F-35 vs Su-30/35

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4959
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Nashua NH USA

Unread post31 Mar 2015, 20:27

So, that's a no
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 714
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post31 Mar 2015, 23:43

bring_it_on wrote:Good luck estimating classified capability that has been backed by significant investment over the last 2-3 decades.


Related materials...

http://dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a436262.pdf

The battery died on my scientific calculator but I'll be sure to verify every single formula in that paper as soon as I run over to the Radio Shack for a replacement :wink:
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 01:01

Thats Canadian estimate of worldwide classified RAM material development.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3268
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 08:09

eloise wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:
APG-80 is smaller in size and power to APG-79. APG-80 is designed to fit inside the smaller 600mm diameter class nose of F-16 and APG-79 the larger 700mm class nose of Super Hornet. This means that APG-80 has about 75% of the range performance of APG-79 if both are using similar construction and same T/R modules (lower power, smaller antenna area).

.

sorry i was trying to say APG-81 and APG-79 have same size and diameter, power
btw what do you think about Gripen NG radar?, it use a new kind of T/R modules, i think


We have pretty good photographic evidence that APG-81 has quite a bit more T/R modules (about 1,676 vs. 1,368 or so modules) and very likely also has larger diameter antenna. Originally APG-79 was said to have about 1,100 modules and the larger number might be upgraded or actual production version. AFAIK, APG-81 has 800 mm diameter class antenna and APG-79 has 700 mm diameter class antenna. That would be consistent with the difference between the T/R module count also. APG-81 also has new T/R modules that have been specifically developed for them. It would be really strange if they didn't have better performance than the earlier modules. If the modules had exactly the same performance and radars exactly similar construction, APG-81 should have about 15 percent longer range. With better modules and radar construction, I can see it being quite a bit more like (like 1/3 better range).

JAS Gripen NG will use Selex Galileo Raven ES-05 radar and it seems to be pretty standard modern AESA radar. I think it's great improvement over PS-05/A radar but not that special compared to other modern AESA radars. Currently they are using similar GaAs T/R modules although all radar manufacturers are going to use GaN modules in the future.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3268
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 08:35

sergei wrote:" AN/APG-81 likely has quite a bit more as it has more and likely newer (higher efficiency and higher power) modules and probably has better cooling capacity. I see it possibly having closer to 10 kW average output power, which is huge amount of power for a fighter radar."

Apg-77 can track target with RCS = 1m2 from 190 km+ in LPI
Apg-81 can track target with RCS = 1m2 from 150 km in LPI
:?


I'd really like to know the source for these figures. Could you provide a credible source?
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1895
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 09:09

What exactly the difference between GaAs and GaN module?
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3268
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 12:15

eloise wrote:what exactly the difference between GaAs and GaN module?


Material used. Gallium Nitride will be used (and is already used in some products) instead of Gallium Arsenide in current modules. GaN has some properties that make it far superior material to GaAs, namely:

- About 10 times the output power density potential which means much more power from smaller modules
- Higher operating and breakdown voltage meaning modules are more efficient and more resilient
- Higher thermal conductivity and resistance to higher temperatures which makes cooling much easier
- Several times wider bandwidth available (superior ECM resistance and EW, LPI and communications capabilities)
- Lower signal losses improving efficiency and making radar more sensitive

All in all GaN AESA could have something like twice the range performance, superior capabilities for LPI, EW and communications and much better ECM resistance with even higher reliability compared to GaAs AESA. Of course GaN is currently more expensive and the processes are more complex and costly which is why they are initially reserved for applications where really high performance is needed and costs are not much of an issue. In the future, most military AESA radars will likely be made from them.
Offline

sergei

Banned

  • Posts: 984
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2014, 22:56

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 17:48

hornetfinn wrote:
sergei wrote:" AN/APG-81 likely has quite a bit more as it has more and likely newer (higher efficiency and higher power) modules and probably has better cooling capacity. I see it possibly having closer to 10 kW average output power, which is huge amount of power for a fighter radar."
Apg-81 can track target with RCS = 1m2 from 150 km in LPI
:?


I'd really like to know the source for these figures. Could you provide a credible source?


It is necessary to ask eloise

eloise Fri Mar 27, 2015 4:42 pm

After a short search I find it probable:


1.31
and

6.02

PS; read all post not only latest.
Offline

pron

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014, 19:28

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 18:11

He asked for "Could you provide a credible source?" and not a youtube video that are made for marketing.
Offline

sergei

Banned

  • Posts: 984
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2014, 22:56

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 18:25

pron wrote:He asked for "Could you provide a credible source?" and not a youtube video that are made for marketing.


You does not believe Western manufacturers? :shock:
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 19:21

Those videos do not show the scale of the display (which is adjustable) or the RCS of the contacts.

Information without context is almost worthless.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

sergei

Banned

  • Posts: 984
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2014, 22:56

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 19:24

SpudmanWP wrote:Those videos do not show the scale of the display (which is adjustable) or the RCS of the contacts.

Information without context is almost worthless.


These characteristics are discussed very well watch video with sound : 2 Su-27
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post01 Apr 2015, 20:30

The videos you linked to make my point for me.


1.31

The only thing that shows is a simulated display having 4 rangebands of 20nm each. Remember that 20nm number


6.02

The "two SU-27s have been scrambled", (ie they are just taking off from an airfield) which is why they were not detected sooner.
You will also note that the scale of the rangebands has changed and now are 40nm each (up to 160nm in this instance). If you look at the TSD from 5:55 to 6:00 you will see the scale change and cycle through 10nm, 20nm, and 40nm per band.

The video does not say that the APG-81 is what detected the Su-27s and only mentions the ESM. Keep in mind that the TSD represents the "Big Picture" which combines data from ALL sensors (on and off board) and is not a just radar display.

Here is a pic showing the TSD (Tactical Situation Display) with 10nm rangebands.
v1PgRZR.png

You also might note that it took a SAR image from at least 40nm (3:40)
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 714
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post02 Apr 2015, 01:06

bring_it_on wrote:Thats Canadian estimate of worldwide classified RAM material development.


Posted that to demonstrate that the idea that there is some kind of generic 'Normal RAM Coating' is kind of overly simplistic assumption. Even though that is kind of an old paper and addresses only non-clasified RAM materials and assembly techniques and attenuation methods, the field is very deep indeed.
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post02 Apr 2015, 01:12

archeman wrote:
bring_it_on wrote:Thats Canadian estimate of worldwide classified RAM material development.


Posted that to demonstrate that the idea that there is some kind of generic 'Normal RAM Coating' is kind of overly simplistic assumption. Even though that is kind of an old paper and addresses only non-clasified RAM materials and assembly techniques and attenuation methods, the field is very deep indeed.


Of course it is deep, but it is not going to give you a reasonable estimate on what is achieved by a highly classified product developed by and for a user that has had experience with RAM that goes into decades.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests