Rafale DH/EH of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions

I think since China is a user of the SU 35 radar,Let's see how China evaluates the N 035 radar
This is a paper by the J 20 design team--,AVIC Chengfeic
The N 035 radar has a maximum detection range of 350KM-400KM in a narrow field of view (+ - 20 °), At the same time need accurate target information guidance to complete.
An autonomous search target (+ - 60 °) has a detection range of only 200KM (for low-altitude targets, With a detection range of 170KM )
For rear targets, it has a detection range of only 80KM (low-altitude targets are only 50KM).
View attachment 27639

Low altitude will see different numbers due to clutter. Look up and look down numbers are different. And it doesn't look like they have spoken about a specific target. Without target size, all these range numbers are meaningless.
 
The average power of the N 011m radar is 1.2 kW, while the average power of the N 035 is 5 kW,It is true that radar power is not the only factor affecting the detection range. Other signal-to-noise ratios, bypass ratios, etc., are also important. But the power of the radar is positively correlated with the range,,
The back-end processing system mainly affects the operating mode of the radar, with no effect on the detection distance, I suspect at the level of India's semiconductor industry, Can you come up with a good processing chip
you said in 2007, I did not find any official exact information, I doubt whether it is as I said before the narrow-field mode of operation

2007 was when the N011M Mk3 was released, it was part of a three phase program to upgrade MKI's avionics with Indian technologies.

Batch 3, with N011M Mk.3, added Indian processor to replace Russian C101 radar computer, ground attack mode with simultaneous air target search and integration with Rafael Litening pod. Indian-assembled aircraft reportedly have new gimbals for N011M's moving antenna, giving ±100 degrees azimuth and elevation, plus tracking range increase to 100 n miles (185 km; 115 miles).

DRDO has been designing chips for over 3 decades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Low altitude will see different numbers due to clutter. Look up and look down numbers are different. And it doesn't look like they have spoken about a specific target. Without target size, all these range numbers are meaningless.
These are the goals of RCS = 3
These things are at least more reliable than bragging about Indian weapons with French and Russian propaganda data
 
2007 was when the N011M Mk3 was released, it was part of a three phase program to upgrade MKI's avionics with Indian technologies.

Batch 3, with N011M Mk.3, added Indian processor to replace Russian C101 radar computer, ground attack mode with simultaneous air target search and integration with Rafael Litening pod. Indian-assembled aircraft reportedly have new gimbals for N011M's moving antenna, giving ±100 degrees azimuth and elevation, plus tracking range increase to 100 n miles (185 km; 115 miles).

DRDO has been designing chips for over 3 decades.
Of course I know you can set up a back-end computer. After all, India can buy what it wants from all over the world,But can India come up with a military processor similar to the US MPC 8640D? China at least has its own Huarui 1Hao
v2-30f0f516974d35d217e4a10eb9087f16.jpeg

Don't take Jane's data seriously, he once speculated that the 1493 radar data is not as good as the J-7G KLJ 10
 
These are the goals of RCS = 3
These things are at least more reliable than bragging about Indian weapons with French and Russian propaganda data

Then Bars is already as good as the Irbis-E.

Or the Russians sold the PLAAF a downgraded radar.

Or what you posted is specifically referring to something I can't verify because I can't read Chinese.
 
Of course I know you can set up a back-end computer. After all, India can buy what it wants from all over the world,But can India come up with a military processor similar to the US MPC 8640D? China at least has its own Huarui 1HaoView attachment 27640
Don't take Jane's data seriously, he once speculated that the 1493 radar data is not as good as the J-7G KLJ 10

A threat created by one of our members here.

In 2015, the govt said that all govt owned computers should have Indian designed and manufactured processors, with priority for military, space and other strategic sectors.

This is from the 90s, built on a 700nm process. It's called Anupama.
ANURAG.jpg


Just so you know, India is one of the biggest contributors to global chip design.

Jane's is quoting official Indian sources in this case. But I know they are very unreliable about news from Russia and China.
 
A threat created by one of our members here.

In 2015, the govt said that all govt owned computers should have Indian designed and manufactured processors, with priority for military, space and other strategic sectors.

This is from the 90s, built on a 700nm process. It's called Anupama.
View attachment 27642

Just so you know, India is one of the biggest contributors to global chip design.

Jane's is quoting official Indian sources in this case. But I know they are very unreliable about news from Russia and China.
I'm talking about a dedicated DSP chip, which is a dedicated digital signal processing chip, although China is 5-7 years behind the US Texas Instruments, But at least China has this thing
As for your claim that India is the leader, this is the best joke I have ever heard
Then Bars is already as good as the Irbis-E.

Or the Russians sold the PLAAF a downgraded radar.

Or what you posted is specifically referring to something I can't verify because I can't read Chinese.
Do you believe what you said
 
I think since China is a user of the SU 35 radar,Let's see how China evaluates the N 035 radar
This is a paper by the J 20 design team--,AVIC Chengfeic
The N 035 radar has a maximum detection range of 350KM-400KM in a narrow field of view (+ - 20 °), At the same time need accurate target information guidance to complete.
An autonomous search target (+ - 60 °) has a detection range of only 200KM (for low-altitude targets, With a detection range of 170KM )
For rear targets, it has a detection range of only 80KM (low-altitude targets are only 50KM).
DO you really understand what you have writen ?
- If you don't tell the size of the target that's mean nothing.
- If you don't have resolution, detection only is useless. You need to identify and to classify. Then the real quality for a radar is the identification range.
 
I'm talking about a dedicated DSP chip, which is a dedicated digital signal processing chip, although China is 5-7 years behind the US Texas Instruments, But at least China has this thing

Yes, we have it, but there are no pics available.

As for your claim that India is the leader, this is the best joke I have ever heard

Dunno where you read 'leader', but as per our top experts, India contributes 20% of the global manpower for semiconductor design, both inhouse as well as outside the country.

Do you believe what you said

Yes, because what you claimed is either based on incomplete information or you have become a victim of downgrades, which is also normal. It doesn't match with known information elsewhere. My post was sarcastic.

IAF's radar detection range requirement for MMRCA was 130Km for 3m2 target, same as original Bars, all competitors provided more than 200Km. And here you are saying Irbis-E with more than twice the power and twice the aperture size also performs the same as small AESA radars?

So either you don't know what the report is actually saying or all air forces and companies are wrong.

Anyway, although I cannot read Chinese, I will try and make a guess what it's trying to say. Irbis-E has a 350Km detection range against 3m2 target and with 20deg narrow beams, it can exceed 400Km. But in look-down mode, detection range is 60% of look-up mode. So the detection range of Irbis-E in such a mode should be between 210-230Km against 3m2 target. So this is what I think that report is saying. This is normal.

In look-up mode, Irbis-E has 350Km range for 3m2, F-22 is said to be 250+Km, it's unclear if the planned upgrade to 400Km against 1m2 (or 520Km for 3m2) was done or not (probably not, it's an expensive upgrade), and J-11BG's radar should be 450Km against 1m2 target (600Km for 3m2) as per CCTV.

So the equivalent look-down ranges will be 210 Km for Su-35, 150-310 Km for F-22 and 360Km for J-11BG. This transition makes sense.

F-22 Mk1 (2005+) < Su-35S (2010+) < F-22 Mk2 (2015+) < J-11BG (2020+)... makes sense. This is how it normally works.
DO you really understand what you have writen ?
- If you don't tell the size of the target that's mean nothing.
- If you don't have resolution, detection only is useless. You need to identify and to classify. Then the real quality for a radar is the identification range.

The report is correct, his understanding of the report is wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
I think let's not have so many fantasies, let's solve the problem at hand, for a simple example, If you change the radar, the plane's center of gravity will change,You need to change the structure and the In order to maintain aircraft performance,flight control system, the power supply, the cooling system, These all need to be changed,Does India have the capability?
It's not as simple as changing a pod and alarm
You know, India used to only assemble aircraft, and these are the J 11 design needs to face
Uttam MK3 is the radar that is going to replace Bars in the MKI. Bars weighs around 600kgs. Uttam AESA is going to be half its weight. So, yes, we know that this will change the weight balance hence as per reports we're looking to update the FCS/FBW as well.

