Sukhoi PAK FA

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[ace009]

If PAKFA remains undetected upto 30NM by the F-22 then it has done it's job for what it is designed to be.

The MKI has a larger RCS than Rafale or EF-2000. But best of luck trying to match 2 medium aircraft with a heavy aircraft.

You cannot dismiss aircraft as easily as you can dismiss a girl by looks alone.

The F-22 pilot has every reason to fear the PAKFA as well as fear the Flanker. You cannot dismiss an aircraft with specs either. In the current US doctrine, they are experimenting using the F-22 and F-15 together for air superiority missions. If I jam your radar, that would make all my air and ground assets as stealthy as the F-22.

About radar Jamming - can you Jam a AESA radar effectively? I thought the whole concept of AESA radars were that they were VERY difficult to Jam, if not impossible. And also, a Jammer (especially airborne) becomes a target for a radar-homing missile -is it not so?
So, a stealth fighter like F-22, can see a non-stealth fighter like a Flanker from hundreds of miles away, while remaining undetected. When the Flanker tries to Jam any airborne radar in one frequency, the F-22 can still track in other frequencies with the AESA Radar and can fire off a Radar homing missile from a hundred mile away. By the time the Flanker picks up the IR signature of an F-22 (which already has reduced IR signature) using a IRST system at aboput 50-60 miles away, the radar-homing missile will be on it's way to the Flanker. Before this time the F-22 can also track the IR signature of the Flanker from 70-80 miles away using it's own IRST and send out another missile or two with IR homing.
Tell me if this makes sense or I am wrong in my assessment.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

About radar Jamming - can you Jam a AESA radar effectively? I thought the whole concept of AESA radars were that they were VERY difficult to Jam, if not impossible. And also, a Jammer (especially airborne) becomes a target for a radar-homing missile -is it not so?

Electronic support

Main article: Electronic warfare support measures
Electronic Warfare Support (ES), is the subdivision of EW involving actions tasked by, or under direct control of, an operational commander to search for, intercept, identify, and locate or localize sources of intentional and unintentional radiated electromagnetic (EM) energy for the purpose of immediate threat recognition, targeting, planning, and conduct of future operations.[1]
An overlapping discipline, signals intelligence (SIGINT) is the related process of analyzing and identifying the intercepted frequencies (e.g. as a mobile phone or RADAR). SIGINT is broken into three categories: ELINT, COMINT, and FISINT.
Where these activities are under the control of an operational commander and being applied for the purpose of situational awareness, threat recognition, or EM targeting, they also serve the purpose of Electronic Warfare surveillance (ES).
Electronic attack

Main article: Electronic countermeasures
Electronic attack (EA) or electronic countermeasures (ECM) involves the use of electromagnetic energy, or counter-electromagnetic radiation weapons to attack personnel, facilities, or equipment with the intention of directly affecting, degrading, neutralizing, or destroying an enemy's combat capability (see Joint Publication [JP] 3-09, Joint Fire Support).[1]
EA operations can be detected by an adversary depending on his level of technological sophistication and paranoia. Many modern EA techniques are considered to be highly classified. Examples of EA include communications jamming, IADS suppression, DE/LASER attack, expendable decoys (e.g., flares and chaff), and radio controlled improvised explosive device (RCIED) systems.
Electronic protection


Main article: Electronic counter-countermeasures
Electronic Protection (EP) (previously known as electronic protective measures (EPM) or electronic counter countermeasures (ECCM)) involves actions taken to protect personnel, facilities, and equipment from any effects of friendly or enemy use of the electromagnetic spectrum that degrade, neutralize, or destroy friendly combat capability. Jamming is not part of EP, it is an EA measure.
The use of flare rejection logic on an IR missile to counter an adversary's use of flares is EP. While defensive EA actions and EP both protect personnel, facilities, capabilities, and equipment, EP protects from the EFFECTS of EA (friendly and/or adversary). Other examples of EP include spread spectrum technologies, use of Joint Restricted Frequency List (JRFL), emissions control (EMCON), and low observability or "stealth".[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_warfare

A EW suit not only Jam but do lots of other work..

Any Radar can be jammed, A Strong EW suit gives all advantage of Stealth but only when its on or working if not then its visible to radar where as Stealth deign allow Aircraft to remain undetected even when its radar is jam..

Today One of the most advance EW suit used by Rafale call Spectra..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[ace009]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_warfare

A EW suit not only Jam but do lots of other work..

Any Radar can be jammed, A Strong EW suit gives all advantage of Stealth but only when its on or working if not then its visible to radar where as Stealth deign allow Aircraft to remain undetected even when its radar is jam..

Today One of the most advance EW suit used by Rafale call Spectra..

I hear what you say, but here is what I meant ...

High jamming resistance
Jamming is likewise much more difficult against an AESA. Traditionally, jammers have operated by determining the operating frequency of the radar and then broadcasting a signal on it to confuse the receiver as to which is the "real" pulse and which is the jammer's. This technique works as long as the radar system cannot easily change its operating frequency. When the transmitters were based on klystron tubes this was generally true, and radars, especially airborne ones, had only a few frequencies to chose among. A jammer could listen to those possible frequencies and select the one being used to jam.
Since an AESA changes its operating frequency with every pulse, and spreads the frequencies across a wide band even in a single pulse, jammers are much less effective. Although it is possible to send out broadband white noise against all the possible frequencies, this means the amount of energy being sent at any one frequency is much lower, reducing its effectiveness. Moreover, AESAs can be switched to a receive-only mode, and use the jamming signals as a powerful source to track its source, something that required a separate receiver in older platforms.
AESAs are so much more difficult to detect, and so much more useful in receiving signals from the targets, that they can broadcast continually and still have a very low chance of being detected. This allows the radar system to generate far more data than if it is being used only periodically, greatly improving overall system effectiveness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Electronically_Scanned_Array

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I hear what you say, but here is what I meant ...

High jamming resistance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Electronically_Scanned_Array

Yes it is dificult to jam, But it can be jam, Presently for that a fighter need to be fully dedicated for EW purpose like offensive jammer the SU-30mki with the latest offensive jamming SAP-14 from Russia or Growler from US or Rafale`s Spectra..

AESA technology which is in use today is very new, As the recent threads are developing newer countermeasure are developing too..

The solution is not what traditional Jammer use but different range of frequencies than other radars..

 

[ace009]

So, the MKI which has a huge RCS is very visible in the radar systems. But also being a Huge plane, it can deliver a lot of power to it's Electronic countermeasure systems, which means it can jam out enemy radars and make itself effectively invisible - is that the current belief? However, AESA being more nimble, will still be able to see the MKI in a different frequency unless there is a dedicated jammer MKI nearby that is jamming ALL frequencies possible.
I still think that in a fight between a squadron of actual stealth A/C like the F-22 and a squadron of the MKI (all else being equal, which is hardly ever the case), the F-22 will win out in terms of first look/ first shoot.
But in case of a faceoff between a squadron of MKI and a squadron of LO aircraft like the Rafale or the EF2K or the F/A-18 SH, which will have the "first look/ first shoot" advantage?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

See, AESA is new and F-22 was never a true rival of SU-30 types ( ot )
Even though a AESA can be jammed with newer EW pods developed by Russia like a said SAP-14..

Present doctrine with EW pods helps in A2A and A2G roles, This doctrine is practiced in real exercises like Mig-21 EW blinding USAF F-15C`s radars, Also is used to jam SAM radars..

Indeed AESA is more than just a radar its different than traditional radars, Hence IAF did ordered Russian EW suits for MKI`s..

In LO aircrafts MKI have the advantage coz of its long range radar with BVRs like R-77, Regarding EW i cannot comment but Rafale have a very advance EW suit..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Can AESA be jammed ?

