Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Share

    victor1985
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 852
    Points : 901
    Join date : 2015-01-02

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  victor1985 on Mon May 25, 2015 9:00 am

    sepheronx wrote:
    Giulio wrote:Hello.
    I'm sorry, but I do not have time to read all the forums.
    By dint of reading in the West about the supposed "backwardness" of Russia, I would like to hear some other bells.
    In short, could you explain briefly what a PESA radar and what an AESA radar are and, above all: is it true that the first AESA radar was on a Mig-31? Thanks for the replies.

    PESA

    AESA

    In short, PESA is a consentration of energy at a single point that produces a massive beam.  AESA is where you got multiple transmitters creating a beam.  Advantage of AESA is that it is harder to fight against in terms of electronic warfare and pick up its transmissions.  PESA is a lot simpler to make and cheaper too.  As well, what is not mentioned, is that PESA tends to be more accurate in its readings due to high amount of power concentrated at one point.  Problem is that it is easier to pick up its transmissions and easier to combat in EW.  In modern times, most aircrafts are equipped with ECM/ECCM subsystems so that can counter this issue.

    MiG-31 radar is PESA radar.  Zaslon radar.

    Irbis-E radar is a hybrid radar (bit of both worlds).

    Phazotron has its Zhuk-A series of AESA radar and Tikhomirov NIIP has their Byelka radar which is AESA.  Zhuk-A has already been tested and flown in the MiG-29M2 for India and is being placed on Ka-52K helicopters.  Byelka is being made for PAK FA and has already been tested/flown.  Possibly can be used as well for current gen aircrafts as well.

    Ground based AESA radar systems are apparently different.  Russia has various ones, one being the NEBO SVU radar.
    The PESA work by the rule that two or more radar or other waves when they meet each other become one single wave whit longer wavelenght? A PESA/AESA combination can be maked? Oh that is irbis....
    But then just free up space in the plane make in bigger and make a big PESA radar....
    Also a user from forum said that noise come in spikes...just transmit on that spike frecvencies and you get no jamming. But then the enemy would try to reach lots of spikes....that consume battery...but aircrafts have electric generators that work non stop.

    victor1985
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 852
    Points : 901
    Join date : 2015-01-02

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  victor1985 on Mon May 25, 2015 9:20 am

    I understand that emp and jammer noise are something different....
    When comes into play the emp? Emp guns can be placed on planes? I hear the expresion "burn the radar" or "fry the electronics" ....in that were come from? So what are the pro and con against use PESA or AESA or emp gun?
    Also there is a thing that i tinked to: waves that comes back can be retransformed to electric energy? And the noise can be retransformed? In this the enemy would jam and you just convert waves to energy and use it for a powerfull PESA wave....

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Austin on Thu Aug 13, 2015 6:46 pm

    Thanks Nice post

    Is the advantage by Aesa is huge enough to cancel procuring Irbis pesa like capability ? Would jamming Irbis say using Aesa antenna will be easier done compared to jamming Aesa ?

    jhelb
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 419
    Points : 483
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  jhelb on Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:55 pm

    Austin wrote:Thanks Nice post

    Is the advantage by Aesa is huge enough to cancel procuring Irbis pesa like capability ? Would jamming Irbis say using Aesa antenna will be easier done compared to jamming Aesa ?

    An AESA radar uses many individual, small transmit/receive modules, whereas a PESA radar uses a common RF source whose signal is modified using digitally controlled phase shifter modules.

    Higher sensitivity allows to reduce power so the J/S (jam to signal) ratio increases. PESA does not have the same comparable frequency agility as that of AESA. Frequency hopping is an effective technique for a radar system to circumvent jamming and electronic counter-countermeasures.

    So if I was flying lets say a Su 35S that has Tikhomirov's AESA radar and you were flying a Su 30MKI that has Irbis, I will find it easier to jam your radar. In this case Tikhomirov's AESA radar would do the following: increase power trying to burn through jamming, change frequency in order to evade jamming or in some cases ignore the jammed sector.

    http://www.tscm.com/rcvr-typ.pdf


    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  medo on Thu Aug 13, 2015 9:16 pm

    Austin wrote:Thanks Nice post

    Is the advantage by Aesa is huge enough to cancel procuring Irbis pesa like capability ? Would jamming Irbis say using Aesa antenna will be easier done compared to jamming Aesa ?

    I's difficult to say. PESA radar is also very agile in frequency hoping and is practically without side loops so it is not possible to jam it from the sides. Also there is more energy loses in AESA because of heating of TR elements and need more cooling.

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Stealthflanker on Fri Aug 14, 2015 12:12 am




    So if I was flying lets say a Su 35S that has Tikhomirov's AESA radar and you were flying a Su 30MKI that has Irbis, I will find it easier to jam your radar.  In this case Tikhomirov's AESA radar would do the following: increase power trying to burn through jamming, change frequency in order to evade jamming or in some cases ignore the jammed sector.

    http://www.tscm.com/rcvr-typ.pdf


    Why PESA radar can't do the same ? PESA can have frequency hopping... can also have guard channel for sidelobe blanking and ignore the jammed sector.. can also have leading edge tracking to counter some types of deceptive jamming.

    PESA can also have high power transmitter to attempt to burn through.





    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Aug 14, 2015 6:52 am

    Irbis isnt even full on PESA anyway. Kinda a mixture between both really. Hybrid radar it was called.


    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  higurashihougi on Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:50 am

    sepheronx wrote:Irbis isnt even full on PESA anyway. Kinda a mixture between both really. Hybrid radar it was called.

    Irbis and its predeccessor Bars are PESA, but they have dynamic shifted phase capability. The radar beam's direction can be quickly changed and oscillated while the radar antenna stand still. Unlike previous radar (Myech, Zhuk,...) the radar antenna has to be oscillated in order to change the direction of the radar beam.

    Irbis/Bars's transmitter is mechanically oscillated in the rate of 200 round per second. The movement of the transmitter caused change in the distance(s) between the transmitter and each phase modules. The difference in these distances cause different phase shifting in each modules, lead to the change of the direction of the radar beam.

    When Irbis/Bars antenna stands still, the radar beam can rapidly move left and right in the angle of 120 degree. The radar antenna can be mechanically move in another 120 degree. Totally, Su-30/35 can have a 240 degree vision.

    Using of PESA in Su-30/35 is actually a good thing, not bad thing. PESA has the distinctive advantage of signal power, cleanliness and purity, something that AESA currently cannot achieve yet. And Su-30/35 radar antenna still have the traditional surface shape, it does not have unconventional shape like T-50 L-band radar, therefore people do not need to use AESA in Su-30/35.

    The reason why Western fighter use AESA in the nose radar, like in the case of Rafale or F-22, is because they failed to create effective dynamic shifted phase PESA like Su-30/35.

    =========
    =========
    =========

    The difference between AESA and PESA dynamic shifted phase (like Irbis, Bars), is that each phase module of AESA has its own phase shifter, while the phase shifting of all PESA modules is generated by one shifter only.

    That means, in AESA we can individually modify the phase shift of each module, and the difference and difference pattern between the phase of each modules can be change as much as we want. Meanwhile, in Irbis and Bars, although the phase shift can be changed due to the movement of transmitter, it follows a certain pattern.

    And that means, we can put and arrange the AESA modules in any kinds and patterns we desire. The shape of AESA antenna can be as unconventional as we desire, we just have to modify the phase shift to suit the radar shape. Russian AESA radars, like T-50 wing edge radar, or Lira sonar, they have unconventional shape, thanks to being AESA.

    But F-22, Rafale, Typhoon put AESA at the conventional position and shape, like PESA. Laughing Laughing Laughing

    The disadvantage of AESA, till today, is the quality, purity and power of the radar signal. Each of F-22's AESA modules has its own phase shifter and transmitters. That cause numerous distortions both in frequency and phase. Newer generation of AESA radars have only one transmitter, but each phase module has its own shifter. That fixes the problem of distortion, but still the power of AESA is still not strong enough.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  medo on Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:16 am

    higurashihougi wrote:Using of PESA in Su-30/35 is actually a good thing, not bad thing. PESA has the distinctive advantage of signal power, cleanliness and purity, something that AESA currently cannot achieve yet. And Su-30/35 radar antenna still have the traditional surface shape, it does not have unconventional shape like T-50 L-band radar, therefore people do not need to use AESA in Su-30/35.

    Su-35 have L-band AESA radar in wing leading edge.


    higurashihougi wrote:The disadvantage of AESA, till today, is the quality, purity and power of the radar signal. Each of F-22's AESA modules has its own phase shifter and transmitters. That cause numerous distortions both in frequency and phase. Newer generation of AESA radars have only one transmitter, but each phase module has its own shifter. That fixes the problem of distortion, but still the power of AESA is still not strong enough.

