Su-57 News and Discussion -version_we_lost_count!-

Read the forum code of contact

Profile picture for user FBW

Member for

10 years 1 month

Posts: 3,106


I am also aware of the problem with the dash target; MICA, for instance, is a medium-ranged air-to-air missile with EO seeker, up to about 100 km. On approach at high Mach, you're going to be detected at very long ranges, and you can be targeted beforehand even if the missile can't acquire a lock and needs data-linking.

Dios Mio!! Man where do you get your figures from? Hearsay on forums? MICA is not a 100km missile.... even against DC-3. I don’t even think manufacturers inaccurate estimates would claim 100km for the MICA.

Profile picture for user FBW

Member for

10 years 1 month

Posts: 3,106

That is not true. There are many factors involved which will yield an optimal frequency. And the RCS reduction measures will diminish in effectiveness on both sides of that frequency.

Ummm, not so much HF radar (like Ka band he referred to). Both VHF/UHF theoretically are effective, but come with another host of issues. There is a reason targeting and ranging radar use certain frequencies.

Member for

12 years 9 months

Posts: 190

Huh, I guess I'm wrong about MICA. I seem to recall it as being an extremely long-ranged IR missile, but with poor agility and pK.

Member for

3 years 8 months

Posts: 333

Ummm, not so much HF radar (like Ka band he referred to).

OK, I agree that it won't fall off quite as much or as fast for higher frequencies not too distant from the X-band. (So lower to mid Ka band). But, actually, at higher frequencies the RCS reduction measures can be defeated just as easily as with low frequencies. For a visual example:

https://www.wired.com/2010/12/lockheed-cross-breeding-raptors-joint-strike-fighters/

See those internal triangular sections outboard of the engine nozzles. The Raptor's RCS reduction measures works best when that outer skin is least reflective and both most absorbent and transmissive. That way the largest amount of RF energy can be drawn into the re-entrant surfaces and attenuated away - and the outer skin absorbing any small specular reflection.

If you drive frequency way up to where that outer skin is no longer mostly transparent then the Raptor's shaping and absorbent coatings are seriously compromised. This is why the Chinese, Russians, and such are pursuing ROFAR.

So the basic principle that stealth technology works better as frequencies increase is false.

Profile picture for user LMFS

Member for

3 years 10 months

Posts: 484

Stealth is both a missile countermeasure and an anti-detection mechanism. In the full-on American stealth aircraft system, you'll have aircraft that are not only undetectable by radar until WVR ranges, but there's also interesting reports that stealth aircraft can get very annoying WVR; even if you can see them, your electronic targeting system might not be able to pick them up due to RCS flicker.

You mean the full-on stealth system they are not wanting to fly anywhere near a S-400? Or the one designed with lower frequency radars in mind that was modified from high-altitude penetration bomber to low-altitude in order to survive Russian AD? Or the experimental one, ultra VLO one captured by the Iranians? :D

Take no offence, low signature or rather signature management is almost mandatory today for many reasons but nowhere close to that effective as to be in close combat with the guy and not seeing it in the radar... that is out of question with modern radar systems.

Member for

12 years 9 months

Posts: 190

LMFS: the thing is, anti-stealth radar tends to be L-band or lower; the E-2D is an UHF-band system. Fighter radars and missiles tend to be in the X-band and up, where stealth coatings and shapings are highly effective.

This is why I'm suggesting that in a stealth-vs-stealth engagement, what's going to happen is that AEW&C / ground counter-stealth is going to pick up the stealth fighter, then allied fighters will track the stealth fighter on IRST / EODAS and either data-link a radar-guided missile in, or fire IR missiles WVR. But the radar-guided missiles can't track on their own vs stealth fighters except at extremely close ranges.

Member for

8 years 3 months

Posts: 2,014

LMFS: the thing is, anti-stealth radar tends to be L-band or lower

Radar need to operate at lower frequency to be effective against stealth
F-117 model without RAM:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]261936[/ATTACH]
Attachments
Profile picture for user SpudmanWP

Member for

13 years

Posts: 5,197

Given that Israel has used F-35s in Syria against Syrian and Iranian troops without nary a peep from the Russians in the way of a warning or a coordinated defence, I don't put much stock in their claims of "anti-stealth" systems.

Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

13 years

Posts: 2,619

How could people bombed to stone age see a thing from their tears ?

Profile picture for user SpudmanWP

Member for

13 years

Posts: 5,197

There is this thing you are typing on called the Internet. Using it, you will find out that Russia has set up an S-400 (it has strong anti-stealth claims) system that they claim is fulling integrated into Syria's IADS. Given that Russia themselves claimed that they have it up and running, it's Russia that would see & warn about the F-35's approact and ops within Syria and not Syria themselves that should have sounded the alram.

Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

13 years

Posts: 2,619

Maybe s-400 system radars are not low band radars ?

Profile picture for user SpudmanWP

Member for

13 years

Posts: 5,197

That's what they have been claiming for years.

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 4,731


Given that Israel has used F-35s in Syria against Syrian and Iranian troops without nary a peep from the Russians in the way of a warning or a coordinated defence, I don't put much stock in their claims of "anti-stealth" systems.

first you have no evidence of F-35 entering airspace and than you are assuming they want to use the system against Israel at this point. Saudi has put indirect sanctiosns on Germany.

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 906

Did they deploy Nebo SVU or Nebo UE in Syria ?

If they don't they only have like S-band 91N6 and 96L6 which are S/L band. and if they did indeed deploy, we still have line of sight problem. as These system are deployed only in Hymeim and nowhere else.

---
Low band radar still have its promise and i believe US will definitely look for same solution had Chinese start pulling their own version of B-2 or Russian finally wake up and finish whatever they got.

Profile picture for user SpudmanWP

Member for

13 years

Posts: 5,197

No evidence except for Israel saying so.

Russia would not have to launch themselves as they are "integrated" with Syria and could have directed a launch. A bare minimum it should have warned the Syrians.

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 906

Yeah and then it depend on whether Syria can mobilize their assets there. If it can't or there simply too many munitions to handle then it got saturated.

We never really seen Syrian MiG's doing anything even in daylight and early warning was available. So it's all down to their ground based system which they dont have many of it and have limited target channel. handful of pantsyrs wont be enough for the task.

Profile picture for user SpudmanWP

Member for

13 years

Posts: 5,197

What was Russia's purpose in integrating into the Syrian IADS if they could not respond to any Russian warnings?

Occam's Razor states that Russia simply could not see the F-35s.

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 906

Another occam's Razor also state Because they don't have enough coverage.

Profile picture for user SpudmanWP

Member for

13 years

Posts: 5,197

Yeah, because Syria is not going to cover the approach from Israel, you know, the neighbour that they are still technically at war with.

I don't think you know what Occam's Razor is.

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 906

I clearly know. But let's be real and do a google earth., then you would see what i mean. Then search Sipri for how many Pantsyrs or Buk they purchase. You would clearly see there are just not many of them to cover whatever Israeli wants to strike. Unless very few strategic place.

or maybe we could have..sorry for the lack of better word.. flat earth ?