Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around identifying the structural layout of the AN/APG-81 AESA Radar antenna used in the F-35 aircraft. Participants explore various antenna designs, comparing the APG-81 to previous models like the APG-68 from the F-16 and the APG-77 from the F-22. The conversation includes technical details about antenna structures and their functionalities.
Discussion Character
- Technical explanation
- Debate/contested
- Exploratory
Main Points Raised
- One participant notes that the APG-81 has a different structure compared to past AESA/PESA antennas, suggesting it may resemble a "honeycomb" layout, although this term lacks scholarly references.
- Another participant proposes that the antenna could be a Vivaldi Slot Array, but later points out that the slots appear to be of uniform width rather than tapered, which is typical for Vivaldi designs.
- Some participants discuss the presence of slotted waveguides in the APG-81, highlighting the offset of the slots as a characteristic feature.
- There is speculation about the elements on the periphery possibly being parasitic elements, with uncertainty about the metallization visible in the images.
- A participant mentions that the antenna operates around 10GHz, with individual radiator dimensions suggested to be approximately 1.4cm, and discusses how these radiators may be driven to direct the beam.
- Comparative analysis is made with the APG-77 from the F-22, noting differences in the radiator shapes and materials used.
- One participant expresses a personal interest in the technology and mentions having a phased array from a terrestrial microwave link antenna that they find difficult to understand.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express various hypotheses and suggestions regarding the structure of the APG-81 antenna, but no consensus is reached on its exact classification or terminology. Multiple competing views remain regarding the antenna's design and functionality.
Contextual Notes
Participants reference images and videos to support their claims, but limitations in visibility and detail from the provided pictures may affect the accuracy of their assessments. The discussion also reflects a reliance on specific measurements and assumptions about the antenna's design.