Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I want specific information on Pak-FA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by ajaybhutani
    Since russians have the AESA technology. (N011M is AESA) .So well there wont be a prob in making a radar competing with F22. We need to take care of the RCS. Though Avionics will be a rpoblem as american ones are considered the best. But again a lot of good stuff can be expected.
    Sources? I think you will find that the N011M is PESA. not AESA. This is quite inferior to AESA for several reasons, not the least of which is because it provides a huge target for radar guided AMRAAM's.
    "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by highsea
      Sources? I think you will find that the N011M is PESA. not AESA. This is quite inferior to AESA for several reasons, not the least of which is because it provides a huge target for radar guided AMRAAM's.
      might be a mistake from my part but i read somewhere a guy saying that he studied in his radar course that N011M has same underlying principles as AESA . Though i have lost the link. I'll search for it and post it.

      Comment


      • #33
        k i found it ..
        i got influenced by this post and didnt check the links .. sorry my fault

        http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...9&postcount=75

        Comment


        • #34
          Should have guessed it was Dima.

          Russia does NOT have AESA. The Russian Phased Array Radars are scanned passively. They are NOT frequency agile, they do NOT have LPI design- they are NOT nearly as beam agile as AESA. They have high power requirements, because the individual elements must be high powered to get the range needed, and PESA designs need tubes (MW amplifiers). Multi-tasking all happens at the same frequencies, because there are no signal processing modules in the elements.

          Thus they are succeptible to jamming, and can be detected at long ranges with RWR's- two faults that AESA does not have, due to spread spectrum design. They are not capable of fingerprinting an AC. If one tube fails, they are rendered non-functional. The tubes degrade with use, so they have to be replaced on a regular schedule.

          What they have is a simple design, that's relatively cheap to manufacture, and is suitable for Russia's needs-e.g. defensive systems.

          There is way too much technical detail for me to go into here. If you want in depth details on the Russian radar systems vs. the American ones, I refer you to:

          International Radar Directory
          Barton Papers (Mr. David C. Barton)
          International Countermeasures Handbook
          Digital Aerospace System Conference 2002
          "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by highsea
            Should have guessed it was Dima.

            Russia does NOT have AESA. The Russian Phased Array Radars are scanned passively. They are NOT frequency agile, they do NOT have LPI design- they are NOT nearly as beam agile as AESA. They have high power requirements, because the individual elements must be high powered to get the range needed, and PESA designs need tubes (MW amplifiers). Multi-tasking all happens at the same frequencies, because there are no signal processing modules in the elements.

            Thus they are succeptible to jamming, and can be detected at long ranges with RWR's- two faults that AESA does not have, due to spread spectrum design. They are not capable of fingerprinting an AC. If one tube fails, they are rendered non-functional. The tubes degrade with use, so they have to be replaced on a regular schedule.

            What they have is a simple design, that's relatively cheap to manufacture, and is suitable for Russia's needs-e.g. defensive systems.

            There is way too much technical detail for me to go into here. If you want in depth details on the Russian radar systems vs. the American ones, I refer you to:

            International Radar Directory
            Barton Papers (Mr. David C. Barton)
            International Countermeasures Handbook
            Digital Aerospace System Conference 2002

            any online link for that??

            Comment


            • #36
              Be more specific. I don't think the Barton Papers are published online (but you should be able to order them from the IEEE). You won't understand much of it if you don't have an electronics background, which is why I am not going to go into technical details here. There is plenty of information on the Bars N011M. Try bharat-rakshak for discussion on the radar in the MKI.
              "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

              Comment


              • #37
                also the SBI-16 Zaslon is a AEAS radar, and the MiG-31 utilizes this radar, has a range of 200km-250km

                ajay, are you absolutely certain that the MiG-31 can supercruise at Mach 2.35, i thought that the F-22 was the only aircraft in service(or entering IOC by the end of this year) that could supercruise

                thanks for your link on the MiG-31 being opted for India, look at the range of Zaslon-M radar, 360km, that's incredible, is that an upgraded version of the SBI-16?

                also, the AL-41 engine will be even more powerful than the F-119

                http://aeronautics.ru/archive/refere...nes/Russia.htm

                44,090 lbs of thrust compared to the 35,000 lbs. generated, also take into account that the T-50 will weigh 4 tonnes lighter than the F-22 at normal weight load, thus, meaning improved maneuverability, and maximum speed,a s to supercruise, that will rely on the dry thrust

                actually, Garry, to be approximate, to manufacture objects in Russia is 3 times cheaper than in America, and to produce something in India is about 4 times cheaper than in America

                Garry, also, the MiG 1.42 project is not complete, but hte MiG 1.44 IS complete, and MiG is financing more research into the MiG 1.42, the Su-47 project is also complete
                i'm waiting for a,link from someone, because i i can't find any yet, try and look back to my previous links ajay, maybe you'll find it


                http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html
                AESA radar?

                "Should have guessed it was Dima. "

                my bad, it states that the SBI-16 Zaslon radar on the MiG-31 is a AESA radar

                but later on, it states that both the SBI-16 and NIIP- NO 11M are passive phased array radars, OR, PESA radars as highseas mentioned, my mistake

                does anyone have any links on future russian developments in radar, possibly AESA? i heard from another forum that Russia is developing a AESA radar for their T-50
                for MOTHER MOLDOVA

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Dima
                  also the SBI-16 Zaslon is a AEAS radar, and the MiG-31 utilizes this radar, has a range of 200km-250km

                  well
                  The B-1B Bone has flown since the 1980s with an AN/APQ-164 radar, fitted with an electronically steered array. The B-1A Batwing also exploits this technology in its AN/APQ-181 multimode attack radar. Both of these radars can be used for terrain following flight, as well as surface attack modes. The Soviet MiG-31 Foxhound also carries this technology in its SBI-16 Zaslon air intercept radar.
                  ajay, are you absolutely certain that the MiG-31 can supercruise at Mach 2.35, i thought that the F-22 was the only aircraft in service(or entering IOC by the end of this year) that could supercruise
                  Here hes talking about SBI-26 as a ESA and not AESA( as ESA can also be a PESA) .
                  Lemme post the link again for u.

                  http://www.hostultra.com/~migalley/mig31_variants.html

                  Here look at the mig31M( type 05)

                  its writte
                  cruise 2500km/h


                  thanks for your link on the MiG-31 being opted for India, look at the range of Zaslon-M radar, 360km, that's incredible, is that an upgraded version of the SBI-16?
                  I dont think india hasnt opted it yes . But yes it was offered.
                  also, the AL-41 engine will be even more powerful than the F-119

                  http://aeronautics.ru/archive/refere...nes/Russia.htm

                  44,090 lbs of thrust compared to the 35,000 lbs. generated, also take into account that the T-50 will weigh 4 tonnes lighter than the F-22 at normal weight load, thus, meaning improved maneuverability, and maximum speed,a s to supercruise, that will rely on the dry thrust
                  Well is there any planned upgrade in phase for F119( to power up the later versions of the Aircraft??


                  Well thats what i was looking for " the dry thrust values does anyone have it ??"

                  actually, Garry, to be approximate, to manufacture objects in Russia is 3 times cheaper than in America, and to produce something in India is about 4 times cheaper than in America
                  The Cost of US F22 program i well above 35B$( propsed) and supposedly another 7 B$ has already been spent more on it.
                  Now even if We are able to maintain the same levels in development as in production( i.e. i/4th of american cost) then we need at least 10B$ of investment.
                  Now we are just cheap at making aircrafts but at developing them the main disadvantage is the cost of avionics which owing to the level of tech with russia and india will be a lot. ( as both are much inferior to west in avionics tech).
                  Garry, also, the MiG 1.42 project is not complete, but hte MiG 1.44 IS complete, and MiG is financing more research into the MiG 1.42, the Su-47 project is also complete
                  Well firstly please explain me whats the difference between Mig1.42 and Mig1.44
                  and then how many times has Mig1.44 flown. u shud know that it takes at least 1000 flight hours to certify a fighter for induction.
                  i'm waiting for a,link from someone, because i i can't find any yet, try and look back to my previous links ajay, maybe you'll find it
                  Are utalking about the link for Mig1.44 being complete . I m sorry i dont remember reading anythin like that in ur links.


                  http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html
                  AESA radar?

                  "Should have guessed it was Dima. "

                  my bad, it states that the SBI-16 Zaslon radar on the MiG-31 is a AESA radar

                  but later on, it states that both the SBI-16 and NIIP- NO 11M are passive phased array radars, OR, PESA radars as highseas mentioned, my mistake

                  does anyone have any links on future russian developments in radar, possibly AESA? i heard from another forum that Russia is developing a AESA radar for their T-50[/QUOTE]

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Does we have any info about new AESA radar for PAK FA ???

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by ajaybhutani
                      didnt hear about PAK T1 before can u give more info on it ??
                      First three letters are common for both programs - that is Perspektivniy (Prospective) Aviatsionniy (Aviation) Kompleks (Complex)

                      the last two mean - Frontovoi Avitsii (Frontline [i.e. shorter range] Aviation)

                      TI - Tyajoliy Istrebitel (Long-range Fighter). It was supposed to follow PAF FA that is a smaller version with size comparable to MiG-29.... while I guess that PAK TI was supposed to be following Su-27 Flanker and its missions....

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by ajaybhutani
                        Well firstly please explain me whats the difference between Mig1.42 and Mig1.44 and then how many times has Mig1.44 flown. u shud know that it takes at least 1000 flight hours to certify a fighter for induction.
                        Ajay, the 1.42 and 1.44 were the same AC. The 1.42 was built for static tests and the 1.44 was for flight tests. The 1.44 made two flights, for a total of 15 minutes. It's unlikely that it will ever fly again, it will probably go into public display somewhere, like our YF-23's.

                        It takes a lot more than 1000 hours to sort out a new AC. The F/A-22 went through more than 7000 hours of flight tests before it was certified for service.
                        "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by highsea
                          Ajay, the 1.42 and 1.44 were the same AC. The 1.42 was built for static tests and the 1.44 was for flight tests. The 1.44 made two flights, for a total of 15 minutes. It's unlikely that it will ever fly again, it will probably go into public display somewhere, like our YF-23's.
                          Well i know . Why i asked this question to dima was to hear his logic of difference between the two for He even considers using S37 instead of Su47 as wrong.But since he claimed that one of the mig 1.44/1,42 is ready. so i thought hes apparently talking of some other aircraft and using a wong name here . .. And yes apparently the work in Mig1.44 was restarted by Mig last year. Though the finances are low. And after the change of the Mig head i dont think it would any more be allowed. Though i wonder what led to the fall of Mig1.44 if it was really a good aircraft capable of competing with F22. For if it was really better than S37 it should have been selected instead of the latter.
                          It takes a lot more than 1000 hours to sort out a new AC. The F/A-22 went through more than 7000 hours of flight tests before it was certified for service.
                          Well that is the figure indian media uses quite often for LCA apparently calling it as a minimum standard for certification. I think it represents a minimum test time to be done ( by some standards i m unaware of). For different aircrafts would need different flight hours. But there shud definitely be the min standard value needed for certification.Though here in india media says its 1000 hours ( assuming that no faults were found/all faults were corrected during this period. ) Though about F22. I think there are still a lot of sft bugs still in the programs written.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            "cruise 2500km/h"

                            hmm, that's odd, that's insanely fast, oh well, nice

                            thanks for the information Garry, never heard of that, what site did you get it from?

                            actually, highsea, the MiG 1.42 was the program name of the actual aircraft to go into service(but they wuold change the designation to something else), the MiG 1.44 was the prototype aircraft

                            here, let me try to find a link, i remember reading a great link on the difference betweene the MiG 1.42 and MiG 1.44, here's something

                            http://www.lowobservable.com/Protos.htm
                            at the very bottom
                            http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/MiG1.42.html
                            (third paragraph, close to the middle, in brackets)

                            also, the cartoon picture, that resembles the way that it was supposed to look like, the picture on the right is the most accurate, compare the wing design on that to the wing design of the MiG 1.44, also, compare the cockpit/radome area, it was to be flattened compared to the MiG 1.44, it's engines were supposed to be of the same design as the F-119's powerinug the F-22, any other differences you notice, those are the most obvious(i know it's a cartoon, but it resembles how the production model would have looked like)

                            "I think there are still a lot of sft bugs still in the programs written."

                            yes, highsea, you seem knowledgeable, is this true, i've heard reports from other people and from some articles stating that the Raptor has been having some software problems?

                            i don't know why they didn't choose either one, really, i don't have an answer for that
                            for MOTHER MOLDOVA

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              highSea,
                              as i said dima will have a strange explanation for calling 1.44 different as 1.42 . LOL..
                              Dima,
                              evn in the links u provided it is said
                              "
                              n a separate event another MAPO official announced that the 1.42 (the fligh-test airframe(s) is often referred to as the 1.44) made its maiden flight at Zhukovsky and the aircraft might be revealed to public at upcoming Moscow Aerospace in two month (MAKS 97) pending on the decision of the Genshtab.
                              "
                              Clearly it says that they are not different. Just as S37 and Su47 are same in the same way 1.44 and 1.42 are the same.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                The companies MiG,Tupolev,Sukhoi and Yakovlev are to be made into one Company within two years,as of Putin's order dated today.........
                                "They want to test our feelings.They want to know whether Muslims are extremists or not. Death to them and their newspapers."

                                Protester

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X