There are no exact figures available, but suffice it to say if a BARs(or Irbis for that matter) equipped Flanker is operating in max power, then their emissions will travel well beyond the claimed 300-400km optimal condition detection ranges. The Super Hornet’s ESM/RWR would allow them to conduct a passive attack, under these conditions without even having to turn on their radars, as an A2A equipped SH won’t be detected at anywhere near those ranges.
If the tables were turned, and the Flankers were not emitting, they may not even be aware that the SH is tracking them, when using LPI modes(or ATFLIR), until AMRAAMs started going active, or if they did something else to betray their positions. That’s why it’s so desirable to remain discreet. I’m pretty sure you’ll never see detection ranges or vulnerabilities of LPI listed anywhere on opensource sites.

Agree and disagree at the same time.
Yes, the LPI mode might enable you to detect an MKM without alerting the Avitronics thing. At the same time, the LPI range of the APG-79 must be greatly reduced compared to the non-LPI figure. That means the SH must come pretty close and since it is by no means a stealth aircraft, it stays exposed to enemy radars. Once detected, the LPI advantage might quickly turn into a trap.

BTW, MKM has the IRST thing which enables similar silent attacks and since it also has suitable missiles for that (unlike the SH), it certainly has some edge here, as well.

I’d say that in the end it comes down to proper tactics and force multipliers. Separate types don’t win battles, entire forces do. I’d take a SH backed by Wedgetail against solitary MKMs any day of the week, just like I’d take an MKM backed by Erieye against solitary Superbugs. 🙂

A PESA radar has the exact same lateral signal degradation of an AESA set. That line of argument is the one used by Eurofighter in relation to CAPTOR versus first generation AESA´s. But Captor uses a mechanical “dish”.

So does BARS, doesn’t it? The antenna does not look fixed to me.

he has been told some stuff, but it wasnt to his liking, what am i suppose to do except to ask him to post his point, so we can see it

Yes, I have been told stuff that isn’t to my liking because I can already see that you guys only offer your guesses dressed up as facts. That truly isn’t to my liking.

The moot point is that APG-79 is much better than BARS and that ALR-67 is much better than the Avitronics suite. So much the claims say. I asked for data to see but guess what, nobody has any.

Thanks for wasting my time, then.. :rolleyes: You could have told me at the very beginning and we would have spared ourselves this pointless argument.

Anyway, the pic of the Aussie Superbugs is sweet, cannot wait to hear about first DACT encounters with the MKMs. 🙂

Let’s rephrase this. In what instance is a PESA better than an AESA, in terms of capabilities?

AESA offers
-more flexibility
-higher resistance to ECM
-higher reliability
-far more discreet with regards to RWR

just to mention a few advantages.

From my memory, it was detection range, especially at lateral scanning angles. The arguments were that if you don’t need to go for A-A and A-G at the same time (which you normally don’t) and if you don’t care about enemy RWRs, then high power PESA outperfroms AESA (of course it is less flexible, noone argues about that)

And of course, cost. Riding 5 miles everyday to your work and back does not justify purchase of a Ferrari Scuderia, even if it’s probably ‘better’ than your everyday Stratus.

Ah, it’s all the politicians getting excited about this AESA gimmick hey? Nothing to do with real capability…. Of course why would they want LPI modes, higher reliability, high resolution SAR modes, the possibility of organic EA down the track! They wouldn’t need that sort of caper, they were just jealous!

Come on mate, you can’t actually believe that. The same argument could be made for PESA, I mean what use do they have for that over an MSA?

There was a fairly large talk about radars on key or ARC, I don’t remember. There were guys who are much more in the know than me and they have highlighted several drawbacks AESA concept brings in. Something with sidelobes, I really don’t know, but that isn’t the point. The point is that less informed folks like you and me show tendences to automatically classify an AESA design as superior to a PESA or slotted design regardless of the actual specs.

There are few things that are generally valid for each concept like AESA requires very little maintenance, requires very powerful cooling which makes it (so far) unsuitable for very small aircraft like F-5 or that AESA antenna alone costs often more than the whole slotted radar. There is no need to argue about that. But I personally would hesitate to claim that APG-79 is superior to BARS in all aspects because IMHO it isn’t.

Many advantages you have provided might be correct but the question is if they really are needed. I personally doubt that the number of targets that the BARS can simultaneously track will ever be insufficient for an air force like RMAF and therefore adding even a few more does not really justify the 79.

No I don’t have them, didn’t mean to imply that I did. What I do have though is logic.

Logic does not suffice here because we have too little data available. By using logic you can assume something but that it where it ends. You seemed to be very self-confident in your claims that is why I really thought you had some numbers at hand. Pity because I really would love to know more.

Its called generational superiority, like a 3rd gen AESA and fully digital RWR.

You know what, you’re right; I don’t have actual number on these systems. No one does here because, let’s face it, if we did we wouldn’t be talking about it on key. However you can make some assumptions based on known capabilities, for example counter detection ranges for two radars with comparable peak power outputs when one has an LPI mode and the other doesn’t. It’s pretty reasonable to say the LPI equipped system would have a far smaller counter detection range because, well, that’s what LPI does.

Now you could take that line of argument on pretty much anything in modern military aviation. You could argue that the F-22A may not be harder to detect than an F/A-18F because after all, we don’t actually KNOW their frontal RCS numbers do we? I’d wager it would be a pretty safe bet though.

I agree. Just like I have said before, we only can assume.. BTW, that SAAB suite the MKM sports, are you sure it is one league behind the AN/ALR-67?

Strange, indeed. As far as I know, there were some Angolan Fitters refurbished and upgraded by WZL2 repair plant in Poland. Looks like Angolans are using every opportunity to get their Fitters going.

malaysia went su because of usa holds missile stock as per their hornets and Singapore f-15 and if you go to malaysian sites, they arent happy with them
what do you base your claim on that the su is better ?

Sorry, I cannot read what they write, therefore I will not go to malaysian sites. If you got anything, post it here…

Su-27SM and MiG-29BM-like upgrade is the most obvious choice.