Really? I know from MY 'entrepreneurial experience' that
Marketing gimmicks are common in Chinese disclosures. And Russians do the same.
Consider following example.
What exactly do you see in this disclosure which indicates that KLJ-7A is on par with AN/APG-82 through and through? KLJ-7A is officially stated to have a combat range of 170 KM, and the developer (i.e. NRIET) is using this 'vague disclosure' to pitch its radar system as a peer of AN/APG-82 in public:
"The KLJ-7A that makes its first public appearance in this show has a combat range of 170 kilometers," says WANG Hongzhe (王宏哲), "This range is equivalent to (that of the radar) F-35, and it's is mostly done on a radar with a much smaller volume in comparison."
Emphasis mine. MARKETING GIMMICK from the developer of this radar system to generate sales. For the naive and gullible; a radar system has much more to it then 'combat radius' in order to assess parity, and crude comparisons between detection ranges are not advised
because different manufacturers have different SNR requirements for detection.
Mr. Wang Hongzhe (deputy director - NRIET) disclosed following capabilities of KLJ-7A in a press briefing:-
- Combat radius of KLJ-7A at 200 KM = valid for targets having 5m^2 RCS
- Combat radius of KLJ-7A at 170 KM = valid for targets having 3m^2 RCS
- Close to 1000 TRMs in total
- Capable of tracking 15 potential targets in one go, and developing a fire solution for 4 potential targets in one go
- 11 modules of operation in total
- Operates in X-band
KLJ-7A is roughly a peer of Raytheon's
AN/APG-63(V2) based on CRUDE comparisons, but even this is not clear due to 'secrecy factor'.
Now, let us talk about the radar system of F-35 variants. From where I shall begin...
F-35 variants feature
AN/APG-81 radar system which is also
ELECTRONICALLY FUSED with
AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda EW/CS system to enhance its offensive and defensive capabilities yet even further. However, technicalities of this radar system are shrouded in mystery and disinformation in public domain.
For example, there are sources on the web which point out that AN/APG-81 have 1000 TRMs but this was an early PROTOTYPE*. The finalized version of AN/APG-81 have
1676 TRMs in total.
*This PROTOTYPE was capable of tracking up to 23 potential targets under 3 seconds in one go, and developing a fire solution of up to 19 potential targets under 3 seconds in one go. One can imagine what the finalized version of AN/APG-81 is capable of in this respect in comparison.
Now a state-of-the-art AESA radar system with 1676 TRMs is expected to have noticeably superior 'combat radius' than Russian PESA Irbis-E radar system which is used in Su-35 (crude assessment). Combat radius of Irbis-E at 350 KM is valid for targets having 3m^2 RCS, so you can imagine what would be the case with finalized version of AN/APG-81 in comparison for the same target - we are looking at 400+ KM in this aspect. Furthermore, there is a lot more about AN/APG-81 which is not public knowledge, and will not be in the near future, and even Chinese developers would not be aware.
Emphasis mine. Refrain from drawing CRUDE comparisons between radar systems in the absence of proper and verified content and/or jumping to ill-advised conclusions on the basis of CRUDE information in brochures from developers.
F-35 is on a completely different level of capability in comparison of JF-17 Thunder Block III and/or similar aircraft. Even if you pick J-20 for comparison, I can pinpoint to you numerous areas where it falls short in comparison to F-35. Use your brain for once. US have invested a TRILLION USD in the R&D for F-35 program, and this translate into something much more profound than what Pakistan can manage with its meager resources even with aid of China.
Basic analogy:-
Huawei Mate 10 Lite = Rs.35,000/-
Huawei P20 Pro = Rs.100,000/-
Do you think these smartphones are similar in terms of capabilities? To a layman, probably.
Did you see
me stating anywhere in this forum that JF-17 Thunder Block 2 is JUNK?
I am rather
extremely vocal against the
nonsense of Russians because they are known to HYPE their products beyond measure in discussions, and to generate sales. Perhaps you were sleeping when I was involved in heated conversations with Russian fanboys in this very forum. Shall I give you pointers?
PAF exposed 'sheer incompetence' of IAF in the recent engagement with well-planned tactics and level of preparation, as well as the shortcomings of Russian hardware. FYI:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/blinders-played-crucial-role-in-paf-assault.610576/
And this is not the first time. PAF
humiliated IAF back in the days of 1965 war.
I came across a discussion in the famous f-16.net community about Russian AESA radar systems, and a Western expert debunked much of Russian hype and nonsense in it, but the Russian fanboys in the discussion were not interested in learning anything. YOU are just like these Russians.
See above.
YOU are NOT an objective person, mind you. And I am not the first Pakistani member to call you out on your BS in this community. You need to overcome your BIASES against Western sources
FIRST before we can even hope to have a constructive discussion about technology-oriented themes, because all of them are not liars by default, and Western authors happen to be among the greatest educators to mankind.
Did you ever go to school?
F-35 is one of the most misunderstood aircraft in public domain; this is in part due to vast amount of disinformation in regards to its capabilities on the web, and this might be INTENTIONAL from certain sources which in turn might be CIA bots. Why would US want the public to learn so much about one of its most prized processions? Does not make sense.
And its not like every tom, d*** and harry can be compared to F-35 in discussions. Refrain from this BS.