You get a stronger reflection from any plane once it turns.
APG-81 is more than 148km and certainly more than RBE2 AESA, which is a lot smaller. APG-85 will be 400+km.
People's Liberation Army Air Force : News & Discussions
- Thread starter Aashish
- Start date
Picdel's APA graph shows that the APG-77 has a range of 203Km. One report claimed 201-241Km. So, if the APG-81 is at 150Km, then it makes sense to have the APG-77 at 203Km, much more realistic than 255Km. 50Km less range for 400 less TRMs makes sense, given both jets have the same radars basically.
Nothing's known about APG-85, so there's no point in speculating. We don't know what sort of numbers can be achieved with GaN either for any radar.
I mean to say there's no third party verification. We are just taking French figures at face value. The same for pretty much all other figures.
Updated again...
Against 1m2:
APG-66 detection range is 68Km.
APG-68 = 80Km
Zhuk-ME = 80Km
PS-05/A Mk3 (2014 version) = 80Km
RDY-2 = 80Km
RBE2 PESA = 80Km
RBE2-AA = 106Km
APG-83 = 116Km
Bars-1 = 126Km
Uttam Mk1 = 126Km design goal
APG-80 = 132Km
KLJ-7A V2 (Type 1478) = 134Km
PS-05/A Mk3 (2017 version) = 145km
APG-63(v)2 = 145Km
APG-79 = 150Km
Irbis-E = 151Km
APG-81 = 150/160Km(?)
RBE2 AESA = 160Km...
APG-77 = 200/240Km(?)
PS-05/A Mk4 = 210Km(?)
Added more radars.
PS-05A Mk4 is really special.
The 2014 version is supposed to be 120Km vs 5m2. So that's 113Km against 4m2. But it seems to have seen some massive improvements since then. Now it apparently does 315Km vs 5m2 or 210 vs 1m2.
So it's at the same level as the APG-77 now. And the best part is it's mechanical scan, not AESA. The GaN version called Mk5 uses the same Mk4 backend, so it must be some sort of beast.
Against 1m2:
APG-66 detection range is 68Km.
APG-68 = 80Km
Zhuk-ME = 80Km
PS-05/A Mk3 (2014 version) = 80Km
RDY-2 = 80Km
RBE2 PESA = 80Km
RBE2-AA = 106Km
APG-83 = 116Km
Bars-1 = 126Km
Uttam Mk1 = 126Km design goal
APG-80 = 132Km
KLJ-7A V2 (Type 1478) = 134Km
PS-05/A Mk3 (2017 version) = 145km
APG-63(v)2 = 145Km
APG-79 = 150Km
Irbis-E = 151Km
APG-81 = 150/160Km(?)
RBE2 AESA = 160Km...
APG-77 = 200/240Km(?)
PS-05/A Mk4 = 210Km(?)
Added more radars.
PS-05A Mk4 is really special.
The 2014 version is supposed to be 120Km vs 5m2. So that's 113Km against 4m2. But it seems to have seen some massive improvements since then. Now it apparently does 315Km vs 5m2 or 210 vs 1m2.
So it's at the same level as the APG-77 now. And the best part is it's mechanical scan, not AESA. The GaN version called Mk5 uses the same Mk4 backend, so it must be some sort of beast.
According to this report Gripen's radar (MK3 variant!!??) picked up J-11A around 160kms. If the above info posted by @randomradio is correct then their improvement(in later variants) is really commendable.
The report: PLAAF Senior Pilot Reveals Poor Performance in Joint Exercise With RTAF
The report: PLAAF Senior Pilot Reveals Poor Performance in Joint Exercise With RTAF
The APG-81 is a newer radar than the -77 and frankly any comparison between Lockheed fighters and Rafales that Picdel makes should be taken with a salt mine.
The 150 miles (241km) was for the initial version of the APG-77, not the one with updated GaAs modules.
AN/APG-77 - Wikipedia
The F-35s came with the updated modules from the off and it will be replaced by the APG-85, which presumably uses GaN modules to give a 2x range improvement, which implies ~16x the power.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/06/state-approves-5-6-billion-f-35-sale-to-czech-republic/
Klj-7A is j20's radar?
So its just comes second only to F22. We will not regret if we choose the same in mmrca2
The APG-81 is a newer radar than the -77 and frankly any comparison between Lockheed fighters and Rafales that Picdel makes should be taken with a salt mine.
The 150 miles (241km) was for the initial version of the APG-77, not the one with updated GaAs modules.
AN/APG-77 - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Doubt there's much of a difference between the two.
The F-35s came with the updated modules from the off and it will be replaced by the APG-85, which presumably uses GaN modules to give a 2x range improvement, which implies ~16x the power.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/06/state-approves-5-6-billion-f-35-sale-to-czech-republic/www.strategicfront.org
View attachment 29218
Doesn't really mention range, it's a bit too general. I don't believe brute forcing power is the answer. Plus I doubt the F-35 can provide that much power. Signal processing is the answer, no different from the PS-05/A Mk4. Gotta wait for the answer.
JF-17 B3.
There are far better radars around.
For example, a derivative of the AESA RBE2 for the MKI will give it up to 4000 TRMs.
There are even more advanced ones too, like digital GaN.
Newer modules would be the difference to the original APG-77.
AN/APG-85, the new generation radar developed for the F-35
Northrop Grumman Corporation is developing the AN/APG-85, an advanced active electronically scanning radar (AESA) for the F-35 Lightning II, which will replace the current AN/APG-81. Northrop Grumman currently manufactures the AN/APG-81 fire control radar, the cornerstone of the F-35 Lightning II se
www.aviacionline.com
So, blk3 is having better radar than almost every radar of fighter jet radar except Rafale. Scary i guess.
It doesn't exist, not even drawing board or even in concept.
The "new" modules are basically the serial production version of the APG-77, it was contracted in 2005. The F-35 came after this radar. So both radars use the same TRMs.
AN/APG-85, the new generation radar developed for the F-35
Northrop Grumman Corporation is developing the AN/APG-85, an advanced active electronically scanning radar (AESA) for the F-35 Lightning II, which will replace the current AN/APG-81. Northrop Grumman currently manufactures the AN/APG-81 fire control radar, the cornerstone of the F-35 Lightning II se
Operating at much higher power and 16 times more power aren't the same.
Why don't you try calculating the power requirements for 16 times more power first?
It's old by today's industry standards, at least by 20 years.
It's irrelevant, 'cause we have chosen Uttam Mk3 for MKI MLU.
How jf17 blk3 radar is old?. Its having higher defection range than mirage, mig29 & current MKI. I would rate Blk 3 definitely over mig, mirage any day. MKI, i dont want to listen my brain, instead going with heart.
What will be uttam MK3 range?
The APG-77 was updated, wiki page.
You need 16x the power for twice the range theoretically.
GaN modules are much more efficient relative to size, so you can use more modules on the same area. The advantage is a combination of higher power, greater efficiency and more space efficiency over the same radar area, giving more modules and greater gain. It's equivalent to a GaAs with 16x the power overall.
X-band: GaAs vs GaN Efficiency Tradeoffs
by Grant Wilcox, Qorvo As the war between GaN and GaAs rages on, GaN continues
www.mpdigest.com
Last edited:
The radar is old tech, 'cause its challengers are more advanced with digital antennas and perhaps even GaN.
The jets you named are too old for comparison. They are getting upgrades or will be phased out.
Astra Mk3 is being designed for 300Km range. So you take a guess.
Yeah, it was. And it was introduced in 2007. And the same updated radar was introduced in the F-35.
What you are referring to is a more recent development which the USAF did not go for.
You need 16x the power for twice the range theoretically.
GaN modules are much more efficient relative to size, so you can use more modules on the same area. The advantage is a combination of higher power, greater efficiency and more space efficiency over the same radar area, giving more modules and greater gain. It's equivalent to a GaAs with 16x the power overall.
X-band: GaAs vs GaN Efficiency Tradeoffs
by Grant Wilcox, Qorvo As the war between GaN and GaAs rages on, GaN continues
You are missing the point. You can output a lot of power through it as long as you can feed it, but the feeding bit is the problem. The engine does not produce that much electricity, where it can double range purely by increasing power alone.
Double range is not impossible, but it has to come through fixing the sensitivity of the antenna and performing better signal processing, using AI, even. You don't need more power if you can extract your own signals from noise more efficiently. Which is probably what was achieved by the PS-05/A Mk4. They were probably able to lower the clutter rejection threshold that way. So more junk came in, but they could make sense of it up to 1.5x times the original range. Perhaps they could lower receiver sensitivity by a magnitude that way.
The update increased the range.
Nope.
As I mentioned some of the range comes from the increased size efficiency of the modules and therefore increased gain, some from increased power transmission and some from increased power.
There are lots of factors, but the main improvement of GaN is increased power density, size efficiency and power efficiency.
Not how it works. The (V)1 is the first upgrade. E.g. for the legacy F-15 unit, you can see that the (V)1 does not come out until the 1990s:
