JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[The Accountant]

Man

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feature/125860/rafale-in-combat:-“war-for-dummies”.html
Rafale pilots are also very complementary about their SPECTRA self-protection suite, which is of critical importance as France does not have any aircraft dedicated to the Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) missions. “SPECTRA allowed us to begin operations over Libya the very same day the political decision was taken, and to fly deep into Libyan territory without an escort,” says one pilot, adding that “the Americans also flew in, but only after they had fired 119 Tomahawks to take out Libyan air defenses.”

http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/03/29/europeans-putting-on-a-fighter-plane-demo-in-libya/
Rafale jets fired the symbolic first shot against Gaddafi at 17.45 Libyan time on 19 March, destroying four tanks on the outskirts of Benghazi. The strike took place three hours before the US and UK began bombarding Gaddafi anti-aircraft bases, with the French ministry of defence swiftly posting a set of Rafale pictures on its website.

Not just that.

MACE XIII - Slovakia. NATO vs S-300 exercise in 2012.
=================
Slovakia’s sole S-300PMU (SA-10 ‘Grumble’) surface-to-air missile system was the main actor during the ‘Trial MACE XIII” electronic warfare exercise held in Slovakia from 16-27 April. The S-300PMU and its attendant ‘Flap Lid’ and ‘Clam Shell’ radars were sited at Nitra, with support provided by a Slovakian Air Force L-39ZAM from the 2nd Squadron at Sliac that flew as a target for the SAM crews. The exercise allowed NATO air arms to practise tactics to deal with the so-called ‘double digit’ air defence threat, while ground and flying personnel alike were exposed to operations under electronic jamming conditions.

Sliac air base hosted the tactical air contingent, which consisted of French Air Force Mirage 2000Ds and Rafale Bs, Royal Danish Air Force F-16AMs, a NATO E-3A and a French Air Force E-3F, a Royal Norwegian Air Force Falcon 20, resident Slovakian Air Force MiG-29AS/UBS, and

Slovakian L-39ZAMTurkish Air Force F-4E-2020s from 111 Filo. Also involved was the rarely seen Learjet 35A D-CARL of German firm GFD, fitted with two Cassidian EW pods, again operating from Sliac.

Aircraft involved in ‘Trial MACE XIII’ included 111 Filo ‘Panthers’ F-4E-2020 from Eskisehir equipped with an Elta EL/L-8222 electronic countermeasures pod. Special markings to commemorate 50,000 Phantom flying hours within the unit were applied during the exercise.
=================

https://twitter.com/x/status/641570657566900224

During NATO Mace XIII in Slovakia, a Rafale B flew unmolested over a S300 radar and was the only type engaged in the exercise able to do it.

Out of all the aircraft involved, only the Rafale-B succeeded against the S-300. If the Rafale did well against the S-300, it would have naturally done well against the older Libyan SAMs. Perhaps they will be more careful against the S-400 and S-500.

Man read carefully ... Outskirts of benghazi ... What does outskirt means ? Outskirt means that it is away from main city and most probably they have computed the high threat zone ...

Unlike your believe war is not fan boy stuff even if frenchs were sure they could jam the SAM they will not take the risk for 4 tanks ...

They did it in outskirts away from SAM threat ...

Regarding exercise do you want me to post PAF f16 defeated typhoon or pakistani mirrages take on against f15s in exercise or pakistani defeating f14 tomcat with old aircrafts ... Exercises are exercizes kid ...

 

[Tank131]

@gambit, be careful, you may get arrested for murder cuz u are killing it on this thread! Lolz

 

[randomradio]

We want to see a few credible sources that says I can have five times the beam quantity over available T/R modules.

It's so simple.

Take 1 T/R module. Put 5 radiating elements in it in a line configuration. You get 5 beams.
In analog system, the 5 beams are similar. In digital system, the 5 beams can all be different since there is an ADC available for each element, unlike in analog systems.

You can have a T/R module with 1 radiating element all the way to whatever number you want.

Man

Man read carefully ... Outskirts of benghazi ... What does outskirt means ? Outskirt means that it is away from main city and most probably they have computed the high threat zone ...

Unlike your believe war is not fan boy stuff even if frenchs were sure they could jam the SAM they will not take the risk for 4 tanks ...

