I certainly know that radar detection range is proportional to RCS to the fourth power
I just said you speculate that the LCA RCS values in the wrong way
Rafale DH/EH of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions
- Thread starter Herciv
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
I just said you speculate that the LCA RCS values in the wrong way
Most of the R77 used in India use the 9B-1348 seeker
Requires 2 minutes to cool down before firing
relatively old. It's normal to have problems
The newer 9B-1103M used by the Chinese PL12
RVVSD also uses the same boot header
It's accurate if he was referring to average RCS.
Su-57, F-35 and F-22 have average RCS below 1m2 and other jets have average RCS above 1m2. 1-3m2 is suitable for 4.5th gen jets like the Eurocanards. The Flanker's average RCS is 20m2.
The JF-17 has nothing to do with Pakistan, China takes the lead in exports. Even the other export contracts were signed by China.
Anyway Pakistan also uses palm oil. It's one of their biggest imports.
You seriously think China will want to give up an important market to India for the sake of palm oil?
That's how it is calculated. Simple multiplication and division.
If you want to calculate the RCS of different parts, including their interaction with other parts, all you need to do is add them all up for total RCS.
My point was democracies have auditors who look into problems, and they reveal true capabilities sometimes, like the R-77's up to 90Km range.
Pakistan owns the intellectual property rights of JF17, after all, they paid for the research and development, and Pakistan is responsible for exports, and the profits are divided equally
I think Malaysia will choose relatively mature fighters such as FA50 and MIG35, most likely FA50, after all, it is a Western product, and there is less political resistance
Pakistan is extremely short of US dollar foreign exchange. At the same time, Pakistan is also under pressure from Rafale fighter jets and needs to equip its troops with JF17BLOCK3 as soon as possible instead of exporting it.
As you said, under different standards, the R77 may not even hit the balloon at a distance of 90KM, after all, the resistance of the grille tail rudder is too large
I don't agree, like canard wings,
It is not simply the addition of the wing RCS value and the body RCS value, you need to consider many issues
Assuming Pakistan is leading the tender, then it makes more sense for them to export their jet, since it also means they can buy palm oil without using dollars.
Malaysians need their jets after 2025. PAF will get all their 50 JF-17 B3s by 2024. If necessary they can increase the production rate for the sake of selling 36 more jets to Malaysia.
Anyway India's gonna participate in Argentina. So let's see if the JF-17 shows up there.
Will India ditch Martin Baker's ejection seat?
And exports could worsen Anglo-Indian relations, after all India is a Commonwealth of Nations
That's the range at which it can hit a target. Beyond that range, when the missile runs out of power, typically it points to the ground and the warhead self-destructs for safety reasons.
This is for the R-77.
It doesn't matter. If you have a final value for it, it is additive.
From a 30 deg aspect angle, the canards, airframe, wing, missiles etc, and the interaction between them can give you individual values, you can simply add them all up and that will be the RCS from the 30 deg angle.
Only for scientific and design purpose.
For tactical reasons, you need aspect angle, because you are showing a particular aspect to the enemy radar. When you are flying straight towards the radar, the radar can only see the frontal aspect, it can't see the vertical fins or the engine.
Different radars with different purposes will see an aircraft differently. For example, a low level radar with short range will see a different aspect, whereas a high altitude radar will see the aircraft from a different aspect. An AWACS will see a different aspect, where it can see the top fuselage, the vertical fins and even the engine nozzle. If the data is sent through a fusion engine, then it can combine the aspects of all three and get a clearer picture.
It's no different from seeing pictures of the jet from different angles with our eyes. If the eyes can't see it, then the radar can't see it.
Yes. All British products on the LCA are replaceable.
Better for Britain that Argentina uses a non-Russian or Chinese plane. The US would also prefer that.
I looked through some information last night and found that I may have misunderstood active stealth
The Chinese and foreign names of this should be called radar active cancellation technology
The principle is basically the same as what you said. Actively transmit radar waves and use waveform superposition to deceive the opponent's radar. J-10C also has
the antenna at the root of the canard.（spec)
At the same time, this antenna can block the gap between the canard and the body
, to achieve better shape stealth
There is a paper describing this cancellation technique, on the J10C,
Able to reduce 19.2DB
But this technology is difficult to replace the appearance of stealth,
There are three reasons
First, the ground or air targets are very complex, and the scattered signals change rapidly. It is not enough to cancel a radar signal. There are also many complex signals such as sound signals, visible light signals, and infrared signals to be canceled. The difficulty and effect of engineering tests are debatable.
Second, the electromagnetic wave propagates at the speed of light, and the speed response of the device must be consistent with the speed of light. If it is a little slower, it cannot catch up with the speed of light, and it cannot be offset, so it is easy to expose the target.
Third, omnidirectional coverage is extremely complex.
Your picture is basically for the R77 at an altitude of 10000m and a range of 50KM, which is in line with China's dataThat's the range at which it can hit a target. Beyond that range, when the missile runs out of power, typically it points to the ground and the warhead self-destructs for safety reasons.
This is for the R-77.
It doesn't matter. If you have a final value for it, it is additive.
From a 30 deg aspect angle, the canards, airframe, wing, missiles etc, and the interaction between them can give you individual values, you can simply add them all up and that will be the RCS from the 30 deg angle.
Yes, the belief is now everybody has it in one form or the other. Just that the Rafale had it operational since 2006 and it has matured a lot more since then. It's even been combat tested in Libya.
It depends. Active cancellation has its own problems, but the same exist with passive stealth. For example, how the Israelis think the F-35's stealth is only good for 10-15 years or that the IAF chief doesn't consider aircraft like the F-22 and F-35 to be stealth aircraft.
Eventually a combination of old techniques and new techniques have to be invented.
Omindirectional coverage can be accomplished using conformal arrays.
It just depends on the altitude and whether the data is correct.
So when the Chinese say PL-15E has a range of 140Km, it must be at medium altitude, whereas the actual range would be double that at high altitude, so 250-300Km. The non-export verison could even exceed 300Km, the missile is big enough. Even if it doesn't reach such a range today, they can always make a PL-15B, C etc.
The Americans and Russians typically release information for high altitude performance. For example, the AIM-120D does up to 180Km, or K-77ME does 190Km, both are at high altitude. Possibly 15Km, so it could go even higher at 18Km.
Israelis release information for medium altitude, so Derby is 50Km and ER is 100Km, but you have to effectively double that for high altitude. They said the Derby is as capable as AIM-120C and AIM-120D is only 50% as capable as ER.
Air superiority aircraft typically cruise at 12 Km altitude, and when they have to employ BVR weapons, they quickly gain altitude to above 15Km and go supersonic before releasing the missiles. So that adds even more to the range.
Using a ballistic trajectory the range increases even more, but it's typically used against slow moving targets like AWACS and tankers.
Last edited:
It looks like a blade antenna, doesn't seem suitable for cancellation.
A picture is not enough though. Need official confirmation saying the J-10C has active cancellation.
Antennas in the LERX/wing roots is pretty normal, even the Mig-29UPG got it in the early 2010s.
China has not even announced the empty weight of the J10C.
I can only find a blurry picture of the J10C radar
We can only find some evidence from some papers published by Chengfei Company
Maybe Pakistan will release technical details
Where is the Rafale's antenna?
Maybe we can speculate from the Rafale fighter