J-10 Vs F-16 Technical Comparison

[flanker143]

Originally Posted by jagjitnatt

This is an absurb comment.

BARS was switched to training mode so that US's surveillance equipment couldn't record the operating frequencies of the radar. Because if it did, it could have created a jamming system to jam BARS.
This is the same reason France was reluctant to bring Rafale to US.

The MKI has canards to provide maneuverability and aid in reducing the min flying speed. It adds stability to the aircraft. It has nothing to do with a radar. What were you thinking when you wrote this?
I think you are deserving of the award presented to you by Growler on the SM-2 thread. A competent radar is capable of frequency agility, if the radar has to be turned off for the fear of revealing operating frequencies then an intelligent person can gauge the radar is incapable of frequency agility and prone to jamming. Will the MKI fly into combat with the radar switched off for the fear of revealing "operating frequencies"? As for the canard the MKI isn't a delta wing to benefit from canards like the Typhoon or Rafale the canards were absent from the first 18 planes received by the IAF these were also missing.. the BARS radar.

Quote:
The first batch were 8 Su-30MKs , the basic version of Su-30. The second batch were to be 10 Su-30Ks with French and Israeli avionics. The third batch were to be 10 Su-30MKIs featuring canard foreplanes.
Quote:
Structural changes were required to the forward fuselage to accommodate the larger radar aperture, relocated IRST, aerial refuelling probe and revised avionics. The additional 3,000 lb of empty weight required strengthened undercarriage, dual nosewheels, detail structural changes, and the Su-33's canards were later incorporated. To offset the loss of combat radius due to additional weight the wet portion of the wing was extended to the 13th rib, from the 9th, and a 360 litre tank was added to each vertical tail thus providing a total internal capacity of 22,630 lb (10,250 kg).

MY GOD U YOU ARE THINKING THAT CANARDS HAVE SOMETHING TO WITH THE BARS !!!!!

CAN YOU PLZZ GIVE A CREDIBLE SOURCE FOR THAT !!!

AND FIRST SU30K AND MK'S FLEW WITHOUT BARS !!!! THAT CUD BE JUST AN COINCIDENCE IF IT EVER HAPPENED !!!!!

AND AT NFB..... THAT WAS JUST AN MILITARY EXERCISE BETWEEN THE COUNTRIES NOT AN ACTUAL COMBAT WHERE ONE HAS TO USE ALL UR TECH TO GET AN UPPER HAND !!!!!!

ALSO MISTER CHOCOLATE AMERICAN JETS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO USE THEIR BWR CAPABILITY ... THAT DOES NOT MEAN THEY WONT USE IT IN COMBAT !!! SO SAME APPLIES TO SU30MKI !!!!

I HOPE U UNDERSTAND ME........

 

[jagjitnatt]

I think you are deserving of the award presented to you by Growler on the SM-2 thread.

Thank you for your kind words but no thank you.

A competent radar is capable of frequency agility, if the radar has to be turned off for the fear of revealing operating frequencies then an intelligent person can gauge the radar is incapable of frequency agility and prone to jamming.

Listen girl, BARS is a PESA radar, it works at a fixed frequency. If someone knows what frequencies it works at, then a jamming device can be made to jam the radar.
This applies to all PESA radars, American radars aren't god sent. We have jammer pods that can effectively jam your apg radars in F15, F16 and F18.

The exercise was held in US where US had all the surveillance equipment set up to find these details about BARS.

Will the MKI fly into combat with the radar switched off for the fear of revealing "operating frequencies"? As for the canard the MKI isn't a delta wing to benefit from canards like the Typhoon or Rafale the canards were absent from the first 18 planes received by the IAF these were also missing.. the BARS radar.

So you mean because we will give away our operating frequencies during a combat, we should let you know today itself. How dumb is it??

In a real combat, we'll operate at full power of the radar cause then you won't have 100s of surveillance equipment around us, all of them would be down thanks to R77

About the canards, you seriously believe an aircraft has to be a delta wing shaped in order to take advantage of the canard?
Canards add maneuverability, horizontal stabilization to the airframe. The BARS is a heavy and powerful radar, it is just an assumption that it is because of the radar that structural changes were required. There are lots of ways in which a heavier radar could have been installed without adding canards. Engines could have been shifted forward, wings could have been modified etc.

Canards are here for maneuverability and make MKI the MOST agile aircraft in the world.

 

[dbc]

Listen girl, BARS is a PESA radar, it works at a fixed frequency.

This one statement is enough, you are the King of RADARS. In fact, from this day forth all RADARS should be called jagjitnatt.

 

[jagjitnatt]

This one statement is enough, you are the King of RADARS. In fact, from this day forth all RADARS should be called jagjitnatt.

and all BS will be deathbychocolate..

Enough of your DeathByChocolate. Now let others get back on topic.

 

[dbc]

Thank you for your kind words but no thank you.


Listen girl, BARS is a PESA radar, it works at a fixed frequency. If someone knows what frequencies it works at, then a jamming device can be made to jam the radar.

..just so that people aren't misinformed.

The V Tikhomirov Scientific-Research Institute of Instrument Design (NIIP) N011M Bars is an X-band (8 to 12.5 GHz) multifunction, phased-array radar that incorporates an L-band (1 to 2 GHz) Identification Friend-or-Foe (IFF) channel and a 1 m diameter N11-01M antenna assembly. In full capability configuration (see following) system functionality includes air-to-air, air-to-surface and anti-shipping modes, with the former comprising velocity search, range-while-search, track-while-scan, target identification (spectral and group target resolution), target illumination (for semi-active air-to-air missiles) and close combat search and lock-on. Air-to-surface modes include real beam mapping, terrain mapping with Doppler beam sharpening, synthetic aperture, ground moving target indication, air-to-ground ranging and ground target tracking. Anti-shipping modes include sea surface search, moving target selection and air-to-surface ranging. Of these various modes, spectral air-to-air target identification is believed to be based on engine compressor face returns. As applied to the Su-30MKI, N011M Bars is understood to have been the subject of a spiral development programme that has resulted in Mks 1, 2 and 3 configurations. Here, Jane's sources report the Mk 1 variant as featuring a Russian-sourced computer (variously described as being the Ts101 or Ts200 unit) and as offering air-to-air modes only. N011M Bars Mk 2 is said to make use of the same computer and to offer a 'wider' range of functions including support for up to four simultaneous air-to-air target engagements (using the RVV-AE (NATO Reporting Name 'AA-12 Adder') active radar-guided air-to-air missile) and ground mapping. N011M Bars Mk 3 employs an Indian-sourced, Vetrivale radar computer

N011M Bars (Russian Federation) - Jane's Electronic Mission Aircraft

 

[satishkumarcsc]

DBC,

The Russians were specific that the N-011M Barss must be switched off when they go to the red flag exercises.

India bans Su-30MKI fighters from using radars during 'Red Flag Nellis' exercise

Moscow has previously stated that the MKI's radar frequencies should not be revealed.

We are not people who sign something on paper and not follow it.

And we have veered far off of the topic. It must be a discussion between the KLJ 10 and the APG 68 V9. Why are we discussing Bars and the APG 80?

SABR is far ahead than any of the two and is not on offer to the PAF.

 

[jagjitnatt]

..just so that people aren't misinformed.




N011M Bars (Russian Federation) - Jane's Electronic Mission Aircraft

The very first line of Wiki

A passive electronically scanned array (PESA), contrary to its active counterpart AESA, is a phased array which has a central radiofrequency source (such as a magnetron, a klystron or a travelling wave tube), sending energy into (usually digitally-controlled) phase shift modules, which then send energy into the various emitting elements in the front of the antenna. AESA devices, in contrast, have each of their elements contain its own radiofrequency source. A PESA radar is therefore simpler to construct than an AESA.

In a PESA the modules operate at a single frequency and can not change. It is only in an AESA that each module can have its own frequency. In AESA the modules can be operating at frequencies spread across entire spectrum but that is not possible in PESA

 

[dbc]

DBC,

The Russians were specific that the N-011M Barss must be switched off when they go to the red flag exercises.

India bans Su-30MKI fighters from using radars during 'Red Flag Nellis' exercise



We are not people who sign something on paper and not follow it.

And we have veered far off of the topic. It must be a discussion between the KLJ 10 and the APG 68 V9. Why are we discussing Bars and the APG 80?

SABR is far ahead than any of the two and is not on offer to the PAF.

The discussion started with someone claiming with great authority that PESA radars are better than AESA.

Note: Most people believe that an AESA is definitely better than a PESA or a Mechanically steered Radar. It is not so. There are a lot of PESA radars that are more powerful than most AESA radars. It all depends on the number of T/R modules, and the power output of the radar.

I apologies, I will resist the urge to explain the difference between "radio frequency source" and "frequency" and exit this discussion.

 

[gambit]

It is not so.

What are the prime important characteristics of a radar? Is it the detection range or is it being flexible enough to be upgraded through software? Or is it being resistant to jamming?


PESA as of today can have detection ranges similar to that of an AESA. The AESA does have other advantages like being resistant to jamming, etc etc.

But the main thing is range and detection. This is where Russian PESA are more powerful than European AESA radars.

Irbis-E is a mechanically steered PESA radar which has more range than western AESA systems in F-35, F-16 and F-18. It rivals the APG-77 in range.

Depends on the mission.

For volume search which naturally involve long range, we prefer a 3 deg minimum beamwidth. Pave Paws is for thousands of km range so its beamwidth is about 2.2 to take beam dispersal into consideration. For example...

Radar Tilt Management

Beam diffusion, or the tendency of the radar beam to widen with distance from the antenna, is directly related to antenna diameter; the smaller the diameter, the more the radar energy is diffused with distance. The typical general aviation radar has a 10-inch antenna and a 10-degree beam; radars found in corporate airplanes typically have 12-inch antennas with an 8- degree beam. The 30-inch antennas in airliners yield a 3-degree beam.

Another important factor is 'resolution cell'...

Definition: radar resolution cell

The volume of space that is occupied by a radar pulse and that is determined by the pulse duration and the horizontal and vertical beamwidths of the transmitting radar. Note: The radar cannot distinguish between two separate objects that lie within the same resolution cell.

For an AWACS, it does not matter if there is one or ten hostiles coming its way. If there is a threat, the AWACS will exit. So the ability to distinguish multiple targets, or to have a very narrow beam to create small resolution cells, is of secondary importance to volume search and long range detection.

For a fighter aircraft, it is a different story. There are very few omnidirectional radars in operations today. The fighter aircraft forces us to be directional with our radar no matter what, plus we are more space limited than a ground or an AWACS, so that make our antenna smaller than those systems. That mean we might as well make our beamwidth as narrow as possible to have as high target resolution as possible.

So clearly what is the highest importance for the fighter aircraft is not the same for a volume search and long distance radar. The mission dictate our design. But for either one, an AESA offers far more flexibility than any other type. Sometimes being the loudest is not always a good thing. The Russian may compensate for resolution with higher power rating therefore longer detection range, but that would mean he is advertising his location for passive guidance for a flight of low observables that he cannot distinguish inside the large resolution cells his radar is creating, assuming he can detect them in the first place.

 

[KEETARP]

Had this discussion about Training mode of radar before . Why radar operates in Training mode during DACT exercise .
Check this thread

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/60839-exclusive-pics-mki-leaving-france-5.html#post917624

 

[gambit]

I apologies, I will resist the urge to explain the difference between "radio frequency source" and "frequency" and exit this discussion.

No...You cannot resist...Give in to the Dark Side...

 

[sancho]

Ok guys, can we stick to topic again?

 

[TaimiKhan]

I apologies, I will resist the urge to explain the difference between "radio frequency source" and "frequency" and exit this discussion.

Well that is what ultimately happens.

You aren't the first one to experience that.

 

[ali786]

where has the j-10 V f-16 thread gone?

 

[hahahaha]

Hahahahaha!!! Radar, PESA, AESA.. you idiot i am smart or I am idiot you are smart but no F16 vs J 10