India only assembles aircraft? Heard about Tejas buddy?
 
Recent rumours have suggested that despite Greece’s interest in the fifth-generation American fighter, HAF officials are ‘flirting’ with the idea of a successive Rafale order along with the creation of two highly capable and numbered squadrons with this modern French fighter. The French newspaper La Tribune implied last January that Greece is interested in increasing the total number of its purchased Rafales. Only time will tell… CAJ
 
Anyway, although I cannot read Chinese, I will try and make a guess what it's trying to say. Irbis-E has a 350Km detection range against 3m2 target and with 20deg narrow beams, it can exceed 400Km. But in look-down mode, detection range is 60% of look-up mode. So the detection range of Irbis-E in such a mode should be between 210-230Km against 3m2 target. So this is what I think that report is saying. This is normal.
Are there any grammatical mistakes in what I wrote? The N035's maximum detection range of 350-400KM is achieved at +-20°,The Chinese call it gaze mode
And the early warning aircraft need to provide accurate target information
At a search Angle of +-60°, his range is only 200KM and his downward-looking range is only 180KM,
For lateral and posterior targets, the detection range is only about 80km
 
IAF's radar detection range requirement for MMRCA was 130Km for 3m2 target, same as original Bars, all competitors provided more than 200Km. And here you are saying Irbis-E with more than twice the power and twice the aperture size also performs the same as small AESA radars?
Compared with AESA radar, PESA itself adds a transmitting high-frequency feed network from the transmitter to the phase shifter oscillator, and add from the oscillator to the low noise amplifier, which itself has a large power loss and a natural reduction in detection range
 
Yes, because what you claimed is either based on incomplete information or you have become a victim of downgrades, which is also normal. It doesn't match with known information elsewhere. My post was sarcastic.
You can find a lot of that from the West, and it's a PESA,bu is not an advanced thing.
 
Uttam MK3 is the radar that is going to replace Bars in the MKI. Bars weighs around 600kgs. Uttam AESA is going to be half its weight. So, yes, we know that this will change the weight balance hence as per reports we're looking to update the FCS/FBW as well.
One of the major problems in the design of the J11B was to solve the trim problem of the aircraft after changing the radar,
Finally solve by the extensive use of composite materials in the rear of the aircraft
 
Compared with AESA radar, PESA itself adds a transmitting high-frequency feed network from the transmitter to the phase shifter oscillator, and add from the oscillator to the low noise amplifier, which itself has a large power loss and a natural reduction in detection range
What I said may not be clear, but this may be clearer
1578793144388119880.jpg
 
Are there any grammatical mistakes in what I wrote? The N035's maximum detection range of 350-400KM is achieved at +-20°,The Chinese call it gaze mode

That's incorrect. The chief of NIIP himself said search range is 350Km and narrow beam range is more than 400Km in an interview.

And the early warning aircraft need to provide accurate target information

It's situational. Fighters can detect and track targets on their own. AWACS provide extra capability. Naturally, AWACS are decision makers so the situation is different.

At a search Angle of +-60°, his range is only 200KM and his downward-looking range is only 180KM,

Even with a look-down range at 180Km, look-up range will be 300Km.

And your search range could be what we call "tracking" range. Then that's fine too, although this could be at lower power settings, which is normal too.

Compared with AESA radar, PESA itself adds a transmitting high-frequency feed network from the transmitter to the phase shifter oscillator, and add from the oscillator to the low noise amplifier, which itself has a large power loss and a natural reduction in detection range

Okay, but it has nothing to do with my post. IAF simply said, this is what my current radar can do, you people need to surpass it, and they did.

You can find a lot of that from the West, and it's a PESA,bu is not an advanced thing.

Irbis compensates for the difference with radiated power. It's a unique solution for the Russians, so I'm not saying it's better than an AESA radar on a whole. But purely on radiated power and detection range, you have underestimated Irbis.