AN / APG-77 vs N036 Byelka

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

khanasad

Banned

  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 26 Feb 2018, 18:13

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 04:26

AN / APG-77 vs N036 Byelka

AN / APG-77
The APG-77 is a solid-state AESA flat-array radar. Composed of 1956 T / R modules, each the size of a rubber chip, it can perform an almost instantaneous beam direction (in the order of tens of nanoseconds).

It provides a field of view of 120 ° in azimuth and elevation, which is the highest possible value for a flat phase array antenna. Unconfirmed sources suggest that APG-77 has an operating range of 125-150 miles (201-241 km), against an objective of 1 m2 (11 square feet). It is believed that a range of 400 km or more is possible, compared to a goal of 1 m2 (11 square feet), with the APG-77v1 with the new GaAs modules, while using narrower beams.

With a range of 300km for a target of 3m ^ 2 and 200km for a target of 1m ^ 2 With 30 modules distributed throughout the fuselage, the AN / APG-77 next to the AN / ALR-94 the pilot of the F-22 has a 360 ° view with respect to existing and emerging threats, it should be noted that T / R modules capable of detecting and following an objective only provide 270 ° coverage around the Raptor, with its main objective being to locate targets, track them and effect jamming.

N036 Byelka

The radar is part of the integrated Sh121 multifunctional system (MIRES) on board the Su-57. The N036 radar system is developed by Tikhomirov NIIP Institute and consists of an AESA X-band radar mounted on the nose with 1,552 T / R modules, designated as the N036 Byelka (N036-1-01), and two AESA radars. smaller X-band with 358 T / R modules mounted on the sides of the front fuselage designated N036B (N036B-1-01). The suite also has two L-band matrices N036L (N036L-1-01) in wing slats that are not only used for identification of friends or enemies, but also for electronic warfare purposes, LO and VLO aircraft search , RF geolocator IFF, Data-Link, communications, etc.

The computer processing of the X and L band signals allows the system information to be significantly improved. With the possibility of tracking 62 targets and attacking 16 simultaneously. In addition to being able to attack 4 targets simultaneously on the ground. The electronic countermeasure set (ECM) L402 “Himalayas” manufactured by the KNIRTI institute uses both its own matrices and those of the N036 radar. It uses the Russian Elbrus processors.

The novel radar system N036 Byelke provides a distribution of arrays of antennas of different ranges throughout the body of the Su-57, which provides a complete view.

anfault.jpg
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7834
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 04:49

:doh:

The L-Band wing things are just IFF. They simply do not have the power required to search for anything.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1731
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 08:41

SpudmanWP wrote:The L-Band wing things are just IFF. They simply do not have the power required to search for anything.


do we have any concrete evidence, cause we might be underestimating them too much, remember they did field PESA, data links and HMCS on fighters before the US did
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7834
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 09:09

You can't overcome the physics of the 1-3 element (in the verticle and depending on frequency) PESA limitation. Without enough rows, the L_Band transmitted energy will be sent out in a giant "fan" shape (again, vertically). This means that the energy that does reach your "target" will be hundreds of times weaker than a proper PESA transmitter of the same emitter count. Each wing holds what, 20-30, maybe 40 emitters per wing? Give me a break on the whole "it's a jammer, a radar, geolocator (again, no verticle resolution), comms, etc" claims.. it's a joke.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1536
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 09:17

zero-one wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:The L-Band wing things are just IFF. They simply do not have the power required to search for anything.


do we have any concrete evidence, cause we might be underestimating them too much, remember they did field PESA, data links and HMCS on fighters before the US did



Which datalink and HMCS specifically?
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7834
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 09:46

Maybe he is thinking of VTAS w/SEAM in 1969 (F-4J).. wait, no.. that's ours.

Oh yeah.. maybe JTIDS in the mid to late '70s... nope, ours too.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1731
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 10:15

basher54321 wrote:Which datalink and HMCS specifically?


Well regarding the datalink, I read that info here that the Mig-31 was the first fighter (or interceptor) equipped with a data link, I just accepted it as true, but if its not then I apologize.

Regarding HMCS, the ZSh-5 / Shchel-3UM was fielded in the mid 80s, more than a decade earlier than the US version. And yes I do know that the US Army had HMCS in their helicopters at that time as well

Well at least I think I was right about the Russians being first to equip PESA on fighters? point is, just be careful when wielding the "everything Russian is crap" card, cause they're often 2nd best which is pretty outstanding considering their limitations and such.
Offline

hythelday

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 399
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 10:25

SpudmanWP wrote: Without enough rows, the L_Band transmitted energy will be sent out in a giant "fan" shape (again, vertically)


It's cuz plazma stealth provides necessary beam forming qualities in lieu of more modules, yo.


SpudmanWP wrote:Maybe he is thinking of VTAS w/SEAM in 1969 (F-4J).. wait, no.. that's ours.


TBH from what I read (on this forum, in a similar thread) VTAS didn't work too well and didn't make it to operational squadrons?

Russians get the credit for fielding the first operational HOBS missile meant to be used with HMCS - the Archer. First operational HMCS was developed by Israel/South Africa and was deployed and tested in combat; it was then stolen by SA defector and reverse rngineered into first Soviet system.

BTW, asadkhan/khanasad aka reportmetothemoderators, you are a persisting fellow, I'll hive you that.
Offline

gideonic

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 270
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015, 13:54

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 10:36

zero-one wrote:Regarding HMCS, the ZSh-5 / Shchel-3UM was fielded in the mid 80s, more than a decade earlier than the US version. And yes I do know that the US Army had HMCS in their helicopters at that time as well

Initial Soviet HMDs were actually reverse-engineered from the one used in South-African F1CZ Mirage's, so you can't even credit them for that. They only started developing them after they were used against their proxies in Africa and somehow managed to get their hands on one. Also US had tested Honeywell VTAS in the 70s, just decided it wasn't worth it.

I do agree overal that you shouldn't flat-out underestimate the Russians, but you also shouldn't run with their "well known firsts" facts, that often are totally wrong, or taken waaay out of context.
Offline

hythelday

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 399
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 12:52

gideonic wrote:Initial Soviet HMDs were actually reverse-engineered from the one used in South-African F1CZ Mirage's, so you can't even credit them for that. They only started developing them after they were used against their proxies in Africa and somehow managed to get their hands on one.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Gerhardt
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 13:05

Hello wewuzkangz, i see you come back again with a new account. Haven't given up on spreading propaganda? :mrgreen:
Offline
User avatar

white_lightning35

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 366
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2016, 03:07
  • Location: Home of nuclear submarines, engines, and that's about it.

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 14:20

Call me biased but the su-57 just looks stupidly ugly imo. Nothing can compare to the f-22.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1731
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 15:27

white_lightning35 wrote:Call me biased but the su-57 just looks stupidly ugly imo. Nothing can compare to the f-22.


The Raptor is the prettiest non fictional flying object in my opinion, better than the YF-23 even. But the Su-57 ain't all that bad. I put it slightly above the F-35C which is the most beautiful F-35 in my eyes and that plane is pretty high in my hierarchy of pretty looking machines.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2473
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 17:42

I always loved the YF-23A, especially what was to become the EMD. After that, SU-57 given its YF-23A inspiration. OK OK, it's not exactly "clean" in the back, but those LEVCON's, chines and especially the wing. Gorgeous!

I will admit the production F-22 looks a LOT better than the YF-22A. That thing was butt ugly. Reminded me of the Edsel (or whatever) car...
Offline

icemaverick

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 405
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2012, 23:05
  • Location: New York

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 18:30

zero-one wrote:
basher54321 wrote:Which datalink and HMCS specifically?


Well regarding the datalink, I read that info here that the Mig-31 was the first fighter (or interceptor) equipped with a data link, I just accepted it as true, but if its not then I apologize.

Regarding HMCS, the ZSh-5 / Shchel-3UM was fielded in the mid 80s, more than a decade earlier than the US version. And yes I do know that the US Army had HMCS in their helicopters at that time as well

Well at least I think I was right about the Russians being first to equip PESA on fighters? point is, just be careful when wielding the "everything Russian is crap" card, cause they're often 2nd best which is pretty outstanding considering their limitations and such.


The SOVIET UNION had a lot of innovative stuff but that state doesn’t exist anymore. The USSR actually had a much larger military budget relative to the US. Russia has a fraction of the R&D budget of the US. They do have some advantages relative to most countries thanks to the legacy of the USSR but that edge is fading fast.

In regards to a lot of military tech, I’d say France, UK, Germany and Israel have matched or surpassed Russia thanks to the better state of their high tech industries.
Next

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 3 guests