Airborne Early Warning Systems - A-50EI Phalcon, DRDO Netra AEW&C, DRDO AWACS

[_Anonymous_]

Afaik, SBS-3 can only play a complementary role to awacs in the air warfare domain currently (unlike space where payloads like Digantara SCOT provide surveillance over other satellites). So for the foreseeable future, manned AWACS will remain relevant (perhaps with unmanned wingmen/ distributed sensor-equipped drones for escort/extended radar coverage.

You're referring to the present whereas I'm referring to the future. In any case by the time the said replacements to the Phalcons are sanctioned tested & commissioned it should be easily more than a decade.

The situation in our neighborhood & the world at large would be completely different around that time. All that I've described in my previous post & more would be a reality.

I really don't see any scope whatsoever for a manned Phalcon or its Iike replacement a decade from now .

In the early 2000s, Russian bureaus had displayed pioneering concepts like the Zond UAV configured with a dorsal 3-panel radar antenna which was eventually abandoned because of technical limitations at the time. But it could well make a comeback in the 2030s and beyond.

View attachment 48920

Yup , the same flying wingmans can be part of the system of system of an LCA Mk-2 or an AMCA or even whatever the IAF has in its inventory today namely the MKI , the LCA Mk-1a or the Rafales.

 

[Speedster1]

You're referring to the present whereas I'm referring to the future. In any case by the time the said replacements to the Phalcons are sanctioned tested & commissioned it should be easily more than a decade.

The situation in our neighborhood & the world at large would be completely different around that time. All that I've described in my previous post & more would be a reality.

I really don't see any scope whatsoever for a manned Phalcon or its Iike replacement a decade from now.

Radar tech is also expected to undergo exponential growth in the next decade or so. DRDO is already testing photonic radar tech which when fully developed promises much higher range, resolution compared to even aesa.

If this can be miniaturised enough, perhaps we'll see HAPS/HALE class drones or (more likely) manned platforms flying at high alt/stand-off distances while peering deep into enemy airspace.

In any case, AFs around the world are replacing their E-3A/A-50U series airframes with newer manned models.

Even the mighty USAF isn't going all in on space based ISR just yet, opting for the smaller, cheaper E-2D instead over the planned E-7 Wedgetail.

Leveraging combat cloud tech, we're likely to see a system of systems approach in the near future.

However, manned platforms will probably still be required to provide deconfliction/man-in-the-loop battle management.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Radar tech is also expected to undergo exponential growth in the next decade or so. DRDO is already testing photonic radar tech which when fully developed promises much higher range, resolution compared to even aesa.

If this can be miniaturised enough, perhaps we'll see HAPS/HALE class drones or (more likely) manned platforms flying at high alt/stand-off distances while peering deep into enemy airspace.

All the more reason you don't need Phalcon like replacements - manned or unmanned when more compact technology is being developed alongside evolution of unmanned platforms .

In any case, AFs around the world are replacing their E-3A/A-50U series airframes with newer manned models.

That's a temporary measure for perhaps a decade likely less. Besides this is the USAF we're talking about. The IAF doesn't enjoy the luxury of unlimited budgets.

Even the mighty USAF isn't going all in on space based ISR just yet, opting for the smaller, cheaper E-2D instead over the planned E-7 Wedgetail.

Answered this one above.

Leveraging combat cloud tech, we're likely to see a system of systems approach in the near future.

However, manned platforms will probably still be required to provide deconfliction/man-in-the-loop battle management.

Precisely my point. However not in the kind of frontline role present day AEW / AWACS are deployed in.

 

[Ad 04 30]

Three different solutions for the same problem on three different platforms. All this while USAF want to cancel Wedgetail for a lower end stopgap. Thats says something.

US procurement is non credible in recent years, same with USN cancelling FF(X) to build cutters, and DD(X) being cancelled to build battleship, or DoD cutting down F/A-XX budget by 85%


Chinese are also testing KJ3000 for now.

Moreover, Congress is still fundjng E7 with 400 million for now

 

[Ashwin]

US procurement is non credible in recent years, same with USN cancelling FF(X) to build cutters, and DD(X) being cancelled to build battleship, or DoD cutting down F/A-XX budget by 85%


Chinese are also testing KJ3000 for now.

Moreover, Congress is still fundjng E7 with 400 million for now

That is specific to USN. If anything, the US still holds the pole position in military innovation, except maybe in drones and hypersonic technology.

 

[Speedster1]

All the more reason you don't need Phalcon like replacements - manned or unmanned when more compact technology is being developed alongside evolution of unmanned platforms .

For most AFs, it will be a phased transition from manned to unmanned aew platforms. The IAF is no exception.

Photonics or any other next-gen tech would need to be sufficiently proven for unmanned application (airframe performance, ew/emi, autonomous navigation, etc).

We don't yet have a strategic UAV prog similar to the RQ-4 or Chinese WZ-7/WZ-9. The Grob 180 (rights now acquired by the Tatas) could be a possible near-term option (optionally manned derivative?) but payload limitations may be a factor.

Space-based EO+SAR sats from Galaxeye, Pixxel et all are another viable alternative. But there is no indication currently that they will feature AMTI capability, wide FoV required for the job.

That's a temporary measure for perhaps a decade likely less. Besides this is the USAF we're talking about. The IAF doesn't enjoy the luxury of unlimited budgets

For the IAF, the priority right now is integrating SDR/DLs on the Netra/Phalcon for enabling third-party designation/guidance to in-flight BVRAAMs.

This is another area where we are lagging and where manned awacs will remain indispensable for the foreseeable future.

 

[_Anonymous_]

For most AFs, it will be a phased transition from manned to unmanned aew platforms. The IAF is no exception.

Photonics or any other next-gen tech would need to be sufficiently proven for unmanned application (airframe performance, ew/emi, autonomous navigation, etc).

We don't yet have a strategic UAV prog similar to the RQ-4 or Chinese WZ-7/WZ-9. The Grob 180 (rights now acquired by the Tatas) could be a possible near-term option (optionally manned derivative?) but payload limitations may be a factor.

Frankly I don't have any high hopes of the IAF. Next to the Navy the AF of any Armed Forces of a nation is the most technical & technologically driven force. Yet how has the IAF gone about their job ?

The other day on Twitter there was a huge debate on how even pilots of the USAF in the technical branches of USAF have PhDs leave aside Masters in Engg but we've no clue on where does the IAF stand on the matter ?

https://twitter.com/x/status/2010238481231163792

https://twitter.com/x/status/2010308169457979774

For those interested , go thru the entire thread. It's very informative & should tell us where does the IAF stand in this regard ?

Even the IN the smallest & most neglected of the 3 forces adapted early going in for incremental improvements , indigenization , building up a technical cadre way back in the 1960s which is how they evolved the Warship Design Bureau , WESEE etc by catching them young , enlisting students as technical cadres , sponsoring their education in premier institutions like the IIT etc.

Apart from the IACCS in recent times what exactly has been the achievements of the IAF as far as modernization & upgradation of the IAF goes ? The Super Sukhoi upgradation program is delayed by a decade & by the looks of it will take another decade , likely more to give the IAF a mere 84 Super Sukhoi configuration FAs.

Let's not get into the other aspects of their upgradation cum modernisation / developmental programs viz the Kaveri TF program , the HTSE / HTFE program Refuellers , AEW / AWACS , Drone & Counter Drone strategy etc.

The less said about their involvement in the matter especially the LCA program till MP read out the riot act & laid down the ground rules for their induction , the better.

Ideally the IAF ought to be focusing on system of system MUMT to solve this problem by investing their resources on photonics , UCAVs , HALE / MALE drones etc .

Space-based EO+SAR sats from Galaxeye, Pixxel et all are another viable alternative. But there is no indication currently that they will feature AMTI capability, wide FoV required for the job.

You need to have a program to develop these technologies . We don't. All we get is wordcelling in the form of a strategic policy or a vision document of the IAF which they ritually release after regular intervals.

For the IAF, the priority right now is integrating SDR/DLs on the Netra/Phalcon for enabling third-party designation/guidance to in-flight BVRAAMs.

Once again these were low hanging fruits which should've been implemented years ago yet took a Balakote to bring home the problems.

We stopped the Netra program with a mere 3 ACs instead of incrementally adding to it over a period of time .

This is another area where we are lagging and where manned awacs will remain indispensable for the foreseeable future.

Yes by the looks of it this is exactly where the IAF is headed. We'd keep operating those manned AWACS right into the 2050s when if Paxtan is around they'd make a complete transition to SBS first before the IAF wakes up.

