Russian 5th-generation fighter to perform maiden flight Jan 29

10:0728/01/2010

Russia is expected to hold the first test of its fifth-generation fighter on Friday, a source at Russia's largest aircraft building enterprise said on Thursday.

"The [test] flight was initially scheduled for Thursday, but has been postponed," the source at the Gagarin KNAAPO company, a subsidiary of Russia's major aircraft holding Sukhoi, said.

Russia's only known fifth-generation project is Sukhoi's PAK FA and the current prototype is the T-50. It is designed to compete with the U.S. F-22 Raptor (so far the world's only fifth-generation fighter aircraft) and the F-35 Lightning II, but has yet to take to the skies.

The PAK FA is believed to possess advanced avionics, stealth capability, a ferry range of 4,000 to 5,500 km, and endurance of 3.3 hrs; it is armed with next-generation air-to-air, air-to-surface, and air-to-ship missiles, and has two 30-mm cannons.

Russia has been developing its newest fighter since the 1990s. Russian Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin earlier said the combat aircraft would enter service with the Air Force in 2015.

MOSCOW, January 28 (RIA Novosti)

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20100128/157701528.html

Hmmmm I'll believe it when I see it? I mean, after all these years of rumblings, we've still not seen any prototype aircraft.

Watch YouTube for the Russian Language News report which seems to show footage of a twin engine, twin tailed LO aircraft landing.

i watch the video

seems like an attempted take off... ending in failure.

I believe the video shows taxi tests... So not sure if it is intended to take off. More pixs:

Strange...seems like when it was about to show the part on the nose, the clip just clipped it off!...mmm. The nose cone shape resembies the Raptors.

Personally, it bears ancestory to the MiG 1.44 but with Raptor like frontal and sides with Flanker-type rear. Can bet the new term 'Raptorski' will apply for this plane!

Given that HUGE exhaust vis-a-vis heat signature, it would be a magnet for IR-type missiles!

IIRC the test plane is using AL-31F or AL-41F engines. new engine for it is in the works.

comparison

F22:


PAK-FA/raptorski:



seems to have bigger inlets ?

Another camera shot of the so-called 1st flight:

Russian News on the PAK-FA


From this view, it sure looks like the YF-23 and damn appropriate! The Americans had the F-22 and the Russians the YF-23 equivalent!....

If the Russians were to mass produce this plane pass the 200-mark, it will sure put pressure on the 187-numbered F-22 and if export to the Chinese, Holy shit!

line between the inlet ...internal bomb-bay between them?

high res photo

http://sukhoi.org/img/gallery/wallpaper/1_...29_01_10_30.jpg

from top view it seem to have some F-16XL lineage

any chance its an elaborate bluff on its state of technical development given that india is a partner on this and brazil did express interest in it ?

- no chaseplane shots
- no takeoff sequence (landing sequence only)

dont think so

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPHzCqSJ5xY...player_embedded

take off shot and in 30sec u can see the Su27 or is it Su-34 chase plane

4 videos of the 1st flight

http://www.alert5.com/2010/01/youtube-pak-...ight-video.html

Those intakes look pretty large. Isn't that going to make quite an adverse impact on the RCS?

Moveable LERX. The Russians have pulled another aerodynamic rabbit out of the bag. Scary thought when the Russians start exporting it.

For an LO design, it seems a little strange in two areas that other forums are starting to point out:

(i) it seems to lack significant tools for heat management with regards to the engines; and
(ii) some of the RCS reduction measures, like Chines (for RCS managment of the nose into the wing formation) on other LO aircraft does not apparently appear prominently on the Russian PAK-FA aircraft (we need more pixs from different angles to get a better idea - it could well have them).



One, as early as the SR-71, the USAF has been developing reduced RCS aircraft with Chines. For the SR-71, the chines contribute useful additional lift at supersonic speeds, as well as acting as Leading edge root extensions (LERX) at low speeds. Fyi, Chines are the flattened areas that blend the fuselage to the wings - in the case of the SR-71, right from the nose to the tail. With the adoption of this design feature, the US reduced the RCS of the SR-71 by 90% and its development is an important development in aviation history. Please note that due to it's speed and heat build up, the SR-71 also does not have the type of heat signature management on modern stealth airraft, therefore it is not generally referred to as a 'stealth' asset. Two, the PAK-FA seems not to have S shaped inlets and there are also no S bends visible in the intake. So monochrome is not far off.

So I really don't understand. We'll just have to see more comments from professionals in the industry, as more aviation journalists learn about this and post on it's features. BTW, the declared RCS for the PAK-FA is 5m^2 so it is not in the F-35 class for RCS signature management. I would assume that the Russians have more tricks up their sleeve and have not revealed it yet. I'll also really like to hear what LionFlyer and pirate have to say on the LO aspects. Free education. :)

Looks like this new PAK-FA aircraft will eat the F-15SG or the F-15SE for lunch. If I had known, I wouldn't have bothered to do those 3 posts on the F-15SG. :D

Soon we'll see in aviation forums:

F-22 vs PAK-FA threads

F-35 vs PAK-FA threads

Indian fanboys boasting about how good FGFA will be and Malaysian fanboys declaring that the the RMAF will be buying the PAK-FA soon.

And finally, Kopp in Australia saying that Indonesia is going to get PAK-FA and the F-35 is not good for Australia.

But I'll think that this PAK-FA thing will go through another 6 to 8 years of developmental work before before gold release from SDD and it will be way after 2020 before IOC for the first Russian squadron (maybe even 2025 to 2030 or later if there are problems). I also predict that the first foreign customer will find the RCS coatings are difficult to maintain.

my bad. didnt see the other videos on youtube.

plus the china dudes will have their J-XX beating every single other aircraft.

interesting though. if we did consider the SU-35 in our NGF competition, any chance PAK-FA ? afterall, our indian friends are getting 200 of them in a 2 seater config arrangement and probably with "mexican"/HAL gear

Adding on to what Grunt said, the SR-71s were easily detectable on radar at long ranges because of it's massive heat exhaust. So clearly that will be a big challenge on the PAK-FA (and goes for any fighter incorporating signature management).

To be fair, this is just the earliest flyable prototype and to tell the truth the finished product is at least a full decade away. That gives plenty of time for all potential adversaries of the PAK-FA to do their homework on how to deal with a similarly equipped LO opponent.

Anyway, most aircraft with RCS management tend to be optimized towards the X-band range. With the advent of frequency agile and highly flexible AESAs, LO is likely to have a reduced impact as time passes and radar technology advances. And guess which nation has a runaway lead in AESAs?


/edit: One more thing, about those huge intakes, they're gonna represent a major FOD nightmare. *Cues reference towards the reports that the MKIs had trouble with FODs at Red Flag*

But I must say that I'm impressed that they did it on a shoe string budget. Anyway, here's two articles from different aviation mags:

And probably F-15SE vs PAK-FA threads too?? :unsure:

Cannot fight - not in the same generation. SE is an improved 4 Gen (or 4++ gen). This PAK-FA design, which is brand new, is supposed to be way superior. The only question is how long will it get to go into service and will it work as promised - is it going into production in 2020, or is it 2025, or is it 2030 (given all the new tech and LO coatings). BTW, the RCS figures are not impressive.

Anyway, the first radar for the aircraft is only expected to be ready in mid-2010 and the first stage of flight trials involving the PAK FA prototype will last until 2012. So, it is really to early to predict production dates accurately.

Russia unveils top secret new fighter

Posted: 29 January 2010 1731 hrs

MOSCOW - Russia on Friday unveiled a new fighter aircraft touted as a rival of the US F-22 stealth jet and developed amid the highest secrecy as part of a plan to modernize the armed forces.

The fifth generation fighter, manufactured by the Sukhoi company and known as the PAK FA, made a maiden flight of just over 45 minutes at the firm's home base of Komsomolsk-on-Amur in the Far East region.

"The flight lasted 47 minutes during which all the aircraft's systems were tested. It was successful," Sukhoi spokeswoman Olga Kayukova told AFP. "This is the first time it has been unveiled."

Pictures broadcast on state television showed the fighter jet -- which has been kept closely under wraps for years -- flying at altitude and then landing on a snow-surrounded runway.

"The aircraft performed well in all stages of the flight programme. It is easy and comfortable to pilot," said Sergei Bogdan, the pilot for the flight, in comments published on the Sukhoi website.

The new jet has the capability of carrying out long flights above the speed of sound as well as simultaneously attacking different targets.

Russia is currently embarking on a major programme to re-equip its military, not least the air force which is still using largely Soviet-era equipment and suffers from frequent crashes.

The new fighter, which has been in development since the 1990s, is due to enter the armed forces in 2015, Russian news agencies said.

The first flight of the PAK FA (Prospective Aviation System of Frontline Aviation) is being seen in Russia as a major boost for the military after the project was hit by repeated delays over the last years.

"There is no doubt that the plane is needed," the ex-commander of the Russian air force, Anatoly Kornukov, told the Interfax news agency.

"Our Su-27 and MiG-29 planes are good but have aged. They are 20 or more years old and it's time to have something as a replacement," he said.

He said the new plane could easily stand comparison with the US F-22, also a fifth generation stealth fighter.

"It's going to be no worse than an F-22. I've been in an F-22 and I know."

Russia's campaign to modernize its military has been marred by repeated setbacks with new equipment, above all a string of failed tests of its new Bulava sea-based intercontinental nuclear-capable missile.

- AFP/ir

Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp...1033999/1/.html

Hey Grunt, may I know where you found the declared RCS for the PAK-FA? I was looking around and didn't come up with anything.

Was anyone else surprised it flew? To be honest, I've been so used to the announced Russian 5th unveiling/flight that I've gotten somewhat blase about it.

Must say that Sukhoi OKB did well though.

News video: Russian 5th Gen PAK FA T-50 fighter makes first ever flight (Over 2 mins of news reporting in English, from RussiaToday)

$100 million a copy? Is that 2017 dollar or today's? If it 2017 dollar, then it is cheap as. The report is not clear.

Furthermore, Russia is looking at getting about 200, so is India.

Does that mean that US congress should allow a few more F-22 to push the number from 187 to 200 as well? Can't wait to see what Block 30 and 40 upgrades will entail?

Hmm, maybe US is pretty confident that the F-35 will meet USAF's needs and still match the PAK-FA, hence we should expect more effort on the F-35 front? Sorry, I'm just resigned to the fact that the F-22 will never make a big comeback, even though I'd love to see more of it :(

I recall in the late 1990's hearing about how Russian fighter stealth technology would include a shroud of ionised gases (I think they used the word plasma) that would absorb radar (a bit like a supercavitating torpedo), maybe they are seriously at it this time? its a very long shot, but the smooth nose seems to make for a nice laminar flow of this plasma...

I'm gonna be surprised at how they plan to keep the IR signature down...just curious, what about that of the F-35? its bum doesn't look like it has anything to work on the IR emissions...

wonder if our neighbour's gonna get a couple in the future... hmm...

@dtwn, I've replied your query via PM - Russian language sources.

If they want to, good for them (would love to see the PAK-FA at airshows around the region). Potential buyers must take the risk of delays due to development issues, to have maintenance problems and serviceability issues before IOC. Further buyers will also discover the lessons learnt from the Malaysian MiG-29 saga that you can get cheap and good at the same time.

There are some advances in the PAK-FA and it is not a 4th Gen design (IMHO, superior to the teen series). So I like it. However, the Russians are on a shoe string budget, developing a product that is in no way superior to US's 5th Gen planes (very much inferior signature management tools, in fact). Given that the PAK-FA is only at first fight - long, long road ahead - radar, engine and don't know what else will need to be sorted. The nightmare of developmental problems has just started (it's the same with most new fighter developmental programs). I understand that the model flying is not intended to be even close to production representative - it's only natural as the Russians are still working on quite a few bits.

http://www.kommersant.ru/dark-gallery.aspx...415335&stpid=65

nice view of the undercarriage.

Bill Sweetman - T-50: A Preliminary Analysis

Well, this brings back the old days when Flug Revue would pop out some over-the-fence shots obtained from the Military Missions in East Germany, and the assembled reptiles at Flight would adjourn to our secret analysis facility to figure out what it all meant.

First of all, for anyone contemplating the use of the word "Raptorski": don't. While this is an airplane that could have been the answer to the Advanced Tactical Fighter requirement, way back when, it's not an F-22 in many important ways.

In a lot of ways, the T-50 reflects the heritage of the T-10 Flanker series - it's much more like them than Sukhoi's last fighter prototype, the forward-swept-wing Su-47 Berkut, ever was. From the Flanker family, the T-50 gets the massive "centroplane" - a wide central body that blends the fuselage and inner wing - three-surface aerodynamic control and true three-dimensional thrust vectoring. The main weapons bay has been seen on a Flanker model, too.

Look at some of these in detail. The centroplane is huge, extending well outside the engines and terminating at the rear in a broad beaver-tail between the exhaust nozzles.

It accommodates a boatload of fuel on the Flanker and will do the same here. After the canard hokey-pokey in the T-10 family (in on the Su-30MK, out on the Su-35) the T-50 has something different: the forward part of the leading edge extension is movable. According to the usually well informed Flateric over at Secret Projects, it is called the Povorotnaya Chast Naplyva (PChN) or movable LEX section.

3-D thrust vectoring is also used on the Su-35. The T-50 and the T-10 family are distinguished by widely separated engines, which is important because that's the only way to use vectored thrust in roll. What's new on the T-50 is that the designers have cashed in on TVC by shrinking the tail surfaces, saving on drag, weight and signature.

With separated engines and a wide body, the T-50 designers have been able to install dual front and rear weapon bays. Added to this are side bays outboard of the engines. Flateric reports that each bay is designed to hold "at least two" missiles and that the outer bays are designed for short-range AAMs. The centerline bays could each hold two large weapons (like R-33s) or three-to-four of the newly announced RVV-MD. The latter has folding wings, as does the RVV-SD development of the R-73 (AA-11 Archer) family - the latter explaining why the underwing bays are small.

The big new feature of the T-50 is stealth. The aircraft that flew today is a prototype - and it does not show visible features like a frameless canopy and panel alignment that you'd expect on a production aircraft. Other not-very-stealthy-looking features include the gaps around the inlet (compare the YF-23) and a spherical infrared search and track housing in front of the windshield. And, of course, the nozzles are round. But it has a chined forebody, edge alignment and (probably) inlet line-of-sight blockage and internal weapons.

Apparently the designers and systems analysts have looked at the thorny question of "how much stealth do we want to pay for?" and have come up with a different answer than the F-22 designers. The fact that the armed forces of potential adversaries don't have S-300 and S-400 missiles may have something to do with that answer.

Supercruise? Definitely. The aircraft has a lot of power, and you would not go with that sharply swept delta wing if that wasn't the goal.

The big question is how long the aircraft will take to enter service, which is a product of three factors - how much money is available, how many resources industry can muster to get the job done, and where the design, technically, stands at this point.

The first question depends largely on the Russian economy, and on the priority which the military gives to the fighter. At the moment, the strategic rocket forces are the priority and are elbowing all others away from the trough; also, the military could decide that the Su-35 is a good upgrade route for now. The X-factor: whether and when India will join the program, and how much cash it will involve.

The second - industry's ability to execute the program - is hard to estimate. On the downside, Russia has not inducted a brand-new aircraft into service since the 1980s. However, there are signs of a new development strategy at work here: the T-50's engines are outgrowths of the Su-35's and are being test-flown on a T-10 airframe, and the flight control system and (very likely) cockpit and avionics may be similar.

How far along is the program? Russian practice historically has been to start development with a series of prototypes that successively conform more to the production design. That's followed by an early series of aircraft that are "pre-operational" - flown by service units. Today's T-50 is, in US terms, something between a technology demonstrator and a systems development and demonstration aircraft.

Upshot - I would expect to see quite a few Su-35S regiments operational before we see a combat-ready T-50 - but with the caveat that a lot of Indian money could change things.

Clearly, there is a strong focus on RCS reduction on the frontal aspect and I stand corrected - there are chines in the design - this we can see from the various photos that are now appearing online. But then it seems they did an Ok job on the front but neglected the rear (engine hosing = round =Big RCS) - it looks like that the Russians had to rush to get it out at this stage, at this time - a long way off final design.

Hope you don't mind, if I respond and ask questions - please note that no harm or slight is intended. :)

Sorry don't understand your point. Was talking about 2 different aspects of LO : (i) RCS and (ii) IR signature. Please connect the dots for the others because your elaboration is not what I was getting at. BTW detection is not = to ability to target.

I think the F-35 that we will buy will be a challenge for our own radars - part of the problem is clutter rejection. If your radar is detecting every bird that flys, processing has to take place to discriminate between birds, UAVs, helos and planes. In the past, early model AWAC radar actually rejects detection of birds to reduce clutter as a means of data management. I'm sure we'll learn more once we buy it. DSTA can test our radars to their heart's content. BTW, certain OTH radars are supposed to be able to detect LO aircraft. It's got to do with the wave length.

I believe DSTA is playing with different techniques now.

I really don't know if that is the case. US LO approach could be more sophisticated. China, Japan and Australia all have major radar development efforts which run counter to USAF efforts at LO.

Not disputed. The US. But I see AESA tech development as more than just LPI x band radar. The technology core affects comms, datalinks and EW.

I'm not sure. There are some non-AESA radars with LPI features. In the past, one of the limitations was processing power to support increased detection.

FOD is a concern for most designs, including the teen series. The MiG-29 on the other hand has alternate air intakes on top that can address that.

Vladimir Putin praises Russian stealth fighter

By Andrew Osborn in Moscow
Published: 1:34PM GMT 29 Jan 2010

Vladimir Putin praised the maiden flight of Russia’s new stealth plane as “a big step” towards giving the air force a fighter fit for the twenty first century.

The Russian prime minister told a cabinet meeting he wanted the first batch of T-50 stealth fighters to be in service by 2013, well ahead of earlier deadlines. :blink: The fighter will be the first all-new military aircraft Russia has built since the collapse of the Soviet Union nearly two decades ago.

Russian aviation and air force officials lost little time in boasting that the plane would equal if not better America's F-22 Raptor stealth fighter.

Experts believe the T-50s maiden test flight underlines the Kremlin's determination to overhaul its ageing Soviet-era military hardware even as it is locked in key nuclear arms reductions talks with the United States.

President Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, his Russian counterpart, discussed a new nuclear arms treaty as recently as last Wednesday. The putative treaty would slash the number of war heads both countries possess and is seen as the centrepiece of a thus far largely rhetorical "reset" in relations between Moscow and Washington.

Negotiators have been hammering out the details of such a deal for months and are said to be weeks if not days away from a final settlement.

But though Russia may be ready to scale back its ageing nuclear arsenal it has signalled it will continue to actively renew its nuclear shield. So far unsuccessful tests to develop a new submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missile dubbed the Bulava continue apace, a new strategic nuclear bomber is in development, and the country's strategic rocket forces have asked for a new silo-based heavy intercontinental missile too.

The stealth project is so secret that until yesterday photographs of the prototype had not even appeared in the Russian media. But state TV broke that embargo on Friday and showed the plane soaring over snowy forests in Russia's far east more than 5,000 miles east of Moscow.

Sceptics believe that Russia's plans to negotiate cuts in its nuclear arsenal do not mean it is ready to downsize its military ambitions. The warheads are ageing and would need to be replaced soon anyway.

Source: TELEGRAPH.CO.UK

Finally! It actually looks pretty good. I'm wondering about the engines though... isn't the AL-31F roughly equivalent to the F100 and F110 series by GE and PW? So they are going with a derivative of a 4th gen fighter engine rather than a supercruise optimized design like the F119? Depending on how successful this is, the decision to end F-22 production might begin to look really stupid...

Ok no problems :) Anyway:

1. Technically RCS and IR signature are 2 different aspects of LO. However, my point is that the ability of the PAK-FA (as was the case of the SR-71) to evade radar detection will be severely compromised by a large engine exhaust which apparently does not have any form of diffusion management. Quoting from wikipedia (which I understand isn't all that 100% reliable):

The SR-71 was the first operational aircraft designed around a stealthy shape and materials. The most visible marks of its low radar cross section (RCS) are its inwardly-canted vertical stabilizers and the fuselage chines. Comparably, a plane of the SR-71's size should generate a radar image the size of a barn, but its actual return is more like that of a single door.[citation needed] Though with a much smaller RCS than expected for a plane of its size, it was still easily detected, because the exhaust stream would return its own radar signature (even though a special cesium compound was added to the fuel to reduce this signature). The SR-71's RCS does not compare to the later F-117's RCS, which is on the order of a small ball bearing.[66]

I agree that detection does not equal a firing solution, but knowing the location of the PAK-FA is certainly much better than knowing nothing at all.

2. Clutter rejection has and always will be a problem. It's not just birds and man made objects causing the problem, but also jet streams, air turbulence and whatnot of atmospheric occurences. The main issue is the power of the transmitter that causes this problem. I confess that I do not fully understand the true mechanics behind dealing with this problem. Doppler shift filtering is one of the common ways in solving it, but there are countermeasures to this technique as well. Correct me if my reasoning is flawed, but my guess is that with AESA 'spreading' out the signal (and thus the power) on so many frequencies, the amount of clutter return might be reduced. But that is just a guess I'm hazarding. I honestly have no clue.

3. OTOH radar uses the lower bands of the RF spectrum, and transmits using longer wavelengths which curve along the horizon by bouncing off the ionosphere. This supports the notion that LO is optimized towards shorter wavelength radar, ie. X-band. IIRC, our G550s will be beaming in the L and S-band range, so they MIGHT stand a better chance. The downside is that this form of LO will play hell with our fighters and AMRAAM seeker heads.

4. You are absolutely correct that the major limitation of modern radars these days is the computing power of the processor sorting out the radar returns. That is why a fighter radar will never compare to, and be a replacement to a comparatively modern AEW&C platform because 10 back-ends > a single fighter radar back-end. You are also correct that AESA is much more than just a radar, it's a sensor suite. Each individual element of the active phased array also doubles up as an extremely sensitive RWR (and even more so, as a passive radar system). Some non-AESAs also have LPI features, but IMHO they are far less flexible than current AESA solutions. With thousands of elements, some elements can be sharing information with similar platforms. This form of radar networking is to be a key feature of the AN/APG-81. This, alongside the EOTS, is one of the purported revolutionary sensor fusion techniques that might have led to the decision to kill the F-22 and buy more F-35s.

5. There is a discussion going on at WAFF about AESAs. http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/military-...a-jammed-3.html now the posters familiar with such systems were deliberately vague about its abilities, but consider what gf0012-aust said:

"As a throw away, the last formal JSF briefing I attended referred to its AESA capability as a weapons system in its own right. In all the time I've been in this operational space, I've never prev heard it referred to at the small platform combat aircraft level as a weapons system. Its probably a good indication of how AESA has evolved at the capability level."

6. Sorry, it's been quite a lengthy reply, I hope I sorted my thoughts out coherently.

@edwin3060

Apparently the engines for the PAK FA are still under development. The Al-31Fs mounted is just an interim solution for the prototype's first flight. Judging as how the Al-31Fs are so critically far behind the F-119s in dry thrust, I'd say they've got a long ways to go.

monochrome, sounds good :)

speaking of L-band (mentioned wrt our G-550s) its said that the PAK-FA will most likely feature L-band detectors in the leading wing edge...apparently most likely a passive system and people have been saying that it helps it spot from long range many electronic emissions and hence potential adversaries as well.

I too am not familiar with electronics and any clarification on the matter would be very highly appreciated :)

Noted the engine inlet of the F-22 and F-35 were designed to block out radar signature from the engine inlets. I wonder how the Russians managed to tackle that with the straight through engine inlet design.

@weasel1962

as with the B-1B as well. Anyway, I'm not sure if the wikipedia article on FOD is to be trusted, but it says:

Some military aircraft have a unique design to prevent FOD from damaging the engine. The design consisted of an S-shaped bend in the airflow, so that air entered the inlet, was bent back towards the front of the plane, and bent back again towards the back before entering the engine. At the back of the first bend a strong spring held a door shut. Any foreign object flying in the intake flew in, hit the door, opened it, flew through, and then exited the aircraft. Thus, only small objects swept up by the air could enter the engine. This design did indeed prevent FOD problems, but the constriction and drag induced by the bending of the airflow reduced the engine's effective power, and thus the design was not repeated. However, many consider it an innovative solution to a challenging engineering problem.

Which leaves me in admiration at the aerodynamics of the F-22. It might also be the reason why S-curves aren't featured in the PAK FA yet, as the russian engineers probably haven't figured out how to solve the problem and want a prototype that can demonstrate super cruise ASAP.

Good effort.

It is only at this point I understand what you are getting at. Sorry, if I was a bit dense.

No, it's a really good effort. If you have the maths, go this this website and start with “Mathematically Basics of Radar Technology”, as a starting point. Discussion on radar can be very technical. Once, it goes a bit deeper, everybody, except the mathematicians and the radar engineers will fall asleep - read this short pdf on RCS and shapes too.

This FAS chapter on Countermeasures is old but also useful.

I think there is more than meets the eye for the G550 CAEWs. The best way is to keep telling every non-Singaporean that it is an AWAC, when it is clearly a generation ahead of the E-2Cs. According to IAI, their EL/W-2085's four sensors are: Radar, IFF, ESM/ELINT and CSM/COMINT. A unique fusion technique continuously cross-correlates data generated by all sensors: this data is combined with an automatically initiated active search by one sensor for specific targets detected by other sensors. The G550 CAEW is more than the E-2Cs but too much of it's capabilities is classified.

Also in relation to IADS read up on multistatic radar.

And to look even further ahead note that DSTA has in 2005 said that:

"...Optical systems based on lasers can potentially offer data rates two to three orders of magnitude greater than those of the best future RF systems. A ground-based lasercom system was demonstrated in 1996 to have a data rate of 1.1 Tbps over a 140km range, with airborne and space borne Tbps lasercom systems expected to go operational in the 2020 - 2025 timeframe (Office of Secretary of Defence, 2001). Airborne lasercom systems with small apertures (7cm to 13 cm) using low power semiconductor lasers have a significantly lower probability of detection, weigh 30 to 50 percent that of comparable RF systems and consume less power, whilst offering Tbps rates of data transmission.

Besides increasing available transmission rates, ongoing research into connectivity concepts such as the Small Unit Operations Situational Awareness (SUO SAS) programme will drive efficient bandwidth management using a 'LAN within LANs' concept (Pengelly, 2002). Dynamic datalink sizing and nodal management will allow users to maintain low, medium or high data rate connections with a continuously moving and changing host of nodes depending on proximity and community of interest..."

Some of the stuff DSO is working on is light-years ahead of what layman can understand. I know that we are working on a laser that 'smells' IEDs via the analysing vapor emissions of buried explosives. Once you realise that we want to understand the electromagnetic spectrum - you will know why I say that we are interested in building a sustainable secret edge and not just focus on the 'obvious'.

Don't mix the two concepts so as to keep conceptual clarity. If not everyone will not understand. Not only do I strive to post accurate info, I strive to post understandable info.

The Distributed Aperture System (DAS) is a system of cameras that feeds an infrared image of the planes' surrounding to the pilots' helmet. DAS also acts as a missile warning system (MWS) that alerts the pilot to incoming missiles. The second infrared sensor, called the electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), allows the aircraft to target, track, and identify object in the air or on the ground at long ranges and high resolutions.

AESA is not just radar, it's a suite. Radar is but one part of AESA's functionality and AESA the array in fighters has about 1,000 to 1,500 transmitters-receiver (T/R) modules that are linked together by high-speed processors. The AESA can obtain electronics intelligence; jam enemy electronic systems; provide surveillance; and perform secure voice and datalink communications, in principle all at the same time. The AESA can simultaneously emit several tight beams to perform different functions. Other antennas on AESA equipped fighters provide missile and radar warning behind the aircraft.

When operating as a radar, the AESA radar transmits waveforms that change from burst to burst, and are sent at random frequencies. Such a changing signal is very difficult for an enemy to detect and analyze. If adversaries do manage to detect the signal, they must then try to get a radar lock on the aircraft so it can be attacked.

The AESA radar on our fighters also analyses the enemy's radar and sends out a jamming burst to disrupt the lock. The AESA then goes on to other tasks until the enemy radar begins its lock cycle again. Between dealing with active threats, the AESA collects information on the "electronic order of battle (EOB)" in the operational area, locating electronic systems, classifying them, and alerting the pilot to possible threats or high-priority targets.

The AN/APG-77 was a pioneer in operational development of the AESA. Later development of the concept for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has led to cheaper and more powerful AESA systems (AN/APG-81), and production F-22s feature a much improved AN/APG-77(V)1 system based on this improved technology. The production AESA system also includes a "synthetic aperture radar (SAR)" mode to provide all-weather ground imaging, a very useful capability in the strike role. This includes the F-15E Radar Modernization Program (RMP) which is designated as AN/APG-82(v)1. Prior to that the AN/APG-63(v)3 on the F-15SGs and the squadron of USAF F-15s with the AN/APG-63(v)2... No intention to repeat the history of the various AESA radar generations in detail here. :)

Please also note what highsea in that thread also said:

grunt, if your intention is to reserve the posting slot you should say "chope" and not "test" :lol: