Hello Sir
Some people on Twitter say that
Rafale with Gallium Arsenide AESA is inferior to MKI with Gallium Nitride AESA
What is your take on this
Airborne Early Warning Systems - A-50EI Phalcon, DRDO Netra AEW&C, DRDO AWACS
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
Hello Sir
Some people on Twitter say that
Rafale with Gallium Arsenide AESA is inferior to MKI with Gallium Nitride AESA
What is your take on this
Hello Sir
Some people on Twitter say that
Rafale with Gallium Arsenide AESA is inferior to MKI with Gallium Nitride AESA
What is your take on this
I ll try to collate random radio views from previous posts.
Rafale F5 will have conformal radar even though it's nose cone diameter is small.
Su 30 mki radar will be big but limited by power availability.
IAF not comfortable with drilling holes in the body of Su 30..
Rafale radars are part of spectra??
Hello Sir
Some people on Twitter say that
Rafale with Gallium Arsenide AESA is inferior to MKI with Gallium Nitride AESA
What is your take on this
Since we do not have concrete information, we have to make some assumptions.
We will assume that F3R has a radar capable of analog beamforming and F4 can perform digital beamforming.
We will assume that MKI is power limited to 10-15W, so even though it will use GaN, it does not exceed the peak power capabilities of GaAs. And it's also capable of digital beamforming.
So by default, we can assume that MKI's radar will be significantly superior to the F3R's radar. However, there's a good chance even the F3R uses digital beamforming, based on Thales claiming that their radar is the best even though they used an older antenna design compared to the Americans. Digital beamforming provides quite a bit of parity.
Now comes cooling. GaAs requires a lot of cooling relative to GaN due to its lower thermal conductivity. So even though MKI's radar may be power limited in the first phase of the MLU, the cooling requirement is considerably lower, so the radar can perform longer and at higher peak power than the Rafale's. But it's best to assume that because of France's greater experience, it's very likely that the Rafale can consistently use its radar as much as the MKI will be able to. So let's assume that India has used GaN to achieve equivalency with France's older tech in this area.
Next comes software, and we have to assume by default that France is better at this. They have had over 30 years to develop and mature the RBE2, while we have just stepped into this realm quite recently. Ultimately, this is where Uttam can lose out. Now, we can say for sure Uttam Mk2 will lose out here compared to RBE2, but there's hope that by the time MKI MLU delivers Mk3, our software will also have matured, ie, 2032+.
If we talk about raw data, the Uttam Mk3 will naturally generate more of it given the bigger array and significantly more TRMs, but the French should be able to use that data better on the Rafale. Everybody here must have been victims of bad software, unstable updates, lags, crashes etc, so you may have a general idea of what I'm talking about. So it's likely the overall software experience for a pilot is going to be superior on the Rafale for now.
If we talk about raw radar performance, Uttam Mk1 is inferior, Mk2 should be a match or have some superiority being in the same class and Mk3 will brute force its way to superiority due to size. But, if we go by time frame, Uttam Mk3 is expected after 2030, whereas we are comparing it to radars from 2012 and 2023. So the real litmus test will be Uttam Mk4 vs RBE2-XG, ie, AMCA vs Rafale F5. The next opportunity for comparison will be in the 2050s. In any case it will be interesting to compare it to Uttam Mk2 in a few years. We could receive more information in a few years.
Since we are have now started upgrading SU 30s
I think that its AESA radar which is
Known as VIRUPAKSHA will be fully operational in 3 years from now
3 years is too little time..
Tejas Mk1A from 41 st is to get Uttam radar.
That itself will take 3 years.
Su 30 upg given 7 years time for development.
Virupaksha will be ready around that time.
GaN will use less cooling and the latest AL-31FP may produce more electrical power for future MLU(my conjecture!). With GaN average power delivery also will be much higher than GaAs.
Anyways, even with GaN, MKI UPG. can't hope to compete with FGFA(as it was conceived with 360° radar coverage) or Rafale F5(same capability as FGFA) in mini-AWACS role.
J-20 as per my knowledge also does not have conformal or cheek mounted radar(like Su-57 does), neither does any other PLAAF fighter (J-16, J-10C et al). All have fixed radar with max 140° azimuth coverage.
MKI UPG. on the other hand, thanks to its re-positioner would have lot more lateral coverage(almost 240° azimuth). So it could continue to guide other fighters towards the threat while performing a hard-crank/beaming maneuver.
None of the PLAAF fighters, including J-20 can claim that as of now.
IN wanted to swap Rafale M's RBE2 AESA with Uttam MK2. The fact that they seriously considered it should tell you want they think about their comparison.Hello Sir
Some people on Twitter say that
Rafale with Gallium Arsenide AESA is inferior to MKI with Gallium Nitride AESA
What is your take on this
MKI's Uttam variant is simply a bigger and more powerful variant of MK2's Uttam variant.
Simple fact: Rafale is seriously outgunned against MKI UPG. in an air-to-air confrontation. MKI's massive GaN radar will be too much for any 4th gen to handle and we're developing AI based algorithms for it which shall make it extremely potent even against VLO.
That would be a disaster I guess
Youtube videos suggest it can be achieved much earlier
Milspec told me some time back if we use the necessary alternator or something , we can extract needed power.
Drdo chief said the number of TRMs right? 2000+
It means they have planned already.
alpha defense said something like each GaN TRM can have / emit 4-8 times the power of GaS trm, greater the power, cooling requirements also should be more right?
will try add those tweets.
Last edited:
I think but not sure
First will be Uttam for Mk1A
Second will be for Mk2 MWF with repositioner
Third will be for Su 30 upgrade
Fourth will be for Amca.
at present Elta 2052 is integrated with Mk1A, had issues and sorted out.
Nope. Because of the nature of the semiconductor used, i.e., Gallium Nitride; it runs much cooler than Gallium Arsenide based MMIC. So it can produce lot more power as you saw in that Alpha Defense tweet vs GaAs with similar amount of cooling because of its superior thermal efficiency. If you can enhance the cooling power you could produce lot more power with GaN and it can literally double the range and frequency bandwidth.
MKI with GaN(both in Radar & EW) is simply a game-changer.
Only slight software tweaks. That's it.
The MKI was considered mini-AWACS in the 2000s because it had a significant detection range advantage against other jets of the time and also carried a patrol link, unlike other jets.
Today it's pointless. Even if MKI carries a GaN radar, other fighters can match its performance to a significant extent. But the main difference is the patrol link, which most modern jets will eventually carry at some point. The patrol link created a sensor-shooter loop with other MKIs, hence mini-AWACS.
IN's willingness to swap RBE2 for Uttam is a good vote of confidence. But this has a lot more to do with ensuring commonality than quality on a carrier. It's very difficult to maintain two very different systems at sea, not just radar, weapons too. GaN vs GaAs is an obvious advantage.
IAF looking at 12 early warning aircraft under two different programmes
The Indian Air Force (IAF), which is short of Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) aircraft, a critical force multiplier, is looking at the procurement of 12 aircraft under two different programmes.
One of them is a follow-on order of six AEW&C systems mounted on Embraer aircraft, akin to the three Netra systems in service. The other order pertains to six AEW&C systems under development by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) that would be mounted on Airbus A-321 aircraft.
“We have three of them, the Embraer based AEW&C. We have plan for six more. We are calling them Mk1A, with minor modifications to the equipment that is inside. [The] idea is to buy the aircraft from Embraer, and being modified by DRDO, Centre for Air Borne Systems (CABS) will be doing the modifications. It is a proven design with minimum risk involved and maximum output,” Air Chief Marshal A. P. Singh said last week. “We should be having it cleared by Defence Acquisition Council very soon.”
The Air Chief said the other development relates to the AEW&C-Mk2, with an Airbus-based system, for which contract negotiations were currently ongoing. “Modification of aircraft is by Airbus, equipment is being developed by DRDO. Initial contract is to be signed with Airbus by DRDO...negotiations are on to come to the correct configurations, as well the price negotiations,” he added.
Six Airbus A-321 passenger aircraft with Air India were transferred to the IAF sometime ago and are awaiting modifications to be undertaken, pending the conclusion of the contract.
Defence officials said that the modifications required for the aircraft turned out to be significantly more extensive and complex than anticipated, and thus the negotiations over the cost too have dragged on, and the process has been delayed. One official involved in the project said the AEW&C mounted on the Airbus aircraft would provide 300-degree coverage.
The IAF also operates three Israeli Phalcon Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS) in addition to the Netra AEW&C systems. While the Phalcons, which have a radome mounted on top of an IL-76 transport aircraft, provide 360-degree coverage, the Netra provides 240-degree coverage of airspace.
A shortage of these force multipliers was felt during the aerial engagement with the Pakistan Air Force a day after the Balakot air strike in February 2019. A long-pending proposal to procure two additional Israeli Phalcons has not materialised.
In July, the IAF issued a ‘Request For Information’ for the procurement of six AEW&C along with the associated ground segment from registered Indian vendors. According to the requirements, the primary radar should be a multimode/multifunctional solid state 4D AESA (Active Electronically Scanner Array) radar incorporating 360-degree coverage with range not less than 400 km, and be able to detect airborne targets flying as low as 30 metres from the ground to as high as 20 km.
The platform requirement is for a customised jet aircraft configured with payloads/systems of AEW&C and on-board workstations, have endurance of eight hours and above, with an operational altitude of 40,000 feet and above, and also featuring air-to-air refuelling and fuel dumping capability.
So, a total of 18 are envisioned for the IAF. 12 till 2030. Rest 06 beyond that may be by 2035+