Could Canada Build

"Ford Prefect" wrote in message ...
Charles Talleyrand wrote:
Radar is a problem. Web searches make me believe that Canada only
builds radars for atmospheric research and air traffic control and one
military radar, which is used by maritime aircraft for periscope
searching.

Given that our radar satellite systems make the US nervous (didn't we
have to agree to reduce resolution on RadarSat during US fly-overs?),
I think we can manage this without much trouble. McDonald-Detwiller
certainly has the talent to do this... and the folks at several other
firms which do international military contracts certainly have
additional talent that could be tapped. And the detection systems
used on the Cougar (correct designation?) certainly attest to the
ability to develop very sophisticated detection and tracking capabilities.


I think the antenna for the radar for RADARSAT-2 was built by a Canadian
company named EMS. I think they used their Atlanta office for this though.
Even so, they must have some clue in their two Canadian offices (they have
three main engineering offices total).

It's the right type of antenna (light weight planar array)
http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/eng/csa_s...2/inf_over.asp
http://www.emsstg.com/

McDermitt and company only manage and sell the data.


Missiles are another problem. Web searches suggest that Canada builds
no missiles and more importantly no seaker heads. They might have to
start from scratch on this.

Common technology --- most countries purchase these from others. And
reverse engineering the missles already in inventory isn;t such a hard
thing to do. Simple web searches would give all the technology, or
one could start with the basics as published in Smithsonian Air &
Space a while back...

Maybe. I'm sure eventually Canada could do this from first prinipals
if need be. I was hoping for an example of Canadian success in the field.


I am curious as to why you base your assumptions on the results of
"web searches". Nor all companies are so stupid as to place
classified, sensitive, or advanced information on the web -- Canadian
companies don't tend to use the web to hype their military knowledge
as those of some other nations do.

Just because it is not on the web doesn't mean it doesn't exist! As
the SETI folks are fond of saying: "Absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence!".

That's true.

But I'm not looking for classified information. However, most companies
put up web pages and issue press releases when they win major contracts
or make sigificant technological accomplishments. It's absolutley no
secret who makes the F/A-18 radar even if some specific techniques are
classified.

Besides, I don't have a pile of industry pundits camped out in my
living room to ask.

In article , "Charles Talleyrand"
wrote:

"Ford Prefect" wrote in message
...
Charles Talleyrand wrote:
Radar is a problem. Web searches make me believe that Canada only
builds radars for atmospheric research and air traffic control and one
military radar, which is used by maritime aircraft for periscope
searching.

Given that our radar satellite systems make the US nervous (didn't we
have to agree to reduce resolution on RadarSat during US fly-overs?),
I think we can manage this without much trouble. McDonald-Detwiller
certainly has the talent to do this... and the folks at several other
firms which do international military contracts certainly have
additional talent that could be tapped. And the detection systems
used on the Cougar (correct designation?) certainly attest to the
ability to develop very sophisticated detection and tracking capabilities.


I think the antenna for the radar for RADARSAT-2 was built by a Canadian
company named EMS. I think they used their Atlanta office for this though.
Even so, they must have some clue in their two Canadian offices (they have
three main engineering offices total).

It's the right type of antenna (light weight planar array)
http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/eng/csa_s...2/inf_over.asp
http://www.emsstg.com/

If you want to build a modern fighter radar, then AESA is the only way to go.

There's only 3 companies in the world with the expertise to do an AESA radar.
2 of them are in the USA, and only one of them has AESA in production.

For Canada to come up to speed with a purely domestic system
would take a minimum of 10 years.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

"Harry Andreas" wrote in message ...
If you want to build a modern fighter radar, then AESA is the only way to go.

There's only 3 companies in the world with the expertise to do an AESA radar.
2 of them are in the USA, and only one of them has AESA in production.


I'm pretty sure the Russians and the French would disagree with you.

For Canada to come up to speed with a purely domestic system
would take a minimum of 10 years.

Could you offer some justification for this estimate? I'd be interested in any
reasoning you might offer.

In article , "Charles Talleyrand"
wrote:

"Harry Andreas" wrote in message
...
If you want to build a modern fighter radar, then AESA is the only way
to go.

There's only 3 companies in the world with the expertise to do an AESA
radar.
2 of them are in the USA, and only one of them has AESA in production.


I'm pretty sure the Russians and the French would disagree with you.

I took the French into account.
The Russians...I'm not sure that what they're building is an AESA.
I could be wrong though.


For Canada to come up to speed with a purely domestic system
would take a minimum of 10 years.

Could you offer some justification for this estimate? I'd be interested
in any
reasoning you might offer.

I takes very specialized knowledge and facilities to build an AESA.
It's a fair bit different than a mechanically scanned array.
Someone with no base in building fighter radars would have to bring
a lot of engineers up to speed, while simultaneously building factories,
foundries,
and test facilities. That takes time.
Other than that I really can't comment on specifics.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur