antonius123
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
As an example, the difference in the max detection range between the APG-63(v9) (mechanically scanned) and the APG-83 SABR (electronically scanned) is 40%.
The strength of AESA is lower side lobe even at max power v a PESA, LPI and detection range, jam resistance is all a consequence of it.
Also, clutter rejection is a function of compute resources (and antenna) the more CPU you throw at it the lower your clutter rejection threshold is ..and therefore you improve your detection probability.
Dont compare APG-63 with APG-83, compare these to SU-35's irbish in term of detection range or J-16's AESA in term of both detection and LPI.
But all this is a moot point, a 4th GEN fighter carrying fuel tanks and ordnance isn't going to have a low RCS - regardless of how small the aircraft is..
Of course if you are talking about true stealth fighter, external carriage wont be able to make fighter really stealthy; but 4th generation with low RCS still end up with lower RCS in spite of tank missile etc esp from frontal direction.
So still 4th gen fighter with lower RCS have better chance to detect another th gen with higher RCS assuming they all have the same radar capability and carry the same external load.
Your final objection on AMRAAM range is valid but like I said before a Meteor or PL 15 launched at the edge of its envelope isn't going to hit a modern 4.5 GEN fighter packed with defensive aids (jammers and decoys)
and certainly not an F-15 that can loiter higher than any other aircraft and see further than them all.
True for Meteor.
But PL-15 radar is AESA, hence good luck if you wanna try to jamm or decoy it... will never work.