What's new

Pakistan Navy interested in J-11Bs

Status
Not open for further replies.
You are trying to compare an ECM equipment used on choppers against PESA radars used on air superiority fighters:hitwall:..............all I can say is wow :cheesy: and any knowledgeable person would understand who is living in the fantasy world.
Thanks for your part of discussion.
Peace Indeed.
:cheers:

Buddy, ever heard of C-130 Compass call heavy duty EW aircraft? The ALQ-211 jammer is used on it to counter heavy EW environment. Do you know the meaning of Heavy EW environment? You are really in a need to read alot of stuff.....

EC-130H Compass Call

Factsheets : EC-130H Compass Call
 
.
So that Russians can give every code and radar frequency to India and Su-35 BM's can be a sitting duck even worse than jf-17 by your imagination :)

On a serious note we don't have any close military relationship with Russia (n you are not a kid to not know that , i hope it was not an adding masala thing ) ,So PAF will never be willing to bank on Russia even if they do so by the virtue of some miracle ,still Russia will not be willing to supply something which is the best she posses as of today , n even if Russia agrees i dont think indians will let them to do say n we might see indian trying everything to stop this sale ,even if they have to go for SU-35BM's themselves to refrain the sales (n i think thats wat you want :rofl:)

End of the story :azn:

Happy ending !!!

I would the happiest person if Russia did this.........I wonder what would the Chinese who are the 2nd largest importers of Russian weaponry had to say on this:azn:
If the sale of weaponry and military trade were to depend on strategic relationships upto the extent you have mentioned then you should forget buying any thing from West aswell since they are also very good friends of India and focus solely on Chinese weapons......guess what you should throw away all the Russian equipments like Mi-8/17, IL-76, IL-78, RD-93 etc............:chilli:

PS; even stuff like JF-17, KLJ-7, T-80s are based on Russian technology:taz:
 
.
Buddy, ever heard of C-130 Compass call heavy duty EW aircraft? The ALQ-211 jammer is used on it to counter heavy EW environment. Do you know the meaning of Heavy EW environment? You are really in a need to read alot of stuff.....

EC-130H Compass Call

Factsheets : EC-130H Compass Call

C-130J coupled with ALQ-211 is used for tactical operations in ECM environment generally generated by small and medium range tactical ground radar system like Pantsir/Tunguska.........get you facts right.......before trying to prove same point again and again..........I guess people like Mikhail A. Pogosian, Dr. Carlo Kopp are more learned and knowledgeable then you........read their views on BARS/IBRIS-E before trying to prove yourself before me.
 
.
A person with your IQ level is the last i will ever confront with. It is simply no use to give you renounced sources as you seem tho think of Mikhail Pogo fantasy more than anything. Keep imagining kiddo...BARS was state of the art in 90s, not in 2011, get this in your mind. A PESA radar is nothing extra ordinary that cannot be countered why is it so difficult to understand? Ever wonder why so many Western nations never opted for PESA? Rather opted for AESA and wait for maturity? The world does not revolve around your fantasy son, get over your mki funda and face the reality that PAF today is no longer what it was in the lost decade when you inducted MKI and we barely had a handful of blk 15s to counter them.
 
.
PS; even stuff like JF-17, KLJ-7, T-80s are based on Russian technology:taz:

An ample evidence of your lack of information! Read JFT info pool thread by Anti body which has excellent collection of events and info on JFT origins.
 
.
C-130J coupled with ALQ-211 is used for tactical operations in ECM environment generally generated by small and medium range tactical ground radar system like Pantsir/Tunguska.........get you facts right.......before trying to prove same point again and again..........I guess people like Mikhail A. Pogosian, Dr. Carlo Kopp are more learned and knowledgeable then you........read their views on BARS/IBRIS-E before trying to prove yourself before me.

Suggest you go to the manufacturers site before talking about intelligence and knowledge.
 
.
I would the happiest person if Russia did this.........I wonder what would the Chinese who are the 2nd largest importers of Russian weaponry had to say on this:azn:
If the sale of weaponry and military trade were to depend on strategic relationships upto the extent you have mentioned then you should forget buying any thing from West aswell since they are also very good friends of India and focus solely on Chinese weapons......guess what you should throw away all the Russian equipments like Mi-8/17, IL-76, IL-78, RD-93 etc............:chilli:

PS; even stuff like JF-17, KLJ-7, T-80s are based on Russian technology:taz:


hahah this post is not worthy of reply :cheers:
 
.
A person with your IQ level is the last i will ever confront with. It is simply no use to give you renounced sources as you seem tho think of Mikhail Pogo fantasy more than anything. Keep imagining kiddo...BARS was state of the art in 90s, not in 2011, get this in your mind. A PESA radar is nothing extra ordinary that cannot be countered why is it so difficult to understand? Ever wonder why so many Western nations never opted for PESA? Rather opted for AESA and wait for maturity? The world does not revolve around your fantasy son, get over your mki funda and face the reality that PAF today is no longer what it was in the lost decade when you inducted MKI and we barely had a handful of blk 15s to counter them.

Another example of your type who rather than making reasonable replies resort to personal attack......let me tell you I don't have any intention to be Mr. Nice here.....merely just to prove my facts over your claims.......feel free to stick with the illusive understanding of yours about EW/ECM.

Taking of Technologies it speaks volumes about you IQ and thinking which determines the supremacy or success of any technological advancement governed by the west.....Ironically USAF itself uses PESA on B-1B Lancer, B-2 spirit and E-3 senetry its top electronic attack and bomber aircrafts.
I guess you'll win The best JF-17 fan boy award any day but that does not makes it exceed its limitations of being a small aircraft which can't house adequate jamming/ECM equipment and provide proper power and cooling for them.
Here are a few parameters which determine Electronic warfare and conter measure of a Radar.


Peak Power (Ppeak) [kW] is the maximum pulsed power the radar can emit. It is limited mostly by the transmitter technology employed, and to a lesser extent, the antenna design. In general, the higher the peak power emitted, to the first order, the better from a range perspective. Peak power is also important in Electronic Warfare terms as it determines the burnthough performance of the radar, or the point at which the energy reflected by a target is greater than the energy produced by the target's defensive jamming equipment. This the point where jamming effectively fails.

Aperture Gain (G) [-] is a measure of the area and efficiency of the antenna employed for transmission and reception. The bigger the aperture gain in a radar, to the first order, the better from a range perspective.

Power Aperture Product (PA or PxA) [Wm2, dBWm2, dBW] in its most commonly used form is calculated by multiplying Peak (or Average) Power x Antenna Area (or Power [dBW] + Antenna Gain [dB] in [dBW]). It is a parameter used by designers to gauge the relative performance of different radar designs. To the first order, the radar with the higher Power Aperture Product or PA will achieve better range, detection and jammer burnthrough performance.

Receiver Noise Figure [-] is a measure of the thermal and shot noise effects which are competing in the radar receiver with intended signals to be received. The lower the noise figure (or 'noise temperature'), the better. Receiver noise figures are generally similar for given generations of radar technology, reflecting the radio frequency transistor types, and antenna configurations used.

In practical terms, to maximise detection range and jammer burnthrough performance, the biggest radars in terms of power and antenna size win over those with smaller antennas and less power.

Leaving detection and tracking range performance aside for a moment, other radar parameters and attributes are also relevant in a combat environment. Unfortunately these capabilities and parameters are often not so easy to compare parametrically, and in many situations are less important than the range and burnthrough performance.

Sidelobe Performance [deciBels] of a radar antenna determines how much energy is emitted in directions other than than intended, and how much energy is detected from directions other than intended. Sidelobe performance is important in rejecting ground clutter when pursuing low altitude targets, and in providing good resistance to jamming. Jammers are often designed to inject false targets into a victim radar via its sidelobes.

Mainlobe Width [degrees of arc] of a radar antenna determines how narrow the main lobe of the antenna radiation pattern is, or in simpler language, how narrow a 'pencil-beam' of microwave energy the radar produces. As the so called 'antenna reciprocity theorem' applies, for a typical antenna design the mainlobe (and sidelobe) parameters are the same for transmitting as they are for receiving. For typical fighter radars, mainlobe widths vary between 4° and 2° of arc. For many applications, the narrower the beam the better, within limits.

Antenna/Receiver/Transmitter Bandwidth is a measure of the radar's potential frequency agility, or its ability to hop across frequencies to evade detection and jamming. Bandwidth is also important for many modes which require wide bandwidth modulations in the signal. These include Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) modes, High Power Jam (HPJ) and high speed datalinking (HSDL) modes.

Signal Processing Performance is a measure of how many computations the radar signal processor can perform per second on the digitised raw radar video signals collected by a receiver. This parameter is often measured in terms of Fast Fourier Transform operations executed per second, or where performance is considered sensitive, in the less revealing measures of MIPS (millions of instructions per second). Signal processing performance will impact the radar's ability to sift targets from noise, jamming and low altitude clutter. A related parameter is the number of receiver channels employed. In digital radars these are usually paired. Again, a larger number of channels is typically better.

Data Processing Performance is a measure of how many computations the radar signal processor can perform per second on the target track data collected by the radar, as well as on computations associated with missile guidance and envelope management. Data processing performance will impact the radar's ability to track large numbers of targets, manage multiple missile engagements, control multiple missiles in flight, and perform other functions important to the managment of the radar's operation.

Beamsteering Agility is a measure of how quickly the antenna mainlobe can be pointed in a different direction, and/or reshaped for a different operating mode. In MSA (Mechanically Steered Antenna) designs this parameter is typically of the order of hundreds of milliseconds. In AESA/ESA (Active / Electronically Steered Antenna) designs this parameter is typically of the order of hundreds of microseconds, or a thousand times faster. Beamsteering agility is important in tracking targets, multitasking the radar between diverse operating modes, providing resistance to jamming, and supporting multiple concurrent missile shots.

Angle Tracking Technique is the method used by the radar to measure the angular position of a target within the radar's mainlobe. The favoured technique in recent decades is monopulse angle tracking, due to its accuracy and resistance to many jamming techniques. Monopulse angle tracking can use multilobed techniques, or sequential lobing techniques.

Again whatever jamming/ECM equipments you would be using on JF-17 would more often than not would be used as defensive role...i.e. avoid being jammed before flanker radar.........The person which I mentioned was the head of Sukhoi corporation and the other is a world known electronic Scientist/expert who have real time experiences on some of world's best fighter planes...........feel free to disagree.
And to add I am yet to mention the SAP-14 jammers and SAP-518 ECM pods being carried by Su 30s........... plus currently MKI are going under extensive upgrades that would house Zhuk ASE/NIIP N050 AESA with 1650+ T/R modules rated at 20+kW peak power+L-band AESA mounted on wings that would make it a formidable electronic attack aircraft with a mini AWACS role.............Hope this ends the discussion here as your types are already lining up........spare me and better find another fan-boy of your type to continue.
Thanks
DARKY

PS
It would be nice if you being a senior member think thank could abstain from using words like ''son'' if you really aren't an old man with 70+ years behind him.......hope you understand.
 
.
First, thats straight from Carlo Copp's "paper" on the Su-35.
Question..
The RD-33 produces 5kw to meet the peak power needs of the Zhuk0ME radar..
So if the JF-17 got an engine that produces 5kw for peak power.. and the Jammer on it can use that power..
How will the 5kw of peak power from the MKI 's bars Burn through??

The experts you mentioned..
one is an employed aircraft designer out to sell his own stuff... right.. very unbiased.
The second is a known extremely opinionated guy like yourself who strongly opposes the F-35 procurement for the RAAF... amongst other things.
He is also considered a joke in most respected aviation forums due to his "cry wolf" nature with the flanker series.

All you have done here is mention the same Su-30 MKi with as of yet uninstalled and untested avionics, whilst refusing to accept any statement on the JF's future upgrades.
Nobody advocates that the JF is an all round superior aircraft, but I consider those with a persistent "You're doomed" attitude not worthy of discussion..or respect.
What would you like to consider yourself??
 
.
First, thats straight from Carlo Copp's "paper" on the Su-35.
Question..
The RD-33 produces 5kw to meet the peak power needs of the Zhuk0ME radar..
So if the JF-17 got an engine that produces 5kw for peak power.. and the Jammer on it can use that power..
How will the 5kw of peak power from the MKI 's bars Burn through??

I guess Mig 29 houses double engines i.e. 2xRD-33.........talking of powerful isn't it simple to understand Bigger nose means more TWRs.......and on that note please don't forget that cooling is an essential part of electronics installed on any plane.

The experts you mentioned..
one is an employed aircraft designer out to sell his own stuff... right.. very unbiased
.

You did advice me to go to the manufacturer's site in your last post.

The second is a known extremely opinionated guy like yourself who strongly opposes the F-35 procurement for the RAAF... amongst other things.
He is also considered a joke in most respected aviation forums due to his "cry wolf" nature with the flanker series.

Actually he is pissed off on the fact that U.S.A. is not selling F-22As to Aussie AF......his papers on flanker series holds some weight if studied with an open eye........I guess even people with simple knowledge like me can understand them.

All you have done here is mention the same Su-30 MKi with as of yet uninstalled and untested avionics, whilst refusing to accept any statement on the JF's future upgrades.
Nobody advocates that the JF is an all round superior aircraft, but I consider those with a persistent "You're doomed" attitude not worthy of discussion..or respect.
What would you like to consider yourself??

I never said that JF-17 is of no use its sad if you people are analyzing my posts on that.........about respect part what do you expect in return when you people are pampering with stuff like he pulls MKI out from a** etc.........anyway I had my arguments at least you people aren't like Chinese people who start crying when somebody else questions their claims on China defense.
 
.
Guys Id request you to ignore this fellow DARKY here........Iv already had to abandon the cruise missile thread due to his ill-informed arguments lacking even the snicker of a premise. He just closes his eyes and refuses to listen. And will frequently jump from A to B and then B to Z and then from Z to God knows where.
 
.
Guys Id request you to ignore this fellow DARKY here........Iv already had to abandon the cruise missile thread due to his ill-informed arguments lacking even the snicker of a premise. He just closes his eyes and refuses to listen. And will frequently jump from A to B and then B to Z and then from Z to Gods knows where.

Since my 1st post here about Radars I have been sticking with BARS even though Its being replaced by more powerful AESA radar as we speak..........It isn't hard to see who's running around in circles even though AN/ALQ series ECM pods would hardly find any service on a non-american Chinese airplane.........you are free to believe what feels good to you I don't intend to spoil the party here.......I find members of your country more reasonable in their approach on many other forums.........guess what I go through posts in JF-17, Qing class sub, China-pak friendship and Vietnam threads just to have a crack........I was here to maintain that J-11/J-15 would have been better platform for PN.......but somehow I find that its hard for you people to swallow that JF-17 is a point defense, short range, multirole fighter which can't house large/high power electronics...............I apologize if I offended you in any way.
Again feel free to believe whatever you want.
 
.
Since my 1st post here about Radars I have been sticking with BARS even though Its being replaced by more powerful AESA radar as we speak..........It isn't hard to see who's running around in circles even though AN/ALQ series ECM pods would hardly find any service on a non-american Chinese airplane.........you are free to believe what feels good to you I don't intend to spoil the party here.......I find members of your country more reasonable in their approach on many other forums.........guess what I go through posts in JF-17, Qing class sub, China-pak friendship and Vietnam threads just to have a crack........I was here to maintain that J-11/J-15 would have been better platform for PN.......but somehow I find that its hard for you people to swallow that JF-17 is a point defense, short range, multirole fighter which can't house large/high power electronics...............I apologize if I offended you in any way.
Again feel free to believe whatever you want.

You see you having a crack ruins it for the rest who are actually here to learn and/or debate. I have no problems with listening to what you have to say but you have to at least read what the other has in response.

Your point about the J-11/J-15 is absolutely correct and I doubt anyone would deny it. But please do make a correction here. The JFT is a multirole combat aircraft. That is what it was always intended to be not just a point defense fighter/interceptor.
 
.
I guess Mig 29 houses double engines i.e. 2xRD-33.........talking of powerful isn't it simple to understand Bigger nose means more TWRs.......and on that note please don't forget that cooling is an essential part of electronics installed on any plane.

What if the cooling is there as well?? then??

You did advice me to go to the manufacturer's site in your last post.

To get appropriate details.. not their opinion on the BARS.

Actually he is pissed off on the fact that U.S.A. is not selling F-22As to Aussie AF......his papers on flanker series holds some weight if studied with an open eye........I guess even people with simple knowledge like me can understand them.

Open eye, closed eye.. one eye open.. its also simple for one to guess that he is highly opinionated.. and since he is pissed off about the F-22 issue, his views will be biased enough to ensure that everything below the F-22 is shown as inferior to the perceived threat.


I never said that JF-17 is of no use its sad if you people are analyzing my posts on that.........about respect part what do you expect in return when you people are pampering with stuff like he pulls MKI out from a** etc.........anyway I had my arguments at least you people aren't like Chinese people who start crying when somebody else questions their claims on China defense.

Yes you did..
Your past posts do nothing more than to bring out the MKI and then play it as a trump card to belittle possible PAF purchases.
 
.
Yes you did..
Your past posts do nothing more than to bring out the MKI and then play it as a trump card to belittle possible PAF purchases.

I can't help on this.
About the cooling part yes all the 4th generation(including JF-17) planes housing electronics have cooling system for transistors and other semiconducting devices,
The extent upto which the manufacturers can have luxury to house such systems depends highly upon the size of the nose part in the fuselage guess why can't Americans who have decades of experience in solidstate packing fit a 1500+ T/R modules in AN/APG-79 of F-16.......It is due the size of the nose and they can't provide proper cooling mechanism for those over heated transistors........even 1100-1200 T/R modules won't be able to function on full power mode often as the 1500 same T/R modules would do in F-15.

I guess people with proper knowledge about Radar electronics can understand the things Kopp wrote about large aperture radars is nothing but what the theory says about microwave propagation and collection.........he might have issues with F-22 and F-35 but his papers on flankers and super hornet are simply the fact if looked into without any prejudice.

Again I would say that for naval surveillance and long range patrolling cover aswell as an answer to possible MKI+bhramos combo attacks on PN ships and bases J-11/J-15....is the best possible platform they can have......If you are able to get Su-35BM then even better.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom