I would say they’re emitting. not only as IFF but *might* also act as primary radar. The power requirements depend on what they are for. For only IFF purpose it would be very small. Maybe at most 1 kW peak with several hundred or tens of watt of average power. Other requirement like being primary radar to complement nose radar and electronic attack purpose will drive the requirement to several Kilowatt. The ultimate limit would be cooling capacity. It remains to be seen what kind of cooling it use. PAE for L-band will likely be better than one in X-band. gotta re read tho to answer why, AFAIK it relates to natural tendency of lower frequency to be somewhat more efficient in terms of converting electric to electromagnetic power another dependency is the class of the module (A,AB,B,C etc). State of the art X-band may deliver 30-40% PAE but L-band can be up to 50% or more.

Should it use what was shown at MAKS (Conduction cooling) Thus limiting cooling capacity to 1.15 kW/sqm of antenna aperture and assume 48 modules (as seen in Su-35S). PAE of 50%, 1000 MHz frequency. It will limit average power of the radar to at most 2.4 kW. Each module is limited to 51 Watt of average emitted power. The power requirement is then roughly 4.8 kW or twice the average power.

and let’s not forget that there are no further information on what frequency the measurement was taken/estimated. That is the most critical part.

There is little to no point arguing about value of RCS without also discussing on what frequency and other possible merit of concern backing the measurement.

It’s really mindboggling to see people defending or denouncing RCS figure without stating additional merit regarding them. One must remember that a metal marble may have X value of RCS at wavelength much smaller than their respective size. But it can be 0.25 times lower to 7 times when the wavelength of radar they’re being exposed to is half or equal their size and continue to increase until the point where the wavelength greatly exceeded their size (10 times or more) where RCS will drop.

hmm something in the line of Stallion i see.

The SCMP seems to have mixed the range against typical airborne target which is 250 Km for 48N6E3. Against ballistic missile, the envelope for S-400 with 48N6E3 is 60 km.

and the RCS value corresponds to its Warhead and from frontal aspect. the missile itself when launched at boost will have much larger RCS and being exposed from side aspect during its boost. Regarding the difference of RCS value, you have to understand that there is relationship between wavelength and RCS. RCS of an object will exhibit increase when exposed to lower frequency, until the point is reached where the wavelength is far too big to cause any resonance effect. Thus the RCS will fall sharply. The rate of RCS increase is depending on shape where wedge shaped object, for typical aircraft would exhibit wavelength dependency in their RCS. while conical object, consistent with ballistic missile RV RCS increase would exhibit squared wavelength dependency.

It’s available in secret projects forum

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,47.0.html

I wonder, but given the Soviet already have MiG-31. The R-33 will be logical to be used against AEW for VVS. Tactics might involve supersonic dash in high altitude to increase missile range. The baseline R-33 have about 120 km range, high-altitude supersonic cruise will increase range by about 30% (156 km total) R-37 might already underway.

Ground based jammers also deserve special mention, there is Pelena and a manportable ground based jammer, specifically developed to counter E-3. and long range SAM like S-200D (Dubna) With 400 Km range.

Well what ROFAR actually is ? If it’s a LIDAR then forget about long range as the laser used will be attenuated heavily by the atmosphere. So far i can only see 2 possibilities.

1.It’s a quantum radar
2.It’s more conventional Photonic phased array where feed network are replaced by fiber optic. This alleviate the limitation of conventional digital/analog phase shifter, as those actually limit the amount of band that can be covered. With fiber optic cut into suitable length, a true time delay beamsteering can be achieved instead of phase steering. Thus more frequency bandwidth can be made available. e.g (covering 8-12 instead just 8-9 GHz) Your limit would only be the element spacing.

I’m curious if AESA being developed for Su-57 will make its way to Su-35 or even Su-30’s.