MMRCA news and discussions.

[p2prada]

This was a problem suffered by old generation of optically(laser, TV, terran matching) and radio PGM. New generation of PGM using satellite guidence coupled with secondary optical guidence(laser or 3rd generation infra-red guidence) are far more accurate.
LJAMD uses both GPS and laser guidence and same goes for Paveway 4. The CBU-105 that IAF has bought have multiple mode of guidence i.e. Infra-red, the primary guidence, laser to find out change in heigh, it may use GPS to find has it reached desired area and has INS if GPS fails.

GPS only does so much. Hitting a tank moving at 40kmph with GPS is not reasonably possible. The accuracy of GPS is measured in metres and not in centimetres.

Satellite guidance will not work if the enemy has multiple 100KW jammers aimed at you.

john,actually during kargil war only mirages had laser pods so only they could have fired lgb's.also they could have only taken french matra 1000lgb's or paveway 2s.even paveways had some parts which were not working and USA did not send them due nuke tests and IAF tecchhies had to remanufacture them to make them work.
The IAF in the Kargil Operations - 1999

Even the Jaguars were equipped with Paveway 2s on a British Mk2 250kg bomb. Only 1 was dropped by the Jag. 8 PGMs were dropped by Mirages due to airframe advantages over the Himalayas. Kargil War.

 

[ppgj]

Even the Jaguars were equipped with Paveway 2s on a British Mk2 250kg bomb. Only 1 was dropped by the Jag. 8 PGMs were dropped by Mirages due to airframe advantages over the Himalayas. Kargil War.

knew it but missed.thanks mate.

 

[Daredevil]

Here is what Vishnu Som posted on another forum about Gripen.

Hi there ... Just had a briefing from Gripen ... heres what they have to say ... there are so many posts that there may be a repeat of info .. so sorry for any repeat ...

* The Selex Vixen radar now goes by the name ES-05 Raven ... its being co-developed with Selex Galileo, Saab Microwave Systems and Saab Aerosystems as partners.
* The beam of the radar can be tracked 100 degrees on either side courtesy the swashplate setup. Two scenarios were showcased ... in one of them ... the Gripen goes evasive post launch while still being able to track the target when other jets would easily have broken lock.
* ECCM-A/A-A/G can all take place simultaneously courtesy the interleaved set up of the radar mated to the display.
* Radar is presently on the demonstrator rig and meets expectations.
* Radar will be flight-tested in last quarter of the year.
* Gripen C/D meets all RFP requirements other than range and AESA. Both these will be showcased in NG which will be flown here in March.
* Gripen IN has 16.5 tonne max take off weight.
* Max range in excess of 4000 kms.
* Turnaround in less than 10 minutes.
* Gripen C/D has cost per flight hour of less than $3000. Statistics based on Swedish Air Force experience.
* More than 50 per cent cheaper to own and operate over the life of the aircraft than twin engine competitors
* Substantial savings over the life of the aircraft compared to F-16 ... They gave a number here which I forget.
* Gripen NG has less than 35 per cent of American components onboard.
* IAF type conversions ahead of trials will take place in late November ...
* Trials in March.

Thanks
Vishnu Som
Associate Editor and Senior Anchor, NDTV

 

[venom]

Sweden's SAAB offers advanced radar with Gripen combat jet

Sweden's SAAB offers advanced radar with Gripen combat jet :: Samay Live

 

[Dark Sorrow]

P2Prada,
CBU-105 uses infra-red as primary guidence for actual tank killing. GPS/INS is used to find out if the bomb is in proper area before it opens and lets out the bomblet that actually destroy tanks and use infra-red guidence.

 

[AJSINGH]

Edited [mod]You have this habit of quoting others without any reference.[/mod]

 

[AJSINGH]

that is what concerns the IAF about MMRCA combat aircraft if SH or sv wins

To John,I will be answering to your argument to . by today u will have a reply to your post 626

 

[purplemarco]

Gripen hardsells new AESA radar, low cost for MMRCA | StratPost

“What we have in the Gripen AESA radar is a ‘Swashplate’. What we are doing is we have an AESA on a movable plate so you can rotate the antenna. That gives added capability to the AESA,” says Edvard de la Motte, Campaign Director for Gripen in India.

This apparently allows the aircraft to have radar coverage from an angle of a hundred degrees from the center of the aircraft. “You can basically start looking a little bit backwards. And that gives you a fantastic edge, specifically when you’re doing air to ground, because you can look sideways or in the BVR (Beyond Visual Range) scenarios, where it’s important to be able to track your target,” explains de la Motte, adding, “The Gripen, with the radar would be able to turn a hundred degrees and still have radar lock on the opponent.” The AESA radar is expected to be flown this year.

 

[purplemarco]

Brazilian U-Turn: Relief and Confusion for Rivals | StratPost

Dassault’s competitors are breathing a little easier after Wednesday’s announcement by the Brazilian Defense Ministry denying their contest for the purchase of 36 fighter aircraft to be decided and complete.

This news was passed around on mobile phones from hand to hand in a room full of Gripen officials, trying to will their hastily pulled-out reading glasses to provide some insight into the seemingly inscrutable workings of the Brazilians.

The news of the reprieve is honestly tinged with bewilderment. “We don’t know what’s happening,” said one official from the Swedish vendor, a rival to Dassault’s Rafale of France for the Brazilian order.

 

[AJSINGH]

[mod] Are you devsethi. This should be the last time [/mod]

 

[AJSINGH]

its not a malicious code...firstly..they are already in the software in order to help US keep tabs on its own aircraft in its own inventory...encrypted recording of platform usage information...etc. is used deliberatly to monitor their own aircraft..its standard code...almost every platform in the US has it. Each US aircraft is full of embedded bugs which helps them to monitor the aircraft's performance and enhances training. Even F-16s, F-18S, EF, Rafales etc have embedded equipment for training and monitoring purposes. To inspect every single aircraft or platform wont happen... we choose the locaion and timing. inspections last 2 or 3 days... they look at some charts...have meals, enjoy the countryside...and go home...as if we are goin to let them break down each aircraft and show that we didnt copy or misuse anything...or as if US has the patience to inspect every aircraft. The manner of inspection is not going to be very physical, those inspectors are pentagon offcials and not radar or mission computer software en/de coders...besides chances are none of the aircraft will be present at inspections since we choose the location and timing...we show them some charts and they'll go home. Thats the way it works.

first the way american check their weaponry is not funny .the very well check everything on it from the missile to the cockpit,everything .They will stay on the air base as long as they want.penatgon offcials do accomnay them and also the expert .The last time they checked USS treton AKA INS JAJASHWA...was everything from the engine room to the captains deck even what was on board at that time

 

[Sridhar]

Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

09 Sep 2009 8ak: Today Saab finally provided some details on the AESA radar and presented some explanations to quell rumours about the Gripen IN. Firstly, the AESA radar is being developed by Selex Galileo and this crucial part of the offering will not be subject to U.S. EUMA laws. In July, Jerusalem Post broke a story saying that the U.S. had pressured IAI to withdraw from jointly offering sensitive technologies such as their AESA radar. Mr Eddy de la Motte, India Director for Saab said that IAI has not communicated any such issue to Saab. Anyway, Saab has chosen to offer Italian firm Selex Galileo's Vixen 1000E AESA radar. This has many improvements and importantly offered a swashplate (rotating base plate) mounting which enables the active array to be rotated by +/-100 and therefore increase the probability of detecting an enemy plane before it detects the Gripen. Hence the claim of see-first, kill-first capability.
To justify the "independent choice" and clarify applicability of EUMA restrictions, Mr Motte said that while it is true that 35% of the Gripen C/D was of U.S. origin, less than 18% on the advanced Gripen NG (excluding the GE F414 engines) will be American. As for the weapon systems, unlike the competitors, they can integrate any missile systems that India chooses. Mr Motte said that while Saab has not integrated the Gripen with Russian missiles it is possible to do so.
In general Scandinavians are world leaders in design and aesthetics, so it is easy to believe that Saab has the most user friendly man-machine interface. This includes the largest HUD that is programmed to selectively display key parameters and hide others that are not required at the particular stage of the mission. This reduces the impact of information overload on the pilot and hence Saab's claim of dont-need, dont-show functionality.
Other key features are that they have the most sophisticated data link technology, lend-a-sensor functionality (important in net-centric warfare), engine switchover time of less than one hour and most importantly the lowest cost. Mr Motte claimed that Swedish Air Force reports that the Gripen is 50% cheaper over its life cycle compared to single engine competitors and 25% cheaper compared to dual engine. Its operating cost is less than $3,000 an hour meaning that at half the cost of comparable jets, pilots can have double the flying time within a given budget.
But wait there is more... on the technology transfer issue they have always maintained that they will provide 100% technology transfer and the source codes. Saab has a proven history of technology transfer to other countries such as South Africa.
Earlier this year, in a conversation with Jan Widerstrom, Vice President, Saab India, Jan mentioned that Saab is the smallest of all the MMRCA competitors. For a U.S. manufacturer this order is important but realistically a negligible part of their overall sales. On the other hand, for Saab this would be their single largest order and hence they will have the strongest commitment to ensure the program's success. Saab would then almost become an Indian company and would be a valuable addition to the private sector defence manufacturing industry in India. In February, Saab had announced its partnership with Tata to jointly develop the Gripen.
Drawbacks? Well check with Bharat Rakshak but 8ak editor pointed out that the opinion on online defence forums seems to be that the Gripen IN will be similar to the Tejas LCA esp Tejas Mark II. So what is the point of buying something you will be producing in quantity in the foreseeable future? Secondly, the Gripen has never been used in a real war (hot combat) and a lot of the technology is cutting edge which could have its drawbacks. Right now, one of Saab's many challenges is to get Selex Galileo to finish the radar development in time for the Indian tests.

8ak - Indian Defence News: Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

 

[AJSINGH]

Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

09 Sep 2009 8ak: Today Saab finally provided some details on the AESA radar and presented some explanations to quell rumours about the Gripen IN. Firstly, the AESA radar is being developed by Selex Galileo and this crucial part of the offering will not be subject to U.S. EUMA laws. In July, Jerusalem Post broke a story saying that the U.S. had pressured IAI to withdraw from jointly offering sensitive technologies such as their AESA radar. Mr Eddy de la Motte, India Director for Saab said that IAI has not communicated any such issue to Saab. Anyway, Saab has chosen to offer Italian firm Selex Galileo's Vixen 1000E AESA radar. This has many improvements and importantly offered a swashplate (rotating base plate) mounting which enables the active array to be rotated by +/-100 and therefore increase the probability of detecting an enemy plane before it detects the Gripen. Hence the claim of see-first, kill-first capability.
To justify the "independent choice" and clarify applicability of EUMA restrictions, Mr Motte said that while it is true that 35% of the Gripen C/D was of U.S. origin, less than 18% on the advanced Gripen NG (excluding the GE F414 engines) will be American. As for the weapon systems, unlike the competitors, they can integrate any missile systems that India chooses. Mr Motte said that while Saab has not integrated the Gripen with Russian missiles it is possible to do so.
In general Scandinavians are world leaders in design and aesthetics, so it is easy to believe that Saab has the most user friendly man-machine interface. This includes the largest HUD that is programmed to selectively display key parameters and hide others that are not required at the particular stage of the mission. This reduces the impact of information overload on the pilot and hence Saab's claim of dont-need, dont-show functionality.
Other key features are that they have the most sophisticated data link technology, lend-a-sensor functionality (important in net-centric warfare), engine switchover time of less than one hour and most importantly the lowest cost. Mr Motte claimed that Swedish Air Force reports that the Gripen is 50% cheaper over its life cycle compared to single engine competitors and 25% cheaper compared to dual engine. Its operating cost is less than $3,000 an hour meaning that at half the cost of comparable jets, pilots can have double the flying time within a given budget.
But wait there is more... on the technology transfer issue they have always maintained that they will provide 100% technology transfer and the source codes. Saab has a proven history of technology transfer to other countries such as South Africa.
Earlier this year, in a conversation with Jan Widerstrom, Vice President, Saab India, Jan mentioned that Saab is the smallest of all the MMRCA competitors. For a U.S. manufacturer this order is important but realistically a negligible part of their overall sales. On the other hand, for Saab this would be their single largest order and hence they will have the strongest commitment to ensure the program's success. Saab would then almost become an Indian company and would be a valuable addition to the private sector defence manufacturing industry in India. In February, Saab had announced its partnership with Tata to jointly develop the Gripen.
Drawbacks? Well check with Bharat Rakshak but 8ak editor pointed out that the opinion on online defence forums seems to be that the Gripen IN will be similar to the Tejas LCA esp Tejas Mark II. So what is the point of buying something you will be producing in quantity in the foreseeable future? Secondly, the Gripen has never been used in a real war (hot combat) and a lot of the technology is cutting edge which could have its drawbacks. Right now, one of Saab's many challenges is to get Selex Galileo to finish the radar development in time for the Indian tests.

8ak - Indian Defence News: Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

why did u delete my post when you have done the same thing ..the last time i also mentioned the source like you did

 

[Sridhar]

why did u delete my post when you have done the same thing ..the last time i also mentioned the source like you did

Check this post

http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/mi...2015-mmrca-news-discussions-63.html#post65688

Next time don't quote the whole message and ask questions Via Posts . You are wasting the time of others , use PMs instead.

 

[AJSINGH]

Check this post

http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/mi...2015-mmrca-news-discussions-63.html#post65688

Next time don't quote the whole message and ask questions Via Posts . You are wasting the time of others , use PMs instead.

my bad .i did not read that post .Thank you for informing me .also how do u use Pm .cause i am new to this forum so i still do not know all the functions

 

[p2prada]

P2Prada,
CBU-105 uses infra-red as primary guidence for actual tank killing. GPS/INS is used to find out if the bomb is in proper area before it opens and lets out the bomblet that actually destroy tanks and use infra-red guidence.

CBU-105 uses both Laser and IR. But, the Russian Shtora and/or Arena will defeat the IR seekers very easily.

Smoke defeats laser guidance and IR jammers defeat IR guidance. Don't forget that tanks and fighters deliver way more power for jamming than a small bomblet.

Simple solutions help make the most expensive and effective weapons useless in times of war.

 

[Tamil]

Say no to us based fighters...

Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

09 Sep 2009 8ak: Today Saab finally provided some details on the AESA radar and presented some explanations to quell rumours about the Gripen IN. Firstly, the AESA radar is being developed by Selex Galileo and this crucial part of the offering will not be subject to U.S. EUMA laws. In July, Jerusalem Post broke a story saying that the U.S. had pressured IAI to withdraw from jointly offering sensitive technologies such as their AESA radar. Mr Eddy de la Motte, India Director for Saab said that IAI has not communicated any such issue to Saab. Anyway, Saab has chosen to offer Italian firm Selex Galileo's Vixen 1000E AESA radar. This has many improvements and importantly offered a swashplate (rotating base plate) mounting which enables the active array to be rotated by +/-100 and therefore increase the probability of detecting an enemy plane before it detects the Gripen. Hence the claim of see-first, kill-first capability.
To justify the "independent choice" and clarify applicability of EUMA restrictions, Mr Motte said that while it is true that 35% of the Gripen C/D was of U.S. origin, less than 18% on the advanced Gripen NG (excluding the GE F414 engines) will be American. As for the weapon systems, unlike the competitors, they can integrate any missile systems that India chooses. Mr Motte said that while Saab has not integrated the Gripen with Russian missiles it is possible to do so.
In general Scandinavians are world leaders in design and aesthetics, so it is easy to believe that Saab has the most user friendly man-machine interface. This includes the largest HUD that is programmed to selectively display key parameters and hide others that are not required at the particular stage of the mission. This reduces the impact of information overload on the pilot and hence Saab's claim of dont-need, dont-show functionality.
Other key features are that they have the most sophisticated data link technology, lend-a-sensor functionality (important in net-centric warfare), engine switchover time of less than one hour and most importantly the lowest cost. Mr Motte claimed that Swedish Air Force reports that the Gripen is 50% cheaper over its life cycle compared to single engine competitors and 25% cheaper compared to dual engine. Its operating cost is less than $3,000 an hour meaning that at half the cost of comparable jets, pilots can have double the flying time within a given budget.
But wait there is more... on the technology transfer issue they have always maintained that they will provide 100% technology transfer and the source codes. Saab has a proven history of technology transfer to other countries such as South Africa.
Earlier this year, in a conversation with Jan Widerstrom, Vice President, Saab India, Jan mentioned that Saab is the smallest of all the MMRCA competitors. For a U.S. manufacturer this order is important but realistically a negligible part of their overall sales. On the other hand, for Saab this would be their single largest order and hence they will have the strongest commitment to ensure the program's success. Saab would then almost become an Indian company and would be a valuable addition to the private sector defence manufacturing industry in India. In February, Saab had announced its partnership with Tata to jointly develop the Gripen.
Drawbacks? Well check with Bharat Rakshak but 8ak editor pointed out that the opinion on online defence forums seems to be that the Gripen IN will be similar to the Tejas LCA esp Tejas Mark II. So what is the point of buying something you will be producing in quantity in the foreseeable future? Secondly, the Gripen has never been used in a real war (hot combat) and a lot of the technology is cutting edge which could have its drawbacks. Right now, one of Saab's many challenges is to get Selex Galileo to finish the radar development in time for the Indian tests.

8ak - Indian Defence News: Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

I think India surly not going to Americans favor b'cos of their interfere in each and every time the block or stop when ever they need, and also not supply the spares also. from here i my point of view the MiG-35 is the best and wise option to IAF.

