Chinese Radar Strongly Resembles Israeli Product..PAF AESA

[Ultima Thule]

Is there AESA functional in Indian Airforce ?

i think PHALCON and green pine AESA may be more

 

[HAIDER]

i think PHALCON and green pine AESA may be more

What about SU30 etc

 

[Ultima Thule]

What about SU30 etc

both SU-30 and SU-30 MKI currently have PESA not AESA

 

[HAIDER]

Found it interesting PAF Mirage 3 is going AESA.....

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Good LOCAL WORK BY Chinese Engineers !! Haters will hate

 

[Sipahi]

We must take advantage of our brotherhood with China and buy these goodies and they are going to be a great induction for Pakistan.

 

[abdulbarijan]

@NKVD

I think the most interesting point of your "argument" is how it keeps changing while you debate -- when someone calls you out on what you have wrong -- you go -- okay -- "give me a link" and when your provided with that -- clearly poking giant holes in the fabric of your "argument" -- you move on to something you deem relevant --

One only needs to refer back to the Mirage 2000 vs JFT thread to look at the baloney you call arguments ... and when you do say something that is at some degree -- thought out by yourself -- it frankly looks as if you are a mortal enemy of logic ...

Now let me just say, that this criticism wasn't without any substance ... just see the quoted sections of your post ....

1- First you have this....

First get it operational in your fighter's before export

2-Secondly you ask for sources/links etc. and give a half baked argument ....

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


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

3- Only to ACKNOWLEDGE the very thing you asked for the esteemed member to prove to you ... and now the debate is not -- that the AESA is "operational or not" --- It's about the number of TWR modules on Chinese based AESA's --

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.

I mean, seriously -- your a senior member dude, atleast have some quality to your posts and stick to an argument -- all of us know how to use google and we can in the same way data mine our way to post page after page of irrelevant information that serves no purpose to the topic on hand ....

What about SU30 etc

SU-30 MKI does not feature an AESA, it features the BARS PESA radar (as of now, however after the Super Sukhoi upgrades (if they are done) some SU-30's will feature AESA's)

 

[NKVD]

@NKVD

I think the most interesting point of your "argument" is how it keeps changing while you debate -- when someone calls you out on what you have wrong -- you go -- okay -- "give me a link" and when your provided with that -- clearly poking giant holes in the fabric of your "argument" -- you move on to something you deem relevant --

One only needs to refer back to the Mirage 2000 vs JFT thread to look at the baloney you call arguments ... and when you do say something that is at some degree -- thought out by yourself -- it frankly looks as if you are a mortal enemy of logic ...

Now let me just say, that this criticism wasn't without any substance ... just see the quoted sections of your post ....

1- First you have this....



2-Secondly you ask for sources/links etc. and give a half baked argument ....




3- Only to ACKNOWLEDGE the very thing you asked for the esteemed member to prove to you ... and now the debate is not -- that the AESA is "operational or not" --- It's about the number of TWR modules on Chinese based AESA's --





I mean, seriously -- your a senior member dude, atleast have some quality to your posts and stick to an argument -- all of us know how to use google and we can in the same way data mine our way to post page after page of irrelevant information that serves no purpose to the topic on hand ....


SU-30 MKI does not feature an AESA, it features the BARS PESA radar (as of now, however after the Super Sukhoi upgrades (if they are done) some SU-30's will feature AESA's)

The argument is based expert analysis easily available Internet

You just turning around thing's Just prove your point

Kindly go through my post throwly

 

[abdulbarijan]

The argument is based expert analysis easily available Internet

You just turning around thing's Just prove your point

Kindly go through my post throwly

I have gone through your post quite thoroughly and I ask this simply ...

Do you believe an AESA is operational in PLAAF ?? ... because you said that YOU DID NOT in the first posts of yours, yet you were quoting articles that assumed that an AESA was operational on J-10B --- as I have quoted to show you in my previous post ...

So which is it ??

and by the way, the very forum posts which you discard today were posting about a program then referred to as J-XX and J-2X around 2009/10 time frame and I remember Indian members on this very forum making fun of such posts and giving numbers like atleast 2018/20 for which China would be able to get a 5th gen platform in nothing more then the prototype stage and we all know the story that followed .... then came the doubters who questioned the authenticity of the pictures being posted --- and then came in the fans of western and Russian equipment who "analyzed" on how pathetic the jet is .... and here we are today ....

So please avoid the same script we have seen over and over again ... it almost always ends up in an embarrassment for many who are just too ignorant to notice that times have changed ...

 

[My-Analogous]

I have gone through your post quite thoroughly and I ask this simply ...

Do you believe an AESA is operational in PLAAF ?? ... because you said that YOU DID NOT in the first posts of yours, yet you were quoting articles that assumed that an AESA was operational on J-10B --- as I have quoted to show you in my previous post ...

So which is it ??

and by the way, the very forum posts which you discard today were posting about a program then referred to as J-XX and J-2X around 2009/10 time frame and I remember Indian members on this very forum making fun of such posts and giving numbers like atleast 2018/20 for which China would be able to get a 5th gen platform in nothing more then the prototype stage and we all know the story that followed .... then came the doubters who questioned the authenticity of the pictures being posted --- and then came in the fans of western and Russian equipment who "analyzed" on how pathetic the jet is .... and here we are today ....

So please avoid the same script we have seen over and over again ... it almost always ends up in an embarrassment for many who are just too ignorant to notice that times have changed ...

I also feel the same and he should be responsible more but any how this what this forum is for that we have to learn from each other

 

[Hell hound]

Found it interesting PAF Mirage 3 is going AESA.....

sir jee khuda ka khuf karien

 

[Quwa]

Ultimately the PAF will equip the Block-III with a Chinese AESA. Air Commodore Khalid Mahmood seemed pretty familiar with a system currently in development, and hinted that it'd offer a substantial performance upgrade over the current KLJ-7.

 

[Akasa]

Like I Predicted These Are Forum's Based Sources Not Authentic ones

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.

These documents and figures are not from any forum but the companies themselves. Ironically, the rebuttal that you posted is from a personal blog, and while it does seem that the author has a very informed opinion regarding the Chinese AESA systems, none of the theories are grounded in authoritative data or numbers. However, it is an interesting read for a change.

Russia's Zhuk-AE AESA is not yet in service. The first platform featured to incorporate this system is the MiG-35, which has thus far appealed to no customers, including the Russians themselves. Thus, the first Russian fighter that will have a dedicated AESA will be the PAK FA.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

sir jee khuda ka khuf karien

Bas bachay jamna baqi reh gaya Mirage k lye ... Baqi to sab kr liya hai.

 

[A2Z]

Well if PAF must go for AESA asap but did the post say that Mirage III is getting AESA? If yes why bhai aren't we phasing them out?