A low-down on India's 'eye in the sky'

India became the first country in South Asia to own an Airborne Early Warning and Control System, called 'an eye in the sky', with the Israeli-made Phalcon arriving at the Jamnagar airbase on the country's western coast on Monday morning. Wing Commander Ajey Lele, who is on deputation at the Institute for Defence Studies & Analysis, gives us the low-down on the Israeli surveillance aircraft.

Lele tells us what the system can do and what it can't. More importantly, Lele says it does not matter how superior our technology is, but what we do with the intelligence gathered from it.

Advantages:
Essentially, India has been wanting eyes in the sky, and the AWACS system will fulfil that requirement. Now, we will have some indication of incoming airborne threat, which will definitely make our defences that much better prepared.

Drawbacks:
When you install the AWACS, it requires a huge aerial platform. In case this platform is deployed in the borders, it becomes a security liability by itself. The enemy will look to target it first if there is a war.

How to overcome this:
There are two ways this can be overcome. One, the platform can be deployed away from the border. The AWACS system has air-to-air refuelling capabilities. So this should be done.

Or, even if it has to be installed at the border, you need some sort of structure that is available to protect this platform. I think we have the capability to do that too.

Will it monitor or curb infiltration?
You use a technology for specific purpose. The AWACS system is not a satellite. Its capabilities lie in detecting and warning in advance about airborne threats. So, you asking about the threat of militancy vis-a-vis the AWACS system is like matching oranges and apples.

Will three units be sufficient? Do we need more?
I don't think we can speak in isolation about this system and the number of units required. Normally, you get input from human intelligence and satellites. Now you will get inputs from AWACS also. There is bound to be a large amount of information thrown up. So more than the actual intelligence and information collection, the key lies in how you interpret this intelligence.