<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Revisit Rate on Counter UAV Radar — Low-Altitude Surveillance Radar</title>
    <link>https://www.counteruavradar.com/tags/revisit-rate/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Revisit Rate on Counter UAV Radar — Low-Altitude Surveillance Radar</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 11:41:00 +0800</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.counteruavradar.com/tags/revisit-rate/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>AESA vs Mechanical Radar: Performance, Cost, and Operational Trade-offs.</title>
      <link>https://www.counteruavradar.com/knowledge-base/aesa-vs-mechanical-radar/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2025 11:41:00 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.counteruavradar.com/knowledge-base/aesa-vs-mechanical-radar/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;AESA and mechanically scanned radar are often framed as a simple upgrade story. The reality is more technical and more operational. The real comparison is about performance, cost, and trade-offs across lifecycle, coverage behavior, and mission fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An active electronically scanned array can change where it looks by steering beams electronically, while a mechanically scanned radar depends on physical motion for part or all of its coverage pattern. That difference affects revisit behavior, integration workload, and lifecycle expectations.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
