Russia - Egypt military contracts

Then, the ceo of kret in one of the articles from 2009 stated that the t/r modules are rated to run at 5W each but are only running at 3 - 3.5. That gives the indication that the engines are either incapable of powering whatever apu the MiG's use, or it is the APU'd thenselves. Which any other AESA will have same issue.

The engine power is not relevant, the generators attached to the engines are what creates the electrical power to power onboard systems... the APU is generally only used on the ground when the main jet engines are not operating... either to run systems for testing or to start the main jet engines and power up the computers and calibrate the navigation systems etc etc.

The CEO didn't state why they were only running at 3-3.5 W did he?

It could have been because the cooling system was insufficient, or that they had only gotten part way through testing and had not tested at full power yet...

Mig 35 new body big like Su 27

Not likely, though their might be some size increases, the new aircraft is based on the MiG-29M2 airframe (and MiG-29K) for commonality.

it is not important what u said or what i said ..the only important thing is that the official announcement will state that it is mig-35

I was expressing an opinion... that is what some people do on web forums... if the Russian AF aren't getting AESA radar with their first 30 odd aircraft what makes you think Egypt can have them?

They are clearly not ready yet.... so if they are not ready yet it makes rather more sense to buy the much cheaper MiG-29M which has the same air frame as the MiG-35 and then just add the new expensive and capable bits when they become available.  That is not the opinion of the Egyptian military... that is my opinion.

1- he also said " UVZ aims to establish a military equipment factory in Egypt"

And I think we can both agree he is not talking about a T-72 factory, but I think an armata factory would not be for export for some time either.

I rather suspect it will be a T-90SM factory with the future upgrade option for armata based vehicles.

In fact to prepared Egypt for the Armata production I rather suspect the T-90SM factory might make heavy T-90 based APCs, and artillery and other vehicles... but even a very good ally like India has not been given the technology to make the frontal armour of the T-90 so I suspect that will still be in export kit form for the time being.

Also Armata will have modular armour and the armour modules for export wont be quite as effective as the ones used for the Russian military.

2- we already produce more than 80% of m1a1 tank in egypt since 1992 .. so we have Infrastructure for building tanks . but it will need big changes to be able to produce t-90sm instead of m1a1 .

I don't doubt it for a second, but the factories to build and assemble T-90sms are more likely to be later used to make armata based vehicles so I suspect new factories will be built and then adapted the way UVZ T-90 factories will be adapted for production... but not any time soon.

3- read that link :

I don't see anything there that changes my mind about anything I have said...

It comes down to lack of power being produced for these T/R Modules.

Or possibly cooling...

If the engines are the EXACT SAME, then power output will be the same, regardless of the amount of T/R Modules or not.  Anyone with common sense will know that.

The engines are irrelevant... the generator attached to the engines creates onboard power during flight and it was designed to work with a much much less powerful radar. the fact the fact that it lacked the power to run an AESA is no great surprise... putting a new generator on the plane is not like having to develop a new jet engine however.

Then they would have replaced the generator.

In the link I provided prior, that is similar link to what House provided, the KRET employee stated that they are running at 3 - 3.5W each but are designed to run at 5W each.

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.in/2009/08/some-questions-about-fazotrons-aesa-are.html?m=1

He answered me, that it would be needed only if the electric power station of contemporary fighters was much more powerful. Now it limits the radar power, not the MMIC's technology. For example, he says, each 'Zhuk-AE's emitting element has 5 watt maximal output. However, now they still use only 3-3.5 watts with more output will be tested in the future.

Note that apparently newer NPP Istok modules according to Carl Kopp are rated at 10W each for GaAS and Japanese GaN are about 50W each.  So can you imagine the required electricity to power that? As clearly stated that the electric power station of contemporary fighters are a problem. So adding any other type of radar to it, be it Italian, German, American or whatever will result in the same exact issue. If it isn't the engines that power the generator then whatever. Point is, it is an issue of the power supply or possibly cooling (I Doubt since he states otherwise).

And why I figure this is a problem with the MiG's more so than any other is that look at the PAK FA. You think for their top of the line fighter, they would apply an AESA radar that would have trouble to provide performance if it was the T/R Modules made by the same company, when the Irbis-E radar has been physically tested at the 400km range? Why would they put an inferior product on the new fighter? They wouldn't. Instead, they would have fitted that Hybrid radar to the PAK FA. Instead, they went with an all AESA variant of Irbis-E, which uses the same NPP Istok T/R modules at a little over 1500 t/r modules. Technically speaking, it will be 15KW feeding to that array compared to the 20KW for Irbis E.

mack8 wrote:Chill out pal, no reason to go ballistic over something like this.

i dont even know what made him do that . i dont think i said anything that could cause that

I was expressing an opinion... that is what some people do on web forums... if the Russian AF aren't getting AESA radar with their first 30 odd aircraft what makes you think Egypt can have them?

i dont think that will happen but i hope that will happen . and there is a big difference

actually in a twisting scenario i could say that russia will not get aesa radars in their first batch because they want to wait for a more mature version (especially there is a big difference between the price of aesa and mechanical radars .. so it would be waste of money to buy aesa radar now then change it after few years with another one)

and i would also say in the same scenario that the radar that was shown in aero india 2015 is an export version available for technology transfer for india and china for their own fighters . while the export version equipping russian fighters will have different range . i said that depending on the twisted understanding of that official link :

"Our exhibition booth featured the technology intended for export to foreign customers, India and China. They are very interested and are currently working on requests to send to Russia in order to be able to manufacture radars for their aircrafts based on our technology," said Yuri Guskov."

http://kret.com/en/news/3465/

i hope that is true . but i dont think so

In fact to prepared Egypt for the Armata production I rather suspect the T-90SM factory might make heavy T-90 based APCs, and artillery and other vehicles... but even a very good ally like India has not been given the technology to make the frontal armour of the T-90 so I suspect that will still be in export kit form for the time being.

i agree with u ecxept that egypt (i think ) will produce the frontal armour . and the difference here from india is that egypt already have good experience in producing tanks . so the only way that the deal will be a progress (in the producing part) is to be able to produce about 100% of t-90sm (may be except the engine)

i found that official link today published at 22 jan 2015 :

"At up to 200 kilometers, the Zhuk-AE has a greater detection range than other radars on modern fighter jets of the 4+ generation."

http://kret.com/en/news/3620/

i dont remember seeing something that much confusing

It wont or be able to achieve that if they failed to provide the electricity. Issue I have is the sheer fact you said it was the T/R modules when I pointed out his statement that it isnt them but the power generated for it and they are rated at 5W each while output is only happening at 3 - 3.5W each. As well, the modules come from same organization between both Kret and NIIP, which is NPP Istok, and apparently newer ones run at 10W and the N036 has similar range as Irbis E with 1500 t/r modules at total power output of 15KW, which indicates that it is recieving exact needed power to same tr modules, and gets similar performance as other radars using the GaAS modules at similar amount of units.

if modules are rated at a given amount "maximum", i wouldn't expect them to run at that power in operational radar,
because while they COULD for a period of time, they will degrade that much faster and require replacing quicker.
it really sounds like alot of old rumors are being conflated with newer rumors. not much to discuss until new facts come out.

Then they would have replaced the generator.

They will likely have to develop a new one... previous generators for the RD-33s didn't have to power AESA radars either...

If it isn't the engines that power the generator then whatever. Point is, it is an issue of the power supply or possibly cooling

It is not the engines... it is the generator and it is not a fault of the generator... when you put a V8 engine in a mini but don't change the transmission and gearing then of course you are going to have problems...

They will likely look at all the electronics being fitted to the aircraft and design a generator with growth potential to allow for future upgrades.

They wouldn't. Instead, they would have fitted that Hybrid radar to the PAK FA. Instead, they went with an all AESA variant of Irbis-E, which uses the same NPP Istok T/R modules at a little over 1500 t/r modules. Technically speaking, it will be 15KW feeding to that array compared to the 20KW for Irbis E.

Bigger heavier aircraft carry bigger heavier radar that already use more power so the generators fitted to those aircraft already generate lots of power anyway.

It is not a new problem... there was a jammer version of the Tu-22M2 aircraft that went up against a jammer aircraft based on the Il-76... the Il-76 version won because it had much more power take off from its four engines so its jammers had more power to play with even though the jammers were made by the same company...

i hope that is true . but i dont think so

I suspect that the export model will be ready first because its design will be less ambitious... and it shows that Egypt wont be gettnig the same radar the Russian AF is getting...

i agree with u ecxept that egypt (i think ) will produce the frontal armour . and the difference here from india is that egypt already have good experience in producing tanks . so the only way that the deal will be a progress (in the producing part) is to be able to produce about 100% of t-90sm (may be except the engine)

It is not about ability... I am sure given the correct recipe that India could make T-90s... Russia simply wasn't prepared to share the recipe and I don't think they will share with Egypt either.

if modules are rated at a given amount "maximum", i wouldn't expect them to run at that power in operational radar,
because while they COULD for a period of time, they will degrade that much faster and require replacing quicker.
it really sounds like alot of old rumors are being conflated with newer rumors. not much to discuss until new facts come out.

More importantly... if lack of power is an issue then running 5 watt modules at 3 watts would only be necessary if all the modules are on at one time. That would never happen operationally... in an array of 1000 modules that means all modules on full would be 5kw with 3w that would be 3kw... now 3kw is a lot of power. In an array with 1,000 modules... say 100 x 10, that means 10 might be on at any one time in a horizontal scan... turn the first vertical line of 10 on and then off and turn on the next 10... so a full scan across the 100 columns of modules means at any one time 10 modules are on... at 5w per module full power that is 50 w... which is less than an old energy inefficient lightbulb.

If the generator in the MiG-35 can manage 30w and not 50w then there is a serious problem...

a "partial" solution would be the addition of large capacitors. it would allow the AESA modules to work on full power for short periods (perhaps enough to get a glimpse far out) before defaulting back to lower power.

I can see issues with heat dissipation, but operating the modules by default at 3-3.5W and "ramping up" to 5W for occasional peek to longer distances is surely possible with not much additional weight using capacitors.

1.5W of power per module "extra" translates to about 2kW for the full array. running at full power for 10 seconds every minute or two should be eminently possible without making changes to the APU or even cooling system. Maybe the Russian MOD wants a "full solution" (updated APU, cooling for full power constant use etc...) rather than a "hack" like this... which may be "OK" for export customers like Egypt, India etc...

Fantastic walkaround of the sand-cammo S-300VM from Armiya-2015, almost certainly destined to Egypt (but a relatively small chance it could still be Iran, although of note iranian SAM systems from Russia like Tor have a mottled desert cammo, while egyptian ones like Buk and Tor are plain sand):
http://saidpvo.livejournal.com/422399.html

And I can dream it's for iraq.

sheytanelkebir wrote:And I can dream it's for iraq.

You mean Iran, right?

AlfaT8 wrote:

sheytanelkebir wrote:And I can dream it's for iraq.

You mean Iran, right?

No.

But its just a dream....

mack8 wrote:Fantastic walkaround of the sand-cammo S-300VM from Armiya-2015, almost certainly destined to Egypt (but a relatively small chance it could still be Iran, although of note iranian SAM systems from Russia like Tor have a mottled desert cammo, while egyptian ones like Buk and Tor are plain sand):

Thanks, wasn't Iran looking at using a wheeled platform for S-300VM? I guess that was just a rumor, but who knows...?

a "partial" solution would be the addition of large capacitors. it would allow the AESA modules to work on full power for short periods (perhaps enough to get a glimpse far out) before defaulting back to lower power.

But that is the point... 90% of the time the AESA modules will be listening and of the remaining ten, eight percent of that time they will be operating at the minimum energy level to get a return without being noticeable... ie frequency hopping LPI type mode.

The main AESA radar wont be blasting out 5kW 24/7 scanning for stealth objects... it will be relying on L band radar and IRST and ground based sensors to detect such targets and pass their coordinates... it will then scan the area where the stealth aircraft was detected to be with a few modules with gradually higher energy levels until a return is detected or it is spotted on IRST or L band radar.

1.5W of power per module "extra" translates to about 2kW for the full array. running at full power for 10 seconds every minute or two should be eminently possible without making changes to the APU or even cooling system.

This is an electronically scanned radar... each element has a sector... it is not like a PESA or other conventional radar where the emitter lights up and the dish moves to scan airspace mechanically.

Typically in an array of 100 x 10 elements, the lower 5 elements might be optimised for terrain avoidance and threat detection, while the upper 5 elements in a vertical row will be looking for threats and targets. To scan from left to right the vertical row of ten elements can be turned on and off in a milisecond and the ten in the row next to it can do the same... you would never leave any elements on for 10 seconds... it would be totally pointless because you need to send out a signal and listen to the multiple signals that return as the beam bounces off various things, so as I said most of the time it is listening for the return signals to make the necessary calculations.

A complete radar scan of about 20 degrees might take 3-4 seconds with a mechanical set because the radar has to linger long enough for the radar signal to go out to the target and come back... with ESA it just sends the signal almost simultaneously... 100 miliseconds... and then listen for the returning signal from the entire 120 degree field of view...

the idea of blastng out 5kW in all directions at 120 degrees horizontal is amusing... it might be used to get everyones attention... or you might use a block of elements to blast a small radar antenna like that within an AMRAAM missile...

Yes the tr modules would be switching on and off rapidly of.course.

What I mean was that lack of power would be easy to overcome even if you wanted to turn on all modules simoultaneously on full power (for whatever mode /  reason you could think of such as continously scanning of airspace with no gci support).

The amount of heat dissipated wouldn't be excessive either with such total power consumption and relatively little need for continuous output by all tr modules. Altough it seems the us has to liquid cool their aesa arrays due to 55% of power going to heat waste!

Nice

Moscow and Cairo are preparing contracts for Egypt air and armored vehicles and warships - Medvedev

''Russia delivers project 12421 missile boat to Egypt''

http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/66220/



Aren't these things a bit long in the tooth?

PapaDragon wrote:
''Russia delivers project 12421 missile boat to Egypt''

http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/66220/



Aren't these things a bit long in the tooth?

Meh, better something then nothing, and honestly who are the Egyptian navy gonna fight?

can someone confirm this

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1430641.html
http://balabin-1712.livejournal.com/3395.html

Seems to be true

Russia handed over to Egypt an offensive missile boat project "Lightning

just got the official news , the Russian government gave the missile boat to Egypt as a gift

MiG denies the claims of Egypt ordering MiG-29's. So no sale.

http://tass.ru/en/russia/815765

Sucks, I thought egypt would have change of heart as well as the temp sanctions would have been temorarly changed their minds. But seems that US still has a strong grasp on Egypt.

sepheronx wrote:MiG denies the claims of Egypt ordering MiG-29's. So no sale.

http://tass.ru/en/russia/815765

Sucks, I thought egypt would have change of heart as well as the temp sanctions would have been temorarly changed their minds. But seems that US still has a strong grasp on Egypt.

NATO is overgearing Egypt to do durty jobs in their place soon .

sepheronx wrote:MiG denies the claims of Egypt ordering MiG-29's. So no sale.

http://tass.ru/en/russia/815765

Sucks, I thought egypt would have change of heart as well as the temp sanctions would have been temorarly changed their minds. But seems that US still has a strong grasp on Egypt.

What the hell is going on?!?! Within the same article MiG is also claiming that they have 'no' plans to supply Mig-31's to Syria....which begs the question why are so many news articles contradicting each other on the issue of supplying Syria with MiG-31's?

magnumcromagnon wrote:

sepheronx wrote:MiG denies the claims of Egypt ordering MiG-29's. So no sale.

http://tass.ru/en/russia/815765

Sucks, I thought egypt would have change of heart as well as the temp sanctions would have been temorarly changed their minds. But seems that US still has a strong grasp on Egypt.

What the hell is going on?!?! Within the same article MiG is also claiming that they have 'no' plans to supply Mig-31's to Syria....which begs the question why are so many news articles contradicting each other on the issue of supplying Syria with MiG-31's?

New stealth technology, claim you supply them and deny it at the same time. Schrödinger's MiG-31...