IMHO absolutely not, so given than this is a discussion forum let’s do like this: once I have an hint that someone beside us is interested in this thing I would say you why i have this opinion and you would say me the reason because you think the contrary, not just made an one line post illustrating your own belief.

@Marcellogo
F-15E has AESA , Su-35 doesn’t. Their radar is about the same size so it is safe to say that F-15 radar is better or at least equal. Both are conventional aircraft with some RAM on it but neither is stealth.
AIM-120C/D is comparable to R-27/77 but F-15 uses comformal load out while Su-35 doesn’t, comformal load => better for aerodynamic and RCS (i don’t think RCS matter here as both aircraft are size of the barn at least)
For short range combat F-15E uses AIM-9X while Su-35 uses R-73. AIM-9X is superior to R-73 in term of IRCCM because it has an IIR seeker while R-73 doesn’t, AIM-9X has better FoV too.
If we discuss kinematic, F-15E is faster and has far better acceleration throughout the envelope while Su-35 has better intantaneous turn rate and may be sustain turn rate. Either factor can be beneficial for air combat.
There isn’t enough information to compare their jammer.
What bring Su-35 to higher league again? they are for the most parts similar.

But against an Flanker you can’t accelerate around it, cause the Flanker, especial Su-35S has a tremendous T/W ratio. And you can’t out turn it

@haavarla
Iam quite sure F-15E can out accelerate Su-35
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?140845-Proof-F-35A-can-out-accelerate-Su-27-35-in-subsonic-region

but hey, it has beaten the T-38s on BVR exercises.. you can be proud

It has also beaten F-16, F-15E that have IADS support.

Flip RWR sound like a horrible idea. If it up then pilot don’t know if he being watched. If pilots know he being watched then why bother flip it down ?.

Well if you have powerful modules GaN modules & big aperture and you know where to look in the first place, + no need to track/search/GMTT/GMTI/SAR at the same time?, + have LBand radars giving a hand?

How many modules do you need then?

_ Leading edge L band isn’t a radar
_ N036 doesn’t have GaN, even if it do the gain of side array still very low due to size
At the moment AESA operate in several mode simultaneously by interleave between them rather than dividing the arrays, so not having to do SAR, GMTI means you can operate at higher PRF, but for long range the maximum PRF is already limited due to range ambigus.

Besides keep in mind that with 60° coverage on each side, there will be some overlapping from 45° to 60° from flight axis. Which means that you get 1500+ + ~400 TRMs.

Nic

The front radar pointed up ,while the side array pointed down. Very little overlap area.

If its job is to direct off boresight missiles, or M-LRAAMs after turning away, how powerful do you reckon it needs to be just to maintain lock on a target?

Nic

Direct HOBS missiles from visual range doesn’t require powerful radar but direct M-LRAAM for BVR after turning away would still require powerful radar.

The total amount is what counts.. something like 750-1,000 more TRMs than your pet, ouch, your little world must be full of pain now..

Limit for PESA/AESA is 120 degrees, so side arrays doesn’t help front array performance

My pet? Which one is it?

Pissfully low? LOL.. 🙂

Play dumb now? typical.

TRM count is more or less given by the size of the apperture.. Antenna size has been just one of the parameters defining the radar performance way before AESA has been introduced and continues to remain so.. only clowns like yourself masturbate on the “mine is 1,518 and yours is 1,236 only” comparisons..

Antenna aperture is one of the most important parameters that affect radar performance. Bigger aperture give not only better transmitting power but also better accuracy and higher power concentration.

OK, the PAK-FA’s N036 system has 2,334 TRMs, try to swallow that..

Including side array