PAF to get ERIEYE/AEW/AWACS from Sweden
- Thread starter fieldmarshal
- Start date
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
AEW/AWACs is a symbiotic process, it covers more issues than just aerial management etc....
7 Eyries is a substantial and powerful capability - certainly they are a platform not to be dismissed.
The Phalcon is a larger platform, and with that comes different capability and different flexibility. The E2C is designed to work in concert with other integrated fleet systems - and it's tasking is somewhat different.
At the end of the day, the Eyrie is a well respected platform. Focus shouldn't really be on the platform compared to other platforms.P.A.F said:
AEW/AWACs is a symbiotic process, it covers more issues than just aerial management etc....
7 Eyries is a substantial and powerful capability - certainly they are a platform not to be dismissed.
The Phalcon is a larger platform, and with that comes different capability and different flexibility. The E2C is designed to work in concert with other integrated fleet systems - and it's tasking is somewhat different.
Stranger things have happened, but why would PAF consider 2 disparate systems? There is a lot of integration required if the PAF wants to have interoperability.umair said:
2 E2C's would not be a useful number - 3 is needed just to allow for service and rotation issues. The search footprint would be greater per individual aircraft - but then you don't have the numbers to provide a merged sweep (unlike 5 Eyries, assuming 2 are in service or stand-down)
What USA Has also goes to Israel and What Israel has some times slip pass them to China.srirangan said:
Wasnt it Israel which sold such a system to China. Well if their biggest allie can do that and USA not having problem with that, I dont think USA would have giving any thing to Pakistan.
and Umair if USA is willing to give us Hawkeyes than they might not have problems giving us F-16s. Ask your contacts for word on that.
Anywasy doest Bush require go ahead from Congress on this HawkEye.
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
yeah ive heard of this too. the US wants to provide two Hawkeyes to PAF and they want to fund this sale through the 1.5 billion dollar Allowance given to PAK ARMY. Its doubtful that the Haweye can be delivered rite now as i am sure it needs to go through an overhaul and upgrading procedure. i still think the Hole thing could be a lie spread through PakDef.info
yeah ive heard of this too. the US wants to provide two Hawkeyes to PAF and they want to fund this sale through the 1.5 billion dollar Allowance given to PAK ARMY. Its doubtful that the Haweye can be delivered rite now as i am sure it needs to go through an overhaul and upgrading procedure. i still think the Hole thing could be a lie spread through PakDef.info
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
The bottom line is that if Erieye is good enough for Greece (NATO inter-op issues)..then it sure is hell a decent system for Pakistan. I for one do think that the Gripens will be forthcoming. Although gripen is going to be a protracted issue.
True, however in the Indo-Pak context, the Erieye is a very relevant and potent system. I personally think that Phalcon is a bit of an overkill even for the IAF (in the context of Pakistan)..however India has grander designs than just dealing with Pakistan.gf0012-aust said:
The bottom line is that if Erieye is good enough for Greece (NATO inter-op issues)..then it sure is hell a decent system for Pakistan. I for one do think that the Gripens will be forthcoming. Although gripen is going to be a protracted issue.
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
Hence my follow up comment:blain2 said:
gf0012-aust said:
fieldmarshal
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #132
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
the hawkeys were offered to the PAF in the 80s, but were rejected than, as Pakistan wanted the sentries.
the hawkeys were offered to the PAF in the 80s, but were rejected than, as Pakistan wanted the sentries.
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
Apparently the 17 Saab 2000 platforms are going to be Used and refurbished. i doubt Saab would restart there production for the 17. that means the Installation production of such Radar systems on Saab-2000 should only take 2-3 years at the most. the plus side is platforms would be availble soon. The platform cannot be too old it went into production about 10 years ago.
Apparently the 17 Saab 2000 platforms are going to be Used and refurbished. i doubt Saab would restart there production for the 17. that means the Installation production of such Radar systems on Saab-2000 should only take 2-3 years at the most. the plus side is platforms would be availble soon. The platform cannot be too old it went into production about 10 years ago.
High tech Phalcon AWACS system on a bulky IL-76 is mind boggling. E-2C has the older conventional rotating radar while both Phalcon and Eyries are solid state phased aray radars. E-2C is propeller driven hence it will have a much less acceleration then the SAAB-2000. E-2C - 2000 might have a better radar but for Pakistan the Eyries is a non-US platform and a win-win situation in all aspects.
Speed and acceleration is irrelevant in any transport sans non combat aircraft in this particular tasking. In an AWACs it's loiter time and range that are critical in it's flying mission.Salman78 said:
They're race tracking, not sprinting. There are other systems designed to do that.
gf0012-aust said:
AWACS is a high value target. First thing indians r gonna do is to take it out of skies and when a pair of Su-30's r racing towards it, acceleration is all that would matter to outrun them or atleast buy enough time for for JF-17's to neutralize the threat. I am not that naive not to know that loiter time and range is more important. Speed and acceleration ARE important no matter what the platform or role is. Otherwise the french have a battle field radar installed on a Puma helicopter which would be a much cheaper alternative to SAAB-2000...
As a high value target then unless it is going to go into an absolutely benign area it will as a matter of course, be travelling assisted. Any controller who sent in an AWACs predicated on the fact that it could outrun (with a plausible gap) an interceptor - be it fighter or missile needs to go back to "meeting engagements 101". I certainly wouldn't put them in charge of ground assisting a forward controller let alone an AEW/AWACs system. The very reason why Nimrods rail on-board ads is so that they can have a degree of self protective autonomy - and they're a larger jet with a pedigree. No small commercial jet conversion (even the Lear - which was initially conceived as a T jet fighter design) could outrun a committed interceptor and it's launch package. A high value target will attract a committed response - no turning churning and burning will save it's butt unless god is on it's side, the meeting engagement detection range is telegraphed early or it's running out there assisted. Any other solution is likely to see the pilots family receive a black bordered letter.Salman78 said:
Before we go on, I have been assuming that you are a pilot? Is that correct? If so, what is your background so that I can establish at what level I should pitch my responses.
To compare a battlefield detection system with a partially manned transport based unit is chalk and cheese.
As I said. Tell me what your level of experience is as we can shorten the conversation very quickly.
Part of my background has been in AEW/AWACs projects - so I find your comments curious.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
A jet for an AWACS is useful as it usually confers a higher dash speed for an aircraft, useful for getting to the AO, rather than out running fighters. In addition jet aircraft are able to fly at a much higher altitude than prop aircraft which enables the radar system to cover a greater area (I believe, though could be wrong). These are the reasons most countries choose to fit AWACS to jet aircraft.
The E-2C Hawkeyes could be an interim AWAC capability for the PAF, leased from the US, to allow PAF a limited operational capability, and an excellent training platform, to allow PAF to fully develop doctrine and tactics prior to introduction of a wholly new capability? I know Greece is doing this with Swedish Air Force Erieyes on lease, until their own new build AWACS are delivered by Sweden. Maybe Sweden was unable to provide any currently operational Erieyes for PAF, and the E-2C is being used in this role instead?
A jet for an AWACS is useful as it usually confers a higher dash speed for an aircraft, useful for getting to the AO, rather than out running fighters. In addition jet aircraft are able to fly at a much higher altitude than prop aircraft which enables the radar system to cover a greater area (I believe, though could be wrong). These are the reasons most countries choose to fit AWACS to jet aircraft.
The E-2C Hawkeyes could be an interim AWAC capability for the PAF, leased from the US, to allow PAF a limited operational capability, and an excellent training platform, to allow PAF to fully develop doctrine and tactics prior to introduction of a wholly new capability? I know Greece is doing this with Swedish Air Force Erieyes on lease, until their own new build AWACS are delivered by Sweden. Maybe Sweden was unable to provide any currently operational Erieyes for PAF, and the E-2C is being used in this role instead?
Re: PAF to induct 60 Gripen jets + awacs into fleet
Jets do provide a greater dash potential, but the comments were predicated on a platform being able to leg it from an incoming. You'd have to be optimistic to think that a Sentry, Hawkeye or Rivet Joint could scoot in time. They'd be wishing hoping and praying that the onboard systems could spook the missile in time. Conversely they would be screaming electronically like a frantic banshee trying to get their own CAP to run intercept.
In an air war the US (and most sophisticated airforces) doctrine is to top the OPFOR AWACs first and reduce their airforce to GCI. GCI is then decapitated by cruise systems or rendered useless by Rivet Joint, Compass NNNN assets etc... Hence as the AWACs is the singularly most battlechanging asset it is highly likely to be the first ones removed. That means they get shoved into peripheral race tracking, or they will be heavily escorted.
The doctrine to support an AWACs has yet to be developed by Pakistan as they don't have the platforms yet. That can only be done by training the AWACs to work in sync with it's CAP. It's not the same as excorting a refueler or "air force 1".
I guess my comments are meant more for those who see this as a simple exercise in purchase and deployment. Far from it.
As for the E2C, I'd be interested to see how that evolves. It's certainly a known quantity and capability, it's range is allegedly longer than Eyrie. It would be interesting to see dry and deadweight comparisons between the 2 aircraft.
Absolute altitiude is of course beneficial. Typically and euphemistically it's referred to as "Gods View". The higher you go (and depending on resolution and acquisition issues) the more real estate you can "watch"Aussie Digger said:
Jets do provide a greater dash potential, but the comments were predicated on a platform being able to leg it from an incoming. You'd have to be optimistic to think that a Sentry, Hawkeye or Rivet Joint could scoot in time. They'd be wishing hoping and praying that the onboard systems could spook the missile in time. Conversely they would be screaming electronically like a frantic banshee trying to get their own CAP to run intercept.
In an air war the US (and most sophisticated airforces) doctrine is to top the OPFOR AWACs first and reduce their airforce to GCI. GCI is then decapitated by cruise systems or rendered useless by Rivet Joint, Compass NNNN assets etc... Hence as the AWACs is the singularly most battlechanging asset it is highly likely to be the first ones removed. That means they get shoved into peripheral race tracking, or they will be heavily escorted.
The doctrine to support an AWACs has yet to be developed by Pakistan as they don't have the platforms yet. That can only be done by training the AWACs to work in sync with it's CAP. It's not the same as excorting a refueler or "air force 1".
I guess my comments are meant more for those who see this as a simple exercise in purchase and deployment. Far from it.
As for the E2C, I'd be interested to see how that evolves. It's certainly a known quantity and capability, it's range is allegedly longer than Eyrie. It would be interesting to see dry and deadweight comparisons between the 2 aircraft.
Every time some one refers to speed. they forget one simple fact and that is that Speed is essential for Availbility of the platform in the area required ASAP. India would have three phalcons and i am guessing they would deploy a considerable ammount of them towards Pakistan and China, now supose they get involved in a conflict with an Eastern Neighbor, ideally they would require awacs in a war theater around that area, and they would require those platform to be availble there ASAP now if they had prop platforms for there AWACS, then they would spend alot of time geting arround to the conflict zone. This would be unacceptable, they would have to fly considerable amount of distances to maintain an eye over the massive indian air space. and since they have more territory and less platforms they would need these Platforms in air as long as possible props can't match the long cruising ability of Jets. now PAF has a smaller airspace to guard and more platfoms (AWACS) so they would have the luxury to land and refresh aircrews. the platforms would cover all PAF Airspace with some platforms to spare.
Can someone tell me what does the big gigantic dome in-front of the falcon equipped platform contain i think its a sat dish for up and downlink to the Communications sats (higher orbits) i am sure it (falcons) would have access to weather aka Spy sats (lower orbit sats)
Can someone tell me what does the big gigantic dome in-front of the falcon equipped platform contain i think its a sat dish for up and downlink to the Communications sats (higher orbits) i am sure it (falcons) would have access to weather aka Spy sats (lower orbit sats)