- Feb 22, 2020
so the pilot can still get communication of where and when to attack?F-117 doesn't have a datalink
It only have Tacan antenna for take off and landing and an UHF voice communication antenna but both of these 2 antenna are flushed inside the fuselage in flight.
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 radar had been upgraded before from APG-77 to APG-77v1
There is also another recent sensor upgrade program for F-22
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."Firstly, I clicked on your link and this is the range the gave for ARGSN seeker: about 25 km against a target with RCS of 5 m2 and radio correction channel (datalink) range of 50 km. That quite a big different from the claimed 35 km detection range against target with RCS of 0.3 m2 as stated from these other source.
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 - YouTubeSecondly, target detection is a matter of sorting out a target from background noise, RCS of aircraft is much greater from the top but the ground surface also generate order of magnitude greater clutter compared to a sky background. Think about it, a stealth destroyer still have RCS on order of 100-1000 m2, so why they are considered stealth despite the much greater RCS compared to even a normal aircraft?. Because the sea surface is a significant source of 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.Thirdly, missiles follow a ballistic arcs to engage target, but that arc have to balance between the energy conservation from drag reduction, energy lost from climb as well as the energy lost when the missile making the diving maneuver. The aerodynamic force required to make the turn is also very important. So the missile trajectory look similar to the image below, SAM doesn't make very sharp climb up to max celling then sharp diving down. In fact, missile won't climb much higher than their targets, so their seeker won't look at target straight from the top, but rather from direction 7-15 degrees higher than target in elevation. Unless you somehow use an ICBM to engage air targets.
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.No, apart from DAS the EOTS also get upgraded, and the EW antenna for ASQ-239 also get upgraded, along with the central processing core.
NGAD is not the main focus, it is just 1 of the program that will be developed, F-35 still produced at much greater quantity and used many countries so there will be many upgrade program for it.
European 6 gen is their first attempt at stealth fighters
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. So for your 3rd reason you dont believe KRET when that was from their own company website?F-16I is a 4 gen aircraft, comparable to F-16C/D but less capable compared to F-16 E/F let alone F-22 or F-35
Also EW is not an invincible I win button (just like how stealth doesn't mean invisible) , there is still the burn through distance, and if you get close enough, the radar can still burn through your jamming.
Secondly, about the IL-76 and Israel F-16I incident, frankly, these jammer on F-16I was working well enough that the tracking gate of S-200 fail to capture the F-16I and lock on the IL-76 instead
Thirdly, I don't want to change your mind, I know for a fact that you will believe what you want to believe. I only explain the misconception so that others who interested in technical aspect can distinguish between fact and Journo BS and yes the piece you just referenced is either propaganda or journo BS or both.
VERA included the B-2 radar and I am sure you already got the news about Germany's claim with the F-35?Secondly, US does have the equivalent of VERA system, you can find it on the RC-135, F-16HTS, EA-18 ALR-218 and F-35 ASQ-239
There are "anti jam" radar already, we called that function on radar side lobe blanker and side lobe canceller
but the key different between a radar and a GPS system is that for a radar, the jammer is very often inside its main lobe. In other words, the jammer is either on the target itself or located in the same direction as the targets so the sidelobe blanker and canceller function doesn't help in that case, they only help when the target and jammer aren't both inside the radar beamwidth. This also is why a high gain radar is harder to jam. By contrast, for a GPS system, the jammer located on the ground and the emitter (the satellite) located in space, so the jammer is always inside the sidelobe of the GPS system.
Secondly, anti jam function of GPS system doesn't counter jamming by changing frequency, as I mentioned earlier, because the the GPS jamming signal always come from the sidelobes of the GPS antenna so the anti jam function must take advantage of that fact.
The most simple one are Fixed Radiation Pattern Antennas (FRPAs): they use antennas designed to have deep nulls in the horizons where the jamming signal come from. A null is the direction where the antenna doesn't transmit or listen to signal. Look at the illustrative image below, the biggest lump is the main lobe where the antenna concentrated most of its energy. The several smaller one are side lobes where a bit of energy leaked into, and the gap between them are the nulls.
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?But FRPAs is just the most simple anti jam method,
This evolved into Multiple Element Fixed Radiation Pattern Antennas (MEFRPAs): which divided into 2 methods:
Switched Multiple Element FRPAs: Still very simple, the system has multiple antenna with different radiation pattern, aimed at different parts of the sky and null the rest, it switched between them until it receive the most stable GPS signal.
Multiple Element Canceller : This technique use 2 antennas, the auxiliary one directed at the jammer and the primary one directed at the direction of true GPS signal. Normally that mean the primary one will located on top of the aircraft or missiles whereas the auxiliary one will located at the bottom. The primary one will receive a mix of both real GPS signal and Jamming signal whereas the auxiliary one will only receive jamming signal. Then the received signal are combined to eliminate the jamming signal
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?Firstly, the method of radar jamming I mentioned earlier doesn't rely on overwhelmed the receiver with noise, so they don't have to covered the whole dynamic range of the receiver
Secondly, because GPS jammer are on the ground (there is no literally satellite ability to transmit jamming signal yet) , so anti jam function on GPS system is much easier than anti jam function on radar, because they only need to deal with sidelobe jammer.
As the name suggests, jamming antennas (jammers) are specifically used to interfere with radio noise or signals. In electronic warfare.
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?
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?These CEO are not insane, and the higher up are not insane either but nothing stopping them from creating some propaganda, just like what people used to say about the magical plasma stealth coat. And let be real, even if they truly try to explain how photonic radar operate, most people wouldn't understand or try to understand, so why bother ?
Furthermore, most journalist who write about photonic radar doesn't fully understand what is and how it supposed to work either, they just grasp the biggest most catchy words, what they think can make a sensational headline and that it. You think most readers will click on a link that talk about coherent radar and how oscillator function? . No, of course. But most reader would click on something that say: " trillion dollars stealth is confirmed death due to new photonic radar that will be installed next week".