Sukhoi Su-30MKI

[Rajput Lion]

This is more than a decade old. The first one is the J-10B's PESA.

Yeah but basic nose mount configuration remain the same.

The second radar is on a repositioner. You can see the gap between the frontend and the backend. The entire disc moves.

Nah, don't think so. Not a single Chinese AESA radar is on a repositioner. It's a well known fact.

This doesn't tell if the J-20's radar is also fixed 'cause we only see the front plate with tile arrays. It doesn't show the basic radar schematic like the second one.

J-20's radar is most definitely fixed just like all other Stealth aircraft have. The question is whether the latest J-20A variant has cheek mounted AESA arrays or not like what F-22 was supposed to have and Su-57 has already got. Stealth jets having a moving radar that is detrimental to their stealth is in itself oxymoron.

And I don't know why you are confused between bigger and heavier. They are not the same. And slightly more TRMs doesn't indicate size either, the second one is a brick array and the third one is a tile array. The latter has smaller antennas. Uttam Mk2 has a smaller array than Uttam Mk1 but comes with more TRMs while seated in a smaller radome. Virupaksha has a bigger array than Bars but is lighter.

While you can argue that the J-20 may have a fixed radar, although that's purely speculation, there's no need for the Flanker to waste all that extra space by removing the repositioner. You can't really do anything else there.

J-20 is likely to have an LCA Mk2 class design, where the radar is angled, but also moves on a plate.

Who cares about which radar is lighter or heavier? It's all about who has more TRMs, the tech involved and the power density of TRMs etc. And in every single parameter, J-20 is superior to every other PLAAF & PLAN jet.

 

[randomradio]

Nah, don't think so. Not a single Chinese AESA radar is on a repositioner. It's a well known fact.

You can clearly see the split. That's how a radar with a repositioner is designed. A fixed radar would have braces on the sides.

J-20's radar is most definitely fixed just like all other Stealth aircraft have. The question is whether the latest J-20A variant has cheek mounted AESA arrays or not like what F-22 was supposed to have and Su-57 has already got. Stealth jets having a moving radar that is detrimental to their stealth is in itself oxymoron.

The J-20 has side arrays, they are too small for radar use. They probably use it for IFF or comms. Or it's likely for EW.

AMCA's radar will also be movable, swashplate.

J-10C was reported to have scan angles of +/-85 deg, it also likely is on a swashplate, even if the J-10CE appears fixed. CE likely comes with a different radar.

Why would movable radar be detrimental to stealth? In fact, if you want the most stealth possible, you would go fully passive in the first place. It actually enhances stealth when you can angle it however you want. Typical stealth jets have small noses, so they are forced to go for a fixed design to maximise the diameter of the array. Swashplate is a new mechanism that came up well after F-22, F-35, and Su-57 were designed.

Who cares about which radar is lighter or heavier? It's all about who has more TRMs, the tech involved and the power density of TRMs etc. And in every single parameter, J-20 is superior to every other PLAAF & PLAN jet.

More TRMs is an entirely different concept.

The point of a heavy radar is the backend of the radar is separate from the front end for a repositioner. That makes the radar heavy. And because the J-16's radar is "smaller" but still the "heaviest" Chinese radar, it means it comes with a repositioner. And the picture shows it has a repositioner. TRMs have nothing to do with this.

 

[Rajput Lion]

You can clearly see the split. That's how a radar with a repositioner is designed. A fixed radar would have braces on the sides.



The J-20 has side arrays, they are too small for radar use. They probably use it for IFF or comms. Or it's likely for EW.

AMCA's radar will also be movable, swashplate.

J-10C was reported to have scan angles of +/-85 deg, it also likely is on a swashplate, even if the J-10CE appears fixed. CE likely comes with a different radar.

Why would movable radar be detrimental to stealth? In fact, if you want the most stealth possible, you would go fully passive in the first place. It actually enhances stealth when you can angle it however you want. Typical stealth jets have small noses, so they are forced to go for a fixed design to maximise the diameter of the array. Swashplate is a new mechanism that came up well after F-22, F-35, and Su-57 were designed.



More TRMs is an entirely different concept.

The point of a heavy radar is the backend of the radar is separate from the front end for a repositioner. That makes the radar heavy. And because the J-16's radar is "smaller" but still the "heaviest" Chinese radar, it means it comes with a repositioner. And the picture shows it has a repositioner. TRMs have nothing to do with this.

?? Are you getting confused between AMCA and LCA MK2 'cause it is the latter that will have AESA radar on a swashplate. AMCA will have a fixed, slighltly tilted up AESA array, that is typical of Stealth jets.

 

[Hydra]

Yep. Pretty much like the F-15EX. Strike and missile truck. But they will keep the MKIs around at least until the late 2060s or even the early 2070s. The MLU itself is pretty generic for its time.

It will be relevant as long as it carries specialized munitions like Brahmos-A. It can be strenthened to carry larger ALBMs someday.

What will replace MKI? I don't think, apart from MKI no aircraft can carry Brahmos air launched variant,Rudram 3 or future Rudram 4 & Nirbhay variants.

 

[Lolwa]

What will replace MKI? I don't think, apart from MKI no aircraft can carry Brahmos air launched variant,Rudram 3 or future Rudram 4 & Nirbhay variants.

There is no replacement for the mki. The only path future for the mki is for India to Indianise it produce a 1000 frames of it a su-57 and hopefully end up making something like this

 

[Choice_of _inevitability]

What will replace MKI? I don't think, apart from MKI no aircraft can carry Brahmos air launched variant,Rudram 3 or future Rudram 4 & Nirbhay variants.

Rudram-3 isn't that heavy, and specs of Rudram-4 aren't in public yet.
BrahMos-A is a valid thing but that's why they are making the NG variant

 

[randomradio]

?? Are you getting confused between AMCA and LCA MK2 'cause it is the latter that will have AESA radar on a swashplate. AMCA will have a fixed, slighltly tilted up AESA array, that is typical of Stealth jets.

No. Both jets will have swashplate. Even TEDBF.

 

[randomradio]

What will replace MKI? I don't think, apart from MKI no aircraft can carry Brahmos air launched variant,Rudram 3 or future Rudram 4 & Nirbhay variants.

It's difficult to say. Earlier, it was supposed to be ADA's next gen jet after AMCA. But now IAF is interested in a JV for SCAF/GCAP.

Plus LCA Mk1A has only 3000 hours of life and will be upgraded to 4000 hours, so it needs replacement after 2055 too.

Overall at least 18-20 squadrons need replacement between 2055 and 2075.

We can design drones for larger weapons.

 

[Shan]

Wrong. IAF will continue to use MKI for air-superiority roles until mid 2050s.

Our UPG. standard is far superior to any Russian upgrade.

If the UPG consisted of an engine upgrade (that brought even moderate amount of changes in terms of performance and maintenance), I would have lowered the Rafale order. Especially since the last few reports have been claiming vastly varying levels of localisation. Our UPG package is substantial and can provide a much needed shot in the arm.

 

[Rajput Lion]

No. Both jets will have swashplate. Even TEDBF.

All of our future 4.5+ gen fighters(except MK1A/B maybe) will have AESA radar on a swashplate(MKI UPG., TEDBF, LCA MK2 et al) but not AMCA 'cause as I said, there is NOT a single 5th gen fighter with moving dish. All stealth fighters employ an upward cant/tilt and have their radar in that fixed position not to reflect incoming signals straight to the source.

Funny that you feel swashplate is a beter or latest tech to enhance stealth, 'cause Chinese just unveiled their latest Flanker variant J-15T with a very different and upward canted nose-cone to reduce its RCS over other Flanker derivatives:




Swashplate/repositioner is necessary to improve FOV/FOR of a radar especially during yanking/beaming maneuver. But having a canted AESA radar along with two cheek-array AESA radars like Su-57 is the best solution to increase survivability and efficacy during BVR duel along with preserving stealth.

If the UPG consisted of an engine upgrade (that brought even moderate amount of changes in terms of performance and maintenance), I would have lowered the Rafale order. Especially since the last few reports have been claiming vastly varying levels of localisation. Our UPG package is substantial and can provide a much needed shot in the arm.

Rafale is necessary in its own way just like LCA series. But MKI UPG. will have uprated AL-31FP with 130+KN wet thrust and maybe even a new engine(Item 177S!!). Let's see.

 

[Shan]

Rafale is necessary in its own way just like LCA series. But MKI UPG. will have uprated AL-31FP with 130+KN wet thrust and maybe even a new engine(Item 177S!!). Let's see.

Rafale is a good 4.5/4.5+ gen FA. If the FA will not carry our weapon systems in the future and have a 30 percent localisation for SCN development, I would go as far as to say that imo we should start re-reviewing the deal with the French. Like the previous order for the IN, order a lot size in fly away condition and be done with it. Whether folks acknowledge or not, the carrot being dangled here is the aid in development of the propulsion system. As per unconfirmed reports, it has been dangled before as well. The rest is speculation and I will not derail the thread further.

I think MKI EW variant ,which we have discussed before, deserves to be looked at. The line in Nashik is being setup for production might as well get a sqdr or two more for dedicated roles. Rudram and Akash series will be nifty little things to bring to the table.

 

[randomradio]

All of our future 4.5+ gen fighters(except MK1A/B maybe) will have AESA radar on a swashplate(MKI UPG., TEDBF, LCA MK2 et al) but not AMCA 'cause as I said, there is NOT a single 5th gen fighter with moving dish. All stealth fighters employ an upward cant/tilt and have their radar in that fixed position not to reflect incoming signals straight to the source.

Funny that you feel swashplate is a beter or latest tech to enhance stealth, 'cause Chinese just unveiled their latest Flanker variant J-15T with a very different and upward canted nose-cone to reduce its RCS over other Flanker derivatives:


View attachment 51676

Swashplate/repositioner is necessary to improve FOV/FOR of a radar especially during yanking/beaming maneuver. But having a canted AESA radar along with two cheek-array AESA radars like Su-57 is the best solution to increase survivability and efficacy during BVR duel along with preserving stealth.

So you can see the difference here.

J-16 and J-11BG have radars with repositioners on a normal bulkhead. J-15T and J-11D come with fixed arrays on a canted bulkhead.

The reason being when you create a canted bulkhead, you increase the aperture size, ie the array is larger than if it was not canted. If you add a swashplate, then you have to make the aperture slightly smaller so it can move about. That's about it.

And you can tell both LCA Mk2 and AMCA have normal bulkheads so the radars can move about inside.





You can see that AMCA does not have canted nose bulkhead. It's the radar that cants itself for stealth.

But yeah, this logic means the J-20's radar is fixed and canted, and the derivative of the same radar seems to have ended up on J-15T and J-11D, possibly even the J-10C. But it implies the J-11BG and J-16 have radars that can be steered, implying they come with the older brick array layout with repositioners.

It's a design trade-off. Canting makes it easier to design a stealth jet while at the same time enhances radar aperture, the drawback is your best FoV is still only 120 deg. You then have to rely on smaller apertures to get off-angle FoV which reduces range drastically. Your main radar's 500-600 km performance cannot be duplicated by the smaller apertures on the sides. A swashplate maintains full radar capability up to 240 deg with a minor downgrade in aperture size.

 

[Shan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2055565013436469498

 

[Rajput Lion]

So you can see the difference here.

J-16 and J-11BG have radars with repositioners on a normal bulkhead. J-15T and J-11D come with fixed arrays on a canted bulkhead.

The reason being when you create a canted bulkhead, you increase the aperture size, ie the array is larger than if it was not canted. If you add a swashplate, then you have to make the aperture slightly smaller so it can move about. That's about it.

And you can tell both LCA Mk2 and AMCA have normal bulkheads so the radars can move about inside.

View attachment 51677

View attachment 51678

You can see that AMCA does not have canted nose bulkhead. It's the radar that cants itself for stealth.

But yeah, this logic means the J-20's radar is fixed and canted, and the derivative of the same radar seems to have ended up on J-15T and J-11D, possibly even the J-10C. But it implies the J-11BG and J-16 have radars that can be steered, implying they come with the older brick array layout with repositioners.

It's a design trade-off. Canting makes it easier to design a stealth jet while at the same time enhances radar aperture, the drawback is your best FoV is still only 120 deg. You then have to rely on smaller apertures to get off-angle FoV which reduces range drastically. Your main radar's 500-600 km performance cannot be duplicated by the smaller apertures on the sides. A swashplate maintains full radar capability up to 240 deg with a minor downgrade in aperture size.

J-16 etc. have moved on to second gen Chinese AESA radars using tile layout and GaN semiconductor. None of them are on a repositioner.

In fact, there are literally only a handful of AESA radar systems that are on a swashplate(Gripen E!). Most are fixed. And don't think AMCA's model displayed last year was very accurate. It does have canted nose as you can see here(meaning a fixed radar):



PS: Looks like the above picture also displayed side-mounted AESA radar too. So AMCA will have Su-57 like BVR capability if that side cheek array is indeed meant to house an X-Band FCR. Even Rafale F5 was supposed to have such side-mounted AESA array but the French decided against it.

 

[randomradio]

J-16 etc. have moved on to second gen Chinese AESA radars using tile layout and GaN semiconductor. None of them are on a repositioner.

Latest image of the J-16D.

China’s J-16D Electronic Attack Jet Seen with Unusual Missile and Jamming Pod Loadout

J-16D seen with missiles and multiple jammer pods, hinting at escort jamming or SEAD missions in contested airspace.

www.armyrecognition.com

Comes with standard nose. So there is repositioner on it.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2033613350874042827

In fact, there are literally only a handful of AESA radar systems that are on a swashplate(Gripen E!). Most are fixed. And don't think AMCA's model displayed last year was very accurate. It does have canted nose as you can see here(meaning a fixed radar):

View attachment 51679

PS: Looks like the above picture also displayed side-mounted AESA radar too. So AMCA will have Su-57 like BVR capability if that side cheek array is indeed meant to house an X-Band FCR. Even Rafale F5 was supposed to have such side-mounted AESA array but the French decided against it.

Yeah, I've seen that, but I prefer the ADA-released schematic for now over a model made by an unrelated aeromodeling company. Model companies tend to add their own stuff in to fill in gaps when the actual aircraft is yet to be seen. But it's possible you are right about AMCA. The schematic might be outdated now.

Rafale's plan for now is single radar initially and eventually getting conformal arrays over time, if it's necessary. So it's a late-F5 or even an F6 upgrade if no one decides to fund it this time.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Latest image of the J-16D.

China’s J-16D Electronic Attack Jet Seen with Unusual Missile and Jamming Pod Loadout

J-16D seen with missiles and multiple jammer pods, hinting at escort jamming or SEAD missions in contested airspace.

www.armyrecognition.com

Comes with standard nose. So there is repositioner on it.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2033613350874042827

Mate! Standard nose doesn't mean it has a repositioner. Heck, even Rafale F3R came with an AESA radar and it never has canted radome but standard nose cone. By your theory, since it has a standard nose, it should have got a repositioner. But it isn't like that, is it? 'Cause Rafale always has got fixed AESA radar. Since beam moves electronically and can be steered almost upto 70° in azimuth, so overall FOV/FOR of 140° is more than enough for most aircraft manufactures to avoid extra weight and other complications which comes up with addition of a swashplate/repositioner.

None of the Chinese Flankers that have AESA radar have it on a swashplate or repositioner. It is a "well known fact".

Yeah, I've seen that, but I prefer the ADA-released schematic for now over a model made by an unrelated aeromodeling company. Model companies tend to add their own stuff in to fill in gaps when the actual aircraft is yet to be seen. But it's possible you are right about AMCA. The schematic might be outdated now.

It's not possible that I am right about AMCA 'cause I am 100% right about AMCA. It will have a fixed GaN based AESA radar not a gimbaled one. It is also a well-known fact.

Rafale's plan for now is single radar initially and eventually getting conformal arrays over time, if it's necessary. So it's a late-F5 or even an F6 upgrade if no one decides to fund it this time.

Doubtful! @Picdelamirand-oil may or may not confirm this. French should now concentrate more on NGF than Rafale for future combat strength of AdlA. So I am indeed doubtful whether Rafale will ever get side mounted/conformal X-band AESA radar.

 

[randomradio]

Mate! Standard nose doesn't mean it has a repositioner. Heck, even Rafale F3R came with an AESA radar and it never has canted radome but standard nose cone. By your theory, since it has a standard nose, it should have got a repositioner. But it isn't like that, is it? 'Cause Rafale always has got fixed AESA radar. Since beam moves electronically and can be steered almost upto 70° in azimuth, so overall FOV/FOR of 140° is more than enough for most aircraft manufactures to avoid extra weight and other complications which comes up with addition of a swashplate/repositioner.

None of the Chinese Flankers that have AESA radar have it on a swashplate or repositioner. It is a "well known fact".

It's not possible that I am right about AMCA 'cause I am 100% right about AMCA. It will have a fixed GaN based AESA radar not a gimbaled one. It is also a well-known fact.

Doubtful! @Picdelamirand-oil may or may not confirm this. French should now concentrate more on NGF than Rafale for future combat strength of AdlA. So I am indeed doubtful whether Rafale will ever get side mounted/conformal X-band AESA radar.

Rafale's standard original design came with a fixed radar for the sake of space. Flanker's original design came with a vertical bulkhead and a repositioner. Why would they change either design in the middle of their lives?

Next gen Flankers got canted bulkheads, so it's clear that we can see there's a difference between the two.

Now what you are suggesting is they took a working design with a vertical bulkhead and removed the bulkhead just to put a canted one in it. Do you realize how complex that sort of work is? You have to recreate the entire frontal fuselage and recertify and retest the aircraft from scratch all over again. If what you said is true, then the angled radar would have come with a canted nose too. So, no, all the J-16s have "heavy" radars on repositioners. Even if you change the radar design completely, there's absolutely no need to remove the repositioner at all.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Rafale's standard original design came with a fixed radar for the sake of space. Flanker's original design came with a vertical bulkhead and a repositioner. Why would they change either design in the middle of their lives?

Next gen Flankers got canted bulkheads, so it's clear that we can see there's a difference between the two.

Now what you are suggesting is they took a working design with a vertical bulkhead and removed the bulkhead just to put a canted one in it. Do you realize how complex that sort of work is? You have to recreate the entire frontal fuselage and recertify and retest the aircraft from scratch all over again. If what you said is true, then the angled radar would have come with a canted nose too. So, no, all the J-16s have "heavy" radars on repositioners. Even if you change the radar design completely, there's absolutely no need to remove the repositioner at all.

Nope. Chinese when going from rotating MSA to AESA transition for their J-11 & J-16 chose aperture size over gimbaling as they believed that they will have more than enough Flankers to support each other in "sensor-shooter" loop. So no need for gimbaling. J-15T is further evolution of this concept as canting allows for even more TRMs than a flat-array plus it has aerodynamic benefits too.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Doubtful! @Picdelamirand-oil may or may not confirm this. French should now concentrate more on NGF than Rafale for future combat strength of AdlA. So I am indeed doubtful whether Rafale will ever get side mounted/conformal X-band AESA radar.

The side antennas were originally designed for the F5; they were intended to be multifunctional antennas capable of supporting radar, communications, and electronic warfare systems. However, the focus has now shifted to escort drones, which has reduced the need for these side antennas: that role has been delegated to the drones! Therefore, the mounting points will be used to install communications antennas.

 

[Rajput Lion]

The side antennas were originally designed for the F5; they were intended to be multifunctional antennas capable of supporting radar, communications, and electronic warfare systems. However, the focus has now shifted to escort drones, which has reduced the need for these side antennas: that role has been delegated to the drones! Therefore, the mounting points will be used to install communications antennas.

That's what I thought too. Thanks for confirmation