KJ-600 carrierborne AEWC thread

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Any info on the radar? Which operating band, PESA or AESA?

Chances are good, based on momentum, the obvious designer of the radars would be NRIET, which supplied the radars for the J-10, J-11, is responsible for the Type 346 on the 052C, D and 055, and is also responsible for the radars on the KJ-2000, KJ-200 and KJ-500, which are AESAs. Chances are good, also based on momentum, the radar on the KJ-600 would be based or derived from the KJ-500.
 

Max Demian

Junior Member
Registered Member
Chances are good, based on momentum, the obvious designer of the radars would be NRIET, which supplied the radars for the J-10, J-11, is responsible for the Type 346 on the 052C, D and 055, and is also responsible for the radars on the KJ-2000, KJ-200 and KJ-500, which are AESAs. Chances are good, also based on momentum, the radar on the KJ-600 would be based or derived from the KJ-500.
By analogy, L-band would be the likely operating spectrum?
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
By analogy, L-band would be the likely operating spectrum?

I don't think we have good certainty exactly what band KJ-2000, 200 and 500 operate on.
I believe there were some confident assertions that KJ-2000's radar operated in L band.

I don't think we know what KJ-500 operates on.


But we can be pretty confident KJ-600 will be an AESA, and at least leverage some technologies already proven and in service on KJ-500.
 

Max Demian

Junior Member
Registered Member
But we can be pretty confident KJ-600 will be an AESA, and at least leverage some technologies already proven and in service on KJ-500.
By analogy, AESA would imply a non-rotating dome.

Interesting divergence in approach. The US favors a larger single antenna in a rotating dome, over 3 smaller 120d view AESAs.

What has me really intrigued is why the US is still using a PESA architecture for APY-9 on E-2D, even though the radar is fully digital with a solid state transmitter and receiver. My hunch is that it has to do with weight/CG/momentum and cooling, which is easier to deal with in a PESA design.

Sorry for digressing.
 
Last edited:

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
By analogy, AESA would imply a non-rotating dome.

Interesting divergence in approach. The US favors a larger single antenna in a rotating dome, over 3 smaller 120d view AESAs.

What has me really intrigued is why the US is still using a PESA architecture for APY-9 on E-2D, even though the radar is fully digital with a solid state transmitter and receiver. My hunch is that it has to do with weight/CG/momentum and cooling, which is easier to deal with in a PESA design.

No, an AESA certainly does not imply a non-rotating dome.


There are quite a number of AESA radars that rotate to achieve 360 degree coverage both in air and naval applications.
The E-2D's APY-9 is an example of a rotating AESA for an aerial AEW&C platform.
The C-295 AEW&C product developed between Europe and Israel is another.

Naval rotating AESAs are of course are quite numerous; SAMPSON, Smart-L, Kronos, among others.

For KJ-600/H-600, I think it's been expected for quite a few years now that its most likely radar configuration will be a rotating dome/rotadome, with an AESA.
 

Max Demian

Junior Member
Registered Member
No, an AESA certainly does not imply a non-rotating dome.
By analogy based on shared features/influence from KJ-2000 and KJ-500. Of course, that’s not a very strong argument.
The E-2D's APY-9 is an example of a rotating AESA for an aerial AEW&C platform.
APY-9 is not an AESA. It is a mechanically rotated PESA radar.
For KJ-600/H-600, I think it's been expected for quite a few years now that its most likely radar configuration will be a rotating dome/rotadome, with an AESA.
OK. I wasn’t aware of that.
 
Top