Its been discussed here:
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/military-aviation/54249-can-aesa-jammed.html

More Info:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/fun/part11.htm

F-35 Radar's Electronic Protection Capabilities Validated During Northern Edge 2009 Exercise

http://www.irconnect.com/noc/press/pages/news_releases.html?d=168340

 

[nitesh]

http://idrw.org/?p=1047
Fifth-gen fighter PAK FA goes supersonic

 

[p2prada]

About radar Jamming - can you Jam a AESA radar effectively? I thought the whole concept of AESA radars were that they were VERY difficult to Jam, if not impossible. And also, a Jammer (especially airborne) becomes a target for a radar-homing missile -is it not so?

There are quite a few methods of jamming techniques. There are some which use the brute force method and some which do selective jamming because you don't want to jam your own systems. In the brute force method, the jammer jams everything and has the highest power requirement. Only aircraft like Flankers or Eagles have enough power to do that and will be our main assets in neutralizing enemy AWACS and control centres. The Growler also has power enough for brute force jamming and they mainly use that against communication frequencies.

So, a stealth fighter like F-22, can see a non-stealth fighter like a Flanker from hundreds of miles away, while remaining undetected. When the Flanker tries to Jam any airborne radar in one frequency, the F-22 can still track in other frequencies with the AESA Radar and can fire off a Radar homing missile from a hundred mile away.

In a zero EW environment the F-22 will detect the Flanker at stand off distances. But in an EW environment the detection ranges are reduced. If I jam only one frequency and the F-22 evades my jamming freq to detect in a different frequency then that aspect is called ECCM. Both ECM and ECCM are heavily dependent on quality and processing.

However if I am able to consistently jam more than half the pulses the F-22 gives out at any given time, then I have effectively decreased the F-22s ability to detect me by a very big margin. However, if I jam the entire frequency spectrum of the F-22's X Band radar, then the F-22 will be as blind as the Flanker.

By the time the Flanker picks up the IR signature of an F-22 (which already has reduced IR signature) using a IRST system at aboput 50-60 miles away, the radar-homing missile will be on it's way to the Flanker. Before this time the F-22 can also track the IR signature of the Flanker from 70-80 miles away using it's own IRST and send out another missile or two with IR homing.
Tell me if this makes sense or I am wrong in my assessment.

F-22 does not have IRST and that's one of it's many drawbacks.

F-22 has the upperhand against the Flanker in pretty much all parameters. But there is a limit to it beyond which the Flanker can play to it's strength and still win. The F-22 has no ECM equipment and that's a major drawback when you are up against the Flankers. Ground based sensors are very important and thus a network centric force is the best bet against stealth technology.

 

[ace009]

There are quite a few methods of jamming techniques. There are some which use the brute force method and some which do selective jamming because you don't want to jam your own systems. In the brute force method, the jammer jams everything and has the highest power requirement. Only aircraft like Flankers or Eagles have enough power to do that and will be our main assets in neutralizing enemy AWACS and control centres. The Growler also has power enough for brute force jamming and they mainly use that against communication frequencies.



In a zero EW environment the F-22 will detect the Flanker at stand off distances. But in an EW environment the detection ranges are reduced. If I jam only one frequency and the F-22 evades my jamming freq to detect in a different frequency then that aspect is called ECCM. Both ECM and ECCM are heavily dependent on quality and processing.

However if I am able to consistently jam more than half the pulses the F-22 gives out at any given time, then I have effectively decreased the F-22s ability to detect me by a very big margin. However, if I jam the entire frequency spectrum of the F-22's X Band radar, then the F-22 will be as blind as the Flanker.



F-22 does not have IRST and that's one of it's many drawbacks.

F-22 has the upperhand against the Flanker in pretty much all parameters. But there is a limit to it beyond which the Flanker can play to it's strength and still win. The F-22 has no ECM equipment and that's a major drawback when you are up against the Flankers. Ground based sensors are very important and thus a network centric force is the best bet against stealth technology.

I see - but disregard the F-22 analogy - I doubt if an IAF Flanker will ever fight an F-22, maybe a PLAAF Flanker might faceoff against an F-22.
However, consider the J-20 against the MKI (do not think that will NOT happen, in 2030 this might very well happen, everytime the J-20 flies, IAF might not be flying a FGFA to counter it). For the time being lets assume the J-20 is exactly like the F-22 plus some IRST features. Let's also assume that the MKI in the future has AESA radar and IRST. What will be the outcome of a MKI squadron and a J-20 squadron faceoff?

 

[prahladh]

What will be the outcome of a MKI squadron and a J-20 squadron faceoff?

A separate thread..........................?





(http://edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/theses/2006/Sep/06Sep_Denk.pdf)

 

[p2prada]

I see - but disregard the F-22 analogy - I doubt if an IAF Flanker will ever fight an F-22, maybe a PLAAF Flanker might faceoff against an F-22.
However, consider the J-20 against the MKI (do not think that will NOT happen, in 2030 this might very well happen, everytime the J-20 flies, IAF might not be flying a FGFA to counter it). For the time being lets assume the J-20 is exactly like the F-22 plus some IRST features. Let's also assume that the MKI in the future has AESA radar and IRST. What will be the outcome of a MKI squadron and a J-20 squadron faceoff?

By 2030, the MKIs with the current generation AESA we are getting in 2012 will be obsolete. It would be a disaster for the MKI.

But if we are talking about a J-20 showdown against MKI in 2015, considering the J-20 has FGFA type avionics in 2015, then the fight will see some J-20 downed. But J-20 will win the battle. J-20 will not have a particularly overwhelming advantage against the newly upgraded MKIs.

The fact is FGFA is being made with a 100-200% advantage over the MKI which is quite significant. Even the F-15E stands a decent chance against the F-22 and the Growler has already achieved an AMRAAM lock against the F-22. The MKI ups the ante with a better flight performance(TVC etc) and equivalent jamming capability once the Knirti jammers come into the picture after 2012.

Stealth does not mean invisibility. It only means the aircraft becomes harder to detect.

We will have to use MKI in tandem with FGFA if we are to win against a squadron of J-20. Lucky for us we will be getting our 5th gen before the Chinese do.

 

[ace009]

I actually read in some other defense forum that F-22s have a kill ratio of 100/ 200:1 in combat trainings against F-15, F-16 and F-18s. That is a scary statistics.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I actually read in some other defense forum that F-22s have a kill ratio of 100/ 200:1 in combat trainings against F-15, F-16 and F-18s. That is a scary statistics.

Dont fall for US ( PR ), We know Rafale Got F22 in its Cross-hair..

MKI is a awesome fighter in hand of good pilots with good tactics any battle can be won..

 

[Anshu Attri]

photoshoped

 

[p2prada]

I actually read in some other defense forum that F-22s have a kill ratio of 100/ 200:1 in combat trainings against F-15, F-16 and F-18s. That is a scary statistics.

The figure is 108:0 in favour of the F-22. The enemy aircraft consisted of F-15C/D, F-16C/D and F-18A.

All previous gen platforms. The F-15E and EA-18G Growler have extra teeth.

 

[ace009]

Dont fall for US ( PR ), We know Rafale Got F22 in its Cross-hair..

MKI is a awesome fighter in hand of good pilots with good tactics any battle can be won..

It was not Rafale. It was a F/A-18G that got the F-22 in a WVR camera sight for three frames (about half a second). Not enough to get a missile lock, far less to shoot. As for US PR - sure it is there, along with EF consortium PR, French PR (no hard feelings Armand) and Russian and Swede PR. Truth is, the F-22 is still the best fighter out there - since 2000. Maye things will change in another 7-8 years.
But leaving the F-22 aside, Among Rafale, EF2K and F/A-18 SH, the Rafale seems to have the edge at this moment.

 

[adyonfire4]

Those Large Canards will increase the RCS of J-20 to a significant extent also HAL along with Russia is developing Stealthier Variant of SU-30 MKI and may be ready by 2014.