What's new

From pk-15 , JF-17 Thunder and Al Khalid to fifth generation stealth fighter jet project Azm

Oct 6, 2020
2,224
-53
1,526
Country
India
Location
India
Dude your so called uttam is not even operational yet and no one knows the capability of the radar because it is your first AESA radar while Chinese have spent alot of money and time in developing AESA radars if uttam is better than KLJ7A then why are you people not integrating it with your Tejas su 30 and mig 29 fleet? Instead even tejas MK1 A will use foreign AESA radar so kindly don't share Indian videos here .... PL 15 outranges anything IAF has R77-1 at 100km and Astra at 100km only meteor has similar range to PL 15 which is the same or better than AIM 120D ... so technically only 36 Rafael aircraft can have a firing solution against block 3s with PL 15s mirages su 30s and mig 29s and tejas will be duds like 27th feb ........ also indigenous AESA radar and long range BVR is also in development once they are integrated on block 1 and block 2 thunders then you will have a bigger problem on your hands ..... good luck dealing with PAF with 36 Rafael the French were struggling in putting AESA radar on Rafael let's see how it performs when the time comes ...
Indo-Russian jointly developed SFDR Tech has been tested already and DRDO says it will test the Astra MK3 in 2022-23 with SFDR which will have a range of 350-400 km at least thanks to the SFDR tech. Astra MK2 will be tested in a few months and is having a range of 160 KM.

Plus none of your Thunders are equipped with those missiles and your Block-III is still under development and currently is far from production.

and having a good missile is not everything, KLJ-7A offers a maximum range of 170 km against a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of 5m2. Whereas the RCS of Tejas is just 0.1m2 so how is your 250+ KM range missile effective against our Tejas when you can’t detect the Tejas aircraft from that distance, thats why this PL-15 is for large targets. By the same logic IAF also uses K-100 Air to air missile with 400+ KM range intended to target large aircrafts.

Tejas’s EL/M-2052 Elta HAL radar is a GaN-based radar with 1500 TRMs. It can track 64 targets simultaneously. It has a range of 290 km in the Air to Sea Mode while in the Air to Air Mode, it is rumored to be between 150 to 200 km for a 1 sq.m RCS, not 3 sq.m.

Israelis have mastered the art of making Radars and now we are also making similar but better next gen Radars for AMCA.
PAF is already restructuring the wings of the JF-17 block 1/2 variants in order to carry larger cruise missiles and the PL-15. Once that and the AESA radar upgrades are complete, IAF is going to have to deal with hundreds of JF-17s equipped with PL-15s compared to their few dozen Rafales :D

PAF has spent decades investing in C4I technologies such as Datalinks and AWACs and regularly conducts exercises using force multiplier assets. A PAF JF-17 is more likely to be backed today with KLJ-2000 AWACS, EIREYE AWACS, link 17 between air/ground assets, and jamming pods compared to any jet in IAF arsenal. The whole Indian airforce only has 3 awacs . PAF has heavily invest with Turkey in jamming pods, once AESAs are integrated on the thunders PAF will have 200 JF-17s thunders capable of advanced jamming since AESA can be programmed to jam better than many jamming pods today, not to mention the advanced jamming pods carried by the F-16 and the dedicated jamming aircraft...The tactics displayed last feb was decades in practice.
Indo-Russian jointly developed SFDR Tech has been tested already and DRDO says it will test the Astra MK3 in 2022-23 with SFDR which will have a range of 350-400 km at least thanks to the SFDR tech. Astra MK2 will be tested in a few months and is having a range of 160 KM.

Plus none of your Thunders are equipped with those missiles and your Block-III is still under development and currently is far from production.

and having a good missile is not everything, KLJ-7A offers a maximum range of 170 km against a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of 5m2. Whereas the RCS of Tejas is just 0.1m2 so how is your 250+ KM range missile effective against our Tejas when you can’t detect the Tejas aircraft from that distance, thats why this PL-15 is for large targets. By the same logic IAF also uses K-100 Air to air missile with 400+ KM range intended to target large aircrafts.

Tejas’s EL/M-2052 Elta HAL radar is a GaN-based radar with 1500 TRMs. It can track 64 targets simultaneously. It has a range of 290 km in the Air to Sea Mode while in the Air to Air Mode, it is rumored to be between 150 to 200 km for a 1 sq.m RCS, not 3 sq.m.

Israelis have mastered the art of making Radars and now we are also making similar but better next gen Radars for AMCA.
 

Tariq Habib Afridi

FULL MEMBER
Mar 20, 2019
131
0
172
Country
Pakistan
Location
Korea, Republic Of
KLJ-7A offers a maximum range of 170 km against a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of 5m2. Whereas the RCS of Tejas is just 0.1m2 so how is your 250+ KM range missile effective against our Tejas when you can’t detect the Tejas aircraft from that distance, that's why this PL-15 is for large targets.
this is a joke of the century.... by that logic Rafale may have RCS in minus lolz
@Imran Khan @The Eagle
 

Ahmet Pasha

BANNED
May 23, 2017
9,061
-5
9,195
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
We should defund HIT it is a waste of Pakistan tax money. Or at least make them have a partner in form of Cavalier group or someone else to share development cost and liability. Decades and they cannot make a proper ifv/afv/mrap.

They have failed to move past barebones "battle taxi" M113. Which is fast becoming outdated.

Cannot make tanks quick enough and well enough that we have to import from gora.
 

alimobin memon

FULL MEMBER
Oct 15, 2009
1,943
1
995
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Hi,

Decades of service has proven that the western equipment is better---par excellence---has been thru the test of times and war and proven itself over the last century and these two decades---.
last century is exaggerated. It all happened especially after fall of soviet union but that too when NATO only fought week armies like IRAQ and Afghanistan alike countries. Respect your opinion but I believe love for west is simply a dilemma.
 

Tariq Habib Afridi

FULL MEMBER
Mar 20, 2019
131
0
172
Country
Pakistan
Location
Korea, Republic Of
It is small in size, and has 40% of its body made of composites, among the highest in any aircraft, go confirm it yourself.
Even going by your statement if 40% of the body is made of composite material it still will have RCS greater than 0.1m2. but let's see it will be clear in the near future.
 

Fighting Falcon 01

FULL MEMBER
Dec 27, 2019
276
0
505
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Because it is just the first iteration, the real deal is a GaN based AESA Radar, UTTAM was complete long back but because it was known that the future will not be of GaAs based radar, so it was never integrated into the Flankers, it is confirmed that the GaAs version UTTAM’s enhanced variant is confirmed for Tejas MK1A, initial MK1As will come with Israeli radars and the rest of the bulk with Indian UTTAM radar. Plus Chinese have zero air-to-air combat experience, they don’t have data of any air-to-air combat while designing and making radars, we do. It is upto you under estimating Indian equipment at the end we are not fools using them and most of our indigenous development of equipment started recently so thats why many of our indigenous systems are not operationally deployed and as far your question that why MiG-29 UPG doesn’t come with UTTAM radar, so my answer would be that MiG-29UPG is a Russian aircraft and the Ruskies won’t allow us deploying our Radar when they can easily sell off their Zhuk-ME AESA radar.
AESA radar development has nothing to do with combat experience the French Italians and SAAB are also making AESA radar with little to no combat experience I can't call their radars bad because of that .... keep underestimating the the Chinese then suddenly your mirage 2000 radars start to malfunction when facing Jf 17s ...... the Chinese have made more than 3 to 4 AESA radars for combat aircraft and they are also not stupid to use underperforming equipment when facing NATO and US if this was the case then they could have simply purchased AESA radars from someone or developed it with Russians....
 
Oct 6, 2020
2,224
-53
1,526
Country
India
Location
India
AESA radar development has nothing to do with combat experience the French Italians and SAAB are also making AESA radar with little to no combat experience I can't call their radars bad because of that .... keep underestimating the the Chinese then suddenly your mirage 2000 radars start to malfunction when facing Jf 17s ...... the Chinese have made more than 3 to 4 AESA radars for combat aircraft and they are also not stupid to use underperforming equipment when facing NATO and US if this was the case then they could have simply purchased AESA radars from someone or developed it with Russians....
Good point but the NATO forces interoperate, they can get tech and info from any country in the group plus they organise large scale exercises which are real combats with virtual weapons so after these exercises they use their data to analyse and make their equipment better, China doesn’t have a combat experience w.r.t PLAAF but they also never get a chance to participate and perform in such big exercises.

IAF exercises with Russia, NATO, Israel, QUAD plus it already has a huge air-to-air combat experience which enables us to make world class avionics and sub systems. Because of these exercises our missiles have a very superior anti jamming capabilities as we receive the data of frequencies used by each country in their radars and the frequencies used in anti jamming equipment.

Abhijit has better explained this...
Even going by your statement if 40% of the body is made of composite material it still will have RCS greater than 0.1m2. but let's see it will be clear in the near future.
The publicly stated one is 0.5m2 but it is believed by many Indian aerospace engineers and airforce veterans to have an RCS lower than the stated. Who knows but it is a low RCS platform, afaik Thunders have an RCS of 3m2, F-16 has an RCS of 5m2 and Flankers have RCS of 10m2.
 

Tariq Habib Afridi

FULL MEMBER
Mar 20, 2019
131
0
172
Country
Pakistan
Location
Korea, Republic Of
Good point but the NATO forces interoperate, they can get tech and info from any country in the group plus they organise large scale exercises which are real combats with virtual weapons so after these exercises they use their data to analyse and make their equipment better, China doesn’t have a combat experience w.r.t PLAAF but they also never get a chance to participate and perform in such big exercises.

IAF exercises with Russia, NATO, Israel, QUAD plus it already has a huge air-to-air combat experience which enables us to make world class avionics and sub systems. Because of these exercises our missiles have a very superior anti jamming capabilities as we receive the data of frequencies used by each country in their radars and the frequencies used in anti jamming equipment.

Abhijit has better explained this...

The publicly stated one is 0.5m2 but it is believed by many Indian aerospace engineers and airforce veterans to have an RCS lower than the stated. Who knows but it is a low RCS platform, afaik Thunders have an RCS of 3m2, F-16 has an RCS of 5m2 and Flankers have RCS of 10m2.
and what is the believed RCS for Rafale?
 

Fighting Falcon 01

FULL MEMBER
Dec 27, 2019
276
0
505
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Indo-Russian jointly developed SFDR Tech has been tested already and DRDO says it will test the Astra MK3 in 2022-23 with SFDR which will have a range of 350-400 km at least thanks to the SFDR tech. Astra MK2 will be tested in a few months and is having a range of 160 KM.

Plus none of your Thunders are equipped with those missiles and your Block-III is still under development and currently is far from production.

and having a good missile is not everything, KLJ-7A offers a maximum range of 170 km against a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of 5m2. Whereas the RCS of Tejas is just 0.1m2 so how is your 250+ KM range missile effective against our Tejas when you can’t detect the Tejas aircraft from that distance, thats why this PL-15 is for large targets. By the same logic IAF also uses K-100 Air to air missile with 400+ KM range intended to target large aircrafts.

Tejas’s EL/M-2052 Elta HAL radar is a GaN-based radar with 1500 TRMs. It can track 64 targets simultaneously. It has a range of 290 km in the Air to Sea Mode while in the Air to Air Mode, it is rumored to be between 150 to 200 km for a 1 sq.m RCS, not 3 sq.m.

Israelis have mastered the art of making Radars and now we are also making similar but better next gen Radars for AMCA.

Indo-Russian jointly developed SFDR Tech has been tested already and DRDO says it will test the Astra MK3 in 2022-23 with SFDR which will have a range of 350-400 km at least thanks to the SFDR tech. Astra MK2 will be tested in a few months and is having a range of 160 KM.

Plus none of your Thunders are equipped with those missiles and your Block-III is still under development and currently is far from production.

and having a good missile is not everything, KLJ-7A offers a maximum range of 170 km against a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of 5m2. Whereas the RCS of Tejas is just 0.1m2 so how is your 250+ KM range missile effective against our Tejas when you can’t detect the Tejas aircraft from that distance, thats why this PL-15 is for large targets. By the same logic IAF also uses K-100 Air to air missile with 400+ KM range intended to target large aircrafts.

Tejas’s EL/M-2052 Elta HAL radar is a GaN-based radar with 1500 TRMs. It can track 64 targets simultaneously. It has a range of 290 km in the Air to Sea Mode while in the Air to Air Mode, it is rumored to be between 150 to 200 km for a 1 sq.m RCS, not 3 sq.m.

Israelis have mastered the art of making Radars and now we are also making similar but better next gen Radars for AMCA.
Whether it is Astra mk2 or mk3 or tejas MK1 A all of these are in development none of them have performed or even taken off or test fired so let's keep it aside since HAL takes 10 years to develop everything ...... now about KLJ7A the radar was initially developed in 2015 in five years they have developed new variants such as the one that can move to increase field of view we have no idea how much range or TRMs the newer variants have .... the older variant has a range of 200km for rcs of 5m2 so newer radar must be somewhere around 250 thanks to more TRMs .... And tejas has an rcs of 0.1m2 really?? You think we are that stupid tejas when equipped with weapons will have an increased RCS it's not F22 that can carry missiles in internal bay ....... PL 15 Aim 120 D and meteor have the same range and I doubt these missiles can hit fighter size targets beyond 160km ...... PL 15 and newer versions of KLJ7A exist while Astra mk2 mk3 tejas mk2 mk1a are all imagination until inducted and combat ready... JF 17 block 3 has taken its first flight on December 15 2019 come back when Tejas mk1a also does the same .......
 

