P-8I maritime patrol aircraft

[IndianHawk]

If you're worried we are wasting billions on P-8I, I am perfectly fine with a Naval variant of Netra being enriched and ordered in large numbers around 30. Heck I'd be very glad if IAF woke up from it's slumber and ordered a dozen home grown Netra.

These platforms are not be cheapened about as they are force multipliers.

We need to have full fledged phalcon in numbers as they raise effectiveness of airforce squadrons multiple times over.

Same goes for p8i it deters Chinese ships and submarines and multiplies lethality of Indian carrier group / naval armada.

If we need to learn anything from USA it is this.


Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[IndianHawk]

Firstly Guardian is not based of Predator (whose performance parameters that Rustom 2 is struggling to match) but on MQ-9 Reaper! Guardian has an endurance of 42+ hours! Ever heard of P8 continously flying for 42 hours??

Rustom 2 can barely carry 200-250kg of 'equipment' (that includes the EO pod or SAR radar etc.). There's no capacity to add a powerful maritime radar etc! Whereas Guardian has an additional payload(beyond the sensors) of 1.5 tons.

How are you arguing so confidently on P8/Guardian issues without knowing the need for deploying sonobuoys? You know that aerial platforms cannot detect submerged subs unless sonobuoys are dropped in the water, right?

I really don't want to be hashing such basic info (that you guys should be researching before blabbing here). It gets tiring. Peace out!

To drop sonobuoys the dropping platform has to fly real slow. That is why I have doubts regarding how drones handle the task . What size can the drop and how effective it will be. Searching online I find usa planned to test sonobuoys of guardian in 2016 .

I probably mistook predator B / guardian spec with predator .

Regarding p8i it can stay at station for 4 hrs for anti submarine warfare while carrying 9 ton payload. Combat radius is 2000km+ .

I still prefer 1 p8i over 2-3 sea guardian.

Regarding rustom payload capabilities will increase with iterative Development there is no rush for this. It has less endurance but we can station it at andmann and lakshdweep and increase the range .

I admit it is behind mq-9 / predator B but then to develop it we should invest into it rather than sea guardian.

If you find my posts stupid just ignore it. I will also stop quoting you . Peace out.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Enquirer]

To drop sonobuoys the dropping platform has to fly real slow. That is why I have doubts regarding how drones handle the task . What size can the drop and how effective it will be. Searching online I find usa planned to test sonobuoys of guardian in 2016 .

I probably mistook predator B / guardian spec with predator .

Regarding p8i it can stay at station for 4 hrs for anti submarine warfare while carrying 9 ton payload. Combat radius is 2000km+ .

I still prefer 1 p8i over 2-3 sea guardian.

Regarding rustom payload capabilities will increase with iterative Development there is no rush for this. It has less endurance but we can station it at andmann and lakshdweep and increase the range .

I admit it is behind mq-9 / predator B but then to develop it we should invest into it rather than sea guardian.

If you find my posts stupid just ignore it. I will also stop quoting you . Peace out.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

FYI...P8's drop sonobuoys; we can rest assured that both Guardian and Rustom 2 will be flying way slower than a P8 does!

Ocean's need continuous monitoring and far away from the coastline. P8 fails on the former, while Rustom 2 fails on the latter!

 

[Indrajit]

I too am saying that the limited number of P8s can be complemented by Guardians. India doesn't need dozens of P8s - too expensive!
As I explained before, Guardians can do everything except probably drop torpedoes. But Guardians can easily signal to a P8 that's close by to sweep in to finish the job. As I also explained earlier...P8 can traverse 500Kms in 30 mins, while a sub would have only traversed about 25-30kms in that time!
Also, in a way Guardians will be more effective as they can be in flight continuously for about 42 hrs, while P8s may not be in flight for more than 5-6 hours!
I can't understand why everyone's fighting me on this obvious solution

We are in agreement, the only part we may be disagreeing on is whether the present number of P8’s are enough (if that’s what you are suggesting). I think we will need a few more.

 

[Indrajit]

I’m not very sure about a drone’s survival in hostile conditions. The Iranians just shot down a $250 million drone.....

 

[Enquirer]

I’m not very sure about a drone’s survival in hostile conditions. The Iranians just shot down a $250 million drone.....

Any aircraft is vulnerable in hostile conditions. Drones might get shot down more often because drones are (predictably) preferred choice over hostile conditions....because getting an aircraft full of crew shot down would be way more expensive than just the price of the aircraft.

That said, patrolling India's own seas/oceans is hardly 'hostile conditions'. Then again, getting a Guardian shot down is so much more preferable than getting a P8 full of crew shot down

 

[IndianHawk]

Well as for the idea we have no 'rush' to have the Guardian or other platform is a silly statement. IN is actually relying at the moment on limited aircraft, they have a need for over 300 airborne platforms. If anything, this is a delayed purchase. Without the P-8I, we are left laughably vulnerable for sub attacks since we also have delays in inducting proper sonars, AIP subs, heavy & light torpedos. The list goes on and on.

We have some face saving grace in the form of Brahmos & Club armed destroyers, frigates, some subs and ASW ships now coming into play quickly. Offcourse Vikky brings it's own quality to the battle field with it's air wing.

Hence even the MH-64R is being pushed through asap.

When I say no rush I mean we are not near any sea war with china and Pakistan navy is very small and ineffectiveness.

This submarine attack thing is red herring as when China has no capabilities for a sustained heavy sea war against India then what is the point of random submarine attacks?

It will take two decades atleast for china to have any real possibility of challenging India in Indian Ocean as it will require many more aircraft carriers and bases with fuel and ammunition all over India ocean plus capabilities to fight both India and us navy together because there will always be danger of usa pouncing upon a vulnerable china either in Taiwan strait or by blocking Malacca.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[IndianHawk]

FYI...P8's drop sonobuoys; we can rest assured that both Guardian and Rustom 2 will be flying way slower than a P8 does!

Ocean's need continuous monitoring and far away from the coastline. P8 fails on the former, while Rustom 2 fails on the latter!

The distance from India coastline to andmann is 1100-1300km well within ferry range of rustom 2.

And if we make a drone base on andmann then rustom 2 can fly from both sides 600 km distance easily . And from andmann it can further venture 600-800 km outward to patrol.

We need to find strategies to use our own equipment and geography better.

I still can't find definitive proof of guardian using sonobuoys! Could you please forward a link if you have any.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[IndianHawk]

I’m not very sure about a drone’s survival in hostile conditions. The Iranians just shot down a $250 million drone.....

Drones are not very manueverable. So not a big surprise.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Enquirer]

The distance from India coastline to andmann is 1100-1300km well within ferry range of rustom 2.

And if we make a drone base on andmann then rustom 2 can fly from both sides 600 km distance easily . And from andmann it can further venture 600-800 km outward to patrol.

We need to find strategies to use our own equipment and geography better.

I still can't find definitive proof of guardian using sonobuoys! Could you please forward a link if you have any.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

The range seems to be around 10,000Kms!!!
https://defsec.net.nz/2019/02/20/seaguardian-new-zealand/

 

[Indrajit]

Any aircraft is vulnerable in hostile conditions. Drones might get shot down more often because drones are (predictably) preferred choice over hostile conditions....because getting an aircraft full of crew shot down would be way more expensive than just the price of the aircraft.

That said, patrolling India's own seas/oceans is hardly 'hostile conditions'. Then again, getting a Guardian shot down is so much more preferable than getting a P8 full of crew shot down

I don’t disagree. However aircraft’s like P8 have more counter measures. This was not some ordinary drone, it was supposedly the grand daddy of all drones and it was shot down by Iran....Iran, not Russia. Scepticism is valid.

 

[IndianHawk]

The range seems to be around 10,000Kms!!!
https://defsec.net.nz/2019/02/20/seaguardian-new-zealand/

The range seems to be around 10,000Kms!!!
https://defsec.net.nz/2019/02/20/seaguardian-new-zealand/

Data points from article
Asw capabilities still in testing. 2017 was first test.
Miniature sonobuoys ! This is why I was doubtful about drone sonobuoys. How effective this miniature unknown low powered sonobuoy will be as compared to a proper sonobuoy. US companies are master of broucher bullshit.

Article notes typical endurance of 35 hours which translates to 10k km range according to the article.

Using same physics 20+ hour endurance for rustom 2 should deliver a range of 5000km!!
Even accounting for less efficient engine , much less fuel it should still be 2000km +
More than enough for Indian requirements.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Enquirer]

Data points from article
Asw capabilities still in testing. 2017 was first test.
Miniature sonobuoys ! This is why I was doubtful about drone sonobuoys. How effective this miniature unknown low powered sonobuoy will be as compared to a proper sonobuoy. US companies are master of broucher bullshit.

Article notes typical endurance of 35 hours which translates to 10k km range according to the article.

Using same physics 20+ hour endurance for rustom 2 should deliver a range of 5000km!!
Even accounting for less efficient engine , much less fuel it should still be 2000km +
More than enough for Indian requirements.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

I want to stop this conversation, but you keep writing BS after BS!
For UAVs range and endurance are not linearly related! UAVs 'travel' to a region of interest and essentially go into 'low power' mode of slowly loitering! So, Rustom 2 will definitely not have a range of 5000kms. (also, Rustom 2 has till date never been tested for 20+ hours of endurance)

Before you discard the article as crap, did you bother to read (in the very first paragraph) that they will be delivering the system to 'Royal Air Force' next year....yes, a paying customer!!!

I am getting tired of explaining basics to novices!

 

[IndianHawk]

I want to stop this conversation, but you keep writing BS after BS!
For UAVs range and endurance are not linearly related! UAVs 'travel' to a region of interest and essentially go into 'low power' mode of slowly loitering!

Before you discard the article as crap, did you bother to read (in the very first paragraph) that they will be delivering the system to 'Royal Air Force' next year....yes, a paying customer!!!

I am getting tired of explaining basics to novices!

You yourself are falling for bullshit propaganda.

When I expressed doubt over drone sonobuoys you jumped to insults now your own linked article points out that it's a miniature sonobuoys and no further information about it.

Rather than accepting flaw of your argument you are again doubling down on stupidity.

You think only guardian will loiter and not rustom 2 . Why? All aircrafts including uav have cruising capabilities and loitering capabilities. Why would rustom 2 not loiter and increase its range.

If it can stay in air for 20+ hours that means it has sufficient fuel to burn for 20+ hours .

And I didn't translates the range linearly either as linear translation suggests 5500km range for rustom 2. If you bothered to read without bias you will find I was doubtful of this range and I find 10000km range of guardian also doubtful.
So I gave much lesser estimate of 2000km plus range for rustom 2. How is that linear translation.

I maybe a novice but I learn and I question. You only double down on things that you can't provide facts for!

Now you want me to believe that this unknown new miniature sonobuoys is ready and operational when it's first test happened in 2017? When there is no credible information on this other than a new zeeland site that information too is without any details of size , capabilities etc. ?

I will call out bullshit when I see it.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Enquirer]

You yourself are falling for bullshit propaganda.

When I expressed doubt over drone sonobuoys you jumped to insults now your own linked article points out that it's a miniature sonobuoys and no further information about it.

Rather than accepting flaw of your argument you are again doubling down on stupidity.

You think only guardian will loiter and not rustom 2 . Why? All aircrafts including uav have cruising capabilities and loitering capabilities. Why would rustom 2 not loiter and increase its range.

If it can stay in air for 20+ hours that means it has sufficient fuel to burn for 20+ hours .

And I didn't translates the range linearly either as linear translation suggests 5500km range for rustom 2. If you bothered to read without bias you will find I was doubtful of this range and I find 10000km range of guardian also doubtful.
So I gave much lesser estimate of 2000km plus range for rustom 2. How is that linear translation.

I maybe a novice but I learn and I question. You only double down on things that you can't provide facts for!

Now you want me to believe that this unknown new miniature sonobuoys is ready and operational when it's first test happened in 2017? When there is no credible information on this other than a new zeeland site that information too is without any details of size , capabilities etc. ?

I will call out bullshit when I see it.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

At least you finally admit you're a novice!
You need to 'up' your ability to comprehend facts.
You have displayed less of an inkling to learn and more of a fetish to pontificate (aimlessly).
I am not going to point out the flaws in your understanding....simply too tiring! Good bye.

 

[IndianHawk]

At least you finally admit you're a novice!
You need to 'up' your ability to comprehend facts.
You have displayed less of an inkling to learn and more of a fetish to pontificate (aimlessly).
I am not going to point out the flaws in your understanding....simply too tiring! Good bye.

Oh well when one tries to ascertain facts people get offended . Lol

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Tanmay]

1:25 onwards manual loading of sonobuoys from racks. I thought the process was automated.
The sheer number of sonobuoys it carries (>120) would not be possible from UAVs like sea guardian. Plus the storage and automatic loading complexities.

 

[Immanuel]

These platforms are not be cheapened about as they are force multipliers.

We need to have full fledged phalcon in numbers as they raise effectiveness of airforce squadrons multiple times over.

Same goes for p8i it deters Chinese ships and submarines and multiplies lethality of Indian carrier group / naval armada.

If we need to learn anything from USA it is this.


Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Phalcon is nice, I don't mind a fleet of upto 10 of those with 2 dedicated to each air command. But Netra is already a great platform being home grown we should have at least 10-15 of those, also 2-3 per air command. Netra is perfectly fine handling task as it proved it self during Balakot.

 

[IndianHawk]

Phalcon is nice, I don't mind a fleet of upto 10 of those with 2 dedicated to each air command. But Netra is already a great platform being home grown we should have at least 10-15 of those, also 2-3 per air command. Netra is perfectly fine handling task as it proved it self during Balakot.

Netra was a stop gap measure as it can't offer 360° coverage which phalcon can. So if we can sort out pricing and platform issues only phalcons will come in future.

In case we can't sort out these issues then again netra will have to fill the gap.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[asianobserve]

U.S. Navy Reveals Unique New Feature Of P-8A Radar

The U.S. Navy has disclosed a new feature added to a secretive radar designed for the P-8A fleet that allows the sensor a full field of view

unobstructed by the aircraft’s engines.

The notice describes the SMPDM as a hydraulically activated system that allows the AAS to extend several inches below its mounting point on the belly of the P-8A fuselage. The extension allows the AAS to descend beneath the obstruction caused by the nacelles of the CFM56 high-bypass turbofan engines mounted on both wings of the P-8A. The SMPDM also retracts the radar pod after the mission is completed to its stowed position on the belly of the aircraft.

https://aviationweek.com/defense/us-navy-reveals-unique-new-feature-p-8a-radar