Radar Ranges Of Different Fighters

[Manticore]

a-5 retired, next in line are early mirages (non rose models), f-7s (only p, not pg), this should be completed as new batches of jft are inducted, within next 5 -7 years at best. Grifo-S is not exactly same as old Grifo-S 7 and I give u the reason why. After fiar presented s-7 to paf, it seem impressive as it had high power and excellent anti jamming, decent range, robust architecture but it lacked in multiple engagements and track range, it also had inherited flaw of unable to communicate with indigenous, chinese weapons. What was presented by fiar as the Grifo-2000/16 was any day, a better option as it had more range, better features. this was discussed with fiar and they came up with and unified version having different antenna, range, processors, features in a customized variant known today as Grifo-S, this can also be observed in the brochure. It was defeated by a more capable radar in all dimensions that is known as klj-7......

klj-7 currently has 550 watt output power and is powerful enough, but plans are in place for locally produced radar to have 600 watt (yes folks, 600) watt which will give it as much power as in APG-68 v9
F-7= Grifo-7=200-250 watt

f-16 blk 15= 300-350 watt

Rose Mirage= Grifo M3= 400-450 watt

Grifo-S (JFT earlier) =500-560 watt

nabil bhai the peak power of grifo7
[P2801] is 100kW , so i what were you referring to when you were saying 250?



AN/APG-68(V)9
Weight 362 lb (164 kg)
Cooling 19.0 lb/min @ 27ºC
Power 5606 VA ---5.6kw???
Volume 4.6 ft3 (1.3m3)

 

[Manticore]

TWT-based transmitter av power ?

 

[Manticore]

GRIFO S - Fire Control Radar


TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Weight < 120kg
Cooling air cooled
Dissipation <2.9 kW
Average Transmitted Power 560W
Frequency X-band
Scan Coverage ± 60° both in Azimuth and Elevation
Scan Rate - Slew Rate up to 100°/s - 400°/s
MTBF >220 hrs
Modes Available
Air&#8211;to-air Single target track
Dual target track
Track while scan
Range while search (normal)
Radar while search (adaptive)
Velocity search
Spot
Situation awareness mode
Air combat Slewable scan
Vertical acquisition
HUD acquisition
Boresight acquisition
Air-to-surface Real beam ground map
Doppler beam sharpening
Spotlight Synthetic Aperture Radar
Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar
Ground moving target indicator
Sea surface search 1
Sea surface search 2
Fixed target track
Ground moving target track
Sea single target track
Sea moving target track
Air-to-ground ranging
Navigation support Beacon interrogation
Weather avoidance
Terrain avoidance
ECCM capabilities Low antenna sidelobes
Guard channel fully processed
Monopulse antenna
Low peak power; pulse compression
Random and adaptive frequency agility
DOJ
HOJ
AOJ
Provisions against:
Range gate/ velocity gate stealers
Noise jammers
CW jammers
Key Parameters
Track while scan 10 targets tracked, 8 displayed
SAR resolution < 1m
Track formation range > 40 NM
look-up detection range > 50 NM

 

[Manticore]

The range for the present Chinese radar is very likely to be more than 100 kms; considering that the PAF chief was comparing with PAF F-16s. The PAF F-16s underwent OCU which increased their range and made it close to MLU (see this)

"The Pakistan Air Force currently has the Block 15 F-16A/B model in operation, which has an upgraded APG-66 radar that brings it close to the MLU (Mid-life Update) radar technology. The main advantage is the ability to use the AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles if they were ever to be released to the PAF. Furthermore, the radar is capable of sorting out tight formations of aircraft and has a 15%-20% range increase over previous models. All the earlier F-16s were brought up to OCU standards and have received the Falcon UP structural modification package."

Consider this bit of information, and also that the APG-66 later modification values are against 1m^2 targets which will be further increased against a significantly greater RCS for the MKI.

Now consider statements made by the PAF Chief about the KLJ-7: is *much better* than their APGs (and these are the upgraded OCU APGs).

Secondly if you visit SOC's old post on FC-1 and see the exchange of comments, one poster pointed out that KLJ-7 beat the Grifo- S and PAF did not lowered their requirements (this includes a link that PAF did not lower it's requirement, and on that is by none other than Richard Fischer ). SOC in fact commented that it is a very potent radar looking at some mentioned features.

Clearly, the KLJ-7 was chosen over this "very potent radar" and clearly the PAF Chief mentions that the KLJ-7 is "much better" than the present APGs.


One would also want to ask what is the detection range by JET modulation when intakes are hidden and treated with RAM. Why does one poster think it is more important and potent than detection by using returns from the airframe when clearly returns from airframe of a non-stealthy aircraft will be in abundance.

Another assertion made is that the MKI has phased array and JF-17 has Pulse doppler and MKI can avoid JF-17 lock by using doppler notch where as MKI will have no problems with locking on as it's radar is not PD.

This is what is common knowledge at various forums:
1)Doppler notch has been known since time ancient and tactics against Doppler notch were known by USAF even back in Vietnam Era.
2) According to one of the viper pilots at the F-16 forum, they have way more modes on their radars and just by switching to different mode of detection and maneuvering your aircraft so that there is no 90 degrees between both aircrafts this dopler notch could be taken care of.
3)Another aviator said "no modern AI radar is worth it's salt if it can't resist doppler notch"

All of the above should be on F-16 forums if you search "doppler notch"

Grande Strategy

 

[Manticore]

 

[Manticore]

from mean machine

 

[Manticore]

^^ this shows that as the radar cone size of jft is greater than rafale/m2k etc [i posted previously]-- if the space is fully used , then, even with a less peak power radar , you get greater aperture product


i hope i interpreted it right

 

[Manticore]

RC 400 KEY FEATURES

&#8226; Modular design
&#8226; Light weight: <120 kg
&#8226; Low power consumption: 3.5 kVA
&#8226; Different antenna sizes available
&#8226; High average transmitted power: 400 W
&#8226; Up-to-date signal processing technologies
&#8226; COTS components for obsolescence protection
&#8226; 1553 Bus
&#8226; Advanced ECCM features
&#8226; Very Low False Alarm Rate
&#8226; Flexibility and growth potential
&#8226; Efficient BITE and maintenance concept for reduced manpower and life cycle cost
RC 400 - Airborne Fire Control Radar - Thales

 

[Manticore]

KLJ-7 Airborne Radar
The KLJ-7 is an X-band airborne fire-control radar (FCR) uses a mechanically-steered slotted array antenna. The KLJ-7 has multiple modes, both beyond-visual-range (BVR) and close-in air-to-air modes, ground surveillance modes and a robust anti-jamming capability. The radar can reportedly manage up to 40 targets, monitor up to 10 of them in track-while-scan (TWS) mode and simultaneously fire on two BVR targets.

* Frequency : X-band
* A mechanically-steered slotted array antenna
* 14 Operational Modes
* Range more than 100 km
* Total targets tracked: 10 in TWS (Track-While-Scan) mode
* Reliability:
o MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure): 220 hours
o MTTR (Mean Time To Recovery): 0.5 hours
* Weight less than 120 kg
* Composition
o Antenna Unit
o Receiver Unit
o Transmitter Unit
o Processor Unit
o Power Supply Unit
o Auxiliary Transmitter Unit
http://www.defence.pk/forums/jf-17-thunder/71435-jf-17-thunder-information-pool-7.html#post1612677

 

[Manticore]

It is not the 'nose' but the fuselage that matter, particularly the wall that separate the 'nose' area from the rest of the body. It is the wall's dimensions. That is where the radar antenna is mounted. If this wall and radome volumn can accommodate a larger antenna, no problem installing the larger one.

There is an inverse relationship between antenna dimension and beamwidth, meaning the larger the antenna the smaller the beamwidth. The smaller the beamwidth the better the target resolutions, particularly when dealing with fighters who can turn bombers when necessary. The danger here is distance. For the average X-band fighter aircraft radar, at 100km for example, multiple targets must be separated by about 5km in order for the radar to distinguish them apart. Against aircrafts like the B-52 or the C-5 this separation is necessary. But against Tornados or Aardvarks or Strike Eagles? No problems deceiving the defenders by flying fully loaded and tight ala 'Thunderbirds' or 'Red Arrows'. Smaller beamwidth reduces, but not necessarily negate, this tactical advantage by the attackers. The 100-200 km distance is crucial as this is range is limited by fighter aircrafts' radars. This is why the F-14 and F-15 have such large antennas. But they can carry large antennas because they are large aircrafts to start.

Next issue is antenna mass, particularly when it is moving and moving under high g maneuvers. The actuating motors must be of the highest caliber in every aspects, from design to material to assembly. It must capable of sweeping the antenna against forces and keep the mass stable throughout its sweep range. The word 'against' here is important as the motors must have total control of the antenna's inertia regardless of whether the sweep direction is the same as the maneuver's direction, or not, and this can change in an instant in a fight. The greater this mechanical 'jitter' factor the greater the system's self induced noise. Not good when the pilot is fighting for his life and his nation's cause. A really really really bad antenna assembly will render the entire radar system worthless, flop around inside the radome and inducing unwanted forces into the fuselage, possibly sending the aircraft out of control. But this would be discovered, contracts canceled and heads lopped off, literally and/or figuratively, in the eval period.

a very informative post

 

[Manticore]

the 5-6 kw is the peak power my friend and this is not in use usually as the aircraft engine can only give a certain amount of power. APG-68v9 has a usual power of 500- 600 watts at best with current f-16 configuration, same as the KLJ-7 with current jf-17 configuration, both radars have a reserve power capacity but this does not mean they are always operated at peak power output, no radar can as per my info. Hence they both have similar ranges and working modes. At the moment, the maximum output power of KLJ-7 as per my info is somewhere around 4-5kw, similar to v9. There are reasons why Italian radar was rejected, first, it had no multi target tracking capability, a small nominal power output of just 400 watts as compared to 600 watt asked by PAF and incompatibility to fire its main weapon, the sd-10 which italians promised to rectify. They improved the radar repeatedly but it still suffered with anomalies and hence got rejected. ''

some info by nabil , posted from the pm after approval

 

[Manticore]

Hope this helps.........and BARS does have TWRs rated upto 7000watts.

JFT will see the MKI first!
http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/20908-rcs-different-fighters-2.html#post1514430

you might find this post interesting

This is highly debatable as you are claiming something which is far from reality. JFT radar has publicized detection range of 105 km against 5m2 target and Su-30 even if, has RCS of 10m2, will be detected at around 200-210 kms!! I bet BARS cannot detect a 3m2 target even at 150 kms and JFT is much less than 3m2 so MKI will have a hard time detecting the JFT at advertised range. Reality is, it will most likely be the other way around.

by Tempest II


If the below is accurate, then yes the JFT will see the MKI first!

 

[Dazzler]

@Antibody...

I stand corrected as Grifo-7 has output of 100 watts but what i heard was the PG version has 200w. The discussion about APG-68v9 maximum output power on that forum by a specific member was rather on the silly side as the 5-6Kw is MAXIMUM DISSIPATION POWER for radar and this simply has nothing to do with ranges or modes, in fact, the smaller the dissipation, the more power efficient the radar which is good for the aircraft itself, notice the highlighted dissipation power of Grifo-S, high average output power of 560w, on par with KLJ and APG, but much less dissipation overall than the two. Average transmitter output power of KLJ-7 and APG-68v9 are same, hence the ranges are same.....

 

[Black Widow]

JFT will see the MKI first!
http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/20908-rcs-different-fighters-2.html#post1514430

you might find this post interesting

So what??? We are so close to each other that we can track Take-off of fighter planes (@ base).. The question is how effective is our (Ind and Pakis) Teeth and shield.. Will JF17 or MKI bring down opponent flying 120Km away??? Will JF17 or MKI defend herself from a AAM??

On your claim some one can counter claim that AWACS can track your JF17 300 KM away, or you can claim that chiese Awacs (Which Pakisatan has) can detect Indian fighter planes at 300 Km away.. But the main question remain unanswered. "How potent is my teeth and Shield".

Don't worry in next 5 years Both will have AESA, then Indian fighter can detect Pakistani planes from far far away, and Pakistani fighters can detect us from far far away ..

 

[Luftwaffe]

Basically Grifo S7 Radar could be for the export customers and not Pakistan. I posted it long time ago but that link has been removed or updated by Selex Galileo.

Notice technical characteristcis The Average Transmitted Power is 560 that is Average not Peak.

http://www.selexgalileo.com/EN/Common/files/SELEX_Galileo/Products/GRIFO_S.pdf