JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

[nomi007]

sexy look

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

 

[nomi007]

 

[gambit]

@gambit, so what I gather is that KLJ-7 would be able to pick a target once it becomes 3 m2 even say at 200km or any other arbitrary range?

A body's RCS depends on:

- Operating freq
- Energy level
- Distance
- Body complexity

The last item, body complexity, includes how a complex body presents itself to the seeking radar. For any aircraft, the frontal aspect is the lowest. Top and underside views are essentially plates: highest.

So the answer to your question is a general: Yes.

In radar detection, NOTHING is invisible. People have seen me said this many times before. NOTHING is invisible.

But the flagging of a body to become a 'target' is a completely different process. A 'target' is an object of interest, whether it is a man looking at a woman and momentarily focus on her because of her physical attractiveness, or a radar system looking at a field of echoes and focuses on one or a few that produces certain type of attractive characteristics, notably energy level.

So if a system is designed to flag a body at 3 m2 in the X band, then regardless of distance between radar and body, the moment a body's energy return, aka 'echo', rises above 2.99 m2, the body is flagged as an object of interest, aka 'target'. Then as the target maneuvers, momentarily it presents a plate aspect angle to the seeking radar, its energy level will rise above the minimum requirement, making it more attractive to the radar. Assuming the distance between the two have not varied greatly, of course.

Can a system flag at 2 m2 ? Absolutely. How much money do you have ? What this mean is that you will be able to focus on targets further out from your position than your opponent's system can from his position. An advantage every pilot want.

But there is a caveat for this advantage...

Your system must be able to give you at least a 30 secs lead response time over your opponent IN A HEAD ON SITUATION. That means if both of you approaches each other at several hundreds km/h, if you can detect him at a distance that will give you at least 30 secs to plan some kind of reaction, or to execute a planned action, then the technical advantage is money well spent. Thirty secs is actually not a lot of time when both of you approaches each other at several hundreds km/h or even at Mach and this is why pilots trains and trains and trains...Or rather should.

This is also why low radar observability, aka 'stealth', is so desirable. If we have identical radar systems on two aircrafts, but A is shaped for 'stealth', then B will not detect A until much closer than 100 km. All the while A have more than 30 secs to do whatever he wants to do.

 

[Windjammer]

 

[Sinnerman108]

@gambit

Please share some knowledge,

Are you aware of a radar (proverbial) that makes use any thing other than the electro-magnetic spectrum ?

Thanks.

 

[Bilal.]

@gambit

Please share some knowledge,

Are you aware of a radar that makes use any thing other than the electro-magnetic spectrum ?

Only hypothetical devices using quantum entanglement. But calling them radar is a misnomer...

 

[random123]

Hopefully PAC would be producing JF-17 with just Pakistan money...

 

[gambit]

@gambit

Please share some knowledge,

Are you aware of a radar (proverbial) that makes use any thing other than the electro-magnetic spectrum ?

Thanks.

Not that I know of. Am sure there are a lot of theoretical stuff going on with DARPA involved, but from my experience, the word 'radar' have become synonymous with any form of detection not possible by the human eyes, no matter how technically incorrect the association may be.

At the quantum mechanics level = 'quadar' ? Kinda odd rolling off the tongue.

 

[Sinnerman108]

Not that I know of. Am sure there are a lot of theoretical stuff going on with DARPA involved, but from my experience, the word 'radar' have become synonymous with any form of detection not possible by the human eyes, no matter how technically incorrect the association may be.

At the quantum mechanics level = 'quadar' ? Kinda odd rolling off the tongue.

Thanks for that.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

@nomi007

 

[Informant]

Watch your language, I did not ask for any proof, I KNOW WE MADE CONTRIBUTION.

All I said is that THIS IS NOT THE CONTRIBUTION WE MADE. You dont even have to go anywhere else to check the R&D on DSI. Just check the References in these Papers and you will know where the research ON DSI was done. I dont know whats all the fuss in this ??

Im being ozzi these days, cunt is word for friend

DSI was first done by the WHITIES in the US. 90s i believe. The Chinese just love DSI technology. They using it everywhere and it does help in attaining around 150 - 200 kph extra velocity. I will ask about the DSI and return soon but point being i think our effort was there on DSI. The Chinese were on with the project not having DSI intakes. Our insistence was the leading cause behind it being present of the Thunder.

 

[raazh]

Im being ozzi these days, cunt is word for friend

DSI was first done by the WHITIES in the US. 90s i believe. The Chinese just love DSI technology.
I will ask about the DSI and return soon but point being i think our effort was there on DSI.

All is mentioned in the introduction .. NASA researched it in the 1950's.
Pakistanis would definetly have contributed alot, but These papers are on ALREADY developed DSI on JF17; as mentioned in the introduction. For more details see the reference to get an idea of R&D on DSI - (especially 9 and 14)

 

[Informant]

All is mentioned in the introduction .. NASA researched it in the 1950's.
Pakistanis would definetly have contributed alot, but These papers are on ALREADY developed DSI on JF17; as mentioned in the introduction. For more details see the reference to get an idea of R&D on DSI - (especially 9 and 14)

I mentioned the 90s because that is when the actual DSI intakes were used on the F-16. I'm not reading all that. Too much reading.

 

[Munir]

Superstar,

This is not chicken recipe that you print right away----but this is part of development of a weapons systems----normally the technology disclosures come out a little while after the item is in service---and that is for is for items that can be copied just by looking at them----.

I think MastanKhan explains it as it is. De development cycle is 6-10years ahead of what is actually published. When I graduated as an engineer I had to remove 90% of the paper cause it was not allowed to be published....

You consider your self very happy to read these kind of information. Normally it is not open nor do 99% of the people understand

I mentioned the 90s because that is when the actual DSI intakes were used on the F-16. I'm not reading all that. Too much reading.

Maybe you should ask why the F16 was not altered but the did it on JSF.... Because it is not that simple.