Radar Sizes

[Charlie_c67]

Bit of a random one. Just wondered if anyone knew of a source of various aircraft RADAR kit dimensions? I realise a lot of this sort of thing is hush-hush by necessity, but surely the basic Length x width x height must be out there somewhere?

[Gondor]

I usually look up the radar type for the particular aircraft I am interested in via the Wikipedia entry for the aircraft, other sources are available and then look for that radar type. It's what I have done when writing the backstory for my F/A-45 single-seat naval attack aircraft based on the Hawk.

Gondor

[jcf]

Dish/antenna sizes are usually the only dimensions that are easy to find, the sizes of the avionics
boxes not so much. The best thing is to search by the designation, you might get lucky, and in the
case of older units, even come up with a manual.

[Dizzyfugu]

Wikipedia is IMHO a good source to start, and when you know a specific system a free document search frequently yields very good matetrial, even though only bitesized. Some specialized books are also much more detailed than online entries. I have frequently to combine at least two sources in my background stories when it comes to radar systems or other avionics, nut I try to stay as "realistic" as possible, as this is also reflected in the model's hardware.

[Charlie_c67]

Thanks for the suggestions guys. I've been looking to compare the AI.24 Foxhunter and AIRPASS systems with the AN/APG series. They seem to be comparable in weights, but I can't work out whether they can be plug and played or not.

[Gondor]

What do you mean by "plug and played"?

All radar systems since the late 1960s are very sophisticated electronic devices which are integrated with the rest of the aircraft equipment. No item is "plug and play" in a similar way to most computers, even then there is always setting up to be done.

Gondor

[Weaver]

Another thing to bear in mind is the pre-1980s and digital databuses, radars tended to be one "can" directly behind the scanner in order to minimise signal losses and wiring lengths (short journey from the receiver, to the signal processor, to the display). However once digital databuses came in, half of the "back end", i.e. everything that was just dealing with data rather than powerful RF signals, could be remoted elsewhere in the aircraft, so the available volume in the nose no longer became a good guide to what was possible.

IIRC, the first aircraft to take advantage of this was the Sea Harrier FA.2, whose Blue Vixen radar only had the TX/RX hardware and the analog-to-digital converter in the nose, and the rest of the electronics in the rear fuselage, mainly, in this case, to balance CofG for hovering, but also because of the limited ability to stretch the nose due to aircraft carrier lift limits.

[zenrat]

You mean real life isn't like Star Trek where one can plug anything into the deflector array and get exactly the result the current situation requires?

Chiz.

 

[NARSES2]

You mean real life isn't like Star Trek where one can plug anything into the deflector array and get exactly the result the current situation requires?

Chiz.

 

Not yet, but wait a couple of weeks and who knows what AI will be capable of ? 

[Charlie_c67]

What do you mean by "plug and played"?

All radar systems since the late 1960s are very sophisticated electronic devices which are integrated with the rest of the aircraft equipment. No item is "plug and play" in a similar way to most computers, even then there is always setting up to be done.

Gondor

Bit of a crude analogy from myself. I mean in the sense that one system can easily physically replace another. I realise the setup side is a little more complex, not looking to go that deep, but like with the F-16 there's the choice of P&W or GE engines with minimal external changes is it possible to do the same with a complete Radar set? Or is it, as highlighted by Weaver, something that's only a recent possibility.

Hope that's a little clearer!

[rickshaw]

It is really only a recent possibility and even then the system needs to be "tweaked" for the aircraft it is fitting into.  With the advent of open-ended systems it is not possible to build a system and configure it for the purposes it is intended to fill.   So, in otherwords you have a radar system which is designed to act as a transmitter and a receiver system for a communication system under AESA rules.   You can have a communication system which acts as a radar system when it isn't acting as a communication system.

[Gondor]

What do you mean by "plug and played"?

All radar systems since the late 1960s are very sophisticated electronic devices which are integrated with the rest of the aircraft equipment. No item is "plug and play" in a similar way to most computers, even then there is always setting up to be done.

Gondor

Bit of a crude analogy from myself. I mean in the sense that one system can easily physically replace another. I realise the setup side is a little more complex, not looking to go that deep, but like with the F-16 there's the choice of P&W or GE engines with minimal external changes is it possible to do the same with a complete Radar set? Or is it, as highlighted by Weaver, something that's only a recent possibility.

Hope that's a little clearer!

Size and volume-wise wise that already happens. Upgrades to some aircraft do involve to replacement of the radar and its associated boxes. All you need to do is to find the physical size of the radar face as it is now, rather than a dish as modern radars are phased array types.

Gondor

[Weaver]

It's always been possible to swap one radar for a new one if the new one fits. However "fits" is a bit more complicated than just the dish diameter. The electronics "can" behind the new one either has to fit in the same space as the old one or the nose has to be stretched. You also have to consider cockpit mods. If the new radar needs a bigger display screen and/or control panel then something has to give.

It's sometimes possible to move other avionics out of the nose to make space for a bigger radar. If the original radar was small, and shared the nose with radios, display black boxes or a nav/attack system, then those things can be moved somewhere else, if there's space there, or they might be replaced by minaturised newer-tech replacements. Wiring issues can make all this more complicated, especially before databuses. If there isn't space, then it might need a fuselage extension behind the cockpit, or a Skyhawk-style avionics hump.

[Old Wombat]

If there isn't space, then it might need a fuselage extension behind the cockpit, or a Skyhawk-style avionics hump.

Interestingly, the Australian A-4G had higher spec avionics than the early A-4F's from which they were developed, plus Sidewinder capability, but fitted this larger amount of equipment into the fuselage without resorting to the hump of the later A-4Fs.

[Charlie_c67]

Thanks for the info guys, a few things to think about there