A-50E/I Phalcon vs Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C.

[sob]

On a serious note as long as the blunder 17 has Chinese electronics and radar they may not be able to link up with the AWACS. This was from an old article but I do not know the current scenario.

Somebody had pointed out that it was the reason why Pakistan was looking at KJ 2000 from china.

 

[sayareakd]

On a serious note as long as the blunder 17 has Chinese electronics and radar they may not be able to link up with the AWACS. This was from an old article but I do not know the current scenario.

Somebody had pointed out that it was the reason why Pakistan was looking at KJ 2000 from china.

one thing is for sure that Pakistan cannot afford Western toys that too in good numbers, now what you say also make sense as they cannot just buy from open market equipment to for all its junk fighters to get real time updates from AWAC may be few of the junk fighters have this tech but not all, they just cannot afford to have them. So free Chines maal.

 

[p2prada]

The G550 runs the 2085 which is the predecessor of the 2090. It is AEW&C as per freely available information.

IAI website particularly classified it as AEW. The description has no mention of Command and Control as explained for EL/W 2090.

2085
http://www.iai.co.il/34480-36643-en/Groups_ELTA_SystemsApp_Products_ELW.aspx?btl=1

2090
http://www.iai.co.il/34480-41070-en/Groups_ELTA_SystemsApp_Products_ELW.aspx?btl=1

Note the description. Anyway the difference between AEW and AEW&C is not limited by radar, rather by software and work stations. You can say requirements too.

AC, IMHO payload of IL76 Capacity: 50,000 kg (Il-76), Payload: 50 tonnes which shall be fixed for the AWAC since it does not have to carry bomb or other equipment, crew is same, since station to man then are same.

The crew is more than what's on the regular IL-76 for obvious reasons. The Phalcon can carry extra crew members to maintain a fully functional command and control post. But I don't know how long they plan on staying airborne even with mid air refueling. If we consider MKIs and Rafales are expected to do 10.5 hours and 16 hours respectively, then the Phalcon can possibly match or exceed that from an operational POV.

I suppose the optimal endurance for Phalcon is 7.5 to 8 hours without refueling. So, you can say that is 2 hours for flying 1000Km from and to base and 6 hours of operational time without refueling. Bring in refueling the endurance can potentially be doubled. DRDO AEW&C will carry a backup crew of 5 controllers + 2 pilots. This is in order to push the endurance of the R-99A to 10 hours with refueling. Without refueling the R-99s endurance is 5 hours. Both aircraft can do around 900Kmph max.

Comparatively Saab 2000(Erieye) flies at half the speed and it has a 9 hour endurance. It cannot refuel. But the endurance is good enough as it is.

 

[p2prada]

most important part of our AWAC is that we will use it to track missile launches and to be part of BMD system. Range is classified, but i suspect it is more the 500 km in tracking mode.

The detection range for a 1m[SUP]2[/SUP] target on the Russia Beriev Mainstay was 215Km. It could track an aircraft at 300Km. It's potential capability against a Flanker like target was 500-600km. All these are figures from 1992. Now you can only imagine the figures for the Phalcon.

Ideally Satellites must be used for BM launch detection but that is still a decade away.

Not for the Russians and Americans. We aren't even talking of detection here. The Americans can track now. SIBIRS may already be operational for all we know.

BTW, the correct comparison would be between the Chinese supplied ZDK-03 to the A-50E/I instead of the Erieye.

The ZDK-03 is a small AEW&C and is far inferior to the Erieye. It is a PESA and is based on the E-2Cs rotodome concept.

I think you are talking about the KJ-2000.

From the defence daily "The limitation of the two sided array is that it can only cover two 120 degree sectors abeam of the aircraft, leaving 60 degree blind sectors over the nose and tail of the aircraft, and reduced antenna performance from 45 degrees off the beam aspect. Another limitation stems from the use of an airframe too small to accommodate a comprehensive self contained command, control and communications system, and other sensors such as a capable ESM and track association system."

This is what I had pointed out when I said the smaller aircraft cannot handle C&C like Phalcons can.

Any idea how the Pakistani's are going to integrate the Chinese systems with the European systems in SAAB.

Magic. It is not possible unless they can develop their own common datalinks. The F-16s will use Erieye and JF-17 will use ZDK-03 as long as the datalinks issue is not solved.

 

[sayareakd]

Saab has range max of 3335.7312km

http://www.saabaircraftleasing.com/prod/datasheets/2000_JAR.pdf

IL 76 has range of 4,300 km

plus IL 76 has mid air refuel facility but same is not visible on Saab

so this gives additional endurance in air then what Saab has.

 

[p2prada]

The Phalcon version of IL-76 has a range of 5000Km. But range is not a good measurement for endurance. As I have mentioned before, the IL-76 can fly twice as fast as the Turboprop. So, the time to fly 5000Km will be lesser at twice the speed. The endurance is 1 to 1.5 hours superior for the Saab-2000. But the IL-76 can refuel while Saab-2000 cannot.

At altitudes of 2Km, the IL-76 can at best manage an endurance of 2 hours.

 

[trackwhack]

The detection range for a 1m[SUP]2[/SUP] target on the Russia Beriev Mainstay was 215Km. It could track an aircraft at 300Km. It's potential capability against a Flanker like target was 500-600km. All these are figures from 1992. Now you can only imagine the figures for the Phalcon.



Not for the Russians and Americans. We aren't even talking of detection here. The Americans can track now. SIBIRS may already be operational for all we know.



The ZDK-03 is a small AEW&C and is far inferior to the Erieye. It is a PESA and is based on the E-2Cs rotodome concept.

I think you are talking about the KJ-2000.



This is what I had pointed out when I said the smaller aircraft cannot handle C&C like Phalcons can.



Magic. It is not possible unless they can develop their own common datalinks. The F-16s will use Erieye and JF-17 will use ZDK-03 as long as the datalinks issue is not solved.

Of Course Americans and Russians have it. I was talking about the timeframe by when ISRO will be able to put satellites with similar capability for India.


The Pukes have the ZDK-03 and are hoping for the KJ2K.


Regarding puki operational issues, the ZDK and Erieye will mark out the others strikers as enemy planes and they will take each other out

 

[p2prada]

Of Course Americans and Russians have it. I was talking about the timeframe by when ISRO will be able to put satellites with similar capability for India.

If it is only detection, then ISRO can manage it even faster. But the problem with satellites is that we need to monitor a small area and the requirement is for a large amount of satellites for 24/7 capability. So, the limitation is policy and numbers and not technology. Then ISRO will also have to balance out it's priority as a civilian entity rather than military. If they launch early warning satellites then they will come under military jurisdiction which does not bode well for ISRO during sanctions.

The Pukes have the ZDK-03 and are hoping for the KJ2K.

Not many IL-76s available. They will have to wait for IL-476. But then again, can they afford it. Even Erieye was a bit too expensive after all.

Regarding puki operational issues, the ZDK and Erieye will mark out the others strikers as enemy planes and they will take each other out

 

[LETHALFORCE]

The new Novator anti-radiation missile on PAKFA is reported to be in 400Km range by the
time ERIYIE detects anything it will be a sitting duck.

 

[A chauhan]

AC, IMHO payload of IL76 Capacity: 50,000 kg (Il-76), Payload: 50 tonnes which shall be fixed for the AWAC since it does not have to carry bomb or other equipment, crew is same, since station to man then are same.

Well that is a lot more than that of the Erieye , yet Pakis keep shouting about their Erieyes. I don't think Kj-2000 will have similar capabilities but it will be interesting to see.

 

[drkrn]

well i have a doubt.

if f-16 use eyrie and j-17's use Chinese aewac how can they share real time info between each of them which is very crucial in a battle field (as some people here say Pakistani aewac's don't posses real time sharing capabilities)

what about their i.f.f capabilities? will eyrie identify j-17 as friend or foe / vice-versa ??

and

 

[p2prada]

Well that is a lot more than that of the Erieye , yet Pakis keep shouting about their Erieyes. I don't think Kj-2000 will have similar capabilities but it will be interesting to see.

Similar capabilities, yes, the KJ-2000 has similar capabilities. Rather they designed it based on the Phalcon, which they were supposed to have received back in 2001. The US stopped transfer of the aircraft, but a lot of specifications, designs and some other documentation were available to the Chinese. While they did accept that the KJ-2000 is not as capable as the Phalcon, however in terms of capability they are neck and neck.

Someday they will build an equivalent or even surpass it like what we have planned.

 

[p2prada]

well i have a doubt.

if f-16 use eyrie and j-17's use Chinese aewac how can they share real time info between each of them which is very crucial in a battle field (as some people here say Pakistani aewac's don't posses real time sharing capabilities)

what about their i.f.f capabilities? will eyrie identify j-17 as friend or foe / vice-versa ??

and

Right now we can say for sure the Erieyes and F-16s use Link 16.

However we can only speculate that the Chinese ZDK-03 and JF-17 may use a Chinese datalink.

But we can also say that Turkey may get involved and have all of Pakistani assets upgraded to NATO compatible Link 16. This IMHO, is the most possible scenario. This way Chinese don't have access to Erieye and F-16 while the Americans have no access to JF-17 and ZDK-03. Turkey is a great middleman for such a venture. Turkey has a very capable aerospace industry.

 

[Neil]

any idea of defences on our phalcon...after all we have only 3 to spare...??

 

[LETHALFORCE]

well i have a doubt.

if f-16 use eyrie and j-17's use Chinese aewac how can they share real time info between each of them which is very crucial in a battle field (as some people here say Pakistani aewac's don't posses real time sharing capabilities)

what about their i.f.f capabilities? will eyrie identify j-17 as friend or foe / vice-versa ??

and

Will US allow F-16's to be data linked to Eriyie or a Chinese system highly doubtful.

 

[p2prada]

Will US allow F-16's to be data linked to Eriyie or a Chinese system highly doubtful.

It wont be difficult if Turkey is involved. I am pretty sure the kind of system updates required will not be denied by the US. The F-16s come equipped with Link 16, Turkey will only have to integrate the Link 16s on ZDK-03.

IAF Mig-29s will be NATO compatible after the upgrade because the French are involved in some changes. I am pretty sure the MKI upgrade will make it NATO compatible as well. Not a big deal for the Turks to do the same.

 

[p2prada]

any idea of defences on our phalcon...after all we have only 3 to spare...??

Self protection jammers and flares and backed by an escort. Best defence is from the radar's long range after all along with ELINT.

IAF has the strategic depth to enable retreat in case of threats.

In the case of PAF, IAF will have the capability to engage across the entire breadth of the country. So, it will be very troublesome for them.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

It wont be difficult if Turkey is involved. I am pretty sure the kind of system updates required will not be denied by the US. The F-16s come equipped with Link 16, Turkey will only have to integrate the Link 16s on ZDK-03.

IAF Mig-29s will be NATO compatible after the upgrade because the French are involved in some changes. I am pretty sure the MKI upgrade will make it NATO compatible as well. Not a big deal for the Turks to do the same.

Eriyie linking is possible but I don't ever think Chinese AWACS will be allowed to be linked
most likely linked only to thunder blunder.

 

[Apollyon]

It wont be difficult if Turkey is involved. I am pretty sure the kind of system updates required will not be denied by the US. The F-16s come equipped with Link 16, Turkey will only have to integrate the Link 16s on ZDK-03.

IAF Mig-29s will be NATO compatible after the upgrade because the French are involved in some changes. I am pretty sure the MKI upgrade will make it NATO compatible as well. Not a big deal for the Turks to do the same.

Any chance Turk's could have secretly provided Paki's with Source Code of FCS and Flight System Software of F-16 so they could integrate Chinese and Brazilian weapons with their MLU F-16

and good to see you back

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Any chance Turk's could have secretly provided Paki's with Source Code of FCS and Flight System Software of F-16 so they could integrate Chinese and Brazilian weapons with their MLU F-16

and good to see you back

US does not provide source codes even to NATO allies.