How to counter Fifth Generation Stealth fighters?

[p2prada]

I am just adding a different view to your post. Don't take it personally.

4.5gen aircraft will be around till 2030-35 atleast, not accounting for any revolution in air warfare. Though you will have to agree that their roles will change from omni role to strike aircraft.

5th gen is a revolution in air warfare. A Spitfire could kill a Me-262. But that could not guarantee its continued existence.

Your analogy of networked forces with 5th gen/6th gen UCAV is flawed by current trends. The F22 can only linkup with other F22s as of now, that too via satellite. This was done to prevent its detection by passive sensors due to emission whilst networking with a 4th gen AC. In future too, this will likely not change, but will possibly allow linking to AWACS.

Directional datalinks are being created today. The Swedes have one for Gripen. There is one version of the Link 16 in a European force that uses a directional link.

Indeed F-22s can link up only with 3 other F-22s. But the F-35s new datalink will be the next universal datalink after the Link 16 for NATO.

There is another factor that must be considered while talking of engagements by 5th gen AC. It is well known that despite presence of AESA, the 5th gen ACs prefer to fly emission silent profile, so as not to give away their position by their own radiation. This is the reason why 5th gen aircraft used till now have only been used as strike aircraft.

It was more due to technological hurdles in developing air combat aircraft in the past.

This is how technology progresses. We are only building strike UCAVs today only because we cannot build an air combat UCAV yet. It was no different in the past for stealth. Start with a simple strike or recce aircraft. Move to an air combat version in 10-20 years.

Air warfare, even against 4th gen neccesitates that it be guided by AWACS,

\

Battlespace control is best handled by AWACS. Actual air combat is conducted by fighters. The quality of the fighter will determine the ultimate victor.

This fact allows the defender a chance to hold their own against the F35, and to an extent the F22.

The AWACS will die first.

In open source simulations, Su-35s took out American AWACS first, actually in just 20 seconds after the fight begins in a 24 vs 24 scenario with different aircraft. Even with 24 F-22s in the field, the AWACS still died.

In a recent LM organized simulation, the AWACS were killed very early during a fight.

A JSTAR equivalent platform or even ground based jamming system can force the F35 to break invisibility by cutting off communications with the AWACS or any other sensor.

In order to cut off the transmission of a directional datalink, you will have to position your jamming aircraft between the F-35 and the AWACS.

In order to cut off satellite communications, which are directional, you will have to fly between the F-35 and the satellite.

Is it possible?

The IRST, though effective, has a high rate of false alarm and thus pilots still prefer the radar detection. This allows the non 5th gen to play on a roughly even plane against the 5th gen, assuming the 4th gen has sufficient EW package.

Yes, it does. But you assume that 5th gen fighters will never use their radars. But that is simply wrong.

Today's 4th gen systems may posses the right avionics in the future, but against the F-22 and PAKFA, the kinematic disadvantage will never go.

 

[p2prada]

Rather wishful thinking,,,, in red flag exercises planes useing IRST are not able to sucessfully shoot down F22 or F35 or even get a lock on the F22 and F35 when they can even see it.

There are plenty of images on the net of the F-22 being locked by Rafale's IRST sensors.

 

[p2prada]

I had taken into account this factor, and this is why I said that you need a JSTAR equivalent platform to disrupt the communication between the different aircraft. This forces them to turn on their own radars, increasing chances of detection, and somewhat levels the playing field.

There is no such aircraft in the world.

JSTARs isn't a jamming aircraft, it carries no ECM equipment. In the USAF only fighters carry jammers and those are mainly self protection suites and stand off jammers used in ground attack. JSTARS is like the AWACS, but used for ground forces, like how P-8 will be for naval targets.

Ground - JSTAR
Air - AWACS
Sea - LRMR

In air combat, jamming is a much more subtle game. Best handled by fighters since they have the agility to escape.

As far as my comment on shrinking range of BVR engagement is concerned, it was in no way aimed at the threshold of BVR. It was rather aimed at people who were stating that bvr kills will be made at 100km, and one stated that it will be done at 200km. My understanding is that such extreme ranges of bvr kill will be unfeasible for the next decade at least.

Such ranges will be used against transports, AWACS etc.

In air combat, max range launch is not meant for a kill.

And as far as your statement on bvr engagements is concerned, I agree fully with it. But a fifth gen with current radar will struggle to get a bvr kill as much as a fourth gen.

Everything takes time.

This will not change until a revolution occurs in radar.

Not really. A radar can detect water droplets in the air, a F-22 is nothing.

The radar of the 5th gen AC will have keep guiding the bvr missile until the seeker of the missile aquires it on its own. This is vey difficult in the modern theatre as the enemy will immediately become aware of his being under radar lock and missile solution being used. With sufficient
EW capability, aka Spectre etc the defending AC will attempt to jam the radar signal, which BTW until now has not been achieved against AESA. Alongwith it jamming will also aim to break communication between the AC and the missile. If either of this is achieved, the bvr will wander off.

Hence why 4th gen systems are obsolete.

A Growler managed a BVR kill against the F-22. We obviously don't know how, but it was done. But then, even Spitfire has killed a Me-262.

 

[p2prada]

p2prada why did you say current bvr missiles can't lock on to f22 ? because of low rcs ? so the rules of rcs vs radar range is applied to missile seeker heads too ?

The radar seeker on the missile works the same way as a radar on the aircraft. It is a monopulse radar. Works in at least 3 known modes.

The seeker can detect the F-22, but it simply rejects the F-22 as an aircraft and considers it to be a bird or an unnecessary anomaly.

do you believe radar detection capability(including missile seeker heads ) is going to be greater and rcs reducing methods will not be able to catch up with it ?

It will be a game of pushme pullyou. One day radar will be ahead, the next RCS.

The next step for the Americans is designing systems in the -70dBsm range and lower. F-22 is at -40dBsm. Meaning, the F-22 has the RCS of a small bird. Later jets will have the RCS of a mosquito and so on.

if yes then at some point of time stealth will become useless because all radars will see the aircraft well before the maximum engagement range of their missile ? isn't it ?

Perhaps. By then there may be newer techniques of hiding aircraft. Today, we are able to bend radar waves away from the source, tomorrow we may be able to bend visible light away from the source.

if so then then determining factor in who shoots first depends on max engagement range of missile vs kinamatic performance,ecm of aircraft on the run. stealth is out from the picture, at least it becomes not so important.

Current techniques of stealth may become completely obsolete in a few decades. How things will progress after that, I don't know.

what I think is new kind of stealth materials and technologies will arise and will keep up the challenge to radar detection.

Yes. One group will always try hard to stay invisible, another group may try hard to see better.

 

[ersakthivel]

Theres nothing to jam on optical guided missiles, IRST on F22 and F35 are reduced by 75 perccent with composites, sheilding an heat reduceing techniques, missiles will be programed to go to a certain point and then the optical systems activated. The T50 has a radar signature of 5000 times that of a F22 , the least detectable plane is allways going to have a substantial advantage.

how will a missile launched from 5th gen F-22 on 4.5th gen fighter will be programed to go to a certain point before it's optical sensor is activated?
The only way possible is with the help of a seeker F-22 which has it's radar on.OR passive seeking with 4.5th gens IR emissions and electro magnetic emissions.

In future upgrades if em emission shielding is done on 4.th gen fighters then the missile from F-22 will not reach the programed point point based on EM emission.
Whatever may be the IR reduction measures on F-22, it is impossible to hide the 320 kn thrust jet blast comming out from the engine of F-22 from future IRST trackers.

Any missile on 4.5th gen can smell this jet blast and reach a programed point and then switch over to seeking the surface heat of F-22 or any other future 5th gen.
SO how effective 5th gens will be, depends on the development of future IRST systems and very high frequency based asea radars

 

[ersakthivel]

Theres nothing to jam on optical guided missiles, IRST on F22 and F35 are reduced by 75 perccent with composites, sheilding an heat reduceing techniques, missiles will be programed to go to a certain point and then the optical systems activated. The T50 has a radar signature of 5000 times that of a F22 , the least detectable plane is allways going to have a substantial advantage.

how will a missile launched from 5th gen F-22 on 4.5th gen fighter will be programed to go to a certain point before it's optical sensor is activated?
The only way possible is with the help of a seeker F-22 which has it's radar on.OR passive seeking with 4.5th gens IR emissions and electro magnetic emissions.

In future upgrades if em emission shielding is done on 4.th gen fighters then the missile from F-22 will not reach the programed point point based on EM emission.
Whatever may be the IR reduction measures on F-22, it is impossible to hide the 320 kn thrust jet blast comming out from the engine of F-22 from future IRST trackers.

Any missile on 4.5th gen can smell this jet blast and reach a programed point and then switch over to seeking the surface heat of F-22 or any other future 5th gen.
SO how effective 5th gens will be, depends on the development of future IRST systems and very high frequency based asea radars

 

[ersakthivel]

The AWACS will die first.

In open source simulations, Su-35s took out American AWACS first, actually in just 20 seconds after the fight begins in a 24 vs 24 scenario with different aircraft. Even with 24 F-22s in the field, the AWACS still died.

In a recent LM organized simulation, the AWACS were killed very early during a fight.

That's exactly what I said. F-22 won't be be able to rely on AWACS for sending their missiles to a certain preprogrammed point based on their AWACS.
If EM spectrum emission shielding methods are applied on future 4.5th gen upgrades F-22 won't be able to use this for tracking 4.5th gens.
So a seeker F-22 has to switch on it's ASEA radar much like the AWACS and allow itself to become the trget of 4.5th gens anti radiation missiles for a radar silent F-22 to launch it's Long range BVRs in stealth mode.It is the main weakness of 5th gens in air to air role.

The seeker F-22 who switches on his ASEA radar will transmit his existence for a distance equal to twice it's tracking range(i.e the F-22 radar has a tracking range of 300 km against a 4.5th gen ,it's radar signals will be trackable at 600 km.)

And it has to continuously do this to obtain weapon pointable tracks on 4.5th gens.But it won't be able to track smaller and much more stealthier Stealth UCAVs flying with dual seeker long range BVRs flying in front of the 4.5th gen fleet,

In such a scenario the Stealth UCVAS won't need a radar to launch the misile

SO the chances of it being safe from the sams and long range BVR shots from much smaller in size Stealth UCAVS flying in front of the 4.5th gen fleet is impossible.

Asea radar won't be untrackable and unjammable for ever. It will be tracked and SPECTRA like counter measures will be employed against ASEA radars of seeker F-22s in future.

 

[DivineHeretic]

There is no such aircraft in the world.

JSTARs isn't a jamming aircraft, it carries no ECM equipment. In the USAF only fighters carry jammers and those are mainly self protection suites and stand off jammers used in ground attack. JSTARS is like the AWACS, but used for ground forces, like how P-8 will be for naval targets.

Ground - JSTAR
Air - AWACS
Sea - LRMR

In air combat, jamming is a much more subtle game. Best handled by fighters since they have the agility to escape.



Such ranges will be used against transports, AWACS etc.

In air combat, max range launch is not meant for a kill.



Everything takes time.



Not really. A radar can detect water droplets in the air, a F-22 is nothing.



Hence why 4th gen systems are obsolete.

A Growler managed a BVR kill against the F-22. We obviously don't know how, but it was done. But then, even Spitfire has killed a Me-262.

Oops, my bad. I confused JSTAR with the E/A-18G. Which btw carries only AIM 120 AMRAAM. But it does operate solely as an Electronic attack aircraft.

The ability to jam AESA signals officially does not exist as of now, however other communication links can be jammed from standoff ranges by the Growlers and Prowlers.

As for extreme range kills of AWACS, well it is murky to say the least. The EW, especially the incredibly powerful AESA onboard the AWACS provides an enormous electronic attack ability against long range bvr missiles. The fact is that it should in theory atleast be possible to disrupt the datalink between the missile and the guiding aircraft by barrage jamming attacks on both the aircraft and on the missile.

And HARM missiles cant be used against AESA and by extension against AWACS because their anti radiation seekers cannot get a lock on AESA signals. Any AWACS killer will have to use either Radar seeker or IR seeker for terminal guidance.

Of course, the US simulations do present the doom scenario of AWACS being killed first, but taking out targets at such extreme ranges will be a challenge for a long time to come.

The Swordfish can detect a cricket ball at 600km. Your point about detecting water droplet and F22 being?
Getting a detection is one thing, getting a missile lock is quite another.

4th gen will indeed become obsolete in time, but atleast until 2025-30, will maintain their own relevance, not as a A2A platform but as a strike platform.
And so long as their radar and EW upgrades match their 5th cousins, they will retain a good chance of kill in a 1v 1 or 2V2 scenario.

 

[DivineHeretic]

I am just adding a different view to your post. Don't take it personally.



5th gen is a revolution in air warfare. A Spitfire could kill a Me-262. But that could not guarantee its continued existence.



Directional datalinks are being created today. The Swedes have one for Gripen. There is one version of the Link 16 in a European force that uses a directional link.

Indeed F-22s can link up only with 3 other F-22s. But the F-35s new datalink will be the next universal datalink after the Link 16 for NATO.



It was more due to technological hurdles in developing air combat aircraft in the past.

This is how technology progresses. We are only building strike UCAVs today only because we cannot build an air combat UCAV yet. It was no different in the past for stealth. Start with a simple strike or recce aircraft. Move to an air combat version in 10-20 years.

\

Battlespace control is best handled by AWACS. Actual air combat is conducted by fighters. The quality of the fighter will determine the ultimate victor.



The AWACS will die first.

In open source simulations, Su-35s took out American AWACS first, actually in just 20 seconds after the fight begins in a 24 vs 24 scenario with different aircraft. Even with 24 F-22s in the field, the AWACS still died.

In a recent LM organized simulation, the AWACS were killed very early during a fight.



In order to cut off the transmission of a directional datalink, you will have to position your jamming aircraft between the F-35 and the AWACS.

In order to cut off satellite communications, which are directional, you will have to fly between the F-35 and the satellite.

Is it possible?



Yes, it does. But you assume that 5th gen fighters will never use their radars. But that is simply wrong.

Today's 4th gen systems may posses the right avionics in the future, but against the F-22 and PAKFA, the kinematic disadvantage will never go.

My point exactly. Until now fifth gen AC have been used instrike role only. Its transition to air dominance role has yet to be done in a battlefield.

As far as jamming is concerned, you can jam from standoff ranges by overwhelming the transmitting and/or receiving antenna with barrage jamming. It is not absolute, but does allow few seconds to confuse the enemy, especialky if the radar is switched off.

I never assumed that the fifth gen will fly with radars switched off. But my understanding is that the pilots will prefer not to use it until they have to..

The PAK-FA and Raptor will have kinematic superiority against all 4th gen granted. But the F35 is woefully short on this. Several Fourth gen AC have better flight characteristics over it. To top it off, it cant even supercruise and has poor range.
Against it, a rafale and Typhoon will fancy their chances, especially given the kinematic superiority they have, and the relatively low RCS they have.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

The radar seeker on the missile works the same way as a radar on the aircraft. It is a monopulse radar. Works in at least 3 known modes.

The seeker can detect the F-22, but it simply rejects the F-22 as an aircraft and considers it to be a bird or an unnecessary anomaly.

if the mono pulse radar/seeker can detect the f22 then recognising it as a threat only needs minor update I guess. otherwise there would have been numerous articles which talk about it , development and procurement for the new gen missile seekers etc.

 

[DivineHeretic]

if the mono pulse radar/seeker can detect the f22 then recognising it as a threat only needs minor update I guess. otherwise there would have been numerous articles which talk about it , development and procurement for the new gen missile seekers etc.

The following are the radar ranges against fifth gen AC-
APG-77 AESA (F-22A)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 20 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 35 km+

CAESAR AESA (EF-2000 Tranch3, post-2015 with 1,500 T/Rs)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 18~21 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 32~38 km+

APG-63 V2/V3/V4 AESA (F-15C/E/SG)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 14~19 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 25~33 km+

APG-81 AESA (F-35A/B/C)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 16 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 28 km+

RBE-2 AESA (Rafale F4, post-2012)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 11~13 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 20~23 km+

Here is a better list of radar ranges
http://www.clashofarms.com/files/Smarter Radars for Hpn.pdf

As you can see from the above data, even AESA with 1500+ t/r modules can detect Fifth gen AC only below 35-40km. And these have very impressive power output. If you compare them to the non AESA radars, the range of detection plummets below 10km.

Under these circumstances, I'm seriously doubtful if the radar seeker of the bvr missile will even detect the presence of the fifth gen AC at WVR ranges even. Nore that even AESA can barely detect them at BVR range threshold.

The statements by the RAAF pilots who flew against the F22 in red flag stated clearly that he couldn't get a missilelock even though he could see the damned plane with his own eyes.

 

[ersakthivel]

The following are the radar ranges against fifth gen AC-
APG-77 AESA (F-22A)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 20 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 35 km+

CAESAR AESA (EF-2000 Tranch3, post-2015 with 1,500 T/Rs)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 18~21 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 32~38 km+

APG-63 V2/V3/V4 AESA (F-15C/E/SG)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 14~19 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 25~33 km+

APG-81 AESA (F-35A/B/C)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 16 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 28 km+

RBE-2 AESA (Rafale F4, post-2012)
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 11~13 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 20~23 km+

Here is a better list of radar ranges
http://www.clashofarms.com/files/Smarter Radars for Hpn.pdf

As you can see from the above data, even AESA with 1500+ t/r modules can detect Fifth gen AC only below 35-40km. And these have very impressive power output. If you compare them to the non AESA radars, the range of detection plummets below 10km.

Under these circumstances, I'm seriously doubtful if the radar seeker of the bvr missile will even detect the presence of the fifth gen AC at WVR ranges even. Nore that even AESA can barely detect them at BVR range threshold.

The statements by the RAAF pilots who flew against the F22 in red flag stated clearly that he couldn't get a missilelock even though he could see the damned plane with his own eyes.

but why couldn't he use his helmet mounted sighting cueing system which relies on his line of sight? And if the missile gets close to say withing 5 km based on his line of sight guidance, then if it has modern FPA IR seekers that capture the thermal image of the F-22's surface heat map, surely F-22 can be hit within this WVR range is my guess.
Also all the above radars are of X band only.Is there any new developments on L band and higher band based ASEA radars ?
The F-22's stealth shaping features are not effective against higher wavelength bands. SO these bands will give a decent track of the F-22 like 5th gens.
Eventhough it may not be accurate enough to be used for terminal guidance it will allow BVrs from 4.5th gens to reach a certain closer distance to the 5th gens. From there on the modern FPA IR seekers that capture the thermal image of the F-22's surface heat map will take over the terminal guidance.

 

[DivineHeretic]

but why couldn't he use his helmet mounted sighting cueing system which relies on his line of sight? And if the missile gets close to say withing 5 km based on his line of sight guidance, then if it has modern DPA IR seekers that capture the thermal image of the F-22's surface heat map, surely F-22 can be hit within this WVR range is my guess.
Also all the above radars are of X band only.Is there any new developments on L band and higher band based ASEA radars ?
The F-22's stealth shaping features are not effective against higher wavelength bands. SO these bands will give a decent track of the F-22 like 5th gens.
Eventhough it may not be accurate enough to be used for terminal guidance it will allow BVrs from 4.5th gens to reach a certain closer distance to the 5th gens. From there on the modern DPA IR seekers that capture the thermal image of the F-22's surface heat map will take over the terminal guidance.

My earlier statement was regarding Bvr engagements and radar seekers. I had not taken WVR into account.

HMS relies on the pilot sighting ability. A pilot must first spot the fighter to be able to use HMS. Now the average human maximum sighting distance is 10 miles for a 747. It will be much less for a fighter plane, especially if it is painted in light grey, the same colour as the sky. Note that several other factors will further reduce this detection range by eyesight.

At such short ranges the IRST will in all likelihood give the first detection, and as I've shown before, even radar will begin detecting the AC. However, in all likelihood the fifth gen AC will get the first detection of the two, even with radar being turned off, as it is more likely to have better sensors, including imoprtantly the passive emmision sensor listening for communication signals.

In simole my point is that it will be the error of the fifth gen AC to bring his AC within WVR range of his opponent. If this happens, it is a fair fight, with IR seekers and optical seekers on both sides making detection.

Bvr from fourth gen will never be fired at a fifth gen from a bvr range, as no radar can make such a detection at bvr ranges. The meteor with terminal IR seekers may be used as WVR but thats about it.

 

[ersakthivel]

My earlier statement was regarding Bvr engagements and radar seekers. I had not taken WVR into account.

HMS relies on the pilot sighting ability. A pilot must first spot the fighter to be able to use HMS. Now the average human maximum sighting distance is 10 miles for a 747. It will be much less for a fighter plane, especially if it is painted in light grey, the same colour as the sky. Note that several other factors will further reduce this detection range by eyesight.

At such short ranges the IRST will in all likelihood give the first detection, and as I've shown before, even radar will begin detecting the AC. However, in all likelihood the fifth gen AC will get the first detection of the two, even with radar being turned off, as it is more likely to have better sensors, including imoprtantly the passive emmision sensor listening for communication signals.

In simole my point is that it will be the error of the fifth gen AC to bring his AC within WVR range of his opponent. If this happens, it is a fair fight, with IR seekers and optical seekers on both sides making detection.

Bvr from fourth gen will never be fired at a fifth gen from a bvr range, as no radar can make such a detection at bvr ranges. The meteor with terminal IR seekers may be used as WVR but thats about it.

how about the possibility of higher bandwidth radars L-band and above(VHF , decimeter ) being able to give a rough idea (say a track within 10 kms of 5th gen's position) to launch a BVR from 4.5th gen and from that closer distance(say within 10 kms) the BVRs using their FPA IR seeker that capture the thermal image of the Fifth gen's 's surface heat map and immune to flairs to home in?

Right now this is the only feasiblity for 4.5th gens to stay relevant against 5th gens without the aid of stealth UCAVS.

 

[DivineHeretic]

how about the possibility of higher bandwidth radars L-band and above(VHF , decimeter ) being able to give a rough idea (say a track within 10 kms of 5th gen's position) to launch a BVR from 4.5th gen and from that closer distance(say within 10 kms) the BVRs using their FPA IR seeker that capture the thermal image of the Fifth gen's 's surface heat map and immune to flairs to home in?

Right now this is the only feasiblity for 4.5th gens to stay relevant against 5th gens without the aid of stealth UCAVS.

Here is the problem with VHF. Note the poor resistance to jamming.

Detection of flying objects with small radar cross section (Uninhabited Air Vehicles and Cruise Missiles - UAV&CM) and/or operating on low altitude is more effective by VHF radars than by radars operating in the "L" or "S" band. This is because STEALTH technology is ineffective in these bands. However central data processing (Multi radar Tracking) of the plots of these radars is difficult compared to that of radars operating at higher frequencies. The most important problems seem to emerge from the inaccurate measurements, high false plot rate, fragmentation of the target signals (plots) and poor jamming resistance

As regards metre wavelength, here is a summary about it.

Application of metric wavelength (VHF band) possesses several benefits on various areas of surveillance radar technique.

Targets have radio resonance effect and the RCS is 5-10 times bigger than in other bands.

Aircraft manufactured by "STEALTH" technology are almost completely visible.

Anti-Radiation-Missals (ARM) are difficult to build in VHF-band.

All meteorological effects are almost fully transparent.

The cost of monitoring the equal air space in VHF-band is less expensive compared to other bands.

High precision measurement range & azimut and less accurate-elevation co-ordinates of targets due to "Ground multipath" effect.

Measurements at resonance frequencies prove a significant reduction of efficiency of stealth techniques at low frequencies.

VHF frequencies, due to diffraction of propagation have the ability to detect low flying targets sometimes beyond the horizon.

On the other hand, there are several problems emerging from the application of metric band radars.

Carefully thought-out frequency allocation is required to work in a band, mainly reserved for communication purposes.

Since relatively coarse angular resolution can be achieved, the sensitivity to jamming is high.

Low probability of intercept (LPI) features like extremely small side lobes and narrow beams also cannot be realised.

All said and done, the L-band has problems with resolution and high false data, which is why their use is limited, despite obvious advantages.

And in any case, even the super SU30 mki with 1536 t/r AESA will detect a fifth gen AC at around the 20km mark, similar to Eurofighter. And it will generate a much better resolution and accurate detection. At sub 20km range, even the IRST should be able to cue onto the engine exhaust and surface heat sufficiently enough to generate a IR or optical missile lock.

The resistance to jamming is a very important parameter, as any fifth gen will carry extensive EW suites.

http://www.zmne.hu/tanszekek/ehc/konferencia/may/balajti.htm

 

[ersakthivel]

Here is the problem with VHF. Note the poor resistance to jamming.

Detection of flying objects with small radar cross section (Uninhabited Air Vehicles and Cruise Missiles - UAV&CM) and/or operating on low altitude is more effective by VHF radars than by radars operating in the "L" or "S" band. This is because STEALTH technology is ineffective in these bands. However central data processing (Multi radar Tracking) of the plots of these radars is difficult compared to that of radars operating at higher frequencies. The most important problems seem to emerge from the inaccurate measurements, high false plot rate, fragmentation of the target signals (plots) and poor jamming resistance

As regards metre wavelength, here is a summary about it.

Application of metric wavelength (VHF band) possesses several benefits on various areas of surveillance radar technique.

Targets have radio resonance effect and the RCS is 5-10 times bigger than in other bands.

Aircraft manufactured by "STEALTH" technology are almost completely visible.

Anti-Radiation-Missals (ARM) are difficult to build in VHF-band.

All meteorological effects are almost fully transparent.

The cost of monitoring the equal air space in VHF-band is less expensive compared to other bands.

High precision measurement range & azimut and less accurate-elevation co-ordinates of targets due to "Ground multipath" effect.

Measurements at resonance frequencies prove a significant reduction of efficiency of stealth techniques at low frequencies.

VHF frequencies, due to diffraction of propagation have the ability to detect low flying targets sometimes beyond the horizon.

On the other hand, there are several problems emerging from the application of metric band radars.

Carefully thought-out frequency allocation is required to work in a band, mainly reserved for communication purposes.

Since relatively coarse angular resolution can be achieved, the sensitivity to jamming is high.

Low probability of intercept (LPI) features like extremely small side lobes and narrow beams also cannot be realised.

All said and done, the L-band has problems with resolution and high false data, which is why their use is limited, despite obvious advantages.

And in any case, even the super SU30 mki with 1536 t/r AESA will detect a fifth gen AC at around the 20km mark, similar to Eurofighter. And it will generate a much better resolution and accurate detection. At sub 20km range, even the IRST should be able to cue onto the engine exhaust and surface heat sufficiently enough to generate a IR or optical missile lock.

The resistance to jamming is a very important parameter, as any fifth gen will carry extensive EW suites.

MULTI-RADAR TRACKING OF VHF RADAR PLOTS

even if jamming is employed against these VHF radars by 5ht gens don't you think this jamming effort will give away the position of 5th gen.because any emission from 5th gens will blow off their stealth cover is my guess.What do you think about it?

Stealth UCAVS flying in front of the 4.5th gens will certainly give IRSt track for 4.5th gen's that will fly behind it.
Then everything evens out between 4.5th gens and 5th gens , because then 4.5th gens can fire their 120 plus km range BVR missiles at the same optimum kill distance from the 5th gens.

The 5th gens cannot target the 4.5th gens with longer range missiles because MAWS and EW capability of 4.5th gens will make them not so lethal, and at longer ranges as you said the missile looses much of it's critical kinematic energy,considering the lower missile load of 5th gens is my guess.



Being smaller and emitting no tracking radar signals there is no way the stealth UCAVS can be picked up by the bigger 5th gen fighters is my guess.

Is this why the europenas unable to match the americans in stealth fighters have moved on to stealth UCAVS?

 

[asianobserve]

Is this why the europenas unable to match the americans in stealth fighters have moved on to stealth UCAVS?

The Americans are ahead on this area too.

 

[ersakthivel]

The Americans are ahead on this area too.

They have to ,because they too have to counter the chinese J-20 and PAKFA .The f-22 is not going to be the only 5th gen around in a decade from now.

 

[DivineHeretic]

even if jamming is employed against these VHF radars by 5ht gens don't you think this jamming effort will give away the position of 5th gen.because any emission from 5th gens will blow off their stealth cover is my guess.What do you think about it?

Stealth UCAVS flying in front of the 4.5th gens will certainly give IRSt track for 4.5th gen's that will fly behind it.
Then everything evens out between 4.5th gens and 5th gens , because then 4.5th gens can fire their 120 plus km range BVR missiles at the same optimum kill distance from the 5th gens.

The 5th gens cannot target the 4.5th gens with longer range missiles because MAWS and EW capability of 4.5th gens will make them not so lethal, and at longer ranges as you said the missile looses much of it's critical kinematic energy,considering the lower missile load of 5th gens is my guess.



Being smaller and emitting no tracking radar signals there is no way the stealth UCAVS can be picked up by the bigger 5th gen fighters is my guess.

Is this why the europenas unable to match the americans in stealth fighters have moved on to stealth UCAVS?

You are getting it backwards.

By the time UCAVS come into the picture, the last of the fourth gen will have been retired.

And as far as bvr engagements are concerned, they are guided by AC radar not IRST until their own seeker aquires the target. The UCAV can certainly detect a fifth gen AC, but how will it guide the 120km bvr without using radar. If it uses radar, it is done for. And in any case. If it can get close enough for an IRST cue without detection, it most certainly will use its own missile.

Then, even if the UCAV uses its radar to guide the missile, the EW suite onboard will jam the communication link between them, thus missile lost.

As far as jamming giving away your position is concerned, the standard method is to use one AC as the EW platform. Even if the individual AC is forced to use its own jammer, it gives away its presence, not its location. Big difference.

 

[ersakthivel]

You are getting it backwards.

By the time UCAVS come into the picture, the last of the fourth gen will have been retired.

And as far as bvr engagements are concerned, they are guided by AC radar not IRST until their own seeker aquires the target. The UCAV can certainly detect a fifth gen AC, but how will it guide the 120km bvr without using radar. If it uses radar, it is done for. And in any case. If it can get close enough for an IRST cue without detection, it most certainly will use its own missile.

Then, even if the UCAV uses its radar to guide the missile, the EW suite onboard will jam the communication link between them, thus missile lost.

Won't stealth UCAVS arrive within a decade?

So ultimately it all boils down to the EW suit which has the capability to jam the link between BVrs and launching crafts.

IF 5th gens use their EW suit they will no longer be stealth and can be picked up by other fighters and stealth UCAVs in the vicinity. Can this be used as a tracking aid for other 4.5th gens in the area?