I'm not going to answer for India but only for France, and what's more, it's only my opinion.India and France don't have anything like it in operation.
Civilians Doesn't buy Jets, Military-Govt Do.
Nah, you did get suckered. The F-35 nations got their aircraft, you spent money on a non-stealth turd project and ended up with nothing.
Read what you posted:
That's ground based, which was a lower priority than hypersonic airborne threats. They're currently fielding fire control satellites.
SDA's latest Tracking Layer contract includes 6 'fire control' sats - Breaking Defense
An SDA official explained that the six "preliminary fire control" satellites in Tracking Layer Tranche 2 will carry a mix of wide-field-of-view and medium-field-of-view infrared cameras.breakingdefense.com
India and France don't have anything like it in operation.
What are you talking about?We trained our engineers in making stealth designs on the cheap. We were involved in the design of the IL-276 as well. Can you even imagine how much we gained out of all that? You'd be stupid to believe these are things that are taught for money.
What are you talking about?
Let's be honest, France can't field such a system. The reason the US has it is for establishing a fire control satellite network that allows RVs and HGVs to be targeted, first with ABMs (GBI, SM-3, GPI) and later with space-based beam weapons. Good luck trying to fly any enemy aircraft after that point.I'm not going to answer for India but only for France, and what's more, it's only my opinion.
It's true that we don't have anything of this kind, any more than the US does, but the US may have this project because they feel they have to monitor the world situation 24 hours a day. We don't feel that way, but we do want to be able to deploy a relevant system in a possible theatre of operation. To achieve this, we're thinking more in terms of a network of drones with multi-static radars than satellites. This is the direction in which the FCAS programme is working.
Tracking HGVs is easier due to heat signature and closer proximity to satellite array. The AMTI will come first. GMTI is a lower priority, because you have air superiority you can use aircraft GMTI.You mean to say tracking air targets is harder than ground targets? Really? Return all of your degrees, including your high school certification. Start from scratch.
That link mentions GMTI, but the constellation will also provide AMTI. The "A" stands for "air."
It's good enough for fire control whatever it is, so whether it's a radar or not is moot.That's not radar.
A lot of what we do is buried under civilian tasks.
Here's an example--
A satellite with the French.
TRISHNA (Thermal infraRed Imaging Satellite for High-resolution Natural resource Assessment) - eoPortal
<p>Thermal InfraRed Imaging Satellite for High-resolution Natural resource Assessment (TRISHNA) is a joint development by the French Space Agency (CNES) and Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO). The satellite will join the Franco-Indian fleet for use in climate monitoring and operational...www.eoportal.org
That's long, mid and short wave detectors.
Yet you still have exactly zero stealth aircraft.We trained our engineers in making stealth designs on the cheap. We were involved in the design of the IL-276 as well. Can you even imagine how much we gained out of all that? You'd be stupid to believe these are things that are taught for money.
Tracking HGVs is easier due to heat signature and closer proximity to satellite array. The AMTI will come first. GMTI is a lower priority, because you have air superiority you can use aircraft GMTI.
It's good enough for fire control whatever it is, so whether it's a radar or not is moot.
Yet you still have exactly zero stealth aircraft.
You helped design a cargo plane? SFW!? You need to gain knowledge on how to build a f*cking cargo plane, yet you supposedly send satellites to the moon by yourself? You make no sense... ever.
And yet no one else has either.The US would like both as of yesterday.
Well the link says for fire control, so it either is radar or it can do what radar does.It needs to be radar.
We already have ours, again you make no sense.We will get ours before you do.
How can you not know how to build a cargo plane?It matters. We gained experience in programs we have never done. That's not something money can buy. The benefits far outweigh the price we paid.
You're saying you can do 4th order differential equations but can't do addition and subtraction then?We may send satellites to the Moon and Mars, maybe even design space shuttles, but we still import rifles. Welcome to the Third World.
And yet no one else has either.
Well the link says for fire control, so it either is radar or it can do what radar does.
We already have ours, again you make no sense.
How can you not know how to build a cargo plane?
You're saying you can do 4th order differential equations but can't do addition and subtraction then?
The US have a partial system in place at least. It's tranche 2 that's going in place now:Exactamundo. You claimed they did. The point being everybody knows what it takes, and you can bet the French will take precautions against such capabilities on the F5.
The f*cking link says it can, READ!No, it uses IR. That can also be used for fire control.
We contributed 10%, which is likely more than what you will contribute to your first stealth fighter, AND we actually have it, you do not.It's an import, not a development. Yours is Tempest. Ours is AMCA.
Whopdeedoo, a cheap, non-stealth Su-57 knock-off.We have never done it, we are not expecting to do it anytime soon either. And you missed the part that we were in the FGFA as well.
Yes. Some R&D labs in India are more successful than others. And in some cases, the capability doesn't/didn't even exist. Like designing a stealth plane and a cargo plane in 2010.
The US have a partial system in place at least. It's tranche 2 that's going in place now:
The f*cking link says it can, READ!
We contributed 10%, which is likely more than what you will contribute to your first stealth fighter, AND we actually have it, you do not.
Whopdeedoo, a cheap, non-stealth Su-57 knock-off.
Tranche 2 indicates an existing Tranche 1 ability.No, it doesn't. At best a TD or prototype, like the NISAR.
I never said it definitely was or wasn't radar, only that whatever it was it could provide fire control against aerial targets including HGVs. You're arguing with yourself. You were the one who said it has to be radar remember.This is getting dumb. IR can provide fire control. You can use IRST to cue and kill targets even on fighter jets.
No, it's just the American BAE, meaning all employees are American Green Card holders or citizens. All Britian has done is contribute money and repatriate profits. There is no real British IP on the F-35. It's all American IP.
TBD but if looks like an Su-57 it ain't.Except it is stealth.
You were the one who said it has to be radar remember.
How British is the F-35?
The F-35 features a significant chunk of British built components.ukdefencejournal.org.uk
View attachment 31766
And no this does not include BAE SYSTEMS inc (US) otherwise it would also include things like the AN/ASQ-239 EW suite. As regards the LM EOTS, Selex UK provided the laser targeting system.
TBD but if looks like an Su-57 it ain't.
That's what you think. I can't confirm or deny either way.AMTI for fighter jets, genius. We were discussing about detecting fighter jets from space. IR won't cut it, it has to be radar.
Nope, refer back to the picture. Again, BAE (US) is not included, because they make the AN/ASQ-239.Lol, that's just production in Britain. And I only see Chobham and Martin Baker on it. BAE UK only produces those STOVL parts for the US. In India, we produce Apache fuselages, that doesn't make it Indian.
Yes, which is why it's not on that picture.The EW suite is produced by Americans in America.
You don't even have a model or working radar mockup of it yet.Sure, sure.