New LKF601E Air Cooling Airborne AESA radar for all JF-17 Block I and II

[MastanKhan]

this is just a recent development. there will be more variants and new radars in a few years to come so upgrades are possible down the line with radars on par with F-35 Lighting II.

Hi,

The problem is not in locating the F35 or the F22---. The problem is getting a missile lock on it---.

 

[serenity]

I love the work on budget fighter and equipment that is effective but cost affordable enough for more nations to buy. This makes future business sales more easy when other nations can afford brand new fighters but still want good effectiveness. Maybe little benefit immediately but in future, because we put in the work today, we can get bigger benefits in future. Must start from somewhere small and unimpressive. Already JF-17 will soon be fitted with AESA. A few years ago, I though it was impossible such expensive radars will be selected for such budget minded fighter. Hopefully they keep improving the effectiveness and upgrade engine to WS-19 in 2020s when FC-31 program receives those engines. Maybe they will pass reliability tests for single engine fighter as well.

 

[Foxtrot Delta]

Hi,

The problem is not in locating the F35 or the F22---. The problem is getting a missile lock on it---.

i didn't mean countering F-35's radar i said radar on par with the radar onboard F-35. also lock on is possible on F-35 its harder for F-22 but F-35 has can be locked on. its going to be made public with in a year or so.

 

[war&peace]

Hi,

The problem is not in locating the F35 or the F22---. The problem is getting a missile lock on it---.

Sir, China has broken that barrier as well with new quantum radars so not only those A/Cs will be detected but will also be locked and targeted successfully however, it is still in the labs but as we know Chinese are pretty fast in making things from the concept to production. Though I'm not sure about its dimension and will it be fitted on the A/Cs, carried by AW&C or ground based.

 

[Beast]

Sir, China has broken that barrier as well with new quantum radars so not only those A/Cs will be detected but will also be locked and targeted successfully however, it is still in the labs but as we know Chinese are pretty fast in making things from the concept to production. Though I'm not sure about its dimension and will it be fitted on the A/Cs, carried by AW&C or ground based.

Maybe J-20 has already install with Quantum Radar.... During Zhuhai airshow 2018, a quantum radar is displayed.

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/pt/2018/11/quantum-radar-counter-stealth-china.html

 

[ozranger]

To be honest, I am pretty intrigued to see if JF-17 Block III is a semi stealth fighter. The nose shape of KLJ-7A with 2 side array panels displayed on Zhuhai 2018 raises my speculation.

I have been hoping it to be a V-tail, no horizontal stabilizer, lift body fuselage and carrying limited payload, say 2 MRAAMs and 2 SRAAMs maximum for typical air to air missions or 2 precision bombs for air to surface missions, for penetrating enemy's front line to hunt down high value air targets or destroy key ground targets.

 

[ziaulislam]

To be honest, I am pretty intrigued to see if JF-17 Block III is a semi stealth fighter. The nose shape of KLJ-7A with 2 side array panels displayed on Zhuhai 2018 raises my speculation.

I have been hoping it to be a V-tail, no horizontal stabilizer, lift body fuselage and carrying limited payload, say 2 MRAAMs and 2 SRAAMs maximum for typical air to air missions or 2 precision bombs for air to surface missions, for penetrating enemy's front line to hunt down high value air targets or destroy key ground targets.

asking for too much..
The whole game plan with thunder is to keep the price tag low..given that i doubt there will be large design changes..now lack of f16s means if that mind set is changed to front line 4th gen than we should see major design changes but to take it to extent of semi stealth will probably not happen given that would be a separate fighter already work in progress

I think at this moment the biggest thing jf17 needs is boast in its range /edurance by 25-30%, AESA and HMD..like gripen NG.. only possible if rd93MA materializes

 

[khanasifm]

 

[serenity]

To be honest, I am pretty intrigued to see if JF-17 Block III is a semi stealth fighter. The nose shape of KLJ-7A with 2 side array panels displayed on Zhuhai 2018 raises my speculation.

I have been hoping it to be a V-tail, no horizontal stabilizer, lift body fuselage and carrying limited payload, say 2 MRAAMs and 2 SRAAMs maximum for typical air to air missions or 2 precision bombs for air to surface missions, for penetrating enemy's front line to hunt down high value air targets or destroy key ground targets.

I think nose for blk 3 or blk 4 may be changed to ones similar to diamond style like FGF but all the other stuff is way too much change. Will require years of modeling and testing. Too expensive and takes too long. I don't think CAC devoted that much to that level of improvement and I don't think PAF wants to spend that much on those improvements either. PAF wants to eventually get close to 100% self reliance on something they can build as many as they want and as quickly as they can. At best we can maybe expect to see diamond style nose to fit new radar and reduce RCS very slightly but that's already pretty good especially with AESA.

 

[MIRauf]

Online Quotes from LKF601E & KLJ-7A maker seems to suggest that LKF601E was tested on FC-1, likely the FC-1 06 test bed, however per AVIC the JLJ-7A without the Side panels has been selected by Customer ( PAF ). There is no mention of even by the LKF601E Maker that it has been selected by any customer, all they have claimed that it has been tested.

PS: I am not sure why it was stated that a cheaper version, ( perhaps meaning lost in translation ), the only thing missing in standard KLJ-7A is that it doesn't have the side AESA Panels ( equating to lesser degree of coverage, now if some wants to claim that it equates to lesser capabilities then oh well. )

Same mistakes were/are being made by PAF staff when giving interview about JF-17 ( "its a cheap aircraft," instead of saying that "its a very affordable aircraft with exceptional capabilities." )

 

[FuturePAF]

Online Quotes from LKF601E & KLJ-7A maker seems to suggest that LKF601E was tested on FC-1, likely the FC-1 06 test bed, however per AVIC the JLJ-7A without the Side panels has been selected by Customer ( PAF ). There is no mention of even by the LKF601E Maker that it has been selected by any customer, all they have claimed that it has been tested.

PS: I am not sure why it was stated that a cheaper version, ( perhaps meaning lost in translation ), the only thing missing in standard KLJ-7A is that it doesn't have the side AESA Panels ( equating to lesser degree of coverage, now if some wants to claim that it equates to lesser capabilities then oh well. )

Same mistakes were/are being made by PAF staff when giving interview about JF-17 ( "its a cheap aircraft," instead of saying that "its a very affordable aircraft with exceptional capabilities." )

Personally Swash Plate would have been better, but the extra weight and costs are factors they had to consider. Good to hear the PAF is going for the KLJ-7A over the LKF601E going forward on Block III. I hope they commit to upgrading the Block I and II, because getting the first shot maybe just the difference in engaging a Su-30MKI or Rafale.

PAF Should look at getting more modern BVR and WVR missiles then the SD-10 and PL-9 for the Block III. A Meteor Equivalent and a 50G WVR Missile should be rolled out with the Block III announcement to bring back the qualitative edge vis a vi the IAF.

 

[khanasifm]

I am sure paf know what they need, bottomline it’s what in your pocket and can afford

Initially usaf had 3/4 ac in sqn with aesa and rest standard mechanical radars Ac with aesa Ac sharing picture and guiding weapons for formation via data link so in Netcentrics you do not need every Ac with same radar/capability


Today paf mirages get picture by link in cockpit for situational awareness

Cheers

 

[aliyusuf]

I have a humble query. In another thread the specs are provided for the LKF601E AESA Radar are shared. In which the detection range for fighter sized targets is stated to be 170KM. If the specs shared in above link is correct, then the question comes to my mind is that it is also the same stated detection range for KLJ-7A AESA Radar. But if LKF601E is the comparatively lower end radar, being air cooled, then how come it matches the KLJ-7A AESA in detection range? Then what is it that makes it comparatively lower end and the KLJ-7A the higher end?

I would appreciate it if someone could clear my confusion on the issue.
@Quwa , @wanglaokan , @HRK , @CriticalThought

 

[Quwa]

I have a humble query. In another thread the specs are provided for the LKF601E AESA Radar are shared. In which the detection range for fighter sized targets is stated to be 170KM. If the specs shared in above link is correct, then the question comes to my mind is that it is also the same stated detection range for KLJ-7A AESA Radar. But if LKF601E is the comparatively lower end radar, being air cooled, then how come it matches the KLJ-7A AESA in detection range? Then what is it that makes it comparatively lower end and the KLJ-7A the higher end?

I would appreciate it if someone could clear my confusion on the issue.
@Quwa , @wanglaokan , @HRK , @CriticalThought

Agreed. There must be other factors. I suspect one is that the LKF601E is only offered as a fixed array, while the KLJ-7A comes as either a moving array or multi-array (sides + front) solution. So you could get more flexibility via the KLJ-7A than LKF601E. The other is the LKF601E's lower power consumption (enabling it to be air-cooled), that is likely to cause a drawback somewhere, but this will only be known to AVIC and the end-user.

 

[aliyusuf]

Agreed. There must be other factors. I suspect one is that the LKF601E is only offered as a fixed array, while the KLJ-7A comes as either a moving array or multi-array (sides + front) solution. So you could get more flexibility via the KLJ-7A than LKF601E. The other is the LKF601E's lower power consumption (enabling it to be air-cooled), that is likely to cause a drawback somewhere, but this will only be known to AVIC and the end-user.

Thank you for clearing that up for me. Yes makes perfect sense (If the stated detection ranges for fighter sized targets is the truly the same), then the main advantage would be the wider angle coverage offered by both versions of the KLJ-7A (i.e. the vixen/raven like swivel-head version and the three-sided --> front + both sides multi-array).