matters. Its not as simple as replacing the batts with high power one.

Now I am not against the development of Ku abnd RADAR for ASTRA. Infact it is something which we all should be proud of. We have shown ingenuity in developing something like this. But I hope the developers had kept in mind the drawbacks of Ku band in target acquisition before going head on.

 

[Flame Thrower]

After reading content about KU band and X band, I got a quick qn. I am a layman in tech terms, please answer my questions patiently.

1. Which radio frequency band is more susceptible to jamming!?

2. If two missiles i.e one with KU band and another with X band are fired at the same target(with ECM pod), what are the chances that both can be jammed.

3. Can these two radio frequency could be jammed with single ECM!?

4. I think Russians use KU band, Nato uses X band... any idea on what China uses!?

5. Can both of these missile could be guided by same radar at the same time!?

Thanks in advance for the answes

 

[Guest]

It is the same thing about 2 years before. My suspicion is that Prasoon Sen Gupta ended up mis-identifying it, simply presuming that since the world works on X-band seekers so we must also be.

Follows is the status as well as the milestone from DRDO honcho, interviewed by by Saurav Jha, which should clarify:

http://www.news18.com/blogs/india/saurav-jha/defence-5-10879-748587.html
Seeking the future: An interview with Dr G Satheesh Reddy, Director Research Centre Imarat
Saurav Jha http://@SJha1618
First Published: September 12, 2014, 2:58 PM IST
Updated: September 12, 2014, 2:58 PM IST
SauravJha: PGMs of the kind?

Satheesh Reddy:Like the lightweight PGM under development here in RCI at the moment. This PGM has already been test-fired from an unmanned aerial vehicle and a sizeable number can also be carried by a missile like the Prithvi or by an aircraft like the Su-30 MKI. The Prithvi configuration can be used for attacking runways for example.

Continuing on the RF seeker front, RCI is also developing a Ku-band seeker for anti-aircraft applications. This is a scaled down version of an existing active radar seeker developed by us and is a requirement for the Astra. System qualification is expected to commence early next year.

An X-band seeker for anti-ship applications is also being pursued very seriously and trials will be held in the first quarter of 2015.

You could be right- I am not so sure about X-band seeker- my assessment is PAD seeker using antenna derived from Tejas slotted planer array MMR and hence retaining the parent frequency band-

Usually missiles with large area for seeker antenna like 500mm plus antenna size X-band should be a good choice- If possible with AESA antenna having GaN TRMMs-

 

[Guest]

Now what you have said regarding advantages and drawbacks are extremely well taken. But one thing which we forget about AAM missiles or any Anti Aircraft missile is what are the factors which would act against it and how to overcome it. For any AAM the first challenge is to overcome the RADOME error slope. Now this could be easily overcome to maximum extent in lab. But when you have to take into account the environmental variables, no coding could make it even 95% accurate. For that purpose you need to have to work your way through compromise.

High frequency RADAR are absolutely brilliant for tracking and targeting, but other interesting thing about these is how easy it is to fool them. The 5th gen fighter tech is all about stealth and by stealth I am not only talking about RAM coating. A stealth fighter is more about its geometry then the coating. These are designed to deflect the RADAR wave and all the current 5th gen are effective to an extent in it. Now Ku band with its higher frequency is much more susceptible to these defraction then X band. Same is the case with MmW. Due to its high frequency, its is susceptible to atmospheric attentuation. In war you could control almost everything, but not the environment in which the war would be fought.

Moreover the battery in an AAM does have to power up a whole lot of system including its flight control computer. So every juice of it matters. Its not as simple as replacing the batts with high power one.

Now I am not against the development of Ku abnd RADAR for ASTRA. Infact it is something which we all should be proud of. We have shown ingenuity in developing something like this. But I hope the developers had kept in mind the drawbacks of Ku band in target acquisition before going head on.

The range at which seeker picks up is too less for stealth- However If we are able to use BVRAAM against stealth aircraft- It wouldn't be stealth anymore-

I get your point- we should look for ward to developing high performance AESA seekers with GaN TRMMs in various frequency bands for different missiles depending on requirements- And improve our coding too-

The power will be a problem but I am sure ISRO with their litium-ion batteries and super-capacitor cells can help us solve It upto the extent of making such high performance seekers feasible-

 

[Guest]

After reading content about KU band and X band, I got a quick qn. I am a layman in tech terms, please answer my questions patiently.

1. Which radio frequency band is more susceptible to jamming!?

2. If two missiles i.e one with KU band and another with X band are fired at the same target(with ECM pod), what are the chances that both can be jammed.

3. Can these two radio frequency could be jammed with single ECM!?

4. I think Russians use KU band, Nato uses X band... any idea on what China uses!?

5. Can both of these missile could be guided by same radar at the same time!?

Thanks in advance for the answes

I am also a layman- But I will try- senior informed member can add corrections-

1- Depends on jamming type- certain jamming methods like introducing noise is far easier on high frequency--

2- If the diameter of antenna is the same- naturally the Ku-band have good chance of success but there are other factors like which seeker is coded better-

3- No

4- China uses copied from Russian- what we were testing on Astra sometime back It should be Ku-band-

5- Yes- seeker's time come in final stage- most of the time parent aircraft radar is guiding-

The basics of any antenna is that the size of antenna is directly proportional to wavelength so small frequency(large wavelength) will have large antenna and high frequency will have small antenna-

Now coming to Radar antenna- the natural performance of antenna can be decided from power aperture product- Power is directly proportional to frequency and aperture is the size of antenna-

The better the power aperture product- the better will be antenna- so performance depends on both size of antenna and frequency- So we have to balance according to requirements-

Now high frequency antenna is not good for long range as it will eat lot of power and is more prone to interference- Low frequency antenna is not good for small ranges as its resolution of target will be poor-

Both X-band and Ku-band are high frequency- But Ku is higher than X-

 

[Flame Thrower]

So it means that if we fire 2 aastras one with Ku band seeker and another with X seeker then the chances are higher that enemy ac is destroyed.

Back then there were some reports that L band of Pakfa will be used to search targets and guide missiles. I understand that L band is not good enough for targeting.

Is it possible to use two primary radars with different frequency to guide missiles towards the target!?