dark light

stealthflanker

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 451 through 465 (of 781 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Israel F-35 damaged. Bird collision or Syrian S-200 ? #2139986
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    The closest S-200 site to Baalbek is Dumayr, and Masyaf, but practically all S-200 sites have coverage over Lebanon especially for high flying planes.

    The Dumayr site however would be more likely as it’s the closest. I wish anyone have Satellite photos of today to see which site apparently damaged.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2140156
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    I wonder what went wrong tho.. since it’s kinda like decades, since the inception of 9M96 family, and it’s already went through trials and such. I heard it’s because of the active radar seeker.. but given the design already made its way to Korea and then used as baseline for their own KM-SAM. The fact that it still have problem till now is kinda hair raising.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2140248
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    so they won’t send something to Syria before full system trials are over and its being tested by Russia. So it could appear but not till a period after 2017.

    That won’t stop “news agency” to cook up stuff on their own nonetheless.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2140663
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    so @TR1 we can dismiss news about “deployment” of S-350 to Syria etc ?

    in reply to: Radar AESA GaN vs. Radar AESA GaAs ! #2140806
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    What are you trying to state here ?

    Anyway comparing J/APG-1 with Zaslon is bit overstretched. Despite being AESA J/APG-1 clearly does not have 1.1 m diameter antenna of MiG-31. Thus comparison is simply useless.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2140811
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    hmm The 9M96 family looks nice. It appears to use Free to roll tail, in conjunction with explosive based Thruster located in missile CG like Erint. Canard control for packaging efficiency. (I assume half of the missile is entirely consist of rocket motor) Such configuration, similar as Israeli Python-4 and 5 family, maximizing missile G capability and thrust.

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141480
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    You can try Radar tutorial’s database

    One example for your interest would be the Seek Iglo
    http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/02.surv/karte007.en.html

    Example of VHF band.
    http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/11.ancient/karte049.en.html

    Selection of PRF for early warning radar band will usually be much lower compared to higher band radar (X etc) Mainly because tradeoff between doppler and range ambiguity.
    —-
    For X band and higher we may have several different PRF. a fighter radar may have like 10-11 PRF. Consist of 1 Low PRF mode for SAR or MTI, 8 for Medium PRF mode, 2 would be high PRF for Velocity search.

    in reply to: JF-17 vs J-10 vs LCA #2141509
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Apparently this is the only source attributing CM-400AKG as “export” version of YJ-12.

    https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairw/20130129.aspx

    ———
    I agree with Quantum… There is nothing common between YJ-12 which is ramjet and CM-400 which is rocket. They even fly different profile.

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141669
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    I think this should suffice for now.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]256254[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141700
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Which essentially bring us back to square one. No matter, i will push forward. see what i could dig up later.

    Perhaps approach using cost break down of typical AESA would yield better result. Then again price may differs. So the result would likely differs by some margin.

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141707
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Then what should i use as input ? What adjustment need to be made ?.

    I would call it conservative instead of “off”

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141714
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Unless there is real up-to date report. I will stand by those i have. Not that i realize the dramatic price decrease or technological advancement but.. What value should i use ? That is the most important. If there is no real value naturally i will seek the closest i could find. Cautious as i am but.. a calculation cannot be made without a starting value.

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141782
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    No @Bring_it_on.

    The equation is correct. I got it from a RAND paper. bit dated but i think still valid. One variable i haven’t play around is the cost of producing the average power of that radar. The original paper gave like U$5 which obviously very high. But today with manufacturing advancement i believe the cost is much lower but how low.. i wonder. If we assume that variable to be 50 cents or U$ 0.5 The array cost would halved. Which i assume closer to your data of AMDR cost.
    @Peed

    Well the calculator already assume half wavelength. If you see at the “Weighting algorithm table” tab you may see antenna width. For planar array.

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141842
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Yeah, i know. I just argue that it won’t have such range even with the max specification of the module and if it deliver so. Then be ready to accept high cost.

    Reserve should always be exercised. considering as i mentioned before this is noise limited. no clutter and environment factor is only come from attenuation. and No F^4 factor. Plus one must always consider change of target RCS on wavelength.

    in reply to: AESA Radar range calculator. #2141852
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    The high performance are simply because of the high power of the TRM and large number of modules.

    And the effects i mentioned..it is significant especially for Early warning application where STC can actually prevent detection of low RCS target and long pulsewidth means low minimum range (thus the radar cannot detect target that are actually close) and possibility of target lost due to eclipsing.

    I really do not recommend using it for ground based radars due to those variables that i haven’t take account in. Unless suitable modifications or at least some clear statements about limitations of the calculations.

    Another issue not related to range could be..Whether it would make a practical system.

    4000 modules of planar array would result in about 4×4 meter antenna. Might be practical for ground based but quite bizzare for AEW might end up making the plane look like Chile Phalcon. There could also be cost issue that made this Radar unsuitable for general air defense. It would be more suitable for ABM.

    The cost of radar hardware could be roughly estimated as follows :

    Cost=Nt*Ct+PaV*CaV*Nt

    Nt=Number of Trm
    Ct=Cost of Trm
    PaV=Average Power
    CaV=Cost of producing that average power (let’s assume this to be U$ 1)

    The cost of typical TRM in S-band is about U$ 200.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]256226[/ATTACH]

    Thus the radar would cost about :

    Cost=4000*200+80000*1*4000
    Cost=320800000

    320 Million dollar radar. Would make sense for ABM applications.

Viewing 15 posts - 451 through 465 (of 781 total)