when u babelfish the document. IRBIS dia is only 900MM. hardly 15% better than MIG-29/J-10/F-16 with over 100% improvement in performance.Size of aircraft does not automatically translate into nose size.
http://www.sukhoi.org/files/su_smi_29-08-07.pdf

But you dont even have a “WEAK EXAMPLE” for your radars concerned .

let me give u a strong example of PESA radar much better than IRBIS. It is Russia which dont have capacity untill 2009 to do the work and for that reason Yak-130 work was moved out from MIG Sokol plant.

http://www.vedomosti.ru/
December 15, 2006
The economic boom in Kazakhstan will enable this important ally of Russia to spend much money on rearming the armed forces. Defense Minister of Kazakhstan Mukhtar Altynbaev reports that in 2007, Kazakhstan will spend 48% of the military budget on purchase and modernization of armament and in 2008, the share of such expenditures will reach 60%. Significant part of this money will be spent on the air force. In 2006, flight time in Kazakh air force amounted to 60 hours per pilot in comparison to 40 hours per pilot in Russia.

However, according to Altynbaev, Russian enterprises are ready to modernize only four Su-27 fighters and two MiG-31 fighters in 2007, although Kazakhstan would like to modernize its entire fleet of 54 airplanes in the shortest possible time. Altynbaev is surprised by the low speed of modernization proposed by Russia.
Elena Fedorova, spokesperson for RSK MiG (its Sokol plant built MiG-31) stated that from Kazakhstan the company received an application for modernization of MiG-31 and MiG-29 (Kazakhstan has about 40 such fighters) but discussion of these proposals only started and the time for fulfillment of this work was unknown yet.

Only Strong countries can renegotiate decades old contracts.

http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article139447.ece
Astana calls halt at Kashagan

APG 63 AESA has 2 customers in singapore and USAF , The APG-79 has 2 customers in the USN and RAAF . The Apg-80 has UAR as a customer . The Apg-80 is likely to see no other customer since it is not something that can be upgraded onto block 50/52 without high cost and complexity not to mention the fact that the UAE is charging 3-4 million per system currently as LICENCE/ROYALTY fee for Blk 60 components . The SABR is more designed for AESA seeking foreign F-16 customers as LMA and NG’s future for the Viper is going to be more for UPGRADES rather then more foreign sales as even they do not expect a much greater increase in backlog over and above the current one that exists . The SABR was just unveiled in mid FEB , it is yet to fly , test and will only be offered once it is ready . NG believes that they have something to offer and are willing to spend own company money . In the future SABR and/or Mini APG-79 can compete if the USAF decides to upgrade F-16 with new radar , however block 50/52 radars are still young , the congress wont spend billions to upgrade radars which have life left in them and are quite capable moreoever the priority like i said is to put AESA in F-15E first , then put JHMCS on all of the fleet (Aim-9x integration) , then SDB integration , Advanced HARM version integration etc etc replacing 50/52 radars is not a priority right now but things could change 10 years from now .

All ur example are very weak export examples. Russia has been dealing with strong countries like China/India/Iran which demands technologies/licenses upfront. It is Russia which is withholding untill this point alot of stuff for different reasons. but still manage to sell stuff as it is very confident of building much better for itself. But it is going to change sooner or later.

http://www.arms-tass.su
Secretaries Sovbezov RF Iran discuss in Teheran the wide circle of questions, including military technical collaboration
As it communicated earlier, by promising trend VTS between two countries are the modernization of the available in Iran park of Russian aviation engineering, the organization of overhaul previously the presented from RF armaments, creation in the Iranian territory of service center on servicing of aircraft MiG-29 and Su-24MK, the creation of training center on training of crews for the tanks T -72S, collaboration in the development of the space systems of communications and observation of the earth’s surface, and also the organization of the license production in Iran of a number of land and sea weapon systems.

PLEASE POINT TO THE LINE IN WHICH I SAID IRBIS IS NOT BETTER THEN BARS? I take offence to the fact that you are PUTTING WORDS IN MY STATEMENTS THAT I NEVER MADE , I hope the moderators are looking at these tactics at your and take proper action .

Bars have easily defeated APG-73 in 2001 when even BARS MK3 was not developed. IRBIS is in differnt level.

And how many are currently seeking a new radar ? NG has just started marketing the new radar and it hasnt even flown yet .

i have explained already it is Russia which is not selling to everyone and on some there is prodcution constraints due to requipment of enterprizes.

One took one some years back , in the meantime they have a new version of the radar because the previous one wasnt plug and play and involved multi nation royalties . APg-80 can only go onto block 60 aircrafts or similar better configuration (such as Block 70 for IAF as proposed) and it cannot be retrofitted and still be called a simple upgrade. Let them complete this radar and market it , lets see how many countries go for it . NG definately see a buisness case therefore spent own money in an industry that is very reluctant to do so. This isnt something NG designed for the next 5 years , this is designed to conincide with upgrades of the block 50/52’s that LMA sold those upgrades are still years away and hence NG will take a few years to test and fully integrate this radar , when major upgrades to block 50/52’s comes this would be ready and on offer . I dont see those upgrades comming just yet.

I dont see F-16 serving past 2030. Its airframe life will not allow it. u better sign for AESA upgrade now as airforce will want to use it for next 20 year. There is no point in upgrading 25 year old aircraft in 2025.

For 1m^2 target ?

they say they can guide 4 semi-active missiles at distance exceeding 300KM and search/tracking range is no less than 350-400KM. upperlimit is not mentioned.

Makes no difference , no radar is designed for one or two seaters , the Apg-79 is meant for both single seater and two seater , dual mode operation , freq hopping etc can be done by single seater aswell .

ur constantly mentioning two seat operations. Su-35 is designed for single seat operations. they dont want to compromise performance with drag and weight of second seat.

Funny that you say that because so far your beloved IRBIS or MIG-35 AESA has sold ZERO and the 1000 Mod AESA on the F-16 has sold 80 sets … Keep on believing but the FACT BASED WORLD differs .

funny u have such weak example. ur mentioning a country that bought Pentsyir 10 years before it was fully developed and paid more for Mirage upgrades than buying new Rafale at that time prices. put some decent airforce with open compitition. Even kazak MIG-31 makes more sense than this.

Like the article says AESA ranges are classified and estimates are all we are going to see . The US doesnt like to talk about this in great detail (Exact ranges etc etc ) .

so why make claims no is taking. only Singapore can be good example as they bought AESA in F-15 as they are facing Bars equiped fighter.

Because NG only unveiled it less then 50 days ago and it is still not complete for offer to customers (test flights will begin shortly( , it is targetted for Block 50/52 upgrades and those AF’s that cannot afford complex integration of Apg-80 (plus extra licence cost ) and want something cheaper as well as things without too much restriction regarding TOT. I dont think the market for REPLACEMENT of block 50/52 radar sets will mature before 2010-2012 so they have plenty of time . The neat thing about this radar is that it can be scaled up or down depending upon platform so they can offer it for other aircrafts aswell for those maybe who dont want the more expensive and complex AN/APG-79 on the F-18 legacy (like australia etc) .

But they can certainly renegotiate contract with a little higher price. why put slotarray radar for another 20 years if AESA benefits are such and easy adoptable? similar case can be made for IAF M2K uprade why pay expensive upgrade for next 20 years without AESA? No one wants to smaller AESA

The radar was not unvelied before the turkish forces were forming their plans moreoever if a country X doesnt choose a product doesnt mean that it is no good . South korea chose a Mechanical array for their latest F-15’s doesnt mean that the ApG63 (V3,4) are crap .

SK chose mechanical array in 2002 so highly unlikely there was multirole AESA developed for there time frame. or they didnot see the added benefit untill this point. the whole point is most of airforces can live without it untill this point.

No need , F-35 is comming , SPending a lot of money on F-16 AESA upgrades wont be really smart unless their is a major delay on the F-35 program and/or a great cut in number meaning longer operation life for existing F-16 fleets . Just like the F-15 AESA , they cut/postponed plans to put 63(v4) on 150 F-15E’s . The USAF wants to upgrade F-15E first with AESA before F-16 if they have the money (they see the F-15E’s having a greater role since they arent being replaced in total capability unlike the F-16 which is being replaced by F-35) . Currently they dont have money for either .

F-35 coming does not mean ur going to retire F-16/F-15 in one day. they will continue to serve for next 20 years. so why not put cheaper aesa as it has lower long term maintaiance (another of your claim)

It has been put on the Small nose of the F-16 , F-18E/F , and by all accounts improved capability . Cooling issues were their earlier in development but they were overcome . Complexity issues existed but then again they were overcome.

F-18 withou AESA is fighter which will be hard to sell.

But they are putting them up now or have been doing so many many years ago . NG Apg-81 has Twin Pack Modules (with Transfer and recieve mod in single chip) and that is further cut in weight and complexity and allows greater packing . APG-77 rolling off the line now come with Twin pack modules .

REGARDING PERFORAMANCE –

The peformance of the AN/APG-80 is not as much available beacuse of propreity control by UAE however we can compare APG-73——–>APG-79 TRANSITION , the APG-79 gets them 3 times greater range and 5 times improved SAR improvment in resolution. Moreover the APG-79 has a reliability of > 15,000 hours for the (MTBCF) for the array .Ofcouse these benefits are over and above the most exciting benefits of AESA such as Agile beam forming and Interleaved Radar modes . The APG-81 array was found to be so much reliable that they initially thought to seal of the radar cone completely .

3 times range performance. Based on which year APG-73? if it is early 90s so it must be around 100*3= 300KM range for fighter size. not some thing earth shattering. Su-35 is same weight class but with 11.5 tons internal fuel.

http://www.sflorg.com/member_gallery/Military-Aircrafts/military33
Irbis-E radar control system detects and tracks up to 30 air targets, retaining continuity of space observation and engaging up to eight targets. The system detects, chooses and tracks up to four ground targets in several map-making modes with various resolution at a range of up to 400 km, without stopping to monitor the airspace.

Irbis-E radar detects air targets with an absolute cross section of 3 m2 on a head-on course at a range of up to 400 km.

Being an improvement on radars with a PAA, Irbis has much better capabilities: expanded (by more than twice) operating frequency band, increased from 70? to 120? target detection and tracking zone in azimuth, substantially (by 2-2.5 times) increased effective range, improved anti-jamming capability, etc. In this aspect, Irbis is comparable to the best foreign counterparts, outperforming most of the US- and Wes-European-made radars with passive and active PAA.

The Research Institute has been developing Irbis since 2004. By now, the engineering prototypes of the system have passed the required bench trials. The first of them has been installed on the Su-30MK2 flying laboratory and is undergoing flight tests. The first flight of the flying laboratory with Irbis onboard occurred in early 2007 at Gromov Flight Test Institute. During the flight, the laboratory proved the superior performance of the new radar in the air-to-surface operating mode

With all the money they have poured into the F-2…..

this wrong example. see my post.

I understand your point!! Same with automobiles .

The US is pretty balanced in that regards and so is EU , good manuactering of high technology (CIVIL AVIATION , DEFENCE , AEROSPACE etc ) , pretty good Automobile industry (GM , FORD etc are still pretty big companies ) and the manuf. sector is decent sized.

EU has trade surplus despite higher currency and less food area. u have to look at russian automobile market how it changed from 90s to 21st century. there is important clues.

And it needent be , technology wise it is probably equal or higher , however it is smaller in size because of the platform it was being mounted on (Small nose of the F-16 as opposed to the huge NOSE section of the Su-27 brute fighter) . Like I said HORSES FOR COURSES. because a radar is smaller in size doesnt mean it is any less advanced for it is small because of its platform . The Wedgetail AESA radar isnt more advanced then the Apg-77 just because it is larger , yes it can prob. detect targets farther but interms of technology they are in the same league .

AESA radar is not for small fighters untill this point because of weight and cooling requirements.

AESA radar for su-30 (suppose they feild one) wont be more advanced interms of technology if the same radar is scaled down to feild onto smaller nose of Mig-29. It would have higher detection ranges but that is due to size and not technology . MATCHING CAPABILITY WITH REQUIRMENTS is very important.

U need bigger nose for AESA radar with power supply. Why Phazotron said that MIG-29 radar will get 1100 T/R modules at maximu but Flanker over 2000 T/R. and Flanker nose is only 30% larger than MIG-29 not 100%

It is still an operational radar , the same version is going to be exported so no difference in capability . the australian radar wont be different as the USN radar . If australia wanted earlier (signed for SH some years ago) they could well have been flying SH with AESA right now (i believe Block2 went online last year)

u can well export MIG-31 and Su-34 class radars that will make Su-35 radar pales in comparision. Russians arent exporting certain things.

Most customers dont want it (Singapore , Current JSF partners , Australia ). The US can be more strict with its defence projects and still sell aircrafts and weaponry .

Most customers doesnot have industial capacity, manpower along with large budgets like China/India for looking into TOT.

And boeing does so with F-18E/F with -79 dozens of which are now operational . What is the point ? IRBIS is concept radar with no operational expereince while the offered -79 is operational and dozens are delivered with hundereds to be delivered . Which has a brighter future ?

IRBIS is built on BARS experiance not some thing totally out of the way and it has been flying on Su-30MK2. Russians chose to test subsystems on various aircrafts. and IRBIS have brighter future as most of its tech will go to BARS upgradation.

400Km with what RCS (evidence included) . Also if it is so damn good why no orders till date ? The US has sold each of its export AESA radars surely the russians shouldnt have had problems .

they dont have problem but prices have risen too much for Su-35. Russians customers were not used to that kind of prices.

They decided to take their own road and develop one indeginiously , they have invested in the BARS , why replace a perfectly good / capable radar before its age has expired ? When it comes to replacing BARS in years from now i am sure they will choose AESA , they are suggesting AESA for Future LCA , MCA and are going to get AESA for pakfa , which way do you think they are headed ???

thats the whole point.they are not there yet. India cannot come with AESA radar that is better than BARS performance for next 10 years.

Yeah the Apg-77 , Apg-80 , apg-79 ., 63(v2,3,4) Apg-81 , Wedgetail , MPRITP are all dismal radars , with zero performance and struggling to stay aloft . the US has crappy AESA radars 🙂 .

they are not crappy but IRBIS is not slouch either.

So because russia chooses to partner with germans , japanese and french their products are superior ? Name me operational AESA radars in Europe ? Biggest phased array radars ? Whom do you think the french are choosing to supply T-R mods for the rafale AESA radars ? Which radar do you think willl be on European F-35’s ?

Russians GAZ bought complete assembly line with Robots from Chrysler but some one later laughed on them.(I am not going into further discuss) EU is not interested in military applications of there industrial power to the extent US but Russia is going to make full use of them.

US has been flying AESA radars (evaluting ) since the ninetees , thats close to 2 decades of AESA expereince with generational increments along the way . T-R mods have matured 2-3 times within that time , cooling is a non-issue now and T-R mods are lighter , cheaper and better manage the situation . If your logic is to be belived then Russian PAKFA would have CRAPPY stealth since russia has no operational expereince with stealth. Also the RUSSIAN AESA aboard the PAKFA would be crappy compared to the BARS because what they have only been flying it for a few months and now it is better then 30 years of PESA development bla bla bla . They are operational because they are mature enough to be made operational as opposed to highest capability of previous generation technology , that is why a particular tech is being pushed ..

Soviet Union began this AESA in mid 80s right with Japanese but they didnot produce to industrial level. even the MIG-35 T/R module is only $400 per peice. PAK-FA wont be crappy as compared to BARS as the money, tools available for Radar development are in whole different level compared to when BARS/Zalson was developed . I have previously mentioned in this form if same conditions are applied in which Soviet/Russians scientist worked Chinese/Japanese will be only making Bicycles.

We are talking about EXPORT here , or did you not read the previous threads . I am talking about your claim that —

And PESA BARS have been delivered for 6 years now. there is no radar in same performance class with any export customer of Western aircraft for past 6 years.

This claim is what i am talking about , and it deals with EXPORT in specific since you Do not talk about in service radar sets . In 1998 US sold AESA fighter radar to UAE . It flew in 2003 for the first time aboard the F-16 block 60 . FACTS would disagree with your notion that the US only sold out dated slotted arrays in 2002-2003 timeframe when russians were selling world beating – PESA’s . The US was selling AESA radars to those interested in 1998 when the SALE of the Block 60 F-16’s took place . They were further marketing Other AESA radars in 2000-2005 timeframe to south korea and Singapore for the F-15 fighters . SK chose to go with a cheaper non AESA radar whilest Singapore in 2005 chose the APG63 AESA version (either 2 or 3 i am not sure but i think it would be 3) again refuting your claims that US was only selling OUT DATED slotted arrays to customers interested in its hardware as opposed to russians who were selling world beating PESA radars.

IAF signed MKI start deal from 1996 so whats the point. It is the actual delivery and Performance that matters. Malaysian clearly found out that in 2001 none of competition at that point offered BARS performance.

So why is PAKFA getting AESA if AESA has no advantages over PESA ? ?

I never said that AESA does not have advantage over PESA. I said that level of AESA radar for export that can overcome Russian PESA for export is not there yet. otherwise IAF will not dether next 5 years on AESA radar as they are perfectly comfortable with all 240 MKIs with PESA along with some other countries. Irkut alone will export 110 MKI class fighters in next 3 years.
Russians have well developed PESA tech just like Vaccum tubes it will take long time for them to make AESA (they are going with GaNs) that will better than PESA. It is highly unlikely there will AESA radar for Flanker untill 2015.

Against APg-79 ? hmmm it would be interesting to compare . The AN/APG-79 provides 3 times greater range , dual band use capability (back seater can use the radar for A2G mapping while front seater uses to scan air space for threats) , LPI , provides 5 times greater resolution as compared to the aircraft it is replacing etc etc . I WOULD LOVE TO SEE YOUR COMPARISON OF THESE RADARS AND WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT THE BARS IS BETTER THEN THE APG-79 , REMEMBER CONSIDER ALL PARAMATERS SUCH AS * BRUTE RANGE , * MULTI MODE OPERATION * SIMELTANIOUS MULTI MODE OPERATION * LPI CAPABILITY * MTBF * PROCESSOR * SAR IMAGERY ETC ETC

APG-79 provide three times greater range compared to What? with IRBIS they have achieved Ultra high resolution SAR with simulatneus 4 ground tracking and hitting. I am sure there will be Bars upgrades long the way but it is not some insurrmontable lead.

AESA sold in 1998 , Delivered in 2002-2003 timeframe and IOC reached in 2004 for EXPORT . US AESA fighters have been flying since 2000 .
Cool!!

And that AESA radar is not in same performance as BARS. And Russian PESA radars have been flying since 70s.