JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[Tempest II]

First, I think the Raptor and the JFT are two VERY separate class planes. I don't think that's even a comparison to discuss here.

I am agreeing with everything you are saying. I figured what you are saying when I saw the image. I went ahead and posted it and said little because I knew it would start a “cyber war”!What you are saying is true but it also remains true that IF the KLJ-7 can DETECT a 1sqm return at 120km, it then will DETECT a 0.004 sqm signature at 30km.

 

[graphican]

motto of the PAF - DCAT,DCAT,and then more DCAT.

What is "DCAT" anyway?

 

[SQ8]

What is "DCAT" anyway?

Dissimilar Air Combat Training.

i.e Two different types of aircraft matched up against each other in ACM(Air Combat Manoeuvring).
Pitting the strengths and weaknesses of each aircraft against each other and understanding how to exploit those.
This is carried out by the PAF within its structure( F-16 vs F-7PG) or with other airforces through their channels (JF-17 vs Su-30, F-16 vs Typhoon) ..etc

 

[Windjammer]

I believe the term is actually DACT..... Dissimilar Air Combat Tactics/Training. ??

 

[DARKY]

This new chart of radar range for jf17 is for klj7v2 which has even greater range then improved klj7's 130km against 5m^2 . I heard the new radar provides jf17 edge over N011m radar of MKI in attack range

JF-17's Radar is a slotted planar array... while Su30MKI has a PESA... which is very big(more than twice the size of JF-17 radar and can radiates about 10times the JF-17 radar in a much larger area(scanned).. Hence the power and aperture product is much-,ore Higher than what JF-17 has.

Many people here argue about Su30MKI having a huge RCS at its disadvantage.. however in almost all of the air-air exercise stimulated and analyzed over the years for both domestic and international... It has been found that MKI always spots the opponents 1st.... yes we are talking of EF2K, F-15, F-16, M2K, Mig29..etc.. inspite of its opponents having a much-much better radar than what JF-17 has and Su30MKI's large size.

There was also an interesting conclusion made about WVR combat which would be hard for people here to digest so I leave it here.

 

[Viper0011.]

I am agreeing with everything you are saying. I figured what you are saying when I saw the image. I went ahead and posted it and said little because I knew it would start a “cyber war”!What you are saying is true but it also remains true that IF the KLJ-7 can DETECT a 1sqm return at 120km, it then will DETECT a 0.004 sqm signature at 30km.

no cyberway here. I don't do personals unless someone does that to me. We are all here to debate and learn from each other so you'll always see elements of truth in my statements. We are talking here so for a lack of a better term, we are cyber-acquaintances or cyber-friends in some cases.

Theoretically and on the paper for stealthy jets other than the F-22, your logic may be correct. The truth is, Raptor is a warehouse of electronics. That adds a huge punch in addition to the lower RCS. I felt like this was the piece that was missing. For other lower RCS planes, your logic may be correct

 

[Viper0011.]

Many people here argue about Su30MKI having a huge RCS at its disadvantage.. however in almost all of the air-air exercise stimulated and analyzed over the years for both domestic and international... It has been found that MKI always spots the opponents 1st.... yes we are talking of EF2K, F-15, F-16, M2K, Mig29..etc.. inspite of its opponents having a much-much better radar than what JF-17 has and Su30MKI's large size.

Absolutely incorrect. F-15 and EF2K.....spotted SU-30 later? My man, were you dealing with the export versions that are dumb-down probably 30-50% of the avionics capability.
EF2K beat the Raptor a couple of times in simulated combat where Raptor wasn't allowed to use BVR. Google it. But both, F-15 and EF2K CAN and WILL spot the SU-30 at the same time or before. IF they are using the right version of avionics!

 

[IceCold]

Not credible. On the other hand, 30 km is well within the WVR regime. Ground level visual horizon is in the low 20s.

Horizon calculator - radar and visual

If you want something a little bit more credible, try this anecdote...

Raptor debuts at Red Flag, dominates skies

Detection and Tracking are different modes of radar operations. Detection is the trespass of a signal over an arbitrary threshold. Tracking involve persistence over time AFTER the target trespass of that threshold. So what this mean is that if the order of modes is: Detection-Tracking-Targeting, then even though the F-22 is 'detected' its signal may not stay above that threshold for long, making 'tracking' problematic and 'targeting' well nigh impossible.

Against 'stealth', the order must be: Tracking-Detection-Targeting.

Track-before-detect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TBD is difficult to implement on an aircraft, especially on a fighter class size aircraft. Basically, the threshold (clutter) is radically lowered to include just about everything. Then that 'everything' is recorded over time. Whatever that moves out of the ordinary is classified as a 'target'. The difficulty lies in data processing because so many things are being processed at anytime within the beamwidth. The solution is enlarge the data processing capability, which is not likely on a fighter, or narrow the beamwidth, which is still problematic because the beamwidth is already narrow at 3-5 deg for most and 2-3 for the more advanced AESA systems.

So even if we grant the Chinese speculation that the F-22 can be 'detected' at 30 km, it still does not make the F-22 a vulnerable target.

What about an AWAC? can it detect F-22 at a distance far enough to pass it on to interceptors?
and let us assume it can, whether that increases the chances of a fighter to track it and actually shoot it down?

 

[Viper0011.]

What about an AWAC? can it detect F-22 at a distance far enough to pass it on to interceptors?
and let us assume it can, whether that increases the chances of a fighter to track it and actually shoot it down?

High power AESA beams that can read and create an image of the smallest signal return with a pattern of movement (reading outbound and inbound and take the differentiator / gaps and out a moving image) ....yes, that's possible theoretically. I've never been in an AWACS to try to do it but theoretically and scientifically the logic is valid. There were some Czech or Russian radars that were two way radars (active forward and passive return), and these was designed for this purpose.

BUT, it'll be slipping In and Out of the Radar. So the AWACS might have to relay the 'proximity' to its interceptors. Which is still as useless and suicidal as a fighter going direct against a Raptor.

Remember, USAF has been testing the Raptor for years to improve it through testing and performance evaluations. I am about 99.9% sure that they had to conduct AWACS based tests on it to see if it'll show up and if it did, how to make it less visible or stealthy.

 

[Dazzler]

i believe those were Tamara/ Veera passive radars (Czeck), also, Ukrainians came up with nifty solution, the Kolchuga.

Warsaw Pact / Russian Emitter Locating Systems / ELINT Systems

 

[ababeel22]

MAN IS THIS A JF17 THREAD IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ONE??

 

[DARKY]

Absolutely incorrect. F-15 and EF2K.....spotted SU-30 later? My man, were you dealing with the export versions that are dumb-down probably 30-50% of the avionics capability.
EF2K beat the Raptor a couple of times in simulated combat where Raptor wasn't allowed to use BVR. Google it. But both, F-15 and EF2K CAN and WILL spot the SU-30 at the same time or before. IF they are using the right version of avionics!

I gave you the a estimated comparison of Su30MKI's radar against JF-17.

You can read about BARS.. the power it is supposed to radiate.... plus the EW package carried by the plane.. It would simply deviate the topic.. If I continue on this... both F-15 and EF2K used Mechanically scanning radars while Su30 had ESA radars.

 

[Viper0011.]

I gave you the a estimated comparison of Su30MKI's radar against JF-17.

You can read about BARS.. the power it is supposed to radiate.... plus the EW package carried by the plane.. It would simply deviate the topic.. If I continue on this... both F-15 and EF2K used Mechanically scanning radars while Su30 had ESA radars.

I am aware of BARS. Not trying to deviate the topic but BARS is F-14's radar with PESA technology. Frankly speaking, it's just not the radar here. The Eagle and EF2K carry PLENTY of other electronics that play a role in detection. These are 'sensitive' electronics and in some cases, they are not sold to ANYONE outside of the US. I can agree with your statement as Red Flag was a pre-set format where certain features of the American aircraft are not utilized to put them under adverse conditions. That's how USAF or USN trains!

Let's PLEASE get back to JFT here. The thread's going off topic now. Please open up a different thread and I won't mind discussing more about this with you.

 

[SBD-3]

KLJ Detection Range
Against F-22 class RCS: 30KM
Against F-16 class RCS: 120KM

 

[gambit]

KLJ Detection Range
Against F-22 class RCS: 30KM
Against F-16 class RCS: 120KM

Be careful with this simplistic claim.

A radar cross section (RCS) depends on these main factors:

- Freq employed
- Power
- Distance
- Target features

Radar Cross Section (RCS)

This is a very complex field that defies simple explanation, and any short treatment is only a very rough approximation.

The chart in that source is that rough approximation. It is based upon ONE fixed variable: The seeking radar.

What it means is that we used the same radar with all the same main factors above to measure some objects to give the readers some scale. Without using the EXACT radar, the next best thing is to use systems that have as close approximations regarding capabilities to each other as much as possible. Then we employ statistical chicaneries from those system differences to justify our presentations.

Can a B-52 have a 1m2 RCS? Absolutely, but at several hundreds kms out. This is where distance is our fix.

The problem lies with the receiver portion of the seeking radar, or the physically distinct receiver antenna, but we will call it 'the receiver' for simplicity.

If the receiver is not as capable as its competitors, instead of the B-52 being 1m2 at 500km, this inferior receiver may have that 1m2 at 490km or even 400km, and this will make the F-22 even closer than 30km. Someday in the future, there will be really good radar that will make the F-22's RCS as 1m2 at 500km.