In its function as an encrypted data & communication link, the L-band AESA affords greater ranges (for both transmission and reception), and bandwidth. Think of the the advantages when operating in conjunction with, say, the upcoming A-100 – with its GaN S & L band AESA.
Berkut, I’ve been strongly advised to place you on my ‘Ignore List’. I’m going to heed that advice given your somewhat bizarre habit of provoking a heated response then running sobbing to the mods. Your modus operandi has resulted in mounting warnings & infractions for myself, clearly such behaviour is evidence of your flawed character – itself symptomatic of your intellectual frailties.
So, прощайте!
FalconDude, the active e-scan IFF maybe somewhat of an anticlimax for those wishing for an anti-stealth sensor, but it is in itself quite revolutionary. The IFF antenna cannot be mounted on the Irbis-E’s PESA array because it rotates – this would result in severe polarity issues.
The 4283MP requires sensor-fusion with the radar, ESM, RWR and IRST. However, the fact that the IFF is separate allows it to work in close conjunction with other sensors, it can operate with any one (or combination) of these sensors. For example, it means the Su-35S can remain ‘radar silent’ operating ‘passively’ with the L-150-35 (which uses Interferometrics via distributed sensors to detect & track incoming radar target sources) and affords the pilot an up-to-date picture of the battlespace without having to resort to his radar.
The following quote supports such a mode:
Цифровые алгоритмы обработки сигналов значительно повышают…точность определения положения целей в пространстве.*
Digital signal processing algorithms significantly improve…[B]the accuracy of determining the position of targets in space[/B].
Alternatively it could be used passively with the IRST. Another major advantage over traditional IFF is the matching field of regard with the radar.
ActionJacksonMan, I’ve got some new stuff on the T-50’s beam-aspect stealth issues which is definitely worthy of debate. So ready when you are.
Personally, I prefer to base my opinions on an official company document from the system’s manufacturer stating testing (and no doubt state acceptance trials) were conducted throughout 2013*. Presenting low-res images as “glaring evidence” of concurrency is hardly conclusive. The pics above (from last month) clearly show the system being installed on the latest production lots, however.
Anyways, if scoring that point makes you so happy- then I’m happy for you.
Maybe berkut the experten can explain to JSTCVW09CD exactly what the 4283MP’s for. Shouldn’t be too difficult, he just has to retrace that eyewateringly grinding U-turn he had to make, what was his ultimate concession? Ah, yes: “they’re not radars- they just do ‘radary’ things”- classic! Not sure his U-turn has translated through to his praeter KeyPubs fora *contributions* though.
Anyways berkut, let me give you a hand: No JSTCVW09CD, they’re not radars, they’re e-scan IFFs. The 400W NPP Pulsar development you refer to is a LDMOS development for ground-based radar and the T/R modules are positively huge. Even IF the TR elements could one day be miniaturised to be installed in the slats (say by LTCC) – there’s the major issue of azimuth coverage and, of course, power. Having said that, 4283MP does have one very interesting algorithm-based function (berkut will translate it for you):
Цифровые алгоритмы обработки сигналов значительно повышают…точность определения положения целей в пространстве.*
See how perfectly amenable I can be?
Quoted for ignorance of the subject matter and an opportunity to (hopefully) educate the uneducated…
If anyone wishes to challenge these statements (points which have also been made in articles by Carlo Kopp), then feel free to present an argument with a “real” scientific basis (with calculations and supporting simulations) rather than the typical high-level blanket statements and guesses and blindly linking unrelated articles you don’t understand…
ActionJacksonMan, the following patent:
http://www.freepatent.ru/patents/2482149
…is from the very people doing this (I can deduce that from the accredited authors & company):
Frequency range 2-20GHz; thickness 1.5mm for -15dB (spray-on -19dB for 1.5mm). Now I concede the operating temperature is a tad on the low side, but given that it dates from 2011, I’m sure a thermal insulator in the PMC binder will factor as the patent is filed by the Type 30’s lead developer (current developments in excess of 300°C).
Anyways, before the first of the ‘second stage’ prototypes break cover and concentrating on the design of the current crop, what sort of values will be achievable for, say, 5mm (objectively speaking of course) and how would these results effect your T-50 ‘beam aspect’ diagram? Shall we call it (a very conservative) -25dB for 5mm?
If you could pay special attention to the paragraph containing the phrases “corner reflectors” and “intersection of two planes”, both these elements are visible on the pole model pic. Thanks.
As to 3 stage LPC, I would say it may borrow tech package from PD-14. Hollow titanium alloy blades and blisk tech
Correct on HPC, wrong on LPC:
Austin, for the Type 30: 3 -stage LPC; 5 -stage HPC (see pics) and single(?) staged turbine.
The LPC is an aluminium (CNT) martix composite, HPC is intermetallic TiAl (both these are BLISKed) and the turbine is a nickel-based superalloy.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]232916[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]232917[/ATTACH]
Combined with a PMC shroud and stator vanes, you can see where they aim to save 30% weight and pull out an extra 2T thrust.
The ‘reliable insider’ has already stated that T-50-6 (onwards) structural changes will be “significant” and that aerodynamics & stealth features will be “highly refined”*.
However, it is important to understand that UAC has implemented a plan aiming @ synergy for the series production technologies for both MS-21/Yak-242 and the PAK-FA. Here, the prime contractor for the T-50’s polymer matrix composites demonstrates such technologies (hope the link works):
This also explains why T-50-6 is taking so long (perhaps late 2015?). Be patient.
I would highly doubt Chinese Su-35s would get the 4283MP e-scan IFF and the L-150-35* ESM systems as these have only just completed development.
Both these systems are software integrated into the Irbis-E, so their omission would be a significant downgrade compared to RuAF standard Su-35S’.
* http://www.aviationunion.ru/Files/Nom_7_Omsk_CKBA.doc
http://www.dissercat.com/content/algoritm-izmereniya-ugla-sdviga-faz-svch-signalov
4283MP is neither a jammer nor radar. It is an e-scan IFF that can operate independently of the Irbis-E namely with the OLS/IRST and ESM, passively. However, I thought this detail quite interesting:
Цифровые алгоритмы обработки сигналов значительно повышают…точность определения положения целей в пространстве.
Digital signal processing algorithms significantly improve…the accuracy of determining the position of targets in space.
The Su-35S has an ESM system similar to AN/ALR-94 called L-150-35 (distributed sensors operating in interferometer mode) which it can use to cue the Irbis (up to 8 digital beams)*, hence facilitate LPI mode. Using the e-scan IFF working in close conjunction with this system has significant advantages.
Well, given that it appears to have variable vanes which would mean it fits directly in front of the first stage fan (the T-50’s vanes are fixed and located downstream of the duct bend), then yes it appears destined for 4G fighter upgrades.
By the same notion the CNT-Al compressor is intended for retrofits, I guess it’s a serious attempt to address engine RCS issues if the RuAF is to continue purchasing & operating 4G+++++++++++++++++++++++++ fighters for the foreseeable future.
…Oh, there was one other missing link. In the short and sharp S-duct, guide vanes are required to facilitate pressure recovery to the first stage fan. I have claimed (to the consternation of some) that in the official patent ‘Device 9’ (Устройство 9) which, remember, only “partially obscures” and is offset from the compressor- has a dual function of a guide vane and ‘blocker’.
Evidence/precedent of this dual function?….Yip:

The text reads ” Inlet Guide Vanes. Development of layered reinforcing carbonfibre (i.e CNT) package, providing absorption of radar waves”.
C/o fimv.
I’m really not sure that CNT will guarantee a stealthy compressor. Reduce its signature? Definitely. But making it stealthy and on par with S-shaped inlets or blockers seem rather unlikely, since the material has to withstand high temperature and loads from rotation. Not only that, I’m not sure if materials can fully substitute shaping in the near future, since blade geometry design for good engine performance may not be optimized for low radar return.
It is an integrated solution*. You can do the research for temperature, Young’s modulus, creep, damping etc.etc. CNT-Al nanocomposite covers all bases for the military LP compressor, comfortably outperforming Ti- this would not be the case if it was a conventional alloy. Not only is one of the co-developers a major player in CNT research, but ROSNANO itself is a major partner with UMPO for upcoming nanocomposite utilisation in military aircraft engines:
http://www.umpo.ru/News118_756.aspx
ROSNANO are the partners and the sponsors of the ‘Sygma’ video above.
Thus far CNT-Al has been the missing link. Combined with ‘Asakurius Duckius’ ®, it is nothing short of a 6G solution.
The lead developer of the ‘Type 30’ is OKB A. Lyulka, and they have teamed with OKB Sukhoi, FGUP TsIAM and a major Russian radar design company to address the RCS tasks (aka *special characteristics*) for the Type 30. These are excerpts and pics taken from a very recent official document:
Доводка конструкции узлов включает в себя исследования специальных характеристик входного и выходного устройств на полнонатурных макетах. В ОКБ им. А. Люльки разработано методика и технология изготовления полнонатурных пакетах с широким использованием технологий прототипирования из полимерных и металлических материалов…
Запущен цикл исследований по специальным матириалам и покрытиям (в.т.ч. высокотемпературным) применяемым в конструкции перспективных двигателей. Большинство из этих материалов впервые применяются в авиастроении.
Completion of construction centres including those for studies of special characteristics of the intake and exhaust structures on high-(pole) mounted models. OKB. A. Lyulka developed a technique and technology of manufacturing pole mounted packages with extensive use of technologies for prototyping from polymeric and metallic materials …
A series of investigations was launched for the special materials and coatings (including high temperature) used in the design of advanced engines.
Most of these materials are applied in aviation construction for the first time ever.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]232128[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]232129[/ATTACH]
Pic 1: ‘Comparison of predictive (in green) and experimental (in black) radar wave signal scattering for a rotating body.’
Pic 2: ‘Model of an engine exhaust structure during anechoic chamber studies of it’s *special characteristics*’. Note what appears to be a PMC cowling.
…Doh!!! Missed the elephant in the room! The ‘keytometals’ link above refutes the description of these aluminium alloys as “high temperature”.
In particular, they do not meet the requirements at relatively high temperatures (up to, for example, 250°C.)
-which “severely limit their industrial applications”. However, the UMPO link describes theirs as “a heat-resistant aluminium alloy” (жаропрочного алюминиевого сплава).
This is a huge indicator that it is the application of CNT additives with their very high thermal conductivity that significantly improve the thermal (as high as 400°C) and thermo-mechanical properties of this aluminium matrix composite (and not necessarily CNT additives to the base Al-Cu-Mg-Ag alloy).
After all, they were bold enough to go for gamma titanium-aluminide for the Type 30’s HP compressor and kept this intermetallic composite’s R&D phase tightly under wraps. Incidentally, UMPO’s 2013 company audit (the one that broke ‘stage 2 PAK-FA prototypes’) also stated the Type 30’s LP compressor fan blades were still at the R&D stage.
Ah what the hell, let’s give ’em the benefit of the doubt (moving pictures speak louder than words):
http://youtu.be/GuiE1C7eZcE
http://www.sygma.ru/metals
So, Ladies and Gentlemen, (imho) with a high degree of certainty we can call this the [making of] the World’s first ‘Stealth Compressor’.
Stealth Compressor Redux
Last week, engine producer UMPO issued a press release regarding a brand new “high temperature” aluminium alloy developed for the LP compressor fan blades of military gas turbine engines. It stated linear friction welding would be used to BLISK the stage this year, it is a codevelopment with UGATU and NPP Motor:
http://www.umpo.ru/News118_873.aspx
This is the very alloy (Al-Cu-Mg-Ag):
http://journal.ugatu.ac.ru/index.php/vestnik/article/view/772
http://www.keytometals.com/page.aspx?ID=CheckArticle&site=ktn&NM=240
Worldwide research on carbon nanotube (CNT) modification of this same alloy dates back nearly a decade*. It appears the previous UGATU/NPP Motor development I detailed a couple of years ago (CNT modified Mg-B-CFRP) has been superseded- probably because of poor fatigue life @ ~14k rpm, difficulty of ‘BLISKing’ and expense. Evidently, the PMC blade is not up to the task either.
The Russians have also CNT modified aluminium alloys for “aerospace, missile & space structures and components”:
http://bankpatentov.ru/node/584395
http://www.freepatent.ru/patents/2487186
http://www.tpmtm.ru/en/kompetencii/26-kompoziti.html
As previously detailed, CNT modification of such materials has a highly desirable LO ‘by-product’ (particularly absorption in the X-band), as well as increasing it’s mechanical/fatigue properties.
Interestingly, just like the preceding Mg-B-CFRP development, the aluminium alloy fan stage appears destined not only for the ‘Type 30’, but to be retrofitable to legacy engines (to defeat NCTR techniques?), as well as for prop/open rotor fans of UAVs.
* infoscience.epfl.ch/record/33609/files/EPFL_TH3140.pdf