 

[AJSINGH]

I think India surly not going to Americans favor b'cos of their interfere in each and every time the block or stop when ever they need, and also not supply the spares also. from here i my point of view the MiG-35 is the best and wise option to IAF.

cannot agree with you more

 

[AJSINGH]

Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

09 Sep 2009 8ak: Today Saab finally provided some details on the AESA radar and presented some explanations to quell rumours about the Gripen IN. Firstly, the AESA radar is being developed by Selex Galileo and this crucial part of the offering will not be subject to U.S. EUMA laws. In July, Jerusalem Post broke a story saying that the U.S. had pressured IAI to withdraw from jointly offering sensitive technologies such as their AESA radar. Mr Eddy de la Motte, India Director for Saab said that IAI has not communicated any such issue to Saab. Anyway, Saab has chosen to offer Italian firm Selex Galileo's Vixen 1000E AESA radar. This has many improvements and importantly offered a swashplate (rotating base plate) mounting which enables the active array to be rotated by +/-100 and therefore increase the probability of detecting an enemy plane before it detects the Gripen. Hence the claim of see-first, kill-first capability.
To justify the "independent choice" and clarify applicability of EUMA restrictions, Mr Motte said that while it is true that 35% of the Gripen C/D was of U.S. origin, less than 18% on the advanced Gripen NG (excluding the GE F414 engines) will be American. As for the weapon systems, unlike the competitors, they can integrate any missile systems that India chooses. Mr Motte said that while Saab has not integrated the Gripen with Russian missiles it is possible to do so.
In general Scandinavians are world leaders in design and aesthetics, so it is easy to believe that Saab has the most user friendly man-machine interface. This includes the largest HUD that is programmed to selectively display key parameters and hide others that are not required at the particular stage of the mission. This reduces the impact of information overload on the pilot and hence Saab's claim of dont-need, dont-show functionality.
Other key features are that they have the most sophisticated data link technology, lend-a-sensor functionality (important in net-centric warfare), engine switchover time of less than one hour and most importantly the lowest cost. Mr Motte claimed that Swedish Air Force reports that the Gripen is 50% cheaper over its life cycle compared to single engine competitors and 25% cheaper compared to dual engine. Its operating cost is less than $3,000 an hour meaning that at half the cost of comparable jets, pilots can have double the flying time within a given budget.
But wait there is more... on the technology transfer issue they have always maintained that they will provide 100% technology transfer and the source codes. Saab has a proven history of technology transfer to other countries such as South Africa.
Earlier this year, in a conversation with Jan Widerstrom, Vice President, Saab India, Jan mentioned that Saab is the smallest of all the MMRCA competitors. For a U.S. manufacturer this order is important but realistically a negligible part of their overall sales. On the other hand, for Saab this would be their single largest order and hence they will have the strongest commitment to ensure the program's success. Saab would then almost become an Indian company and would be a valuable addition to the private sector defence manufacturing industry in India. In February, Saab had announced its partnership with Tata to jointly develop the Gripen.
Drawbacks? Well check with Bharat Rakshak but 8ak editor pointed out that the opinion on online defence forums seems to be that the Gripen IN will be similar to the Tejas LCA esp Tejas Mark II. So what is the point of buying something you will be producing in quantity in the foreseeable future? Secondly, the Gripen has never been used in a real war (hot combat) and a lot of the technology is cutting edge which could have its drawbacks. Right now, one of Saab's many challenges is to get Selex Galileo to finish the radar development in time for the Indian tests.

8ak - Indian Defence News: Feature: Saab offers advanced radar for Gripen IN, clarifies some controversies

inspite of Gripen being the best aircraft for IAF .it will lose out on the political front because SAAB has ties with the infamous bofors company and because of the whole 1987 bofors scandal .i think Govt of India would not be able to shake off the bofors ghost

 

[Dark Sorrow]

CBU-105 uses both Laser and IR. But, the Russian Shtora and/or Arena will defeat the IR seekers very easily.

Smoke defeats laser guidance and IR jammers defeat IR guidance. Don't forget that tanks and fighters deliver way more power for jamming than a small bomblet.

Simple solutions help make the most expensive and effective weapons useless in times of war.

Both Shtora and Arena currently don't have capability to stop CBU-105 bomblets. Shtora has a elevation capability ranging from -5 to +25 degree to engage with treat, while CBU-105 bomblet fall at 60 to 90 degree angle making shtora ineffective. Its only defence against CBU-105 is the foam aerosal but that would be useless against vertical threats. The two lights emitters emit coded pulsed infra-red signal (the heart of shtora) are use to confused laser guided ATGM and would be useless against infra-red seekers as they produce limited infra-red signature.
Till date i have not heard of any infra red jammer. Infra-red mode of guidence is a passive mode of guidence and passive mode of guidence can't be jammed but only fooled. The only effective counter-measure against infra-red seeker till day are flares.
Greatest problem for both Arena and Shtora to counter CBU-105 is that how would they detect CBU-105 as all radar have a limited azimuth and area above the radar is generally blind spot for the radar. Any target in such area can't be detected.