well the turbojet intake isn't ever closed off, but there is a bypass.
I guess a more classical example is the R-15 which was greatly held back by being made of regular steel, which won't be a problem with a modern Chinese version.
Chengdu next gen combat aircraft (?J-36) thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
I guess a more classical example is the R-15 which was greatly held back by being made of regular steel, which won't be a problem with a modern Chinese version.
Listed ceiling is top of engagement envelope where horizontal radius approaches zero
Who says the whole radar will be in the nose? Why not conformal arrays elsewhere around the airframe?
I completely understand that there very well could be arrays in other parts of the aircraft, side arrays almost confirmed from the photo's we've seen. I'm mainly interested in what could be housed in the radome, why? Because it gives the best apples to apples comparison to current fighter systems, (other than the su57) and maximum frontal and BVR abilities against targets infront of the aircraft.
(if true, 4000 in the nose completely smashes the numbers of the su57 shown here)
If you pardon my fanboy numbers, if all else are equal (which is impossible because Irbis-E is PESA and old)
X-Band Radar with 4000 elements in the nose, 0.03s dwell time,10Ghz Frequency, 10W modules and 1 us pulsewidth like the Irbis-E shown above. Target 3sqm
(only difference is element amount here),
The array will have a PD of 90% at 351km, and a PD of 50% 547km away,
^the number shown here, take it with the worlds largest salt flat, because this is probably the absolutely most conservative and lowest estimate of the range of an array with 4000 elements.
Last edited:
Mig25 flew to 38km height and attain Mach 3+ (although limited to Mach 2.8 due to reasons) with a lousy engine, so I'd say present day turbo jet should be able to go to mach 3 as well. On the US side the Valkyrie can as well, but it had 6 engines.
It doesn't work this way.
Vertical ceiling for most non-manpad missiles is determined by effective pK, i.e. whether they can maneuver or not at a given altitude.
Reaching it isn't a problem.
I am not sure if you are inclining the surface of the radar bulkhead at all, but if you are not, inclining it a few degrees will give you more surface area to install TR modules and lessen radar return from opposing radars at the same time.
It works exactly that way when the number come from wiki and American marketing, in SM6's case it also has no requirement to maneuver when intercepting ballistics.
Can jet fighters fire off flares at supersonic speeds? If yes, then hard-kill munitions can be designed to be safely fired off as well, I believe. Also, if there is AI augmented flying, then during a evasive maneuver the AI can steer the plane into an optimal flight path for the Hard kill munition to intercept the incoming missile. From what I understand, most AA missiles follow the Proportional Guidance algorithm to intercept its target, so if you know where that missile is (and its heading and speed), you know where you are then you sort of know how that missile plans on killing you. At that point, AI can "lure" the incoming missile into a path what would be easier for the hard kill munition to get to given its limited fuel and kinematics. It is probably like solving some hairy partial differential equations.
Last edited:
There is no incline, but given how the radar could be mounted in the radome, the area could actually shrink given as the array is usually a big portion smaller than the radome outline. Therefore I'd like to stay reasonable in what could possible fit in the given size.