    Are you sure? If new generation AESA have only one transmiter and each module have its own shifter, than what is the difference between Irbis/Bars and those new AESA radars? This is actually PESA radar, because modules don't transmit themselves, but only shift transmitting signal and receive returned signal. This is how Irbis/Bars and other PESA work.

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Stealthflanker on Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:19 am

    higurashihougi wrote:
    The difference between AESA and PESA dynamic shifted phase (like Irbis, Bars), is that each phase module of AESA has its own phase shifter, while the phase shifting of all PESA modules is generated by one shifter only.


    This is wrong. Both PESA and AESA's antenna Does contain Phase shifter.

    The differences is that AESA antenna module have Amplifier network and Receiver on its own. Why AESA got "A" (Active) Is because the existence of a component that can amplify or actually generate EM Wave.. Which is the amplifier (Which made of GaAs or GaN)

    PESA Antenna modules does not have that active element in it only phase shifters Thus why PESA got "P" for Passive.

    jhelb
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 419
    Points : 483
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  jhelb on Fri Aug 14, 2015 2:11 pm

    Stealthflanker wrote:Why PESA radar can't do the same ? PESA can have frequency hopping... can also have guard channel for sidelobe blanking and ignore the jammed sector.. can also have leading edge tracking to counter some types of deceptive jamming.

    PESA can also have high power transmitter to attempt to burn through.

    PESA can do that but not as effectively as AESA.

    However in an AESA radar since the power supplies, final power amplification and input receive amplification, are distributed, Mean Time Between Failure(MTBF) is significantly higher than that of PESA. Also in defense of PESA what can be said is that the act of jamming the PESA  radar effectively surrenders the frequency hopping agility in the emissions of the  AESA radar like APG-79 or APG-81.

    victor1985
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 852
    Points : 901
    Join date : 2015-01-02

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  victor1985 on Thu Aug 20, 2015 3:58 pm

    [quote="jhelb"][quote="Austin"]Thanks Nice post

    Is the advantage by Aesa is huge enough to cancel procuring Irbis pesa like capability ? Would jamming Irbis say using Aesa antenna will be easier done compared to jamming Aesa ?[/quote]

    An AESA radar uses many individual, small transmit/receive modules, whereas a PESA radar uses a common RF source whose signal is modified using digitally controlled phase shifter modules.

    Higher sensitivity allows to reduce power so the J/S (jam to signal) ratio increases. PESA does not have the same comparable frequency agility as that of AESA. Frequency hopping is an effective technique for a radar system to circumvent jamming and electronic counter-countermeasures.

    So if I was flying lets say a Su 35S that has Tikhomirov's AESA radar and you were flying a Su 30MKI that has Irbis, I will find it easier to jam your radar.  In this case Tikhomirov's AESA radar would do the following: increase power trying to burn through jamming, change frequency in order to evade jamming or in some cases ignore the jammed sector.

    http://www.tscm.com/rcvr-typ.pdf

    [/quote]


    point is even you change frecvency the enemy would jam with same thing mean changing frecvency too in this your signal not getting to missile. this is about the power of how many signals the missile electronics process per second. that mean the speed of electrons. and also about the bias of the transistors in amplification because of errors that can occur errors in bias of curent and bias of voltage

    mack8
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 923
    Points : 983
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    PESA and AESA

    Post  mack8 on Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:17 pm

    Did not know till today that the Bars-M was gimballed, apparently horizontal only though. Picture posted by Jo Asakura:

    victor1985
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 852
    Points : 901
    Join date : 2015-01-02

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  victor1985 on Fri Aug 21, 2015 6:22 pm

    i wanna ask something: as far as i know the PESA radar has a single beam but powerfull than AESA well in a combat the PESA will detect from far away than AESA ? so why AESA?
    at what help if PESA will detect first and fire a missile?

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Mike E on Fri Aug 21, 2015 9:50 pm

    victor1985 wrote:i wanna ask something: as far as i know the PESA radar has a single beam but powerfull than AESA well in a combat the PESA will detect from far away than AESA ? so why AESA?
    at what help if PESA will detect first and fire a missile?
    PESA isn't more powerful based off of design, rather, it depends on the model. AESA panels are harder to "lock on to" (they can hop frequencies, blend frequencies etc), harder to jam, and also higher resolution. A good example of this, is how many AESA panels can map the ground.

