You can't realistically expect an answer to that kind of specific question.
J-15 carrier-borne fighter thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
You can't realistically expect an answer to that kind of specific question.
Probably not.
But this may be a good estimation:
According NIIP's product specification, the Irbis-E can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets at one time at ranges near 350 kilometers, and attack up to 8. In air-to-surface mode the Irbis-E provides mapping allowing to attack four surface targets with precision-guided weapons while scanning the horizon searching for airborne threats that can be engaged using missiles. In air-to-surface mode, the radar has a limited .
It can detect a target with (RCS) 3m2 at up to 350 km within ± 120 degrees while the radar can get a quality track and engage four targets within 100 km range. In track-while-scan mode, the radar can engage two targets with semi-active radar homing missiles. It can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets with a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of three square meters at ranges of 400 kilometers using track-while-scan mode while engaging two targets with semi-active radar homing missiles or up to eight targets with active radar homing missiles. In the air-to-surface mode the Irbis provides clues allowing to attack two surface targets with precision-guided weapons while tracking up to four targets on the ground and scanning the horizon searching for airborne threats that can be engaged using active radar homing missiles.
But this may be a good estimation:
According NIIP's product specification, the Irbis-E can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets at one time at ranges near 350 kilometers, and attack up to 8. In air-to-surface mode the Irbis-E provides mapping allowing to attack four surface targets with precision-guided weapons while scanning the horizon searching for airborne threats that can be engaged using missiles. In air-to-surface mode, the radar has a limited .
It can detect a target with (RCS) 3m2 at up to 350 km within ± 120 degrees while the radar can get a quality track and engage four targets within 100 km range. In track-while-scan mode, the radar can engage two targets with semi-active radar homing missiles. It can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets with a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of three square meters at ranges of 400 kilometers using track-while-scan mode while engaging two targets with semi-active radar homing missiles or up to eight targets with active radar homing missiles. In the air-to-surface mode the Irbis provides clues allowing to attack two surface targets with precision-guided weapons while tracking up to four targets on the ground and scanning the horizon searching for airborne threats that can be engaged using active radar homing missiles.
I don’t see how this is a good estimation on J-15 capabilities? Irbis-E is a Russian PESA radar where as J-15 uses a domestic planar array radar, it’s like comparing apples to oranges. Plus, it’s not like there are any deep technical connections (or at all) between the two radar models.
Last edited:
But why mentioning a Russian radaon, when everybody knows, the regular J-15 uses the same radar like the J-11B?
This is public information. True characteristics of J-11B radar are classified. Still it gives an idea of numbers.
No, both are in no way comparable radars, so to ask, what performance maybe my Renault Scenic as a family car has and then present my neighbour‘s Audi A6 and what it can or not is more or less irrelevant.
Alright, in that case be happy with Wikipedia.
Why should I be happy with Wiki? I wasn‘t quoting Wiki, that was you and if you would know me, I rather prefer to leave it open as „unknown“ than quoting a totally different radar and start wild but IMO totally unjustified speculations.
As such, if you are happy with quoting a different radar from Wiki and make or own conclusions, it‘s fine, but far from reality.
It is comparing of apples & bananas …
Apologies for stretching the discussion in the wrong direction but the quoted information on Irbis-E is (hilariously) wrong.
The text @snake65 quoted is an incoherent product of copy-pasting performed by someone who doesn't understand the basics of radars. Wikipedia is not a source - it is a secondary source aggregator. It's a place where information is put together, very often by people who should not be doing it, so it always has to be verified. In this instance it were the secondary sources that made the errors.
The data from the manufacturer directly contradicts this claim:
Дальность обнаружения целей (ППС в пределах зоны 100 град.² по целям с ЭПР = 3м²), км - до 350-400
The bolded part refers to the angular size of the beam - 100 gradians squared that is an area of 10 by 10 gradians. A gradian is 1/400 of a circle (360 degrees) therefore the beam has angular dimension of 9 by 9 degrees. It's a narrow high-power beam generated with most of the radar's power, effectively reducing the parameters for the rest of the array during that time. While this beam is generated the radar's impulse is weakened outside of that narrow 9 by 9 degrees section so this mode is completely unsuitable for scanning and is not used for extremely long range searches. Irbis-E has to be told where to look first in this mode.
The real purpose for this mode is to enable targeting at longer ranges against VLO objects. Small RCS can be compensated for with high power density of radar emission. This mode is for gaining R-77-1 and R-37M locks against VLO fighters at ranges of 100-150km, not for detecting 3m2 RCS at 350km, although obviously it can be used for that purpose.
Irbis-E is Russia's admission that their strategy of countering VLO aircraft with IRST was a failure. Flankers have huge RCS and Khibiny is just a basic EW system so the aircraft are hopelessly outranged by F-22, F-35 and even reduced-RCS 4,5 gens with better radars like Rafale or Super Hornet have a clear advantage against Flankers with Bars radar. Russia couldn't get their airborne AESA arrays to work when Irbis was being developed in the early 2000s so they had to find an interim solution and that was it. It's not particularly good either but that's all they have because work on N036 was delayed.
In regular search and track mode Irbis-E has much lower ranges of detection because the power is spread across its entire aperture and area of 120 by 60 degrees. Cut the distances for focused beam by half for a plausible figure: 50km for 0,01m2 RCS, 80km for 0,1m2, 130 km for 1m2, 170km for 3m2.
Irbis-E is an "ESA" radar which is supposed to be an intermediate stage between passive and active phased array. In reality it is a PESA array that can modulate the signal in such a way that it can project the narrow beam while continuing to generate the beam for the rest of the array thus allowing two "beams" one narrow and one wide - similar to how AESA radars generate multiple beams.
The conclusion is: Irbis-E is nothing special. It is a modern PESA array with more modern processing systems and with a specific mode for VLO or long-range target acquisition. Not sure if this qualifies it as "apples and oranges" vs J-15's radar but I don't know much about the latter. I do expect J-15 to follow the current logic of relying on external, more powerful radars (shiborne, AEW or LPI aesa on other aircraft) and cueing data for targeting via datalink. J-15 is a Flanker so it has has large RCS. To compensate in BVR it would have to have J-16 type of radar and I'm not sure PLANAF. J-15 is already a heavy shiborne fighter deployed from STOBAR carriers which have exactly the same problem as Kuznetsov had with Su-33. Powerful radar is a heavy radar and heavy radar is a problem. It's easier and more practical to have basic radar and use datalinks.
Apologies & EOT.
The text @snake65 quoted is an incoherent product of copy-pasting performed by someone who doesn't understand the basics of radars. Wikipedia is not a source - it is a secondary source aggregator. It's a place where information is put together, very often by people who should not be doing it, so it always has to be verified. In this instance it were the secondary sources that made the errors.
The data from the manufacturer directly contradicts this claim:
Дальность обнаружения целей (ППС в пределах зоны 100 град.² по целям с ЭПР = 3м²), км - до 350-400
The bolded part refers to the angular size of the beam - 100 gradians squared that is an area of 10 by 10 gradians. A gradian is 1/400 of a circle (360 degrees) therefore the beam has angular dimension of 9 by 9 degrees. It's a narrow high-power beam generated with most of the radar's power, effectively reducing the parameters for the rest of the array during that time. While this beam is generated the radar's impulse is weakened outside of that narrow 9 by 9 degrees section so this mode is completely unsuitable for scanning and is not used for extremely long range searches. Irbis-E has to be told where to look first in this mode.
The real purpose for this mode is to enable targeting at longer ranges against VLO objects. Small RCS can be compensated for with high power density of radar emission. This mode is for gaining R-77-1 and R-37M locks against VLO fighters at ranges of 100-150km, not for detecting 3m2 RCS at 350km, although obviously it can be used for that purpose.
Irbis-E is Russia's admission that their strategy of countering VLO aircraft with IRST was a failure. Flankers have huge RCS and Khibiny is just a basic EW system so the aircraft are hopelessly outranged by F-22, F-35 and even reduced-RCS 4,5 gens with better radars like Rafale or Super Hornet have a clear advantage against Flankers with Bars radar. Russia couldn't get their airborne AESA arrays to work when Irbis was being developed in the early 2000s so they had to find an interim solution and that was it. It's not particularly good either but that's all they have because work on N036 was delayed.
In regular search and track mode Irbis-E has much lower ranges of detection because the power is spread across its entire aperture and area of 120 by 60 degrees. Cut the distances for focused beam by half for a plausible figure: 50km for 0,01m2 RCS, 80km for 0,1m2, 130 km for 1m2, 170km for 3m2.
Irbis-E is an "ESA" radar which is supposed to be an intermediate stage between passive and active phased array. In reality it is a PESA array that can modulate the signal in such a way that it can project the narrow beam while continuing to generate the beam for the rest of the array thus allowing two "beams" one narrow and one wide - similar to how AESA radars generate multiple beams.
The conclusion is: Irbis-E is nothing special. It is a modern PESA array with more modern processing systems and with a specific mode for VLO or long-range target acquisition. Not sure if this qualifies it as "apples and oranges" vs J-15's radar but I don't know much about the latter. I do expect J-15 to follow the current logic of relying on external, more powerful radars (shiborne, AEW or LPI aesa on other aircraft) and cueing data for targeting via datalink. J-15 is a Flanker so it has has large RCS. To compensate in BVR it would have to have J-16 type of radar and I'm not sure PLANAF. J-15 is already a heavy shiborne fighter deployed from STOBAR carriers which have exactly the same problem as Kuznetsov had with Su-33. Powerful radar is a heavy radar and heavy radar is a problem. It's easier and more practical to have basic radar and use datalinks.
Apologies & EOT.
Huitong posted this as a J-15S Batch 01 - the regular J-15 Batch 01 had only 10 aircraft - and indeed, the construction number 0115 indicates this to be already the 15th J-15S built. Also, according the new "serial number" H1741049 this should be bort number 49.
Even more interesting, its H1741xxx number correlates with three other H-numbers, namely H1741030, H1741031 and H1741032 on three J-15s carrying the bort numbers 30, 31 and 32:
(Image by YSJSBD via Huitog's CMA-Blog)
Even more interesting, its H1741xxx number correlates with three other H-numbers, namely H1741030, H1741031 and H1741032 on three J-15s carrying the bort numbers 30, 31 and 32:
(Image by YSJSBD via Huitog's CMA-Blog)
Last edited: