JF-17 Block III's proposed AESA Radar KLJ-7A

[grey boy 2]

Is this an AESA radar or PESA radar?

AESA

 

[!eon]

what is advantage of this ?

Advantages of AESA radars

 

[Faiez]

Advantages of AESA radars

thanks, very informative video...

 

[Jungibaaz]

LPI, TWS, AA, AG, SAR, ECM, ECCM, DL, NC, +MTBF -MTTR, +SA,

And now we speak in code, I chuckled a lot at this sir.

Got this much through google :

SAR = Specific absorption rate
ECM = Electronic Countermeasures.
ECCM = Electronic Counter Countermeasures.
+MTBF = positive mean time before failure, that's a common figure in electronics.
-MTTR = reduced mean time to repair.

The rest:

LPI - Low Probability of Intercept. It's one of the great advantages of AESA, it keeps the enemy's RWR (radar warning receiver) cold and off your trail.
DL- Data link.
SAR- Synthetic Aperture Radar, not your definition.
TWS - Track while scan, it's self-explanatory. It's good for dealing with multiple targets, radar can perform more than one task at once, allows you to track current targets while scanning for any new at the same time.
AA/AG- Air-to-Air, Air-to-Ground.
SA- Situational Awareness.

 

[Faiez]

The rest:

LPI - Low Probability of Intercept. It's one of the great advantages of AESA, it keeps the enemy's RWR (radar warning receiver) cold and off your trail.
DL- Data link.
TWS - Track while scan, it's self-explanatory. It's good for dealing with multiple targets, radar can perform more than one task at once, allows you to track current targets while scanning for any new at the same time.
AA/AG- Air-to-Air, Air-to-Ground.
SA- Situational Awareness.

Don't all radars have that?
Didn't know these were like optional luxury items on higher end jets...

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Don't all radars have that?
Didn't know these were like optional luxury items on higher end jets...

It's a "luxury" when you're making fighters at your own backyard with your folks eating Chapati and Chana, while not providing Champagne and Caviar for the most well-to-do folks and at the same time not providing the "luxury" of little privacy of a restroom to your about-to-be-wed brides...

 

[Basel]

Hope the GaNs TR will be matured with Chinese tech firms soon so the TR modules will be replacesd as GaNs are power efficient and known to my knowledge they are cheap as well.

A question arise when i read the specifications as compare to other AESA it tracks only 16 targets and simultaneously engage 4 where as I have read it somewhere around a figure of 64 target tracking. If its right how this could be improved ? with the improvement of its processing system ??

I agree that its tracking capability is lower then similar systems, at least 24-30 target tracking and engagement of 6-8 targets is what PAF needs because in net centric war it allows older jet and new UCAVs to fly with BVR missiles as force multiplayers with AESA JFT

Detection is when a body is above a certain threshold.

Tracking is when the (detected) body is assigned a queue to be updated with certain target resolutions. If 10 bodies are detected and if the system is capable enough, all 10 bodies will become 10 tracking targets. The problem then becomes resource allocation. The more queued bodies, the lower the target resolutions per target. Those resources are processor cycles, memory space, and display area.

In the classic mechanical antenna system, the reason tracking targets are less than detected bodes is because of the fixed mechanical movement of the antenna. The beam traverses a known path: back/forth.

If the pilot selects 4 out of 10 bodies for tracking, the radar computer must remember which four bodies and where each is in relation to each antenna sweep cycle.

For example...

Say the pilot chose 4 out of 10 bodies for tracking. Two on his starboard and two on port. Now the antenna has to run itself fully back/forth in order to update the pilot of those 4 targets.

Now say the pilot chose 4 out of 10 bodies for tracking, but all four are on his starboard. Now the antenna has to cycle (sweep) only to starboard.

In theory, there is no limit to how many bodies can be queued to become targets. Ten out of 10 or 100 out of 100. But in practice, limits to resources demands the radar design to have lower tracking targets from detected bodies. If the update time between multiple tracking targets is too long, the missiles launched may not acquire those multiple targets. If the designer chose too low a figure, like 2 tracking out of 10 detected bodies, he limits the pilot on the combat capability and increases the odds of losing that pilot and fighter aircraft.

A PESA system is superior to the classical mechanical system in the sense that the single beam can move thru all 10 targets much faster. But this is still a single beam with sequential movements.

On the other hand, an AESA system can create multiple beams to track multiple targets quite literally simultaneously. Say the pilot detected 10 bodies and designate 4 for tracking. But since the system can create multiple beams, why not 10 beams for 10 bodies ? In theory, yes, but in reality, the quantity of beams is limited by array size and software choreography. If the array is designed, including software, to produce 4 simultaneous beams, that is still far better than the PESA system because the pilot is seeing 4 target updates at the same time, compares to sequential like the mechanical and PESA systems.

Another advantage of the AESA system is that the pilot can switch one beam to become a communication signal, telling his companions of what he found. Or he can designate one beam to ground mapping while monitoring airborne targets just in case they become threats.

The flexibility of the AESA system is limited to only two items: software and array size.

Every country can perform cost/benefits analyses. From that perspective, it is telling that not single American fighter is going PESA. If the performance and capabilities gap between PESA and AESA is not that great, that cost/benefits analysis would have the AESA system confined to top line fighters like the F-22 and F-35, and PESA to older F-15, F-16, and F-18. Instead, the US is moving every fighter in inventory to AESA as fast as budget allocation allows.

Detection and Tracking in an AESA system is far superior in every aspects of the two modes.

What is you opinion about AESA for JFT, th Chinese one shown or any other western AESA like Vixon or Reaven from Selex?

Which one you think will be better in terms of capabilities Chinese or Selex?

How big boost it will be for PAF for facing IAF?

 

[Dazzler]

LPI, TWS, AA, AG, SAR, ECM, ECCM, DL, NC, +MTBF -MTTR, +SA,

Low probability of intercept
Track while scan
Air-air
Air-ground
Synthetic aperture radar
Electronic countermeasure
Electronic counter-countermeasure
Datalink
Mean time between failure
Mean time to recover
Situation awareness


Modes

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Low probability of intercept
Track while scan
Air-air
Air-ground
Synthetic aperture radar
Electronic countermeasure
Electronic counter-countermeasure
Datalink
Mean time between failure
Mean time to recover
Situation awareness


Modes

In our day, the band drum rolled, and then Tariq Aziz said, yeh cooler app ka hua!

 

[SQ8]

In our day, the band drum rolled, and then Tariq Aziz said, yeh cooler app ka hua!

Aap ka howa kiun ke sara masla AESA ke saath cooler ka hi tha.

 

[Zarvan]

Aap ka howa kiun ke sara masla AESA ke saath cooler ka hi tha.

Can this AESA be fitted into BLOCK 1 and BLOCK II in future upgradation ???

 

[SQ8]

Can this AESA be fitted into BLOCK 1 and BLOCK II in future upgradation ???

It if uses similar power levels and the same power fittings, yes it can be.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Aap ka howa kiun ke sara masla AESA ke saath cooler ka hi tha.

You don't let any innuendo pass do you, sharp cookie!

 

[monitor]

for the first time in 20 years, an active antenna radar (AESA) for fighter aircraft is presented to the Zhuhai Airshow by a Chinese industrialist.
Given its small size (~ Ø600 mm) and its official reference, it is likely that the KLJ-7A is developed for the Block III version of JF-17, just considering replacing its current radar by an AESA radar .

If confirmed, the KLJ-7A will provide about 55% more sensing remote Pakistani aircraft upgraded, giving a tactical advantage very interesting and will allow him to use other types of long-munition scope.

We still know little about this new AESA radar in Chinese, as its weight average transmit power, MTBF or the type of materials (GaAs or GaN) MMIC used for example.

However, we know that it can track 15 targets and engage four simultaneously in air-air mode, 10 against and 2 for its mechanical scanning predecessor. The radar also has at least 11 modes including SAR imagery, Air-ground mode and Air-Mer.



In these photos taken in preview at NRIET stand, we can see three modules in the back of the radar - the food, the computer and the cooling cell. The antenna module and calculators are cooled by liquid, such as what is marked on the case.

The most onboard radar in China, whether for fighter planes and AWACS, developed by the Institute 14 (NRIET), Institute 38 or 607. Institute The first two are subsidiaries of Chinese electronics group ECCC, while the latter is a subsidiary of the AVIC aeronautics group.

Radars J-10, J-11B and J-15, for example, are designed by the NRIET, and the J-16 by the Institute 607. If the rumors are true and the new radar J-20 is actually developed the NRIET, we can probably learn during this Exhibition in Zhuhai, where the presence of J-20 is now confirmed by the army of the Chinese air.

The case forward.

Henry K.

 

[airborne77]

LPI: Low probability of intercept
TWS:Track while scan
A/A: Air-air
A/G:Air-ground
SAR: Synthetic aperture radar
ECM: Electronic countermeasure
ECCM:Electronic counter-countermeasure
DL: Datalink
MTBF:Mean time between failure
MTTR:Mean time to repair
SA: Situational awareness



We missed NC...or is it NCTR you were referring to?

Secondly, can some one elaborate how AESA is used as DL?...any source, if you can refer to, would be appreciated.
Thanks