UK Tornado force pushes NTISR
Thread Starter
UK Tornado force pushes NTISR
This from Janes.
UK Royal Air Force (RAF) Panavia Tornado GR.4 reconnaissance/attack aircraft are now in the forefront of developing non-traditional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (NTISR) tactics during missions to support coalition troops.
US and UK aircraft operating over Iraq are using their electro-optical targeting pods to improve situational awareness for ground troops and detect insurgent threats. The changing nature of the counter-insurgency campaign has forced coalition air forces in Iraq to evolve their operations and push non-kinetic effects to the fore, according to RAF officers.
UK Royal Air Force (RAF) Panavia Tornado GR.4 reconnaissance/attack aircraft are now in the forefront of developing non-traditional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (NTISR) tactics during missions to support coalition troops.
US and UK aircraft operating over Iraq are using their electro-optical targeting pods to improve situational awareness for ground troops and detect insurgent threats. The changing nature of the counter-insurgency campaign has forced coalition air forces in Iraq to evolve their operations and push non-kinetic effects to the fore, according to RAF officers.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WTF does this mean? Perhaps a loose translation into plain English might be:
"Growing sensitivity of Western public opinion to collateral damage and civilian casualties has limited offensive operations by coalition air forces. They are increasingly using EO sensors, primarily intended for target designation, for passive tactical reconnaissance in support of ground forces."
Am I anywhere near right?
"Growing sensitivity of Western public opinion to collateral damage and civilian casualties has limited offensive operations by coalition air forces. They are increasingly using EO sensors, primarily intended for target designation, for passive tactical reconnaissance in support of ground forces."
Am I anywhere near right?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the Litening pod, the GR-4 will finally be at least as good as most other strike aircraft of the '90s in its ability to actually see a target, pity it is 15 years too late. Why, oh why has TIALD allowed to continue to be used with its marginal picture, and overly complicated switchology and functionality?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: All Bar One
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IIRC this article also mentioned the Litening 3 data link capability which I dont think the TIALD pod has (or at least didnt have). Sounds like this a useful, albeit long overdue, enhancement to make current ops more effective. A current operator's perspective (unclas of course) would be interesting here for those of us out of touch.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the Litening pod, the GR-4 will finally be at least as good as most other strike aircraft of the '90s in its ability to actually see a target, pity it is 15 years too late. Why, oh why has TIALD allowed to continue to be used with its marginal picture, and overly complicated switchology and functionality?
RAPTOR has datalink facilities, but can't 'paint' targets. And unfortunately they are fitted to the same station on the aircraft, so you can't carry both.
All you need to know is http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SI...ILES/7/477.pdf
As for how good it really is just, compare the different times it has taken to get it to service cf. RAPTOR or the quality against TIALD despite all its evolutionary guises.
Most importantly the squaddies on the floor will benefit from better info and more.
As for how good it really is just, compare the different times it has taken to get it to service cf. RAPTOR or the quality against TIALD despite all its evolutionary guises.
Most importantly the squaddies on the floor will benefit from better info and more.
Last edited by insty66; 15th Jan 2007 at 16:48. Reason: missing link!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Magnetogorsk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Podcast
So why has the Sniper turned up on the GR9 then (BAE's ZD320 test ship)...at the same time as the first Litening IIIs appeared on GR4s?
What in pod's name is going on??
What in pod's name is going on??
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Neither the A-6E nor the A-7E ever used LANTIRN, but had their own unique systems 5 years before LANTIRN was tested.
The A-6E used an airframe-mounted ball turret half-inside and half-outside the nose, below the radar and in front of the nose wheel. AN/AAS-33A made by Hughes Aircraft. Accepted for service after trials in 1978.
The A-7E used a single large pod slung under the starboard wing on the inner pylon. AN/AAR-45 made by Texas Instruments. Accepted for service after trials in 1979.
Neither of these had any data-link capability, but recorded images on magnetic video tape.
Early F-15 & F-16 FLIR systems were a 2-pod Martin Marietta Corp. [now Lockheed Martin, Inc.] LANTIRN package comprising AN/AAQ-13 (navigation) and AN/AAQ-14 (targeting) pods. Accepted for service March 1985 after trials in 1984.
AN/AAQ-28 Litening: research and development program began at Rafael Corporation's Missiles Division in Haifa, Israel, with subsequent completion of LITENING I for use in the Israeli Air Force. Accepted for service in 1995.
Litening was fitted by the USAF on the F-15, F-16, A-10, & B-52, and by the USN/USMC on the F/A-18 & AV-8B.
The A-6E used an airframe-mounted ball turret half-inside and half-outside the nose, below the radar and in front of the nose wheel. AN/AAS-33A made by Hughes Aircraft. Accepted for service after trials in 1978.
The A-7E used a single large pod slung under the starboard wing on the inner pylon. AN/AAR-45 made by Texas Instruments. Accepted for service after trials in 1979.
Neither of these had any data-link capability, but recorded images on magnetic video tape.
Early F-15 & F-16 FLIR systems were a 2-pod Martin Marietta Corp. [now Lockheed Martin, Inc.] LANTIRN package comprising AN/AAQ-13 (navigation) and AN/AAQ-14 (targeting) pods. Accepted for service March 1985 after trials in 1984.
AN/AAQ-28 Litening: research and development program began at Rafael Corporation's Missiles Division in Haifa, Israel, with subsequent completion of LITENING I for use in the Israeli Air Force. Accepted for service in 1995.
Litening was fitted by the USAF on the F-15, F-16, A-10, & B-52, and by the USN/USMC on the F/A-18 & AV-8B.
Interesting how an Israeli company now appears to be at the forefront of the air targetting pod market.
Given the huge investment in US (and UK / European) technology suppliers of this sort of kit, or at least similar key enabling technology components (IR detectors, lasers etc.) you might have expected more US (and UK, Edinburgh?) domestic competition. Anyone want to comment?
Has the size of the domestic Israeli air force market lead to this? Surely not?
Given the huge investment in US (and UK / European) technology suppliers of this sort of kit, or at least similar key enabling technology components (IR detectors, lasers etc.) you might have expected more US (and UK, Edinburgh?) domestic competition. Anyone want to comment?
Has the size of the domestic Israeli air force market lead to this? Surely not?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: cambridge
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
7 Litening III pods were purchased under a UOR for Op TELIC and not rented as stated earlier. The gentleman saying he would rather have Sniper over L3 must consider the following:
1. Whilst Sniper offers a better max magnifiaction, it doesn't allow the operator the same zoom-out facility. CAS, etc ,sometimes requires that big picture view. In fact, the ANG were offered both for their block-50 CGs, and this was the reason they opted for Litening AT (the same sensor as L3).
2. Whilst the Rover 3 datalink has been fully integrated on the Litening AT, it wasn't integrated on Sniper or L3, until this UOR. There was, however, considerably less risk on the L3.
3. The L3 has an outstanding Recce function (unlike the Sniper), which will offer similar NIRRS to DJRP. Now consider getting rid of the DJRP in place of the L3, and you then have decent flexibility - Massive benifits over Sniper.
4. Sniper offers some massive benifits for the Harrier which are not relevant to the GR4.
7 Litening III pods were purchased under a UOR for Op TELIC and not rented as stated earlier. The gentleman saying he would rather have Sniper over L3 must consider the following:
1. Whilst Sniper offers a better max magnifiaction, it doesn't allow the operator the same zoom-out facility. CAS, etc ,sometimes requires that big picture view. In fact, the ANG were offered both for their block-50 CGs, and this was the reason they opted for Litening AT (the same sensor as L3).
2. Whilst the Rover 3 datalink has been fully integrated on the Litening AT, it wasn't integrated on Sniper or L3, until this UOR. There was, however, considerably less risk on the L3.
3. The L3 has an outstanding Recce function (unlike the Sniper), which will offer similar NIRRS to DJRP. Now consider getting rid of the DJRP in place of the L3, and you then have decent flexibility - Massive benifits over Sniper.
4. Sniper offers some massive benifits for the Harrier which are not relevant to the GR4.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: A Small Island
Age: 48
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFZ- Isreali design, but built in the US by Northrup Grumman Corp, guess this satisfies the politicians who would be concerned with such things, IMHO I don't really care, it's a great pod.
Great points by Tboy, I find it interesting that the Harriers are considering Sniper since the Tornados already have Litening. It seems like it would be benificial to have a common pod for all fast jets. The USMC had a similar issue a few years back, with Harriers being heavily investedin Litening and the Hornets using their AT FLIR (crap). Now all airframes in the Corps are using the same pod under a central manager. Simplifies support and allocation greatly.
Great points by Tboy, I find it interesting that the Harriers are considering Sniper since the Tornados already have Litening. It seems like it would be benificial to have a common pod for all fast jets. The USMC had a similar issue a few years back, with Harriers being heavily investedin Litening and the Hornets using their AT FLIR (crap). Now all airframes in the Corps are using the same pod under a central manager. Simplifies support and allocation greatly.