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

Ankit Kumar said:
IAF needs to decide if 2 more A50 mounted radars are worth 2 billion usd. Or in their place 3 slightly less capable but cheaper and with high availability rates emb145 drdo ones will do the job?

Because it's not like the Israeli ones will come quick. First the airframes will need to be assembled then transported to Israel for fitment etc. It will take minimum 3-4 years before both are into service. Emb line is more established and for the radar we will not have to depend on a foreign entity. We may be able to put 3 more in emb145s in service in 3 years.
Click to expand...
I guess in 2billion USD, we stand to get much more than 3 Netras. Could well be 8-10 or more. But this isn't an either or situation. Given that our indigenous AWACS will materialise close to 2030 timelines, we need both these options. 2 Phalcons + 6 Netras at least.
 
_Anonymous_ said:
I guess in 2billion USD, we stand to get much more than 3 Netras. Could well be 6 or more. But this isn't an either or situation. Given that our indigenous AWACS will materialise close to 2030 timelines, we need both these options. 2 Phalcons + 3 Netras at least.
Click to expand...

As much as the Phalcon radar is capable,the availability and on station time is affected by Il76 airframes limitations.

I used to follow the Russian defence forum till 2018 I think, Russian MoD had then placed orders for 28 new built Il76 airframes worth 100 million USD per piece built over 30 years. The second plant Taskent one , is not functional since 2012. So that means new airframes even if we order will be very costly and have long built times.

Compared to that EMB 145 airframe is continuing production and is worth less than 30 million USD a piece. They have proven higher availability rates and the IFR means extended time on station.

At this moment I think we are better off without the Phalcon import. And after the sanctions on Russia , it will be very difficult to buy the airframe, diamantle it piece by piece, transport to Israel , re assemble and then fly to India. During Repairs first going to Israel , stripping all its western components and then flying to Russia for refit ? It's difficult thing. 3-8 EMB145 based systems upto 2028 will be a good and value for money investment.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: JustCurious, AbRaj, Sathya and 6 others
Ankit Kumar said:
IAF needs to decide if 2 more A50 mounted radars are worth 2 billion usd. Or in their place 3 slightly less capable but cheaper and with high availability rates emb145 drdo ones will do the job?

Because it's not like the Israeli ones will come quick. First the airframes will need to be assembled then transported to Israel for fitment etc. It will take minimum 3-4 years before both are into service. Emb line is more established and for the radar we will not have to depend on a foreign entity. We may be able to put 3 more in emb145s in service in 3 years.
Click to expand...
How we will be able procure things from a blacklisted company?
 
Ankit Kumar said:
At this moment I think we are better off without the Phalcon import. And after the sanctions on Russia , it will be very difficult to buy the airframe, diamantle it piece by piece, transport to Israel , re assemble and then fly to India. During Repairs first going to Israel , stripping all its western components and then flying to Russia for refit ? It's difficult thing. 3-8 EMB145 based systems upto 2028 will be a good and value for money investment.
Click to expand...
looks like a lot of circus, seems like idea of having integration with best components is not as easy it sounds.
 
Hydra said:
How we will be able procure things from a blacklisted company?
Click to expand...
There were problems with emb , yes. But as of today GOI was trying to buy a controlling share in Civil Aircraft parts of the company. Further till 2018 the CBI probe did continue but the blacklisting hasn't happened as the new policy which was to replace the blacklisting policy hasn't come out yet.

If the IAF does decide to acquire more, it can be done imo.
 
Ankit Kumar said:
As much as the Phalcon radar is capable,the availability and on station time is affected by Il76 airframes limitations.

I used to follow the Russian defence forum till 2018 I think, Russian MoD had then placed orders for 28 new built Il76 airframes worth 100 million USD per piece built over 30 years. The second plant Taskent one , is not functional since 2012. So that means new airframes even if we order will be very costly and have long built times.

Compared to that EMB 145 airframe is continuing production and is worth less than 30 million USD a piece. They have proven higher availability rates and the IFR means extended time on station.

At this moment I think we are better off without the Phalcon import. And after the sanctions on Russia , it will be very difficult to buy the airframe, diamantle it piece by piece, transport to Israel , re assemble and then fly to India. During Repairs first going to Israel , stripping all its western components and then flying to Russia for refit ? It's difficult thing. 3-8 EMB145 based systems upto 2028 will be a good and value for money investment.
Click to expand...
Hasn't the CCS passed the AoN?

Further, we're already procuring the S-400 challenging the CAATSA as it were. I'm sure a via media can be worked out with the State Department to circumvent the sanctions.

I think you underestimate the impact the post Chinese virus & Chinese actions on the LAC as well as their steadily deteriorating relationship with the West has had on the US .

The US can't expect us to fight the Chinese with one hand tied behind their backs. It's the responsibility of the MEA to make the case.
 
_Anonymous_ said:
Hasn't the CCS passed the AoN?

Further, we're already procuring the S-400 challenging the CAATSA as it were. I'm sure a via media can be worked out with the State Department to circumvent the sanctions.

I think you underestimate the impact the post Chinese virus & Chinese actions on the LAC as well as their steadily deteriorating relationship with the West has had on the US .

The US can't expect us to fight the Chinese with one hand tied behind their backs. It's the responsibility of the MEA to make the case.
Click to expand...
Can be done, maybe. But we are investing a lot, so imo we shouldn't take chances.

LM with F35A has the best chances of winning MRCA competition, but with S400 deal... If we see LM offering F35 then yes we can manage certain critical systems with USA in loop. If not, we shouldn't bank on things outside our control.
 
Ankit Kumar said:
As much as the Phalcon radar is capable,the availability and on station time is affected by Il76 airframes limitations.

I used to follow the Russian defence forum till 2018 I think, Russian MoD had then placed orders for 28 new built Il76 airframes worth 100 million USD per piece built over 30 years. The second plant Taskent one , is not functional since 2012. So that means new airframes even if we order will be very costly and have long built times.

Compared to that EMB 145 airframe is continuing production and is worth less than 30 million USD a piece. They have proven higher availability rates and the IFR means extended time on station.

At this moment I think we are better off without the Phalcon import. And after the sanctions on Russia , it will be very difficult to buy the airframe, diamantle it piece by piece, transport to Israel , re assemble and then fly to India. During Repairs first going to Israel , stripping all its western components and then flying to Russia for refit ? It's difficult thing. 3-8 EMB145 based systems upto 2028 will be a good and value for money investment.
Click to expand...

Why will we dismantle the jets when they can fly over to Israel?

Jets are dismantled because they can't fly far, not a problem for the IL-76.

Also the Phalcon is way, way better than the Netra. If the IAF is given a choice between the two, even with double the number of Netras, the IAF will choose the Phalcon.
Ankit Kumar said:
Can be done, maybe. But we are investing a lot, so imo we shouldn't take chances.

LM with F35A has the best chances of winning MRCA competition, but with S400 deal... If we see LM offering F35 then yes we can manage certain critical systems with USA in loop. If not, we shouldn't bank on things outside our control.
Click to expand...

The F-35 will fail in the performance aspect. Especially in the mountians, where the thrust drop is high.

The F-35 needs Growth Option 2.0 for its engine if it has to be relevant in the Indian environment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot
Compared to saab erieye how does our netra compare? Specifically the pakistani erieyes. I have heard the newer version also use GaN.
 
Lolwa said:
Compared to saab erieye how does our netra compare? Specifically the pakistani erieyes. I have heard the newer version also use GaN.
Click to expand...
Talking about their aircrafts, one thing people miss is their base aircraft the SAAB2000. That aircraft had a really small production run uptill only 1999. Means two things, 1st all the airframes are bought second hand and as of today are already atleast 21 years old. And the extremely small production run means a lot of operational difficulties too.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Sathya and Lolwa
Lolwa said:
Compared to saab erieye how does our netra compare? Specifically the pakistani erieyes. I have heard the newer version also use GaN.
Click to expand...

You can take it for granted that Saab's radar is better. Not to mention all the software associated with it. However in terms of capability, both should more or less be the same although the Erieye has greater coverage. Saab's new radar is definitely very good, but Netra's radar can also be upgraded.

The main differences will be platform. Erieye uses the Saab 2000, which is a turboprop, so has significant speed and altitude deficiencies compared to Netra's EMB 145I, which is a jet. The only advantage the Erieye has over the Netra is it has twice the endurance, Netra will have to compensate for that through mid-air refuelling. But the Netra is the better platform.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: JustCurious, Sathya and Lolwa
Hydra said:
IL76 is not the best choice, a hanger Queen. Only advantage of IL is its service ceiling.
Click to expand...
We assume that the IAF is not aware of the lower serviceability of our existing AWACS or they are being forced to accept the AWACS that is based on a Russian transport aircraft that is in use with them. What we don't know is how often these platforms are really airborne in a 24 hour window. IAF in the past have rejected aircrafts it doesn't find useful and has stood its ground to pursue its preference of Rafale jets. So either the platforms are far more serviceable than when they were initially inducted or they have found a Desi jugad to circumvent the issues or the cost of acquisition / maintenance of IL-76 based platform Vs Airbus 330 is not that big compared to the idea of operating the same type of platform. That said, we should give IAF the credit / benefit of doubt for their wisdom. We need to remember, they are the ones who live and die while operating these platforms and they are well aware of the risks of choosing a platform over the options that are available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot
Damn , Netra Emb platform can't perfom In Chinese side because of altitude limits.
Even the load seems not desired ones.

Seems like we have shortened our foot to fit the shoe.
 
Sathya said:
Damn , Netra Emb platform can't perfom In Chinese side because of altitude limits.
Even the load seems not desired ones.

Seems like we have shortened our foot to fit the shoe.
Click to expand...
Where do you get this ? We arein a far better position geographically.

Watch is video if you can.

 
Sathya said:
Cag report posted by hellfire in Twitter
Click to expand...
It's not what you have written above.

Report says netra cannot operate from high altitude. Meaning cannot take off from high altitude airfields. It's an unnecessary requirement considered it's a modified civil aircraft. None of it's contemporary can't do it either.

It can take off from normal airfields and gain altitude with ease. Which is enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GuardianRED, Killbot, Shekhar Singh and 3 others
Ashwin said:
It's not what you have written above.

Report says netra cannot operate from high altitude. Meaning cannot take off from high altitude airfields. It's an unnecessary requirement considered it's a modified civil aircraft. None of it's contemporary can't do it either.

It can take off from normal airfields and gain altitude with ease. Which is enough.
Click to expand...

I edited post 218 to include his tweet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom