J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter crobato
- Start date
- Status
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Who did the rough count?
I count 25 TR modules for the shortest line and 39 lines of TR modules (excluding the top and bottom lines, which don't look like the other modules but may be TR modules nonetheless). So that's 975 TR modules if every single line is as short as the shortest lines, which obviously they are not.
The IFF probs makes it impossible to do a proper count, but my rough estimate would be between 1600-2000+ TR modules. Although that is more from feeling rather than any scientific method.
I count 25 TR modules for the shortest line and 39 lines of TR modules (excluding the top and bottom lines, which don't look like the other modules but may be TR modules nonetheless). So that's 975 TR modules if every single line is as short as the shortest lines, which obviously they are not.
The IFF probs makes it impossible to do a proper count, but my rough estimate would be between 1600-2000+ TR modules. Although that is more from feeling rather than any scientific method.
I counted roughly 1400 elements, +/- counting error. I was probably off by one or two on some of the lines, and it got trickier around the IFFs, but the pattern of roughly 42-46 modules at the widest parts of the array was pretty consistent.mpleio @MP.net
rough count 800<TR modules<1000
anyone want to have exact count go ahead
sorry did that rough count real quick last time before bed 
yes its many more than 800-1000, almost double than that i think
about AESA/PESA, i hope someone who with knowledge can chip in here,
we had IFF dipoles assumption based discussion on CDF already, not sure if we want to have a clone of that discussion, maybe some insights from the processing module? or other tidbits
yes its many more than 800-1000, almost double than that i think
about AESA/PESA, i hope someone who with knowledge can chip in here,
we had IFF dipoles assumption based discussion on CDF already, not sure if we want to have a clone of that discussion, maybe some insights from the processing module? or other tidbits
^^ The first photo mentions a PESA while the second mentions AESA. They are both fire-control radars. The PESA has the ability to track 10 targets and engage 4 at the same time.
Engineer
Major
This radar is our country's first PESA fire control radar, and is developed by 14th institute. It achieves scanning without mechanical movements through the use of electronic beam steering. The radar can detect and track multiple targets, and is capable of tracking 10 targets and engaging 4 targets simultaneously. The use of broad spectrum enables the radar to have excellent resistance against ECM.Any translation?
This radar is our country's first prototype of AESA fire control radar. It is developed by [unknown translation] is capable of agile beam steering, varying in power output, and low power loss. It has long detection range, strong ability in tracking multiple targets, excellent resistance to ECM, and low probabilty of interception. The successful development of this radar signifies our country's level in research of airborne radar is on par with other advanced countries.
Engineer
Major
One way to tell is by whether the radar is actively cooled. The Chinese forums settled the AESA/PESA radar debate for 052C that way.
it's PESA.not AESA.
modern AESA adapted Vivaldi slotted array antenna,pioneer by the US.compare with previous design,this allow higher T/R density.
Use of PESA is simple stepping stone toward AESA.
according to the russian sources, prototype already been tested on J-11B.
modern AESA adapted Vivaldi slotted array antenna,pioneer by the US.compare with previous design,this allow higher T/R density.
Use of PESA is simple stepping stone toward AESA.
according to the russian sources, prototype already been tested on J-11B.
- Status