DRDO and PSU's

[fire starter]

TARA.

 

[Hawkeye]

Is this the first time we're seeing this?

VSHORAD twin-launcher setup:

View attachment 18505


View: https://x.com/hossaintajrian3/status/1867832605573624131

Wanted it to look like dual mount stinger setup rather than this mistral like setup, DMS setup looks more lighter and compact to my noob eyes

 

[Ayan Barat]

Wanted it to look like dual mount stinger setup rather than this mistral like setup, DMS setup looks more lighter and compact to my noob eyes

A system can either be man-portable (like Igla) or non-man-portable (like say RBS70); there is no point in putting efforts in lightening a non-man-portable system if even after lightening the weight is still too much to become man-portable.

As soon as you make it a tripod system the whole weight thing becomes irrelevant

Is this the first time we're seeing this?

VSHORAD twin-launcher setup:

And now we just wait for Sanharika to achieve its maximum potential

Top it off with some lightweight radar like Ashlesha and you'd get a teeny tiny yet quite a formidable platform for the Himalayan sectors.

 

[Corvus Splendens]

Bhim is still possible. We already have the chassis of Arjun MK1A.

Now sell this to the el generals who already have ready access to K-9s. They will immodestly cite the weight increase from Arjun's chassis. Let ATHOS in, and ATAGS will suffer the same fate.

 

[Patriots]

View: https://x.com/NewsIADN/status/1867951028379045969

 

[Patriots]

Aero India 2023: Indian Army orders QRSAM weapon systems

The Indian Army has ordered five Quick Reaction Surface-to-Air Missile (QRSAM) weapon systems, manufacturer Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) told Janes at the Aero India...

www.janes.com

Qrsam ordered by army ?

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

IDK where to put this generic question:
Can an EW jet like EA-18G be totally immune to AAM/SAM? If equipped with antennas of multiple band used by missiles, then can it jam & deviate any # of missiles fired together at it?

 

[Ayan Barat]

IDK where to put this generic question:
Can an EW jet like EA-18G be totally immune to AAM/SAM? If equipped with antennas of multiple band used by missiles, then can it jam & deviate any # of missiles fired together at it?

Short answer; nothing can be made absolutely immune.

Now the long answer

If we talk about EW jets or even SEAD/DEAD jets then we don't have a diverse dataset (multiple countries Vs multiple countries) to look at as USA is pretty much the only country to seriously work on these over the decades. If USA is the only...obviously Russia would have been the only country worried about these EW jets. So what were they doing? They were modifying their existing AAMs for Passive Radar Homing. Both of their mainstay BVR-AAMs have a PRH variant; R-27P and R-77P. You take any other example of BVR-AAMs like AIM-7, AIM-120, Super 530 you'd find that at some point everyone had tried making a PHR variant but none got adopted except for the Russian ones, as only they needed to counter USAF EW platforms.

So if an AAM is fired with an PRH seeker and advanced features like home-on-jam then it can very easily pose a threat to dedicate EW platforms. Not to mention the fact that a PRH missile won't trigger the Missile Approch Warning System the way an Active Radar Missile would, further narrowing the window for the pilot to take evasive measures.

 

[Anants]

Short answer; nothing can be made absolutely immune.

Now the long answer

If we talk about EW jets or even SEAD/DEAD jets then we don't have a diverse dataset (multiple countries Vs multiple countries) to look at as USA is pretty much the only country to seriously work on these over the decades. If USA is the only...obviously Russia would have been the only country worried about these EW jets. So what were they doing? They were modifying their existing AAMs for Passive Radar Homing. Both of their mainstay BVR-AAMs have a PRH variant; R-27P and R-77P. You take any other example of BVR-AAMs like AIM-7, AIM-120, Super 530 you'd find that at some point everyone had tried making a PHR variant but none got adopted except for the Russian ones, as only they needed to counter USAF EW platforms.

So if an AAM is fired with an PRH seeker and advanced features like home-on-jam then it can very easily pose a threat to dedicate EW platforms. Not to mention the fact that a PRH missile won't trigger the Missile Approch Warning System the way an Active Radar Missile would, further narrowing the window for the pilot to take evasive measures.

Also i belive Russians usually fire R27 passive/active homing missile along with R27 IR homing missile to increase chances of hit.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Also i belive Russians usually fire R27 passive/active homing missile along with R27 IR homing missile to increase chances of hit.

