Fully digital doesnt mean it's DBF tho. It can mean it has a digital receiver, digital displays it's very wide and general term.
Chinese Radar Developments - KLJ series and others
- Thread starter indochina
- Start date
Fully digital doesnt mean it's DBF tho. It can mean it has a digital receiver, digital displays it's very wide and general term.
Full digital is very strict and specific defination. The only difference between KJ-500 and the rest is DBF, DBF is the last piece to fully digitalize the radar.
Before Beam-forming everything in AESA is already fully digital. If we take your defination all current AESAs are already "fully" digital decades ago, then you are basically denying fully digital as a thing.
Last edited:
According to ? Or like do we really have things like specifications or description on what KJ-500 Radar is ?
Like, Fully digital thing is more like a marketing material covering wide bracket of things. If the radar is DBF then you will see manufacturer proudly announce that e.g Japan or French.
I am confused on what you mean about this ?
The designer of KJ-500 from 14th institute said that KJ-500 was the first fully digital AESA radar in operation during an interview some years ago. That statement implies that KJ-2000 is not "fully" and other AESA radars up to that date. Since any AESA is digitalized all the way up to phase shifting, therefor the difference between full and not full is the final step of beamforming.
Again in the mind of 14th institute, and also in my mind (in the industry), fully digital is a technical thing. It is DBF, be it in radar or mobile cellular network. DBF is the last step between digital domain and radio domain that can be digitalized.
The reason why other countries did not proudly announce it is simply because they could not and have not made it work. Not becuase it is a marketing term.
You seem to hold the view that if Japan and the west could not do something, nobody could. That is very old mind-set.
BTW, all major mobile network supplier are providing DBF already. So DBF has been a reality for a while. It is only that military application lags behind in the west.
It is not surprising that you are confused because you think "fully digital thing is more like a marketing material".
No offense, but your confusion is due to your lack of basic knowledge in the field. Further explaination will be like giving lectures of radio communication, digital communication and signal processing, this is not the place.
Last edited:
I mean Limited DBF architecture with some analog components do exist. and it's still Digital. This is from Arik Brown's "Active Electronically Scanned Array, Fundamentals and Application"
Uh no. Communications and radar have its distinction. Like in communication do you have sidelobe concerns or do you need high resolutions.
For starter tho. How do you digitize the beamforming in your DBF ? Or maybe the architecture of the KJ-500 Radar. It can use the same architecture as i depicted on top and it's still Digital alright.
The "final" form of DBF tho are elemental level like this one :
Well I'm confident with what i have, I can use corrections of course. But you seem to take offense when i say Digital is very broad terms.
When a country susccessfully achieved Elemental level DBF they will announce it for sure and use specific term "Elemental control" or "Element level DBF"
by78
General
Two radomes on display at a museum. One is the radome for the PL-12A AAM, and the other is an unknown radome featuring frequency selective surface (you can see the cutout of it on the backside). I'm not sure what this radome is for, but it looks like it belongs to a stealth UAV or missile.
