best suited radar for pak fa

[Major Shaitan Singh]

Active Electronically Scanned Array
An Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA), also known as active phased array radar is a type of radar whose transmitter and receiver functions are composed of numerous small transmit/receive (T/R) modules. AESA radars feature short to instantaneous (millisecond) scanning rates and have a desirable low probability of intercept.

As solid state devices, AESA radars have vastly simpler mechanical designs. They require no complex hydraulics for antenna movement nor hinge appendages. The AESA radar occupies less space than typical radar, because of its reduced infrastructure requirements and of course its absent range of motion. With these improvements, maintenance crews are far less severely taxed, and the radar is much more reliable.

Main advantages over mechanically scanned arrays are extremely fast scanning rate, much higher range, tremendous number of targets being tracked and engaged (multiple agile beams), low probability of intercept, ability to function as a radio/jammer, simultaneous air and ground modes, Synthetic Aperture Radar.

Mechanical steering may be added to AESA radars for increased radar field of view; The movement performance of the antenna would not need to be nearly as great as that of a traditional radar, as the radar sweep is not integral to the contact update rate.

Contents
1 Features
2 The Difference Between AESA and PESA
3 List of AESA radars
3.1 Airborne systems
3.2 Ground and sea-based systems
4 See also
5 References
6 External links



Features
AESA radars have:

High ECM resistance:
The extremely fast scan of the radar makes it difficult for an ECM device to find the correct azimuth and elevation in which the radar's main lobe is currently directed.
High gain associated with AESA radars gives them high ERP, which makes it difficult for an active ECM device, using noise jamming techniques, to successfully jam such a radar.
The extremely fast scan of the emitter gives it LPI features.
Less susceptibility to voltage failures, due to the relatively very low voltage in which each and every single radiating element operates; This is combined with graceful degradation.

The Difference Between AESA and PESA
In a passive electronically scanned array (PESA), the microwave feed network in the back of the antenna is powered by a single radio frequency (RF) source (magnetron, klystron, TWT, etc.), sending its waves into phase shift modules (usually digitally-controlled), which, in turn, feed the numerous emitting elements.

An AESA, instead, has an individual RF source for each of its many transmit/receive elements, making them "active".

This provides for a graceful degradation, so that many T/R modules may fail and the radar would not stop functioning.

AESA radars replace the traditional radar RF sources (magnetron/klystron/TWT), which usually require extremely high operating voltage and power, with multiple solid state RF sources operating at low voltage (40 to 60 volts). Solid state electronics use silicon or gallium arsenide based power amplifier technology and benefit to some extent from mass production techniques developed for consumer electronics. US based manufacturers of the AESA radars used in the F22 and Super Hornet include Northrop Grumman[1] and Raytheon.[2] These companies also design, develop and manufacture the transmit/receive modules which comprise the 'building blocks' of an AESA radar. The requisite electronics technology was developed in-house via Department of Defense research programs such as MIMIC Program.[3][4]


List of AESA radars

Airborne systems
Northrop Grumman/Raytheon AN/APG-77, for the F-22 Raptor
Northrop Grumman AN/APG-80, for the F-16E/F Block 60 Fighting Falcon
Northrop Grumman AN/APG-81, for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
Northrop Grumman Multi-role AESA, for the Boeing Wedgetail (AEW&C)
Northrop Grumman APY-9, for the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
Raytheon AN/APG-63(V)2 and AN/APG-63(V)3, for the F-15C Eagle
Raytheon APG-79, for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler
Raytheon AN/APQ-181 (AESA upgrade currently in development), for the B-2 Spirit bomber
AMSAR, research from the European GTDAR consortium, for Eurofighter and Rafale fighter Radar
Captor-E CAESAR (CAPTOR Active Electronically Scanning Array Radar)
RBE2-AA Radar à Balayage Electronique 2 - Active Array
SELEX Seaspray 7000E, for helicopters
SELEX Vixen 500E
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation J/APG-1, AESA for the Mitsubishi F-2 fighter
Ericsson Erieye AEW&C and NORA AESA for JAS 39 Gripen
Phazotron NIIR Zhuk-AE, for MiG-35
Tikhomirov NIIP Epaulet-A
Elta EL/M-2083 aerostat-mounted air search radar
Elta EL/M-2052, for fighters
Elta EL/M-2075 radar for the IAI Phalcon AEW&C system

Ground and sea-based systems
APAR Thales multi-function radar, primary sensor of Dutch De Zeven Provinciën and German Sachsen class frigates
Selex EMPAR (European Multifunction Phased Array Radar)
Elta EL/M-2080 Green Pine ground-based early warning AESA radar
Elta EL/M-2248 MF-STAR multifunction naval radar
AN/SPY-3 multi-function radar for U.S. DD(X), CG(X) and CVN-21 next-generation surface vessels
Raytheon U.S. National Missile Defense X-Band Radar (XBR)
MEADS's fire control radar
THAAD system fire control radar
SAMPSON BAE Insyte multi-function radar for UK. Type 45 destroyers
FCS-3 Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (Melco)
OPS-24 Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (The world's first Naval Active Electronically Scanned Array radar)
J/FPS-5 Japanese ground-based next generation Missile Defense Radar
CEAFAR CEA Technologies Naval Phased Array

 

[IND151]

zuk me is best option for pakfa i think.

 

[jagjitnatt]

zuk me is best option for pakfa i think.

zhuk me?? Is that not what our Mig-29s have??

 

[mnd]

Wrong...It is superior. An AESA with subarray partitioning software can do the one thing all other radar types, including a PESA, cannot do: true multi-modes operation. That alone made an AESA at least one level up from a PESA.

You missed my point. AESA technology is better than PESA, and has its advantages, but not all AESA radars are necessary better than PESA ones. The Irbis, being PESA offers higher performance as a radar than most AESAs in service (detection range, power,) and can perform the same functions, such as 120º steering, multimode functions (tracks air targets while terrain scanning), etc. Yes, AESA is better but only because a radar incorporates that tech does not imply it´s better than others,

 

[jagjitnatt]

Wrong...It is superior. An AESA with subarray partitioning software can do the one thing all other radar types, including a PESA, cannot do: true multi-modes operation. That alone made an AESA at least one level up from a PESA.

Wrong.
Just being an AESA doesn't make a radar superior. There are other factors that contribute more to the performance than just it being an AESA.

A PESA with 1000 T/R elements would be superior to an AESA with 500 T/R elements. There are many more factors than just T/R elements, like duty cycle, average/peak power, processing systems, band, fluctuation, beam width, lobes, beam shape, antenna size, all the way up to every controller, phase shifter, transistor used in the radar system.

An AESA is an improvement over a PESA, but two different radar systems can not be compared just on the type of technology used, but rather the performance offered.

 

[rockstarIN]

Active Electronically Scanned Array
List of AESA radars

Airborne systems
Northrop Grumman/Raytheon AN/APG-77, for the F-22 Raptor
Northrop Grumman AN/APG-80, for the F-16E/F Block 60 Fighting Falcon
Northrop Grumman AN/APG-81, for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
Northrop Grumman Multi-role AESA, for the Boeing Wedgetail (AEW&C)
Northrop Grumman APY-9, for the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
Raytheon AN/APG-63(V)2 and AN/APG-63(V)3, for the F-15C Eagle
Raytheon APG-79, for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler
Raytheon AN/APQ-181 (AESA upgrade currently in development), for the B-2 Spirit bomber
AMSAR, research from the European GTDAR consortium, for Eurofighter and Rafale fighter Radar
Captor-E CAESAR (CAPTOR Active Electronically Scanning Array Radar)
RBE2-AA Radar à Balayage Electronique 2 - Active Array
SELEX Seaspray 7000E, for helicopters
SELEX Vixen 500E
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation J/APG-1, AESA for the Mitsubishi F-2 fighter
Ericsson Erieye AEW&C and NORA AESA for JAS 39 Gripen
Phazotron NIIR Zhuk-AE, for MiG-35
Tikhomirov NIIP Epaulet-A
Elta EL/M-2083 aerostat-mounted air search radar
Elta EL/M-2052, for fighters Elta EL/M-2075 radar for the IAI Phalcon AEW&C system

Ground and sea-based systems
APAR Thales multi-function radar, primary sensor of Dutch De Zeven Provinciën and German Sachsen class frigates
Selex EMPAR (European Multifunction Phased Array Radar)
Elta EL/M-2080 Green Pine ground-based early warning AESA radar
Elta EL/M-2248 MF-STAR multifunction naval radar
AN/SPY-3 multi-function radar for U.S. DD(X), CG(X) and CVN-21 next-generation surface vessels
Raytheon U.S. National Missile Defense X-Band Radar (XBR)
MEADS's fire control radar
THAAD system fire control radar
SAMPSON BAE Insyte multi-function radar for UK. Type 45 destroyers
FCS-3 Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (Melco)
OPS-24 Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (The world's first Naval Active Electronically Scanned Array radar)
J/FPS-5 Japanese ground-based next generation Missile Defense Radar
CEAFAR CEA Technologies Naval Phased Array

Elta EL/M-2052 is not a AESA so far I know. Its only a multi-mode radar. (MMR). I think they are working on a BVR variant on this

It is mounted on Indian Sea Harriers along with Derby BVR.

 

[jagjitnatt]

Elta EL/M-2052 is not a AESA so far I know. Its only a multi-mode radar. (MMR). I think they are working on a BVR variant on this

It is mounted on Indian Sea Harriers along with Derby BVR.

ELTA EL/M 2052 is AESA. The one installed on Sea Harriers is ELTA 2032 which is a MMR

 

[rockstarIN]

^^oppsss... My bad..

Did the new one integrated to any fighter?

 

[WAQAS119]

Nope... who is that?

Their use to be a really nice person called BENNY! We really miss him!
You are not nice, Benny was!

 

[amalakas]

Wrong...It is superior. An AESA with subarray partitioning software can do the one thing all other radar types, including a PESA, cannot do: true multi-modes operation. That alone made an AESA at least one level up from a PESA.

I apologize, my memory does not serve me right now, perhaps you could clarify something for me,

the Su-35 has -if not mistaken- what is effectively an AESA radar that is also mechanically steered. OK , not fully AESA but it is an active array that can be sub partitioned but it is mechanically steered ..

am I wrong?

 

[jagjitnatt]

I apologize, my memory does not serve me right now, perhaps you could clarify something for me,

the Su-35 has -if not mistaken- what is effectively an AESA radar that is also mechanically steered. OK , not fully AESA but it is an active array that can be sub partitioned but it is mechanically steered ..

am I wrong?

It is not active array, but a passive array radar steered mechanically. So it overcomes the limited horizontal field view problem of standard phased array radars.

 

[gambit]

You missed my point. AESA technology is better than PESA, and has its advantages, but not all AESA radars are necessary better than PESA ones. The Irbis, being PESA offers higher performance as a radar than most AESAs in service (detection range, power,) and can perform the same functions, such as 120º steering, multimode functions (tracks air targets while terrain scanning), etc. Yes, AESA is better but only because a radar incorporates that tech does not imply it´s better than others,

Sorry...But you had no 'point' to speak of. Not a single item you cited is beyond the capabilities of an AESA system and while every modes are possible, a PESA cannot multi-task those modes. A PESA has a single beam. An AESA antenna, with the appropriate subarray partitioning software, can create two or more beams simultaneously. An advantage a PESA has over the classical mechanical scanning antenna is that the PESA's beam can be repositioned much faster, giving the illusion of simultaneous operations. But not a true multi-tasking system. In subarray partitioning, those many beams will not have the same power as a single beam created by the array, but that is not the point. If needed, all subarrays will be erased and that powerful single beam will be recreated to do whatever is required. It is this flexibility and speed regarding that flexibility that make an AESA superior to all.

 

[gambit]

Wrong.
Just being an AESA doesn't make a radar superior.

Yes it does.

There are other factors that contribute more to the performance than just it being an AESA.

A PESA with 1000 T/R elements would be superior to an AESA with 500 T/R elements. There are many more factors than just T/R elements, like duty cycle, average/peak power, processing systems, band, fluctuation, beam width, lobes, beam shape, antenna size, all the way up to every controller, phase shifter, transistor used in the radar system.

An AESA is an improvement over a PESA, but two different radar systems can not be compared just on the type of technology used, but rather the performance offered.

This argument is valid only IF those attributes cannot be matched by any AESA system. But given today's sophisticated combat environment and integration with other combat platforms, true multi-tasking capability will be more important than sheer antenna output power. We are not talking about variations in built systems but about the inherent characteristics of the technology itself. Electronically scanned array technology is the foundation for both PESA and AESA but an AESA is a step up from that foundation.

 

[gambit]

I apologize, my memory does not serve me right now, perhaps you could clarify something for me,

the Su-35 has -if not mistaken- what is effectively an AESA radar that is also mechanically steered. OK , not fully AESA but it is an active array that can be sub partitioned but it is mechanically steered ..

am I wrong?

It is not active array, but a passive array radar steered mechanically. So it overcomes the limited horizontal field view problem of standard phased array radars.

Regardless of whether it is a PESA or an AESA, both works on the 'wave superposition' principle to create their beams...

Superposition of Waves

The principle of superposition may be applied to waves whenever two (or more) waves travelling through the same medium at the same time. The waves pass through each other without being disturbed. The net displacement of the medium at any point in space or time, is simply the sum of the individual wave displacements. This is true of waves which are finite in length (wave pulses) or which are continuous sine waves.

It require precision controls over individual transmit-receive (TR) elements in an array to create waves of varying power levels...

But as the main beam -- as shown above -- begins to approach the array's mechanical edge, it will be 'contaminated' with sidelobes and target resolutions will be negatively affected. Hence the electronic limits on either side. Installing the ESA array upon a mechanical scanning platform allow the ESA array to go beyond those electronic limits. The benefits are debatable at best and for now the US will remain with static and stable platforms for our AESA systems.

 

[jagjitnatt]

This argument is valid only IF those attributes cannot be matched by any AESA system. But given today's sophisticated combat environment and integration with other combat platforms, true multi-tasking capability will be more important than sheer antenna output power. We are not talking about variations in built systems but about the inherent characteristics of the technology itself. Electronically scanned array technology is the foundation for both PESA and AESA but an AESA is a step up from that foundation.

We are talking about two radar systems, not two technologies.
And in this case a PESA radar can out perform an AESA.