The insane engineering of the F-35 AESA radars!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 лют 2023
- We use the announcement of the APG-85 to replace the APG-81 as an excuse to dive a bit deeper into AESA radars and their properties.
Enjoy!
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Mille...
Join the Discord server / discord
Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/?aff=173
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the UA-cam Partner Program, Community guidelines & UA-cam terms of service.
As an engineer involved in the design and production of the APG-65 Radar (flat plate antenna) I am really appreciating you great explanation of AESA antennas.
How much does a mechanical scan radar like the -65 increase RCS when it's moving?
I'm an F-15C pilot. Believe it or not, the APG-63v3 radars are significantly better for air to air missions than the APG-81 1. more TRMs and 2. no air to ground TRMs. Multi-role radars hamstring the air to air effectiveness of detecting and tracking. Size real estate (# of TRMs) is also a big factor, as you covered in your video. These advantages routinely allow jets with the biggest radars to shoot down opponents before opponents were even aware they were in danger, as AIM-120 doesn't alert the other jet's RWR until it goes pitbull. This is one of the biggest reasons for the push for data links, allowing smaller jets to get information from AWACS or larger jets. There is a reason why Owls have huge eyes. Bigger is better. Bigger airframes also have more space for cooling. We also maneuver better in the cons (thin air above 30k feet) because big wings catch and hold more air. F-16 and F-35 skate around like a hot knife through butter up high.
Thanks for pointing out!
In clear sky, all missiles give themselves off to modern missiles warning systems, the moment they are fired.
The numbers of TRM is not the only parameter that decide output of radio power. Aperture and output power/TRS is equaly important. Can you eplain in detail how this number affect the capability of the radar, please?
I believe that one version of F-15 radar could be datalinked with other radar to increase aperture?
🤫 no more talking please
Except the F15 keeps getting smashed by the F35 and F22 in war games because it is unable to detect it with it's radar.
Wow, I am an electronics engineer and I learnt something. A+++ technical video. So I think this should be part of the training for real pilots.
it probably very much IS
learnt?
@@housemana That is correct.
When knowledge meets discernment.
Another excellent video. Thank-you for sharing your knowledge with us.
Great episode, I enjoy the longer ones much more. So much more knowledge to be gained from these kind of in depth episodes.
AESA can also be a communication antenna. Great video. Thank you!
StarLink has AESA based communication dish.
Thank you very much. I know I can never be an expert on this field, but this one video has expanded my knowledge of radars by a quantum level. I will have to watch this video a few times to digest everything and come to a basic understanding, but it will be worth the time and effort. Once again, thank you for this video.
I have a folder in my bookmarks named "Science and Understanding", and this one video now resides there.
a "quantam" level... does that mean an unimaginably minute amount?? 🤣
@@byloyuripka9624 I think he meant to say a quantum leap.
It was absolutely splendid presentation Mill 7! One of my favorites on your entire channel.
There was a paper with a subsequent practical implementation for active self-interference cancellation, allowing simultaneous transmit and receive on the same antenna.
Uses similar techniques to noise cancelling earphones.
No doubt this is already in the latest radars.
EM cancelling system would eventually allow for fully stealth designs like cloaking technology from star treak
@@hphp31416 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_stealth
That is one most hyped features that Su-57 was claimed to have when the fighter was revealed and it was mythical by its features. As who would be able to do that, they could effectively become transparent to RF spectrum.
@@paristo The SU-57 has the ability to do what exactly?
No this is just a technology to allow a transmitter and receiver to simultaneously transmit and receive on their shared antenna.
It has nothing to do with stealth.
I love the way you present very complex information in a way anybody can understand. Great video. Thank you.
A simply superb explanation of radar technology. Summed it up in 17 minutes and in a way even dumb old me could understand.
Wonderful video.
Excellent video, I'm in no way an expert, just like to know more about fighterjet technology, and I understood everything here, which is a sign of your superb skill to transfer the knowledge. Thank you
As always, didn't get disappointed since it is the best channel covering these topics.
A masterpiece video on AESA radars basic meanings. Thank you, gentleman.
The next step on fighter radars is digital beamforming which was impossible until recently due to size and weight constraints but electronics miniaturization has done it's thing...though I wanted to see your take on the APG-85 like you said in the title, but it maybe for the next video
@@gags730 I'm no expert on the subject but I will refer you to this video which is great ua-cam.com/video/p7zWBF1P_Bs/v-deo.html
@Gags you're welcome buddy :)
Digital beam forming was present in WiFi 802.11n, at least a decade old.
PESA uses beamforming, either in the analogue or digital domain.
It's the bit where you change the phase to change direction of the beam without moving the antenna.
@@amzalkamel3009 well your reply isnt visible. Did yt remove it for some reason🤔
@@gags730 Well, in 5G you have maybe a dozen antennas to control and the target is moving around at a few meters per second if at all.
In a jet you control about a 1000 antennaes (the pictures seem to show such a module count) and the beams have to be adjusted perhaps a 100 times per second ....
Great presentation! I would like to acknowledge the time and effort involved in producing content such as that found in this video. Above and beyond that, may I compliment you on your delivery which, on such a technical subject, remains fluid, comprehensible and, at times, humorous. Again, great work my friend!
GaN is pretty exciting stuff. For example, the old motor controller on my electric motorcycle was standard silicon, it was heavy and about the size of a tissue box. It overheated and died. New one features GaN components. It's 1/4 the size and weight, with an extra 1000 watts output. Similarly, my new phone charger block is the size of a standard iPhone charger, but charges at 65 watts.
Do you really have a GaN component electric motor controller in your motorcycle? What type of motorcycle is it and was this advertised, or a modification made?
Even the starlink antenna is absolutely mind boggling and totally AWESOME 😮
Always among the most informative videos to watch, and yet, entertaining as well. Thank You!
Once again an extremely complex topic lucidly explained. Bravo and thank you.
It occurred to me. When you mentioned several antennas around the aircraft, now with modules we’re no longer limited to having a single emitting region on the nose. We could place them wherever we wish on the aircraft, say on the wing roots of the belly, tail, or fuselage. Not just small radars but almost engrained into the machine. Similar to the F-35’s current RWR which is baked into the skin, but it’s just modules all over the jet providing images all over.
Now there are probably limitations, but who knows.
Not just on one aircraft, if the relative position of the planes in a flight is known, that radars could work together, similar to Very Long Baseline radio telescopes.
Interesting though, I was thinking about this but wondered if there might be dynamic issues to consider in the normal movement of the components relative to the different arrays. So whether a nose mounted and wing mounted arrays would be greater than the sum of its parts, notwithstand that the structural duties of the wing leading edges might not lend itself to arrays mounted behind them if optimisation for it's transparency to radar cannot be balanced. A longer base distance could some localised depth perception to the aircraft
The SU57 is supposed to have two small radars on each side of the cockpit and the one in the nose then small on the wings and one in the back.
@@kilianortmann9979 No. The relative positions of the different aircraft vary too much and too rapidly for a multi-aircraft array to be feasible.
@@aramisone7198 The radars are all separate sets and their antennas are dispersed about the aircraft in order to prevent them from interfering with each other.
Thank you so much for this. I have always been so curious how these systems work. You have provided such a clear and concise explanation that's easily digestible. You are a boss!
I LOVE tis channel! I've been obsessed with aircraft since I was kid and this channel keeps that obsession alive!
Thanks for posting such in depth information!
I do find it amazing that the Eurofighter still uses a traditional (albeit flat panel) radar, and the AESA replacement won't be in service till 2030, 17 years after the rFench one.
Fun fact:
The SAMPSON AESA radar on the Type 45 air defence destroyer has three panel antennas AND rotates, making the scan speed the combined electronic _and_ rotational speed.
For when even AESA isn't fast enough.
Is there some reason for that? It seems unlikely that they would introduce additional mechanical complexity and thus maintenance and downtime on a radar unless they needed to, or if there was some benefit from it. What application would need even higher scan speeds than normal AESA radars already can produce? Hypersonics?
@@jonathanpfeffer3716
First off, I made a mistake, it's two back to back rotating panels.
An AESA panel can't see 180° of sky, so you either rotate the panel or rotate the ship.
And the ability to see art high off angles is reduced, reducing your vision even more, so rotating is even more important.
Aegis solves this problem with more than two panels, a more expensive solution.
SAMPSON is designed to defeat supersonic sea skimmers, where fractions of a second is life, so scanning rate is life. Every fraction counts.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716
This next part is speculation.
You could have 3 or 4 panels that don't rotate.
But maybe having radars overlap is a bad thing?
Certainly is another problem to solve, filtering out each others transmissions.
Whereas with two panels that can't ever interfere with each other.
But with two panels, they _must _ rotate, otherwise you have native dead spots where the radar can't see, "shoot here to win"
@@MostlyPennyCat Makes sense, that’s certainly an ingenious cost saving measure, although I doubt the improved scan rate would really come into play just given how (as the video describes) GN AESA radars are basically instant already.
As to your speculation, the way you get multiple radars to not interfere with each other is just done by angling them correctly and using some fancy software to filter the side lobes out. That’s what American destroyers do.
I love all of your videos, but the ones like this on technical topics are the reason I fell in love with this place. This is GREAT man, and please keep 'em coming! (Maybe EW next?! 🤣)
Thank god we are back on track learning something which will stand the test of time. The title was a bit misleading in that regard. Thanks for explaining radar technology for laymens like me.
Bravo! Great presentation and masters class on what is out there!
It was a surprise. There must be significant capability improvements to warrant the change.
GREAT job man !
Very valuable station you operate here sir !
AESA radars are cool. Would like more on this topic.
Thank you very much! There is a little bit more to come, actually.
Outstanding thanks I worked on OTH radars in a different life but I nearly understood some of that ! A credit to your ability to explain mind melting concepts to the less mentally agile.
Fantastic video! I’ve been watching your stuff for a while, but now you got a new sub! Keep up the great work!!
I'm greatful for the video, I was just waiting for it 📹♥️
Brilliant. Your videos keeps getting better.
Awesome information, expertly explained, thank you!
The best military aviation channel on UA-cam.
I am a highscooler, that likes physics, but is not good at it. I did not understand anything, but I managed to convince myself i got the message. Video is 10/10.
That was a great class of Radars, thanks for publishing.
Great deep dive. Wonderful vid 😮
Thanks for the explanation.
Thank you. Very good explanation.
Wow, i took some basic training as part of my job... And your 17 minutes video just informs/teaches better about the technology... You should offer classes
Omg man!!!
I just can't bring myself to adress precisely how much sheer unbiased knowledge you can put in such short videos!!! You're incredible sir!!!
Seriously, please keep up with your awesome work!!!
I love how you closely and deeply talked about lesser known or even misunderstood jets, (usually by american propagandas) like the Gripen and the Felon per instance!
I really appreciate it sir!!! Thanks again for sharing your knowledge with us.
It's even more amazing how much he CANT put in. 😂
@@alleycatsphinx LOL yeah
FYI, F-35 didn't skip the "active stealth" feature when coupled with passive stealth.
From "Out Of The Shadows: RNLAF experiences with the F-35A" via Combat Aircraft Magazine May 2018
F-35A Block 3F used its "active stealth" feature to hide the Blue team's friendly F-16A against the Red team's F-16A MLU.
Ive enjoyed watching the quality of your vids and information increase!
Excellent lecture!
Wow, that was really interesting! Thank you.
Very interesting video as always.
Great info dump on an obscure topic!
It's too bad that even PESA is still so expensive. The US National Weather Service got to borrow a Navy PESA radar and test out the technology's potential for weather radars. The results were fantastic. Scans done in a hundredth of the time it takes traditional radars. Doppler capabilities built in so tornado warnings could be issued sooner. Of course it is still able to do its original job, so in addition to monitoring the weather it would also provide a near constant picture of the airspace around it for the FAA.
Great overview!
Excellent video
Many years ago I was in engineering college, and working alternate semesters as an "engineering coop" for a large US aerospace/defense company. I spent one semester term in the Attack Radar dept, assisting an engineer who was tasked with convincing USAF (or any other AF) to fund an AESA project which was currently being funded in-house. One day some of the engineers met with representive of a foreign customer, to give the pitch for AESA funding. (I was not in this meeting.) After the meeting, one of the engineers came back to our cubicle farm, frustrated as hell. It seems upon explaining how AESA worked, caused one of the foreign reps to immediately inquire about the possibility of LPI applications. And our engineers were forbidden to even discuss that aspect with foreign customers.
Thanks for sharing
thanx a lot man serious and impresive data
very interesting video. Im going to rewatch it tomorrow but I will have a note pad to help me remember it.
I knew all about RADAR 60 yrs ago. Thanks for the crash course.
Well done
Another excellent video on a very interestng topic.
Perfect pitch, great video as usual. 🎯👍🇫🇷
This is one of my FAVORITE videos from you @millenuim ... THANK YOU ! JAM PACKED WITH INFORMATION !
Excellent info
Theoretically, if the radar beam is narrowed from 33° to 3° for the same distance, the signal strength is reduced by 19.6x.
from one nerd to another, you're awesome!
This is fascinating
The pilots in f35 don’t even call it a radar anymore since it does much more
I love this channel!!
Big jump from the APN-59 I worked with quite some years ago.
Super interesting to see the dispersion of the recevers all around the gripen!! Did not know it had such coverage.
I remember when you did a video of the Su-57 you mentioned long pannels on the sides or of it was the wings that potentially would be in the L-band but you were wondering abit if it was true. Are they built with the same type of elements as the one you described now but with a different geometrical shape or do they build on different technologie? Is it just the size of the plate that limite what band ot can send in or are there other factors? Have ypu heard any thing more about the "L-band" on the -57
Thanks for a super video!
Gripen E is full of sensors of different types, it has 50 antennas for a sphereic all around coverage.
Very clear.
this is an awesome channel
i see aesa i click
I feel like i might actually understand like 0.1% of this now... That means your explanation was pretty outstanding
Thanks
Beautiful explanation as always! Rooting for 100K subs in 2023 👏🏻
Fingers crossed!
0:45 - that, my friends, is a screenshot from Digital Combat Simulator (DCS). It’s the F-15C from Flaming Cliffs 3.
Super interesting!
Excellent !
WOW Awesome Video!! Amazing presentation too. I learn so much from you it’s crazy - thank you….PS. I missed OTIS though haha
15:15 The Gripen E employs the most GaN of any aircraft, making it outstanding. (Excellent Video)
Currently Gripen E have GaAs in the nose AESA and the Gripen C is being upgrade to GaN nose ASEA plus the Avionics of Gripen E, and more powerful engine. Gripen E will be full GaN(and SiC) soon.
@@atlet1 The radar upgrade for Gripen C is to MK4 so it's not an AESA radar. There are some indications that Gripen E might get a completely new radar in the future, it could be the SAAB GaN based one but there is no real information about it yet.
Incorrect. Gripen E will never have as many GaN TRMs in its nose and wingtips, even compared with a single AESA in the F-35. The US pioneered and controls the supply chain of GaN TRMs, which have gone into F/A-18A/C+, F/A-18E/F Block 3 with APG-79(V)4, and other programs not mentioned publicly. The US stacks TRMs closer to each other than any other nation’s Radar assembly companies, who are using a lot of licensed technology from Raytheon via Foreign Military Sales and technology sharing agreements. Old F/A-18s in USMC and RCAF service have a superior Radar than what is currently in any of the Gripens, including the Gripen E.
The one area where the Gripen E has an advantage is the ability to rotate the AESA to provide side aspect continual tracking after offsetting abeam of airborne fighters in the BVR timeline. But since the Gripen’s Radome size is so small and the Leonardo Radar doesn’t have high TRM stacking density, its maximum detection and tracking ranges will be limited compared to a Hornet+ or Super Hornet Block 3, let alone anything 5th Gen even with GaA TRMs.
@@LRRPFco52 False! SAAB is the leading company in GaN tech and the whole supply chain is in Sweden. Only Gripen have GaN AESA, which are several times more powerful than GaAs. Even the range of wavelengts is bigger. The area of the nose antenna is approximately the same in Gripen as in F-35. The elements in the distributed aperture system in Gripen is approximately the samme as in F-35. This make Gripen AESA more powerful, especially in a tactical mening.
Some USMC F/A-18C have GaN AESA radar i.e. Raytheon APG-79(V)4.
Excellent 👌 job sir much greatful 🙏🤲 keep up the great work
Me, scrolling my feed: “Boring, will watch later, not interesting…Oh! Millennium 7*! Must watch immediately (after I leave a thumbs up)”
Thankings. Have interactions.
Wonderful
I can imagine the conversation between the scientists in charge of radar developing: “so… what are you up to, guys?” “Well… we’re working on a device that virtually creates some map like Call of Duty, but from a real airspace” “Mmm… sounds interesting” “it also can send moaning sounds to enemy radars!”
"Your budget is approved"
Wow ... . I would like to make a suggestion about a series of chapters on electronic warfare : intelligence , jamming , decoys , countermeasures , etc. . Thanks for your time .
Very little of the really interesting stuff in EW technology is anywhere near the public domain, and rightly so.
@@hb1338 True but I have seen some articles and videos from a Spanish channel "portierramaryaire" that are interesting. But I think this channel can offer something "more" and "more synthesized". Thank you .
You're an electrical engineer? My grandfather was one for Bell labs. I miss him.
Absolutely brilliant video! I wonder if you can answer a question that I have always had. The nose cones of stealth fighters must be transparent to radar for obvious reasons. But this means that their radar antennaes are visible to enemy radars. What are the design characteristics that prevent the face of an AESA radar array from increasing a stealth fighter's radar cross section? All those sharp edged antennaes have always looked like excellent edge reflectors to me, but I am far from an expert in stealth and radar.
Thank you sir 🇮🇳
Wait, it came out of the blue? What? How was I aware of this a couple months ago? Seriously, I should not know anything before this channel.
So cool.
Note there are also Hybrid PESA RADAR (Bars, Irbis and so on..) i.e.radars that has an emitter/receivers module for each antennas but still has a single TWT for generating radio waves.
This allow almost all the advanced features of a an AESA radar but to keep a lighter and steerable antenna (that however didn't need to scan constantly like a mechanical one but can be pointed sideways so allowing a complete FOW) Only thing it cannot do is emitting at two different frequencies or direction or modes at the same time so it is a little less flexible and a little less capable for what it came to low probability of intercept mode.
Irbis has 2 TWT’s and thus 2 transmitters. The advantages of AESA is mainly reliability and jamming. But AESA has the potential to have greater bandwidth but is hampered by this due to beam steering technology.
Bravo completely distracted me from my chores...just to date me I remember GAs Photo Diodes becoming a thing after Silicon PDs, now I'm wondering what wonders of SA can be achieved with these things on something the size of the Mig31 or indeed the NGAD Fighter
Tank you! Can we see a clip about the Wegetail and Global eye soon? I miss information of the higher frequency span in the GaN tech and even the possibility to place more avionics directly in the element. I even want to know more about what properties are effected by the numbers of elements in an AESA and how distributed aperture of AESA's are effecting the radar performance.
Well Infantry Fighting Vehicle you! 👍🏻
There is plenty of information in the scientific and engineering journals relating to the design and construction of phased arrays, about fifty years worth.
most excellent - as always -------- ps. more robot
Excellent material covered here as always! I'd be curious to hear more about the detection capabilities of different IRST systems currently being fielded 🤔. Having a highly refined / integrated IRST system has the potential advantage of keeping radar systems in passive modes (thus minimizing return signatures). Allows for firing of BVR air to air missiles without having to 'illuminate' the target. Best wishes!
Current gen (semi) active missiles don't need guidance from the source so no need for "illumination" . Just to be able to detect the targets is where the game is at then launch and steer the missile in a general direction until the missiles guidance system takes over. This can be done with passive systems like AESA in passive mode or IRST. The analogy with how submarines operate is also more and more applying to air warfare these days. Also more likely the detection will be done by platforms like ground radar / AWACs and maybe even SAR equipped satellites.
Much harder to hide an aircraft than a submarine from those.
Don't forget you still need ranging information, not just direction
Good video. A few points.
AESA/PESA are often still movable due to the mentioned scan angle limit. I'm sure you are aware of this but I don't recall it being discussed.
You covered many of the additional capabilities of AESA systems. As an extension of the passive capabilities, AESA systems could be synchronized with external emitters and passively generate high fidelity data.
You touched on heat rejection. This is one of the primary problems facing modern military aircraft. You may consider doing an video just on this topic as AESA radars are just the tip of the proverbial iceburg.
Australian CEAFAR has 5 faces with AESA fcr
Where have I heard this before? Audio! I am a retired audio engineer and not long before I retired the combination of arrayed monitors (speakers in caninets) and digital signal processing (DSP) was revolutionising mainly audio reproduction but also capture. Have you seen those large stacks of ‘speakers’ at a rock concert? Often flown (as in suspended) and curved slightly in a convex way pointing towards the audience? Same principles as laid out here. Phase delays, originally using analogue delay circuits but more recently DSP applied to individual drivers (speakers) enabled sound to be focussed where it is wanted. And calculated use of short digital delays also enabled stacks to be placed anywhere as the signal could be delayed taking into account the speed of sound to synchronise the sound waves throughout a venue. It tickles me that all these different fields converge into the meta field of signal processing. Whether it’s a digitised audio signal or radar radio waves, the principles are the same. Visible light is kinda it’s own thing because the wavelengths are so small. Quantum and other effects apparently screw up the processing algorithms that work fine for audio and radar wavelengths but most of this works, with exceptions and reservations even with uncorrelated (I.e. - NOT Laser) light.
Huygens would have loved this technology!
Very nice presentation! I work in telecoms and we have been using coherent t/r tech for several years. I do wonder if AESA technology inspired this approach, it is essentially the free-space equivalent, (and of course 5G mobile networks use essentially the same principle of coherent beam steering).
If you want to see someone in the know have a mini aneurysm, ask them about intra- and interflight coherence and how lock is maintained over large distances in a contested EW environment (with complete GPS denial, so no external satellite synchronization)...