Tariq Habib Afridi

FULL MEMBER
Mar 20, 2019
131
0
172
Country
Pakistan
Location
Korea, Republic Of
Good point but the NATO forces interoperate, they can get tech and info from any country in the group plus they organise large scale exercises which are real combats with virtual weapons so after these exercises they use their data to analyse and make their equipment better, China doesn’t have a combat experience w.r.t PLAAF but they also never get a chance to participate and perform in such big exercises.

IAF exercises with Russia, NATO, Israel, QUAD plus it already has a huge air-to-air combat experience which enables us to make world class avionics and sub systems. Because of these exercises our missiles have a very superior anti jamming capabilities as we receive the data of frequencies used by each country in their radars and the frequencies used in anti jamming equipment.

Abhijit has better explained this...

The publicly stated one is 0.5m2 but it is believed by many Indian aerospace engineers and airforce veterans to have an RCS lower than the stated. Who knows but it is a low RCS platform, afaik Thunders have an RCS of 3m2, F-16 has an RCS of 5m2 and Flankers have RCS of 10m2.
These give the Rafale an estimated Radar Cross Section (RCS) of slightly above one square meters

and rafale use 70% of composite material and forget about SPECTRA for now and still it has around 1m2 RCS
1606199588600.png


Now tell me how you got 0.1m2 with 40% composite material on Tejas?
 

Fighting Falcon 01

FULL MEMBER
Dec 27, 2019
276
0
505
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Good point but the NATO forces interoperate, they can get tech and info from any country in the group plus they organise large scale exercises which are real combats with virtual weapons so after these exercises they use their data to analyse and make their equipment better, China doesn’t have a combat experience w.r.t PLAAF but they also never get a chance to participate and perform in such big exercises.

IAF exercises with Russia, NATO, Israel, QUAD plus it already has a huge air-to-air combat experience which enables us to make world class avionics and sub systems. Because of these exercises our missiles have a very superior anti jamming capabilities as we receive the data of frequencies used by each country in their radars and the frequencies used in anti jamming equipment.

Abhijit has better explained this...

The publicly stated one is 0.5m2 but it is believed by many Indian aerospace engineers and airforce veterans to have an RCS lower than the stated. Who knows but it is a low RCS platform, afaik Thunders have an RCS of 3m2, F-16 has an RCS of 5m2 and Flankers have RCS of 10m2.
The stated RCS of tejas is not believable dude how can it have an RCS of just 0.5m2 ( is it using something like stealth coating ? ) when equipped with weapons I think it must be somewhere around 3m2 .....
 
Oct 6, 2020
2,224
-53
1,526
Country
India
Location
India
and what is the believed RCS for Rafale?
1m2
The stated RCS of tejas is not believable dude how can it have an RCS of just 0.5m2 ( is it using something like stealth coating ? ) when equipped with weapons I think it must be somewhere around 3m2 .....
No RCS doesn’t work the way you think
0.1m2 RCS doesn’t mean it is 10 times stealthier than Rafale with 1m2 RCS or 30 times stealthier than 3m2 JF-17.

RCS concept is different and you should give a read on what it is, how its calculated etc.

Tejas is small, has 40% composites and a stealth RAM coating.
These give the Rafale an estimated Radar Cross Section (RCS) of slightly above one square meters

and rafale use 70% of composite material and forget about SPECTRA for now and still it has around 1m2 RCS
View attachment 690622

Now tell me how you got 0.1m2 with 40% composite material on Tejas?
A slight correction, Tejas airframe is 45% composites (mostly carbon-epoxy) by weight contributing to its reputation as the world's smallest light weight fighter aircraft.

The pic you gave States that 70% of the Surface Area of Rafale is composite, the overall usage of Composite in Tejas is 45%.

Tejas is smaller than Rafale in size and its intake doesn’t expose the engine blades like other conventional twin engine fighters like Rafale, Su-30 and F-15 etc.

see...

1606200197004.jpeg


Now Tejas’s intake
1606200239371.jpeg


Even JF-17’s intake is stealthy and even better than Tejas because of the employment of DSI which Tejas currently lacks. JF-17’s intake also doesn’t expose engine blades.
1606200383169.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom