The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

[Vekkinho]

For you ? or for a computer ?

It's not cutting edge technology to make such an array on the ground, the only tricky bit would be to know the position of each aircraft accurately while in the air, and then collect and process the data - but the Russians have a history of doing things that were too hard - who got the first PESA radar into the air ?

 

 

Sounds too complicated for the device in picture...

 

This KV-101 or whatever optical sideview looking tracker we see on latest T-50-04 is nothing but average Joe's garage security camera that costs 50$ and ships worldwide in 24hours...

[Pilotasso]

Not if they data link to get a dispersed array as a single virtual radome.

 

You cant cluster missiles like you cluster radiotelescopes, or radar dishes. (it would mean multiple launches at 1 target and they all had to impact at the EXACT same time) :)

 

But, AFAIK L band doesnt provide targeting info to beggin with.

 

What I think the russians want is to smell out incoming low RCS targets using L band and then slave secondary sensors onto a smaller sweep area, like the X band radar or the ISRT in an attempt to burn through and achieve a lock on, I guess its better than nothing but there are no miracles here.

Edited December 22, 2012 by Pilotasso

[Esac_mirmidon]

Great vekkinho.

 

Now Russia only needs to call Joe to build the rest of the PAK-FA with the same 50 dollar items in his garage and after that shipping the new fighters world wide with UPS.

 

A lot of money saved. I can´t imagine why Sukhoi aren´t calling Wall Mart to build fighters.

[marcos]

You cant cluster missiles like you cluster radiotelescopes, or radar dishes. (it would mean multiple launches at 1 target and they all had to impact at the EXACT same time) :)

 

But, AFAIK L band doesnt provide targeting info to beggin with.

 

What I think the russians want is to smell out incoming low RCS targets using L band and then slave secondary sensors onto a smaller sweep area, like the X band radar or the ISRT in an attempt to burn through and achieve a lock on, I guess its better than nothing but there are no miracles here.

If you use the missile in a fire and forget capacity but if you provide a mid-flight update then things differ.

[Pilotasso]

You always need guidance in the terminal phase, mid course guidance have large margins of error.

[Weta43]

You cant cluster missiles like you cluster radiotelescopes

It wasn't the missiles I was suggesting clustering - it's L band the emmiters / receivers in the wings I was talking about clustering .. there's nothing special about the actual dishes used in distributed arrays, it's all software based, so if you know the relative postions of the in wing L band radars of a number of aircraft accurately, you can use the radar "dishes" of a number of aircraft to create a distributed array as a single antenna.

Sounds too complicated for the device in picture...

 

This KV-101 or whatever optical sideview looking tracker we see on latest T-50-04 is nothing but average Joe's garage security camera that costs 50$ and ships worldwide in 24hours...

& you can tell this from looking at a picture of the lense ?

With psychic powers like that you should hire yourself out to the CIA (you can start practicing staring at goats beforehand to get a head start)

"All*" that's needed is a good enough EOS to fix the positon system of the linked planes relative to each other in real time, and then a whole lot of computing power.

 

* which isn't an easy thing, but you can't tell whether the T-50 has this capability by looking at the lenses of it's sensors...

[mikoyan]

The Eurofighter has s 3D nozzle as option, no clients wanted it so far.

 

You meant projected right, It has never flown on the real thing and I haven't seen the eurofighter flipping around

[NOLA]

This KV-101 or whatever optical sideview looking tracker we see on latest T-50-04 is nothing but average Joe's garage security camera that costs 50$ and ships worldwide in 24hours...

 

Do you realize what "U" stands in "KS-U"?

[marcos]

You always need guidance in the terminal phase, mid course guidance have large margins of error.

Use several updates to get the missile within about 10 miles, it's own homing will do the job from there, since the approaching aircraft will no longer be stealthy at that range.

[marcos]

You meant projected right, It has never flown on the real thing and I haven't seen the eurofighter flipping around

The EJ230 is a Tranche 3 upgrade.

[tflash]

The EJ230 is a Tranche 3 upgrade.

 

To what I have read, Tranche 3 hasn't been defined yet, but EJ230 is not on the table. Beyond P1E, it will be Meteor and AESA, depending on the buying nation some specific A/G ordnance like possibly Storm Shadow and advanced GBU's.

EJ230 isn't considered yet since EJ200 is one of the very best parts of the Typhoon, with excellent performance, maintainability and fuel burn. And Typhoon is already very manoevrable so there is no need for TVC at the moment.

[marcos]

To what I have read, Tranche 3 hasn't been defined yet, but EJ230 is not on the table. Beyond P1E, it will be Meteor and AESA, depending on the buying nation some specific A/G ordnance like possibly Storm Shadow and advanced GBU's.

EJ230 isn't considered yet since EJ200 is one of the very best parts of the Typhoon, with excellent performance, maintainability and fuel burn. And Typhoon is already very manoevrable so there is no need for TVC at the moment.

That runs contrary to what I read. The EJ230 was definitely going on during Tranche 3, the only question was whether it'd be 3A or 3B.

 

http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eurojet_EJ200&stable=0&shownotice=1

 

I guess we'll see.

[Pilotasso]

Use several updates to get the missile within about 10 miles, it's own homing will do the job from there, since the approaching aircraft will no longer be stealthy at that range.

 

Thats what all ARH missiles do anyway, nothing new except the fundamental part where you *think* what the F-22 Stealth burn through range is, without the classified data that is a hell of an acessment...

 

A) you cant provide guidance with L band radars, not even when triangulating from multiple arrays (since no radar gets targetting data to beggin with, none of the other will either)

B) you cant send the missile in mid course guidance untill you burn through because you dont know what that is and the longer it flies in that mode, the longer the error is, and the lesser PK.

 

The only thing sane to say about those wing root L band radars, is: as I said previously, to sniff out low RCS targets and then sweep the area with other sharper sensors (much like a srearch antenna linked to track antennas on ships and SAM complexes), unless someone else comes with a better more feasable idea how it might work.

Edited December 23, 2012 by Pilotasso

[Pilotasso]

You meant projected right, It has never flown on the real thing and I haven't seen the eurofighter flipping around

 

When a client sets requirements on fighter tenders, many of those capabilities are already studied but not fully developed or implemented. The client purchase will determine integration. They wont just spend all the money on their own.

 

If by any change the Euro finds itself competing for a supermanuverable capability fighter tender rest assure it will be demonstrated.

[marcos]

Thats what all ARH missiles do anyway, nothing new except the fundamental part where you *think* what the F-22 Stealth burn through range is, without the classified data that is a hell of an acessment....

And presumably you have all the classified data on the T-50 radar operation. If it can sniff it out maybe it can track it to. If you don't know where to point them, how can you sweep any specific area with sharper sensors, unless the L Band provides this information somehow?

 

I don't know either because of the lack of data but it's a lot of effort to go to just to tell you that something is somewhere. Half decent intuition would tell you as much when in combat.

Edited December 23, 2012 by marcos

[Pilotasso]

marcos, this is the Idea:

 

L band= Idea where stealth threat is coming from (general azimuth),

 

X band =exact position, azimuth, altitude and clossure, and then targetting data for missiles.

 

And then you launch (assuming your still alive) and hope the missiles aquire the target at the inertial guidance estimated point of contact.

 

Bi directional datalink to missiles and GPS (or equivalent) will reduce the margin of error if missiles are equiped with them.

 

Of course this is saying without taking in consideration targets own ECM if it percieves it is being tracked (or attempting to) and/or attacked.

Edited December 23, 2012 by Pilotasso

[GGTharos]

No, it won't. Stealth is a serious concern vs radar guided missiles. It doesn't just cut down your aircraft radar's detection range to 1/8th or 1/10th vs a non-stealthy target, it does so for the missile's radar as well. So where you have a missile that would normally acquire at 20km, now you have one that need to get into 2-4km. Not an easy feat against a radar-evading platform.

 

Use several updates to get the missile within about 10 miles, it's own homing will do the job from there, since the approaching aircraft will no longer be stealthy at that range.

[mikoyan]

The EJ230 is a Tranche 3 upgrade.

 

Has it flown with TVC?

[RIPTIDE]

I think the biggest advantage of an L-band radar is the detection of very long range conventional RCS targets at the horizon with limited steering required. Any Stealthy detection would only be an afterthought and only considered a bonus, regardless of what PR folks might say. So basically the L-band is simply an augmentation of the conventional X-band nose mounted radar.

That's my guess.

 

If you want genuine Stealth Detection, consider VHF-HF ground installations.

[marcos]

No, it won't. Stealth is a serious concern vs radar guided missiles. It doesn't just cut down your aircraft radar's detection range to 1/8th or 1/10th vs a non-stealthy target, it does so for the missile's radar as well. So where you have a missile that would normally acquire at 20km, now you have one that need to get into 2-4km. Not an easy feat against a radar-evading platform.

What about lock after launch? Use the superior aircraft radar to track the target and guide the missile using that until such time as the missile radar can pick it up. Several radar-guided SAMs don't even have a radar in the missile itself.

[marcos]

Has it flown with TVC?

I don't think so but the engine has been ground tested and I'm assuming they didn't just build it for a laugh.

[RIPTIDE]

What about lock after launch? Use the superior aircraft radar to track the target and guide the missile using that until such time as the missile radar can pick it up. Several radar-guided SAMs don't even have a radar in the missile itself.

Well yes, but those Ground based sams always suffer from ambiguity. As does all radar installations. Ambiguity correlates with pulse length and range and is limited by the Radar band itself and by the switching gear in the radar set.

 

The more advanced Theatre level SAMS are moving to TVM.

[marcos]

Well yes, but those Ground based sams always suffer from ambiguity. As does all radar installations. Ambiguity correlates with pulse length and range and is limited by the Radar band itself and by the switching gear in the radar set.

 

The more advanced Theatre level SAMS are moving to TVM.

Ambiguity isn't important if you're just trying to get the missile within ball-park so that it can home itself.

[Namenlos Ein]

[marcos]

 

 

 

This be wrong.

 

Edited December 26, 2012 by marcos