What's new

Radar comparison between JF-17 B3 and Rafale

ozranger

FULL MEMBER
Jul 3, 2012
664
1
1,137
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
This post https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/can-...en-the-french-rafael-vs-chinese-j-10c.732278/ drew my attention and raised my interest investigating radar performance difference between JF-17 Block III and Rafale.

First thing we need to know Rafale has a smaller nose than that of JF-17. Therefore JF-17's nose can house a larger AESA radar with more TR modules

- KLJ-7A for JF-17 B3 = More than 1000 T/R modules
This number was revealed by its designer at https://m.fx361.com/news/2017/0315/1131775.html
1641186179593.png


- RBE2-AA for Rafale = 838 T/R modules
1641186216434.png


Regarding performance of those radars and especially their equipped T/R modules, all latest products made in China are GaN based. They are supplying products to the market at large scale now. Economically I don't believe KLJ-7A won't use GaN based T/R modules.

1641183857894-png.805492

1641183874479-png.805493


RBE2-AA is using GaAs based T/R modules as described on Internet. Power output comparison between GaN and GaAs can be seen in many web pages such as https://www.mwrf.com/materials/arti...-rf-whats-the-difference-between-gan-and-gaas. Generally speaking, compared with GaAs modules, GaN modules are much cooler or having much higher power output when at same temperature.

So in conclusion, Rafale is much inferior to JF-17 B3 when fighting in a BVR scenario, not only because the radar is inferior, the missile will also be inferior because JF-17 B3 is using PL-15E.

BTW I am not interested in any baseless debate with individuals high on copium.
 
Last edited:

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
38,205
481
84,845
Country
United States
Location
United States
Uhh- have you taken into account where does the radar for the Rafale sit relative to the JF-17?
How are both of them cooled and how much space within the nose does this system take?
What is the radiated power of the two systems?

Just two questions out of many before you can reach any "conclusion".
 

Mujahid Memon

SENIOR MEMBER
Apr 24, 2012
2,472
-4
3,363
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
China has long surpassed Western giants in terms of technological superiority. Chinese industrial microprocessors and microcontrollers are on average 4-6x more powerful, efficient and economical than their Western counterparts.
 

ozranger

FULL MEMBER
Jul 3, 2012
664
1
1,137
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
I am reposting one of the lost images in my top post which shows a Chinese company launching marketing campaign for selling their GaN based T/R modules for AESA radars covering spectrum of radio wave bands from L to X. I am reposting it because it seems I am not allowed to modify the first post.

641.jpg
 

Genghis khan1

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2015
4,883
1
6,504
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
I wouldn’t discount Chinese technology just because it’s Chinese. Specially since Chinese telecommunications industry is leading the world in 5G and now 6G technology.

Chinese radars and warfare suits could be totally legit in terms of their claims.

Or As per Sun tzu “The art of war”. Appear weaker to your enemy.
 

ozranger

FULL MEMBER
Jul 3, 2012
664
1
1,137
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
I wouldn’t discount Chinese technology just because it’s Chinese. Specially since Chinese telecommunications industry is leading the world in 5G and now 6G technology.

Chinese radars and warfare suits could be totally legit in terms of their claims.

Or As per Sun tzu “The art of war”. Appear weaker to your enemy.
5G base stations are essentially composed of AESA antennas with GaN T/R modules to meet critical power output, power consumption, heat dissipation and bandwidth requirements.
 

Princeps Senatus

FULL MEMBER
Nov 7, 2021
157
0
190
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
it's not about chinese vs french technology
China's best and most expensive radars are on the ground or on AWACS or on the J-20
they don't need to unnecessarily raise the J-10's cost
Theres a reason why the J-10 costs half as much as the Rafale
 

huanghong

FULL MEMBER
Nov 3, 2021
132
0
90
Country
China
Location
Yemen
There is no evidence that klj-7a used GAN.
According to the interviewed with the designer at the Zhuhai Air Show, the detection distance of the klj-7a to the RCS=5 target is 170km.
According to this link
the early estimate of RBE-2 AESA to RCS=5 target detection distance is 150km, and the latest news mentions that compared with RBE-2 (PESA), it has increased by 100% to 200KM.
 

wali87

FULL MEMBER
Jun 22, 2007
1,022
-1
1,027
Someone please provide an approximate range of KLJ-7A. I’ve been hearing conflicting statements for years now.
 

huanghong

FULL MEMBER
Nov 3, 2021
132
0
90
Country
China
Location
Yemen
I don't quite understand, why not choose LKF-601E. According to the official data, the target of RCS=5 is found to be 200KM away.
 

serenity

FULL MEMBER
Jan 9, 2007
1,732
0
4,159
Country
China
Location
Australia
I think only J-20's radar uses GaN? I remember reading this quite some time back. Not even J-16 and J-10C radars were developed with GaN technology. GaN modules for other electronics like LED and in specific processors may be commercially available in last few years but J-10C and J-16 AESA radars were developed well before GaN was integrated into military AESA.

JF-17's new AESA is even newer than J-20's purely in timeline. It could include GaN but it is also aiming to be a more budget friendly radar unit. It is extremely difficult and expensive to manufacture T/R modules for AESA, even for China and with the scale China produces them. We simply do not know if block 3's radar uses GaN technology. Depends on the manufacturing costs.

Radar capability also isn't only T/R module numbers and GaN or GaA. There is a lot of it that is software too and much more than we know about or even aware of. But we can make some basic judgements based on other information. Electronics industry in China is vastly, vastly superior, more well funded, much more competitive and has maybe 100,000 more talented engineers and research laboratories doing work in everything from ship based AESA to SAMs and sensor systems for space, air, sea, land, all integrated for HGV defence, ballistic missile defence and even to play in a long battle of electronic war. As some military commentators speaking basically for the government, it is not missiles or firepower nowadays but how to keep your sensors and how to disrupt enemy ones.

Only USA and China are at this level in the game. The invisible domain of war but the most important one. France as capable in technology as they are simply are not focused in this realm and not with as much need or seriousness.

This doesn't mean Rafale's radar is weaker than JF-17 3's but we do know the block 3's radar is newer and the Rafale's is older. This is also China's what 4th or 5th fighter AESA? While it is France's first. J-16, J-10B, J-10C, J-20, JF-17 3, J-16D, J-15A, J-15D. All AESA or at least with J-10B, either PESA or AESA. We're not even counting the ones experimental and not put onto service fighter.

This doesn't mean JF-17 block 3 receives a good AESA from China. China could sell a poor product or a good product. It depends on the money and the reasons for selling and supplying a certain level. There's no way JF-17's radar is as good as even later batch J-10C even if it is more modern. How good is it compared to RBE or J-10C's well only those who know, know.

France has no communication technology that can compare with China's. No semiconductor design or even foundry (which is China's relative weakness) comparable to China's. It doesn't have decades of building early warning, SAR satellites, communication satellites, supercomputers, telecomm chips and modules, dual band AESAs, space based sensor networks and so on.

China pretends to be weaker, much much weaker than it really is. Some old powers who decline and dwindle still like to keep the rotting mansion's facade pristine though. Behind it all where is France's supercomputers that can even get half way to China's. How about 5G? What about 6G? Communication with Mach 20 maneuverable re-entry vehicle like China's DF-26 and WZ-8 guidance and communication?

I think RBE is roughly at Japan's J/APG-1 level. The French would have worked out the initial bugs since they use it themselves but the Americans produced some of their components for them. This is both a strong point and a weak point.
 
Last edited:

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


Top Bottom