Latest Thread
Availability. But ASELSAN could theoretically develop a smaller variant of the MURAD AESA and then fit it on the aircraft at a later date. Hürjet is also different in the sense that it isn't an outright combat platform, although it is configurable to be one. So it is normal in my view, that ASELSAN prioritized BÜRFİS & MURAD and their integrations to platforms such as Akıncı, Kızılelma, F-16 and the MMU.Hey @MADDOG , do you know why we are buying AESA Radar from Italy for Hürjet while ASELSAN designs AESA for MMU, F-16 Özgür, Akıncı, and Kızılelma? What made Hürjet separated from rest in this sense?
Just to add to this:Availability. But ASELSAN could theoretically develop a smaller variant of the MURAD AESA and then fit it on the aircraft at a later date. Hürjet is also different in the sense that it isn't an outright combat platform, although it is configurable to be one. So it is normal in my view, that ASELSAN prioritized BÜRFİS & MURAD and their integrations to platforms such as Akıncı, Kızılelma, F-16 and the MMU.
They are older compared to Grifo-E and our radars.All the F35,F16V,Rafale fighters use GaS not GaN,does it make any sense?
More power and less heat generation? It's true that power density of GaN modules are like 5-10 times that of GaAs but they require equally more cooling. That's why ASELSAN had to develop a liquid cooled system. With AESA radars you need about two times more power for the cooling system than the T/R module consumes. If say a module needs 20 watts of power for operation, you need to supply the cooling system with 40 watts. However your GaN radar has %50 more range than a similar sized GaAs radar. The trade-off is worth it.But GaN brings lots of advantages, allowing more power, less heat generation etc
i mean, per unitMore power and less heat generation? It's true that power density of GaN modules are like 5-10 times that of GaAs but they require equally more cooling. That's why ASELSAN had to develop a liquid cooled system. With AESA radars you need about two times more power for the cooling system than the T/R module consumes. If say a module needs 20 watts of power for operation, you need to supply the cooling system with 40 watts. However your GaN has %50 percent more range than a similar sized GaAs radar. The trade-off is worth it.
If you mean per watt then you're right. GaN is more efficient than GaAs but due to their much higher power density they require more cooling than GaAs.i mean, per unit
Yes, I am bit high rn can't really create sentences hahaIf you mean per watt then you're right. GaN is more efficient than GaAs but due to their much higher power density they require more cooling than GaAs.
The #1 priority for all Hurjet systems must be minimum cost per flight hour. Getting Aselsan to make an expensive, high power AESA radar for it that can cook a chicken from 1km is not sensible. Same for twin engine, carrier versions, etc etc. People underestimate how valuable real flight time is for a pilot and how much it affects the skill level of an airforce.Aselsan's MURAD AESA radar with 1000+ T/R module is overkill for the Hurjet trainer version. Hurjet light attack might have MURAD though. TAI should have integrated Aselsan's smaller AESA radar(cut-down version of MURAD) planned for Akıncı if that wasn't canceled.
For general training you are right but for red air training mission it should have aesa radar for maximum benefit.The #1 priority for all Hurjet systems must be minimum cost per flight hour. Getting Aselsan to make an expensive, high power AESA radar for it that can cook a chicken from 1km is not sensible. Same for twin engine, carrier versions, etc etc. People underestimate how valuable real flight time is for a pilot and how much it affects the skill level of an airforce.
Yes, it needs an AESA radar for many reasons but it doesn't have to be a high quality cutting edge one from Aselsan. Normally I always say to make components locally if possible but in this case, since we can downscale our larger radars and produce it quickly if needed in a war, it's better to use a foreign one if it has a much lower cost per flight hour.For general training you are right but for red air training mission it should have aesa radar for maximum benefit.
I didn't see a slightly better statement, they say it will be more than equivalentEveryone says GaN based aesa radar are at least 50 percent effective than GaAs based ones,but our officals says”slightly better”,what does it mean?Are the TR modules reduced?
And actually iirc an official said it is more powerful than what's on most modern aircraft, I will try to find that interviewI didn't see a slightly better statement, they say it will be more than equivalent
That's what they're going for most likely!"generate sales for the contract" that part is sus, also does this kind of confirm stage 2 of partnership?