It could be a stronger PD radar. But it is not feasible for any nation to have had AESA maws in the 90’s. It’s just not possible. Keep in mind AESA radars didn’t exist on fighters at the time either, with F-2 and F-15 being the first application of fighter aircraft’s.
It is harder to make smaller AESA antennas than bigger ones, similar to how older technologies were much bigger to newer technologies.
It’s not AESA. It’s a commonly known fact that it uses quantum entanglement to see in the future to see if the plane got hit by a missile.
Proof : about as much as the argument it uses AESA
It is not ? It’s just about as far as i get there is no proof that the eurofighter have an aesa maws, nothing else and people are discussing about it.
There will always have some comparison between planes otherwise it doesn’t go too far especially compared to what happened in the eurofighter thread, probably only thing that i have against it is that we are on the wrong thread but well it happens.
Nah it had AESA MAWS. Nothing else would have fitted. I dont get why French mains believe the EFT was so bad. It was on-par or even superior to the Rafale in all respects
Huh ?
Rafale used IR MAW. It’s known, we even know the sensors used.
For the EFT, appart from the fact that it’s PD, we have no proof on what type of radar it is. Regular PD, PESA or AESA. Considering no fighter jets equipped AESA when the EFT was in development, it’s highly unlikely the EFT uses such a system.
And since you often claim it has an AESA MAW, yet have never given a single proof of that, I can claim just as well that it uses quantum entanglement technology than you can claim the existence of an AESA. Both are as likely
Edit :
Since you edited your comment, here’s what I was originally replying to before he edited it