“No, it more like you don’t have a reasonable or logical argument so you can’t convince others to agree with what you want to believe. “

By stating what is stated there?

“basically you implied that current variation Himalayas already uses GaN module while the source stated no such thing. Finished development of new technologies that can be used in future upgrades is one thing, transferring those technologies directly to current pre-planned production chain is another.”

2014 sources states where the GaN MMICs will be used since they are already created, later in 2015 they have GaN AESA present on their EW systems. So why do they have GaN MMICs present on their EW equipment(according to niip) while the only hinted EW to utilize GaN was on that Rostec PDF as a brand new feature. hmmm brand new feature using GaN, 2015 they say GaN is present on their EW systems. What does that tell you? Do you actually believe that they are not suggesting their 4 GaN MMIC types is present, but that they have other GaN MMICs that are present on their aircraft but not the ones mentioned on Rostec? pg17 of niip catalog, “Usually, solid-state gallium-arsenide and
gallium-nitride amplifiers are used as active
elements of active phased-array antennas of
present-day EW equipment.”

“I haven’t see the Feb 2015 edition and to be honest, it kinda hard for us to trust your words. Either way, unless they specifically said in Feb 2015 that Himalayas has Gan modules, I don’t see how can you make the jump”

You haven’t seen yes this makes alot of sense at this rate. But the source states GaN present on AESA systems. Unless your going to argue that the GaN mmics that are present just dont happen to be on rostec which has only gave mentions of which equipment will have it.

“these UHF modules was not created for Himalayas. As stated in rostec, they are part of development project” what the PDF states, “In 2014, research and development
into
4 types of solid, high-dynamic
UHF amplifiers (the Odnotsvetnik-21
project) was completed. The units will
be used as components of advanced
weapons”

The developement project is already completed, says will be used…..UHF modules not created you say……”As part of a research
and development project, four
types of nitrite gallium UHF modules
(М421364-1, М421364-2, М421374,
and М421375) have been created”
Than it goes onto say where 4 of these will be put into the other 4 systems.

Well atleast the smartskin explanation you were helpful however ironically the Spectra I heard has happened to have GaN from another forum I visited. But I am not getting this thread derailed talking about a different subject not relating to the SU-57.

“Same way I consider T-3, Hyfly to be experimental. It sort of a technology demonstrator. ” Except they have the modules completed and will apply it to be used. Than some months later they say in another catalog we have GaN present on our EW systems.

” It sounds to us that you saw they written “new modules X is 50% smaller than the old one” then you read somewhere that GaN modules is half as big then you leap to the conclusion that module X is GaN based” Same materials being used, same efficiency and size reduction claims. I am saying is it an indicator that the radio-optical radars would be developed on same based benefits.That is all.

“but it does not help us estimates how good your eye sight is. ” Like stating how good its by jamming AWACs at 700km and LEO satellites at 300km? Your probably meant the context of saying whats the jamming power and what state the jammed equipment will be in. But I was just stating a previous mentioned GaN EW system and other systems that have surpassed it in range.

“Where did they said that “
https://www.niip.ru/upload/iblock/4c8/4c89c11ae741be234a5f900b3fb41e86.pdf pg 20 pdf……At this rate do I have to hold your hand whenever I post something and even give page numbers prior like I already did?

An important line of activity for KRET is the development of
ultrabroadband antenna systems using the AESA active phased array
radar. In the AESA, every element or group of elements has its own
miniature microwave transmitter, working in the frequency band
from 1 to 18 GHz.
Powerful solid-state amplifiers, made of gallium-arsenide and
gallium-nitride technologies, are used as AESA’s active elements in
modern EW solution. Thanks to them, the equipment’s weight can be
reduced by 1.5–2 times, raising reliability and efficiency by 2–3 times.

Since you have stated broadband sucks and that narrow band is better at a gain. Can transceivers like this limit their broad frequency scope to a narrow frequency? Why I also hinted the fga-35 (3d) is that its weight reduction as a radar from a previous AESA radar got drastically reduced by 1.5-2 times similar to the weight of the EW systems that got reduced by 1.5-2 times smaller being based with the same LTCC MMICs.

“I don’t want to be mean but to be frank, your questions and statements aren’t really to anyone liking, because either you don’t really understand what you wrote or you are being disingenuous because your documents doesn’t say what you you claimed they do.Then the lack of citation and extreme JSR like attitude doesn’t help either.”

Denial, not reading anything that was actually cited, calling something experimental when said to be completed and another source later state presently used on EW equipment…….These are usually the symptoms I have come across from patients that don’t like something being better than something they like

“They didn’t, come on, why are you lying? last time you cite the document it was about some experimental UHF GaN T/r modules “

https://rostec.ru/upload/iblock/749/7499bd4f8161ec87a58c080c077564e8.pdf page 63 so again why did they say they have created the modules and that it would be used as advanced components for weapons? It clearly states that

“Those are very big leap of faith and still lacking in links”

Literally stated the model numbers of the 4 different modules as being GaN modules, Feb 2015 stated they clearly have GaN present on their AESA antennas on the catalog? How is it this hard to put the 2 together?

“Iam quite certain that they didn’t said that and beside, GaN isn’t a requirement to have smart skin”

It was mentioned on the rostec 2014 pdf that that the GaN modules were created for the himalayas and it was mentioned that the Himalayas EW was to be used as a smart skin. Since GaN is by default smaller than GaAS modules this is a hint or indication it most likely is. Can you give a source where GaAS modules can be smaller than GaN or GaAS modules being able to fit throughout of the body of an aircraft?

“You are making the assumption that experimental t/r modules will be used immediately on production line ”

I think I should have posted the rostec 2014 pdf book to begin with besides talking about it. Because the book clearly stated the project was completed, and that the modules would be used. Though I dont know why you consider them experimental t/r modules since they are completed and the fact that the modules were stated to be present on their EW systems from the Niip catalog.

“ROFAR is a different thing” I am talking about the same LTCC modules with the same reduction of the in size and efficiency being exactly the same as the LTCC modules of their EW equipment that they have currently stated as GaN.

“I don’t know where you pull these numbers from but jamming distance isn’t a fixed value.” Than just look at the estimated claims.

“ROFAR is pretty much therotical at the moment, beside, fire control radar operate in 8-12 Ghz range because it give you a good balance between accuracy and atmospheric attenuation, and you wouldn’t want a radar that operate from 1hz and 100ghz because it affects others things like directivity, grating lobes ..etc “

That does not really help answer if one person’s claim about GaN having a broader band frequency than GaAS. I was not asking about 8-12 ghz being a good balance I was asking if it was true that for aircraft modules does GaN have a broader frequency than GaAS? Its more of a yes or no answer with an explanation if you have one? As the niip catalog stated they have 1ghz-18ghz AESA radars. And you seem to be already mentioning about the effects from 1hz to 100ghz which I already mentioned and agreed as well will be impractical. Which is why I stated a KRET official giving an example using a UHF signal.

“”We tested the ability of F-22 and F-35 to detect our Su-57s – telemetry showed significant reason for their (Su-57’s) improvement” – V.Gutenev.”

might as well troll back by putting, “Apparently along with the Rafale, one aircraft which proved to be a real threat for the F-22 is the Eurofighter Typhoon: during the 2012 Red Flag-Alaska, the German Eurofighters not only held their own, but reportedly achieved several kills on the Raptors. ” every time I respond.

“We tested the ability of our aircraft to be detected by the F-22 and F-35 in a short deployment to Syria. After gathering the data, we found significant cause for their (the Su-57s’) improvement “

So why is everyone getting their panties wet from this statement since it can be interpreted in many different ways?

https://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/these-may-be-the-only-f-22s-achilles-heels-in-a-dogfight-against-4th-gen-fighter-jets/
“Apparently along with the Rafale, one aircraft which proved to be a real threat for the F-22 is the Eurofighter Typhoon: during the 2012 Red Flag-Alaska, the German Eurofighters not only held their own, but reportedly achieved several kills on the Raptors. “

OK supposedly the F-22 had more kills on the Euro-fighters. So what does this say everyone? Countries who believe their aircraft’s are far superior to another adversaries would still find means of trying to improve their aircraft. Even a 4th gen can still be considered a threat to a F-22 and improving the F-22 does not mean the F-22 is inferior. Even 5th gens like the F-22 and F-35 can still be considered a threat to a SU-57 and improving the SU-57 does not mean the SU-57 is inferior.

A network admin in this forum managed to have this website have 99.99 uptime so this website for a year has experienced 52 minutes of down time a year. That does not make the network admin here a rookie if he increased the uptime to 99.999 by providing a mesh topology with multiple servers in case one went down with multiple links

Why bother making a big deal out of users that have a professional troll background here?

speaking of drones we might get to see their heavy UAV in flight tests by the end of this year. http://tass.com/defense/1012351

Also if it has not been mentioned here. They will make their cockpits twice as stealthy http://tass.com/defense/1011704

@stealthflanker Jan 30 2017 article stated a 2 year time for the production of mig-35s. Doubt there is going to be any information until than especially the LTCC version. I am curious about the watts for the modules of the LTCC version(exceeding 5 watts does not cut it for me) and the NO36.

go to 2:40 to see 12 tomahawks striking ISIS. Just posting this video as an evaluation on the destruction it should bring.