Military Sensor/Missile capability

[topol-m]

I'll try to pose the question in a different manner: Why, when knowing of the possibility of stealth development by the 'other side' (and I know it was a concern, it's been mentioned in OLD papers) has the USAF not been scrambling to equip everything with the latest in EOS technology, and they have been piling AESA radars onto everything instead?

Same with missiles: Where's that AIM-120IR?

 

Very soon they might equip them with EOS ;)

 

The Russians aren't eactly going counter to this trend, either. The EOS has always, ALWAYS been the backup to the radar, not the other way around. And this is true even now, with stealth aircraft. If EOS really was 'all that', since after you can stealth against radar, jam a radar, detect a radar, go EOS vs. your radar emitting foe, etc, etc, WHY on earth is everyone still putting RADARS on their planes as the primary instrument of doom-bring goodness?

 

They put them because radars are better in almost all cases, except when you can`t detect your target with radar (at least not at a distance you would like to) :P So far only american aircraft have stealth why would you need EOS? Things are changing though. Now with PAK-FA and by 2020 we might see yet another stealth fighter, or two...

Edited February 23, 2010 by topol-m

[Pilotasso]

EOS are more usefull within WVR and when you want a stealth attack. Others without EOS, untill recenlty had to turn torwards the target and uncage the missile, wich was of course a big disavantage. "WAS" because now you got helmet mounted sights capable of slaving missiles directly which are becoming stabdard even on smaller countries with tiny budgets.

[GGTharos]

Very soon they might equip them with EOS ;)

 

Seriously, do you see that happening? ;)

Not in a single case is it the primary instrument of detection ... they are focusing on different types of radar instead. I'd imagine they find EOS unreliable.

 

They put them because radars are better in almost all cases, except when you can`t detect your target with radar (at least not at a distance you would like to) :P So far only american aircraft have stealth why would you need EOS? Things are changing though. Now with PAK-FA and by 2020 we might see yet another stealth fighter, or two...

 

I'm hearing that fighters will start going away at that time. Not that they'll stop existing or being flown, but I've been hearing that the fighter pilot career is dying.

[topol-m]

Seriously, do you see that happening? ;)

Not in a single case is it the primary instrument of detection ... they are focusing on different types of radar instead. I'd imagine they find EOS unreliable.

 

I don`t think EOS will ever become primary instrument, but as a secondary this technology is improving and has future IMHO.

 

I'm hearing that fighters will start going away at that time. Not that they'll stop existing or being flown, but I've been hearing that the fighter pilot career is dying.

 

In such a short period of time? I don`t believe it. Especially in peace time. Everything is slow, same planes are used for decades and decades, new ones are tested for decade+, development costs billions... Nah veery unlikely IMO, if we are talking about 2040-2050, then maybe... :)

 

P.S. What`s with the typos lately??? "thing" instead of "think" :huh: I should write only when I`m not drunk. Cheers! Kanpai! :drunk:

Edited February 23, 2010 by topol-m

[GGTharos]

I don`t thing EOS will ever become primary instrument, but as a secondary this technology is improving and has future IMHO.

 

I don't disagree. I just disagree with the whole EOSPWNSF22 outcry that is very common.

 

Funny enough, Kopp like to write EOSPWNSF22 but then, the F-35's EOS never pwnsflanker :D

 

In such a short period of time? I don`t believe it. Especially in peace time. Everything is slow... same planes are used for decades and decades, new ones are tested for decade+, development costs billions... Nah veery unlikely IMO, if we are talking about 2040-2050, then maybe... :)

 

Yes, this is when the fighters themselves will go away, but the 'fight for pilot slots' has already begun. People trying to hold onto airframes, new people wanting those airframes, and not a whole lot of new airframes being built.

[jerom1992]

Quick question in between... Are missiles EMP shielded?

[Pilotasso]

Not the nose cone for sure, and thats all it takes. ;)

[jerom1992]

So if you could put some powerful enough EMP-containers (i mean drop-off) on a plane and if you could time it well enough, you could have a much more effective anti-missile system?

[sobek]

So if you could put some powerful enough EMP-containers (i mean drop-off) on a plane and if you could time it well enough, you could have a much more effective anti-missile system?

 

You don't need to fry a circuit to make it malfunction. There are more energy efficient ways to do things.

[topol-m]

So if you could put some powerful enough EMP-containers (i mean drop-off) on a plane and if you could time it well enough, you could have a much more effective anti-missile system?

 

If your goal is range then your plane will be in big trouble too :joystick: The best way is to use an ICBM. The nuclear blast has an EMP effect too :cheer3nc: For a better effect it should explode in the air at given altitude.

Edited February 24, 2010 by topol-m

[tflash]

Boeing is still involved in developing IRST for F-15K, F-15SG and Super Hornet.

 

I guess the anti-stealth powers of IRST are mostly PR. The real advantage of EO or IR systems in addition to radar is visual ID.

 

Whereas Rafale's OSF has been touted as part of a stealth attack ability in combination with Mica IR, its real use is much more profane: it comes in very handy to be able to visually identify a target or object of interest from far ahead. Rafale pilots like their (now daytime only) OSF eg for linking up with tankers and looking more closely into civilian flights.

 

For many QRA flights, the likelyhood that they will actually intercept an airliner or a small drugs plane is much more higher than that they have to intercept a stealth fighter. A good forward looking EO or IRST or dual channel optronic sensor makes perfectly sense for this.

 

But then I guess you could do the same with a standard lightening pod, so there must be some genuine added advantage in the Ir Search capability. Theoretically it is much faster of course than a radar beam; I dunno if this yields a useable advantage.

[GGTharos]

It's a backup in a heavy ECM environment.

[A.S]

Translation: Bull*** :D

 

 

http://www.roke.co.uk/sensing/radar.html#citem0 *pointer*

[sobek]

Theoretically it is much faster of course than a radar beam; I dunno if this yields a useable advantage.

 

What do you mean with much faster? Propagation speed? If yes, then no ;) Light and radar waves are both electromagnetic waves that propagate at the same speed.

[FeoFUN]

I don't think it's main purpose is to detect VLO objects, but it IS a nice backup against ECM in probably a lot of cases.

I found an article, where official of NIIP company - developer of radars for PAK FA, has mentioned that role of L-band AESA is to detect VLO-targets due to impossibility to make the plane, which will be invisible in such wide spectrum, from X to L, because the longer wavelength, the bigger RCS(and closer to physical dimensions of target). Additional, you can't get a RAM, which can absorb emission in such wide spectrum.

 

P.S. According to man, who shot down F-117, it was detected and tracked not with radar(which was off to avoid detection by NATO), but FLIR, that was installed on the few SAMs before the war.

Edited February 25, 2010 by FeoFUN

[GGTharos]

There are definitely reports of radar track, and that same man confirmed it (the radar may have been used for detection only though, and not guidance)

 

As for the L-Band radar, again, it's not going to be like that. That's hype and I really doubt there's merit to it as an anti-VLO sensor. RAM is the minor stealth component on these planes now, not the major one.

 

P.S. According to man, who shot down F-117, it was detected and tracked not with radar(which was off to avoid detection by NATO), but FLIR, that was installed on the few SAMs before the war.

Edited February 25, 2010 by GGTharos

[Pilotasso]

Its is convenient to clarify wich L band standard your talking about:

 

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

[GGTharos]

It should be obvious, you'd think, that it would be the IEEE standard (Which also contains the X-Band we're talking about) but then again, we've been nailed on the 'obvious' before :D

[Pilotasso]

Well, thats because this F-117 thing keeps bein on mentioned but I think that SA-3 radar utilized a bigger wavelength than this, similar to the planes size in order to bypass some of stealth shapings.

 

If so, no aircraft nose nor missiles can have big enough antennas to pick up such frequencies (any object smaller than a wave length basicaly becomes transparent to that beam).

 

But wing edge-long sensors, could, though you still couldnt shoot any weapons due to the reasons above. ;)

 

This is also susceptible to pick up lots of reflection noise. too unpratical for guidance.

Edited February 25, 2010 by Pilotasso

[GGTharos]

It used C and E band, which straddle L-Band (both using different band definitions of course!).

 

The tracking radar is I/D which is essentially X+L Band.

[FeoFUN]

But wing edge-long sensors, could, though you still couldnt shoot any weapons due to the reasons above. ;)

 

You can - an (I)IR long range missile. ;)

[GGTharos]

If you get one with a datalink, like MICA IR - but the R-27 family won't fit the bill. Those missiles won't launch without a seeker lock, and if you attempt to do so and succeed anyway, they'll hit the ground instead of whatever you may have wanted them to hit ;)

 

Further, their FoV is even narrower than that of an ARH, so I'd expect L-Band guidance to be the worst you could possibly use for this purpose.

 

No one is rushing to replace radar seeker with IR seekers - far from it. This IR missile fan fad continues to be just that: a fad.

[FeoFUN]

R-27T it's just an example, of course PAK FA should be equiped with the new missile, based on RVV-AE or even 'object 180' design.

[tflash]

What do you mean with much faster? Propagation speed? If yes, then no ;) Light and radar waves are both electromagnetic waves that propagate at the same speed.

 

An IRST doesn't send anything out, as it is a passive system. So the waves only travel half the way.

[GGTharos]

I don't think a fraction of a second that you can't even imagine let alone dare to measure with anything but automated scientific instruments is going to make any difference.