Absolutely correct, when R-77s were not there and R-27s were the premium AAM then it was a common tactic to compensate the lower kill probability of single missile.

Incidentally R-27 would be one of just couple of missiles with which one can use this tactic as it was virtually the exact same missile with the only difference being the seekers across RF and IR variants. You can't do this with say AIM-9 and AIM-120 as both would have completely different kinematic profiles.

The only modern analogue I can think of would be MBDA's MICA. It's also the exact same missile with interchangeable seeker heads that make it either MICA-RF or MICA-IR. Tough I've this gut feeling that the next generation of BVR-AAMs would combine Active, Passive Radar Homing and IIR into a single seeker.

 

[Anants]

. Tough I've this gut feeling that the next generation of BVR-AAMs would combine Active, Passive Radar Homing and IIR into a single seeker.

Bingo I had same desire and inkling that as minitiaurisation progresses we shall see sensor fusion. I also have an idea if its feasible to build to long range x band radar which can be slapped on Awac wide body which while flying in safe zones can share data with CAP crafts who can launch missile on basis of shared data without engaging own radar. X band radar can continue to guide those missiles to target. Same X vand awacs radar can fire really long range AAM to take down or even bog down planes in enemy airspace. But again its part of my sunday musings.

 

[Bleh]

IDK where to put this generic question:
Can an EW jet like EA-18G be totally immune to AAM/SAM? If equipped with antennas of multiple band used by missiles, then can it jam & deviate any # of missiles fired together at it?
View attachment 18534

Truth is we don't really know... In theory yes.

We might even find that stealth jets might turn out to be duds in practice if BVR missiles are too vulnerable to EW. Yet to be seen.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Short answer; nothing can be made absolutely immune.

Now the long answer

If we talk about EW jets or even SEAD/DEAD jets then we don't have a diverse dataset (multiple countries Vs multiple countries) to look at as USA is pretty much the only country to seriously work on these over the decades. If USA is the only...obviously Russia would have been the only country worried about these EW jets. So what were they doing? They were modifying their existing AAMs for Passive Radar Homing. Both of their mainstay BVR-AAMs have a PRH variant; R-27P and R-77P. You take any other example of BVR-AAMs like AIM-7, AIM-120, Super 530 you'd find that at some point everyone had tried making a PHR variant but none got adopted except for the Russian ones, as only they needed to counter USAF EW platforms.

So if an AAM is fired with an PRH seeker and advanced features like home-on-jam then it can very easily pose a threat to dedicate EW platforms. Not to mention the fact that a PRH missile won't trigger the Missile Approch Warning System the way an Active Radar Missile would, further narrowing the window for the pilot to take evasive measures.

I'm limiting focus only to RF system, not IR.
I understand it is always a Tom & Jerry game on both sides - staying undetected but detect enemy, AESA, PESA, narrow beam control, frequency hopping, active cancellation, 1st look, 1st shot, 1st kill, etc, using mix of passive & active techniques.
CT/IT guys don't study electronics deeply like the specs of electronic parts, but AFAIK the trancievers have certain sensitivity level beyond which people say that it will get "fried" bcoz the EM wave is converted to electric signals for processing. IDK if the radome has some kind of filter to limit the strength of radiation like our polarized goggles do in the visible spectrum, but that would be disadvantageous to PRH seeker.
These pods, including the wingtip ones, exist bcoz a fighter jet's EW suite is not enough, different band antennas have different size. In case of stealth jet it becomes a bigger challenge.
To counter home-on-jamming, a towed decoy is used & their makers advertise proudly.
IDK if LASER can be used in DIRCM then if MASER/RASER can be used in DRFCM or not.
But I'm not talking about DEW advertised for 6gen jets, with its own conditions & challenges.
Even if an ARH-AAM use frequency hopping or a PRH-AAM tries home-on-jammer,

Ultimately i wanna know if a pod based EW system can FRY the RF tranciever of incoming missile, just disorient, break lock & deviate it somehow ALWAYS.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Bingo I had same desire and inkling that as minitiaurisation progresses we shall see sensor fusion. I also have an idea if its feasible to build to long range x band radar which can be slapped on Awac wide body which while flying in safe zones can share data with CAP crafts who can launch missile on basis of shared data without engaging own radar. X band radar can continue to guide those missiles to target. Same X vand awacs radar can fire really long range AAM to take down or even bog down planes in enemy airspace. But again its part of my sunday musings.

I wonder if USA or Russia has tried this combo of AWACS+VLR-AAM/SAM.

 

[AMCA MK1]

IDK where to put this generic question:
Can an EW jet like EA-18G be totally immune to AAM/SAM? If equipped with antennas of multiple band used by missiles, then can it jam & deviate any # of missiles fired together at it?
View attachment 18534

As far as I know some missile can home on radiations, aim120 can. I suppose modern Russian a2a missile could do too. So it just can't be completely immune. In this hypothetical case many missile will be fired at ea18 it couldn't survive all.

 

[Blood+]

Short answer; nothing can be made absolutely immune.

Now the long answer

If we talk about EW jets or even SEAD/DEAD jets then we don't have a diverse dataset (multiple countries Vs multiple countries) to look at as USA is pretty much the only country to seriously work on these over the decades. If USA is the only...obviously Russia would have been the only country worried about these EW jets. So what were they doing? They were modifying their existing AAMs for Passive Radar Homing. Both of their mainstay BVR-AAMs have a PRH variant; R-27P and R-77P. You take any other example of BVR-AAMs like AIM-7, AIM-120, Super 530 you'd find that at some point everyone had tried making a PHR variant but none got adopted except for the Russian ones, as only they needed to counter USAF EW platforms.

So if an AAM is fired with an PRH seeker and advanced features like home-on-jam then it can very easily pose a threat to dedicate EW platforms. Not to mention the fact that a PRH missile won't trigger the Missile Approch Warning System the way an Active Radar Missile would, further narrowing the window for the pilot to take evasive measures.

Uhh... I'm pretty sure you meant the RWR.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Spoiler: To lessen spamming on this thread...

IDK if LASER can be used in DIRCM then if MASER/RASER can be used in DRFCM or not.
But I'm not talking about DEW advertised for 6gen jets, with its own conditions & challenges.

The topic of the discussion was "Can EWs be engaged" and my response was "Yes, using PRH". So it doesn't make much sense to divert into this as we're already spamming an unrelated thread. Because then we'd have multiple things to discuss upon ranging from SWaP, to attenuation, to the fact that a laser can only engage one missile at a time, and so on.

trancievers have certain sensitivity level beyond which people say that it will get "fried" bcoz the EM wave is converted to electric signals for processing.

This "burn" thing is both an older phenomenon and also something that got "miss translated" with it travelled from military to civilian domain.
And even if there's such thing as a radar/jammer (not a DEW) buring a seeker then a seeker too has some tricks up its sleeves. RF proof electric components, thermal management, automatic gain control, frequency filtering, narrow directional antennas, pulse management, frequency selective radome, limiter circuit, the good ol' diodes.

To counter home-on-jamming, a towed decoy is used & their makers advertise proudly.

That's not how towed decoys works, they simply "seduce" an ARH missile by imitating the RCS of the plane.

Here's a basic idea of the hypothetical engagement of an EW platforms by an PRH
1. Neutralizing the Jamming Pods
The R-77P uses its PRH seeker to lock onto the jamming signal emitted by the Growler's AN/ALQ-99/249 pods...by exploiting the fact that jamming pods emit far stronger signals than the decoy because of SWaP constraints.
You can always add algorithm based filtering to ignore less powerful or irrelevant signals.

2. Frequency Hopping Resistance:
Nowadays ECM and ECCM through adaptive algorithms are standard on all Passive Radar Homing missiles. With AI, the processing time to select the most "lucrative" frequency out of the whole chaos of frequencies would beat the time it takes to hop.

3. "Burn-Through":
ECM pods are designed to jam radars atleast hundred kilometres away so they need to put in a lot of power to compensate for things like attention. A side-effect of this is the phenomenon called Burn-Through...when the missile closes in to within a certain range, the noise-to-signal ratio increases, making the jammer more vulnerable as its location becomes more apparent.

4. Differentiating Plane from Decoy (the point you raised)
Almost all the towed decoys currently in service like ALE-50 or 55 are specifically designed to mislead missiles by mimicking the aircraft’s radar cross-section (RCS) and emissions. They can't lure a HOJ missile, what they can lure is a missile that's using Active Radar Homing to search for a RCS of say J-10 from its threat library by mimicking that same RCS some tens of metres away from the actual plane. Because of how small an ALE-50 is compared to AN/ALQ-99, it can never emit the same amount of power.

I wonder if USA or Russia has tried this combo of AWACS+VLR-AAM/SAM.

Voilà
• Can easily achieve a 400km range
• Has both SARH (can be guided by the kind of AWACS Anant mentioned) and ARH for endgame
• Being part of the Aegis Combat System it should be one of the, if not the best missile in terms of being "handed off" to multiple platforms during its course.
• There are already variants of the seeker that combines RF with an IIR seeker.

Uhh... I'm pretty sure you meant the RWR.

Oh c'mon Buddy, not you doing this potato patato with me
Or otherwise I'll fire a sabot at your general direction and you'll just keep wondering whether it was an APFSDS or a FSAPDS

By the way, a general question.
What's the archnemesis of weapons designers?

 

[Anants]

By the way, a general question.
What's the archnemesis of weapons designers?

Same as you as the poster while posting/replying: mission creep

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Spoiler: To lessen spamming on this thread...

The topic of the discussion was "Can EWs be engaged" and my response was "Yes, using PRH". So it doesn't make much sense to divert into this as we're already spamming an unrelated thread. Because then we'd have multiple things to discuss upon ranging from SWaP, to attenuation, to the fact that a laser can only engage one missile at a time, and so on.

This "burn" thing is both an older phenomenon and also something that got "miss translated" with it travelled from military to civilian domain.
And even if there's such thing as a radar/jammer (not a DEW) buring a seeker then a seeker too has some tricks up its sleeves. RF proof electric components, thermal management, automatic gain control, frequency filtering, narrow directional antennas, pulse management, frequency selective radome, limiter circuit, the good ol' diodes.

That's not how towed decoys works, they simply "seduce" an ARH missile by imitating the RCS of the plane.

Here's a basic idea of the hypothetical engagement of an EW platforms by an PRH
1. Neutralizing the Jamming Pods
The R-77P uses its PRH seeker to lock onto the jamming signal emitted by the Growler's AN/ALQ-99/249 pods...by exploiting the fact that jamming pods emit far stronger signals than the decoy because of SWaP constraints.
You can always add algorithm based filtering to ignore less powerful or irrelevant signals.

2. Frequency Hopping Resistance:
Nowadays ECM and ECCM through adaptive algorithms are standard on all Passive Radar Homing missiles. With AI, the processing time to select the most "lucrative" frequency out of the whole chaos of frequencies would beat the time it takes to hop.

3. "Burn-Through":
ECM pods are designed to jam radars atleast hundred kilometres away so they need to put in a lot of power to compensate for things like attention. A side-effect of this is the phenomenon called Burn-Through...when the missile closes in to within a certain range, the noise-to-signal ratio increases, making the jammer more vulnerable as its location becomes more apparent.

4. Differentiating Plane from Decoy (the point you raised)
Almost all the towed decoys currently in service like ALE-50 or 55 are specifically designed to mislead missiles by mimicking the aircraft’s radar cross-section (RCS) and emissions. They can't lure a HOJ missile, what they can lure is a missile that's using Active Radar Homing to search for a RCS of say J-10 from its threat library by mimicking that same RCS some tens of metres away from the actual plane. Because of how small an ALE-50 is compared to AN/ALQ-99, it can never emit the same amount of power.

View attachment 18588
Voilà
• Can easily achieve a 400km range
• Has both SARH (can be guided by the kind of AWACS Anant mentioned) and ARH for endgame
• Being part of the Aegis Combat System it should be one of the, if not the best missile in terms of being "handed off" to multiple platforms during its course.
• There are already variants of the seeker that combines RF with an IIR seeker.

Oh c'mon Buddy, not you doing this potato patato with me
Or otherwise I'll fire a sabot at your general direction and you'll just keep wondering whether it was an APFSDS or a FSAPDS

Well, kindly forgive my low IQ brain, engineering didn't help me much. But i mentioned 1st itself IDK where to ask the generic question, so you could have replied in appropriate thread & tagged me. But i appreciate your explanation points.
@SKC @Suryavanshi , i request my question & all replies to it to be moved to appropriate thread if you guys have, thanks. I'll wait 1 day & then reply further on the question topic
.

By the way, a general question.
What's the archnemesis of weapons designers?

Uh!... Sleeper cells, moles, spies, assassins, agents like James Bond