via nabil-
WMD-7 has performed better than expected in all weather, foggy, day night conditions in China and Pakistan. It has replaced Chinese legacy pods and is now the standard targeting pod in PLAAF service. In PAF, it falls between the SNIPER, ATLIS, slightly inferior than former, much enhanced than latter. Should be on par with Litenning 2 at least.
requires One hardpoint for now, should be on chin pylon from second blk onwards...
klj-7 currently has 550 watt output power and is powerful enough, but plans are in place for locally produced radar to have 600 watt (yes folks, 600) watt which will give it as much power as in APG-68 v9 ! but its radar antenna size will remain same. ISAR will be introduced, other modes will remain same but range will be increased. Overall, i expect it to be as capable as V9 in general capability but less in range. MTBF is around 300 hours. AESA is being worked out in China and is going through final trials. Blk 3 will have AESA but it will be tested on a prototype in China and then in Pakistan......
The more powerful transmitter, more options available such as more range, functions, processing speed, cooling, etc, although range greatly counts on antenna size too...Also, ESA antenna can be enabled on current klj-7 too !
How much do you want from a light fighter? Its radar can guide four, not two sd-10s simultaneously, search range is 150 kms, MTBF 230 hours, 30 modes of functions, this all gives it a good cost to performance ratio, is being improved and built in house, better than the rest of our radar inventory except the APG 68 V9 but than V9 is better than most pulse dopplers in the world anyway
----
the 5-6 kw is the peak power my friend and this is not in use usually as the aircraft engine can only give a certain amount of power. APG-68v9 has a usual power of 500- 600 watts at best with current f-16 configuration, same as the KLJ-7 with current jf-17 configuration, both radars have a reserve power capacity but this does not mean they are always operated at peak power output, no radar can as per my info. Hence they both have similar ranges and working modes. At the moment, the maximum output power of KLJ-7 as per my info is somewhere around 4-5kw, similar to v9. There are reasons why Italian radar was rejected, first, it had no multi target tracking capability, a small nominal power output of just 400 watts as compared to 600 watt asked by PAF and incompatibility to fire its main weapon, the sd-10 which italians promised to rectify. They improved the radar repeatedly but it still suffered with anomalies and hence got rejected
JFT radar has publicized detection range of 105 km against 5m2 target and Su-30 even if, has RCS of 10m2, will be detected at around 200-210 kms!! I bet BARS cannot detect a 3m2 target even at 150 kms and JFT is much less than 3m2 so MKI will have a hard time detecting the JFT at advertised range. Reality is, it will most likely be the other way around. yes the JFT will see the MKI first!
----
a-5 retired, next in line are early mirages (non rose models), f-7s (only p, not pg), this should be completed as new batches of jft are inducted, within next 5 -7 years at best. Grifo-S is not exactly same as old Grifo-S 7 and I give u the reason why. After fiar presented s-7 to paf, it seem impressive as it had high power and excellent anti jamming, decent range, robust architecture but it lacked in multiple engagements and track range, it also had inherited flaw of unable to communicate with indigenous, chinese weapons. What was presented by fiar as the Grifo-2000/16 was any day, a better option as it had more range, better features. this was discussed with fiar and they came up with and unified version having different antenna, range, processors, features in a customized variant known today as Grifo-S, this can also be observed in the brochure. It was defeated by a more capable radar in all dimensions that is known as klj-7......
---
F-7= Grifo-7=200-250 watt
f-16 blk 15= 300-350 watt
Rose Mirage= Grifo M3= 400-450 watt
Grifo-S (JFT earlier) =500-560 watt
http://www.defence.pk/forums/jf-17-thunder/68207-jf-17-thunder-multirole-fighter-thread-4-a-74.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/air-warfare/94948-radar-ranges-different-fighters-3.html#post1900693
Pakistan
Mirage III (Grifo-M)
F-7 Airguard (Grifo 7)
Peak Power
P2801 100kW
Grifo Radar series
The range for the present Chinese radar is very likely to be more than 100 kms; considering that the PAF chief was comparing with PAF F-16s. The PAF F-16s underwent OCU which increased their range and made it close to MLU (see this)
"The Pakistan Air Force currently has the Block 15 F-16A/B model in operation, which has an upgraded APG-66 radar that brings it close to the MLU (Mid-life Update) radar technology. The main advantage is the ability to use the AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles if they were ever to be released to the PAF. Furthermore, the radar is capable of sorting out tight formations of aircraft and has a 15%-20% range increase over previous models. All the earlier F-16s were brought up to OCU standards and have received the Falcon UP structural modification package."
Consider this bit of information, and also that the APG-66 later modification values are against 1m^2 targets which will be further increased against a significantly greater RCS for the MKI.
Now consider statements made by the PAF Chief about the KLJ-7: is *much better* than their APGs (and these are the upgraded OCU APGs).
Secondly if you visit SOC's old post on FC-1 and see the exchange of comments, one poster pointed out that KLJ-7 beat the Grifo- S and PAF did not lowered their requirements (this includes a link that PAF did not lower it's requirement, and on that is by none other than Richard Fischer
). SOC in fact commented that it is a very potent radar looking at some mentioned features.
Clearly, the KLJ-7 was chosen over this "very potent radar" and clearly the PAF Chief mentions that the KLJ-7 is "much better" than the present APGs.
One would also want to ask what is the detection range by JET modulation when intakes are hidden and treated with RAM. Why does one poster think it is more important and potent than detection by using returns from the airframe when clearly returns from airframe of a non-stealthy aircraft will be in abundance.
Another assertion made is that the MKI has phased array and JF-17 has Pulse doppler and MKI can avoid JF-17 lock by using doppler notch where as MKI will have no problems with locking on as it's radar is not PD.
This is what is common knowledge at various forums:
1)Doppler notch has been known since time ancient and tactics against Doppler notch were known by USAF even back in Vietnam Era.
2) According to one of the viper pilots at the F-16 forum, they have way more modes on their radars and just by switching to different mode of detection and maneuvering your aircraft so that there is no 90 degrees between both aircrafts this dopler notch could be taken care of.
3)Another aviator said "no modern AI radar is worth it's salt if it can't resist doppler notch"
All of the above should be on F-16 forums if you search "doppler notch"
Grande Strategy
I dont give a crap if members dont agree with these values --- they can have mutual brain masturbation sessions on other fora
This is a thread regarding paf and its not about iaf--- such further posts will be regarded as offtopic trolling and will be rewarded with a pink saree