They did it in outskirts away from SAM threat ...

Regarding exercise do you want me to post PAF f16 defeated typhoon or pakistani mirrages take on against f15s in exercise or pakistani defeating f14 tomcat with old aircrafts ... Exercises are exercizes kid ...

The radius of action of S-200 is 300Km. For S-75 and S-175, it is up to 40Km.

What do you define as outskirts?

 

[The Accountant]

It's so simple.

Take 1 T/R module. Put 5 radiating elements in it in a line configuration. You get 5 beams.
In analog system, the 5 beams are similar. In digital system, the 5 beams can all be different since there is an ADC available for each element, unlike in analog systems.

You can have a T/R module with 1 radiating element all the way to whatever number you want.



The radius of action of S-200 is 300Km. For S-75 and S-175, it is up to 40Km.

What do you define as outskirts?

This is detection range, which missiles were there and what was the engagement range and for what size of the target and flying at what height?

If SAMs would have been so perfect then every country could have bought 5 to 6 batteries and that's it ...

I can bet that Pakistani mirrages can sneak into your territory from multiple areas undetected provided that there are no AWACS and I hope you know that how difficult it is to detect a low flying target ...

 

[randomradio]

This is detection range, which missiles were there and what was the engagement range and for what size of the target and flying at what height?

The S-200's missile range is 300Km.

Regardless, you will have to come within 10Km of Benghazi to be in the outskirts.

If SAMs would have been so perfect then every country could have bought 5 to 6 batteries and that's it ...

Look up the controversy surrounding the S-300 for Iran and S-400 for Turkey.

No matter how good a SAM system is, you still need fighter jets for patrols.

I can bet that Pakistani mirrages can sneak into your territory from multiple areas undetected provided that there are no AWACS and I hope you know that how difficult it is to detect a low flying target ...

If the Rafales flew low, then they can't detect tanks. Even from high altitude, you need to get very close in order to detect tanks. The Phalcon is advertised up to 50Km.

 

[gambit]

It's so simple.

Take 1 T/R module. Put 5 radiating elements in it in a line configuration. You get 5 beams.
In analog system, the 5 beams are similar. In digital system, the 5 beams can all be different since there is an ADC available for each element, unlike in analog systems.

You can have a T/R module with 1 radiating element all the way to whatever number you want.

Mmmm...Yeah...It is also simple to do basic research.

http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html

The basic building block of any AESA is the Transmit Receive Module or TR Module. It is a self contained package making up one AESA antenna element, and contains a low noise receiver, power amplifier, and digitally controlled phase/delay and gain elements. Digital control of the module transmit/receive gain and timing permits the design of an antenna with not only beam steering agility, but also extremely low sidelobes in comparison with passive ESA and mechanically steered antennas.

See the highlighted?

Because you have no experience in the field, you misinterpreted words and phrases that are common knowledge in that field.

http://blog.bliley.com/understanding-aesa-radar-tech

Unlike a PESA, which uses one transmitter/receiver module, AESA uses many transmitter/receiver modules which are interfaced with the antenna elements and can produce multiple, simultaneous radar beams at different frequencies.

See the highlighted?

PESA have one T/R module that contains multiple elements.

AESA contains many T/R modules where each module, as the APA source said, contains one element plus supporting electronics.

What you described is a PESA system, where almost nobody uses, and as if that was not bad enough, you associated AESA capabilities to PESA, which is absurd.

Here is an illustration of the basic difference between the two methods...

How about another source...???

https://www.ecnmag.com/article/2013...ure-and-phased-array-antenna-characterization

The advantage of active electronically scanned arrays (AESA) is that a separate module is mounted directly on or very near the surface of the antenna for each element in the array unlike the shared transceiver with PESA.

What ECNMAG said is that for AESA there is one element per module, while for PESA there are multiple elements per module.

In trying to extol the technological superiority of the Raffle and SPECTRA, you unwittingly associated an older technology to them.

Leave the thread. You got nothing left.

 

[My-Analogous]

This is sheer 'Indian physics'. And it shows you know nothing about what you are blabbering on.

An ESA radar array create a beam by way of the 'wave superposition' principle. In other words, the main beam is created by the controlled interference of multiple beams from multiple T/R modules.

Like this...

