Yes? It's a generation ahead in material science, there could be multiple generations of radars based on GaN technology and we could just be seeing the latest generation of GaN technology here. Let's not jump to baseless conclusions just because it's a new radar it means it must have every single piece of emerging technology in it.
Gallium oxide is significantly superior to gallium nitride in terms of , with gallium oxide having a critical field strength more than twice that of gallium nitride. Gallium oxide's ultra-wide bandgap also contributes to its superior performance.
No one is questioning how awesome gallium oxide is. They’re questioning whether you have any concrete evidence the next destroyer will use gallium oxide for their radars. If you don’t have any concrete evidence then you’re engaging in blind speculation.
What is chance they will use this tech for next version of destroyer?
Like many others have said, we don't know what they're testing. Could be a bigger GaN, could be a GaO. And frankly, there's not much indication in literature that GaO has progressed to the point that it's feasible for actual large-scale use. Building radars is a bit trickier than taking a lump of some mineral and attaching it to a battery.
An educated guess must be based on observable facts. You have none and I have none. We can see a new radar being field tested. My educated guess is that this radar's technologies are at the same level as the KJ-3000. Both probably finalized years and years ago. Like the points raised by others above, 055 is a relatively new ship and using a newer generation of GaN is even more plausible and practical. Given the slow speed of USN developments, future threats to PLAN ships will not appreciably change in the next decade. At this point, both quantity and maturing the current CEC are more useful. I don't see the need to rush at all. Ships are expensive toys and just like the USN, PLAN must have their own long term wish list and build schedule that we are not privy to. Just like the larger gun that we also have seen, I am sure lots of full time researchers in China are exploring GaO and all the complementing battle management/kill chain technologies/nodes today but we don't know their priorities and trade-offs.
If you don’t have concrete evidence then you should not talk in certainties. Speculation is fine but treating speculation like they’re confirmed guarantees without evidence is not productive or thoughtful discussion.
