What's new

Chinese Radar Strongly Resembles Israeli Product..PAF AESA

HAIDER

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
33,771
Reaction score
14
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
TAIPEI and ISLAMABAD — A Chinese avionics marketing and manufacturing firm has put Israeli-US relations under a microscope after marketing an advanced fire control radar identical to Elta’s ELM-2052 active electronically scanned array (AESA).

Elta is the same Israeli state-owned subsidiary at the heart of an incendiary chapter in US-Israel relations that continues to reverberate 15 years after Washington forced Israel to cancel a controversial Phalcon airborne early warning aircraft contract with Beijing.

Beijing-based NAV Technology claims in its 63-page product catalog to offer an unnamed AESA radar that is identical to the ELM-2052. The two-page description appears to be identical to current ELM-2052 product brochures distributed by Elta, including a photograph of the radar. Elta is a subsidiary of the state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).

Israel’s Ministry of Defence said it had no knowledge of NAV and its claimed association with Elta. IAI has also denied any association between Elta and NAV “or any other Chinese firm.”

Yang Yunchun, NAV Technology chairman and president, did not respond to repeated requests to comment. By phone, NAV Technology’s Mr. Xiong turned down requests for information about the company’s activities. The Chinese-language company website does not list an AESA radar as a product.

Public information indicates that Yang began his career in aeronautical engineering with bachelor and master degrees from Harbin Engineering University (1993/1997) and a doctorate at the University of California (2001). His primary academic focus was global positioning system (GPS) and inertial navigation system (INS) integration, and advanced GPS signal processing. After his doctorate, Yang worked for NavCom Technology and ContainerTrac.

NAV’s product catalog offers to “reverse engineer” an INS system for the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF's) Dassault Mirage III. “Currently the Litton LN-33 INS has reliability problems at PAF and NAV Technology has proposed a comprehensive solution to reverse engineer the problem and provide detailed solution.”

A source who worked with Yang in California said that Yang had been under investigation by the FBI for “creating shell companies” and “violating intellectual property” and “export controls.” However, there are no public US federal judicial records indicating Yang was charged with any crime.

In 2003, public records indicate Yang, his wife, Yi Yang, and Yunhai Science and Technology (YH Technology) were sued by Crossbow Technology over patent violations involving GPS technology. The suit was dismissed in 2007 over an inability to properly identify those responsible for the violation. Yang and his wife claimed they had no connection to Yunhai.

According to Chinese-language media sites, Yang is participating in the Chinese government’s secretive 863 Program. The program is designed to create advanced technologies that will wean China off its dependence on difficult-to-obtain foreign technologies. Yang’s participation in the program involves improvements to the GPS/BD2 receiver and the network of continuously operating reference stations used for real-time kinematic satellite navigation systems, used to improve the precision of positioning data.

The product catalog does indicate a strong interest in marketing avionics products to the Pakistan Air Force, in particular the joint China/Pakistan-developed JF-17 fighter aircraft, as well as providing support for the Mirage III.

The large amounts of marketing proposals in the product catalog suggest the AESA radar might have been targeted to the JF-17.

The head of the JF-17 sales and marketing team, Air Commodore Khalid Mahmood, would not comment specifically on any progress being made on acquiring an AESA radar for the JF-17 Block III beyond saying, "The AESA radar project is making steady progress. Installation of the radar will add significantly to the combat potential of our aircraft. We are satisfied and happy with the progress."

No comment was forthcoming from Mahmood on Pakistan's relationship with NAV Tech.

Though unaware what level of progress has been made on selecting an AESA radar, analyst Kaiser Tufail, former Pakistani air commodore and pilot, said if a Chinese AESA radar has been selected, it may have been the only realistic option.

"Given the Western concerns about transfer of sensitive technology, which could find its way further east, I think we may have had no other option but to buy Chinese," he said.

Analyst Usman Shabbir with the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank said that from his discussions with the JF-17 team at this year's Paris Airshow, he learned that a Chinese AESA radar option had gained favor over a European offering.

He acknowledges NAV Technology is heavily involved in providing navigation avionics for the JF-17 as well as some precision-guided munitions along with a transfer of technology to enable local production. However, he was inclined to believe a Chinese AESA radar would be provided by an established company such as Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology, which produces the current JF-17's KLJ-7 fire control X-band radar.

"Very few companies can make AESA solutions and not much is known about Chinese companies apart from NRIET," he said, although he is uncertain of Chinese progress in this area that would allow an AESA radar to be installed in the JF-17.


Chinese Radar Strongly Resembles Israeli Product
Barbara Opall-Rome contributed to this report from Tel Aviv.
 
Good news. Get the best of everything there and tailor it to our needs.
 
NRIET also produces radar systems for the KJ-2000, J-10B, J-20, and J-11D; PAF has plenty of options other than the ELM-2052 look-alike if it wishes so to choose one.

If that doesn't work out, there are also other competitors to think about: the 607th Institute (producing AESA radars for the J-15S and J-16), the 38th Institute (producing AESA radars for the KJ-200, KJ-500, Z-18F, and ZDK03), or other private vendors.
 
TAIPEI and ISLAMABAD — A Chinese avionics marketing and manufacturing firm has put Israeli-US relations under a microscope after marketing an advanced fire control radar identical to Elta’s ELM-2052 active electronically scanned array (AESA).

Elta is the same Israeli state-owned subsidiary at the heart of an incendiary chapter in US-Israel relations that continues to reverberate 15 years after Washington forced Israel to cancel a controversial Phalcon airborne early warning aircraft contract with Beijing.

Beijing-based NAV Technology claims in its 63-page product catalog to offer an unnamed AESA radar that is identical to the ELM-2052. The two-page description appears to be identical to current ELM-2052 product brochures distributed by Elta, including a photograph of the radar. Elta is a subsidiary of the state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).

Israel’s Ministry of Defence said it had no knowledge of NAV and its claimed association with Elta. IAI has also denied any association between Elta and NAV “or any other Chinese firm.”

Yang Yunchun, NAV Technology chairman and president, did not respond to repeated requests to comment. By phone, NAV Technology’s Mr. Xiong turned down requests for information about the company’s activities. The Chinese-language company website does not list an AESA radar as a product.

Public information indicates that Yang began his career in aeronautical engineering with bachelor and master degrees from Harbin Engineering University (1993/1997) and a doctorate at the University of California (2001). His primary academic focus was global positioning system (GPS) and inertial navigation system (INS) integration, and advanced GPS signal processing. After his doctorate, Yang worked for NavCom Technology and ContainerTrac.

NAV’s product catalog offers to “reverse engineer” an INS system for the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF's) Dassault Mirage III. “Currently the Litton LN-33 INS has reliability problems at PAF and NAV Technology has proposed a comprehensive solution to reverse engineer the problem and provide detailed solution.”

A source who worked with Yang in California said that Yang had been under investigation by the FBI for “creating shell companies” and “violating intellectual property” and “export controls.” However, there are no public US federal judicial records indicating Yang was charged with any crime.

In 2003, public records indicate Yang, his wife, Yi Yang, and Yunhai Science and Technology (YH Technology) were sued by Crossbow Technology over patent violations involving GPS technology. The suit was dismissed in 2007 over an inability to properly identify those responsible for the violation. Yang and his wife claimed they had no connection to Yunhai.

According to Chinese-language media sites, Yang is participating in the Chinese government’s secretive 863 Program. The program is designed to create advanced technologies that will wean China off its dependence on difficult-to-obtain foreign technologies. Yang’s participation in the program involves improvements to the GPS/BD2 receiver and the network of continuously operating reference stations used for real-time kinematic satellite navigation systems, used to improve the precision of positioning data.

The product catalog does indicate a strong interest in marketing avionics products to the Pakistan Air Force, in particular the joint China/Pakistan-developed JF-17 fighter aircraft, as well as providing support for the Mirage III.

The large amounts of marketing proposals in the product catalog suggest the AESA radar might have been targeted to the JF-17.

The head of the JF-17 sales and marketing team, Air Commodore Khalid Mahmood, would not comment specifically on any progress being made on acquiring an AESA radar for the JF-17 Block III beyond saying, "The AESA radar project is making steady progress. Installation of the radar will add significantly to the combat potential of our aircraft. We are satisfied and happy with the progress."

No comment was forthcoming from Mahmood on Pakistan's relationship with NAV Tech.

Though unaware what level of progress has been made on selecting an AESA radar, analyst Kaiser Tufail, former Pakistani air commodore and pilot, said if a Chinese AESA radar has been selected, it may have been the only realistic option.

"Given the Western concerns about transfer of sensitive technology, which could find its way further east, I think we may have had no other option but to buy Chinese," he said.

Analyst Usman Shabbir with the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank said that from his discussions with the JF-17 team at this year's Paris Airshow, he learned that a Chinese AESA radar option had gained favor over a European offering.

He acknowledges NAV Technology is heavily involved in providing navigation avionics for the JF-17 as well as some precision-guided munitions along with a transfer of technology to enable local production. However, he was inclined to believe a Chinese AESA radar would be provided by an established company such as Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology, which produces the current JF-17's KLJ-7 fire control X-band radar.

"Very few companies can make AESA solutions and not much is known about Chinese companies apart from NRIET," he said, although he is uncertain of Chinese progress in this area that would allow an AESA radar to be installed in the JF-17.


Chinese Radar Strongly Resembles Israeli Product
Barbara Opall-Rome contributed to this report from Tel Aviv.
Well it is good news hope to see soon AESA in JF-17 and also either J-10 B or J-11 D with AESA in PAF in really large numbers
 
AESA radars are indeed operational aboard the J-10B, J-16, and pretty soon J-15 and J-11D.
Post the Link not some Forum's Photoshop picture's but the Authentic Source
You mean to say you get your AESA operational Before Russians who are Generation Ahead in Radar Packing Technology than you.who are Still Exporting you PESA's

Type 1493 - the name and tracking numbers provided by Sinodefense "PLAAF Su-27/J-11 Flanker". Kopp states the J-11B radar strongly resembles the Zhuk-27 (N010) radar, the J-8II is equipped with a N010 derivative, the Zhuk-811. Numerous Chinese internet sources claim the J-11B is equipped with an AESA radar but these claims are baseless and unsubstantiated. An official SAC image (below) clearly show a mechanically scanned array within the nose of the aircraft (available on Air Power Australia website). Similarly, many Chinese internet sources claim the J-11B incorporates stealth coatings and a reduced radar cross section along with an AESA. David Shalpak, The Chinese Air Force: Evolving Concepts, Roles, and Capabilities, dismisses the reduced rcs claims (pg. 196). Clearly a great deal of misinformation exists with respect to the J-11B.
J-11B-Flanker-B-Systems-1.jpg


J-10B and J-16D.
Not AWACS ,No fighter is operational with AESA in Chinese Fleet Yet All are Still in prototype Stage
 
Post the Link not some Forum's Photoshop picture's but the Authentic Source
You mean to say you get your AESA operational Before Russians who are Generation Ahead in Radar Packing Technology than you.who are

Russia does not have a single airborne AESA in service, and judging from their lackluster devotion to such systems, it can be safely presumed that they either lack the funds or simply do not see the need to do so.

China, on the other hand, has been developing and deploying such systems since 2003, when the KJ-2000 became the first PLAAF asset to sport such technology.

As for fighter-based AESA radars, here are some samples of company documents released regarding them. Make of it what you will, but note that these are only a snapshot of what constitutes a major focus and sector of their electronics industry.

China's AESA Radars For J-10B J-16 and J-20.jpg


J-10B's AESA:
2713597603460e57e90daca.gif

27135976e80062f76c39146.gif

27135976c43636fece03a67.gif

2713597638e303b1fe431fe.gif


J-16's AESA:
145402va0aabzazzlatb0ag.gif

145351oz3pn48b4351n318.gif

07d3e691c93e4fe5b644fdd736061ba2.jpg


Not AWACS ,No fighter is operational with AESA in Chinese Fleet Yet All are Still in prototype Stage

Au contraire, the J-10B and J-16 have both entered service, albeit recently; giving the PLAAF two aircraft in two weight classes to sport active phased radar technology. When the J-11D and J-15S do likewise, the PLAAF will have another AESA-equipped platform fill a niche that was previously occupied by the J-11B, while the PLANAF will have its first AESA-equipped fighter plane.

The KJ-2000, KJ-200, KJ-500, Z-18F, and the Divine Dragon UAV are all surveillance aircraft, every single one of which incorporates AESA radars. Pakistan's ZDK03 does as well.
 
Russia does not have a single airborne AESA in service, and judging from their lackluster devotion to such systems, it can be safely presumed that they either lack the funds or simply do not see the need to do so.

China, on the other hand, has been developing and deploying such systems since 2003, when the KJ-2000 became the first PLAAF asset to sport such technology.

As for fighter-based AESA radars, here are some samples of company documents released regarding them. Make of it what you will, but note that these are only a snapshot of what constitutes a major focus and sector of their electronics industry.

View attachment 250054

J-10B's AESA:
View attachment 250053
View attachment 250056
View attachment 250055
View attachment 250057

J-16's AESA:
View attachment 250061
View attachment 250059
View attachment 250058



Au contraire, the J-10B and J-16 have both entered service, albeit recently; giving the PLAAF two aircraft in two weight classes to sport active phased radar technology. When the J-11D and J-15S do likewise, the PLAAF will have another AESA-equipped platform fill a niche that was previously occupied by the J-11B, while the PLANAF will have its first AESA-equipped fighter plane.

The KJ-2000, KJ-200, KJ-500, Z-18F, and the Divine Dragon UAV are all surveillance aircraft, every single one of which incorporates AESA radars. Pakistan's ZDK03 does as well.
Like I Predicted These Are Forum's Based Sources Not Authentic ones
Chinese%2Bfighter%2BAESA.jpg


Image 3:The image which allegedly describes the number of TR modules within the J-10B, J-16, and J-20 has been posted on numerous defense forums since at least December of 2013.


Chinese defense forums have posted copies of the image above which claim to cite the J-20’s AESA T/R module count at 1,856, the J-16’s at 1,760, and the J-10B at 1,200 T/R modules. It is likely the J-10B is the first Chinese fighter aircraft to feature an AESA; J-10B units achieved initial operational capability (IOC) in October of 2014. The volume of the J-10s nose cone is not substantially different from that of the F-16 or the Israeli Lavi from which the J-10 is partially based. Therefore, if one were to assume China had reached parity with the United States in packaging technology, the 1,200 T/R module figure would be plausible but slightly high. For comparison, the APG-80 AESA for the F-16C/D Block 60 has 1,000 T/R modules (DSB, 2001). However, it is unlikely that China has been able to reach parity with the United States in terms of packaging technology on their first generation AESA design. Neither Russia nor Israel was able to field 1,000 T/R element arrays within their first generation fighter mounted AESAs for similar nose volumes as the F-16 with the Mig-35 and Israeli F-16 respectively.


Russia’s first fighter mounted AESA radar, the Zhuk-AE, contained 652 T/R modules and was unveiled in 2007. The Israeli ELM-2052 AESA radar, which has been marketed for both the F-16 and the FA-50 – a joint Korean Aerospace Industry and Lockheed Martin F-16 derivative, has roughly 512 T/R modules (Trimble, 2014). The only firm outside of the United States that was able to produce a 1,000 T/R element within one generation was the French avionics firm Thales with its RB2E radar (Avionics Today, 2009). While the relative technological maturity of European, Israeli, and Russian AESAs is not directly indicative of the relative technological maturity of China’s packaging technology, it is an indicator that the first generation AESA produced by China is likely not on par with the US which is generally recognized as having the most technological mature T/R packaging technology (Kopp, 2014).

The prospect of China’s TR packaging technology being on par with US firms within a single generation of radars is even more dubious when one examines the preference for an incremental technological development within the Chinese aerospace industry. Several Chinese aviation authors have hypothesized that the J-10B serves as a “technological stepping stone” with respect to the development of the more advanced J-20. For example, Feng Cao argues the J-10B and the J-16 AESAs were likely used to test technology related to the J-20’s AESA which would be a second generation Chinese design. By virtue of the larger nose volumes in the J-16 and J-20 airframes, it is highly probable the two aircraft will feature radars with more T/R modules than the J-10B’s radar.
The J-16 utilizes the Su-27BS airframe which has room for a 0.9-1.1 meter aperture in the nose which is on par with the F-15 and F-22 in terms of volume (Kopp, 2012). The 1,500 element N036 Tikhomirov NIIP AESA has a similar aperture size to the electronically scanned array (ESA) Irbis-E radar featured in the Su-35 series of fighters which shares the base Su-27 airframe. If the 1,760 T/R figure is correct it would indicate the Chinese aerospace industry has eclipsed Russian T/R module packaging technology as the N036 is arguably the most advanced Russian fighter mounted AESA. Similarly, the most advanced US fighter mounted AESAs such as the APG-77(V)2 and APG-82(V)1 contain 1,500 T/R modules*. While the prospect of Chinese avionics firms reaching parity with US and Russian firms is more plausible within two generations of designs, the author is skeptical the 1,760 figure is correct given the unsubstantiated nature of the image and the fairly substantial 260 T/R discrepancy between the J-16 radar figure compared to the most advanced US and Russian AESA designs. Therefore, the author speculates it would be more reasonable to assume a figure between 1,200 and 1,500 TR modules for the J-16 rather than the 1,760 figure.
 
lol thats not a big deal,
the chinese PL series of missiles namely (PL8 +) was also based on Isreals Python Series if i remember correctly.
There really shouldnt be much fuss about it.
 
Is there AESA functional in Indian Airforce ?
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom