Which AESA radar fits better the JF-17 Block 3?

[Arsalan]

I knew that.


On paper, the system seems to be excellent. But the reality is that we should take all claims -- even Americans' -- with caution.

All these on-paper specs were done under ideal conditions, which while does exist in open environment, they are very rare.

These are the normal target resolutions:

- Altitude
- Speed
- Heading
- Aspect angle

In normal situations, any radar system must contends with atmospheric losses that degrades target resolutions, unknown signals interference that enhance hence create false target resolutions, and geographical reflections which includes water that can produce ghosting effects.

Ghosting effects is the worst to encounter, especially in combat. Ghosting effects is when a radar system 'sees' multiple targets when in reality there is only target. Each ghost have its own target resolutions as above. A ghost can actually be higher altitude and/or with different airspeed. But a ghost will have the same heading and aspect angle as the real target.

An AESA system is not immune from these factors but their effects are far less noticeable to the system. A pilot that transition from the mechanical scanning system to the AESA will immediately notice the superiority of the latter.

For example...

Persistence and consistency are not the same. A target can have a persistent or even a permanent presence, like a fixed post in the ground, but fog or rain can make it visually inconsistent to the observer.

A radar system have two maximum ranges:

- The maximum travel range where the beam travels and at this point target resolutions degrades to the point of being statistically unusable, hence, tactically detrimental.

- The maximum usable range where target resolutions are persistent and consistent enough that it is tactically useful.

An AESA system is superior in both. We want the maximum travel range not because we want to reach as far as possible, but because the longer the maximum travel range, the longer the maximum usable range.

An AESA system is superior in signals-to-noise (S/N) ratio, which equals to finer target resolutions. It is like measuring in ones instead of in tens. This is useful in look-down-shoot-down situations where ground clutter interference is highest. Ground clutter often produces ghosting effects so the missile may end up calculating the interception point too far in front or too far aft of the real target.

What everyone want to know is the comparison between AESA systems in fighter A and fighter B. Unfortunately, that is not going to be available to the public in large part of the secrecy involved. The bottom line is that the superiority of the AESA system is so obvious that future air combatants, no matter which class, fighter or bomber or else, will insist on it.

Thanks a lot sir for the detailed reply. Again, as informative as they get and explained in a manner that is much easier to understand. Thanks.

For me, it is good to know how you mention it to be excellent on paper, not good but excellent. Actually i was a bit speculative reading the max range and all. Under 100km or even around 100Km is a bit low as far as i can see. I mean, talking like a fanboy, i would atleast want my planes to be able to detect and track there targets 160-180 Km away and be able to engage them at 80-100km ranges. Anyway, your post was a bit comforting.

 

[Thorough Pro]

That gun is not a fixed "Port", it's a "Pod" attached to a hard point and a hard point is a hard point, Period.

That gun "Pod" can be dismounted and hardpoint used to hang/attach whatever, provided it has the appropriate electrical connections.

you shouldn't consider fixed gun port as a 8th hard point because its can't carry another weapons except the gun

I said they might add "4R", the gun would remain at "4L".
What's the confusion?

where would the gun go!?

 

[ziaulislam]

I said they might add "4R", the gun would remain at "4L".
What's the confusion?

we are too lazy to read, i just looked at the photo Lol

 

[My-Analogous]

There are actually two options for an AESA radar for the JF-17 Blk 3:

1- The Chinese made KLJ-7A

And

2-The Italian made Vixen-1000E



Let's take a look on their specs:

1- KLJ-7A

For 5 m2 RCS target, the radar detecting range under air-air mode is increased by 65% to the original model (KLJ-7), compare with Israel EL/M-2302, 70% better range, compare with PS-05/A from sweden, 40% better effective range.

... much better than earlier version of ZUKE N001 of SU-27, better than N011M PESA of SU-30MKI of IAF. Considering the different standard of "detecting range" between China and Russia, which Chinese one is more strict or tough, the advantage of the detecting range of KLJ-7A in real case will be more obvious than the brochure data.

The US APG-83 radar, for Taiwan F-16V, is a kinda shrank version of APG-81 of F35, has bigger array size than KLJ-7A, but their performance are on same level.

Regarding it's a radar for mid/light fighter, but it's major performance parameters can beat some heavy fighter's radar, and also consider the array size, antena aperture and transmit power, the technology level of this radar is very close to the APG-77 of F-22, which is among the best level in the world...

........ the radar also improved the multi-target tracing ability, increased simultaneous-tracking-number from 10 to 15, and can attack 4 of them at the same time, and this performance can be upgrated when it's needed........

the radar has abundant work mode ---- scan/trace air/ground/sea target, guide missile to attack, synthetic aperture radar for map drawing, dog fight....etc. etc....
Radar modes

The active phased array technology is to KLJ-7A radar has many advantages of the predecessors are not: the type of radar is not only difficult to implement interference with traditional measures, but can use the technical characteristics of its launch antenna electronic jamming operations; , Because the radar signal transmission and reception is composed of a large number of independent transmit / receive unit, virtually improve the operational reliability of the radar, because a few of the transmitter / receiver unit failure does not affect the normal use of radar, Said that even if 30% of the transmitter / receiver unit fails, the radar system can still maintain the basic use. At the same time, the multi-unit structure of the phased array radar can make it perform many functions at the same time, so that the fighter can perform the functions of weather detection and mapping, or use the radar mode Alternating function, and executes a plurality of different contents successively in a short time.
http://errymath.blogspot.com/2016/11/klj-7a-aesa-fire-control-radar-for-jf-17.html#.WObaqbjXtBp

Data from: Janes Defence[1]

• Range While Search (RWS)
• Velocity Search (VS)
• Single Target Track (STT)
• Track While Scan (TWS)
• Dual Target Track (DTT)
• Situational Awareness Mode (SAM)
• Air Combat Mode (ACM)(with five sub-modes)
• Real Beam Map (RBM)
• Doppler Beam Sharpening (DBS)
• Ground Moving Target Indication/Ground Moving Target Track (GMTI/GMTT)
• Air to Ground Ranging (AGR)
• Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)
• Sea Single Target Track (SSTT)
• Beacon (BCN)

Specifications

Data from: Jane's Defence [1]

• Frequency: X band
• Range:
  • Look-up: >75 km (for RCS of 3 m2) (V1)[1] or
    130 km for RCS of 5 m2 (V1), or
    110 km (for RCS of 3 m2) (V2), or
    140-150 km for RCS of 5 m2 (V2)
  • Look-down: >35 km (for RCS of 3 m2) (V1)[1]
• Total targets tracked: 10 in TWS (Track-While-Scan) mode (V1)
• Reliability:
  • MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure): 220 hours
  • MTTR (Mean Time To Recovery): 0.5 hours
• Weight: ≤120 kg
• Volume: 0.065 m3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KLJ-7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2- Vixen-1000E

ACTIVE ELECTRONICALLY SCANNED ARRAY
(AESA) FIRE CONTROL RADAR

Vixen 1000E is a high performance AESA radar
designed for fighter/interceptor aircraft building on
over 60 years of fire control radar experience. Vixen
1000E features an innovative roll-repositionable
AESA antenna to provide a full ±100º field of regard
allowing maximum situational awareness and platform
survivability. This Wide Field of Regard (WFoR) allows
the aircraft to turn away after missile launch, whilst still
maintaining datalinks to the missile.
The highly reliable AESA transmit-receive module
technology incorporated in Vixen 1000E significantly
improves system availability leading to reduced
lifecycle costs.
Vixen 1000E is part of a family of AESA Radars
delivering greater performance and higher reliability
than comparable mechanically scanned radars and
offers all the advantages of multi-function AESA arrays
with significant through life cost savings.
KEY FEATURES
The Vixen 1000E Radar has been designed from the
outset to meet worldwide fire control radar detection
and target tracking needs combined into one efficient
modular system. The Vixen 1000E builds on common
modular units for a scaleable system architecture to
meet the needs of fire control and intercept radar
operational requirements whilst remaining resistant to
radar countermeasures.
The AESA antenna is coupled to fully digital
multi-channel exciter/receiver and processor
Line Replaceable Units (LRUs). These provide a
comprehensive mode suite which includes air-to-air,
air-to-surface, interleaved and support functions,
which can be readily adapted or extended in software
to meet future needs.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
Frequency X Band
Scan Coverage +/- 100°
Scan Velocity Instant beam switching
Cooling Liquid and Air
Weight 215kg
Key Interfaces Ethernet, 1553B
MODES AVAILABLE
Air-to-Air Modes Search While Track
Single Target Track
Air Combat Modes HUD search
Vertical scan
Slewable scan
Boresight
Air-to-Surface modes Real beam ground map
Doppler Beam Sharpening
Sea Surface Search and Track
Ground Moving Target Indication and Track
Spotlight & Stripmap Synthetic Aperture
Radar
Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar
Imaging
Air to Surface Ranging
Interleaved Modes Customer configurable
interleaved Air & Surface modes
Support Functions Passive Search
While Track
Missile Datalinks
Cued Search
Non-Cooperative Target Recognition
Comprehensive ECCM suite

The radar makes use of AESA alert-confirm techniques
to confirm targets on first detection. This combined with optimised AESA waveforms results in increased track initiation ranges, whilst simultaneously maintaining situational awareness. The instantaneous scanning ability of the AESA also provides a comprehensive suite of interleaved air and surface modes, thus providing the pilot with all round situational awareness.

Reliability
At the core of the AESA radar design is the ability to
tolerate individual item failure. Component failures in the array result in graceful performance degradation rather than complete system failure, delivering high operational availability when compared with conventional radar systems. Significant cost benefits over the life of the system are realised due to the high reliability, increased availability and reduced maintenance requirements.

Modes and capabilities
The mode set allows the system to deliver all of the functional capabilities of a Fire Control Radar within an acceptable platform volume. This is combined with the full capabilities of a detection, tracking and prosecution system to meet the needs of emerging new world threats.
The system utilises all the benefits of an electronically scanned array to deliver:
▪▪
Significantly enhanced performance relative to similar sized systems with the same weight, volume and power
▪▪

View attachment 389258
Comparable performance to larger mechanically scanned system whilst offering reduced weight and power.

http://www.leonardocompany.com/en/-/vixen1000e

I say go for complete package with Viren and JF17 will be become one hell of the beast.

 

[The SC]

haath haula rakho ...hamare officials der se batate haain


@MastanKhan gave a good lecture on cons of introducing new tech suddenly to mai fleet earlier....it would take our pilots yearsss to master that tech...i say block 3 for now wih AESA while block 1 and 2 after 2021

I heard that in order to install an AESA radar, you need to enlarge the planes nose, so I doubt it will be ever installed on the JF-17 Blk 1 and 2, The KLJ-7A was tailor made for the Block 3, which means that its nose will be a bit biger than the previous Blks? Also a Chinese expert said in a paper that fitting AESA radars on planes to change their actual radar might create problem not found when it is done in mind when designing a fighter plane..The only plug-and-play radar I know of is the new one for the US F-16s..What is your take on these facts?

KLJ-7A weight =115kg
VIXEN weight=215kg
But what is the price difference between both radars ?

Well, the Vixen will cost at least double..the same as the weight, minus ToT and other important factors..

 

[MastanKhan]

Thunder already has 8 hard points.
They would probably add 4R dedicated for a targeting pod

Hi,

And that puts it at 8 hard points---.

Sometimes we have a 'hardpointe' staring right back at us and we cannot see it.

 

[araz]

I heard that in order to install an AESA radar, you need to enlarge the planes nose, so I doubt it will be ever installed on the JF-17 Blk 1 and 2, The KLJ-7A was tailor made for the Block 3, which means that its nose will be a bit biger than the previous Blks? Also a Chinese expert said in a paper that fitting AESA radars on planes to change their actual radar might create problem not found when it is done in mind when designing a fighter plane..The only plug-and-play radar I know of is the new one for the US F-16s..What is your take on these facts?


Well, the Vixen will cost at least double..the same as the weight, minus ToT and other important factors..

I read some where a long time ago in the PAF time line that Block 1 will be upgraded to block 2 but Block 3 would be a separate beast altogether. My question is do we need all the fighters to be equipped with AESA as a long as we have good PD radars and a good linkage ala Link 17 the other fighters could have their radars off and run of the feed provided by the lead fighter. However having said that hte Chinese are coming up with an Air cooled AESA so is that the answer to the earlier blocks. As you said, it remains to be seen. The factr that it has been done means that the possibilities are there if required.
A

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

Whatever, can be locally built is the best solution really..be it under lience or what not. Even if it is not the best, it is the best if it has local man hours in it. Long term freedom!


However, there was an interesting development regarding AESA in Pak not that long ago...

Seems like some university prof and students have achieved a milestone...in collaboration from one armed service's active participation....
and the development could/should benefit local proudction for all 3 services.

This fits neatly into PAF chief's statement of local production of ASEA and NGF...

@HRK @Oscar you gentlemen might know a thing or two about it.

Or

@messiach madam, you might like to add if you like

 

[WarFariX]

I heard that in order to install an AESA radar, you need to enlarge the planes nose, so I doubt it will be ever installed on the JF-17 Blk 1 and 2, The KLJ-7A was tailor made for the Block 3, which means that its nose will be a bit biger than the previous Blks? Also a Chinese expert said in a paper that fitting AESA radars on planes to change their actual radar might create problem not found when it is done in mind when designing a fighter plane..The only plug-and-play radar I know of is the new one for the US F-16s..What is your take on these facts?


Well, the Vixen will cost at least double..the same as the weight, minus ToT and other important factors..

You are 100% right and in that case 100 thunders PESA

 

[messiach]

Whatever, can be locally built is the best solution really..be it under lience or what not. Even if it is not the best, it is the best if it has local man hours in it. Long term freedom!


However, there was an interesting development regarding AESA in Pak not that long ago...

Seems like some university prof and students have achieved a milestone...in collaboration from one armed service's active participation....
and the development could/should benefit local proudction for all 3 services.

This fits neatly into PAF chief's statement of local production of ASEA and NGF...

@HRK @Oscar you gentlemen might know a thing or two about it.

Or

@messiach madam, you might like to add if you like

I am not aware of this particular project? is it based in kamra? link?

 

[WarFariX]

Whatever, can be locally built is the best solution really..be it under lience or what not. Even if it is not the best, it is the best if it has local man hours in it. Long term freedom!


However, there was an interesting development regarding AESA in Pak not that long ago...

Seems like some university prof and students have achieved a milestone...in collaboration from one armed service's active participation....
and the development could/should benefit local proudction for all 3 services.

This fits neatly into PAF chief's statement of local production of ASEA and NGF...

@HRK @Oscar you gentlemen might know a thing or two about it.

Or

@messiach madam, you might like to add if you like

Could you be more specific please. What are you trying to say brother ?

 

[SQ8]

Whatever, can be locally built is the best solution really..be it under lience or what not. Even if it is not the best, it is the best if it has local man hours in it. Long term freedom!


However, there was an interesting development regarding AESA in Pak not that long ago...

Seems like some university prof and students have achieved a milestone...in collaboration from one armed service's active participation....
and the development could/should benefit local proudction for all 3 services.

This fits neatly into PAF chief's statement of local production of ASEA and NGF...

@HRK @Oscar you gentlemen might know a thing or two about it.

Or

@messiach madam, you might like to add if you like

I would not like to call a university project done on test boards a milestone.
We'll have to see exactly what has been achieved in terms of prototype T/R and design.

 

[Arsalan]

I am not aware of this particular project? is it based in kamra? link?

No, it was a make-do land based radar made by an institute in Islamabad.
And it was a Phased Array Radar.

Here is the thread discussing the same:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...stans-first-phased-array-radar-system.486045/

 

[WarFariX]

I would not like to call a university project done on test boards a milestone.
We'll have to see exactly what has been achieved in terms of prototype T/R and design.

So are there any Airborne radar tech testing projects running currently sir ? Such as you mentioned T/R module

No, it was a make-do land based radar made by an institute in Islamabad.
And it was a Phased Array Radar.

Here is the thread discussing the same:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...stans-first-phased-array-radar-system.486045/

Ohh you talking about this

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

I am not aware of this particular project? is it based in kamra? link?

Capital University of Science & Technology (CUST), Islamabad has recently conducted a field trial for Pakistan’s first ever Phased Array Radar.

Pioneered under Controls and Signal Processing Research (CASPR) department of CUST, the radar will be used for air surveillance.

The circuits and signal processing modules were ready by 2016 and required testing. The sponsor for the project provided a good testing team that worked for a whole year with the Professor and his project partners. The work has finally concluded and the project is ready.
The Phase Array Radar will help Pakistan Army, Pakistan Air Force and Pakistan Navy. It will be able to benefit other interested and relevant parties as well.



source: https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/pakistan-military-news-reports-data-etc.t5723/page-52

I would not like to call a university project done on test boards a milestone.
We'll have to see exactly what has been achieved in terms of prototype T/R and design.

Kind sir, thank you! just posted the referene to the said uni... at least it is something... But I see your point.

Thanks for elaboration.