broadsword
Brigadier
Just to mark where the latest 'nm' is at now, Samsung unveiled the world's first 14nm mobile processor two days ago.
Chinese Radar Developments - KLJ series and others
- Thread starter indochina
- Start date
antiterror13
Brigadier
Intel was the first to produce 14nm CPU about 6 months ago ... the Samsung one Exynos series 7420 is not really 14nm the same way Intel is, the Intel one is better
I have a crazy idea: how would be that mobile radar sistems could be connected to civilian electric energy infrastructure? Or just at least at high tension power lines that power up factoryes and large consumers of power. And how would be that mobile wind turbines or mobile water turbines tu power up radars?
Really? You want to have generators developed for some rather specialized terrain? Wind turbines requires rather high towers -- and you don't think a tower in the middle of nowhere is really asking for "somebody, hit be please!"? Wouldn't it simpler just to use fuel powered generators -- much easier to move, much easier to conceal, much easier to setup.
Don't think you know better than the people who actually developed the systems currently in use. They are likely to be far more competent then you are, know more about the technical requirements, and they have constraints outside of technical realm. If you must post your ideas, please at least consider both advantages AND DISADVANTAGES first before posting -- that will increase the chance of people taking your posts seriously.
@Victor1985
Even more I already kindly asked You in the J-20 tread to stay on topic !
Therefore again please read the rules and one of them is to stay on topic since otherwise no-one can follow the certain contents or such "brilliant ideas" like Yours.
Again ... this is the tread for Chinese radars ... and not for Your strange ideas....
Deino
Even more I already kindly asked You in the J-20 tread to stay on topic !
Therefore again please read the rules and one of them is to stay on topic since otherwise no-one can follow the certain contents or such "brilliant ideas" like Yours.
Again ... this is the tread for Chinese radars ... and not for Your strange ideas....
Deino
Last edited:
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Victor, I understand that you are very enthusiastic towards learning about military technology. Everyone else is also here for that reason. But, generally, to meaningfully contribute to the discussions here, you need to have a certain amount of background knowledge under the belt. This forum is kept highly professional and well-looked upon as a source of reliable information (as relative to forums) because there is lack of crazy posts like "Why don't we just strap a rocket to J-20 so it becomes the first space fighter?" Once again, I understand your enthusiasm and curiosity but in the early phases of following global (or Sino) military developments, it is advisable to simply watch and absorb information for a while until a strong-enough knowledge base is built up for intellectual contribution. As I myself am not an expert, I comment very rarely and mostly use this forum as a gateway for military news and to see what opinions/analyses others have on possible developments.
Last edited:
I just want to mention that claims that Chinese T/R counts can't be that high are superfluous; the thing to note is that the mark of technological sophistication in AESA is not pure T/R count, which is mostly a matter of money, but density (imagine coating a football field in T/R modules. It's relatively trivial to match American high-density radars in module count through that method). Once you've gotten your head around that concept, consider that Chinese radar apertures tend to be larger than American radar apertures; the Su-30 operated by the Russians has a 1 m diameter aperture radar, while the F-15 only has a .950 m diameter radar and the F-22 has approximately a .900-.925 m diameter radar. So Chinese T/R module counts, even with consideration for technological backwardness, is believable simply because, #1, their radars are larger, #2, their radars are less dense than their American counterparts.
The other thing to mention is that there's something weird going on; American AESA to radome-size ratios tend to be around .75 to .8, while Russian antennas can be .85 to .9. Does anyone know what is happening? Is this a result of needing a better cooling solution for ESA than for MSAs?
Basically, the problem is, for me, I had measured out the radome of the J-31 to be roughly 1.02 m, when done on average. Applying a Russian MSA ratio, you get a .9 m^2, which is comparable with F-22s and F-15s, but when you plug it in for American AESA ratios, you get roughly a 700-750 mm diameter, about the same as the F-35's.
Anyone know what's happening?
The other thing to mention is that there's something weird going on; American AESA to radome-size ratios tend to be around .75 to .8, while Russian antennas can be .85 to .9. Does anyone know what is happening? Is this a result of needing a better cooling solution for ESA than for MSAs?
Basically, the problem is, for me, I had measured out the radome of the J-31 to be roughly 1.02 m, when done on average. Applying a Russian MSA ratio, you get a .9 m^2, which is comparable with F-22s and F-15s, but when you plug it in for American AESA ratios, you get roughly a 700-750 mm diameter, about the same as the F-35's.
Anyone know what's happening?
thunderchief
Senior Member
Russians use mostly PESA in newer radars, not MSA . Theoretically, PESA modules could be packed more densely for obvious reasons , although in practice operating wavelength limits the minimum size of modules more then thermal considerations .
We're talking about the ratio of radome-size to antenna aperture, not about T/R density relative to radome size.
I am arguing about half-wave dipole limits vs T/R density (ie, half wave dipole antennas have an antenna size about half that of the wavelength the antenna is intended to operate in) elsewhere, but I doubt that half-wave dipole is the limiting factor for X-band AESAs; S, UHF, sure; but when it comes to X-band the F-35's APG-81 is at the half-wave dipole limit for ~9 GHZ at 4400 T/R per m^2, whereas the APG-77 and other radars have a density correlating to stuff around 6-8 ghz, which is below X-band.
I am arguing about half-wave dipole limits vs T/R density (ie, half wave dipole antennas have an antenna size about half that of the wavelength the antenna is intended to operate in) elsewhere, but I doubt that half-wave dipole is the limiting factor for X-band AESAs; S, UHF, sure; but when it comes to X-band the F-35's APG-81 is at the half-wave dipole limit for ~9 GHZ at 4400 T/R per m^2, whereas the APG-77 and other radars have a density correlating to stuff around 6-8 ghz, which is below X-band.