AWACS won't carry jammers. Period.
Dedicated jammers are used for SEAD missions and not in air to air combat. It gives away too much targeting information.
That is when you are made the IAF chief. Dedicated Ew crafts are not radio mirchi FM stations broadcasting thier location.They will recieve and monitor the attacking aircraft's radar signals. And start jamming for the needed critical period from the criitcal distance where the attacking crafts are dangerous. And the vectored defending fighters move in for the kill. Then they will switch off their jamming . So dont bluff.
A radar is just a radar. EW depends on software, information gathering, processing and a lot of other things and not just power. A bigger platform has greater chances at jamming a smaller platform. Period.
[COLOR="#800000" I did not say a RADAR is a missile. That is what I said that a bigger EW platform will JAM the F-14. Because the power of F-14 's jammers and radars are 10 percent of dedicated EW craft.. You yourself went on bluffing in another forrum about the subject of F-18 growler scoring a missile kill on F-22 all by itself. I will post it shortly][/COLOR]
[QUOTE]No it won't. I have been explaining that for days now. Get it through your head. Weapons on an aircraft are based only on how capable the aircraft's radar is.[/QUOTE]
[COLOR="#800000"]That was in days before DATA link. If you have any doubts please go and read the Redflag engagements in which when USAF did not use AWACS, and under the powerfull jamming of sukhoi's jammers (even in training mode), how even the lowly mig-21 s swarned in and scored kills on USAF. When the results were out. The USAF said Well, we didnt use AWACS. If we did it would have been a victory for us. Now you are comming here and claiming that AWACSS is just a RADAR.
If your suggestion that weapons on aircrafts are entirely dependent upon the crafts radar, Why did the USAF said , We did not use AWACS?
[/COLOR]
AWACS is not the reason for it. AWACS are not always available and it's availability in a conflict is questionable. In actual simulations AWACS could not survive beyond a few minutes. The Americans have been using AWACS for 40 years now. How about learning from the tried and tested? They did not datalink F-16s with heavy missiles to it even though these AWACS had range.
The role assigned to F-16 was not that of F-14 in USAF. The primary reason why americans and russians built their big fighters was to dominate their vast airspace and the vast airspace over sea with longer range.
I once again say that a bigger twin engine fighter is built primarily to lug the large amount of fuel and bomb load over long ranges. Thier radars and EW suit were not made to jam dedicated Ew aircrafts.period.
Nothing stops any other nation from building a smaller fighter with lower range and lessser weapon loads to have the same amount of power available to a twin engine fighter's EW suit.
Until israelis built thier MERKAVAAs noone thought that the bulky tank can be efective . So if an MLU gives 95 kn engine to LCA mk-1s nothing stops ADAA from configuring a quarter fo them with lower payload and allot more all the 10kn extra power to their jammers.
Even as you and me arue there are plans afoot to convert one of Lca prototype into dedicated EW platform. Dont htink ADA guys will sit quiet after LCA leaving it to be target pracice for BIggies.
If an 4 LCAs team up with a dedicated EW craft in the form of PAKFA or SUKHOI it will be an unbeatable combination throgh out their service life, AWAC or no AWACS.
F-14 was needed to kill bombers and enemy AWACS and that's why it was given a long range missile. F-16 and F-15 were not expected to do this. Large fighters with large radars have the capability to enter and exit the battlefield at will. They are not limited by AWACS range. Sometimes they need to chase down an aircraft that is 1000Km away and they can do that. With a 400Km AAM, the mission can be performed even better.
The F-15 and can F-14 can do that only over airspaces in IRADQ and AFGANISTAN. Can they do it over RUSSIA? or anyother network centric and EW rich AWACS environment? A no no hundred times, Before they use their 400 km missiles thet will be spotted .
And do you know what happens in an awacss environment The defending fighters aree vectored on to the attackers in such a way that they wont even know that they are about to be attacked.The defending AWACS knows the limitations of F-14s radars and coverage cone. Only sukhoi has a rear seeing 50 km range radar. So the defending fighters will be vectored on the flanks and move into their radar darkness area and launch a missile. That is why it is such a powerfull platform.
If a stealth UCAVs with one ton payloadof bvr missiles ring the attacking group under awacs command.so in a modern warfare it is the earlir detection that gives the game away. That's why guys like DASSAULT are havin NUEROn as their next project. Get uptodate mate. Every one in fighter industry are saying that the last great manned fighters are already built.
In future AWACS too will move into stealthier platforms and they wont be detected 400 kms away.
AWACS is a very defensive aircraft in many situations, especially in area where there are heavy aircraft.
Also, fighters can maneuver to evade radar. Even AWACS's radar. A heavy fighter with a low RCS = good bye AWACS. Forget about AWACS detecting the PAKFA or J-20. These are new generation aircraft. They are expected to be many times superior to the LCA class aircraft. Heck Rafale and EF-2000 are expected to do the work of 3 LCAs. It will probably take 20 LCAs to do the work of one PAKFA.
UCAVs of this generation are not capable of providing targeting coordinates. All the UCAVs presently operational don't have radars and won't have it for quite some time. What you are thinking of is in the region of 2030 or 2040, well after even PAKFA is obsolete. UCAVs won't be used for battlespace management either. Because it is just a stupid machine. Humans manage the battlespace, not machines.
Where in the world is a heavy fighter having lower RCs and lower heat signatures ? The RCS of sukhoi is 20 Sq.m. And you are completly ignoring the huge heat signatures . A modern IRST carrying stealth UCAv can detect them far away and vector the smaller fighters into them
I am not clarifying things. I am educating you. People like you harm society more than help it.
You can also educate the ADA that CAS speed is the ultimate speed of fighters. And also educate ADA not to further open the flight envelope to achieve it's design speed of mach 1.9. You can also educate ADAA that LCA has drag issues and it's speed should never cross the grippen's top speed of mach 1.9+,using the same 85 kn engine.
You will soon get a doctorate in aeronautics
It is USN, not USAF. Get it. F-14 uses Phoenix to kill bombers and AWACS. That's why the F-14 needed it.
In the modern day too the heavy fighter will carry an even bigger radar and a bigger jammer and long range missiles. This will go on for probably another 100 years.
]The heavy heat signatures and heavy RCS of these modern biggies will be tracked by IRST carrying UCAVs for another 100 years. And also dedicated Ew crafts can jam them in part of fighter group for another hundred years
In a decade from now, LCA will have the smallest operational radar among all aircraft in the IAF.
That is only your opinion.
You wont even know the top speed of the LCA even after a decade.
And keep on sayiing its pre FOC flight envelope opening speed of mach 1.6 as it's top speed.
And even after a decade you will claim LCA cant cross 6G.
The discussion is about LCA working in combination with EW crafts and AWACS in home airspace and taking on bigger crafts with the help of them
Keep your family's urinary problems to yourself. The logic is completely different today. Specialization was a thing of the past. Role specific aircraft are gone. It is all multirole now. Aircraft are expected to do everything.
In cold war days the defence budgets were big and fighters were built for multi roles. Since the end of cold war to avoid costs multi role was born. In fact all of today's multi role fighters are air superiority fighters with an added ground bombing roles. Why cruise missiles have taken over most of the strike fighter's high accuracy missions.
The gravity bombs are dropped from heavy bombers. Only few fossils like JAGUAR are operating today in memeory of pre cruise missile days.They too will vanish in a decade. So much for the strike fighter.
The james bond brucelee days of HEAVY FIGhETERs swatting smaller ones in the pre EW AWAACS period is trully over.
And killing these AWACS and jamming aircraft goes to aircraft like the MKI.
A 5th generation aircraft can bypass all the escorts and jammers to get to the AWACS. Don't forget that.
Are you going to lay a by pass road for them. Infatuation with heavy fighters never stop it seems.What is a generation number. It is the stealth to shrtwave lenght radar waves. Other than that all the technologies available to a 5 th gen can be upgraded into any aircraft .
So dont confuse the forum.
Bwahahahahaha!
You fool. Why do you think the F-15 has a 104:0 kill ratio? The F-15 also took out around 250 aircraft over Iraq without a single loss. The F-15's kill ratio is all against good dog fighters of the time. Do you understand the difference between a Maruti and a Ferrari. Learn the difference when we use the term "generation gap."
That is what exactly what I said you genius, in skies over IRAQ and Afganistan they can kill all fighters . Dont read too much into brouchers and fanboy forums. Try to learn some thing about the revoulution in military affairs (RMA) since gulf war. There were many seminars on the subject. If you are over 60 there will be a generation gap with your son. That's why you are still talking of the old days and never learn about network centric warfare of today.
The so called big radar signature is a disadvantage. But that did not stop the MKI from finding the Mirage-2000 first during Indo-French air exercises. LCA's tiny RCS and heat signature can be identified by heavier aircraft at a much farther distance simply because of a massive difference in electronics capability. It does not matter how big the MKIs RCS is if the LCA does not have the equipment to find the MKI in the first place.
The massive massive heat signature of biggies will be relayed to LCA by stealth UCAVs operating in the group. The smaller RCS craft cannot be identified by a bigger RCS craft earlier ,however big a radar it can have.Where are you from man, mars? Do you know the meanig of the word RCS?
Even an awacs cannot detect a smaller RCS craft beyond it's detection range, However much more power they spit out.
Fire at what? Escorts don't fly the way you think they do. Escorts are heavily dependent on the AWACS to provide information. Against Long range missiles, the chances of the MKI escaping after firing a salvo is much greater while the AWACS surviving is much lesser simply because one is a fighter and the other is a slow, lumbering transport aircraft.
Once the F-14's radar is jammed how do you expect it to find awacs?The MKI's chances are certain only if a supporting jammer jam's the attackers radar. Other wise if a volley of missiles are unleashed in kill box manouvering to evade is impossibile.
Your logic is wrong. LCA won't fly low. It will fly high because that's what it is supposed to do. LCA is the worst fighter for the job. It does not have the speed or the range. It is just a first attempt to build a fighter jet and is not expected to do anything more than what it is actually designed to do. That is to replace Mig-21s. The ultimate worst aircraft for most mission profiles. It is aircraft like MKI that will handle such jobs like killing AWACS. Point defence aircraft are expected to defend a very small area. Nothing more.
Lcaa can fly low into the war theater. If you ask me to give source for this I have to commit suicide.
For people like you singing prasie of grippens ,f-16s and even a museum piece Jaguars Lcaa is not a music to the years I agree.
I never said LCA has to kill AWACS . All I sid was that if a pylon in LCAA has strenght enough to carry 800 kg it will carry a long range missile and guide it via data link from awacs or sukhoi in it sfighter group. But nothing goes throug your wooden head.
You don't even know the ABC of the difference between fighters, capabilities and the concept of AWACS. You don't know the limits of radars, limits of AWACS and the capabilities of fighters. You don't even know the difference between heavy and light fighters. How do you expect to hold your own in a discussion with such terrible knowledge?
Since you are retired long time ago You will never know anything about networn centric warfare. You will post great lies like low RCS LCA can be picked much further awaay by powerfull radar, Forgeting that RCS is for the reflecting profile of LCA and the power of the waves is irrelevant.
Now, stop posting till you find the link for LCA's 2 ton payload.
Okay then .
IAF gave 5 ton empty weight . 4 ton weapon load.and 85 kn thrust. with a range of 800 km or in 1980s.soCan any bud head name any fighter in 1993 when the LCA program is started that had the same specs.Even today no fighter in the world has done that. Since you are such a supreme genius ,please give the specs and start the discussions .Otherwise run away
