AESAs can use spread spectrum techniques, transmitting multiple low power pulses over a wide frequency range and integrating them. It makes it harder to detect.

It is not a simple task to vary the frequency emitted by a number of modules while keeping the phase relationships appropriate. It is next to impossible to form a beam out of spread spectrum signals using phased arrays because each component needs a different phase relationship. The only viable method is to dedicate one module for one frequency. It is also possible to use multiple channels in one module, but that is essentially multiple modules in one package.

Also, the signals of all the modules participating in forming a beam MUST be synchronized to each other.

Bottom line, spread spectrum as you know from communication systems doesn’t exist in Radars. The best you can do is a bunch of individual frequencies. Now, those returns can not be combined in time domain. You can only combine them on raster. That will not improve detection, but will only aid in resolution.

Completely reversal opinions makes me fall in vague notion about AESA and PESA.:confused::confused::confused:

there is such thing as standard fighter RCS. The Russians use 5 m^2. Just look at all of their fighter radar displays. Frankly, the Russians don’t have any 2 m^2 fighters to do the test on. It’s either 5 m^2 with Mig-29s or a really huge number with su-27s. If you have any proof, please post a picture to show, all the Russian radar displays that I’ve seen are using 5m^2 as targets.

:confused::confused::confused: Why flyable MiG-19, MiG-17 couldn’t be used?

ugly indeed

I’m talking about even at higher speeds. For instance check out these two pics of it flying with an Eagle. The Eagle’s wing is all cleaned up while the F-22 is still at partial flaps. Not saying it’s a good or a bad thing, just wondering the reason for it.

Be careful, the photo you posted didn’t show what you were saying.

Although your express is right, but what you said wouldn’t present during subsonic flight.

The topic is Su-35 vs EF2000, but I don’t know where it is going now

The first time when I saw the Su-34 and its payloads, I though why so many pylons with large space between these pylons, only 8 tons bombs could be carried?? Many jets which smaller and lighter than it, but also could load approxi 8000 kg as well.

In operational circumstances, range is not a massive concern a.k.a IFR, 3D turn ability very useless until flight regime allows it, stick the gripen with cobra helmet, IRIS-T, all TVC advantages have been more than accounted for. Does anyone know sustained turn rates, also instananeous of su-35?

ive got a normal gripen A as sustained, 21 degree/sec, instan, 30 degree per sec.

Climb rate will be around the 50,000 mark, so guess su-35 has it beat there.:p

The maneuverability of Gripen was quite good according to your data if it was right, but maneuverability and agility are different things.