By: Jō Asakura
- 18th January 2016 at 18:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Su-35S doesn't employ the 'Pastel'. It uses a more modern system designated L-150-35 and has much more advanced capabilities as an ELINT system (станции непосредственной радиотехнической разведки/СНРТР), than a mere RWR:
By: Molnya
- 18th January 2016 at 21:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
L-150 is Pastel the following number is modification for specific use on a plattform. Pastel RWR were since a few years advertized as being accurate enough to cue ARHM on the source of the radar when designated as a target (narrow beam).
By: Ozair
- 18th January 2016 at 22:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What does LWR stands for ?
Laser warning receiver. Would be used to detect ground and air based laser targeting systems such as those from SAMs or laser range finders on aircraft.
By: Jō Asakura
- 18th January 2016 at 23:02Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
L-150 is Pastel the following number is modification for specific use on a plattform. Pastel RWR were since a few years advertized as being accurate enough to cue ARHM on the source of the radar when designated as a target (narrow beam).
L-150-35 is most certainly NOT 'Pastel'. If the differences in the system components (pic in link above) aren't glaringly obvious, then GT this:
By: MSphere
- 18th January 2016 at 23:28Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Laser warning receiver. Would be used to detect ground and air based laser targeting systems such as those from SAMs or laser range finders on aircraft.
Is that relevant on a fighter? I've always thought that fighters would be either too fast or too high to care about laser guided anything...
New
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot
- 18th January 2016 at 23:37Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is that relevant on a fighter? I've always thought that fighters would be either too fast or too high to care about laser guided anything...
Plenty of fighters use laser range-finders with their IRST.
By: Ozair
- 19th January 2016 at 00:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is that relevant on a fighter? I've always thought that fighters would be either too fast or too high to care about laser guided anything...
Agree with what hopsalot stated. Range finders are present on a lot of fighter aircraft these days and so the LWR provides another source of passive warning to the pilot. For the ground based scenario, there are a few SAM systems with primary or secondary laser range finding or guidance and at some stage these aircraft will fly low enough or slow enough to make this an issue.
I'm not surprised to see this on the SU-35 as I thought I had seen a few previous Flanker variants with LWRs?
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 19th January 2016 at 00:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Agree with what hopsalot stated. Range finders are present on a lot of fighter aircraft these days and so the LWR provides another source of passive warning to the pilot. For the ground based scenario, there are a few SAM systems with primary or secondary laser range finding or guidance and at some stage these aircraft will fly low enough or slow enough to make this an issue.
OK.. that would mean that even IRST guidance is not entirely passive..
I'm not surprised to see this on the SU-35 as I thought I had seen a few previous Flanker variants with LWRs?
I don't think any other Flanker variant had this.. Not even Chinese J-11s, AFAIK..
By: Ozair
- 19th January 2016 at 00:41Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OK.. that would mean that even IRST guidance is not entirely passive..
Passive until the laser range finder is used at which point, if the target aircraft has an LWR (which is not many), it would be noticed. The range finders overcome the IRST ranging issue but typically don't have a range over 20-30kms.
I don't think any other Flanker variant had this.. Not even Chinese J-11s, AFAIK..
Just found it, the Malaysian Su-30MKM has a LWR from Avitronics in South Africa although they refer to it as a sensor not a receiver...
For the Malaysian deal, Irkut was the main contractor, but canards, stabilizers and fins were manufactured by India’s HAL Nasik under a $25-30 million value subcontract, and India plays a role in helping the RMAF to maintain their fleet. The main difference between the MKI and MKM versions is the replacement of Indian and Israeli avionics, ECM (electronic counter-measures), and LITENING pods with Russian, French and South African equipment. This includes original Russian equipment, Thales of France’s HUD, NAVFLIR, and Damocles surveillance and targeting pod; Avitronics South Africa missile approach warning sensors and laser warning sensors. India’s SU-30MKI Mk3 is also be equipped with an on-board mechanical health-and-usage monitoring system (HUMS) from South Africa’s Aerospace Monitoring And Systems (Pty) Ltd (AMS), but there is no announced word on whether the Malaysian SU-30MKMs are equipped with a similar system.
By: TR1
- 19th January 2016 at 01:07Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With all the talk of extra Su-30SMs (certainly the airframe number will be higher than Su-35 before 2020) I sure hope they finally put LWR and MAWS on it...
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 19th January 2016 at 10:41Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Passive until the laser range finder is used at which point, if the target aircraft has an LWR (which is not many), it would be noticed. The range finders overcome the IRST ranging issue but typically don't have a range over 20-30kms.
Just found it, the Malaysian Su-30MKM has a LWR from Avitronics in South Africa although they refer to it as a sensor not a receiver...
Riiiight.. Stand corrected... I have never noticed that the MKM actually had two sensor suites by Avitronics - the MAW-300 (UV based MAWS) and the LWS-310 (laser warning sensors against GaAs, NdYag, shifted NdYag and Erbium Glass lasers)
By: Dr.Snufflebug
- 19th January 2016 at 15:25Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Brilliant builds, Ken.
Regarding the MKM in general, I must say that I wish the VVS/VKS had a squadron of Su-30's in that scheme. Not that there is anything wrong in particular with the Russian affinity for colorful things, au contraire, but that sleek grey "western-ness" does look good on a Flanker.
By: medo
- 19th January 2016 at 21:21Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With all the talk of extra Su-30SMs (certainly the airframe number will be higher than Su-35 before 2020) I sure hope they finally put LWR and MAWS on it...
Depend on contract, if those components will be included.
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 19th January 2016 at 23:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I doubt they will put Avitronics on them if they haven't already.. and integrtaion of the domestic LWS and MAWS found on the Su-35S would be quite costly..
New
Posts: 2,171
By: Berkut
- 19th January 2016 at 23:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One died on the spot, one died two months later (75% burns...) and 3-4 didnt get any injuries apparently.
R.I.P. to the deceased... But, pardon me for sounding insensitive but this was a rather bizarre incident - a positively massive engine failure - and that's the most"interesting" part if you will. The mighty NK-12 has proven itself incredibly reliable over its 50+ years of service, so what exactly was the cause of this apparent cascade of sudden failures? Engine suddenly blows up (?!), fuel tanks are ruptured and boom - you got yourself a fireball. Horrific to say the least... I do want to see the results of the investigation though... That kind of thing just doesn't happen from out of nowhere.
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 19th January 2016 at 23:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What was the reason for such violent flameout? An object on a runway which might have ruptured the port main gear leg and perforated the wing fuel tank? Or a massive inner port engine failure? Can't see it clearly..
Posts: 1,286
By: Jō Asakura - 18th January 2016 at 18:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Su-35S doesn't employ the 'Pastel'. It uses a more modern system designated L-150-35 and has much more advanced capabilities as an ELINT system (станции непосредственной радиотехнической разведки/СНРТР), than a mere RWR:
https://www.google.co.jp/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.aviationunion.ru/Files/Nom_7_Omsk_CKBA.doc&ved=0ahUKEwiG8rf-97PKAhWJVz4KHf8OD_oQFggdMAE&usg=AFQjCNGnWRKvJlQLQJRLqVhw_92WMG8VgA&sig2=U6cXV3XouvUnO8xWBvJ0Ag
A derivative (L-150-16M), marketed as an upgrade for Su-25SMs, even claims a capability to cue radar-guided AAMs:
...but I'm a tad sceptical on this last claim - even the mighty AN/ALR-94 needs the AN/APG-77 to cue radar homing AAMs!
Posts: 151
By: mikoyan - 18th January 2016 at 21:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What does LWR stands for ?
Posts: 48
By: Molnya - 18th January 2016 at 21:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
L-150 is Pastel the following number is modification for specific use on a plattform. Pastel RWR were since a few years advertized as being accurate enough to cue ARHM on the source of the radar when designated as a target (narrow beam).
Posts: 815
By: Ozair - 18th January 2016 at 22:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Laser warning receiver. Would be used to detect ground and air based laser targeting systems such as those from SAMs or laser range finders on aircraft.
Posts: 1,286
By: Jō Asakura - 18th January 2016 at 23:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
L-150-35 is most certainly NOT 'Pastel'. If the differences in the system components (pic in link above) aren't glaringly obvious, then GT this:
http://www.dissercat.com/content/algoritm-izmereniya-ugla-sdviga-faz-svch-signalov
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 18th January 2016 at 23:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is that relevant on a fighter? I've always thought that fighters would be either too fast or too high to care about laser guided anything...Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot - 18th January 2016 at 23:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Plenty of fighters use laser range-finders with their IRST.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 18th January 2016 at 23:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Pretty significant news for Sukhoi- the 100th SSJ has flown.
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1687161.html
It is the 95th serial air-frame, and the first for the Irish airline CityJet.
Posts: 815
By: Ozair - 19th January 2016 at 00:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Agree with what hopsalot stated. Range finders are present on a lot of fighter aircraft these days and so the LWR provides another source of passive warning to the pilot. For the ground based scenario, there are a few SAM systems with primary or secondary laser range finding or guidance and at some stage these aircraft will fly low enough or slow enough to make this an issue.
I'm not surprised to see this on the SU-35 as I thought I had seen a few previous Flanker variants with LWRs?
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 19th January 2016 at 00:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OK.. that would mean that even IRST guidance is not entirely passive.. I don't think any other Flanker variant had this.. Not even Chinese J-11s, AFAIK..Posts: 815
By: Ozair - 19th January 2016 at 00:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Passive until the laser range finder is used at which point, if the target aircraft has an LWR (which is not many), it would be noticed. The range finders overcome the IRST ranging issue but typically don't have a range over 20-30kms.
Just found it, the Malaysian Su-30MKM has a LWR from Avitronics in South Africa although they refer to it as a sensor not a receiver...
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/malaysia-receives-first-2-su30mkms-03336/
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 19th January 2016 at 01:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With all the talk of extra Su-30SMs (certainly the airframe number will be higher than Su-35 before 2020) I sure hope they finally put LWR and MAWS on it...
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 19th January 2016 at 10:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Riiiight.. Stand corrected... I have never noticed that the MKM actually had two sensor suites by Avitronics - the MAW-300 (UV based MAWS) and the LWS-310 (laser warning sensors against GaAs, NdYag, shifted NdYag and Erbium Glass lasers)
Posts: 3,652
By: Flanker_man - 19th January 2016 at 14:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I had to scratch-build them on my Su-30MKM model....... the MAWS is in a multi-facetted 'turret' on the upper spine, behind the airbrake...
.... and on the underside in front of the nosewheel bay....
Note also the forward-facing LWS-310 next to the MAWS - the rear-facing ones are on the intake sides.
The finished model.......
.... next to its Indian cousin.....
Ken
Posts: 479
By: Dr.Snufflebug - 19th January 2016 at 15:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Brilliant builds, Ken.
Regarding the MKM in general, I must say that I wish the VVS/VKS had a squadron of Su-30's in that scheme. Not that there is anything wrong in particular with the Russian affinity for colorful things, au contraire, but that sleek grey "western-ness" does look good on a Flanker.
Posts: 311
By: medo - 19th January 2016 at 21:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Depend on contract, if those components will be included.
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 19th January 2016 at 23:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I doubt they will put Avitronics on them if they haven't already.. and integrtaion of the domestic LWS and MAWS found on the Su-35S would be quite costly..
Posts: 2,171
By: Berkut - 19th January 2016 at 23:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Video from 8'th June 2015;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtqYAv5xyTg
One died on the spot, one died two months later (75% burns...) and 3-4 didnt get any injuries apparently.
Posts: 479
By: Dr.Snufflebug - 19th January 2016 at 23:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
R.I.P. to the deceased... But, pardon me for sounding insensitive but this was a rather bizarre incident - a positively massive engine failure - and that's the most"interesting" part if you will. The mighty NK-12 has proven itself incredibly reliable over its 50+ years of service, so what exactly was the cause of this apparent cascade of sudden failures? Engine suddenly blows up (?!), fuel tanks are ruptured and boom - you got yourself a fireball. Horrific to say the least... I do want to see the results of the investigation though... That kind of thing just doesn't happen from out of nowhere.
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 19th January 2016 at 23:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What was the reason for such violent flameout? An object on a runway which might have ruptured the port main gear leg and perforated the wing fuel tank? Or a massive inner port engine failure? Can't see it clearly..