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Aug 22, 2015 3:01 am

    Mike E wrote:
    PESA isn't more powerful based off of design, rather, it depends on the model. AESA panels are harder to "lock on to" (they can hop frequencies, blend frequencies etc), harder to jam, and also higher resolution. A good example of this, is how many AESA panels can map the ground.

    Incorrect. Frequency hopping, etc is already feature of today's modern radar regardless antenna types. Same goes for "jammability" There's no reason why PESA can't also have similar mainlobe nulling as AESA, especially for hybrid array like bars or irbis.

    Resolution for ground mapping is determined by physics not antenna type. It does not need AESA for high resolution ground mapping. Even MiG-29's Zhuk ME conventional slotted planar array can produce map with sufficient resolution for weapon delivery or navigation.

    Main advantages of AESA however lies in its reliability as it does not subject to single point transmitter failure unlike conventional or PESA radar. Other advantage however.. though debatable is transmitter flexibility. the AESA can actually split its aperture into several smaller antenna and each subarrays can transmit or receive independently.. That might be desirable, for application like highspeed datalinking.

    Furthermore..if it can be realized the AESA is the only way to "true time delay" Photonic beamsteering control, where phase shifter is replaced with other means like optic fibre.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Mike E on Sat Aug 22, 2015 3:40 am

    But AESA's can "do it better", quicker etc. Along with the reliability you mentioned.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Aug 22, 2015 5:36 am

    Mike E wrote:
    victor1985 wrote:i wanna ask something: as far as i know the PESA radar has a single beam but powerfull than AESA well in a combat the PESA will detect from far away than AESA ? so why AESA?
    at what help if PESA will detect first and fire a missile?
    PESA isn't more powerful based off of design, rather, it depends on the model. AESA panels are harder to "lock on to" (they can hop frequencies, blend frequencies etc), harder to jam, and also higher resolution. A good example of this, is how many AESA panels can map the ground.

    In general PESA does have advantage about the purity, cleanliness and power of the signal. Many AESA models suffer from the distortion of both phase and frequency, like F-22 AESA. Newer AESAs fix the distortion problem, but seems like the power is still not strong enough.

    The distinctive advantage of AESA is that, each phase module can be shifted individually, thanks to the fact that each phase module has its own phase shifter. That means, you can put the AESA module in any kinds of unconventional surface instead of the traditional phase plane. Easy to see, you can individually change the phase of each module to create desirable total radar beam, disregard of the position of each module.

    That's why T-50 manage to put the AESA radar on the wing edges.

    Many people usually emphasize one advantage of the AESA that is dynamic shifted phase, that it can rapidly move the direction of the radar beam due to the rapid shift of the phase of each modules. But PESA like Irbis and Bars can have dynamic shifted phase, too. PESA dynamic shifted phase is relatively bulky and heavy, and the movement of the radar beam is slower, but well the size of Irbis and Bars is acceptable.

    There are radars who use one common transmitter for all phase module, but each module has its own phase shifter instead of using one common phase shifter for all the modules. Some people call them PESA because of the one common transmitter, but some others call them AESA since each module has its own phase shifter and the phase shift can be controlled individually. Question Question Question

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Aug 22, 2015 7:07 am

    higurashihougi wrote:
    In general PESA does have advantage about the purity, cleanliness and power of the signal. Many AESA models suffer from the distortion of both phase and frequency, like F-22 AESA. Newer AESAs fix the distortion problem, but seems like the power is still not strong enough.

    Where did this come from ?


    The distinctive advantage of AESA is that, each phase module can be shifted individually, thanks to the fact that each phase module has its own phase shifter. That means, you can put the AESA module in any kinds of unconventional surface instead of the traditional phase plane. Easy to see, you can individually change the phase of each module to create desirable total radar beam, disregard of the position of each module.

    AESA Got "A" In it because it has its own amplifier in each module. Even PESA got a phase shifter.. Have a look at this B1B APQ-164 PESA Radar.



    Those tubes like object at the array is the Phase shifter.


    Many people usually emphasize one advantage of the AESA that is dynamic shifted phase, that it can rapidly move the direction of the radar beam due to the rapid shift of the phase of each modules. But PESA like Irbis and Bars can have dynamic shifted phase, too. PESA dynamic shifted phase is relatively bulky and heavy, and the movement of the radar beam is slower, but well the size of Irbis and Bars is acceptable.

    You're keep repeating incorrect description. This is not good and can mislead ppl. All ESA Radar regardless whether it's PESA or AESA are able to shift the beam electronically. and there is no correlation at all between size and beam steering time. It's related to phase shifter design. Ferrite phase shifter is known for its relatively slower steer time (in some tens to hundreds of miliseconds) But now we have digital or diode based phase shifter which is faster and used in airborne radar today.

    Ferrite phase shifter however are still in use though application might limited to older ESA's such as APQ-164 and S-300's 30N6 radar.



    There are radars who use one common transmitter for all phase module, but each module has its own phase shifter instead of using one common phase shifter for all the modules. Some people call them PESA because of the one common transmitter, but some others call them AESA since each module has its own phase shifter and the phase shift can be controlled individually. Question Question Question

    Those who called it AESA are wrong. Phase shifter is NOT an Active device. Active here means it can amplify or modify currents or power that inputted to it.

    AESA antenna module have that capability because it has its own amplifier stage. something which PESA don't.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Aug 22, 2015 7:53 am

    Stealthflanker wrote:
    Furthermore..if it can be realized the AESA is the only way to "true time delay" Photonic beamsteering control, where phase shifter is replaced with other means like optic fibre.

    It's not a question whether it can be realized, it's whether it can be mass-produced at a cost-effective price. As I stated before, KRET has already announced that they have early working prototypes of photonic based 2nd-gen AESA's, in which they reliably maintain a 10-fold increase in resolution over their contemporary electronic-based 1st-gen AESA counterparts. KRET has also stated that by 2020 their production model 2nd-gen photonic based AESA will increase the superiority of resolution, over contemporary electronic based 1st-gen AESA's, by several dozen times:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2547p315-russian-radar-systems#92339

    victor1985
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 852
    Points : 901
    Join date : 2015-01-02

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  victor1985 on Sat Aug 22, 2015 8:58 am

    in terms of power i dont know how many amperes lets say would be on a single PESA and 30 AESA antenna. problem is if the generator will sustain all. basically as far as i know is like this when in a circuit some things are in series same current go trought all so for PESA and AESA would be same consumption. but there is a problem. some looses exist trought the circuit.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Aug 22, 2015 11:44 am

    Stealthflanker wrote:

    Many people usually emphasize one advantage of the AESA that is dynamic shifted phase, that it can rapidly move the direction of the radar beam due to the rapid shift of the phase of each modules. But PESA like Irbis and Bars can have dynamic shifted phase, too. PESA dynamic shifted phase is relatively bulky and heavy, and the movement of the radar beam is slower, but well the size of Irbis and Bars is acceptable.

    You're keep repeating incorrect description. This is not good and can mislead ppl. All ESA Radar regardless whether it's PESA or AESA are able to shift the beam electronically. and there is no correlation at all between size and beam steering time. It's related to phase shifter design. Ferrite phase shifter is known for its relatively slower steer time (in some tens to hundreds of miliseconds) But now we have digital or diode based phase shifter which is faster and used in airborne radar today.

    Ferrite phase shifter however are still in use though application might limited to older ESA's such as APQ-164 and S-300's 30N6 radar.

    I didn't say that the size and weight of Irbis/Bars make cause slower beam steering time. I just say that the radar is bulkier and heavier. And the radar movement of the radar beam is slower, but I didn't say that it is because of the size of antenna.

    Probably my bad in English caused some misunderstanding. What I say here is, many people claimed that only AESA has effective dynamic shifted phase, and these are wrong. PESA has dynamic shifted phase, too.

    victor1985
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 852
    Points : 901
    Join date : 2015-01-02

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  victor1985 on Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:09 am

    one i dont understand: how you make beam sterring electronically without moving mecanical parts?

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    PESA and AESA

    Post  higurashihougi on Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:21 am

    victor1985 wrote:one i dont understand: how you make beam sterring electronically without moving mecanical parts?

    By changing the phase of each module

    http://www.radartutorial.eu/06.antennas/pic/if3.big.gif

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Austin on Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:32 pm

    Can some one tell me the difference bewteed BARS and IRBIS , Some one was stating IRBIS is more of hybrid radar ?

    Karan of BRF was stating 400 km range of Irbis is only in narrow band something

    http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6842&sid=09f75535375128adbc1b01009f207c79&start=1040#p1893826

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian PESA and AESA radars: History

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 6:57 am


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:57 am