The Great Asian Showdown : India’s Kolkata Class v/s China’s Type-52D Destroyer



This is my first article which involves comparing major frontline warships. In this article I will compare the most powerful destroyers of the Chinese Navy and the India Navy, The Type-52D class and Kolkata class respectively. The reason I’m choosing to compare these two is because they are the newest destroyers of their respective nations and incorporate multifunction AESA radars and long range missiles with vertical launch capabilities. They pack a formidable punch but they have their strengths and weaknesses. These two ships will be the primary escorts of the Chinese Navy and Indian Navy carriers for years to come. They are game changers for their respective nations. All these will be discussed in detail in the comparison below. I am comparing only the most important aspects of each ship.

10 points have been allocated for each category and it will be totaled up at the end of the comparison. This is entirely my opinion and analysis and you are free to make your own analysis or suggestions in the comment section below as a good discussion is always appreciated.


Kolkata Class:

The Kolkata follows the Soviet tradition of having an assortment of weapons at the bow on various raised platforms. It has a 163 m long hull which is retained from its predecessor, Delhi class. It displaces around 7500 tons when fully loaded. The massive size of the ship allows the installation of a wide range of sensors and weapons. The Indians have chosen to leave a lot of deck space for future additions and upgrades.

kolkata 7

Type 52D:

This uses essentially the same hull as its predecessor, the Type-52C. Its hull is slightly smaller at 154 m, but it displaces around 7500 tons when fully loaded suggesting that it is packed to the brim with sensors and weapons and there is hardly any space left for additions of new systems.



Kolkata Class:

This is the first Indian warship to use an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, which has 4 static panels instead of a single rotating panel. This Multi-Function radar also allows for the replacement of a dozen other smaller search, track and fire control radars with a single system. The Israeli MF-STAR has been chosen for this role. It is mounted very high up on a specially built mast.

The MF-STAR operates in the S-band of radio frequency. It consists of 4 panels mounted on each side of the main mast. This radar is capable of performing a variety of functions like

  • Long range surface surveillance
  • Long range 3D air surveillance
  • Gunnery control
  • Target classification
  • Simultaneous multi-engagement support
  • Guidance for active and semi active missiles

These features make the INS Kolkata, the most advanced radar platform in the Indian Navy. The radar is said to be capable of guiding 24 missiles at once to hit 12 targets. This gives the ship an ability to defend itself against saturation air attacks depending on the number of available missiles. The MF-STAR is capable of detecting large aerial targets at distances >250 km and sea skimming cruise missiles at ranges >25 km. The actual values are much higher and are classified. Since Israel is one of the leading makers of radars, I will give them the benefit of doubt and award them with a high rating.

Its secondary radar is a Thales LW-08 2D radar which operates in the D-Band. It’s a long range surveillnce radar and provides target indication to weapon control systems.

It scores 10/10 in this category


The primary radar, the Type-348, is similar in arrangement to the SPY-1 radars of the American AEGIS system. It is a dual band AESA which has 4 square panels mounted on 4 sides of the superstructure. This radar is said to have a range of 350 km and is primarily associated with the HQ-9 SAM.  China claims that this radar has the capability to detect stealth fighters like the F-35, but i seriously doubt this claim.

The secondary radar on board is the Type-517 A-band VHF air search radar. The biggest problem is that, details of new Chinese radars aren’t available anywhere. But their radars, though powerful, aren’t on par with the western radars.

It scores 8/10 in this category. 


Both these ships rely mainly on vertically launched missiles as their primary weapon and guns as their secondary weapon. The Type52D possesses a Universal Vertical Launcher system with 64 cells which can fire any type of missile from Surface to Air, Surface to Surface to Anti-Submarine missiles. The Kolkata meanwhile makes use of a fixed missile launch VLS which can launch only one type of missile.


Kolkata Class:

16 BrahMos VLS and a 76 mm gun

India has chosen to make this class excel in surface warfare. Its main armament is a battery of 16 vertically launched BrahMos supersonic long range Anti-Ship missiles. This is by far one of the deadliest missile armament of contemporary warships. It can hit ships at ranges of around 300 km with extreme accuracy. It has 2 flight paths, 120 km range in sea skimming profile or 300 km range in a high altitude with a terminal 40 km sea skimming profile. The missile maintains a speed of Mach 2-3 throughout its flight, which makes it extremely difficult for modern defense systems to shoot it down. There is space behind the 16 VLS cells for a batch of 8 more cells, but has been left empty. I strongly feel that India will install their new Land Attack Cruise Missile, the 1000 km range Nirbhay in that space once it has entered service.

Naval variant
INS Kolkata firing BrahMos

Secondary surface warfare capability is provided by its 76 mm Oto Melara super rapid gun, which can fire 120 rounds per minute up to a distance of 15 km against surface targets and up to 8 km against aerial targets. This gun is supposed to be extremely effective against low flying aircraft and cruise missiles. The small caliber of this gun limits its range and effectiveness in shore bombardment roles. It is unknown whether India has procured guided shells for use with this gun.

It’s limited 16 missile loadout and the small caliber main gun ensures that it bags 9/10 in this category

Type 52D:

32 x 2 Vertical Launch Cells

The configuration of this ship for surface warfare can be changed based on mission requirements due to its Universal Vertical Launchers which can fire any type of missile. An ideal layout would consist of 16 YJ-12Anti-Ship Missiles (AShM) for surface warfare. The range of the missile is said to vary from 220 km to around 350-400 km depending on flight profile. The only drawback of this missile over BrahMos is that it travels at subsonic speeds at 40 km altitude and reaches supersonic speeds only during the final dive towards its target, which makes it easy to intercept using long and medium range missiles during the subsonic phase. But an alternate high-low flight profile gives it a range of 250-300 km, putting it in the same category as the Indian BrahMos. Nevertheless, a large number of these missiles can be fired which gives it the ability to saturate modern air defenses.

The flexibility of the UVLS allows it to practically carry 32 AShMs on a dedicated surface warfare mission which is a huge advantage over the fixed 16 AShM loadout on INS Kolkata. This would give it the best AShM loadout among contemporary ships, but a balanced load would be 16 AShMs. The best bet against a salvo of YJ-12 missiles would be a layered air defense system.

130 mm gun type 52D
130 mm gun

Secondary surface warfare capability is provided by a 130 mm main gun. This has an effective range of over 25 km against surface targets and can prove to be very useful in shore bombardment missions. Its capability against aircraft and missiles is very limited. The ability to carry a 16-32 missiles and the presence of a large caliber main gun ensure that it gets 10/10 in this category.


Kolkata Class:

The primary Long-Range SAM on board the Kolkata is the Barak-8 which has been jointly developed by India and Israel. This 90+ km range missile is designed from the start to intercept supersonic cruise missiles which travel a few meters above water which makes it perfect for missile defense. It is housed in specific launchers at the fore and aft of the ship. The total loadout is 32 missiles though there is easily enough space to mount 64 cells of Barak-8 missiles in the future. The Barak-8 s very unique because it has a minimum range of just 0.5 km when similar missiles have a minimum range of 3-4 km. This enables it to intercept missiles very close to the ship and it performs the role of a point defense SAM as well. 24 Barak-8 can be guided at once to intercept 12 targets simultaneously.

It lacks a secondary layer SAM system and all the burden is on the 32 Barak-8 to perform area defense, missile defense and point defense duties. But its current load of 32 Barak-8 is highly insufficient for a destroyer of this size in a modern day conflict. Ships of the same category of other nations carry 48-96 SAMs in comparison.

The role of CIWS is left to the 4 AK-630 6 barreled, 30 mm Gatling guns which is a last ditch defense against missiles. It has an effective range of 4 km. The 76 mm main gun also has excellent anti-air capability and can complement the CIWS with its effective range of 8 km against aerial threats. All these guns are open loop and depend on the sensors and radars mounted on the ship. The advantage is that these sensors can detect targets at long ranges as they are mounted high up and increase the effective range of these guns. If it had the 10 km range Barak-1 like its predecessor, it would have had a 3 layered air defense system with a total of 64 missiles. The current 2 layered air defense system leaves it vulnerable to a saturation attack as it can run out of missiles very fast.

It scores a 7/10 in the CIWS category

It scores a 10/10 in the missile defense category.

It scores a 4/10 in the area defense category.


This is one category where the Chinese have an edge over the Indians. The Type-52D can carry 64 Surface to Air missiles (SAMs) theoretically on a pure anti-air mission. But practically its loadout will be 32-48 cells of SAMs. Its primary SAM is the HQ-9B which is a long range area defense SAM. It has a slant range of 200 km which gives it a unique advantage over the Kolkata. It can shoot down a missile launch platform like fighter aircraft at 200 km before the fighter can fire its AShMs at it. The ability to destroy missile launch platforms means that it can prevent saturation missile attacks. The only thing that needs to be considered is an Airborne Radar platform like the Ka-31 in order to detect and guide the HQ-9B to hit low flying targets at 200 km. High altitude aerial targets can be detected by the ship’s radar and engaged independently.

HQ-9B Vertical Launch

The secondary air defense is provided by the HQ-16 SAM which has a range of 50 km. There are rumors that the Chinese are developing a new medium range SAM that can be quad packed in 1 UVLS cell. If this is true, it would allow the Chinese to have a huge number of missiles on board as 32 such medium range missiles can be packed into 8 cells. The ability of the HQ-9B to engage sea skimming missiles at short ranges is seriously doubted. Hence, to complement the HQ-16, the Chinese have installed a short range missile system FL-3000N to deal with sea skimming missiles at ranges of 10 km. An 18 cell FL-3000N launcher is installed on top of the hangar at the aft. This missile is comparable to the American RAM in dimensions and role.

The last ditch anti-missile capability is provided by a Type 730 Close in Weapons system. This has a 6 barreled 30 mm Gatling gun which can effectively engage sea skimming missiles at a range of 2 km. It is a closed loop CIWS and unlike the Ak-630, it has its own radar and electro-optical sensors which reduce its dependency on ship borne sensors and allow it to operate independently. This, combined with the missiles give the Type-52D a 4 layer air defense system, which is definitely an advantage over the 2 layered air defense system of the Kolkata.

It scores an 8/10 in the CIWS category

It scores an 8/10 in the missile defense category.

It scores a 10/10 in the area defense category.


Kolkata Class:

This class has a very well balanced suite of ASW weapons, platforms and sensors. The Sonar is an indigenously developed HUMSA bow sonar and the towed array is yet to be procured. This is a temporary hindrance and it will most likely receive a Thales ATAS soon.


The main ASW weapon will be its 2 twin 533 mm torpedo tubes which can fire long range, heavyweight torpedoes with a range of up to 40 km. It is complemented by the RBU-6000 rocket launching system. This unique system can launch a variety of ASW rockets fitted with mines, explosives or decoys. 2 launchers with a total of 24 rocket tubes and 192 reloadable rockets are carried. This system has a range of 6 km max which makes it effective against submarines in littoral ad blue water regions. It can also act as a hardkill measure against incoming torpedoes if sufficient warning is there. The other role it can fulfill is that of anti-frogman where it can fire death charges against combat divers who try to sabotage ships.

The dual helicopter hangars

Beyond the horizon ASW capability is provided by ASW helicopters. The Kolkata has 2 large hangars which can support any modern ASW helicopter. Since India is most likely to procure MH-60R as its next ASW helo, 2 of those on a destroyer would make it extremely effective against enemy submarines. Currently it can deploy the Seaking ASW helo which can carry 2 lightweight torpedoes. Overall the Kolkata class has a well-balanced and powerful ASW capability on par with its western equivalents.

It scores 9/10 in ASW


Bow mounted sonar

The Type-52D has a bow mounted sonar and a towed array sonar. Its main ASW weapon is 2 triple mountings for a total of 6 lightweight torpedo tubes. These have a range of around 15 km. It also has 4, 18 tube ASW rocket launchers, which are non-reloadable and have a range of around 1 km. It is used to fire decoys against incoming torpedoes and to act as last ditch defense against submarines.

Single helicopter hangar and ASW rocket launchers (highlighted)

It is rumored that it can fire a vertically launched ASW missile with a range of 30 km. But this report hasn’t been confirmed and there is no evidence of such a missile. Over the horizon ASW capability is provided by a single ASW helicopter. This offers half the capability of the Kolkata which can house 2 helicopters. Overall, the ASW reach of this ship is comparatively lower than the Kolkata class. It is the only category where the Indian ship dominates.

It scores 7/10 in ASW


RADAR 10          8






TOTAL 49/60 51/60


The Kolkata class narrowly loses out in the overall rating. Its main strengths lie in its radar systems and ASW. The Type-52D has its strengths in Anti-Air and Anti-Surface warfare. Both are first rate products of their respective nations and truly deserve the attention they get.

A higher rating for the Type-52D doesn’t necessarily mean that it will win against the Kolkata in a one on one engagement. Victory in a conflict depends largely on the training of the crew in maneuvering, damage control and the tactics employed the captain.

Enjoyed this article? Rate it below!

NOTE: I may have missed out a few points and categories in order to keep the article within a reasonable size. Feel free to add to my article in the comments section.


146 Replies to “The Great Asian Showdown : India’s Kolkata Class v/s China’s Type-52D Destroyer”

  1. Why is it that Soviet-based design warships have multiple CIWS while Western warships are designed with only one or two?


    1. You are referring to the Ak-630 in particular I believe. That’s because it is an open loop CIWS with far lesser accuracy when compared to a closed loop one, but around 10 times cheaper. By using multiple Ak-630 , their strategy involved creating a wall of lead with its bullets and prevent a missile from passing through. This option was cheaper and worked well only with multiple guns.

      With the entry of the closed loop kashtan, Russia switched to smaller number of these expensive systems as they could fire more accurately. Western systems are closed loop and are designed to directly engage the incoming missile with more accuracy. Hence 2 Phalanx can do the job of 4 Ak-630.


      1. I see, however if the ship’s radars are jammed, will that not render the AK-630 useless? Whereas the Phalanx will still be able to fire since it has its own radar?




    1. no, the chinese 52d will still have an advantage over the kolkatas in air defence role
      1 .adding maitri sam will give the kolkatas a three layered defence but the 052s have four layered defence . the kolkatas wont have any system equivalent to the chinese fl-3000m .
      2. barak 8’s range is significantly lesser than the chinese hq-9b
      3. 052d can also quad pack hq-16 medium range sams and can carry 4 missiles in one cell , which the kolkatas cant .
      4. 052d is more versatile because of the universal vertical launch system .


  3. Interesting article, NRP!

    I wish I could fill in you on some things…

    1. The CY-5 anti-submarine rocket exists and have been deployed on the Type 054A:

    2. The DK-10A (quad-packed) missile also exists, and thus far have been offered for export (although the VLS-launched variant is not):

    3. The 052D does NOT use the Type 348. That radar was adopted by the 052C, but the new vessel uses a new variant (note the flat vs curved covers). Moreover, I would be hesitant to assume that Western radars offer superior performance solely based on the unavailability of data.

    4. The 052D uses the YJ-18. It is a supersonic-dash missile (Mach 2.5-3), with a range of 540 km (this was claimed by the Secretary of Defense Annual Report to Congress). Even though it does not feature a wholly-supersonic flight regime, this brings its own set of advantage.

    Overall, this article makes a wholehearted attempt to be neutral, and deserves to be praised for that!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Kolkata/Visakhapatnam destroyers are no match to the Europeans ships like Sachsen, Nansen, Alvaro De Bazan, De Zeven Provincien, Iver Huitfeldt, Daring, Horizon, FREMM etc. All these European ships have credible LRSAM (SM-2/ASTER-30) deployed. Why doesn’t India have such a capability? India should purchase some of these ships directly without involving local agencies. Barak-8 still falls short of being a full-fledged LRSAM, it is just a stop gap arrangement. And it will take at-least a decade more to get Barak-8 deployed fully.


    1. The armament of ships depends on their threats and strategies. European ships are defensive and Indian Ships have more offensive firepower. Your statement about Barak 8 makes holds no weight as it’s a top quality Long range SAM. It will be fully deployed in an year and is by no means a stop gap arrangement. It’s 90 km range is more than enough for India. Their ships are very well equipped in anti ship missiles which you conveniently ignored.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Ok lets analyze your statements,

    “The armament of ships depends on their threats and strategies” – A generic statement which has no value and not sure what it means in this context. This may hold true against Pakistan but not China, then(if we consider your statement) these ships (with such armament) are inferior to the Chinese.

    “European ships are defensive and Indian Ships have more offensive firepower” – again generic statement with very little value. Any ship that goes on an offensive missions should have the best defensive armament.

    “Your statement about Barak 8 makes holds no weight as it’s a top quality Long range SAM.” – I can understand your inclination towards Indian weaponry. Barak 8 is a potent missile for small and medium class ships but destroyers need to have more than that.

    “It will be fully deployed in an year and is by no means a stop gap arrangement” – You are being too optimistic, best of luck. Indian fleet is still waiting for the Towed Sonar which DRDO promised to deliver in 2014.

    “It’s 90 km range is more than enough for India” – Not sure how you justify that. A Paki P-3 Orion can launch a Salvo of 6 harpoons from 100kms away and get away with it and now the ship has to forget about the attacking aircraft and concentrate all its resources against the incoming missiles.

    “Their ships are very well equipped in anti ship missiles which you conveniently ignored.” Not sure what you mean by this. Anti-Sip missiles are complementary and are of no use if the ship itself cannot protect itself from air attacks. Look at Chinese Destroyers, they have HHQ-9 which is a derivative of S-300 and can take out targets more than 100km away from the ship and even further with TVM version.

    In my opinion, the reason why India does not need a missile of HHQ-9’s caliber is probably because Indian warships will be operating under the umbrella of Aircraft carriers while China still lags in this area with just one AC.


    1. barak 8 has a 90%+ 1st hit probability…also barak ER with range of 150km are under development and will not require any modification to launchers to equip them and will be easily fitted in the same launcher so expect barak 8 been soon replaced with barak 8 ER giving decent AA capability…also i too feel loadout of 32 SAM is far too less…but this maybe probably because barak 8 has just come in production and has already over requirement to arm almost all new indian and israeli ships…atleast 15 indian and 10+ israeli ships…so maybe untill missile comes in proper production they will keep a 32 missile loadout…future it may be 64 missile…which will be interesting load…it will be interesting to see how indian navy see threat perception…even i feel SAM loadout of thi ship doesnt worth it…owning both new class of its frigates shivalik and talwar has more SAM than kolkata class which is bigger ship…but as author said kolkata space is under utilised currently…


  6. First, while I applaud the author for a good attempt at a balanced review, there are still a few areas that he could improved upon.

    1. I noticed that whenever there is a lack of information (mostly on the type 52D) the author discounts the ability of the system. I think that in this case, it is not a good assumption to make. Just because you don’t know how good something is does not mean that it is inferior. Particularly in the case of Chinese missiles and electronics. They have come a long ways.

    2. The author failed to consider quantity. There are 13 type 52D either inducted or under construction (and more on the way) and only three Kolkata class ships in active service. When you consider the weight of the two navies, the differences becomes even more stark.

    3. The idea that Kolkata class (Indian flag ship destroyer) is going up against the type 52D (Chinese flagship destroyer) is quickly becoming outdated. Just two years after this article was written, the first type 55 is coming on fast. The type 55 would, by any measure, outclass the kolkata class destroyer.


    1. Thanks JJ for your comment. I realized that I’ve wrongly assumed a couple of things about the Chinese destroyer and will update the article soon.

      Quantity doesn’t come into picture in a head to head comparison.

      The type 55 will definitely outclass the Kolkata and pretty much everything else out there.


  7. Dear NRP,
    Without underestimating PLAN, my question to you would be whether Indian Navy with the rapid transformation it is undergoing with new generation of ships being inductedcan effectively deal with PLAN in the Indian Ocean Region? I know Project-55 will be a real game changer for which India currently had no equalent.


    1. Hi Manoj.

      The PLAN, though expanding greatly, can dedicate only a small part of its fleet for operations in the Indian Ocean as they have pressing needs in the SOuth China Sea and the Pacific. Hence it will be relatively simple for the Indian Navy to monitor and keep a check on Chinese activities in the IOR.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Sorry, that is a typo. What I meant was Type-055. Type-055 is the next generation of Destroyers that is currently being built by PLAN and is a successor to the Type-52D. NATO code name Renhai, Type-055 will be a multi role stealth destroyer, displacing more than 13000 tonnes fully loaded. It will have significant land attack capabilities along with anti air and anti submarine capability. One ship is being fitted out and alteast three more are under construction.


  8. The real issue here is the ability of those ships to obtain over the horizon radar coordinates and networked targeting data back to the missile platform. There is possibly no more dominant ship on the seas than an Arleigh Burke destroyer with an F-35 overhead. ASW helicopters cannot provide such information to a destroyer. Today’s warfare is about networking information to where it will do the most good. That is one of the areas where other nations lag far behind the US.

    The major strategy in conflict has always been to bring superior forces to battle. Today’s top destroyers are all more or less equivalent to each other. The fact that China has almost three times the surface combatants of India says that India is not yet competitive with China on the high seas.

    So what do you all believe is the overall effect of the US networking every possible information source into strategic battle management? I personally view it as a complete game changer in modern conflict. And realistically in the end we all can thank the F-35 for this breakthrough. Some very intelligent people a decade ago had a vision of what the future would bring.


  9. just few questions-
    1- Can’t india quad pack barack 1 in those 8 cell left? and if not these cells can be fitted with 8 more barack 8..and system like Rolling airframe missile can be procured and be fitted on small launcher like systems providing kolkata 3 layered defence?
    2- the work on barack 8 range is being increased to some 150km is going on…so will it help??
    3- wont all these longe range missile will be of no effect in case of a sea skimming missile as it will only be detected and some 30 km range…and with mach 3…how much time will it give to chinese ships or indian ship to reach??
    4- to my understanding a supersonic terminal stage with S manoeuvre will land CIWS useless…which actually means both ship CIWS will be useless…
    5- what about aircraft flying an sea skimming level making it difficult to detect and firing a missile in low low profile at some 120-150km away…wont it lend multi layered long and meduim range defemce useless?


    1. 1. Not possible. Barak 1 cannot be quad packed as it’s not designed like that. And it’s old technology. Will be replaced by new SRSAM. And RAM can be procured and fitted on the ship. But in the future, fitting 16-32 VL Mica SRSAM in place of 2 Ak630 makes more sense.

      2. Thats supposed to be a Barak-8 with a booster to increase range. It will help in long range intercept of aircraft but won’t make a difference in other performances.

      3. SAMs are designed with a variety of targets in mind. So it’s not wise to say that the king range is of no use while intercepting at 30 km. Every missile won’t be a sea skimmer and lots of targets will be at higher altitudes and longer ranges. And with Mach 3 speed, an incoming missile will give a target ship, less than 40 seconds to react. But if airborne assets are used to detect, then the reaction time can be increased.

      4. That maneuver will not render missile or based CIWS useless. As missiles evolve, the defense mechanism also evolve.

      5. If an aircraft launches a missile at sea level 120 km away, the missile won’t be able to travel far! For example, Kh31 missile has a 120 km range when launched at 25,000 ft with terminal low altitude flight and just 20 km range when launched at 100 ft! That’s why all missiles are launched at high altitude unless the target is very close.


  10. How good will be Barak-8 ER? Everything except the speed of 2.0 mach looks fine. All other SAMs of this class have a SERIOUS speed of close to 4.0 mach which makes them possible to engage targets at long range. Can Barak 8ER really attack targets at long ranges? Not sure.


    1. It’s speed is not Mach 2!! That’s just a publicly stated brochure figure which is over 5 years old. It mentions that the speed is GREATER THAN 2 Mach. It’s important not to ignore thet ‘Greater than’ symbol while reading brochures.


  11. This year the Anti ship Brahmos missile range is being increased from approx 300km to 450-600+ km’s (as India is now part of MTCR). This will give the Kolkatta class – a score of 10 in Anti Surface category.
    Also the next class – Visakpatnam Class is more advanced ( maybe comparable type 55)

    But the Chinese have a great edge on the quantity of ships of these types. If both sides lose 3-4 ships of each type on first day then Indian navy will be left with nothing to fight with. Losing by attrition is a fact. ( the Germans faced it in WW2). Quantity has a quality of its own.


  12. Hi NRP
    When it is said that a Kolkata class carries 16 Brahmos missiles then does it mean that it carries only 16 of these ? ..or does it mean that it carries 16 in VLS cells and additional 8 – 16 in its weapons storage area (which can be loaded in VLS cells once the initial 16 are fired) ? ..Please do reply


  13. The author says the kolkata class radar is better because of it’s western origin. But the fact is that Kolkata class uses a radar which is used in a sa’ar class corvette. Author completely ignored that the Yagi antenna VHF radars has an inherent capacity to detect stealth aircraft like f-35 albeit with limited accuracy. But this becomes effective when used along with an AESA radar which could focus all it’s power to the direction cued by the VHF radar thus resolving the accurate location of the aircraft.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s