In basic radar antenna principles, there is an inverse relationship between beamwidth and array size.

http://meteorologytraining.tpub.com/14271/css/14271_60.htm

This applies to ESA systems as well. Each set of T/R modules, 5 or 10 or 100, make up an array. The more T/R modules in a set, the narrower the beam.

In a main array of 1000 T/R modules, multiple beams are created from multiple SUB-ARRAYS. The process is called 'sub-array partitioning'.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7181641/

That means there is no way you can have more beams than available T/R modules. The Raffle's AESA array have 1000+ T/R modules but can create 5000 beams is sheer defiance of the laws of nature.

You do not know what you are talking about.

Sir you don't no the vedic science of India they are 3000 BC ( omghaha) ahead of rest of the world. Their radar signal are second to none and need only Indian soil to enhance the range multiple folds

Did someone notice, this thread completed more then 12 years now (April 2006 this baby born)

 

[randomradio]

Mmmm...Yeah...It is also simple to do basic research.

http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html

See the highlighted?

Because you have no experience in the field, you misinterpreted words and phrases that are common knowledge in that field.

http://blog.bliley.com/understanding-aesa-radar-tech

See the highlighted?

PESA have one T/R module that contains multiple elements.

AESA contains many T/R modules where each module, as the APA source said, contains one element plus supporting electronics.

What you described is a PESA system, where almost nobody uses, and as if that was not bad enough, you associated AESA capabilities to PESA, which is absurd.

Here is an illustration of the basic difference between the two methods...

How about another source...???

https://www.ecnmag.com/article/2013...ure-and-phased-array-antenna-characterization

What ECNMAG said is that for AESA there is one element per module, while for PESA there are multiple elements per module.

In trying to extol the technological superiority of the Raffle and SPECTRA, you unwittingly associated an older technology to them.

Leave the thread. You got nothing left.

A T/R module can have 1 or more radiating elements.

The Rafale's operational radar is analog and each T/R module has only 1 element. No different from F-22 or F-35. But the build quality is better. On a 0.55m diameter antenna they have managed to fit in 1100 T/R modules.

If the Rafale's T/R module is used in the F-22, then on a 0.9m dia, you can have as many as 2900 T/R modules. Which means, the LCA Tejas with a 650mm dia antenna can carry as many as 1500 T/R modules.

The French and the Israelis were competing to deliver a radar for the LCA Mk1A. The French offered the Rafale's radar up-sized for the LCA. And the Israelis offered a new radar which was a derivative of the ELTA 2052 radar. Now guess what? The French radar, with a potential for 1500 modules, lost to the ELTA radar which has 512 modules.

So how does 512 modules win against 1500 modules? The answer is only if each T/R module is carrying multiple radiating elements, which is possible if you replace the analog element with a digital element. Even better if the material itself is changed to GaN. From GaN-on-Sic to GaN-on-diamond, you will get various sizes too, which means even more elements.

Antenna * Array * T/R modules * radiating elements on each T/R module = Total radiating elements

Here's an American made AESA module with 4 radiating elements.

But sure, if your T/R module has 1 element only, then it makes sense to call it a T/R module, whereas a T/R module with more than 1 element can be given a new name to differentiate between the two, like a T/R mega-module or something.

Radiating elements are typically multi-packed for the sake of manufacturing. So if you have made an analog T/R module with 1 element since your production process is superior, then awesome. I think everybody in this business has reached that level for analog technologies now. But it's possible that if you want a digital element today instead, you will have to multi-pack it until a more suitable design becomes economical to produce. So this has nothing to do with PESA vs AESA, but the technological maturity of the design and production process, and the financial viability. For example, the BARS and Irbis-E PESAs have individual T/R modules with a single radiating element.

Regardless, my point was, switching from analog to digital gives you 2x space for more radiating elements. Switching to GaN can double or even triple that. So while your F-22 and F-35 are stuck with the old analog radiating element, the Rafale's radar can be modified to carry any kind of element, and the switch can be done on the flightline by regular air force ground crew. Even the GaN version is ready, if you are willing to pay for it. Anything for a tactical advantage, right?

 

[gambit]

A T/R module can have 1 or more radiating elements.

Yes, that is PESA. All the elements cannot operate independently.

The rest of your post is nothing more than a feeble attempt at distraction. We want to see a few credible sources that says I can have five times the beams of available T/R modules.

Compactness just simply means you can have a higher count of radiators in a given array real estate, but that does not mean five elements under the control of one controller equals to five separate beams going five different directions. Constantly throwing out the word 'digital' is not going to help your ignorance and being wrong.

 

[randomradio]

but that does not mean five elements under the control of one controller equals to five separate beams going five different directions.

Five elements under the control of five controllers equals to five separate beams going five different directions.

Yes, that is PESA. All the elements cannot operate independently.

The rest of your post is nothing more than a feeble attempt at distraction. We want to see a few credible sources that says I can have five times the beams of available T/R modules.

Compactness just simply means you can have a higher count of radiators in a given array real estate, but that does not mean five elements under the control of one controller equals to five separate beams going five different directions. Constantly throwing out the word 'digital' is not going to help your ignorance and being wrong.

Here's an example.

http://micro.apitech.co.uk/x-band-qtrm.aspx
API Technologies Quad Transmit Receive Module is comprised of four T/R channels and associated DC and control electronics, with built-in factory calibration, thus providing a line replaceable unit for the array.

4-bit array address code giving up to 16 QTRM sub-array (64- element array)
Ability to schedule up to 16 phase & amplitude settings for rapid execution.

So 16 T/R modules with 64 radiator elements.

 

[Ultima Thule]

@waz @The Eagle @Horus please clean the thread, this is JF-17 discussion thread, especially @randomradio Posts thanks

 

[gambit]

Five elements under the control of five controllers equals to five separate beams going five different directions.

Yes, then there are 5 T/R modules, not one controlling 5 elements.

Here's an example.

http://micro.apitech.co.uk/x-band-qtrm.aspx
API Technologies Quad Transmit Receive Module is comprised of four T/R channels and associated DC and control electronics, with built-in factory calibration, thus providing a line replaceable unit for the array.

4-bit array address code giving up to 16 QTRM sub-array (64- element array)
Ability to schedule up to 16 phase & amplitude settings for rapid execution.

So 16 T/R modules with 64 radiator elements.

This just goes to show your ignorance is grasping at words and phrases that you do not understand.

Take this phrase: "Quad Transmit Receive Module".

Quad means four. The word 'Module' here does not specify the individual T/R module (lower case) but is a descriptor of the entire unit. Inside this 'Module' contains "four T/R channels and associated DC and control electronics". The entire 'Quad' module is a line replaceable unit (LRU). That is what the capitalized 'Module' really mean.

There comes a point where it is no longer an intellectual exploration but outright muleheadedness which is you despite being proven wrong over and over. You are an example of the danger of debating technical issues with someone who is ignorant but refuses to admit it.

Am done with you and I advise others to do the same -- put you on disregard. You are beyond salvage.

 

[randomradio]

Yes, then there are 5 T/R modules, not one controlling 5 elements.


This just goes to show your ignorance is grasping at words and phrases that you do not understand.

Take this phrase: "Quad Transmit Receive Module".

Quad means four. The word 'Module' here does not specify the individual T/R module (lower case) but is a descriptor of the entire unit. Inside this 'Module' contains "four T/R channels and associated DC and control electronics". The entire 'Quad' module is a line replaceable unit (LRU). That is what the capitalized 'Module' really mean.

There comes a point where it is no longer an intellectual exploration but outright muleheadedness which is you despite being proven wrong over and over. You are an example of the danger of debating technical issues with someone who is ignorant but refuses to admit it.

Am done with you and I advise others to do the same -- put you on disregard. You are beyond salvage.

This is getting funnier by the minute. Firstly, let's separate the semantics and get rid of it so we are on the same page first.

According to me, my "T/R module" is the above example of a Quad Packed T/R Module. And my "radiator element" is a device that has its own high power amplifier and low noise receiver. Hence a T/R module according to me the entire time was a set of multi-packed radiator elements.

According to you, your "T/R module" is the radiator element itself.

But the fact is I have explained my position very well many times. There are so many times that when I use the word "element" I was always referring to "your T/R module" and not "my T/R module."

Your post: 1000 T/R modules can create 5000 beams?
My very next post: You don't even know what it does at the element level. DBF works at the element level.

So for you: 1000 T/R modules = 1000 radiator elements.
For me: 1000 T/R modules = 5000 radiator elements. (Hell, I just threw this number on the table along with 10,000 just to make a point, that digital arrays simply take up less space. My main focus was just doubling the radiator elements in a digital radar compared to an analog radar for the sake of discussion, in order to explain the modular nature of the Rafale's radar).

Even after I have explained my position, you still kept repeating the same thing over and over again, talking about PESA and what not while deviating the discussion from actual "intellectual exploration" about the Rafale. To me it looks like you have just been running away from the discussion by using semantics and being pretentious, while pretending to not understand the point I have already explained.

Funny thing is I even conceded to your point about your definition:
But sure, if your T/R module has 1 element only, then it makes sense to call it a T/R module, whereas a T/R module with more than 1 element can be given a new name to differentiate between the two, like a T/R mega-module or something.

But you still wouldn't give up. So it looks like being condescending is second nature to you.

Basically you have succeeded at running away from the core discussion, so congratulations there.

 

[gambit]

This is getting funnier by the minute. Firstly, let's separate the semantics and get rid of it so we are on the same page first.

According to me, my "T/R module" is the above example of a Quad Packed T/R Module. And my "radiator element" is a device that has its own high power amplifier and low noise receiver. Hence a T/R module according to me the entire time was a set of multi-packed radiator elements.

For me: 1000 T/R modules = 5000 radiator elements.

According to you? You are STILL wrong.

Here is from YOUR source...

http://micro.apitech.co.uk/pdf/aesa/X-Band-QTRM.pdf

See the 'QTRM' initials? What does the letter 'M' stands for? MODULE.

The word 'Module' here describe the entire component, not the individual T/R module (lower case) element.

Inside the (upper case) 'Module' are the four individual T/R modules that controls their four elements.

According to APITECH's functional block schematic, it does not mean one T/R controller operating four elements.

My very next post: You don't even know what it does at the element level. DBF works at the element level.

And you are wrong. I do understand it and understand it better than you do. I understand your own source better than you do because I have relevant experience. You do not.

You are not only dense, but stubborn.

 

[gambit]

But sure, if your T/R module has 1 element only, then it makes sense to call it a T/R module, whereas a T/R module with more than 1 element can be given a new name to differentiate between the two, like a T/R mega-module or something.

Here is what really happened for the benefit of the readers out there...

You made a claim that an AESA system can have more beams than available T/R modules. You cannot support the claim at the theoretical level so you desperately searched the Internet for anything that you could interpret. Then you found APITECH and their 'Quad Transmit Receive Module' wording. You jumped for joy, am sure. Salvation, at last...!!!

Here is what APITECH really did...

APITECH wanted to LRU their AESA systems as much as possible, so they took four T/R modules and packaged them, with associated electronics, into a discrete and flightline removable unit. If not literally on the ramp, then at least in a room inside a hangar. That would still make it a line replaceable unit (LRU). APITECH then call this unit 'Quad Transmit Receive Module'' (QTRM) as indicated in their product guide.

http://micro.apitech.co.uk/pdf/aesa/X-Band-QTRM.pdf

The word 'Module' (upper case) in 'QTRM' is understood to be a product identifier/label UNIQUE TO APITECH. Not to be applied universally.

On the other hand, the word 'module' (lower case) in 'transmit/receive module' (TRM) is universal according to the conceptual model of the AESA design.

You cannot find a single credible source, least of all from Thales, the AESA radar maker for the Raffle, to support your claim that it is possible to have more beams than available T/R modules. In your ignorance and desperation, you found APITECH's product and applied it to your argument.

APITECH's design is not Thales' design. For all we know, maybe Thales use 5 or 6 T/R modules per package and call it 'Controller' instead of 'Module'. Thales could call it something like 'Multi TRM Controller' (MTRMC). But that does not mean Thales made it so that one controller operate multiple elements with each element being an independent beam.

You simply cannot support your claim that an AESA system can produce and control more beams than available T/R modules. You took words out of product contexts and tried to make it universal. That is dishonest.

The sad part is that am sure there are plenty of gullible people over at the Indian forums who accepted what you claim. But it ain't gonna fly here.