Sukhoi Su-30MKI

That wiki is wrong. We first tested Ku-band seeker 3-4 years ago and its now in production with latest order. We are totally self sufficient on seeker front that includes regular SAMs and BMD missiles.

RCI-1.jpg


main-qimg-9b72a68ec48f0219fd04c4fffd044161-c


Astra always had Lock-on After Launch capability.
Do you know how big a target 13KM is in the first picture? This figure is very poor, for example the R-77-1 9M1103M is 20KM and the R-77 9M1384 is 16KM(RCS=5)
Lock-on After Launch capability is mainly used in close combat, this is the common mode, has nothing to do with the data link
 
I don't get what's the point of others not attacking China in a war with India. Are you talking about them bringing all their jets into the fight?

That's not gonna happen, at least to the extent you are assuming. Simply because if 150-200 advanced jets defeat the IAF, then a whole lot of their scrub jets, drones and bombers will take to the air and pound Indian forces. If 150-200 advanced jets do not defeat the IAF, then they will simply retreat and focus only on air defence, where they will try and prevent IAF scrub forces from bombing them. There is no real need to add more jets from elsewhere in either case, since that's needed only in a long war, where attrition is very high. Basically, just a handful of expensive air superiority squadrons will determine in which direction the air war will go.

Also, a theater command is a simple numbers game. A terrain fits these many ground units. To defeat these many enemy ground units from the air, I need these many air units. And in order to ensure these many air units can attack with these many bombs with this much success rate, I need this level of air to air capability in these many numbers. And if I fail, I need these many units to prevent the enemy from doing this much damage to these many of my own ground units to hold this much of ground to consider it a victory.

This is pretty much how theater commands are set up. The commanders have already pre-decided what they need to win and how much they are willing to lose before calling it a day. But if the enemy is much more capable than planned, then adding more jets from other commands will simply mean more losses to your own side. So if your own command and resources from the reserve command are not enough, then you're gonna call it a day with a loss. It means you have severely underestimated the enemy. Although units can be reassigned to your own command, it's gonna happen in very specific cases, particularly when you are losing really badly and need more assistance, at least for the sake of buying time until you gain an advantage somewhere.

Theater commands are for rich countries. Which is why, while the Chinese have theater commands for all forces, we will have a single command for the air force, since our resources are not equal to requirements. But if the Chinese are forced to do this during a war, then it means things are going really badly for them.
I don't get what's the point of others not attacking China in a war with India. Are you talking about them bringing all their jets into the fight?

That's not gonna happen, at least to the extent you are assuming. Simply because if 150-200 advanced jets defeat the IAF, then a whole lot of their scrub jets, drones and bombers will take to the air and pound Indian forces. If 150-200 advanced jets do not defeat the IAF, then they will simply retreat and focus only on air defence, where they will try and prevent IAF scrub forces from bombing them. There is no real need to add more jets from elsewhere in either case, since that's needed only in a long war, where attrition is very high. Basically, just a handful of expensive air superiority squadrons will determine in which direction the air war will go.

Also, a theater command is a simple numbers game. A terrain fits these many ground units. To defeat these many enemy ground units from the air, I need these many air units. And in order to ensure these many air units can attack with these many bombs with this much success rate, I need this level of air to air capability in these many numbers. And if I fail, I need these many units to prevent the enemy from doing this much damage to these many of my own ground units to hold this much of ground to consider it a victory.

This is pretty much how theater commands are set up. The commanders have already pre-decided what they need to win and how much they are willing to lose before calling it a day. But if the enemy is much more capable than planned, then adding more jets from other commands will simply mean more losses to your own side. So if your own command and resources from the reserve command are not enough, then you're gonna call it a day with a loss. It means you have severely underestimated the enemy. Although units can be reassigned to your own command, it's gonna happen in very specific cases, particularly when you are losing really badly and need more assistance, at least for the sake of buying time until you gain an advantage somewhere.

Theater commands are for rich countries. Which is why, while the Chinese have theater commands for all forces, we will have a single command for the air force, since our resources are not equal to requirements. But if the Chinese are forced to do this during a war, then it means things are going really badly for them.
In 1962 China was enemy with USA and USSR, but who helped India in 1962? The idea that the US and Japan would start a war with China to help India is ludicrous in itself. The theater is for unified command of the army, air force and support forces for joint operations
 
You need to calm down with your unnecessary boasting. It's very immature and unnecessary.
That was just to counter the Chinese guys' claim that Astra doesn't have 2 way data link and still uses Russian seeker.
We don't even have 100 Astra operational. Total order is 250 !. We have 15 times more operational Ukranian BVRs.

If airforce had one third of your confidence they would have placed additional orders, isn't?
Perhaps they are waiting for Astra 2 to become operational as it gives us a proper counter to PL-15.
The Mika missile data link on the Rafale conflicts with the Meteor data link, only one-way data link
Yes, this is true. But Astra does have it, that was my point.
 
I mean passive detection, detecting electromagnetic signals from the target (passive guidance) I think we are talking about different things, also, the difference between digital radar and analog radar is mainly the back-end processing, as for the two-way data link, the most important What is CEC cooperative operations, has nothing to do with the sensor

Digital and analog are different at the front end, not back end, it has to do with the antenna design itself.
Can I understand that you use the radar receiver to detect the electromagnetic signal of the target? What are you kidding?

I'm not sure what you mean.
 
Nope. A 2 way data-link is absolutely mandatory for 3rd party targeting. The shooter doesn't need to emit or track the target whatsoever. Just fire the missile and turn away allowing AWACS or some other fighter to guide it till it goes Active.

Not having 2 way data link on our Rafale for Meteor is a big miss. 2-way data link is now integral to network-centric warfare.

A 2-way link is not necessary for third party targeting. A missile has no need to transmit to change targets or get mid-course guidance. Both fighter and AWACS only need one-way link to the missile. The fighter and AWACS require a two-way link instead, and that's already there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
In 1962 China was enemy with USA and USSR, but who helped India in 1962? The idea that the US and Japan would start a war with China to help India is ludicrous in itself. The theater is for unified command of the army, air force and support forces for joint operations

I didn't talk about US/Japan going to war with China to help India.

What I said was, China cannot reposition most of its air forces away from US and Japan in a war with India because those jets will be necessary to act as deterrence to avoid problems with US and Japan. If China moves its forces away from those borders to attack India, then the US and Japan can take advantage of that hole to create new problems for China, even if peacefully, like what China is currently doing to Taiwan. This will take Chinese resources away from India.
 
That was just to counter the Chinese guys' claim that Astra doesn't have 2 way data link and still uses Russian seeker.
Then refute with proper sources what is the point of unnecessary boasting? What does that achieve?

Perhaps they are waiting for Astra 2 to become operational as it gives us a proper counter to PL-15.
When Mk2 is ready for production, Will we wait for Mk3 with SFDR like this?
 
Then refute with proper sources what is the point of unnecessary boasting? What does that achieve?
What? He claimed Astra didn't have 2-way data link and I refuted him with proper source. Our future Astra variants having AESA seeker is an open secret. GaAs to GaN is also a natural progression. Sorry, if my post came to you as "boastful", but I did refute him how I deemed perfect.
When Mk2 is ready for production, Will we wait for Mk3 with SFDR like this?
Because of their respective 'ranges', I think both should be ordered in big numbers. There is a place for both, but Astra 2 makes Astra 1 pretty redundant 'in my opinion'.
 
A 2-way link is not necessary for third party targeting. A missile has no need to transmit to change targets or get mid-course guidance. Both fighter and AWACS only need one-way link to the missile. The fighter and AWACS require a two-way link instead, and that's already there.
2-way data link should allow better ECCM too. So having it is a definite advantage, IMO.
 
What? He claimed Astra didn't have 2-way data link and I refuted him with proper source. Our future Astra variants having AESA seeker is an open secret. GaAs to GaN is also a natural progression. Sorry, if my post came to you as "boastful", but I did refute him how I deemed perfect.

Because of their respective 'ranges', I think both should be ordered in big numbers. There is a place for both, but Astra 2 makes Astra 1 pretty redundant 'in my opinion'.
what is your source?

Astra do not have two way data link.

Some blog post by an internet stranger is not a "Source".
 
How can anyone ever think that a BVR missile will not have atleast a oneway data link? How will the missile be guided to the target during flight without one such link? Mid course updates have to be given to the missile to reach a point in space from where it can acquire the target.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion

It's kinda crazy, it's like two F-16s.
It has to be this big because of its inferior tech. Imagine if the US made a 4th gen the size of a flanker... Just how big and powerful its engines, radar and potent its EW would be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lolwa
Conventional missiles use radio command guidance for relay guidance, unlike the datalink here, which has a much larger capacity, enables collaborative operations (CEC), and outshooting
How can anyone ever think that a BVR missile will not have atleast a oneway data link? How will the missile be guided to the target during flight without one such link? Mid course updates have to be given to the missile to reach a point in space from where it can acquire the target.
 
What? He claimed Astra didn't have 2-way data link and I refuted him with proper source. Our future Astra variants having AESA seeker is an open secret. GaAs to GaN is also a natural progression. Sorry, if my post came to you as "boastful", but I did refute him how I deemed perfect.
At present, the only missile I know that will use GaN chips in the future is JNAAM jointly developed by Japan and Britain. As for India, let’s talk about what is currently available and what will be in the foreseeable future. Don’t talk about something so far away
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tatvamasi
  • Like
Reactions: RASALGHUL
A 2-way link is not necessary for third party targeting. A missile has no need to transmit to change targets or get mid-course guidance. Both fighter and AWACS only need one-way link to the missile. The fighter and AWACS require a two-way link instead, and that's already there.
The two-way data link can obtain the status of the missile, plan the missile path and
Or re-select the target based on the reconnaissance information and decide whether to supplement the strike based on the final state of the missile, which is not available in the one-way data link