How to counter Fifth Generation Stealth fighters?

[DivineHeretic]

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?

You wont be seeing UCAVS untill 2030, at the minimum. Most of the technology being touted fot the UCAV havent even left the drawing board.

The possibilities for a sixth generation fighter seem almost the stuff of science fiction.

It would likely be far stealthier than even the fifth generation aircraft. It may be able to change its shape in flight, "morphing" to optimize for either speed or persistence, and its engines will likely be retunable in-flight for efficient supersonic cruise or subsonic loitering.

Read the following article to understand what the US may want from its UCAV.

The Sixth Generation Fighter

An exerpt:

major systems such as radar will be embedded in the aircraft skin.

With an appropriate engine—possibly an auxiliary engine—on board to provide power for directed energy weapons, there could be an "unlimited magazine" of shots, Meyer said.

Hypersonics—that is, the ability of an air vehicle to travel at five times the speed of sound, or faster—has routinely been suggested as an attribute of sixth generation fighters.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

@Picard please post your views, I have followed your debate with others in other forum, I don't share most of your arguments but it will be interesting to have you in debate.

 

[average american]

Detection range by a modern AWACS and RCS of some fighters:

* F-15C & Su-27 (RCS = 10~15m2): 450 ~ 600 km
* Tornado (RCS = 8 m2): 420 ~ 500 km
* MIG-29 (RCS = 5 m2): 370 ~ 450 km
* F/A-18C (RCS = 3 m2): 330 ~ 395 km
* F-16C (RCS = 1.2 m2): 260 ~ 310 km
* JAS39 (RCS = 0.5 m2): 210 ~ 250 km
* Su-47 (RCS = 0.3 m2): 185 ~ 220 km
* Rafale (RCS = 0.1~0.2 m2): 140 ~ 200 km
* F-18E (RCS = 0.1 m2): 140 ~ 170 km
* MIG-42 (RCS = 0.1 m2): 140 ~ 170 km
* EF2K (RCS = 0.05~0.1 m2): 120 ~ 170 km
* F-35A (RCS = 0.0015 m2): 50 ~ 60 km
* F/A-22 (RCS < or = 0.0002~0.0005 m2): < or = 30 ~ 45 km

Even an AWACS has to be within 30 to 45 km to detect an F22, well within BVR range.

Mini AWACS, "First-look, first-shot, first-kill"
F-22 aircraft has a radar with a range farther than other planes, even almost equal AWACS. This means that F-22 can see you long before you could see the plane. F-22 also has a system of super-sophisticated radar LPI (Low Probability of Intercept Radar), meaning aircraft that have been detected F-22 radar will not be able to know if he was detected and its warning radar will not light.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

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.

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.

assume a aesa radar detect say f22 at 30km and be able to track it at 25 km then it can feed the info to missile seeker and fire it, missile should be able to go active mode at 10 km distance and guide itself. this is just to assume, I think at this shorter ranges infrared, OLS systems are better.
one more think I want to say is apparently anti radiation missiles can home on to aesa signals of enemy fighter jet or awac unless signals are on LPI Mode.

 

[ersakthivel]

assume a aesa radar detect say f22 at 30km and be able to track it at 25 km then it can feed the info to missile seeker and fire it, missile should be able to go active mode at 10 km distance and guide itself. this is just to assume, I think at this shorter ranges infrared, OLS systems are better.
one more think I want to say is apparently anti radiation missiles can home on to aesa signals of enemy fighter jet or awac unless signals are on LPI Mode.

Everything depends upon how future development in electronics will go.
How 5th gen LPI Asea is countered in future, and how stealth UCAVS are used.
And how development in higher bandwidth radars which can detect 5th gens will progress.
How secure is the data link between the 5th gens and their BVR missiles (guided towards the 4.5th gens)
will remain in future from jamming by 4.5th gens will determine the course of developments too.
it will be the weakest link in the chain that has to be broken first by 4.5th gens by jamming methods,
with the aid of MAWS and EW suite along with dedicated Ew crafts,and stealth UCAVS,
if 4.5th gens are going to have any hopes in this contest with 5th gens.
And how far will future AWACS armed with VHF and L band ASEA radar will be able to give rough co ordinates of 5th gens will also be crucial. Because X band radars on Awacs are useless against 5th gens.
And how immune their VHF, L band radars reamain free from jamming?
4.5th gens will have to launch their BVRs with the aid of this info from VHF L band AWCAS and stealth UCAVS in front and hope once their BVRs reach the engagement zone FPA IR sensors will finish the job.
On their own 4.5 th gens will have no hope against 5th gens .
Only future will tell.

 

[DivineHeretic]

assume a aesa radar detect say f22 at 30km and be able to track it at 25 km then it can feed the info to missile seeker and fire it, missile should be able to go active mode at 10 km distance and guide itself. this is just to assume, I think at this shorter ranges infrared, OLS systems are better.
one more think I want to say is apparently anti radiation missiles can home on to aesa signals of enemy fighter jet or awac unless signals are on LPI Mode.

The detection range for a non AESA radar for a VLO AC is less than 10km. Your scenario is quite valid that a AESA radar might detect and track a VLO AC below 30km and guide a bvr missile towards it. But there is no guarantee that the missile seeker will even detect the VLO at 10km or less, let alone track it, seeing as a much more powerful radar (non AESA) cannot detect it.

It would take incredible luck for a non 5th gen AC to come this close to a fifth gen, and if it does, the first detection will be made by the IRST, especially in the tail chase mode.

As far as Anti radiation missiles are concerned, there is a major problem tracking the source of AESA emission. The AeSA radar can hop frequency in a fraction of a second, evading tracking. This also contributes to LPI, as even though short packets of signals can be picked up, the location of the source is vey difficult, similar to a frequency hopping radio.

 

[ersakthivel]

The detection range for a non AESA radar for a VLO AC is less than 10km. Your scenario is quite valid that a AESA radar might detect and track a VLO AC below 30km and guide a bvr missile towards it. But there is no guarantee that the missile seeker will even detect the VLO at 10km or less, let alone track it, seeing as a much more powerful radar (non AESA) cannot detect it.

It would take incredible luck for a non 5th gen AC to come this close to a fifth gen, and if it does, the first detection will be made by the IRST, especially in the tail chase mode.

As far as Anti radiation missiles are concerned, there is a major problem tracking the source of AESA emission. The AeSA radar can hop frequency in a fraction of a second, evading tracking. This also contributes to LPI, as even though short packets of signals can be picked up, the location of the source is vey difficult, similar to a frequency hopping radio.

But once the missile gets closer to 5th gen it's FPA Ir seeker which store the surface heat map of the 5th gens can aid terminal homing is my guess.

 

[DivineHeretic]

But once the missile gets closer to 5th gen it's FPA Ir seeker which store the surface heat map of the 5th gens can aid terminal homing is my guess.

My bet for a good probability of kill against fifth gen at WVR ranges would be dual seeker missiles. The IR guidance is passive, it could be coupled with a optical guidance seeker or a radar seeker to improve the chances of kill, something the Israeli dolphin nose aims to achieve.

As for Bvr, well thats a pipe dream for most 4th gen AC, except perhaps against the F35.

 

[average american]

Both Sukhoi and Mikoyan are known to have seriously overinflated the testimoney of what their aircraft are capable of in order to sell the planes and keep their Russian aircraft industry alive. The Radar of the T50 is going to be at most only 3/4 as powerful as the F22 and F35 and the radar signature of the PAK FA is going to be 5000 times larger then a F22.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Both Sukhoi and Mikoyan are known to have seriously overinflated the testimoney of what their aircraft are capable of in order to sell the planes and keep their Russian aircraft industry alive. The Radar of the T50 is going to be at most only 3/4 as powerful as the F22 and F35 and the radar signature of the PAK FA is going to be 5000 times larger then a F22.

The PAK-FA will have 1536 t/r modules in its AESA, more than the F35. Of course though the quality and performance of the t/r modules will be suspect, given it is a new thing for them.

The RCS of Pak-Fa is unknown until now, actually the plane is yet to show its final shape. At this stage it would be pure speculation to compare its rcs with the F22.
But of course indications are there that the Russians have taken a different approach to stealth.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Both Sukhoi and Mikoyan are known to have seriously overinflated the testimoney of what their aircraft are capable of in order to sell the planes and keep their Russian aircraft industry alive. The Radar of the T50 is going to be at most only 3/4 as powerful as the F22 and F35 and the radar signature of the PAK FA is going to be 5000 times larger then a F22.

sure f22 will be better against pakfa in stealth, but radar as well as other sensors like IRST, L Band aesa modules on wing tips to act as IFF as well as probably to detect stealth jets, are there in favour of pakfa .we are yet to see what will be the avionics on Indian version. in any case we are not that concerned about f 22 unless America has plans to sell it to Pakistan or China .

 

[p2prada]

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.

For SEAD.

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.

Jamming is a very broad term. What they aim for in air combat is degradation. What could be detected at 100Km will be detected at 50Km and so on. Sometimes, jamming fails so miserably than you will have a missile on you in no time.

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.

If missiles are jammed, then the seeker will act as receivers and continue to home in on the source.

And HARM missiles

Modern BVR missiles have this ability inbuilt, called home on jam.

The Swordfish can detect a cricket ball at 600km. Your point about detecting water droplet and F22 being?

My point is nothing is really invisible to radars. Water droplets can be detected, the F-22 can be detected, birds can be detected, insects can be detected etc. But there is such a thing called clutter rejection threshold. This is a threshold built into the radar as a software input. In case something as small as a bird or insect is detected, which it does, the radar computer will automatically reject it saying it is not an aircraft. This is where the F-22's stealth works. It makes the radar believe it is looking at a bird, not an aircraft.

Getting a detection is one thing, getting a missile lock is quite another.

Yes, and this is where fifth gen aircraft run supreme.

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.

4th gen is already obsolete, even if they receive new 5th gen level upgrades.

EF pilots have no issues saying they would stand no chance against the F-22 in BVR combat. They have said it, on record.

The F-35 is said to be 4 times superior to a F-16 B52 and equivalents. The F-22 is said to be 15 times superior to the F-15C. These are not numbers that can be equalized with an avionics upgrade. Also, avionics that can compromise 5th gen aircraft of this caliber will push the 4th gen to beyond obsolescence since the same avionics will perform better against 4th gen fighters.

 

[p2prada]

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.

Exercises can also do the same. Modern day exercises are pushing training to as real situations as possible.

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.

Jamming serves no purpose if your radar is switched off.

A jammer gives away far more information than a radar.

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..

Situational. Groups of aircraft will have different priorities in the same mission. There would be F-22s which would constantly have their radars turned on. There would be groups where the radar is always turned off. Like I said, this is not a 5th gen ability, it is as old as radar itself.

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.

The F-16 has inferior supersonic performance compared to F-15. Similarly, F-22 has superior supersonic/transonic performance compared to the F-35.

The F-15 has inferior subsonic performance to the F-16. The F-35 will have superior or at par subsonic/transonic performance to the F-22.

There is too much expectation that the F-35 needs to match the F-22 or PAKFA simply because they think that's how it should be. But a lot of air forces are very happy with just the F-16 as an air superiority fighter.

F-35 isn't designed to be a high flying, supercruising, uber cool BVR fighter like the F-22. It is a bomb truck and will have excellent dog fighting abilities, exceeding most 4th gen fighters, especially the fighters it is meant to replace, F-16, Harrier and Hornet.

In terms of acceleration and ACM maneuvers, the F-35 exceeds the F-16. Chase F-16s had to use afterburner to keep up with the F-35s flying in normal cruise profile.

Against it, a rafale and Typhoon will fancy their chances, especially given the kinematic superiority they have, and the relatively low RCS they have.

Give them weapons and the RCS will count for nothing.

But they have kinematic superiority over the F-35 in certain parameters and inferiority in some. According to an EF pilot, the acceleration and subsonic capability of the F-35 in on par with the EF. Comparatively the Rafale should have inferior acceleration. Then again, this depends on fuel loads on the F-35. Mainly 50% fuel, like the MKI.

 

[p2prada]

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.

It is not so simple. The seeker should be able to differentiate between a flock of birds and a F-22 within a small window of time.

You won't find many articles talking about ways to counter 5th gen technology for at least another decade.

 

[p2prada]

Both Sukhoi and Mikoyan are known to have seriously overinflated the testimoney of what their aircraft are capable of in order to sell the planes and keep their Russian aircraft industry alive. The Radar of the T50 is going to be at most only 3/4 as powerful as the F22 and F35 and the radar signature of the PAK FA is going to be 5000 times larger then a F22.

The PAKFA's RCS is very similar to the F-22's. It is not 5000 times larger.

The radar of the Su-35 called the Irbis-E is already more powerful than the APG-77 (F-22's radar). 20KW, the highest on any fighter to date.

 

[average american]

The PAKFA's RCS is very similar to the F-22's. It is not 5000 times larger.

The radar of the Su-35 called the Irbis-E is already more powerful than the APG-77 (F-22's radar). 20KW, the highest on any fighter to date.

It is estimated the most AWACS can detect a PAK FA at 120 ~ 170 km and a F22 at only 30 ~ 45 km.

Stealth ( RCS )

F22 0.0001 m²[7]

PAK-FA 0.5 m²[8]

Radar

The F-22´s AN/APG-77 has about 2000[5][11]-2200[12] receive modules and its an low observable AESA radar, which is able to track a 1 square meter target at a range of 240 km, it is considered the most advanced fighter radar, with the highest detection range[5]. The PAK-FA´s radar has 1500 elements (it tracks a 2.5 m² target at 400 km[6]), therefore the PAK-FA has full 360 degree radar coverage because of two L- band on the wingtips and a small X-band on its tail. The Raptor can do so as well, through the use of sensor fusion and highly advanced passive sensors. One problem of the PAK-FA is that its radar lacks a "Low Probability of Being Intercept" mode.



Power of two Cray supercomputer in F-22 cockpit
Power of two Cray supercomputer in F-22 ... make identifying an enemy aircraft and firing a missile at the plane as easy as moving a cursor on a computer screen. Raytheon Company: F/A-22 Common Integrated Processor (CIP)

 

[p2prada]

It is estimated the most AWACS can detect a PAK FA at 120 ~ 170 km and a F22 at only 30 ~ 45 km.

Wrong.

Stealth ( RCS )

F22 0.0001 m²[7]

PAK-FA 0.5 m²[8]

I had pointed this out earlier. You are comparing average RCS with frontal RCS.

Frontal RCS for PAKFA would also be around ~0.0001m[SUP]2[/SUP].

 

[roma]

i heard there is a russian helicopter in development that can fire missiles to bring down aircrafts. it will be stealth helicopter.

i think it better be some kind of unmanned "helicopter" or more appropriately, airborne vehicle

 

[DivineHeretic]

Wrong.



I had pointed this out earlier. You are comparing average RCS with frontal RCS.

Frontal RCS for PAKFA would also be around ~0.0001m[SUP]2[/SUP].

I hate to admit, but the frontal RCS of the PAKFA will not match that of Raptor, if there is no drastic change in final design. The engine air intales are not even DSI, and I'm seriously hoping that they do something about it. Then there is also the problem of the canopy, which till now has not been optimised for stealth. Actually, the Russians have yet to demonstrate this on any AC.

But one thing I'm fairly certain of is that the RCS of PAKFA will be much lower than the touted figure of 0.5m2, which again is really based on speculation and videos, and not on solid statistics.

There is a lot of talk of the Russians taking a different approach to 5th gen AC, both in terms of stealth characteristics and flight characteristics compromise.

They have shown that manuevrebility is still a top priority for them, to the point of willing to sacrifice some other characteristics,which implies that they are confident that they can sneak within WVR ranges of another 5th gen AC, because that is when this will be most necessary.

 

[DivineHeretic]

i think it better be some kind of unmanned "helicopter" or more appropriately, airborne vehicle

You are probably correct.

The Americans experimented on their own stealth helicopter gunship in the mid 90s, aka the Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche, and gave up owing to a host of problems, including necessity, cost over conventional heli and survivability against modern AD network.