Military Review

Modernization of German Eurofighter: a holiday with tears in his eyes?

74

Old new radar



In June, Airbus received a contract for the installation of 110 radars with an active phased array antenna (AFAR) Captor-e on the Eurofighter Typhoon of the German Air Force and five radars of this type on the Spanish Typhoons. In the latter case, we are talking about the initial batch of radar. Work under the contract should be completed in 2023.

Some Western media have called Captor-E "the most advanced fighter radar." A number of sources say that he is capable of detecting a fighter target at a range of approximately 270 kilometers. In principle, this is comparable to the indicator (or even more than that) of the American F-22 radar station, which has a target detection range with an effective scattering area of ​​one square meter in the region of 240 kilometers.

And what about full-fledged stealth, for which this indicator is even better? Earlier, a senior radar specialist at the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS) said that Captor-E is capable of detecting the F-35 at a distance of about 59 kilometers. If true, the figure is very decent.


However, there is one “but”, and it does not directly relate to the characteristics of the new product. Captor-E is an incredible long-term construction. The first flight of the Eurofighter Typhoon with a new radar performed back in ... 2007. And until now, German Air Force combat vehicles have Captor-M multi-mode pulse-Doppler radars. Recall that the fighter itself was adopted in 2003: at that time, Captor-M, although it was not in the top, was considered quite modern. Time passed, technology changed. It is not surprising that in an interview with the Flug Revue for the year 2019, Luftwaffe Lieutenant General Ingo Gerharts noted that Germany was lagging behind other countries in modernizing its combat aviation. It was about radar stations. The fact that Panavia Tornado aircraft (which the Luftwaffe is also actively operating) is outdated, and so it is clear to everyone for a long time.

And what about other European countries?


For obvious reasons, we will not compare the capabilities of Eurofighter operators with the capabilities of the US Air Force or Navy. Suffice it to say that the Americans have built more than half a thousand F-35s alone, and besides it, there are radars with AFAR, in particular, on the Raptor and the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet. However, it makes sense to compare the state of the German Air Force and the air forces of other European countries.

France. The fate of the direct competitor of the Eurofighter Typhoon - the French fighter Dassault Rafale - was significant. Back in 2012, at the Dassault Aviation aerodrome in Merignac, the first flight built for the French Air Force, the Dassault Rafale serial fighter equipped with an on-board radar with AFAR Thales RBE2-AESA, completed its first flight.


The detection range of radar targets of this type is about 200 kilometers. It is not entirely clear, however, which ones. In general, comparing radar stations is difficult. Obviously, Captor-E has large dimensions, and, according to data from open sources, it is equipped with a large number of transceiver modules: about 1000 versus 1200-1500 for Captor-E radars. Typhoon was already superior to its French "colleague" in flight performance, and in the future it will be ahead in terms of radar. However, so far the French are generally ahead of the Germans.

United Kingdom. Another European country with a very impressive fleet of winged cars. The UK operates over 150 Typhoon and relies heavily on these fighters. Recall that in 2012 the British Air Force completed the modernization of 43 Eurofighter Typhoon to Block 5. The aircraft were equipped with infrared sensors, as well as advanced systems for hitting air and ground targets.


It is not completely clear how the program for equipping Captor-E radar aircraft will develop after the UK withdraws from the European Union. However, this will not affect the country's defense: at least for now. Recall that back in 2018, the first four British F-35B arrived in the territory of Foggy Albion. The purchase plans for these machines can be adjusted, but now the British expect to get 138 F-35 from their overseas partner, that is, the UK will not have to think about updating the fleet for a long time.

Russia. The situation with the German Eurofighter Typhoon resembles what is happening in the Russian Federation. Russia has long wanted to be armed with a fighter with a radar with AFAR, however, as of today, the aerospace forces probably have no such vehicles. The presence of a radar with an active phased array antenna in the MiG-35 has not been confirmed in the Russian VKS version, and the first production Su-57 crashed during tests in December last year.


The de facto most advanced in this regard can be considered the Su-35S, which has a radar with a passive phased antenna array (PFAR) "H035 Irbis". Again, we do not undertake to make bold statements, but with a high degree of probability it is inferior in the sum of qualities of Captor-E. At the moment, it makes no sense to judge the capabilities of the Su-57 radar station: so far there are no such vehicles in service.

It's not so bad


As you can see, there is a significant gap between the German Eurofighter Typhoon (and, therefore, the entire Luftwaffe) from the fighters of the most powerful European countries in terms of avionics. France and Great Britain already have fighters equipped with radar with AFAR, while Russia operates many new Su-35S and Su-30SM equipped with radar N035 Irbis and N0011M Bars with PFAR, respectively.

Nevertheless, the German Typhoon cannot be called obsolete. The aircraft boasts excellent flight performance, reduced radar visibility (although it is not a full-fledged stealth), as well as ample opportunities for modernization. The fighter is well armed. Earlier, Germany ordered an MBDA Meteor long-range air-to-air missile, which has an active homing radar and a ramjet engine, which allows maintaining a high flight speed of the missile until the moment the enemy is defeated.


To defeat ground targets, Luftwaffe fighters will be able to use the latest Brimstone missile, also equipped with an active radar seeker, which allows to hit moving targets with great accuracy. Moreover, one Typhoon is able to take up to eighteen such products: the mass of the rocket is only 50 kilograms.

Thus, the Captor-E radar installation will complete the transformation of the German Typhoon into a fighter that meets all the requirements of the current time, except for indicators of stealth.
Author:
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Bar1
    Bar1 6 July 2020 05: 23 New
    +3
    and ours, that afar is not needed or what?
    1. barin
      barin 6 July 2020 07: 43 New
      13
      Yes, we need, but so far behind in development.
    2. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 6 July 2020 08: 30 New
      -1
      We can’t do it yet. The lag in microelectronics from the West is enormous.
      1. Genry
        Genry 6 July 2020 10: 16 New
        0
        Quote: Grazdanin
        The lag in microelectronics from the West is enormous.

        Do not confuse the household and specialized ....
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 6 July 2020 10: 21 New
          +9
          I do not confuse. There is simply no household.
          1. Genry
            Genry 6 July 2020 10: 29 New
            +1
            Quote: Grazdanin
            I do not confuse. There is simply no household.

            The household has lagged behind - import has suppressed.
            And in specialized imports are very limited.
            Try to prove that all Russian weapons are built using backward electronics.
        2. kris_67
          kris_67 6 July 2020 15: 44 New
          -1
          Both back and forth
      2. Passing
        Passing 6 July 2020 16: 32 New
        +4
        Quote: Grazdanin
        The lag in microelectronics from the West is enormous.

        Colossal at the production, and not at the scientific and engineering level.
        PPM for AFAR we have our own design. And the delays were apparently caused by sanctions and in this regard, due to the impossibility of ordering a series of key element base on the side, and the inability to buy a "factory" for its production.
        The most expensive, highly intelligent part - microprocessors are also of our own design. Yes, they are several years behind the western civilian flagships, but for the military field they are more than comparable to the western military. True manufactured in Taiwan ...
        The controllers for the GOS and other automation seem to have slipped on the Internet too, although I don’t know how it is in real products.
        NVD of domestic production, at least it used to be.
        In thermal imagers, almost all matrices are imported, although one developer boasted of achievements, but it is not known how much this is really released right now.
        In LCD monitors, all matrices are imported, it is clear here, the volumes for equipping the equipment are scanty, own production is unrealistic for economic reasons.
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 6 July 2020 16: 38 New
          -5
          Quote: Passing by
          delays were apparently caused by sanctions and in this regard, due to the impossibility of ordering a series of key element base on the side, and the inability to buy a "factory" for its production.

          Microelectronics is a subsection of electronics related to the study and production of electronic components with geometric dimensions of characteristic elements of the order of several micrometers or less.
        2. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 6 July 2020 16: 55 New
          -4
          The first AFAR appeared back in the 90s, how it works and the design, to all who need it, is already clear. The question is in implementation. The fact that we can do a 2-3 ton AFAR radar has no doubt that the problem is to create a usable fighter, and in serial. The problem is precisely in microelectronics, for it we do not have a scientific, non-engineering, or industrial base.
          1. Passing
            Passing 6 July 2020 17: 21 New
            +3
            Microelectronics is not only "machine tools", it is also fundamental science and applied science, which practically merges with engineering in advanced products. It is impossible to separate one from the other.
            Therefore, for such advanced things as APM for AFAR, thermal imagers, the scientific fundamental and applied aspects are as if primary, and production is already secondary, adapts to them. But iPhones can be riveted according to pre-worked out patterns. There, the production is primary. They mastered a new process technology, it became possible to design a processor with greater performance and lower power consumption.
            quote = Grazdanin] problem create usable in fighter [/ quote]
            So they did, both for the MiG and for the Su-57, no worse than the western ones. The question is only with seriality.
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 6 July 2020 17: 23 New
              -3
              I, like a radio engineer by education, have blood from my eyes from what you write. I will not torment myself in a discussion with you, all the best.
              1. Passing
                Passing 6 July 2020 17: 42 New
                +6
                And to you the same, but as an honest person I want to warn you, your cowardly escape is very short-sighted, I’m not going to disappear from this site, and will traumatize your eyes more than once, and if I write nonsense, it would be wiser to convince me once, I am quite susceptible to arguments than endure the torment for many decades. wink
            2. Sckepsis
              Sckepsis 13 July 2020 07: 55 New
              0

              the fundamental and applied scientific aspect is primary, and production is secondary,

              And here it is exactly the opposite. What difference does it make that you can develop there even on diamond, if production only pulls silicon of the 80s? As a person involved in all this, I say: Russia’s lag is measured by dozens of generations, and much rests precisely on the technological base. Well, if only we are not talking about the domestic ECB from China.
          2. 6895
            6895 6 July 2020 19: 58 New
            +1
            So tell me, China had a scientific, engineering, production base. Probably for the start, or rather for the resumption of large-scale work, Russia now has better conditions than China at the beginning, because at least the scientific and engineering base is not so bad. We need money and time, nothing supernatural. At the end of the 80s, he had practice and some time before the collapse of the USSR he worked on the flagship of the USSR microelectronics NPO Integral in Minsk. A huge association, a serious production base, a design bureau, a social base, the best memories. Already in 87-88, the association introduced plastic cards for cashless payments in a huge food complex for workers. In the late 80s, they bought new robots for the production of microcircuits in Germany, unfortunately no one needed anything, they ruined such a country.
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 6 July 2020 20: 02 New
              -4
              Quote: 6895
              Russia now has better conditions than China at the beginning, because at least the scientific and engineering base is not so bad.

              Are you crazy? My neighbor died a year and a half ago, he designed cartridge factories.
              1. 6895
                6895 6 July 2020 23: 04 New
                +1
                Mordovian humor is somehow not very. It is clear that not from the beginning of Chinese civilization, but from 1990-92, the beginning of the introduction of new corporate policies and the steady growth of the economy.
                1. Mordvin 3
                  Mordvin 3 6 July 2020 23: 24 New
                  0
                  Quote: 6895
                  and from 1990-92 g,

                  Yes, we still at the beginning of the zero neighing over Chinese goods.
            2. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 6 July 2020 20: 13 New
              -5
              China has 60% of the world's mining of rare earth metals, which they banned from exporting, so they have electronics production from around the world. And there are 2 huge differences between electronics manufactured in China by foreign companies and manufactured by Chinese companies.
              Russia has every chance to become the world's No. 2 economy in a maximum of 10 years, not to become a leading country in microelectronics. But not with the current government.
              1. EvilLion
                EvilLion 6 July 2020 23: 41 New
                +2
                And there it is. Come on, dance hopopa.
              2. free_flier
                free_flier 8 July 2020 10: 57 New
                +2
                Something you didn’t come out of your eyes with blood for a long time ... quickly put on a pan and rushed ...
          3. Skifotavr
            Skifotavr 6 July 2020 22: 51 New
            -2
            The problem with the Russian military AFAR radars is much simpler and more commonplace - AFAR technology is very expensive, which is why their mass production is released on the brakes. And the fact that its electronic products are heavier than Western ones, and even have imported components (in fact, they are cheap Chinese, as they refuse to sell their best cunning and brazen friends in Russia), has long been reconciled to this in Russia.
          4. EvilLion
            EvilLion 6 July 2020 23: 40 New
            0
            And what do you have to do with Russia?
        3. silver_roman
          silver_roman 24 August 2020 10: 34 New
          0
          It seems that they talked about solving the issue of teplakov on the armature, and if this is really so, then the issue was partially resolved with the matrices. Previously, the French used. On the turntables like our PNV stand, though the red eyes of the pilots from there. But it seems to me that there is a clear goal to move away from imports in the main directions. But what concerns microelectronics, it is not clear. In principle, we have Baikals, but they are for a citizen. Is there something for the military?
    3. iouris
      iouris 6 July 2020 12: 19 New
      -5
      All questions to Rogozin.
    4. iouris
      iouris 25 August 2020 13: 17 New
      0
      "I have a desire to buy a horse, but I have no opportunity ..."
  2. Mitroha
    Mitroha 6 July 2020 06: 55 New
    0
    Obviously, Captor-E has large dimensions, and, according to data from open sources, it is equipped with a large number of transceiver modules: about 1000 versus 1200-1500 for Captor-E radars

    Author, correct, fill this sentence with meaning wink
    Again we do not undertake to make bold statements, however, with a high degree of probability it is inferior in the sum of qualities of Captor-E.

    And it looks like a quote from the Western press. We don’t know anything, but worse. Do not know, do not write, everything is very simple
  3. Maks1995
    Maks1995 6 July 2020 09: 00 New
    +2
    Eee ...
    if the detection is 240 kilometers., and the stealth is 59 kilometers. this is not bad for AFAR, why did you often write earlier that both ours and them have detection for 400 km, and stealth - 100 km ??:
    And why, after many years of PR about our super AFAR, it is again written that we don’t have AFAR, only PFAR ???

    Is the info from the article true, who will tell?
    1. barin
      barin 6 July 2020 09: 48 New
      10
      Quote: Max1995
      Why did they often write earlier that both ours and their detection are 400 km away, and stealth 100 km?

      About 400 km were written with an EPR of 20 sq.m
      1. Maks1995
        Maks1995 6 July 2020 11: 14 New
        0
        OK. Thank.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 6 July 2020 23: 42 New
        -2
        Why are you lying?
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 6 July 2020 10: 11 New
      +5
      Quote: Max1995
      Is the info from the article true, who will tell?

      According to the PFAR, the USSR was the first Mig-31 in 1981. We don’t have AFAR, we have only 20-year PR and chatter on this topic. It should have been at Mig-35. But in fact there is an extremely archaic slit, now the first Su-57 is announced. But so far there are no combat sides. We are waiting, sir.
      By detection range, a lot depends on the angle of the target, sector, and EPR of the target. And then you need to separate advertising from reality. This applies, of course, not only to ours.
      However, there are no problems with the range of air targets in our PFAR (especially Irbis).
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 6 July 2020 11: 49 New
        0
        Quote: Odyssey
        on the detection range - a lot depends on the angle of the target, sector, EPR of the target.


        Add radar power
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 6 July 2020 12: 23 New
          0
          Undoubtedly.
        2. Kolka Semenov
          Kolka Semenov 6 July 2020 12: 49 New
          +2
          The author of the article is strikingly illiterate! How can we talk about the superiority of Kaptor over Irbis without understanding the features of the PFAR and AFAR?

          Kaptor sees a target with an EPR of 1m2 = 240 km.

          Irbis EPR 3m2 = 400 km. 1m2 = ~ 340 km.

          AFAR is superior to PFAR in theoretical noise immunity (which still needs to be implemented) and in theory, in terms of its possible weight - it is stupid much easier.
          At the same time, it loses by the loss of the useful signal: you need more power, emnip, in the region of 15-25% for the same result and, as a result, a larger canvas size for the same result, and therefore a larger nose fairing with all the inevitable consequences.
          As long as anti-ballistic missiles with GaN are not installed on the radar, it would be an o-very big assumption to say that AFAR is superior to SPAR.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 6 July 2020 12: 51 New
            +1
            according to the possible weight - it is stupidly much lighter.


            The cooling system in the diagram is not conventionally shown? On AFAR it is a vital necessity.
            1. Kolka Semenov
              Kolka Semenov 6 July 2020 12: 52 New
              +1
              On AFAR with GeAs - possible. GaN can be dispensed with by air cooling (in theory).
          2. Passing
            Passing 6 July 2020 16: 38 New
            -2
            Quote: Kolka Semyonov
            AFAR exceeds PFAR in theoretical noise immunity (which still needs to be implemented)

            As far as I understand, I’m not an electronic engineer), if you made a working AFAR, then it will be a priori more interference-proof before the PFAR. For it has a narrow radiation pattern, and not numerous wide petals.
            1. Hexenmeister
              Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 17: 01 New
              0
              The minimum width of the radiation pattern depends only on the dimensions of the antenna and the wavelength, and does not depend on the "afarity"! And the side lobes are so crafty, their low level is above a certain one only due to the expansion of the main lobe and the loss in antenna gain.
              1. Passing
                Passing 6 July 2020 17: 33 New
                -1
                Quote: Hexenmeister
                the width of the radiation pattern depends only on the dimensions of the antenna and the wavelength, and does not depend on the "afarity"!

                I've heard from my ear that for a classic radar with a decrease in the radiation pattern, the proportion of side lobes increases, hence, in practice, the beam width of the PFAR will always be more than theoretically possible, and with side lobes. But afar, with perfect performance, will have the minimum beam width possible in theory, and without side lobes at all.
                1. Hexenmeister
                  Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 17: 42 New
                  -1
                  and without side lobes at all.
                  Only mathematics absolutely disagrees with this!
                  1. Passing
                    Passing 6 July 2020 18: 00 New
                    0
                    Maybe I'm confused with the CAR.
                    Digital beamforming based on the fast Fourier transform operation [5] [6] [7], which makes it possible to form an orthogonal system of so-called secondary spatial channels in which the maximum radiation pattern of one channel coincides with the zeros of the others, is most widely used.

                    This little idea about the CARs from the wiki, doesn’t it mean zero petals? I do not state, but ask.
                    And besides, the current AFAR, if I don't confuse anything, have controlled petals, i.e. you can simply "move / muffle" the petal looking at the interference. Is PFAR capable of this?
                    1. Hexenmeister
                      Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 20: 14 New
                      0
                      The description is primitive, it is better only through mathematics, and this does not speak of zero petals. As they said a long time ago, if it wanders somewhere, it will arrive elsewhere, and with regard to the side lobes, this is true. And most importantly, a muffled petal will not give anything, many do not believe in this, but in vain.
          3. Odysseus
            Odysseus 6 July 2020 19: 39 New
            +1
            Quote: Kolka Semyonov
            Irbis EPR 3m2 = 400 km. 1m2 = ~ 340 km.

            Irbis is certainly a great radar in terms of range (though a healthy bastard), but your numbers, let's say, are somewhat exaggerated smile Even for the sector 10 ° x10 °.
            1. Hexenmeister
              Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 20: 19 New
              0
              On the developer's website, these are the numbers for the "three meters", and for the export version wink
      2. Liam
        Liam 6 July 2020 12: 05 New
        +2
        Quote: Odyssey
        According to PFAR, the USSR was the first Mig-31 in 1981

        The AN / FPQ-16 Perimeter Acquisition Radar Attack Characterization System (PARCS or EPARCS) [1] [2] is a powerful phased-array radar system located in North Dakota. It is the second most powerful phased array radar system in the US Air Force's fleet of missile warning and space surveillance systems.

        AN / FPQ-16 PARCS


        Country of origin
        US
        Introduced
        1975
        1. Hexenmeister
          Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 12: 29 New
          +2
          phased-array radar system located in North Dakota.
          and which fighter did it stand on? wink
        2. Odysseus
          Odysseus 6 July 2020 12: 30 New
          +2
          Quote: Liam
          The AN / FPQ-16

          Of course, this refers to a fighter.
          1. Liam
            Liam 6 July 2020 13: 12 New
            -1
            And what is the next Soviet / Russian fighter used PFAR?
            1. Hexenmeister
              Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 13: 19 New
              +1
              And at what next
              The next of the series was the Su-30MKI
              1. Liam
                Liam 6 July 2020 13: 53 New
                -1
                I wonder why they were not put on the Mig-29 / Su-27. And only after 20 years and on the export machine.
                You do not know ... PFAR is used on foreign fighters?
                1. Hexenmeister
                  Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 14: 03 New
                  +2
                  With the MiG-29 I will not say, but the Su-27 it was essentially a temporary option, it was necessary to saturate the troops with new equipment, and as soon as it came out into the light, it already needed modernization under multipurpose shelling, and at the exit there was already a T-10M, where is it everything was, and then it was what it was, and everything that was done with the Su-27 was "easy and cheap" modernization for the N-001V, and the T-10M line was just continued in the Su-30MKI.
                2. Odysseus
                  Odysseus 6 July 2020 17: 38 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Liam
                  I wonder why they were not put on the Mig-29 / Su-27. And only after 20 years and on the export machine.

                  Because you can’t shove the unbeatable. A screen is such a fool weighing more than a ton and with an antenna diameter of more than a meter. How to shove it in Mig-29)
                  The barrier was originally built in conjunction with the Mig-31, as the highest-priority airborne interception system to destroy the carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic before launch and reconnaissance.
                  MiG-29 and Su-27 passed through the same competition for a promising fighter (PFI), there the technical task did not provide for tasks under the PFAR, but provided for dominance on the battlefield in a maneuverable aerial combat. And everything was done urgently, on the first MiG-29 radars from the MiG-23 were put in general.
                  There was multichannel firing under the requirements (Hexenmeister writes everything correctly), so after taking it into service, it was immediately necessary to refine the Su-27 and especially the Mig-29.
                  And then everything fell apart. Irbis, however, this was done almost 20 years later, on the money of the Indians, and under their requirements. It was already possible to make everything more miniature.
                  1. Hexenmeister
                    Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 17: 48 New
                    -1
                    there the technical task did not provide for tasks under the PFAR
                    Everything seemed to be more complicated there, and for the Su-27, an electronically controlled grating was developed in one plane and mechanical in the other (like this), but it didn’t work, and in order not to delay the time, they put the Cassegrain antenna, it was a long time ago, who can remember probably the development details ...
                    1. Odysseus
                      Odysseus 6 July 2020 19: 28 New
                      0
                      Quote: Hexenmeister
                      but it didn’t work, and in order not to delay the time, they put the Cassegrain antenna, it was a long time ago, figs who probably already remember the details of the development ...

                      In the 70s it was not technically possible to enter PFAR into the Su-27, and even more so the Mig-29, while retaining the potential for aerial combat .. In the late 80s, such attempts were made under the Su-27M, but you write correctly, you did not enter in time (and already the general mess began). According to MiG-29M, EMNIP, and there were no such plans. There you need a relatively miniature radar.
                      Until now, the MiG-35 rushing between the SHCHAR and AFAR.
                  2. Liam
                    Liam 6 July 2020 17: 53 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Odyssey
                    then everything fell apart. Irbis, this was done almost 20 years later, on the money of the Indians, and under their requirements

                    Well yes. They began to switch to PFAR for fighters (MiG-31 is a separate issue. And as a fighter and like PFAR) when everyone else understood that PFAR was a dead end and began to switch to AFAR intensively.
                    1. Hexenmeister
                      Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 17: 56 New
                      +2
                      began to intensively switch to AFAR
                      Yeah, and made the Irbis, which, in terms of detection range, surpasses any afar, with a turning blade, which the Americans do not have. The so-called afar is just a type of antenna, not a type of radar!
                      1. Liam
                        Liam 6 July 2020 19: 09 New
                        +3
                        To understand why all the aircraft developers (including Russian ones) have been moving for 10 years already to this afar. Are all such fools?
                      2. Hexenmeister
                        Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 20: 07 New
                        +2
                        What if it is so? You can increase the detection range as it is done in the "Barrier", or you can primitively raise the power through the AFAR, losing efficiency and sensitivity.
                    2. Kolka Semenov
                      Kolka Semenov 6 July 2020 21: 51 New
                      +1
                      Without ever denying your innocence (I even posed a plus for you), I still believe that the future lies with AFAR. If the technology is GaN, then you can throw out the emitter and cooling, and so that it rotates by 200 degrees. The VFAR technology has been brought to the Sukhoi Design Bureau to perfection and nothing can be squeezed out of it.
                    3. Hexenmeister
                      Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 22: 17 New
                      0
                      Lattices are just put on Sukhoi aircraft, and they are developed not at all there. About the future for AFAR - well, it is very doubtful. For me, the main characteristic of the radar is that it can and cannot. What do they show us all the time? A flat grid, even an AFAR, can it turn the beam 90 degrees? Not!!! Therefore, in their present form they are completely hopeless! A primitive solution promoted by advertising!
                    4. Kolka Semenov
                      Kolka Semenov 6 July 2020 22: 19 New
                      0
                      Okay, NIIP Tikhomirova made Irbis.

                      For the rest, justification is needed, since I did not quite understand you.
                    5. Hexenmeister
                      Hexenmeister 6 July 2020 22: 48 New
                      +1
                      Everything is determined by the terms of reference! You need a primitive cheap radar for a light fighter - sculpt on the basis of a flat AFAR canvas, cheap and cheerful! We need a system that will "shut everyone up", cover the group and provide information, here we need electronic pumping for plus / minus 90 degrees in azimuth, a highly concealed radar station on a "complex signal" that receives maximum detection ranges. Will the existing AFAR be able to realize this? No.
                    6. Kolka Semenov
                      Kolka Semenov 6 July 2020 23: 36 New
                      0
                      Well I do not know. kmk, you have to pay for any technical solution and anyone has a flip side. It is possible that AFAR is only better in one parameter - size and weight, but in aviation this is not the most important thing, there they fight for every gram. I understand that AFAR is just a canvas, and the hardware should be considered separately, but still there are some advantages of this technology, and when they switch to other materials, it is possible that AFAR will have advantages, IMHO.
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 7 July 2020 08: 54 New
    0
    OK. Thank.
  • Odysseus
    Odysseus 6 July 2020 10: 18 New
    +2
    Not very clear article title. Why with tears in my eyes? The Germans that paid an exorbitant price for the modernization of the Typhoons? Quite the contrary, they are not particularly in a hurry and do not pay much.
    Essentially, Typhoon with AFAR and Meteor will be a serious machine. True, as practice has shown, is very expensive to operate.
    1. sharp-lad
      sharp-lad 6 July 2020 20: 44 New
      -1
      Why with tears in my eyes? Yes, just - WAIT !!!! smile hi
  • 5-9
    5-9 7 July 2020 12: 07 New
    +1
    What nonsense about Kaptor's superiority over Irbis? Irbis is the most powerful radar in the world today with the longest detection range. Well, in addition to range, there are many more parameters, but power is power ....
    AFAR is not a panacea and not an automatic superiority over PFAR.
    Given the size and energy of the Su-27 line, we don’t need an AFAR for him right now (considering its price). For the Mig-35, yes you need an AFAR and without it, neither VKS (I hope) is needed, nor foreign customers.
  • Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 13 July 2020 07: 56 New
    0
    The author so presses on Afar as if Pfar is much worse ...
  • Crabong
    Crabong 3 October 2020 14: 31 New
    0
    Compare the noses of the Su-35 and the F-35 for example ... What are the dimensions of the radar?