JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[gambit]

there is any possibility to detect stealthy aircraft or helicopter on radar if yes then how many countries have this tech ????????????

Yes...There is such a technology. It is called 'radar'. Not a joke.

 

[farhan_9909]

their is nothing like 100% stealth

it means the stealthy fighter/chopper can be detected but not from long distance compare to non stealth fighters

 

[air marshal]

 

[khurasaan1]

there is any possibility to detect stealthy aircraft or helicopter on radar if yes then how many countries have this tech ????????????

I guess not more than 3 countries....US, Russia and China and maybe somewhat Israel.....

 

[krash]

I guess not more than 3 countries....US, Russia and China and maybe somewhat Israel.....

Its about the range of detection not detection itself.......All radars can detect the stealth 'demon' planes.

 

[abaseen99]

dear mastan khan or nabil put glance on my question

 

[niaz]

there is any possibility to detect stealthy aircraft or helicopter on radar if yes then how many countries have this tech ????????????

Have come across a passive radar detection system called Kolchuga manufactured by Ukraine. Apparently it can detect stealth aircraft by triangulation of emissions of the radar equipment of the aircraft itself and of the disturbance produced in the atmosphere by hot gasses of the engine of the flying object. Iran claims to have purchased this system.

There is another system called VERA developed by the Czechs that performs similar function. Such a system would be immune to jamming as being 'passive' it does not emit any radar beam. However, since none has actually been used in a combat environment, it is difficult to prove or disprove the producer’s claims

 

[husn25]

How can a country which doesnt have stealth jet can make a radar that can detect a stealth jet? I mean how can they test that radar? Its not just that you make a radar and that can detect stealh jet. A lot of tests are needed. What object are they testing their radar on?

 

[bc040400065]

Interesting to note from the video that 117 is different from SP17. Also not SP25, the highest SP# I have seen.

Sir i think PAC does not include the first 10 in the SP list because they came directly from china. So i think the PAC SP#1 is 111. So SP17 is 127 and SP25 is 135.

 

[Machoman]

did we receive any Jf-17 from china yet?

 

[AdelAhmad]

It is very essential that we develop our own technology and hardware. We need engineers, scientist and policy makers for self-reliance.

Support Pakistan Armed Forces against enemy of Islam & Pakistan. The propaganda machine of enemy is working against Pakistan and Pakistan Armed Forces

 

[Manticore]

more info from eagle hannon




Bit of exageration here and there. I tried to carefully mention with reasons of J-11 and also mentioned, the source for this particular one is NOT Pakistani.

Block II configurations were layed down since last September (2010). I did mention them in my earlier posts.

A swash plate AESA was in testing till 2011, January and was to be redied till the planned visit of Prime Minister Gillani. However, I think the media is exagerating about 50 numbers in weeks. Impossible. I can tell that Aicrafts will be fitted with sensors and electronics in batches of 5. If they take 2 weeks per batch (fitting, testing), how will they complete 50? in 6 months makes more sense.

One thing I want to clear is, that while I am sure the sensors wil be fitted in JF-17s in Chingdu, I did not ask if all the said 50 will be flown here or a few batches to have the engineers trained and rest of the work being done at Kamra.

FC20 was indeed praised in best words and FC20 inshallah will be announced soon. I was told 34 as a first order. Deliveries should begin by december or Jan next year.

There are serious exagertion mentioned for JF-17s, RETRACTABLE IFR? Till last news, it was NOT retractable. RAM Coating is a definate.

I was being told that A darter is a serious possibility as the vendor has no problem with its integration on a chinese platform. PAF at present has the problem because Denel Dynamics wants PAF to share develpment cost. Till then PL9C is the standard WVR missile on all Chinese Platforms.

HOBS?? May be after this SRAAM issue matures.

 

[Manticore]

Alan Warnes on twitter
Three pak air force JF-17s will route from izmir to italy (pratica?) around 12 or 13 june bound for le Bourget.


[info from another forum, i havent confirmed it myself]

 

[gambit]

Have come across a passive radar detection system called Kolchuga manufactured by Ukraine.

First...There is no such thing as a 'passive' radar system. Radar detection is a two-part process: transmit and receive. Absent either and there is no 'radar'. Whether either part is under the control of a single operator is a different issue and that is where the misunderstanding and label 'passive radar' came from.

Apparently it can detect stealth aircraft by triangulation of emissions of the radar equipment of the aircraft itself and of the disturbance produced in the atmosphere by hot gasses of the engine of the flying object. Iran claims to have purchased this system.

There is another system called VERA developed by the Czechs that performs similar function. Such a system would be immune to jamming as being 'passive' it does not emit any radar beam. However, since none has actually been used in a combat environment, it is difficult to prove or disprove the producer’s claims

Both the Kolchuga and the VERA have been discussed here before, or at least the basic principles of them. Both systems are 'bi-static' radar system, which is where the transmitter and receiver are physically and geographically distinct from each other.

Here...

If the transmitter is the typical radar system, which is 'mono-static' meaning one antenna does the job of transmit and receive, the amount of echo power that it will pick up will be at least an order of magnitude less than the amount of echo power that is reflected AWAY from it.

But in a 'bi-static' radar system, the transmitter does exactly just that -- transmit -- while the many receiver stations are the ones who will pick up the majority of echo power. Due to the laws of physics, Receiver A will receive less echo power than Receiver B, but if there is another receiver that is directly behind the target, we have what is called 'back-scatter' radar, which is category of 'bi-static' radar systems, and will offer the greatest odds, not certainty, of detecting 'stealth' aircrafts.

The Kolchuga, VERA, and the US Silent Sentry systems uses 'illuminators of opportunity', meaning the 'transmit' part of radar detection is not under their control. Those 'illuminators of opportunity' are television, radio, and cellular signals that are plentiful in dense population areas. This is the source of confusion and misunderstanding that gave the lay public the wrong label 'passive radar'. I do not care what the popular press and commentators may say. I only care that technically speaking, there is no such thing as a 'passive radar' system. They should be called 'passive' sensors because that is exactly what they do: they pick up echoes from aircrafts that deflects those TV, radio, and cellular signals.

The major problem of these passive sensor systems are obvious: structural. We need geographically distinct transmitters and receivers throughout the area of intended coverage.

In the above example, Transmitters 1 and 2 could be those TV, radio, and cellular sources of opportunity.

If the system depends on 'illuminators of opportunity' such as TV, radio, and cellular transmitters, then an obvious vulnerability exist: electricity. Desert Storm is instructive in that the US attacked electrical power stations and this tactic will at least produce serious passive sensory coverage gaps because the receivers are deprived of those TV, radio, and cellular signals that they depended upon.

 

[abaseen99]

i think the radar working on the same system which is use before in ptcl called microwave system in microwave system dish to dish comunication and radio system in radio system there are transmiter and reciever and modulater and demodulater when from station A send a signal this signal called radio frq in radio frQ also generat two other frequencies which is called F1 AND F2 when station B collect this radio frq station B send F3 AND F4 FRQ if station B send F5 AND F6 FRQ it means that there is problem in station B.....................and may b i m not sure but the aesa radar working on uhf basis or litel bit defferent because on uhf system in ptcl 72 sub scriber in one time speach if this tech use in AESA RADAR so they will b detect 72 points . correct me if im wrong. thanks