Sukhoi PAK FA

[Drsomnath999]

NO body knows the exact range of PAK fa aesa radar yet claiming anything about it's range is not right at the moment
though IRBIS -E claims to have a range of 400km but if u look by american counterpart AESA radar of APG 77 radar it claims to have 200-250 km against a fighter size target of 1 sq m2


PAK-fa 360 degree aesa coverage depends upon whether a tail X band aesa radar is installed in it's tail
but chances are there a RWR receiver may be placed like SU 35 BM



@ gadeshi

RBE 2 radar has a range of 180-200km range against a fighter size target 1 sqm

 

[gadeshi]

NO body knows the exact range of PAK fa aesa radar yet claiming anything about it's range is not right at the moment
though IRBIS -E claims to have a range of 400km but if u look by american counterpart AESA radar of APG 77 radar it claims to have 200-250 km against a fighter size target of 1 sq m2


PAK-fa 360 degree aesa coverage depends upon whether a tail X band aesa radar is installed in it's tail
but chances are there a RWR receiver may be placed like SU 35 BM



@ gadeshi

RBE 2 radar has a range of 180-200km range against a fighter size target 1 sqm

1 - Tere are no official data about RBE2, but 180-200 km are apparently the most likely range.
2 - There will be no rear-looking AESA on T-50 or FGFA. It is simply don't need this radar - aperture will be too small, and there's no place for electronics blocks and (the most problem) - power feeds and cooling magistrales in the tail boom rear tip. This is because the rear tip is too close to the rear MWB.
However, the angles and the power and aperture of the other AESA units (both forward and side-looking) is enough to form almost 360 deg radar field.
At the top of this, there is 101-KS EOTS with full-sphere scope, so...

 

[gadeshi]

Sukhoi's official press release and Russia 1 / Russia Today official video:
ОАО "Компания "Сухой" - Новости - Новости компании

And unpainted photo:

 

[p2prada]

Rafale has 240-250 km on 1 sq m RCS target in 100 sq deg sector.

RBE-2 has too small aperture and peak power capacity to compete with heavy fighters AESA radars, which only proves that medium fighter is not a serious competitor for the heavy one. Heavy will always win except for the special cases with external circumstances and tactics and also numbers

The requirement in the MRCA deal was 130 Km tracking for a 3m2 target. Mig claimed that Mig-35 would be providing 200 Km tracking capability of a 3m2 target. So Rafale should be at the same level with a similar sized radar.

PAKFA's radar should be 500+ Km for a 3m2 target too.

NO body knows the exact range of PAK fa aesa radar yet claiming anything about it's range is not right at the moment
though IRBIS -E claims to have a range of 400km but if u look by american counterpart AESA radar of APG 77 radar it claims to have 200-250 km against a fighter size target of 1 sq m2

The rules of physics is the same for F-22 vs for PAKFA.

Irbis-E claims have crossed 500 Km too, for a 3m2 target apparently.

PAK-fa 360 degree aesa coverage depends upon whether a tail X band aesa radar is installed in it's tail
but chances are there a RWR receiver may be placed like SU 35 BM

A tail based radar and side arrays will make the aircraft expensive. PAKFA prototypes have a radiation warning symbol on the tail.

So, countries may end up having a choice between having it or not.

@ gadeshi

RBE 2 radar has a range of 180-200km range against a fighter size target 1 sqm

It is highly unlikely.

The theoretical limit on a GaAs module is 9-10W. If we assume there are 1000-1100 modules, the max possible power output is ~10 KW.

That basically puts it in the Bars level of capability which is at 7KW, but the RBE-2 antenna is very small. So, theoretically it cannot even exceed a 7KW Bars let alone a 20 KW Irbis-E or a possible ~12-16 KW N036 (main) or APG-77 because the gain is very low in comparison.

The claim of a 200 Km tracking capability on a 3m2 target still stands only because the Russians claimed the same for FGA-35.

The rear array of the PAKFA may match RBE-2, but it could also be in the class of the CEASAR, that's around 100-150mm more in dia. So, we will need to wait and watch for official news.

 

[Austin]

gadeshi , Does 101-KS EOTS has capability similar to JSF DAS ? I mean all the capabilities that DAS offers or does it work differently ?

AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for the F-35

 

[Sridhar]

Fifth PAK FA fighter aircraft made its first flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur
28/10/2013 RIR

The fifth prototype of the prospective 5th - generation aviation complex (PAK FA, T-50) made its maiden flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur at the Y.A.Gagarin KnAAZ aircraft plant of the Sukhoi Company. The plane was piloted by distinguished test pilot of the 1st class Roman Kondratiev. The fighter aircraft spent 50 minutes in the air and landed safely on the factory airfield runway. The test flight was a success and in full accordance with the flight plan. The stability of the aircraft and the propulsion system were tested during the flight. The aircraft performed well in all phases of the planned flight program. The pilot confirmed reliability of all systems and equipment.

Upon completing the test flights program in Komsomolsk the aircraft will join the flight tests in the city of Zhukovsky near Moscow. Four 5th – generation fighter aircraft have already joined these tests. Two more planes are involved in ground tests - one as a complex ground stand and the other undergoes static tests.

The first flight of the PAK FA took place on January 29, 2010 in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. Currently work is underway on the full range of ground and flight tests. To date, more than 450 flights were carried out under the flight test program.


Fifth PAK FA fighter aircraft made its first flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur | Russia & India Report

 

[p2prada]

There will be no rear-looking AESA on T-50 or FGFA. It is simply don't need this radar - aperture will be too small, and there's no place for electronics blocks and (the most problem) - power feeds and cooling magistrales in the tail boom rear tip. This is because the rear tip is too close to the rear MWB.

That's for PAKFA. Not for FGFA. IAF has asked for a full 360 degree capability exceeding VVS requirement in this regard.

Delays and challenges for Indo-Russian fighter | Business Standard

A key IAF requirement is a '360-degree' AESA (airborne electronically scanned active) radar, rather than the AESA radar that Russia developed. Either way, India would pay Russia extra: either in licence fee for the Russian radar; or hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, for developing a world-beating, 360-degree AESA radar.

So our radar version will be developed further over the current N036. Which means a new radar + new designation and, of course, new capability.

 

[gadeshi]

gadeshi , Does 101-KS EOTS has capability similar to JSF DAS ? I mean all the capabilities that DAS offers or does it work differently ?

AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for the F-35

Yes, EOTS is a complete EO DAS analog.
But it offers not only surviallance, like EO DAS, but IR/laser missiles jammers (so called R2D2 - crystal balls on the spine and under the nose) to protect from IR-homing missiles, including multispectral ones.

 

[gadeshi]

The requirement in the MRCA deal was 130 Km tracking for a 3m2 target. Mig claimed that Mig-35 would be providing 200 Km tracking capability of a 3m2 target. So Rafale should be at the same level with a similar sized radar.

PAKFA's radar should be 500+ Km for a 3m2 target too.



The rules of physics is the same for F-22 vs for PAKFA.

Irbis-E claims have crossed 500 Km too, for a 3m2 target apparently.



A tail based radar and side arrays will make the aircraft expensive. PAKFA prototypes have a radiation warning symbol on the tail.

So, countries may end up having a choice between having it or not.



It is highly unlikely.

The theoretical limit on a GaAs module is 9-10W. If we assume there are 1000-1100 modules, the max possible power output is ~10 KW.

That basically puts it in the Bars level of capability which is at 7KW, but the RBE-2 antenna is very small. So, theoretically it cannot even exceed a 7KW Bars let alone a 20 KW Irbis-E or a possible ~12-16 KW N036 (main) or APG-77 because the gain is very low in comparison.

The claim of a 200 Km tracking capability on a 3m2 target still stands only because the Russians claimed the same for FGA-35.

The rear array of the PAKFA may match RBE-2, but it could also be in the class of the CEASAR, that's around 100-150mm more in dia. So, we will need to wait and watch for official news.

True in every word.
However, we are speaking about detection of 1 sq m target (with a standard 75% probability), not about tracking, which is possible on the less ranges.

 

[gadeshi]

That's for PAKFA. Not for FGFA. IAF has asked for a full 360 degree capability exceeding VVS requirement in this regard.

Delays and challenges for Indo-Russian fighter | Business Standard


So our radar version will be developed further over the current N036. Which means a new radar + new designation and, of course, new capability.

1 - N036 is already a 360 deg radar thanks to its scanning angles
2 - Where do you suppose to place all the rear antenna support hardware?
3 - Why to do this looking at the point 1?

 

[Austin]

I remember reading that they had tried experimenting putting Rear Mounted Radar on the Sting of Su-34 but it was abandoned because it was putting the wing man to risk in many versus many close combat , because the R-73 WVR missile would turn 180 * to attack the target and since the target is not on FOV it may go for a friendly target.

Also the aperture size , power available and cooling issue would restrict the performance.

 

[gadeshi]

Photos from the first flight video:

1 - All-composite radio-clear tailfins:

2 - A nose fuselage section with 101-KS-O ("R2D2" optical jammers)

3 - Cocpit closer look:

4 - A 3/4 look, a new PChN (LEVCon) mounts are clearly visible:

 

[Austin]

Yes, EOTS is a complete EO DAS analog.
But it offers not only surviallance, like EO DAS, but IR/laser missiles jammers (so called R2D2 - crystal balls on the spine and under the nose) to protect from IR-homing missiles, including multispectral ones.

I see , One interesting capability that DAS has is passive ranging for weapons.

Normally an IR sensor would track the target but would need Laser to range the target that would alert the LWR of the hostile aircraft.

Does EOTS have passive ranging capability to give ranging information ?

 

[rugved]

Fifth Russian 5G fighter jet prototype takes wing

The fifth flight-capable test variant of the Sukhoi PAK FA fighter jet has made its maiden flight at the company's test range in Komsomolsk-on-Amur in Russia's Far East.

The flight took some 50 minutes and was dedicated to testing the aircraft's powerplant and flight stability, the company said in a statement.

The jet will take part in further testing at the site before relocating to the Zhukovsky test range near Moscow, where four other PAK FA prototypes are being fly-tested. Two more vehicles are used in ground testing currently.

PAK FA, also known as T-50, is Russia's first 5th generation fighter jet, a counterpart to the American F-35C Lightning II and F-22 Raptor, and China's J-20.

Its first-ever flight took place in January 2010. The test program since then has included some 450 air tests.

Most of the information about the aircraft remains classified and its final characteristics are not known yet. It will be a stealth one-man supercruise-capable fighter with an estimated maximum speed of more than Mach 2 (2,135 km/h).

It's is expected to carry up to 7.5 tons of armaments in its two internal bays and up to six external hardpoints. In addition to missiles it is likely to be armed with auto cannon.

Russian Defense Ministry has so far ordered 60 PAK FA aircraft and may double the number in the future. The fighter jet is expected to enter service in 2017.

The fighter jet will be offered to foreign buyers, too, including possibly India, Vietnam, Brazil and Peru.

 

[Drsomnath999]

1 - Tere are no official data about RBE2, but 180-200 km are apparently the most likely range.

the official data says twice the range of RBE PESA radar against a fighter size target , RBE 2 pesa radar range is around 90-100km so u can do your maths
Dozens of sources are there u can check my know your rafale thread for more info on that

2 - There will be no rear-looking AESA on T-50 or FGFA. It is simply don't need this radar - aperture will be too small, and there's no place for electronics blocks and (the most problem) - power feeds and cooling magistrales in the tail boom rear tip. This is because the rear tip is too close to the rear MWB.
However, the angles and the power and aperture of the other AESA units (both forward and side-looking) is enough to form almost 360 deg radar field.
At the top of this, there is 101-KS EOTS with full-sphere scope, so...

it depends upons IAF requirements u cant say it wont happen in FFGA (indian version)

No thats wrong it doesnt provide 360 coverage at all at best 280-300 degree coverage

See the PAK_FA radar complex pics carefully u would understand what i mean

It can have Passive 360 degree coverage thanks to it's RWR

CHEERS

 

[Drsomnath999]

The rules of physics is the same for F-22 vs for PAKFA.

Irbis-E claims have crossed 500 Km too, for a 3m2 target apparently.

But i am talking about fighter size target of 1 Sq m

A tail based radar and side arrays will make the aircraft expensive. PAKFA prototypes have a radiation warning symbol on the tail.

So, countries may end up having a choice between having it or not.

well safe bet would be a SU 35 style rear RWR at the moment ,but i cant say what would be FFGA requirements from IAF

It is highly unlikely.

Like i said to gadeshi it is according to manufacturer's claim only twice the detection range of rbe PESA radar against a fighter size target of 1m2


CHEERS

 

[Defcon 1]

I remember reading that they had tried experimenting putting Rear Mounted Radar on the Sting of Su-34 but it was abandoned because it was putting the wing man to risk in many versus many close combat , because the R-73 WVR missile would turn 180 * to attack the target and since the target is not on FOV it may go for a friendly target.

Also the aperture size , power available and cooling issue would restrict the performance.

Since R73 is IR guided, what does it has to do with aircraft's radar? The missile won't be using it anyways

 

[Drsomnath999]

Strangely comparing the 4th protype with 5th protype

2 things again reappear

1st is 101KS-O (defensive countermeasures station against infrared homing missiles)

2nd is 101KS-U all-round awareness system (roughly saying, Russian counterpart of the F-35's Distributed Aperture System (DAS) ). Threat detection, acquisition and targeting.

3rd 101-KS U MAWS On the fuselage sides of the t-50-4, dissappeared again (lol)

here compare those 2 pics again

5TH PROTOTYPE

4TH PROTOYPE

CHEERS

 

[Austin]

Since R73 is IR guided, what does it has to do with aircraft's radar? The missile won't be using it anyways

The Missile will lock what it sees first and that could be your wingman too , as its LOAL

 

[p2prada]

But i am talking about fighter size target of 1 Sq m

Your figures are wrong for 1m2 target. Only F-22 figures are right.

well safe bet would be a SU 35 style rear RWR at the moment ,but i cant say what would be FFGA requirements from IAF

Of course. We need to wait until the contract is signed. Whether IAF can afford or not we will know soon, hopefully.

Like i said to gadeshi it is according to manufacturer's claim only twice the detection range of rbe PESA radar against a fighter size target of 1m2

The claim is not twice. It is 50%.

Rafale News: Thales delivers First AESA radar for the Rafale F3

greater range (up to 50%) matching the meteor range

That's why I said RBE-2AA is not entirely a match for Bars Phase 1 radar (7KW TWT) when it comes to range performance and maybe even resolution. Irbis-E, APG-77, N036 will far outstrip Bars Phase 1 in many ways.

Anyway, official data for RBE-2 PESA is for 3m2 target, not 1m2 target.
Avionics Magazine :: Serious Squall

In air-to-air mode, the RBE2 gives a tracking range beyond 60 nautical miles against a 30-square-foot target, with detection ranges up to 75 nautical miles.

That's tracking range of 108Km and detection range of 140Km for a 3m2 target. That's why I gave comparative figures of Irbis-E for 3m2 resolution.

If we go by Thales claim of 140 Km detection range being improved by 50%, then that's 200 Km detection range for RBE-2AA for a 3m2 target. This surpasses Bars-1 but is lesser than Bars-2. Yup, this matches Phazatron's claim for Zhuk-AE too, with a similar level of capability as RBE-2AA.

There is supposed to be an estimated 400% improvement in capability between Bars-1 and Irbis-E in just range performance. N036 is naturally a much higher improvement over Irbis-E, maybe not so much in range but in every other parameter.