Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

Okabe Rintarou

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
2,337
Likes
11,988
Country flag
Yes, but a seeker is useless in UWB frequencies as switching to longer wavelengths will deteriorate the accuracy for tracking. It is equivalent to switching off the seeker. They need to get into X or Ku-bands for target acquisition.
Have the seeker frequency range as 10GHz +/- 2 GHz, i.e. between 8 and 12 GHz. That is still between the optimal bands X and Ku. Non-UWB seekers won't achieve such a wide range.


Did not know IAF is using multi-spectral camouflage nets.
Wonder when Army will order these for the T-90. DRDO already demoed it for that application.
 

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
4,995
Likes
11,564
Country flag
Likely a retarded troll, this guy's community is full of it.
The irony is that I actually once came across this guy in a comment section. I got into an argument with him. He kept on trying to prove that HAL is inefficient and Also tried to say things like India should buy KAI-FX, India should privatise HAL and blah blah blah.

Oh boy I have the screenshots of his Comments.
Screenshot_20220714_035912.jpg

Screenshot_20220714_035916.jpg
Screenshot_20220714_035918.jpg


Lol what a "retard".
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
It seems you are correct, Meteor indeed lacks an AESA seeker. But that got me questioning if there are really any overwhelming advantages of having an AESA seeker over an X-band seeker.
In simple words AESA seeker means having multiple independent TR module each capable of identification and tracking over a single TR module.
Band of seeker contributes for resolution and not jamming resistance.
AESA seeker provide you a wide plethora of ECCM and ESM to help defeat/degrade capabilities current generation of EW suites like Elta ELL-8222.
AESA seeker need for AESA jammers. As the technology is still new it has not proliferated much. Hence missile like PL-15 have advantage.
Mind you, for radars, it is a different game as AESA offers multiple other capabilities other than target tracking.
AESA Seeker is much like AESA radar when it comes ESM, ECM and ECCM.
 

Okabe Rintarou

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
2,337
Likes
11,988
Country flag
True, LPI capability, frequency hopping along with modern ESM and ECCM capabilities will render current generation of EW suite rather ineffective.
Agreed, but EW suites are also co-evolving. GaN AESA based SPJs will also proliferate just as AESA seeker AAMs will.
.
Band of seeker contributes for resolution and not jamming resistance.
AESA seeker provide you a wide plethora of ECCM and ESM to help defeat/degrade capabilities current generation of EW suites like Elta ELL-8222.
ECCM is jamming resistance.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
Yes, but a seeker is useless in UWB frequencies as switching to longer wavelengths will deteriorate the accuracy for tracking. It is equivalent to switching off the seeker. They need to get into X or Ku-bands for target acquisition.
AESA seeker are very good with frequency hopping and tuning out frequency that the guidance computer has detected jamming signal to be present on. AESA seeker can keep the jammer busy on a particular frequency and operate on multiple different frequency simultaneously.
X-band seeker is also very much capable as a Ku-band seeker but has lower resolution than Ku-band seeker. It is all cost benefit trade-off. Ku-band seeker provides better resolution than X-band seeker but at expense of range and power. The performance of Ku-band seeker's performance degrades in rain, snow or operation on sea/water bodies i.e. with increase in humidity or water/water-vapor content in air.
 

Okabe Rintarou

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
2,337
Likes
11,988
Country flag
AESA seeker are very good with frequency hopping and tuning out frequency that the guidance computer has detected jamming signal to be present on. AESA seeker can keep the jammer busy on a particular frequency and operate on multiple different frequency simultaneously.
X-band seeker is also very much capable as a Ku-band seeker but has lower resolution than Ku-band seeker. It is all cost benefit trade-off. Ku-band seeker provides better resolution than X-band seeker but at expense of range and power. The performance of Ku-band seeker's performance degrades in rain, snow or operation on sea/water bodies i.e. with increase in humidity or water/water-vapor content in air.
And an ultrawideband AESA seeker would be able to utilize the entire spectrum of both Ku and X bands, therefore taking advantage of both. Right?
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
And an ultrawideband AESA seeker would be able to utilize the entire spectrum of both Ku and X bands, therefore taking advantage of both. Right?
True but such ultrawideband AESA seeker are still in research phase. Most current generation of AESA seeker confine to single band.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
Agreed, but EW suites are also co-evolving. GaN AESA based SPJs will also proliferate just as AESA seeker AAMs will.
Once GaN AESA based SPJs will also proliferate the effectiveness of as AESA seekers will reduce till then AESA seekers will be the dominant threat.
Second problem is GaN AESA based SPJs are expensive to produce and operate. Its is a difficult technology to master. Not all jets will have capability to field such advanced jammers.
One produce more AESA Seeker based BVRAAM than GaN AESA based SPJs.
Currently only US, Israel, Sweden and probably PRC has this technology.
ECCM is jamming resistance.
One of job of ECCM is jamming resistance.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
The irony is that I actually once came across this guy in a comment section. I got into an argument with him. He kept on trying to prove that HAL is inefficient and Also tried to say things like India should buy KAI-FX, India should privatise HAL and blah blah blah.

Oh boy I have the screenshots of his Comments.
View attachment 168962
View attachment 168963View attachment 168965

Lol what a "retard".
Nowadays everyone thinks they are defence analyst after watching a video on YouTube.
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,059
Likes
27,164
Country flag
The irony is that I actually once came across this guy in a comment section. I got into an argument with him. He kept on trying to prove that HAL is inefficient and Also tried to say things like India should buy KAI-FX, India should privatise HAL and blah blah blah.

Oh boy I have the screenshots of his Comments.
View attachment 168962
View attachment 168963View attachment 168965

Lol what a "retard".
Ekdum sexy Frankenstein Airforce.. Brazil , south africa , South Korea..
 

Aniruddha Mulay

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2019
Messages
1,819
Likes
9,723
Country flag
The irony is that I actually once came across this guy in a comment section. I got into an argument with him. He kept on trying to prove that HAL is inefficient and Also tried to say things like India should buy KAI-FX, India should privatise HAL and blah blah blah.

Oh boy I have the screenshots of his Comments.
View attachment 168962
View attachment 168963View attachment 168965

Lol what a "retard".
Just say "Don't Care", "Didn't Ask" and "Kindly F off"
 

mokoman

Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2020
Messages
6,237
Likes
33,928
Country flag

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,059
Likes
27,164
Country flag
does it come in red :laugh:


only high iq ppl will understand.



Chinese use light tank - we need light tank

Chinese use bomber - we need bomber
Even chingChongs don't have anything to be considered as atrategic bombers.

These retiree runts lobbying for Import should be brought under scanner..
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top