Checked out of interest and in NPP Istok’s LTCC production facility photo tour I couldn’t actually spot one piece of native Russian kit. I would disagree that they aren’t reliant on other countries for IC production. They seem to be almost 100% reliant on European countries for their equipment.
Versaflow 40/50 soldering machine – Ersa – Germany – Discontinued
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225080[/ATTACH]
PVD250 Film Deposition System – Kurt J Lesker – UK
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225081[/ATTACH]
AD830 Die Bonder – ASM Pacific Ltd – Netherlands
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225082[/ATTACH]
X5-STS Stencil Printer – EKRA – Denmark
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225083[/ATTACH]
Corial 200FA Si Etcher – Corial – France
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225084[/ATTACH]
BAK 641 Evaporator – Evatec – Netherlands
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225085[/ATTACH]
Certainly Not Russian
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225086[/ATTACH]
10Ghz, 40W, 18mm2, Power density of 2.2W/mm but in a nutshell bound to a single frequency of 10GHz, not so useful.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225087[/ATTACH]
Cree HEMT Die, 10-18GHz, 70W, 3.84mm2, Power Density of 18W/mm
http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cree/RF/Data%20Sheets/CGHV1J070D.pdf
Summary:
Higher frequency range, almost double the output, around 1/5th the size and a power density 8 times higher.
That’s just in case that certain somebody thinks I made this up. Thanks. It’s a Russian institute’s development paper circa 2009, paying special attention to the GaN HEMT’s power density of 4.2W/mm and where ‘Pbas’ is the base/average power output
K, so a little tip so you don’t look so foolish for future posts, you can forget talking “average” output when discussing PA specs unless the article also says the duty cycle the PA was tested at my uneducated friend.
Duty Cycle is dependant on multiple external factors to the PA and any knuckle dragging ape knows, in fact even “Tu 160” knows it is pointless stating average power output unless you’re also stating duty cycle or pulse width and pulse duration.
Scientists don’t state average power of a transistor in an article without supporting it with duty cycle used in testing.
Average output is a value used to describe whole transmitters, not individual front end components.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]225088[/ATTACH]
The article is talking about base transistors and the Pbas values are the MAXIMUM output of the base transistors for various frequencies.
Rough translation from OCR, but you get the picture.
b . ” POTSNOS ! ITATION
base Attribute
AYuaM / SZaM – HEMT transistorsAs follows from (1) , the specific output
tion power transistors RZSH study co-
constitutes 4.2 W / mm . Accordingly , yielding
it following output value RESULT ? for
base transistors at different frequencies. at
Lg = O.26 microns at frequencies 1 = 10-12 YY Y output
RZEE power = 4.5 W at a frequency of 1 ‘ = 20 GHz – 3 watts.
At 1.8 = 170 nm at frequencies 1 = 30-40 GHz output
RES power ? = 1.26 watts. Thus, with increasingoperating frequency of length 1.8 , width Heel ‘ closures and
output RESULT ? base transistors must
decrease. Therefore, when designing microwave MIS
at higher frequencies to provide enough
high output power would require more co-
amount of parallel base transistors
in each stage the moat .By the above results should be added that
advantage of the technology – korotkokanal
tion 170 is Ньа-АКЗаМ/ОаМ-НЕМТ-транзисторов
In any case, “base” certainly does not mean “average” outputs as per Jo’s “fantasy” and 4.2W/mm is certainly not 18W/mm.
Have you got anything else to show me Jo, I’m feeling very underwhelmed? Your bumbling, desperate attempts to make it look like Russia is suddenly the world leader in this area are amusing.
GaN based HEMT’s are at the heart of the T-50’s ability to survive against US aircraft that will receive upgrades in the near future and Chinese aircraft coming online. Stealth on stealth brings fighter aircraft closer together at launch, making the first shot even more critical and devastating. With the T-50 having the worst RCS of all stealth fighters and from all significant aspects, it needs to have the best engagement radar by a long margin.
Given the tennis ball vs marble comparison in frontal RCS for the T-50 and Raptor respectively, with equal radars the raptor (marble) will detect the tennis ball from over double the range it is detected ie. (0.0035/0.000143)^0.25 based on the basic radar range equation.
The T-50 effectively needs to have a radar around 24 times more powerful than the raptor’s to get the drop on it head to head. As Jo has kindly demonstrated, Russian HEMT manufacturers are falling a LONG way behind in this arena. The difference in the industries is easily visible just by looking at the range of products available elsewhere and the almost complete lack of products from Russian suppliers.
And Jo…
Also, for the record, I made a hypothetical remark regarding the ganging of four of these L-band (1.0-1.55GHz) modules (pic below) into the huge radome aperture of the MiG-31
I would suggest you go pick up a radar or em theory manual or two before posting again. Can I suggest you seek some education on what happens when you mix small antenna area and width with long wavelength? The power source wasn’t the area where you went full retard on this comment. And don’t just be all sciolistic and just glance over a few buzzwords as you try (unsuccessfully) to do, actually try to grasp the concepts.
My reasoning is being GaN, OKB Planet’s PAs will outperform these in power efficiency, thermal management and other parameters but with comparable power output
OK so why didn’t you tell us in the first place it was simply a finger in the air guess on your part?
Your habit of inserting your own assumptions and guesses into calculations to create a completely fictional value and claim its fact, then referring back to this “fact” as a known constant in subsequent posts is what can only be called “fraudulent”.
Is that an unreasonable supposition?
Sure is and why?
Because if you take a look at actual GaN HEMT manufacturers’ products you will notice that there is a distinct balancing act at play in regards to frequency range, power output and power gain.
Amplifiers with a wide frequency range tend to have comparitively low power and/or gain compared to those with smaller range and this is particularly true in the higher frequency regions.
One only needs to look at Cree’s and Triquints extensive GaN product listings to verify this:
http://cree.com/ (click applications and compare typical radar amplifiers with broadband amplifiers)
http://www.triquint.com/ (click products and compare wideband amplifiers to high power amplifiers)
It can even be seen on the site you linked…
These transitstors have a limitted frequency range with high ouput
http://www.gz-pulsar.ru/index.php/poluprovodnikovaya-produktsiya-2/tranzistory-new/25-kremnievye-n-p-n-bipolyarnye-moshchnye-svch-impulsnye-tranzistory
And these have wider frequency (yet many stil not appropriate for military purposes) ranges with lower power
http://www.gz-pulsar.ru/index.php/poluprovodnikovaya-produktsiya-2/tranzistory-new/23-kremnievye-n-p-n-bipolyarnye-moshchnye-svch-tranzistory
The legacy amplifier list you have linked run at tiny frequency ranges and have extremely low power gain meaning they offer very little benefit in power amplification (they’d almost require 500w input to run).
There is no way those specifications can be used to determine the output of a wider band amplifier (required for military applications or else it’ll be instantly jammed) with much higher gain requirements. So your method of “guessing” that 500W output for the original L and S band amplifiers is horribly and fundamentally flawed, period.
The same FACT about the difference in output also debunks your latest “assumptions” regarding the 3.5W wideband amplifier you mention in your latest posts.
I’m afraid 3.5W is all you get Jo, that’s it, that’s its PPO. Not only do amplifier manufacturers typically use the Peak output to describe their product (and when duty cycle is used in supporting tables, the duty cycle value is the smallest allowable value with it transmitting at peak power) but this product falls well and truely into the wide/broad-band category (4-18GHz range) which will typically have a much lower power output than a dedicated X-band HPA.
So 3.5W Peak is it for this product, period. Falls a little short of Triquint’s 2-18GHz, 10W product, probably many times smaller too with higher power gain I’d bet, but hey…
http://www.triquint.com/products/p/TGA2573-2
In summary your power level calculations are kid’s fantasy using 1 factual variable and multiple guesstimates made by you (and certainly not “educated” guesstimates as shown by your demonstrated lack of fundamental knowledge in the area). You never even took input power requirements into account as you don’t have the values, they are important.
Good to see I educated you on the reality of average power output and duty cycle, and cudos for trying to use it to try and exaggerate the capabilities of otherwise low end PA’s. Where’s the thanks for educating you though? Quick before I spit the dummy and delete the thread…oh wait.
The prime performance indicators for HEMT’s is always going to be power density and efficiency. A previous, recent link you’ve posted cited that a Russian manufacturer was achieving..
“extremely high output power Pout = 1.1 W / mm and efficiency = 47 – 50%”
Well…
0.5 – 6GHz Range
65% efficiency
With a WAIT FOR IT, WORLD EXCLUSIVE COMING RIGHT UP, FAP FAP, MINDBLOWING 25W/mm power density
http://cree.com/~/media/Files/Cree/RF/Data%20Sheets/CGH60120D
BTW, where is the link to verify this below?
Also as an addenda to the post above. The 3.5W is indeed the average p/o over the range 4-18GHz. It’s an AlGaN/GaN-HEMT on a 170nm die with a power density ~5W/mm. From the range 4-9GHz the av.p/o will be closer to 5W. The duty cycle of 10 is too high, in fact 8 can be considered ‘conservative’
Geez for full FAP you shoulda gone for 2.
Certainly hope its not more manufactured fact created from assumptions based off entirely different devices again? We’ll see if you substantiate it.
Also I do believe you still haven’t provided a source where you got your 40W PPO x-band HPA’s from earlier in the thread. Ducking and dodging that one a bit.
I actually think you haven’t yet provided ANY examples of X-band GaN PA’s suitable for radar application, merely assumptions based off different hardware. I’m also beginning to think Russia hasn’t even advanced to GaAs at higher frequencies yet given the lack of evidence on their manufacturer sites.
and.. you asked when you mentioned L-Band AESA on fighters. You mentioned it in reference to Mig-31’s using them to act as AEW aircraft and said with today’s miniature components, it wouldn’t need to look like …
Did you notice in the picture of the HEMT production lab, the production machinery was German? This means the best that Russia’s leading transistor manufacturer could possibly produce will only be on par with old generation German products (as I doubt any NATO member will be selling their latest production equipment to Russia). So I guess you can stop calling it Russian GaN and rename it “Russian GaN materials in n-3 generation German HEMT’s”
Sign In
