Inferiority of Russian fighter radar

[Nodeo-Franvier]

Recently Algeria reject Su-35,One of the reasons cited was the inferiority of Russian Irbis-E radar over Rafale RBE2 AESA radar.
Is Russian radars and avionics in general lagging behind the West?

 

[SaparotRob]

Perhaps their export versions aren't competitive?

 

[Ovod]

Perhaps their export versions aren't competitive?

Is there even an export version of the Su-35 available?

 

[SaparotRob]

What's an SU-35?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

According to Wiki (I know, I know) the -35 has three operators: Russia, China, and Egypt.

 

[J_P_C]

China is using Su-35 with their own avionics - i think this including radar. And yes - russian electronics in general particular avionics lagging 1.5 generation behind western one - example - most of su-35 computer systems is based on illegally copied first gen Pentium 100MHz

 

[MiTasol]

But unlike American avionics the Russian avionics, at least up to the 1970s, are far more reliable. That said many of those avionics were developed from US ww2 units.

When the USAF were doing flight comparisons of the MiG-15/17 against the F-86/100 the Russian avionics were faultless but the US avionics caused multiple flight cancellations.

The MiG com unit looks exactly like the old SCR-522 and even fits the SCR-522 mounts/trays/racks but internally they are totally different. Likewise the ADF looks exactly like the Bendix MN-26 until you open the box - and, again, it fits in the Bendix trays.

 

[J_P_C]

But unlike American avionics the Russian avionics, at least up to the 1970s, are far more reliable. That said many of those avionics were developed from US ww2 units.

When the USAF were doing flight comparisons of the MiG-15/17 against the F-86/100 the Russian avionics were faultless but the US avionics caused multiple flight cancellations.

The MiG com unit looks exactly like the old SCR-522 and even fits the SCR-522 mounts/trays/racks but internally they are totally different. Likewise the ADF looks exactly like the Bendix MN-26 until you open the box - and, again, it fits in the

reliability is function of complexity - russian avionics is less sophisticated thus in some aspects more reliable - this is whole mystery. From my personal experience - 12 years working mainly as a avionics engineer with both russian/soviet and western systems it looks as follow:
1985 onward
russian analog avionics (military grade)- dials, switches, power electronics, navigation gear, sensors - bulky, unsophisticated, highly reliable, - radios, radars, dopplers, fire control systems (analog) - just hopeless - unstable in parameters, very limited functionality, moderate/poor quality/reliability
russian digital systems all of kind - moderate/poor reliability, human machine interfaces are ...... i'm trying to find proper description.... shitty
western avionics (nonmilitary grade) hybrid/digital - depends what - many things is offering better reliability and much bigger functional value than russian ones - especially communication, radars, navigation and fire control systems, some elements are not up to standard - for example artificial horizon indicators made by Bendix - just disaster....
western avionics (military grade) - some systems are presenting surprisingly (considering its complexity) high reliability level (especially i like Collins radios of all kinds - just engineering masterpiece), 5 class better human-machine interfaces,

Reparability - past mid of 80's both russian and western avionics reparability is module level - below of this is nonexistent, thus difference in this matter is none.
Maintainability - in russian equipment is nonexistent - i think if something has been designed with this concept in mind it happen just by accident. In western aircrafts in general repairs are much, much easier.

 

[BlackSheep]

China is using Su-35 with their own avionics - i think this including radar. And yes - russian electronics in general particular avionics lagging 1.5 generation behind western one - example - most of su-35 computer systems is based on illegally copied first gen Pentium 100MHz

The Pentium 100mhz chip, state of the art and powered through all of my, ahem, research AS A TEEN IN THE 1990s…

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Chips are better than tubes so long as the chips are shielded against EMP.

Tubes are pretty ginger, subject to vibration (I've killed a few in loud amps shaking around), and they're also hard to source nowadays.

 

[SaparotRob]

Obligatory snack joke joke.

 

[MiTasol]

reliability is function of complexity - russian avionics is less sophisticated thus in some aspects more reliable - this is whole mystery. From my personal experience - 12 years working mainly as a avionics engineer with both russian/soviet and western systems it looks as follow:
1985 onward
russian analog avionics (military grade)- dials, switches, power electronics, navigation gear, sensors - bulky, unsophisticated, highly reliable, - radios, radars, dopplers, fire control systems (analog) - just hopeless - unstable in parameters, very limited functionality, moderate/poor quality/reliability
russian digital systems all of kind - moderate/poor reliability, human machine interfaces are ...... i'm trying to find proper description.... shitty
western avionics (nonmilitary grade) hybrid/digital - depends what - many things is offering better reliability and much bigger functional value than russian ones - especially communication, radars, navigation and fire control systems, some elements are not up to standard - for example artificial horizon indicators made by Bendix - just disaster....
western avionics (military grade) - some systems are presenting surprisingly (considering its complexity) high reliability level (especially i like Collins radios of all kinds - just engineering masterpiece), 5 class better human-machine interfaces,

Reparability - past mid of 80's both russian and western avionics reparability is module level - below of this is nonexistent, thus difference in this matter is none.
Maintainability - in russian equipment is nonexistent - i think if something has been designed with this concept in mind it happen just by accident. In western aircrafts in general repairs are much, much easier.

As far as I know both Mil-8/17 operators in PNG use the Russian Avionics on everything except the ELT and the SpiderTracks. I know with one operator the Russian avionics are trouble free, despite the high humidity, the temperatures, and being mainly 1980's vintage.

 

[davparlr]

reliability is function of complexity - russian avionics is less sophisticated thus in some aspects more reliable - this is whole mystery. From my personal experience - 12 years working mainly as a avionics engineer with both russian/soviet and western systems it looks as follow:
1985 onward
russian analog avionics (military grade)- dials, switches, power electronics, navigation gear, sensors - bulky, unsophisticated, highly reliable, - radios, radars, dopplers, fire control systems (analog) - just hopeless - unstable in parameters, very limited functionality, moderate/poor quality/reliability
russian digital systems all of kind - moderate/poor reliability, human machine interfaces are ...... i'm trying to find proper description.... shitty
western avionics (nonmilitary grade) hybrid/digital - depends what - many things is offering better reliability and much bigger functional value than russian ones - especially communication, radars, navigation and fire control systems, some elements are not up to standard - for example artificial horizon indicators made by Bendix - just disaster....
western avionics (military grade) - some systems are presenting surprisingly (considering its complexity) high reliability level (especially i like Collins radios of all kinds - just engineering masterpiece), 5 class better human-machine interfaces,

Reparability - past mid of 80's both russian and western avionics reparability is module level - below of this is nonexistent, thus difference in this matter is none.
Maintainability - in russian equipment is nonexistent - i think if something has been designed with this concept in mind it happen just by accident. In western aircrafts in general repairs are much, much easier.

I was the design manager for the B-2 Controls and Displays Subsystem, which consisted of the Multipurpose Display Set, Data Entry Panel, Standby Flight Instrument Set, and the Engine Performance Monitor, practically everything you can see in my picture (except the airplane). As such, I can tell you that reliability a was critical design point. Each component was intensely examined for reliability. Rigorous testing of vibration and thermal cycling occurred. Also burn-in was required to minimize infant mortality. Acceptance testing was done on every system. Quality inspectors monitored each step, some good, some not so. Our electro-magnetic interference (EMI) and electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) levels were so severe that I could see the suppliers face pale when I told them we would accept no waivers.

Quality control issue. We had a ground support equipment delivered but it had a rattle in in on investigation we found a flashlight left inside. Can you guess what department the flashlight belonged to?

 

[J_P_C]

I was the design manager for the B-2 Controls and Displays Subsystem, which consisted of the Multipurpose Display Set, Data Entry Panel, Standby Flight Instrument Set, and the Engine Performance Monitor, practically everything you can see in my picture (except the airplane). As such, I can tell you that reliability a was critical design point. Each component was intensely examined for reliability. Rigorous testing of vibration and thermal cycling occurred. Also burn-in was required to minimize infant mortality. Acceptance testing was done on every system. Quality inspectors monitored each step, some good, some not so. Our electro-magnetic interference (EMI) and electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) levels were so severe that I could see the suppliers face pale when I told them we would accept no waivers.

Quality control issue. We had a ground support equipment delivered but it had a rattle in in on investigation we found a flashlight left inside. Can you guess what department the flashlight belonged to?

QC of course

 

[SaparotRob]

I got $2 on Accounting!

 

[J_P_C]

I got $2 on Accounting!

you think they have searched more money in this project?