damn are you saying most of the african militaries aren’t competent?
While it’s true that AESA radar range decreases when beams are spread (like wide angle search), this is a trade-off for unmatched flexibility. A mechanical radar can’t even attempt multi-beam tracking it’s stuck sweeping like a lighthouse. AESA can instantly switch from wide search to focused tracking without wasting time repositioning a dish. And if max range is critical? AESA can still focus all beams forward like a mechanical radar but with no inertia, no lag, and the ability to jump back to scanning in microseconds.
TWS on an AESA is not just about raw power it’s about efficiency. Even with split beams, an AESA’s LPI modes and adaptive dwell times let it maintain tracks at longer ranges than a mechanical radar can manage. A mechanical radar must spend precious milliseconds physically moving, while an AESA time-shares seamlessly.
Mechanical radars theoretically could use frequency hopping or power management but in practice, they don’t because their slower scan rates and fixed beam patterns make them easier to predict and jam. An AESA can randomize scan patterns, spread emissions across hundreds of micro beams, and adapt in real time to jamming, something a rotating dish physically cannot do fast enough. That’s why modern EW systems prioritize AESA threats over mechanical ones and actually use AESA systems for jamming.
1 Like
to AESA because of it’s one real advantage: Multi Beam scanning
perhaps being much lighter due to not having a heavy mechanical gearbox and Several motors and the by now Similar range due to now being able to just give the radar 20KW if it needs them are also good reasons
Jamming ressitance?
better EW capabilities
on the last part: and what if I tell you that this specific one… in theory, without Breaking NDAs, could maybe have some of those characteristics?
Are they?
yesn’t, yes because modern AESA ans PESA radars do have that advantage over their predecessors, but no because this is not because of the antenna type but rather because of the technology behind it
wasnt meant to be taken serious
The F-14D could do the same thing. It’s one of the most famous F-14D occurrences.
1 Like
Yeah the only really IR stealthy jets are B-2/B-21 and maybe F-117 to a lesser degree
1 Like
By far. The F-14D’s went out to 305km and found 2 F-16s and a tanker with good resolution.
1 Like
Source?
1 Like
bigger aircraft → Easier to detect
3 Aircraft together! → Much easier to detect
It’s further up. Search 190 on the forum. It’s all timestamped.
6 Jet exhausts next to each other being determined as there’s something there by the IRST isn’t a big accomplishment
3 Likes
Apparently, you’re not understanding the words I typed out. The SU-35’s IRST range best case scenario is ~90km. The F-14D picked up something from more than 3x that range and still had good resolution to pick out the F-16s. These F-16s are on low throttle and are low heat sigs. The Tanker is probably a bit more hot, but it doesn’t have afterburners or anything. And it has to be a tanker that supports boom, because I don’t think the F-16 has any other method of refueling.
I did not mention the argument
I just commented that those 300km aren’t special under those circumstances
1 Like
I thought it was saying (Su-30) as a distinction to the Su-30 Series’s IRST. My bad.
What other fighter has that IRST range in those circumstances? I’m curious.