Read the forum code of contact
By: 15th March 2007 at 12:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I belive I asked aprox the same question about a year ago, and we got a nice little discussion going:
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=57086&highlight=A-50
Enjoy! :)
By: 15th March 2007 at 13:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Sorry to break into the non-stop obsession with fighters/interceptors but wars aren't fought only with these!Does anyone have any feel for the capabilities of this bird and whether it compares with western types? I feel sometimes that this type of machine escapes 'the radar'!
I said in that thread and I say again: AWACS stands for AWAC System. it is not the radar by itself, but the integration into a working system. A big part of the equation is processing capability and software. Both require maintenance. So, although this question is interesting and actually of much higher relevance than questions concerning turn rates, nobody here is possibly able (or willing) to answer them.
By: 15th March 2007 at 22:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I belive I asked aprox the same question about a year ago, and we got a nice little discussion going:http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=57086&highlight=A-50
Enjoy! :)
Thanks for that, Gauntlet. I think many of the 'fighter obsessed' lose sight of the fact that modern warfare isn't a matter of 'one-man-and-his-plane'.
The best fighters in the world aren't of much use if they're in the wrong place at the wrong time. That is a lesson which goes back at least as far as the Battle of Britain.
By: 16th March 2007 at 01:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I said in that thread and I say again: AWACS stands for AWAC System. it is not the radar by itself, but the integration into a working system. A big part of the equation is processing capability and software. Both require maintenance. So, although this question is interesting and actually of much higher relevance than questions concerning turn rates, nobody here is possibly able (or willing) to answer them.
This is the AWACS
While all of these aircraft are classified under the generic term AEW&C
Just as this is an AEGIS vessel
and this is just another AAW DDG with a phased array radar system
By: 16th March 2007 at 17:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-
and this is just another AAW DDG with a phased array radar system
Well most of the time its the western media that mades mastakes in labeling new platforms with american platform in mind.
i.e. the 052C was never labeld aegis until Kanwa coined the term red aegis.
Then people picked up the term and somehow it even made it onto the annual report to congress. Now you can't condemn people for using the term since it already have seen widespread use.
If it's like comparing mandarines and oranges and condeming those that call a mandarines an orange. Its nice if they knew the difference but quite inconsequential as we know what they mean.
By: 21st March 2007 at 15:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-This is the AWACS
No, it isn't. It's the Sentry. It's an AWACs.
By: 21st March 2007 at 16:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Has the Topic is also about Awacs,
Tell me something, What is Difference between an AWACS and AEW?.
Like example do AWACS like the Phalcons have a longer range and AEW Erieye?
As far as I could research, AEWCS is less versatile & less costlier than AWACS. Thus an AEWCS lacks processing of data onboard.
Can anyone plz give a Nice Detail Explanation.
By: 21st March 2007 at 17:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Has the Topic is also about Awacs,Tell me something, What is Difference between an AWACS and AEW?.
Like example do AWACS like the Phalcons have a longer range and AEW Erieye?
As far as I could research, AEWCS is less versatile & less costlier than AWACS. Thus an AEWCS lacks processing of data onboard.
Can anyone plz give a Nice Detail Explanation.
Nothing to do with radar range, or the range of the platform. All to do with onboard facilities.
AEW = Airborne Early Warning
AWACS = Airborne Warning And Control System
AWACS does AEW, but also has facilities to vector aircraft (or missiles, or whatever) onto targets. "Pure" AEW just acts as an airborne radar, & relays information to ground stations which do the controlling.
The original Swedish Air Force Erieyes were intended to function as just AEW, and were intended to work within a ground environment. Export versions, & the Brazilian Erieyes, use the same radar but also act as airborne control posts. But even the original Swedish AF Erieyes had some ability to process data on board, & had a couple of operator posts, so could act as limited AWACS, in case the ground environment was severely degraded by an attacker.
I think the early AEW helicopters for shipborne use were pretty much pure AEW. Not sure what the latest ones are.
Posts: 198
By: Jolanta Nowak - 15th March 2007 at 12:13
Sorry to break into the non-stop obsession with fighters/interceptors but wars aren't fought only with these!
Does anyone have any feel for the capabilities of this bird and whether it compares with western types? I feel sometimes that this type of machine escapes 'the radar'!