What's new

Pakistan's Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircrafts

EW aircraft, and specifically AW&C's role is not to carry ordnance but to stay at standoff distance and provide data to netted forces.
I think what he meant was that can these AWACS provide active guidance to BVR missiles of other PAF aircrafts such as JF17 or F16?

For example JF17 locks on enemy jets and fires BVRs, and once fired turns radar off or flees away with awacs guiding the missiles to target. In another case can the fighter jets keep their radars off and fire missiles just based on data provided to them by other ground based and airborne assets? I hope these questions were not too sensitive or specific for PAF capabilities ( if they are please ignore the questions).
 
Last edited:
I think what he meant was that can these AWACS provide active guidance to BVR missiles of other PAF aircrafts such as JF17 or F16?

For example JF17 locks on enemy jets and fires BVRs, and once fired turns radar off or flees away with awacs guiding the missiles to target. In another case can the fighter jets keep their radars off and fire missiles just based on data provided to them by other ground based and airborne assets? I hope these questions were not too sensitive or specific for PAF capabilities ( if they are please ignore the questions).

I know exactly what he meant. I am unable to discuss this subject.
 
I think what he meant was that can these AWACS provide active guidance to BVR missiles of other PAF aircrafts such as JF17 or F16?

For example JF17 locks on enemy jets and fires BVRs, and once fired turns radar off or flees away with awacs guiding the missiles to target. In another case can the fighter jets keep their radars off and fire missiles just based on data provided to them by other ground based and airborne assets? I hope these questions were not too sensitive or specific for PAF capabilities ( if they are please ignore the questions).
It can not. There's a difference between a search radar and a fire control radar
 
Maybe the answer lies in the difference between AEW (Airborne Early Warning) & AWACS (Airborne Early Warning and Control System). Erieye is an AWACS! The rest we leave it to the imagination and open source info available on the net!
 
Maybe the answer lies in the difference between AEW (Airborne Early Warning) & AWACS (Airborne Early Warning and Control System). Erieye is an AWACS! The rest we leave it to the imagination and open source info available on the net!
Control here does not imply controlling and directing AA missiles but ability to act as a command and control node, similar to a ground based air traffic control in a sense. Its controlling airspace and directing fighters and other assets. No need to spread misinformation about guiding missiles etc as is being implied here.
 
Last edited:
Control here does not imply controlling and directing AA missiles but ability to act as a command and control node, similar to a ground based air traffic control in a sense. Its controlling airspace and directing fighters and other assets. No need to spread misinformation about guiding missiles etc as is being implied here.

No misinformation spread! Asked people to look for open source info. which has tons of info. on beyond just CnC node.
 
I think what he meant was that can these AWACS provide active guidance to BVR missiles of other PAF aircrafts such as JF17 or F16?

For example JF17 locks on enemy jets and fires BVRs, and once fired turns radar off or flees away with awacs guiding the missiles to target. In another case can the fighter jets keep their radars off and fire missiles just based on data provided to them by other ground based and airborne assets? I hope these questions were not too sensitive or specific for PAF capabilities ( if they are please ignore the questions).
The USSR had gamed using its Moss AEW systems with datalinks to a theoretical missile to be used for the Tu-128. A lot of issues were encountered including the handoff of the weapon from the Tu-128 to the AEW system.
Once the instructions were sent, the AEW controller would transmit instructions to the Tu-128 intercept computer which would automatically fly the aircraft to the required intercept launch zone and provide authorization to launch weapons at target.

That being said, those were days of vacuum tubes and today everything is miniaturized solid state digital systems.

So now, think of a PL-15 with a two way datalink and the ZDK needing the ability to use beam sharpening to lock onto a target at 200miles out - then a weapons commander using a trackball to select a target and then the system automatically suggests a shooter based upon datalink parameters knowing an airborne JF-17’s fuel state, weapons status and distance; after which the said aircraft gets an encoded text message with intercept instructions.

For e.g the following fictional scenario could occur.
PAF AD Network detects targets - relays to command - gets authorization and the airborne commander on a ZDK gets permission to engage.
The Commander sends the following encrypted message to a JF.
THUNDER 1 - INT TSK -2 TRGT BLSEYE 033 FOR FL015 - INIT HDG 060 HNDOF LNCH - EXEC

the pilot of the aircraft flies to the point required with emissions off and possibly with additional instructions sent via AWACS to ensure minimum exposure to enemy detection systems.

Once within the launch parameters of the PL-15... lets say 100km; the ZDK starts painting the target and locks on - the JF-17 still undetected as such and green lights the pilot to launch. The datalinks synced, the pilot confirms all green, presses a button and goes defensive.
60 seconds to impact - The PL-15(s) are off the rail and on their way, the enemy is aware it is being painted and starts defending as the missile is guided - the Jf-17 meanwhile gets new instructions to reposition itself for either a second launch or to paint the target and guide the PL-15 if needed since now it is close enough to catch the target via its onboard radar.

The enemy aircraft is jamming now and the lock from the ZDk breaks but a cue is now sent to the JF - 25 seconds to impact- its radar lights up and now suddenly the target is being painted again and the PL-15 gets a refreshed track - 7 seconds to impact- the PL-15 goes pitbull and the JF is beaming and pulling away - the jamming from the target now actually guiding the missile home.
2 seconds to impact - the fuzes are about to engage on the initial warheads - the ZDK has pulled away on its race track and more assets are airborne with other missiles - the target realizes it may have to drink tea.
 
The USSR had gamed using its Moss AEW systems with datalinks to a theoretical missile to be used for the Tu-128. A lot of issues were encountered including the handoff of the weapon from the Tu-128 to the AEW system.
Once the instructions were sent, the AEW controller would transmit instructions to the Tu-128 intercept computer which would automatically fly the aircraft to the required intercept launch zone and provide authorization to launch weapons at target.

That being said, those were days of vacuum tubes and today everything is miniaturized solid state digital systems.

So now, think of a PL-15 with a two way datalink and the ZDK needing the ability to use beam sharpening to lock onto a target at 200miles out - then a weapons commander using a trackball to select a target and then the system automatically suggests a shooter based upon datalink parameters knowing an airborne JF-17’s fuel state, weapons status and distance; after which the said aircraft gets an encoded text message with intercept instructions.

For e.g the following fictional scenario could occur.
PAF AD Network detects targets - relays to command - gets authorization and the airborne commander on a ZDK gets permission to engage.
The Commander sends the following encrypted message to a JF.
THUNDER 1 - INT TSK -2 TRGT BLSEYE 033 FOR FL015 - INIT HDG 060 HNDOF LNCH - EXEC

the pilot of the aircraft flies to the point required with emissions off and possibly with additional instructions sent via AWACS to ensure minimum exposure to enemy detection systems.

Once within the launch parameters of the PL-15... lets say 100km; the ZDK starts painting the target and locks on - the JF-17 still undetected as such and green lights the pilot to launch. The datalinks synced, the pilot confirms all green, presses a button and goes defensive.
60 seconds to impact - The PL-15(s) are off the rail and on their way, the enemy is aware it is being painted and starts defending as the missile is guided - the Jf-17 meanwhile gets new instructions to reposition itself for either a second launch or to paint the target and guide the PL-15 if needed since now it is close enough to catch the target via its onboard radar.

The enemy aircraft is jamming now and the lock from the ZDk breaks but a cue is now sent to the JF - 25 seconds to impact- its radar lights up and now suddenly the target is being painted again and the PL-15 gets a refreshed track - 7 seconds to impact- the PL-15 goes pitbull and the JF is beaming and pulling away - the jamming from the target now actually guiding the missile home.
2 seconds to impact - the fuzes are about to engage on the initial warheads - the ZDK has pulled away on its race track and more assets are airborne with other missiles - the target realizes it may have to drink tea.
Thanks for the wonderful explanation. The description is great but still does no justice to the effort that went in achieving such an integrated battle system - integration of info from A/C to ground and air-bone assets , some flying at greater than mach 1, and that too with strict real time requirements of different distributed systems, with God knows how many different equipment vendors and protocols to deal with etc. This is no easy feat, and oh I also forgot to add dealing with the financial constraints and difficult diplomatic/political environment as well. Kudos to the managers, planners and engineers.
 
I think what he meant was that can these AWACS provide active guidance to BVR missiles of other PAF aircrafts such as JF17 or F16?

For example JF17 locks on enemy jets and fires BVRs, and once fired turns radar off or flees away with awacs guiding the missiles to target. In another case can the fighter jets keep their radars off and fire missiles just based on data provided to them by other ground based and airborne assets? I hope these questions were not too sensitive or specific for PAF capabilities ( if they are please ignore the questions).
No. It is thus far not possible.
 
Hi sir sorry to be a knob is it possible to integrate Chinese VLAAM or PL15 kind of missiles on these planes so they can guide those missiles through their own radars
If possible to answer to answer
Thank you

As i understand you ask for Cooperative engagement mode..Where ZDK-03 via Datalink 17 provides data to JF17 to open fire (SD10 or ?) without using its own radar..then JF17s disengages or apply a Notch..SD10 or ? could get updates from ZDK-03 and kills the target..at very long range..

If this you want to know..then its classified..just as Saab2000 AEW&C cooperative mode is..with link 16.
:)
 
Thanks for the wonderful explanation. The description is great but still does no justice to the effort that went in achieving such an integrated battle system - integration of info from A/C to ground and air-bone assets , some flying at greater than mach 1, and that too with strict real time requirements of different distributed systems, with God knows how many different equipment vendors and protocols to deal with etc. This is no easy feat, and oh I also forgot to add dealing with the financial constraints and difficult diplomatic/political environment as well. Kudos to the managers, planners and engineers.


Assuming that such a system is ever implemented - yes, it would be extremely complex and require a lot of moving parts to work per requirements.
 
As i understand you ask for Cooperative engagement mode..Where ZDK-03 via Datalink 17 provides data to JF17 to open fire (SD10 or ?) without using its own radar..then JF17s disengages or apply a Notch..SD10 or ? could get updates from ZDK-03 and kills the target..at very long range..

If this you want to know..then its classified..just as Saab2000 AEW&C cooperative mode is..with link 16.
:)
Hi thanks for your detailed reply to some extent you have given the answer but I was looking for
Something through Chinese AAM with very long range if possible to use them through ZDK long range radar without using less capable jf17 radars but I believe one can not arm their AWACS
If I’m not wrong
Thank you once again for your answer to my Q
 
106248202_1574330699411076_1808345392834483250_n.jpg
 
Why would it be complex?
The missile is communicating with the mothership using a transmit/receive module using encrypted codes with specific identifiers, as long as the received codes (instructions) are validated by the onboard computer to be legit regardless of who the sender is, it should work. As an over-simplified example, its like a remote control unit with multiple transmitters (JF17 and AWACS) but only one receiver (missile) all working on a specific frequency only in this case the frequency is replaced by encrypted code unique identifiers like a password. Or am I missing something?



Assuming that such a system is ever implemented - yes, it would be extremely complex and require a lot of moving parts to work per requirements.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom