The J-11D Surprise (and SU-35) : China Upgrades Russian Flanker Fighters On Its Own

rohit.gr77

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
135
Likes
117
Yea but your dumb outburst has no intelligence at all.

I've told you there is nothing wrong to put IFF dipole on the AESA radar.

Now explain me why cant AESA have IFF interrogator ??
I recommend you to please read blueblood's posts again very slowly to understand what he's trying to make u understand.
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
If still you are unable to comprehend his simple language then please enroll urself in some elementary English classes.
 

Antam1505

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
65
Likes
1
I recommend you to please read blueblood's posts again very slowly to understand what he's trying to make u understand.
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
If still you are unable to comprehend his simple language then please enroll urself in some elementary English classes.

He has no solid argument, except picture with his own fantasy.

There is no ground to claim that AESA cannot have IFF interrogator.

Prove me if I am wrong. He is now busy googling to find the evidence that can support his outburst that AESA technically may not have IFF dipole/iinterrogator and he will fail.

He is such a retard, better be picky if you want to cheerlead.
 

rohit.gr77

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
135
Likes
117
He has no solid argument, except picture with his own fantasy.

There is no ground to claim that AESA cannot have IFF interrogator.

Prove me if I am wrong. He is such a retard, better be picky if you want to cheerlead.
He's merely saying that modern designs of AESA does not have interrogator. He never said that AESA cannot have them.
Seriously you have a very big comprehension problem, or you simply see the world through your Chinese Lens. One more thing, I'm not here to cheerlead anyone, just to learn. Hope you can easily understand this.
 

blueblood

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
1,872
Likes
1,475
Yea but your dumb outburst has no intelligence at all.

Explain me why cant AESA has IFF interrogator ??
Despite the fact that you are too retarded to understand, I'll still try.

AESA is composed of solid state transmit/receive modules which form the beam. These T/RMs are independent and can handle multiple functions simultaneously. Each T/RM makes its own signal which can used as desired. So instead of a singular large beam there are multiple smaller beams which can be used independently. This allows the operator to engage several functions or modes simultaneously, air to air, air to ground or air to sea.

IFF is one such function the T/RMs handle. So you can activate the IFF function of the radar without interrogators.

There is no need for interrogators because the aforementioned T/RMs will function as one if needed while continuing to do n number of the functions.

This is a quad T/RM made by BEL India.

http://**********/attachments/u8k3h1m-jpg.202178/

And they are used below. No interrogators.

http://**********/attachments/16609418226_52e0ab8378_k-jpg.202177/

So the operator will use a small number of T/RMs for IFF and use the rest at his discretion.

 

Antam1505

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
65
Likes
1
He's merely saying that modern designs of AESA does not have interrogator. He never said that AESA cannot have them.
Seriously you have a very big comprehension problem, or you simply see the world through your Chinese Lens. One more thing, I'm not here to cheerlead anyone, just to learn. Hope you can easily understand this.
No, it is both of you that have comprehension problem, or logical fallacy.

I know the point that both of you intend to say that (modern) AESA should not have IFF interrogator, eventhough your friend blueblood has difficulty to construct proper argument. But again that has no ground.

Tell me the reason why modern AESA should has no IFF interrogator?
Why cant China get out of the box and has her own technical solution or innovation?
 

Antam1505

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
65
Likes
1
Despite the fact that you are too retarded to understand, I'll still try.

AESA is composed of solid state transmit/receive modules which form the beam. These T/RMs are independent and can handle multiple functions simultaneously. Each T/RM makes its own signal which can used as desired. So instead of a singular large beam there are multiple smaller beams which can be used independently. This allows the operator to engage several functions or modes simultaneously, air to air, air to ground or air to sea.

IFF is one such function the T/RMs handle. So you can activate the IFF function of the radar without interrogators.

There is no need for interrogators because the aforementioned T/RMs will function as one if needed while continuing to do n number of the functions.

This is a quad T/RM made by BEL India.

http://**********/attachments/u8k3h1m-jpg.202178/

And they are used below. No interrogators.

http://**********/attachments/16609418226_52e0ab8378_k-jpg.202177/

So the operator will use a small number of T/RMs for IFF and use the rest at his discretion.


I know, you dont need to explain that to me.

But even if TR can be used as IFF, doesnt mean that we are not allowed to have seperate IFF dipole, unless you say it break physical law. Technical solution cannot be limited.

Your explanation cannot be used as a ground to judge that radar with IFF interrogator should be not AESA. Unfortunately you are too retarded to understand that point.
There is no western expert say so when they review the J-10B radar appearance.
 

rohit.gr77

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2015
Messages
135
Likes
117
No, it is both of you that have comprehension problem, or logical fallacy.

I know the point that both of you intend to say that (modern) AESA should not have IFF interrogator, eventhough your friend blueblood has difficulty to construct proper argument. But again that has no ground.

Tell me the reason why modern AESA should has no IFF interrogator?
Why cant China get out of the box and has her own technical solution or innovation?
OK credit to China for thinking out of the box, but that technical solution or innovation of using interrogators is not in line with modern designs. Bringing up an old design and claiming it as innovation is so pathetically Chinese:frusty:
 

blueblood

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
1,872
Likes
1,475
I know, you dont need to explain that to me.

But even if TR can be used as IFF, doesnt mean that we are not allowed to have seperate IFF dipole, unless you say it break physical law. Technical solution cannot be limited.

Your explanation cannot be used as a ground to judge that radar with IFF interrogator should be not AESA.
There is no western expert say so when they review the J-10B radar appearance.
Right.......

Reality and logic be damned. What next? A minibar for the pilot.o_Oo_O.


oqaye.jpg


You have been beaten soundly and from this day till the day you die;


YOU ARE MY BITCH
 

Antam1505

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
65
Likes
1
OK credit to China for thinking out of the box, but that technical solution or innovation of using interrogators is not in line with modern designs. Bringing up an old design and claiming it as innovation is so pathetically Chinese:frusty:
It doesnt matter it look old or different. Each design has its own purpose, eventhough it may look old fashion.
I think with that IFF dipole, can transmit more powerful signal than TR. It could be the purpose of IFF interrogator.
 

Antam1505

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
65
Likes
1
Right.......

Reality and logic be damned. What next? A minibar for the pilot.o_Oo_O.


View attachment 5600

You have been beaten soundly and from this day till the day you die;


YOU ARE MY BITCH
Is that all you can argue? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

See .. you have no ground to beat my argumentation.
You can't find in google the reason why AESA should not has IFF dipole
You can't find in google any western expert who said AESA cannot has IFF interrogator.


You loose buddy





And I like to see you are humiliated day by day


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
 

Yumdoot

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
778
Likes
675
Much higher than Indian can have :lol:
Uttam AESA is Indian.

I used to think that west based NRIs and American fanboys resident in India, just want to pull down the Chinese to maintain their own congruence with western interests by degrading you Chinese. But seems like they are not entirely wrong.
 

Antam1505

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
65
Likes
1
T/RMs in the Indian Uttam Aesa is much higher than Indian can have.

I bow down to thy intelligence sire.:hail:
Sorry to forget that your failure in communication should be other own fault or due to some one else intelligence problem.

:india:
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top