 

[Ad 04 30]

That is specific to USN. If anything, the US still holds the pole position in military innovation, except maybe in drones and hypersonic technology.

Yes but my point was that procurement seems to be dominated by Trump and Hegseth plus their boys.

USAF is still in very bad spot and is oldest and smallest since formation, and most procurements are in mess.

US defence spending bill: key investments in Air Force, Navy programmes | Caliber.Az

Last week, as part of the agreement that ended the longest US government shutdown in history, Congress passed critical defence spending legislation, including billions...

caliber.az

They were still funding prototypes

 

[Speedster1]

Apart from the IACCS in recent times what exactly has been the achievements of the IAF as far as modernization & upgradation of the IAF goes ? The Super Sukhoi upgradation program is delayed by a decade & by the looks of it will take another decade , likely more to give the IAF a mere 84 Super Sukhoi configuration FAs.

Let's not get into the other aspects of their upgradation cum modernisation / developmental programs viz the Kaveri TF program , the HTSE / HTFE program Refuellers , AEW / AWACS , Drone & Counter Drone strategy etc.

The less said about their involvement in the matter especially the LCA program till MP read out the riot act & laid down the ground rules for their induction , the better.

Ideally the IAF ought to be focusing on system of system MUMT to solve this problem by investing their resources on photonics , UCAVs , HALE / MALE drones etc .

If the IAF abandoned the HF-24 Marut in the 1970s, the IN did the very same thing to the NLCA Mk1 a few years ago. They won't even induct it as a carrier-based LIFT.

The IA can't make up its mind on the Zorawar, leaving the door open for another imported design.

All 3 services have been guilty of setting SQRs that were technically impractical ( often diluted for foreign vendors) and then insisting on full compliance before induction.

MP was perhaps the only DefMin in India's history who was a technocrat (and a reluctant one at that.) This should've been the norm, not an exception.

Successive govts have been ham-handed with their portfolio allocation. Folks with absolutely no technical background (like the incumbent gentleman) are routinely given the job in India.

Parliamentary standing committees are manned by equally clueless folks. In the absence of higher level direction, the armed forces have no real incentive to rein in their penchant for foreign maal.

In other countries, govts lead with a cohesive strategic vision. It was Ronald Reagan who proposed the Star Wars prog of the 1980s, not the US military.

Although, Modi seems to have gotten the drift lately. We now have a Sudarshan Chakra in the works which supposedly will include IRF, SBS, BMD, hypersonics and cyber/ew in 1 integrated A2/AD architecture.

 

[jmaxwell_]

If the IAF abandoned the HF-24 Marut in the 1970s, the IN did the very same thing to the NLCA Mk1 a few years ago. They won't even induct it as a carrier-based LIFT.

The IA can't make up its mind on the Zorawar, leaving the door open for another imported design.

All 3 services have been guilty of setting SQRs that were technically impractical ( often diluted for foreign vendors) and then insisting on full compliance before induction.

MP was perhaps the only DefMin in India's history who was a technocrat (and a reluctant one at that.) This should've been the norm, not an exception.

Successive govts have been ham-handed with their portfolio allocation. Folks with absolutely no technical background (like the incumbent gentleman) are routinely given the job in India.

Parliamentary standing committees are manned by equally clueless folks. In the absence of higher level direction, the armed forces have no real incentive to rein in their penchant for foreign maal.

In other countries, govts lead with a cohesive strategic vision. It was Ronald Reagan who proposed the Star Wars prog of the 1980s, not the US military.

Although, Modi seems to have gotten the drift lately. We now have a Sudarshan Chakra in the works which supposedly will include IRF, SBS, BMD, hypersonics and cyber/ew in 1 integrated A2/AD architecture.

I dont think its fair that the IN with the least of the budgets has to be responsible for spending capex on aircraft atmanirbharta too -- it was a good decision to let IAF mature that first. If there is some room for improvement, its on the non-nuc sub front. But it has conducted itself very well with realistic QRs for the most part and the results show.

 

[Hydra]

If the IAF abandoned the HF-24 Marut in the 1970s, the IN did the very same thing to the NLCA Mk1 a few years ago. They won't even induct it as a carrier-based LIFT.

Use your brain, a single engine fighter aircraft with limited pay load capacity and range to be inducted to skie jump AC? For what, as a show piece?

 

[Speedster1]

I dont think its fair that the IN with the least of the budgets has to be responsible for spending capex on aircraft atmanirbharta too -- it was a good decision to let IAF mature that first. If there is some room for improvement, its on the non-nuc sub front. But it has conducted itself very well with realistic QRs for the most part and the results show.

N-LCA Mk1 may soon become an operational necessity. The IN currently doesn't have a two-seat carrier conversion trainer. Rookie pilots in the IN go directly to operational sqns from Hawk AJTs.

Once the MiG-29Ks leave service, the IN will have no option but to send its Rafale pilots to the US for carrier training on the T-45 Goshawk.

If inducted, N-LCA mk1 would also come in handy for testing avionics, carrier landing aids/ILS integration, etc for the TEDBF/5G carrier fighter.

Besides, a sqn worth of N-LCA Mk1 would hardly make a dent in the INs budget.

Edit: if the IN had set more realistic QRs, P-75I could've been an IDDM design based on the Arihant/P-77.

 

[_Anonymous_]

N-LCA Mk1 may soon become an operational necessity. The IN currently doesn't have a two-seat carrier conversion trainer. Rookie pilots in the IN go directly to operational sqns from Hawk AJTs.

Once the MiG-29Ks leave service, the IN will have no option but to send its Rafale pilots to the US for carrier training on the T-45 Goshawk.

If inducted, N-LCA mk1 would also come in handy for testing avionics, carrier landing aids/ILS integration, etc for the TEDBF/5G carrier fighter.

Besides, a sqn worth of N-LCA Mk1 would hardly make a dent in the INs budget.

Edit: if the IN had set more realistic QRs, P-75I could've been an IDDM design based on the Arihant/P-77.

IMO the IN should be releasing the order for the N- LCA within a year or 2 . The reason they haven't done so is probably their own list of priorities being dominated by the Project 75 , Project 75 I , Rafale M etc in addition to the CAPEX budget allocation.

With these out of the way , you'd see progress on the N- LCA .

 

[Ad 04 30]

E-7 Wedgetail Radar Jet The Pentagon Tried To Cancel Gets Over $1B In New Defense Bill

Lawmakers already shot down Pentagon plans to buy E-2 Hawkeyes instead of E-7s Wedgetails.

www.twz.com

Seems like US has reversed the E7 decision

Context in regard to previous discussions

 

[babablacksheep]

E-7 Wedgetail Radar Jet The Pentagon Tried To Cancel Gets Over $1B In New Defense Bill

Lawmakers already shot down Pentagon plans to buy E-2 Hawkeyes instead of E-7s Wedgetails.

www.twz.com

Seems like US has reversed the E7 decision

Context in regard to previous discussions

A comment under the article



Congressional funding does not un-cancel the E-7. It just keeps it alive so long as Trump doesn't divert the funding which is unlawful, but the Supreme Court only stops that when a Democrat does it. DoD still has this as a cancelled program.

 

[Ad 04 30]

A comment under the article



Congressional funding does not un-cancel the E-7. It just keeps it alive so long as Trump doesn't divert the funding which is unlawful, but the Supreme Court only stops that when a Democrat does it. DoD still has this as a cancelled program.

I have poor understanding of US political system and feel free to correct but the congress controls the purse and major decisions, while POTUS( executive) has seperation of power even more so compared to India, where CCS is the topmost defence body, so will not have rhe final say

So I'm assuming, USAF will keep it alive and develop it so as to buy it via loopholes or will wait until Trump is gone

A comment under the article



Congressional funding does not un-cancel the E-7. It just keeps it alive so long as Trump doesn't divert the funding which is unlawful, but the Supreme Court only stops that when a Democrat does it. DoD still has this as a cancelled program.

 

[babablacksheep]

I have poor understanding of US political system and feel free to correct but the congress controls the purse and major decisions, while POTUS( executive) has seperation of power even more so compared to India, where CCS is the topmost defence body, so will not have rhe final say

So I'm assuming, USAF will keep it alive and develop it so as to buy it via loopholes or will wait until Trump is gone

Can't predict the future but as said currently
US DoD still has this as a cancelled program.

 

[Shan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2015795430953714154

 

[Gautam]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2021575000889704854

 

[Gautam]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2022630520082116696