In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
Grande Strategy

Some Additional Comments on the FC-1 Debate

This is in reference to the running debate between SOC and myself, as continued from my last post and the following running commentary at keypublishing:

Relevant Post 1
Relevant Post 2



The range for the present Chinese radar is very likely to be more than 100 kms; considering that the PAF chief was comparing with PAF F-16s. The PAF F-16s underwent OCU which increased their range and made it close to MLU (see this)

"The Pakistan Air Force currently has the Block 15 F-16A/B model in operation, which has an upgraded APG-66 radar that brings it close to the MLU (Mid-life Update) radar technology. The main advantage is the ability to use the AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles if they were ever to be released to the PAF. Furthermore, the radar is capable of sorting out tight formations of aircraft and has a 15%-20% range increase over previous models. All the earlier F-16s were brought up to OCU standards and have received the Falcon UP structural modification package."

Consider this bit of information, and also that the APG-66 later modification values are against 1m^2 targets which will be further increased against a significantly greater RCS for the MKI.

Now consider statements made by the PAF Chief about the KLJ-7: is *much better* than their APGs (and these are the upgraded OCU APGs).

Secondly if you visit SOC's old post on FC-1 and see the exchange of comments, one poster pointed out that KLJ-7 beat the Grifo- S and PAF did not lowered their requirements (this includes a link that PAF did not lower it's requirement, and on that is by none other than Richard Fischer :D). SOC in fact commented that it is a very potent radar looking at some mentioned features.

Clearly, the KLJ-7 was chosen over this "very potent radar" and clearly the PAF Chief mentions that the KLJ-7 is "much better" than the present APGs.


One would also want to ask what is the detection range by JET modulation when intakes are hidden and treated with RAM. Why does one poster think it is more important and potent than detection by using returns from the airframe when clearly returns from airframe of a non-stealthy aircraft will be in abundance.

Another assertion made is that the MKI has phased array and JF-17 has Pulse doppler and MKI can avoid JF-17 lock by using doppler notch where as MKI will have no problems with locking on as it's radar is not PD.

This is what is common knowledge at various forums:
1)Doppler notch has been known since time ancient and tactics against Doppler notch were known by USAF even back in Vietnam Era.
2) According to one of the viper pilots at the F-16 forum, they have way more modes on their radars and just by switching to different mode of detection and maneuvering your aircraft so that there is no 90 degrees between both aircrafts this dopler notch could be taken care of.
3)Another aviator said "no modern AI radar is worth it's salt if it can't resist doppler notch"

All of the above should be on F-16 forums if you search "doppler notch"

Here is a link to the F-16.net dicussion regarding beaming/doppler notch tactic to break lock of a pulse doppler radar.


To me it seems some bloggers out there find it easy to feed garbage to folks thinking they know nothing. With a small Pakistani online community it becomes a recurring problem, yet it seems one would never try this on Chinese posters.

Vision Without Glasses

1 comments:

Muslim Social Networks said...

post and after some time there is another social media site will be added in this picture because we guys know that the Muslim Social Networks is the new emerging social media site that have the best tool to create the best networks. just check this out.

Post a Comment