Military Review

Media: Chinese J-20 will hide the "cold plasma"

67
The contract for the purchase of China fighter Su-35 has not yet been ratified. The Russian military explains this by the fact that “the domestic Air Force urgently needs to equip Su-35 with new batches, and China already has its own sophisticated avionics systems,” writes club.mil.news.sina.com.cn.


Prototype fighter J-20

“In 2015, China demonstrated the flight of its own advanced version of the J-11 (Su-27 - probably, we are talking about J-11D with a radar with active PAR, approx. Military Parity), which embarrassed Russian negotiators,” the resource notes.

In addition, China "has seriously advanced in the creation of plasma stealth devices," the author writes.

“Plasma technologies sound like science fiction, but they have their history. At the beginning of the 1960-ies in the Soviet Union began to explore the possibilities of plasma for the absorption of electromagnetic waves. The basic principle of this technology is that the plasma generated by the antenna element becomes an insulator and does not reflect back the radio waves emitted by the enemy. China has now made a breakthrough in this area, ” - quotes an article Military Parity.

According to him, "the Chinese research institutes have created a theoretical basis for creating a" cold plasma ", that is, an ionized field around the aircraft."

In the future, "the newest J-20 fighter will be equipped with plasma stealth technology, and now it does not seem to be fiction, because the theoretical basis for creating a cold generator of non-equilibrium plasma has already been worked out," the author reports.

Photos used:
errymath.blogspot.com
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. John_f
    John_f 24 May 2016 12: 05
    +46
    you can't sell anything to the Chinese .. they immediately make their own copy or clone and put it up under their own brand ... it is not yet known how it will come back to haunt us ... the "cold plasma" technology was also cut off here ...
    1. Vladimyrych
      Vladimyrych 24 May 2016 12: 19
      +19
      Quote: John_f
      you can’t sell anything to the Chinese ..

      Absolutely to the point.
      1. oldseaman1957
        oldseaman1957 24 May 2016 12: 30
        +5
        Quote: Vladimir
        the "cold plasma" technology was also cut off here ...
        - This is not entirely true, but in the right direction you think ...
        1. Inok10
          Inok10 24 May 2016 12: 43
          +14
          Quote: oldseaman1957
          Quote: Vladimir
          the "cold plasma" technology was also cut off here ...
          - This is not entirely true, but in the right direction you think ...

          ... well, how to say, while judging from the article:
          According to him, "the Chinese research institutes have created a theoretical basis for creating a" cold plasma ", that is, an ionized field around the aircraft."
          ... the conversation is about theory, before practice, oh oh how ... hi ... we have worked out these technologies back in 1984, a quote about the Meteorite RC:
          Of key importance to increasing the missile’s ability to break through air defense was the achievement of a low level of radar visibility. A new special electronic installation was created that did not have world analogues. The principle of its action was based on the effect of absorption of external electromagnetic radiation. When creating an electronic installation, the results of scientific developments and experiments on masking spacecraft at altitudes of over 100 km were used. Such experiments were carried out by the Central Design Bureau and the Research Institute of Thermal Processes (now the MV Keldysh Research Center). However, the creation of an on-board electronic installation for masking a relatively large-sized aircraft, such as a cruise missile flying at an altitude of 20–25 km, was a completely new and challenging task. Even research has not been conducted in this area before. Calculations showed that the electronic installation will have a large power consumption and high voltage on the executive bodies. This created additional complexity in the conditions of limited capabilities of onboard power sources for the cruise missile and the need to ensure electromagnetic compatibility of the special electronic installation with other electronic systems.
          The development of the electronic installation was carried out by the Research Institute of Thermal Processes under the supervision of Vitaly Ievlev, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The installation was created and passed a full range of bench and field flight tests. During flight tests of the Meteorite rocket, when the electronic installation was switched on, airborne radar indicators showed a decrease in the brightness of the target’s mark, unstable tracking and the disappearance of the mark. Source: http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/meteorit/meteorit.shtml

          ... the main thing is highlighted, now on this topic and specifically on the practical application of plasma ... everything went under deep vultures ... and this is right ... hi
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 24 May 2016 12: 53
            +3
            Quote: Inok10
            everything went under deep vultures ... and this is right ...

            ... and it has always been so.
            bully
            here some comrades are trying to find out with an incomprehensible goal -
            4 May 2016 11: 23 | Anti-ship ballistic missile DF-21D (China) - http://topwar.ru/index.php?do=lastcomments&userid=33242


            also, about "plasma masking" and "plasma cover". This, oddly enough, also takes place ...
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            This can not be in principle, according to the laws of physics

            Quote: Rus2012
            it is just according to the laws of physics!
            For example, a plasma cloud is placed on the path of the warhead. And how - this is already know-how and vulture ...

            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Where, in this case, is the electromagnetic field generator?
            ... "the right place at the right time" laughing bully
            1. Inok10
              Inok10 24 May 2016 13: 13
              +5
              Quote: Rus2012
              here some comrades are trying to find out with an incomprehensible goal -

              Quote: Rus2012
              Quote: Rus2012
              it is just according to the laws of physics!
              For example, a plasma cloud is placed on the path of the warhead. And how - this is already know-how and vulture ...

              ... wink ... let drool further ... here's another Meteorite from the same source:
              Tests of an ultra-long rocket posed a number of new challenges for the technical leadership. The range of the Kapustin Yar training ground was not enough. On the flight path from the Volga to Balkhash (the Groshevo-Turgai-Terekhta-Makat-Sagiz-Emba highway), a very exotic (for a rocket with such a speed) 180 ° turn maneuver had to be carried out.
              ... at 3500 km / h a turn of 12,5 meters 6,4 tones at 180 ?! ... right, only when around her ... bully
              ... and another patent from the distant 1995, to a tropospheric communication station using a plasma formation ... hi
              1. Telakh
                Telakh 24 May 2016 14: 34
                +2
                This technology has been known for a long time. Kalashnikov also wrote in "Battle for Heaven" at the beginning of the XNUMXs.
                After all, a radio beam, falling into a plasma cloud, interacts with charged plasma particles and gives them part of its energy, while fading away. In addition, the radio wave tends to go around the plasma formation, and therefore the signal reflected from the MiG is weakened even more. At the same time, the machine itself remains aerodynamically complete, a real fighter - unlike the American crosses “a mantis with a motorcycle” that can operate only at night.
                As Academician Koroteev told the world, all this is the operation of equipment of only the first generation. Generators of the second generation of its center can make it so that the operator of an enemy radar appears on the screen at once several false reflections-ghosts at different heights and ranges.
          2. Alex777
            Alex777 24 May 2016 13: 17
            +2
            And the Chinese probably in the 90s and cut ...
          3. Verdun
            Verdun 24 May 2016 14: 12
            +1
            .. the main thing is highlighted, now on this topic and specifically on the practical application of plasma ... everything went under deep vultures ... and this is right ...
            There is nothing particularly secret there. And talking about stealth technologies at the expense of plasma is for those who poorly taught physics. Yes, you cannot look through the plasma layer. But at the same time, the plasma itself shines on the screens of the locators cleaner than the New Year tree. This became clear even when at the Moscow Aviation Institute there were developments to place plasma generators on an airplane glider to achieve hypersonic speeds. About thirty years ago, or even more ...
            1. FID
              FID 24 May 2016 15: 57
              +4
              Quote: Verdun
              This became clear even when at the Moscow Aviation Institute there were developments to place plasma generators on an airplane glider to achieve hypersonic speeds. About thirty years ago, or even more ...

              Cold plasma is a bit different ... They also planned to equip Tu-160 with a cold plasma generator ...
    2. razmik72
      razmik72 24 May 2016 12: 32
      +15
      Quote: John_f
      you can't sell anything to the Chinese .. they immediately make their own copy or clone and put it up under their own brand ... it is not yet known how it will come back to haunt us ... the "cold plasma" technology was also cut off here ...

      I am sure that this is all idle talk, the Chinese do not have such technology, if they had, China quietly put it on its planes, and not tryndel on the Internet. China does not need to sell military equipment, since it quickly copies and creates competition for Russian weapons in that same market segment due to limited arms market.
      1. Asadullah
        Asadullah 24 May 2016 13: 14
        +3
        I am sure that this is all idle talk, the Chinese do not have such technology


        Yes and no. All developed countries are working on plasma, cold or hot. But the fact is that the concept of "cold plasma does not mean anything, because hot plasma is what starts a thermonuclear reaction. In ICP, which in theory can be used in an aircraft, sufficient density is more important. But in any case, a blanket is needed. Otherwise, all energy losses will be spent on creating a layer of vacuum between the object and the atmosphere. In any case, such a device will be a turning point in the history of mankind. Many times more significant than the discovery of a chain reaction. The first creator of such will completely solve the energy problems of his country That is, if the PRC suddenly refuses to purchase oil and gas, then they have made a breakthrough. laughing
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 24 May 2016 13: 15
      +1
      It seems that they are knocking down the price of Su -35. They’ll do it, let's see.
    4. YURIY888
      YURIY888 24 May 2016 14: 36
      0
      Hollowness !!!!! Wait and see!!!
  2. Ami du peuple
    Ami du peuple 24 May 2016 12: 06
    +4
    writes the resource club.mil.news.sina.com.cn.
    The resource is Chinese and, in fact, that’s it. smile Cold plasma is, of course, good, but what about the engines for the J-20? Something is not heard of Chinese progress in this area. Or are our AL-41F1 going to buy? With copying, they somehow went wrong ..
    1. Maxom75
      Maxom75 24 May 2016 12: 16
      +5
      the only issue was with the cold plasma, it did not reflect radio waves either from the object enveloped in it or coming from it, so it was more suitable for ballistic missiles than aircraft. So we did not go further, and the Americans followed the path of "broken lines-stealth".
      Engines are the most difficult, but the AFAR is not simple. China is big and does not spare money on science, I think it can catch up, but most likely it will copy or copy
    2. Tibidokh
      Tibidokh 24 May 2016 13: 01
      +9
      Quote: Ami du peuple
      The Chinese cannot really copy our AL-41F1

      AL-41F1 did not sell to the Chinese, you mislead the members of the forum.
      The Chinese developed their WS-10 not only with an eye on the AL-31FN sold to them, but also on the American F110 (or rather, its sibling SFM56). China received mattress engines in the 80s (before the events in Tiananmen) to evaluate performance in order to subsequently purchase a batch of these engines. When the US wanted the engines back, the Chinese said ... the engines were destroyed by fire!
      Compare the appearance of the AL-31FN and what is called its copy. You will see that there are significant design differences.
      Imagine that the F119-PW-100 engine will fall into our hands. Are we going to fully copy it ?! No! We will take all engine technology, where mattresses are ahead of us, and reasonably compatible with our technologies. At the exit we get a great engine.
      As a Sinist, I constantly live in Chinese forums. The Chinese are soberly evaluating their strength. Their WS-10 now can not compete with the engine for the Su-35. But with the AL-31 it can already compete. The assigned and overhaul life reached 1000 and 500 hours, respectively, against 2000 and 1000 hours on the AL-31FN. Yes, WS-10 is less reliable, it has some problems with surging and build quality, but believe me, everyone who is guilty has already been shot by the party. am The most important minus so far, you will not believe ... the price of WS-10A is higher than that of AL-31FN one and a half times. belay That is why the AL-10FN, and not the WS-31, will be offered to foreign customers J-10.
      Their generals are already expressing disappointment that, in their opinion, China hastened to purchase 399 AL-31FN engines in 2013. At the end of 2015, it was decided to equip J-10 and J-11 with Taihan (WS-10) engines. Engine tests are still ongoing. There is already a version of the WS-10G with a controlled thrust vector (that's why, among other things, they need the Su-35 wink ) and a thrust of 14000 kg, which will be installed on the J-11D with AFAR.
      By the way, critical AFAR technologies were obtained thanks to the participation of Chinese specialists in the development of AFAR for ... Raptor! Naturally, the technology immediately got to the PRC.

      Therefore, your skepticism about Chinese engines is inappropriate. Unfortunately, having sold the Chinese the Su-27 and the documentation for it, as well as the AL-31FN engines, we have generated a very serious competitor, it will be incredibly difficult for us to compete with it.
      1. yehat
        yehat 24 May 2016 17: 12
        +1
        I believe that the Chinese would soon acquire a similar engine anyway from different places. For example, the purchase of Israeli Kfirs with engines from phantoms. Therefore, I do not consider the decision to sell a mistake. But I think that it was necessary to link it more tightly with the schedule of work on product 30 for t50.
        1. Tibidokh
          Tibidokh 24 May 2016 18: 59
          0
          Quote: yehat
          For example, buying Israeli Kfirs with engines from phantoms

          I doubt that Israel would act without the consent of the United States. Maybe they may not coordinate foreign policy with the United States at key points, but the United States spends a lot of money on maintaining Israel’s defense capabilities and would not be happy to receive technology from China when an embargo was imposed on the latter.
          Quote: yehat
          Therefore, I do not consider the decision to sell a mistake.

          Your opinion has a right to be, but I completely disagree with you. hi
          Quote: yehat
          it was necessary to tightly link with the schedule of work on the product 30 for t50.

          And here I just slightly disagree. I think you shouldn't have given China technology. Gratitude is zero, the Chinese boast that they developed everything on their own, without looking back at foreign technologies. But the Chinese will definitely not buy planes from us in the future. Moreover, some of our customers will be lured away. I don’t know about the designers, but the traders are great. And given that the Communist Party even agrees to suffer significant losses in order to "dump" foreign competitors, China's task of taking away a part of the market from us seems quite achievable.
          With respect!
      2. adept666
        adept666 24 May 2016 19: 55
        0
        By the way, critical AFAR technologies were obtained thanks to the participation of Chinese specialists in the development of AFAR for ... Raptor! Naturally, the technology immediately got to the PRC.
        The USA and the Russian Federation still can’t bring AFAR to their minds (despite the fact that in the field of radar both of them have a huge backlog, including in the PFAR and SHCHAR and the Central African Republic), and the Chinese have mastered mathematics and heterostructures right away. . smile Oh well. And as for AN / APG-77, there’s something more like nonsense that the Chinese took part in the design there. They are just more interested in H035 than nozzles and engines.
        1. Tibidokh
          Tibidokh 25 May 2016 05: 29
          0
          Quote: adept666
          The United States and the Russian Federation still can not bring to mind AFAR

          Northrop Grumman SABR
          AN / APG-63 B2
          AN / APG-63 B3
          AN / APG-79
          AN / APG-80
          AN / APG-77
          AN / APG-81
          AN / APG-82 B1
          AN / APYA-181
          Sorry, but which of the manufactured radars can the USA bring to mind ?! : whites:
          Here, unfortunately, AFAR is only being brought to mind. Beetle-A (E) and H050 are not mass-produced, yet. I hope for PAK DP they will still create something special.
          Quote: adept666
          and the Chinese have mastered right away both mathematics and heterostructures ...

          No, not right away. Mr. Lin (or whatever it is), who participated in the development of the AN / APG-77, "leaked" to China all the information to which he had access. China China has implemented these technologies in its own AFAR, which they have been developing since 2005.
          The Chinese have a saying: 国人 能做 的 , 中国 人 一定 能 做到, if someone could do, and the Chinese can do.
          Quote: adept666
          They are just more interested in H035 than nozzles and engines.

          China has shown interest in the Su-35 just after the 117C demonstration at Airshow China. Naturally, China has a desire to study H035, just like any country has a desire to study the technology of an enemy / partner / competitor, etc.
          1. adept666
            adept666 25 May 2016 08: 03
            0
            Sorry, but which of the manufactured radars can the USA bring to mind ?!
            For example, APG - 79. Report DOT & E FY2012 (year of report), quote:
            The APG-79 AESA radar demonstrated marginal improvements since the previous FOT & E period and provides improved performance relative to the legacy APG-73 radar. However, operational testing does not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in mission accomplishment between F / A-18E / F aircraft equipped with AESA and those
            equipped with the legacy radar.
            • Full development of AESA electronic warfare capability
            remains deferred to later software builds.
            • While SCSs H6E and 23X demonstrate acceptable suitability,
            the AESA radar's reliability continues to suffer from software
            instability despite software upgrades. The radar's failure
            to meet reliability requirements and poor BIT performance
            remain as shortfalls from previous test and evaluation periods.
            • Overall, the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet weapon system
            is operationally effective and suitable for most threat
            environments. However, the platform is not operationally
            effective for use in certain threat environments, the details of
            which are addressed in DOT & E's classified report.
            The radar has been developed since 2000, a 2003 flight prototype. 2012 - The reliability of the radar continues to suffer due to software despite its constant updates. And this is the official letter for general use, that there is another question in the secret report, it seems that the problem is much deeper. And now 2 years pass, the same office, the same characters.
            The Navy has continued to defer development of the AESA's full electronic warfare capability to later software builds and plans to test this capability in SCS H12 and H14.
            Well, and summarizing recommendations from them:
            Status of Previous Recommendations. Per previous recommendations, the Navy should continue to improve
            the reliability and BIT functionality of the AESA radar and develop and characterize the full electronic warfare capability of the APG-79 radar. DOT & E's recommendation to conduct
            an operationally representative end-to-end missile test to demonstrate APG-79 radar and system software support for a multiple AIM-120 missile engagement also remains.
            Something that does not look like a radar brought to mind. As for the AFAR options AN / APG-63 (V) 2/3/4, this is a gradual transformation from AN / APG-63 to AN / APG-79 (more and more modules are taken from version to version from it). Against this background, I’ll just keep silent about Chinese AFARs because something works really, and not in fantasies, it will be possible there by the 30th year, and that’s all optimistic. One example with Pearls is worth ...
            1. Tibidokh
              Tibidokh 25 May 2016 15: 30
              0
              Quote: adept666
              For example, APG - 79. Report DOT & E FY2012 (year of report), quote:

              As I understand it, the problem for the Americans is that they still do not have enough intelligence to develop software that would fully unleash the potential of the APG - 79. In my subjective opinion, it is like developing a fighter flying with overload in 9G, but having problems with the anti-G suit, as a result of the "human" limitation in 7G.
              Quote: adept666
              As for the AFAR options AN / APG-63 (V) 2/3/4, this is a gradual transformation from AN / APG-63 to AN / APG-79 (more and more modules are taken from version to version from it).

              I do not see anything unusual in this. We would call such a unification. From a marketing point of view, this is naturally a minus when the AFAR has a kinship with a slot antenna. From the economic - quite attractive.
              Quote: adept666
              Navy should continue to improve
              the reliability and BIT functionality of the AESA

              Well, naturally problems are identified during operation. There were many who doubted the full functionality of the avionics Su-34. As the operation in Syria has shown, practically any problems can be eliminated. So are the Americans - identify, eliminate, improve.

              Let me remind you the reason for our dispute:
              Quote: adept666
              and the Chinese have mastered right away and mathematics and heterostructures ..

              I did not state that the Chinese made the best AFAR in the world. Or that their AFAR is better than our H050. However, the Chinese have already tested their AFAR on the Jian-11D. It is worth noting that before that the radar was tested on a Su-27, purchased from us. AFAR is being brought to mind. Naturally, they, like the mattresses with us, have difficulties that they solve.
              Here is what I wrote:
              Quote: Tibidokh
              which will be installed on the J-11D with AFAR.
              By the way, critical AFAR technologies were obtained thanks to the participation of Chinese specialists in the development of AFAR for ... Raptor! Naturally, the technology immediately got to the PRC.

              You will not argue that I announced that the Chinese were ahead of us or the Americans in creating the AFAR?
              1. adept666
                adept666 25 May 2016 17: 24
                0
                As I understand it, the problem with the Americans is that they still do not have the mind to develop software that would fully reveal the potential of APG - 79.
                In order to answer this question you need to know what is in classified report. because the concept of a software problem is very broad. For example, it can be an attempt to programmatically solve problems with energy / thermostating (the AFAR based on gallium arsenide has no small problems with this) or problems with errors in signal accumulation, failure of work in certain sectors of the survey. AFAR is a "live" antenna with a bunch of transmitters-receivers, which must be made to work together + difficulties in the production of these modules, since they must be with the most identical parameters on the antenna (which is very difficult to do) and when there are slight differences in their performance characteristics can also be compensated partially by programmatically setting optimization algorithms, etc. And this cannot be attributed to minor problems, since it has not been resolved for almost 10 years.
                I do not see anything unusual in this.
                I’m not saying that it’s bad, that using the operating time is vice versa good, but I said this in the sense that they take the modules and the key ones from the antenna, which itself still suffers from sores and as a result brings them to those stations for which is a donor.
                As the operation in Syria has shown, practically any problems can be eliminated.
                I agree.
                I did not state that the Chinese made the best AFAR in the world. Or that their AFAR is better than our H050. However, the Chinese have already tested their AFAR on the Jian-11D.
                In the US, the APG-77 was tested in 2003 and has not yet been brought to mind. The Chinese love effects and PR and like look, we also have AFAR, but all of them can be said the work on radar began in 92, when our good-natured Phazatron gave them to stick their nose into the Zhuk-8-II radar and even involving work on the Pearls, but when they began to make their SCAR, they used the Pearls to align their station, i.e. they did not even have a design methodology for relatively simple antenna arrays until the early 2000s. AFAR and SHCHAR are two completely different worlds, the USA and Russia have been moving towards this since the late 50s (both in the field of heterostructures and in the field of theory of radar). The French did their AFAR in deep cooperation with Raytheon, otherwise they would have stagnated. The Chinese will not have enough competence in the next 10 years to master a working AFAR, but put it on board and say that it can be anything, but this does not say that it really is.
                You will not argue that I announced that the Chinese were ahead of us or the Americans in creating the AFAR?
                No, of course, I just say that the Chinese are disingenuous as wishful thinking. smile
                1. adept666
                  adept666 25 May 2016 17: 53
                  +1
                  APG-77 tested in USA in 2003
                  Of course 79 (typo) smile
                2. Tibidokh
                  Tibidokh 25 May 2016 18: 24
                  0
                  Quote: adept666
                  The concept of a software problem is a very broad interpretation.

                  Here I pass. I will not argue, because I do not know. Better just to honor you. good
                  Quote: adept666
                  APG-77 tested in USA in 2003, still not brought to mind

                  Well, depending on what is considered "not bringing to mind." I believe that if the APG-77 had very serious problems, it would not have been installed on the F-22. And the F-15 and F-15 would not be equipped with too problematic AFAR. The fact that the current AFAR may not reach the declared characteristics and do not allow to fully implement the principle of stecentric war does not call into question the fact of a sharp increase in the combat potential of AFAR carriers (I do not mean that you are saying otherwise). Once upon a time, electric windows in cars were very unreliable ... wink
                  Another example. At first, the AL-31F resource was 100 hours. But this did not mean that this engine was somehow flawed. He was just ... a baby or something. request Now we sell for export engines from 2000 hours of the assigned resource.
                  Quote: adept666
                  The Chinese love effects and PR

                  Naturally! yes
                  Quote: adept666
                  all of them can be said work on radar began in 92

                  The breakthrough happened in 2004. When Lenovo bought the IBM PSG. Since then, the Chinese have believed in themselves. Even then, I studied in the PRC and saw how China had an understanding that it was time to move from simple copying to our own developments. Naturally, no one will refuse to study foreign analogues. This is where the Chinese need to learn. They study the alien at the slightest opportunity, and theirs, even for friends, is a taboo.
                  What am I saying ... China is a world leader in chemistry, has almost unlimited financial and human resources. Gradually, the traditions of mechanical engineering, machine tools, aircraft design. Experience is gained in materials science. Now I probably agree with the majority of Chinese people that the PRC is doomed to success. And the fact that China has managed to develop an AFAR (albeit not with the best characteristics), and its characteristics are considered worthy at the world level, I have no doubt.
                  There is no doubt ... one envy. crying
                  1. adept666
                    adept666 25 May 2016 19: 16
                    0
                    Well, depending on what is considered "not bringing to mind." I believe that if the APG-77 had very serious problems, it would not have been installed on the F-22. And the F-15 and F-15 would not be equipped with too problematic AFAR.
                    Yes and no. I made a mistake in that comment, I meant APG-79, but not the point. In order to understand the motives, you need to add a little history. The USSR was the first to create a PFAR radar, while we already had a Zaslon in the USA, there were only SHAR (not very bad, but SHAR). The difference between PFAR and AFAR is actually not that big, therefore, in parallel with the PFAR in the USSR, they began to work out the concept of AFAR, i.e. at the moment when we have already seen that the PFAR "yesterday" in the USA was only SHAR. The team of comrade Alferov added fuel to the fire, who was half a step ahead of his German friend Kroemer (a US citizen). And now the United States was faced with the task of resting against PFAR (easier, cheaper) or AFAR (more expensive, more difficult, but more promising). If in PFAR, then when it is put on the F-15 in the USSR, there will already be an AFAR with a probability of 80%, and this is a technological lag. Therefore, we chose AFAR (as if not from a good life). And then the USSR fell and it was no longer for us to AFAR. After the collapse of the alliance, the US aviation practically did not have any opponents, and possible problems with the radar could cover the AWACS, therefore, the USA felt calm and felt all this time, but there were problems with the radar, but there were no threatening opponents either. If in general, then something like that. The working radars would certainly have returned to the SHAR otherwise, but the problems were and remain, which means that they most likely do not reach the declared characteristics.
                    But this did not mean that this engine was somehow flawed.
                    AFAR the future is not even discussed, I’m talking about something else ... the technology is very complicated, it can’t work on my knee. In the United States, they have been developing competencies for almost 20 years, we are about the same and still the truth is somewhere nearby smile
                    They study the alien at the slightest opportunity.
                    We, too. It’s just that China was chosen as a factory and its production was taken there (and many are very technologically advanced), i.e. much was given to look at a freebie, we didn’t get so alas.
                    Gradually, the traditions of mechanical engineering, machine tools, aircraft design.
                    Therefore, I do not deny them the fundamental possibility of creating their own radar with AFAR, but only say that this is not the 10th year to the 25th-30th completely mastered.
                    There is no doubt ... one envy.
                    It is bad to envy, they are not bad, but we harness for a long time and go not fast ...
          2. adept666
            adept666 25 May 2016 08: 53
            +1
            Here is what the same office wrote in a 2013 report on APG-82 (v1):
            The primary emphasis behind the RMP upgrade is to improve the reliability, maintainability, and sustainability of the F-15E radar system while significantly improving the aircraft's
            air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities. As has been the case in similar fighter AESA upgrades (eg, F / A-18 APG-79 AESA), preliminary RMP IOT & E results indicate improved
            operational capabilities, hardware reliability, and system maintainability. However, as has also been the case with similar AESA upgrades, the inability to achieve the level of
            software stability necessary to meet the users' operational mission requirements detracts from the overall effectiveness and mission capability of the F-15E RMP system.
            • The F-15E RMP system software architecture shares significant commonality with that of the F / A 18 APG-79, and the APG-79 has yet to resolve the software stability
            deficiencies identified in its 2007 IOT & E. Therefore, it is unlikely that the Air Force will achieve the stability necessary to achieve the full potential operational capability of the F-15E RMP system unless significant effort and resources are directed towards improved software stability.
            It’s understandable, the technology is one, the names are different simply. hi
            1. Tibidokh
              Tibidokh 25 May 2016 15: 42
              0
              Quote: adept666
              technology is one

              Let me quote another of my early comments on the topic "Foreign press: PAK FA is not a fifth generation fighter".
              Now I will sign almost as a real expert that the F-22 is not a 5th generation aircraft. To do this, try to find fault with the AFAR of this AN / APG-77 (V) 1 aircraft.
              1. So, open the website designation systems and the official sites Northrop Grumman and Raytheon;
              2. We look at the history of the creation of AN / APG-77 (V) 1;
              3. AN / APG-77 (V) 1 - such an upgraded version of AN / APG-77 was created on the basis of technical solutions used to create AFAR AN / APG-80 (which is for F-16E / F). Thus, the latest F-22 radar uses 4th generation technology. A SHAME!

              One could calm down on this, but no. They provoked me very much. angry

              4. AFAR AN / APG-80 (using the technologies of which AN / APG-77 (V) 1 was created for the F-22), created using technologies ... PULSED DOPLER AN / APG-68! Hurray, the enemy is defeated! fellow
              5. Let’s get it so that I don’t suffer ... wink AN / APG-68 is based on the decrepit AN / APG-66. Fuuuu-22!
              6. Thus, the radar AN / APG-77 (V) 1 for F-22 originates with the slot AN / APG-68. But how does he even fly with such a radar ?! belay

              All this is of course a joke. Radar AN / APG-77 (V) 1 and AFAR AN / APG-80 give an idea of ​​the level of development of American science. And I am proud that our scientists can compete with the Americans on equal terms, with less funding.
              But imagine two options for publishing a similar "exhaust" in relation to the radar: Western and domestic.
              We will write - the West is indignant and declares that we are raving.
              The West writes - we are indignant and declare that they are raving ... and in general they have same-sex marriages there. wassat
              There, the Chinese generally stated that our T-14 is significantly inferior to the Ex VT-4.
              This dishonest game of Americans and Kytays in common people is called advertising.

              So you are absolutely right, there is only one technology. And this is normal.
              Thank you for such a substantive debate. hi
        2. Tibidokh
          Tibidokh 25 May 2016 15: 37
          0
          Quote: adept666
          They are just more interested in H035 than nozzles and engines.

          I searched for a long time, but I found my retelling of the content of Chinese forums (where they really dislike me wink )
          But what the experts write about the acquisition of the Su-35 in Chinese forums.
          Work on the thrust vector China began to carry out relatively late. In order to compensate for the weight gain during the modernization of the Jian-10 and Jian-11, not only a more powerful and economical engine is needed, but also the presence of a thrust vector. In 2009, significant problems were revealed with the Taikhan engine (as I understand it, they are trying to make an analog of the AL-31FP).
          In short, the Chinese declare that the Irbis is not as important to them as the 117C. They say that over time they will have an "analogue" of the Su-35, where, unlike the latter, there will be not PFAR, but AFAR. But the Chinese have no desire to develop "maneuverability", efficiency and engine thrust on their own. For this, the Su-35 is being bought.
          Although the Chinese do not deny that their purchase of the Su-35 will make poor advertising of their products, as testifies to the level of their aviation industry not in the best light.
          In addition, as I understand it, for many Chinese, the purchase of the Su-35 is a rather humiliating event. They have already rolled out their lips on Jian-20. Following the example of their recent comparison of the VT-4 and our "Armata", the T-50 was criticized. According to the Chinese man in the street, the PAK FA has no chance against the Jian-20. And then such an embarrassment in the form of the purchase of the Su-35 ... Yoshkin the cat! How is that ?! laughing
          In general, the period that the Chinese themselves set for copying technologies and transferring them to Jian-11V and Jian-20 = 3,5 years. Thumbs up ... But I doubt so fast. request

          BUT! The most important thing for China ... Drum roll! ... belay
          This is to get an idea of ​​the future aviation group of neighboring Asia-Pacific countries in order to create a military advantage over all sorts of Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia.
          Thus, after analyzing the "mood" of the Chinese members of the forum, I came to the conclusion:
          1. China is not such a peaceful country. Surely someone might think that Indonesia will attack China ?!
          2. China does not console itself with the hope that the Jian-11V will be considered more attractive to buyers from the Asia-Pacific region than the Su-35.
          1. gridasov
            gridasov 25 May 2016 16: 15
            +1
            Within the framework of the issue under discussion, it can be said that whoever possesses technology that will allow to detect a target without sending an impulse of indignation will dominate in almost all aspects. Therefore, we can talk a lot about different things, but so far no one has such pulsed-Doppler methods and all sorts of others give rise to optimism. We need technologies based on controlling the density of magnetic power flows. Then the Generator does not send an impulse of disturbance, but only accepts any gamma of the electronic scale. magnetic radiation of any aircraft or object in general. And of course, when someone achieves even the smallest results, we will all feel it. I even think that no one even has the prerequisites for understanding the essence of such physical processes and how to translate them into reality.
            1. Tibidokh
              Tibidokh 25 May 2016 17: 49
              0
              Quote: gridasov
              detect a target without sending an impulse of disturbance

              Interesting idea. drinks
              Only, as for me, there are still three big BUTs:
              1. Without irradiating the target, it is difficult to establish its speed.
              2. The law of conservation of energy, as applied to this situation, means that the detection range is unlikely to be very dependent on the receiver. To a greater extent from the environment in which the aircraft are located and from the power of email. magnetic radiation target.
              3. This problem is partially solved by the use of OLS. But, built on the principles of nonlinear optics, products now cannot provide a detection range comparable even to slotted radars, not to mention the headlamps.

              I admit honestly, I do not understand this problem, I just expressed my opinion. School-level knowledge has already been forgotten, but it cannot be so deep as to understand even a small fraction of what controls such physical processes.
              With respect! hi
              1. gridasov
                gridasov 25 May 2016 18: 20
                +1
                You correctly voiced the related problems. However, this is relevant only for modern computational principles, when there is very little input data for analysis. However, if a large number of parameters are introduced into the analysis system, including the properties of the space in which the object moves, then any change in polarization will be the answer where and in what parameters the object moves. Optics in this case does not solve issues. All decisions are made by the analysis system. Therefore, I position the system of mathematical analysis on capacitive parameters. Well this is in a generalized sense. I admit that for people it looks like a fantasy, but whoever is able to reason will see that it is real. By the way, a person has two eyes, not because he considers everything with each eye, but because an analysis of space is built on a different disposition of perception. In other words, a person does not perceive space and events with his eyes, but with the brain as a mechanism of perception. There is much to talk about. In general, the same technique is applicable in this case.
          2. adept666
            adept666 25 May 2016 17: 51
            +1
            I searched for a long time, but I found my retelling of the content of the Chinese forums (where I really do not like wink)
            Well, you understand that the Chinese forum is just a forum of who is there and what this is a big question. Purely from partisan experience: when the adversary says that he is not interested in something, this is what interests him, and when he says that he is interested in something, he probably does not care. Do the Chinese want to feel our new engines? Of course they want, but they already felt the engines and got everything they could get. Everything else is no longer possible to understand, simply by feeling here you already need to know the technology and processes (they can get them in Ukraine as an option). But to check one of the most powerful radar in the world is just very interesting, see the modes, energy. By applying various signals to the input and evaluating the reaction, thereby generating statistics, you can open the logic of work without any reverse engineering. And Irbis, although it is a PFAR, but it is not far from the AFAR only half a step behind. IMHO from all history, it is a pity that it is the Irbis that the Chinese will get.
            1. gridasov
              gridasov 25 May 2016 18: 25
              0
              If in the statistical volume of information there are no initial geometric functions defining the direction vector of the development of processes and there are no potential parameters, then it is impossible to construct a comprehensive analysis. This will be called the subjective method of the brain of each individual individual. Sometimes this may completely contradict one argument against another. BUT! But smart, these contradictions are used as new initial data in the analysis, while others perceive on senseless emotions.
    3. krops777
      krops777 24 May 2016 17: 35
      +1
      The resource is Chinese and, in fact, that’s it. smile Cold plasma is, of course, good, but what about the engines for the J-20? Something is not heard of Chinese progress in this area. Or are our AL-41F1 going to buy? With copying, they somehow went wrong ..


      That's right, copying is not a problem, but what this or that part is made of is the secret behind seven seals.
  3. pavelty
    pavelty 24 May 2016 12: 07
    +1
    So far, of course, it all sounds fantastic, I can’t even imagine the implementation in practice ...
  4. VNP1958PVN
    VNP1958PVN 24 May 2016 12: 09
    +2
    The Russian military explains this by saying that "domestic air forces urgently need to be equipped with new batches of Su-35,
    Well, finally, we see an adequate explanation! Straight balm to the soul! And then for so many years Sushki took off in Komsomolsk, but in Russia they did not sit down any more - "the partners needed it more" request
  5. Barakuda
    Barakuda 24 May 2016 12: 09
    +8
    As far as I remember from early articles, it is not possible to "wrap up" the entire plane, otherwise it will completely go blind and stall, you cannot be seen, but you are also nothing. Perhaps only some part .. request
  6. demchuk.ig
    demchuk.ig 24 May 2016 12: 10
    0
    Our specialists have long announced plasma-based stealth technologies, but so far this is not on the real sides. Perhaps the Chinese are only engaged in a declaration! Although it is possible not.
  7. Tusv
    Tusv 24 May 2016 12: 10
    +1
    Let's reasonably believe in stealth plasma and be ready. In the meantime, this is Star Wars episode number 69
  8. Yakut14
    Yakut14 24 May 2016 12: 16
    0
    Yes, this is another PR move of the Chinese! What if someone falls for this Chinese miracle in "cold plasma".
  9. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 24 May 2016 12: 18
    +3
    The Chinese are already installing a radar with AFAR on their Su-27, and we are working it out only for PakFa, and for the MiG-35 as well.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Barakuda
      Barakuda 24 May 2016 12: 29
      -1
      And on the MiG-31, what do you think?
      1. Tibidokh
        Tibidokh 24 May 2016 13: 07
        +3
        Quote: Barracuda
        And on the MiG-31, what do you think?

        On the MiG-31 is PFAR. This is a significant difference, Dear! hi
  10. Max40
    Max40 24 May 2016 12: 23
    0
    http://slide.mil.news.sina.com.cn/k/slide_8_240_42515.html/d/1#p=1 Смотрите что там еще есть! Интересное что это за самолет и что у него кончиках крыльях??
    1. NordUral
      NordUral 24 May 2016 13: 49
      +1
      Google, translation under the photo: Recently, there are users exposed to a group of Pakistani military airfield photos of the suspect Chinese Su-30 fighter appeared.
    2. NordUral
      NordUral 24 May 2016 13: 54
      +2
      Here is the Su-30MK2 (J16)
    3. Tibidokh
      Tibidokh 24 May 2016 13: 57
      +2
      Judging by the signature to the photo, this is the Chinese Su-30. Look, the kitty with epaulettes is standing.
      At the endings there is a jamming station "Sorption", if I'm not mistaken.
  11. AVA77
    AVA77 24 May 2016 12: 24
    0
    I don’t understand what the video is about?
    1. Vanzalez
      Vanzalez 24 May 2016 12: 38
      +6
      On motorized infantry in plasma clots
  12. NEXUS
    NEXUS 24 May 2016 12: 40
    +3
    I read about work on "cold plasma" for a very long time. If sclerosis does not change me, such work was carried out on the TU-160 back in the 80s. But then scientists faced a number of problems. Whether our scientists solved these problems is not known. But something tells me that these statements by the Chinese are precisely from the same Soviet program.
    1. Yuri Y.
      Yuri Y. 24 May 2016 17: 06
      +1
      Quote: NEXUS
      that these statements of the Chinese are precisely blowing from that very Soviet program.

      Anyway.
  13. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 24 May 2016 12: 50
    0
    Cold plasma makes the plane not only invisible, but also blind. Plasma ABSORBS radio waves both externally and internally. Even the connection is lost. Optics also receives interference from plasma. So invisibility is conditional, but this plasma is visible in optics. Not like a meteor, of course, but there is someone to see.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  14. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 24 May 2016 12: 52
    +1
    Quote: Barracuda
    It is not possible to "wrap" the entire plane, otherwise it will completely go blind and stall, you cannot be seen, but you are also nothing. Perhaps only some part of .. request


    This is about the same as with Stealth. In the Ik range, the engine, and in supersonic and superheated glider glow. Jumped out of the clouds and here you are. The only +, early warning radar is turned off, but not yet evening.
  15. edeligor
    edeligor 24 May 2016 12: 54
    +1
    The article is complete crap! A vocational school-shnik could have told about cold plasma (to paraphrase ice fire), but here it is on the ZUBRA website of military acceptance! Let's start debunking the theory? So first, the new physical principle "cold plasma", what is this? Is it known to be generated by an antenna - a microwave field? Let's admit. Then, to cover the entire fuselage with the field, several generators are needed and off we go - weighting the structure is the main flaw of innovations in the aircraft, plus the protection of the crew. But the most interesting thing is that this field has the properties of a plasma! That is, the product is completely shielded, both from outside and from under the field, which means that this miracle Yudo is switched on occasionally, to pass the enemy's air defense zone. Continue? I think not worth it. I said this, dilettante, what will the specialists say?
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 24 May 2016 13: 33
      +2
      Quote: edeligor
      what will the specialists say?

      ... specialists will not say ANYTHING. Why see above...
      bully
      1. Yuri Y.
        Yuri Y. 24 May 2016 17: 48
        0
        Quote: edeligor
        Microwave field? Let's say.

        And on this tolerance you base any conclusions.? As an amateur, I can also start generating)). If the generators are directed after the cab? And if the removal of the antenna beyond the dimensions of the plasma cloud and the reception of information from the satellite is acceptable. )))
  16. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 24 May 2016 13: 17
    +1
    Quote: edeligor
    I said this, amateur, what will the experts say?

    To the point, almost. We leave the nuances for now, but enough for a general understanding.
  17. Earnest
    Earnest 24 May 2016 13: 24
    0
    Quote: Max40
    http://slide.mil.news.sina.com.cn/k/slide_8_240_42515.html/d/1#p=1 Смотрите что там еще есть! Интересное что это за самолет и что у него кончиках крыльях??

    Website about the Pakistan army. China is very actively trying to crush Pakistan. However, nothing super secret there can appear earlier than in China itself.
  18. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 24 May 2016 13: 41
    0
    Quote: demchuk.ig
    Our specialists have long announced plasma-based stealth technologies, but so far this is not on the real sides. Perhaps the Chinese are only engaged in a declaration! Although it is possible not.

    If it’s very interesting, dig in, there are a lot of articles on the topic, and there are answers. The main thing is energy consumption, although there are many other problems.
  19. NordUral
    NordUral 24 May 2016 13: 44
    +1
    That’s what I’m constantly muttering about - you can’t live in a cloud of arrogance and denial of the capabilities of others. Do not boastfully declare, but silently do, as they did in the days of the Union. And as they did, we still live on that one!
  20. Forest
    Forest 24 May 2016 13: 51
    0
    The Chinese are able to fill. American advertising of weapons can be believed, but the Chinese generally anneal.
  21. cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 24 May 2016 14: 24
    0
    As the hero of the film said, "the elusive avengers" performed by Savely Kramorov: - "RUNNING".
  22. wild
    wild 24 May 2016 15: 18
    0
    P ... t of the chinas.
  23. gridasov
    gridasov 24 May 2016 15: 39
    0
    The mystery lies in the fact that the "cold plasma", or rather the polarization of the aircraft body with the flight environment or, in general, movement, can be generated by the process of controlled ionization. ABOUT! how much I've heard about mushrooms and vocational schools. Only the problem did not end there. Its solution is very simple and obvious in justification. But the angular shapes of the aircraft are far from contributing to the formation of the required level of polarization on most of the object's body.
  24. Vittt
    Vittt 24 May 2016 16: 44
    0
    Yet I don't think the "great" Chinese scientists are ahead of the rest.
    The fact is that even if they could not (in the presence of the aforementioned Russians on their fighters) reliably reproduce the engines of the "dryers" until now, then their lot is "fucking".
    They can say "cold plasma", "hot anu-ass", "shawarma" and other magic words (by the way, both Russia and the United States are engaged in this (one mega-global blow is worth something), but the result will be the same - we will consider the minimum losses and multiply their territories (moreover, absolutely friendly).
    I am not concerned about Chinese stealth, but about the number of our long-range cruise missile production plants.
    You give 100000 of these missiles in 3 years !!!
    1. itvs
      itvs 25 May 2016 14: 08
      0
      do not underestimate the systematic development by the state of scientific institutions with the infusion of unlimited resources into critical industries. In the USA, after WWII, no one could even think of Gargarin, the first satellite, a nuclear bomb. And the argument that the Chinese cannot because the Chinese is smacks of racism.