J-31 stealth fighter designed for export, says PLA admiral

[That Guy]

Truth is china's aerospace industry needs maturity and they need some help. Reason why they is a proposal to by su 35 fighter jets.

That's not the same as actually buying them.

Do you know how many the proposal indicated? 24-48, with an option to buy more in the future. China wanted to reduce it even further, but Russia refused to do so.

The Chinese only care about it's technology, they don't care about actually buying the damn things.

 

[Fattyacids]

Truth is china's aerospace industry needs maturity and they need some help. Reason why they is a proposal to by su 35 fighter jets.

The truth is india's troll industry needs more maturity and they need some psychiatric help. They bashed China's aerospace capability, they called themselves supa power, but they couldn't even make their own fighter jet.

 

[Akasa]

Naval radars and Awacs radars are not the topic we are discussing here, they are bulky are in a different league together.

We are discussing fighter aircraft AESA radar.

Phazotron Zhuk AE/ASE :Assessing Russia's First Fighter AESA

The Zhuk AE developed for the MiG-35 and legacy MiG-29 upgrades is the first Russian Active Electronically Steered Array (AESA [Click for more ...]) antenna equipped radar to be disclosed publicly. The manufacturer, NIIR Phazotron, has released a considerable volume of technical literature detailing the design philosophy and technology employed in this radar. This paper explores, in radar engineering terms, antenna and transmit receive channel related design features, and the cardinal performance parameters for this radar. While this pre-production radar operates at the lower end of the X-band and has a lower transmit receive channel count than Western radars of similar aperture size, it delivers power-aperture performance superior to all but the very latest Western small aperture fighter radars. The Zhuk AE employs lower density liquid cooled quad channel transmit receive module packaging technology which is comparable to first generation US AESA designs.

A parametric analysis and power aperture modelling is performed on the proposed Zhuk ASE, which is a scaled up version of the Zhuk AE following the model of the Zhuk MSFE built for the Flanker. The Flanker sized Zhuk ASE radar with existing Russian transmit receive module technology will deliver around 60 percent higher raw power aperture performance compared to US APG-79 (F/A-18E/F BII) and APG-81 (JSF) class radars, and if fitted with transistor technology permitting 15 Watts/channel or more, as proposed by NIIR Phazotron, it will outperform the N035 Irbis-E (Su-35BM) and all currently deployed US fighter radars other than the APG-77(V)2 (F-22A Raptor). The earliest feasible IOC for the Zhuk ASE on the Flanker is estimated at 2010.

Phazotron Zhuk AE: Assessing Russia's First AESA


Airshow China 2012: Russia showcases AESA radar with view to Chinese co-operation

Airshow China 2012: Russia showcases AESA radar with view to Chinese co-operation - IHS Jane's 360

Interesting thing the article mentions is that Russia is vying to help chinese in AESA technology.

Sure, Russia may be vying to help China in AESA technology, but China is rejecting it for the very reasons mentioned in the above post.

The Zhuk-AE has 500 T/R modules compared to the J-10B's 1152 T/R modules, J-15/11B/16's 1760 T/R modules, and J-20's 1856 T/R modules. The Zhuk-AE is Russia's only airborne AESA radar and yet it did not even enter service.

Meanwhile, China has produced AESA radars for all of its AWACS aircraft, J-11B, J-15, J-16, J-10B, J-20, J-21. China also produces multiple models for competition selection and have competing companies, something which the Russians don't enjoy. China's first AESA entered service long before the Zhuk AE was even built.

China to Get Russian Su-35 Jets in 2014 – Rosoboronexport

China to Get Russian Su-35 Jets in 2014

From the same report that was denied by both Russia and China?

Truth is china's aerospace industry needs maturity and they need some help. Reason why they is a proposal to by su 35 fighter jets.

That report was denied by both countries.

No offense my Chinese friend,but I think that Russian military is ahead of Chinese,not in all aspects but in most.For example in UAV technology China is ahead of Russia,Russia has just begun to devolp Mig Skat.
Your biggest adventage is hardworking,so if you continue to hardwork you will continue to advance in all aspects.

I think both countries have their respective advantages over each other. I was simply replying to a crude and false generalization stemming from a Cold War stereotype.

 

[Akasa]

@cirr we know how much chinese are advanced in copying.

Best of luck for gathering the leaks and stealing of AESA info from the west and Russia.

But the fact remains AESA radar, aircraft engines are crucial tech. which no country gives out nor any country which started the research a decade ago can do it on their own.

Every time chinese say we did this or did that, we get the feeling that chinese are chest thumping their immature techs.

Some new threads related to some minute scientific advancements will not make us jealous nor we do care for it.

It's funny how the Chinese "stole" AESA technology from the West and Russia only to produce radars that outperformed the Russian ones and somehow managed to enter service long before the "original" one was built.

Perhaps China stole India's time machine technology as well. XD

 

[Icewolf]

So now we can violate India airspace without them even knowing?

 

[Black Eagle 90]

Really we have been taking about J-31s induction in PAF by 2018 but we have forgotten that PAC and CAC might also be working on a single engine 5th Generation aircraft.

 

[vK_man]

Sure, Russia may be vying to help China in AESA technology, but China is rejecting it for the very reasons mentioned in the above post.

The Zhuk-AE has 500 T/R modules compared to the J-10B's 1152 T/R modules, J-15/11B/16's 1760 T/R modules, and J-20's 1856 T/R modules. The Zhuk-AE is Russia's only airborne AESA radar and yet it did not even enter service.

Meanwhile, China has produced AESA radars for all of its AWACS aircraft, J-11B, J-15, J-16, J-10B, J-20, J-21. China also produces multiple models for competition selection and have competing companies, something which the Russians don't enjoy. China's first AESA entered service long before the Zhuk AE was even built.



From the same report that was denied by both Russia and China?




That report was denied by both countries.



I think both countries have their respective advantages over each other. I was simply replying to a crude and false generalization stemming from a Cold War stereotype.

PESA's have their advantages too where maintainance ,operations in nuclear war environment or narrowband HPM attacks are underway.

F-22, F-16 Block 60, F-2, Rafale and Mig-35 use AESA.
Su-30MKI and Mig-31 use PESA.

Having said that AESA is not always Synonim of superiority. Su-30 and Mig-31 PESA Radar are much more powerfull than that of the Mig-35.
The Captor radar in the Typhoon wich is mechanical array probably beats them all in range except that of the F-22 (APG-77). AESA has its advantages over all other technologies but as I said due to other factors theres exceptions when your comparing radars for different classes of fighters.
What's the difference between PESA and AESA? - ED Forums

ctive Phased Array Radar (AESA)

With an AESA set, on paper, each transmit/receive module is it's own radar; but you need controllers for them; usually on the count of one for every four modules. So, a F-22 with a 1,500 module AESA array would effectively have 375 radar sets to play with at any one time.

However, there are severe drawbacks to AESA as of the writing of this document (2009). Current yield levels of AESA transmitter/receiver chips is about 60%, leaving the remaining 40% of chips manufactured as defective....at about $2,000 dollars each. And this is factory reliability. By the time the radar set is assembled and run through it's tests, even fewer of the chips work.

This is why many nations continue to pick PESA technology over AESA; because not only are hardware yields higher, but the software that goes with them is far more mature, and the various quirks are well-known, even if the PESA sets do require more maintenance (magnetrons and waveguides) over AESA ones.
Low Probability of Intercept Radars Explained

Which brings us to the next issue. I don't think GaAs based AESA is the way of the future due to its power requirements and heat emissions. Despite the advantages of AESA, the great heat and power means the plane will be saddled with heavier supporting equipment even though the radar itself can be made lighter. This means more powerful and heavier transformers, which you cannot shortcut for weight since they depend on ferrite cores, as well as refrigeration.

It is better to leap the entire GaAs generation into GaN or Gallium Nitride, which uses less power and wastes less energy as heat. GaN also has very big potential applications in commerce in the telecom MMIC business and in the LCD flat screen business, and this is one field Chinese industries are also jumping aggressively headlong.

China's jump into AESA in some applications may be as a result of another deficiency. Unlike the Russians, the Chinese may have trouble producing TWTs (Traveling Wave Tubes) of enough size and power for large PESAs. (A TWT is something like a Klystron or Magnetron). So going into solid state T/R modules may be in fact be easier, though more expensive.
http://www.*********************/air-force/any-aesa-radar-development-projects-china-3351.html

Plus operations of AESA are tricky and can produce real headaches for maintainence guys .AESA has its advantages ,but there are disadvantages also.But in future AESA will mature as a technology,but currently it is costly and maintaince intensive though it has advantages.In 15-30 years PESA will be obsolete.

 

[vK_man]

“Low power PESA technology offers significant advantages over alternative architectures such as the power hungry AESA (active electronically scanned array) technology being used in other e-scan radars,” Mark Radford said. “PESA technology is simple, though tricky to design in the first instance, but once the e-scan module is manufactured it can be used symmetrically on both the transmit and receive channels to achieve excellent sidelobe rejection, a key radar parameter; and it requires very low power consumption leading to low internal heating and hence high reliability.”

“Another benefit of these solid state PESA radars is that during scanning, the radar’s microwave beam is entirely stationary, allowing such systems to detect very small and slow moving targets in extremely cluttered environments,” continued Mark Radford. “This improves their detection capabilities and reduces the false alarm rate. Contrast this with mechanically rotating radars, where the reflected signals received by the radar are always blurred by the continuous rotational movement of the antenna.”
BATTLESPACE - Exhibition News

Replacing a mechanically scanned array with a fixed AESA mount (such as on the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet) can help reduce an aircraft's overall radar cross-section (RCS), but some designs (such as the Eurofighter Typhoon) forgo this advantage in order to add the limits of mechanically scanning to the limits of electronic scanning and provide a larger angle of coverage.
http://avionicsdepo.blogspot.in/2010/12/active-electronically-scanned-array.html

few things about pesas ...

 

[BigDaddyWatch]

@cirr we know how much chinese are advanced in copying.

Best of luck for gathering the leaks and stealing of AESA info from the west and Russia.

But the fact remains AESA radar, aircraft engines are crucial tech. which no country gives out nor any country which started the research a decade ago can do it on their own.

Every time chinese say we did this or did that, we get the feeling that chinese are chest thumping their immature techs.

Some new threads related to some minute scientific advancements will not make us jealous nor we do care for it.

Chinese tech is still better then Indian tech which is NO tech at all. And do you have sources or evidence for your claims that China "stole" the AESA radar designs ? Or are you just full of BS. And aren't Indians chess thumping all over the internet and this forum about their country with far fewer achievements then China so far.

 

[GR!FF!N]

No hard fillings guys,but the prospect of buying costly 5th gen aircraft is really low..tell us,how many countries can afford these costly jets..even if some small country has the capability,they can't maintain a large fleet of these.Plus USA's F-35 will be supplied majority of these countries.Others,which are influenced by Russia will buy Pak-Fa(remember,around 600 is going to be exported,Potential Customers are : Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Vietnam, Egypt,Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan,Libya,Malaysia and Syria.though none will be hoped to operate more than 2-3 Squadrons).Even Germany and France may include them to joint develop custom fighter jets based on this aircraft.if you tally the users of F-35 along with this list,you may find that there is barely few users left who can actually operate this kind of costly tech.J-31's main customers may become North Korea and Pakistan,apart from Iran may be(though chances are low).so,export this in a large number is somewhat improbable.though China can reduce the cost of this jet within $60-70mil,then it'll be lucrative.all of of 5th gens cost way over $100 mil.

 

[xunzi]

All words are pointlessly debated. We haven't field a 5th gen yet and we don't know how far China is in our engine program. All critics are nonsense because of this unpredictable development. I would like to say, let our complete aircraft do the talking and prove to Western critics and Indian trolls in the future time. No point to talk with them.

 

[siegecrossbow]

I'm sorry. But if Zhang zhaozhong said that the J-31 is designed for export, in all likelihood it will probably enter service with PLAN first. That guy is notorious for making wrong predictions.

 

[applesauce]

I'm sorry. But if Zhang zhaozhong said that the J-31 is designed for export, in all likelihood it will probably enter service with PLAN first. That guy is notorious for making wrong predictions.

this.

now the rest of you please stop the pissing contest

 

[faithfulguy]

Russian tech even though it is rugged is reliable and cheap. Russian Radars are powerful and comparable to any radar in the market.


Regarding avionics Russians are also co operating with India. India do have the experience related to Su 30 MKI. India successfully integrated Israel and European avionics into su 30 MKI and have a decade of experience.

India is the world expert in integrating components from various vendors. That is for sure. Besides China, all of world's major arms exporters export to India.

 

[gambit]

Plus operations of AESA are tricky and can produce real headaches for maintainence guys .AESA has its advantages ,but there are disadvantages also.But in future AESA will mature as a technology,but currently it is costly and maintaince intensive though it has advantages.In 15-30 years PESA will be obsolete.

Not sure what kind of maintenance 'headaches' are you talking about here. Flightline maintenance takes priority, meaning in designing components, ease of remove/replace takes priority. This is known as 'organizational' level. People at this level are neither trained nor expected to delve into the innards of any component. They are to simply troubleshoot any issue down to the sub-system level, pull out the part, and install a replacement. It could be a hydraulic actuator or a flight control computer. They not supposed to dissect the actuator or the computer to find out what went wrong inside that caused problems outside.

It sounds simplistic but actually at the aircraft or organizational level, maintainers do more than just R and R. The greater the integration of sub-systems to produce an aircraft that removes as much as possible the chores of flying from the pilot, the more difficult it is to troubleshoot problems as often sub-systems demands the same data and/or produces the same data for other sub-systems to use. So when a problem does occur as evidenced by a warning light or an anomalous flying condition/response, the trick is to isolate which data that is faulty.

It is at the component repair level -- off flightline -- is where the AESA system will be taken apart and automatic test stations will perform the necessary checks prior to disassembly by the technician. Then if necessary, the part may be sent back to the manufacturer.

Any supposed 'disadvantages' the AESA concept have are far far outweighed by the operational and tactical advantages, especially in the military arena. On the civilian side, in high traffic situations like an airport or even ground car traffic monitoring system, multiple beams and rapid deployments of those beams enhances awareness of every target within radar view and gives the operator increases response time for any traffic conflictions, ground or air. Civil engineers designing a more efficient traffic deconfliction system, fancy phrasing for stop/go lights and roads, will benefit from having the flexibility of an AESA system at their disposal. They can better monitor the rate of vehicle flow and even the sizes of vehicles at any given time of day.

In air combat, having seen the AESA performed under real world condition, I dare say that any PESA-ed fighter might as well signed its own death warrant if it goes up against an AESA-ed opponent.

PESA is done for. It does have its usefulness in certain situations but that is like saying the horse drawn wagon does have its usefulness. If I could get back to aviation today, I would not work on any PESA related project. Pfffttt....