Not true -- pesas are electronically steered and most do not move like the irbis e on the su-35
J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter crobato
- Start date
- Status
Not true -- pesas are electronically steered and most do not move like the irbis e on the su-35
But china has been building aesas for years...
The only half plausible reason you've given for why the radar is pesa is ts look and even that is shaky. Everything else, from china's recent history with aesas and what we've heard of the j-10b being equipped with aesa would point inevitably to... Said radar being of said type.
Regarding PESAs, the defining characteristic of a PESA versus an AESA is that a PESA has a magnetron or klystron behind the system to generate radio waves for the radar, whereas the radio waves are generated by the transmit receive modules in AESA.
For highly-advanced Russian PESAs, you have many many transmission modules on the PESA, so that you don't have any apparent antenna, but there are other ways to handle this. For example, look at this Zhuk radar. There are large and obvious transmission devices here.
This is the RDY-2 used on the Mirage:
So, the fact is, all AESAs have flat sensor panels, some PESAs have flat sensor panels, but if there's a flat sensor panel with protrusions, it's likely a PESA.
===
And if you don't misinterpret my statement about backings, what I'm saying is that if the backing is very large, it's likely a PESA. Look at the Zhuk, for example.
Ask the big shrimp on Chinese boards about Chinese AESA costs. It fits, because it explains why, despite having naval and AWACs AESA for quite some time, you haven't seen the radar adapted to fighter applications as of yet.
It depends on the situation, for example, both computing and the internet were developed as military technologies, but they were ultimately adapted for civilian use. and as I've mentioned, the Chinese are good at acquiring, stealing, some might say, civilian technology from abroad, but are relatively behind when it comes to military technologies.
For highly-advanced Russian PESAs, you have many many transmission modules on the PESA, so that you don't have any apparent antenna, but there are other ways to handle this. For example, look at this Zhuk radar. There are large and obvious transmission devices here.
This is the RDY-2 used on the Mirage:
So, the fact is, all AESAs have flat sensor panels, some PESAs have flat sensor panels, but if there's a flat sensor panel with protrusions, it's likely a PESA.
===
And if you don't misinterpret my statement about backings, what I'm saying is that if the backing is very large, it's likely a PESA. Look at the Zhuk, for example.
Ask the big shrimp on Chinese boards about Chinese AESA costs. It fits, because it explains why, despite having naval and AWACs AESA for quite some time, you haven't seen the radar adapted to fighter applications as of yet.
It depends on the situation, for example, both computing and the internet were developed as military technologies, but they were ultimately adapted for civilian use. and as I've mentioned, the Chinese are good at acquiring, stealing, some might say, civilian technology from abroad, but are relatively behind when it comes to military technologies.
Comon. I dont know why some people are getting so worked out because of this. Most probably, that is a cover. Not only because that line is definetly chinese caracters ( that line is irregular), but also because the plane is on the outside. Taking into account that china´s air is dusty, (specially now), it would be wise to cover that. In addiction do you think that PLA would let people ouside to sneak at this radar ???
Most probably, that is the truth.
You said that the J-10 was switched to Russian engines. The WS-10 was completed far earlier than the J-10 was, but its performance characteristics were unsatisfactory, and if I recall, was linked to one of the rumored crashes of the J-10 in 1997.
You're being disingenuous. We are all expecting the J-10 to be fitted with the WS-10 engines, and this is a common belief on this board. This is because the J-10 is intended for export to Pakistan, and there are difficulties exporting Russian engines to Pakistan.
This is the chief difference in our understandings. My point of view is that there exist expensive AESA and cheap AESA. One is suitable for AWACs and naval ships, but is unsuitable for cheap fighter aircraft. As we can see, the F-16E is 55-80 million USD, the F-22 is $100 million, the F-18E/F Super Hornet is $60 million. This is because of the difficulty in manufacturing AESA modules. If you're aware, the fabrication plants for Intel and AMD are frequently over 1 billion dollars. So, there's a difference between being able to manufacture AESA cheaply and being able to manufacture AESA at all.
If you look at the Zhuk and Mirage radars I've shown you, there are external protrusions on the radar surface which channel the radio waves from the radio source.
and if I may add....
didn't the russians tried to sell pesa attenna radar in one of those su-30 deals back then and PLAAF said... nahh, thank you we will take the slotted planar-array antenna.
If they didn't have confidence in their own AESA effort they wouldn't pass that opportunity up.
Well, if Engineer will drop it, I'll drop it as well, and let's just wait and see for more information to show up.
There's talks that the protrusions are the characters for Nanjing 14 Radar Research, but the number of characters doesn't fit.
I'd be amused if it turned out to be an AESA-PESA hybrid with some AESA units jacked in to both reduce cost and increase effectiveness over a pure PESA approach.
There's talks that the protrusions are the characters for Nanjing 14 Radar Research, but the number of characters doesn't fit.
I'd be amused if it turned out to be an AESA-PESA hybrid with some AESA units jacked in to both reduce cost and increase effectiveness over a pure PESA approach.
- Status