so the pilot can still get communication of where and when to attack?
Not really, as I told you, the UHF radio antenna are flushed into the airframe inflight. So F-117 mostly rely on mission planning. It doesn't have the sort of directional datalink such as those available on later stealth aircraft. There was some effort in 2002 to integrate real time communication into the aircraft though, but that is after the war
Oh I know it had the upgrade dont forget to include the year 2007. Are there new t/r modules on EW system other than the EA-18?
F-22 use its radar to send jamming signal, so technically speaking, when you changed the T/R modules of radar, you also change the T/R modules of EW system.
doesnt sound like you clicked on both links if you said you clicked on a link because one of them will tell you the same value. I am not talking about the 9B-1103M radar but the 9M317MA radar(big difference with letters) ""Slatec" active radar head of homing (ARGSN) developed by Moscow Research Institute Agat. Detection and capture of air targets is made by a slit antenna grille with a monopulse radiopelentator. ARGSN "Slate" can receive targeting from almost any external sources (DRLOIU aircraft, BRLK multirole interceptor fighters, ground and ship radars with appropriate information exchange equipment). ARGSN's energy potential "Slate" allows to capture the target with EPR 0.3m2 up to 35 km."
You are confusing between the name of the missile and the name of the radar seeker used on it.
Big difference.
9M317 is the original missile with
9E420 semi active radar seeker
9M317M is the improved version with
9E432 semi active radar seeker (also known as Buk-M3 )
9M317MA is the modified version of 9M317M missile but with
ARGSN 9B-1103M active radar seeker
Yeah but the direction an incoming air to air missile when approaching targets dont do nose dives when engaging aircrafts. radar on a missile does not necessarily have to face down but at an angle. it didn't stop an S-200 from hitting this aircraft
WATCH: Israeli F-16 fighter jet crashes after shot down by Syrian missiles - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wbl-i3HIcM
If your missile coming from higher altitude then target, then it must do a nose dive, how else does it reach target?.
Secondly, I don't see the relevant between your suggestion of missile with active seeker tracking aircraft and F-16 shootdown by S-200. F-16 isn't a stealth aircraft, especially when it carry several bombs and fuel tank. Furthermore, your video only show a burning F-16 crashing to the ground (unless you think a SAM is that slow when they dive), so it really doesn't show anything regarding how hard it is to lock on a target in high clutter.
Yeah but I got the attitudes and trajectories of those specific SAMs same thing as I already got info before from two companies from Russia and India where they kept the same dimensions with increased range and speeds. So I am going with data that is already presented by the missile companies which you probably already know by now, thanks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wbl-i3HIcM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wbl-i3HIcM
What do you mean? do you mean that the maximum service ceiling is the same even though range and speed increased?
That should be obvious because the maximum ceiling of missile is not just how high you can launch it upward, but also how high its control fins can remain effective. The higher the missile go, the thinner air will be. And aerodynamic force is dictated by air density, so even if you put the biggest rocket motor on your missile, if it lack the alternative mean to steer direction at high altitude, then its ceiling will be limited still.
Trajectories will always change with range
any sources for the ASQ-239 getting new modules or is that a software program update? 6th gen options are not decided yet some are either going with variable cycle or going with near at hypersonic speeds and if its a hypersonic option that aerodynamic layout will be suited more for spead than stealth like we wont say a F-35 pull mach 5 with current features..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wbl-i3HIcM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wbl-i3HIcM
Yes, ASQ-239 does get new processor and antennas
Adaptive cycle engine isn't something only 6 generation aircraft have either.
Well yeah Israel did not deny that F-16Is were near and the only reason S-300s were deployed later was claimed to have friend or foe identification which the S-200 lacked and than they slaved the rest of the air defense network with those S-300s with an agreement to Israel saying were not targeting your aircrafts.
Even assuming Syrian didn't integrate their own IFF system on the S-200, wouldn't it make more sense for them to attack all F-16 instead of only the IL-20 there? , S-200 launcher have several missiles per battery.
So for your 3rd reason you dont believe KRET when that was from their own company website?
When I don't believe something, it is because it make no sense, a marketing piece on a company website sometimes fall in to that categories. Because more often than not, it is written by the marketing department and not the engineer who involved.
VERA included the B-2 radar and I am sure you already got the news about Germany's claim with the F-35?
Yes, I know VERA include B-2 as the threat that they can detect. That how they advertise system like VERA, and in theory, when B-2 use its link 16 omi directional datalink, it can be detected. What they wouldn't tell you, is that in combat, stealth aircraft won't use omi directional datalink. They will have their own directional stealth datalink such as MADL or IFDL
About the case where the German radar detect the F-35 the working principles of the system is a little bit different from VERA
For VERA, you rely on having several VERA station located some distance from each others and all receive the same pulse transmitted by the same aircraft. By calculate the time difference of arrival, you can locate target. That why a high gain directional radar and datalink are good counter against this sort of system, because it ensure only 1 station or 2 stations receive the pulse at a time
For the German Twlnvis, it isn't truly a passive radar, it is more like a bi static radar (meaning the transmitter and the receiver aren't at the same location). This system rely on having the transmitter being the national TV or radio station which are at VHF frequency and the receiver itself is silent. In peace time, this work alright, in war time, these station will be one of the first to get hit by missiles, and the biggest issue is that they can't move. No fixed transmitter, no bi static radars.
Secondly, the F-35 was flying in peace time, so it must have its transponder on, which make target identification and IFF much easier.
ahh what? my only concern is that the photonic radar had a higher threshold for decibel sensitibity than the suppression capabilities of conventional radars. photonic communications will have higher EW suppression resistance as well than conventional communications. I am just stating what EW terms were you referring to radar that can be used on GPS, which did not necessarily answer what anti-jamming capabilities we are talking about?
I don't understand what you want to ask me ?
This is the equivalent of a gay person saying im not gay he is the one that is gay for sucking my dick. Its like that one time on secretprojects where you state how the speeds of the missile that is to simulate PRSM or agm-183 has slower speeds than AGM-183, when I just found out you were in another thread where you were stating how speeds of HGVs get slower in descent where am like is the agm-183 an HGV? why didnt he tell me it will be slower than mach 10 like the simulated missile will be slower than mach 6+? Same as why didn't you tell me that GPS only has to worry about sidelobe?
As the name suggests, jamming antennas (jammers) are specifically used to interfere with radio noise or signals. In electronic warfare.
www.jemengineering.com
.
To the jamming techniques you complained about the photonic radar might face than having a higher sensitivity threshold. Which of these apply to radars and which apply to antennas using GPS signals?
Firstly, I already explained to you the speed of boost glider several times before. When we talked about Avangard I already told you that a boost glider is slower than a ballistic missile because its is slow down gradually by the atmosphere. I also showed you the velocity charts for boost glider system several times when you asked me why there are so many number for AGM-183 speed. Think of boost glider weapon like a gliding bullet or an sabot round, the closer the target, the faster it is at impact. Of course boost glider decelerate much slower than bullet because they gliding at much higher altitude. But basic principles are the same
Secondly, GPS only have to worry about sidelobes because of where the satellite located versus where the jammer located. For a GPS system, the source of signal aka the satellite are up in the sky, whereas the jammer are on the ground. So the direction of the main lobe of a GPS antenna is not the same as the jammer
For a radar, it is opposite. Because the source of signal are at target direction (since you shine them with radar beam and listen to reflection). But the target can carry a jammer to protect themselves. So the main lobe of radar will be at the same direction as the jammer.
So the way for a GPS system to "
anti Jam" is practically just not receive the signal from jammer direction. A radar don't have that option when jammer is on target. Does that make sense now?.
For your link, like I said earlier: a radar with very wide dynamic range can help negate noise jamming, but no impact on repeater techniques. But these repeater techniques still doesn't work on GPS with anti jam, because as I said earlier, in principles the solution of anti jam GPS is literally not listening to signal not coming from their main lobe.
OK remember you heard those words from their CEOs and some higher ups that managed their ABM shield. Just like the advancement of nuclear propulsion the beauty will unfold later. I am curious did you say earlier that aircrafts can deal with higher frequencies than current firecontrol frequencies? While I believe a changing battlefield and you dont, can I have some information on the frequencies absorption range for stealth aircraft if you have any?
I do believe in a changing battlefield, just not in the way you are thinking.
Physics CAN'T change.
I think you should read the book I mentioned earlier then you can understand why high frequency aren't good against stealth aircraft.
