OT: F/A-22 vs. well everything else

[BladeLWS]

Overloaded sensors should not be an issue with modern aircraft, should be easy enough to just take in what you need/want.

And what is the purpose of frequenzy hopping? The emissions are still coming from the same place.

Because if you knew jack about ECM and jamming that with the APG-77's freq jumping it's almost unjammable. It changes freqs so fast that ECM's can't lock on and jam it, and if it does lockon the freq changes a millesecond later. This is compared to the F-16's four frequencies with the APG-66.

 

What the Raptors radar does is that it beams all of its radar energy directly at its target, scrambling all of its electronic sensors with so much data it overloads them.

[D-Scythe]

Why are we still arguing over this?

 

Let's get one thing straight - Air-to-air, anti-radiation missiles exist (ever heard of the R-27P?). They DON'T work.

 

Now, the APG-77 is an AESA radar. Nothing even compares - it is capable of jamming its target's radar and RWR WHILE it is tracking it. And not just jamming in the normal sense; it absolutely overloads and blinds the target with garbage radiation. That is one of its BASIC applications - there are probably many more complex, classified ones we don't know about. Coupled with the Raptor's datalink, the thing would be unbelievable.

 

Don't you think Lockheed would've realized that having a radar on-board might give away the Raptor's location? They've done measures to prevent that ;)

[wasserfall]

Has anyone info on how the N0011M Bars phased array radar of the SU30/35

performs to other sophisticated radar systems?

[BladeLWS]

Has anyone info on how the N0011M Bars phased array radar of the SU30/35

performs to other sophisticated radar systems?

Even though it has no relevance to this topic, I'll entertain ya. *pulls out Brassey's World Aircraft and System's Directory*.

 

Lets see, ok here it is.

 

Manufacturer: NIIP.

Designation: N-011/N-011M (multirole)

Type: Unknown

Antenna Type: Flat slotted. N-011M is phased array derivative

Operating Modes AA: TWS, LD/SD

Operating Modes AG: Ground mapping, TFR

Tracking capability: 15

Engagement Capacity: 4-6

Max range: 43-54 miles (80-100 km) fighter head on, 16-21.5 miles tail on; 108 miles in surface to surface mode

Comments: Coverage 85 degrees in azimuth, 55 degrees in elevation

 

But in comparison to other radars its range is pretty small. The current radar used on the Eagle's the APG-70 has a 100+ mile range, and the Tomcat's APG-71 has a range of 115+ miles.

[Pilotasso]

Who said it wasn't all it was suppose to be?.. Anyway I thought both sides would have had AWACS .. I think I saw the same documentary and the explanation they gave wasn't very specific but along the lines of it can track from other F22's or AWACS....could be I saw a different program but no need to get defensive.

 

The AWACS can track stealth fighters that belong to its side through the usage of a transponder. It might detect it fisicaly but at much shorter ranges of course. But of course these recognition systems other than fisical detection are classified to the highest level.

 

Adding another thing I saw in one of the Disc. wings doc's, I think they mentioned the F-22 being capable transmit its own waves through the radome while it acts opaque to others.

Any country using these capabilities will turn oposing fighters completely blind, while preventing others from doing the same.

[peterj]

There are some similar technology in the pipe. An AESA radar is/has being developed for Gripen, Ericsson NORA.

Saabs next venture appears to be in unmanned aircrafts.

 

http://www.airforce-technology.com/contractors/surveillance/ericsson2/

[TucksonSonny]

Experiment: - Put a lighted candle in your microwave oven and turn it on.

Result: You have just created Plasma Stealth Technology.

Please take note: I am not responsible if the experiment goes wrong and you get hurt or your wife also could kill you after the experiment. Anyhow, don’t try this at home.

The theory:

Apparently the flame, which is, of course plasma, absorbs the microwaves, and becomes self-sustaining, absorbing the microwave energy, and actually spreading. It may be that the Russian plasma generator works the same way.

Plasma is ionized gas, which means that it's atoms have so much kinetic energy that valence electrons have been freed through atomic-level collisions. I suppose a radio signal encountering a plasma stream would easily be subject to dispersion. The electromagnetic radio wave encountering the plasma would become highly energized and change directions. This would cause it not to be reflected back to the radar station, and thus the radar station would have no knowledge of the aircraft's presence. It could be possible (and this is complete speculation on my part) that plasma could also entrap and dissipate the energy of the radio wave. This is what radar-absorbent materials currently do, like "IronBall," which is the nickname for the radar-absorbent paint used on planes like the F-22. They use ferro-magnetic (permanently magnetized) materials to try bounce the signal around until it dies, so that it can't reflect back to the radar station. Having a plasma stream do this would increase stealthiness without sacrificing aerodynamics and it may be more weight-effective."

The system developed by the Russians is also based on electromagnetic wave-plasma interactions, but in a very different way. Russian stealth plasma device creates a plasma field around an aircraft. This field partially consumes electromagnetic energy of a hostile radar or causes it to bend around the aircraft, reducing the aircraft RCS by up to 100 times. Sounds fantastic? Not really: effects of dissipation and bending of electromagnetic signals in presence of plasma field have been observed for decades. If there is anything new about the system developed by the Russians it certainly is not the theoretical part but technical aspects of the plasma generator. Keldysh Research Center claims to have developed, built and tested a plasma shield generator that weighs only 100 kg.

:rolleyes:

[GGTharos]

On the other hand, if you actually look at how much 'plasma stealth' is used in practice vs. IronBall, you start to wonder exactly what it is they tested.

 

Plasma itself is still a topic of research. ;)

[Guest IguanaKing]

Where did that theory come from? A candle's flame isn't plasma...LOL. :D

[GGTharos]

You can turn carbonized material into plasma in your microwave oven IK. Your oven's ruined, but you can do it.

 

Then funny thing is that you pump out a whole bunch of energy to accomplish ... nothing ;)

[Guest IguanaKing]

Have you ever tried it? I would think you'd also have to add pressure in order to get it to work. Maybe I should try it, since my microwave was included with my apartment. I wonder how much it'll cost me from my security deposit. :D

[GGTharos]

I suggest if you want guaranteed results, google 'microwave plasma' :D

[Guest IguanaKing]

The first link shows a light bulb, which is not the same as a candle. A light bulb is generally an evacuated glass chamber...that's why I mentioned pressure, although I failed to show the direction of pressure. ;)

 

This technique that is shown definitely has its merits. It is the same basic principle as that which surrounds the need to pressurize radar waveguides in aircraft that operate above a certain altitude. The Rockwell/Collins manual for the WXT-250A Weather Radar states that the waveguide from the R/T to the antenna should be pressurized in aircraft expected to operate above 40,000'. The reason for this is that air can actually be ionized by the RF at this altitude which causes a direct short to ground and can fry the magnetron. Fortunately, in the case of the Cheyenne 400 LS owner, who's aircraft I repaired the radar on today, this occurrence only blew the fuse in the power supply. The waveguide was missing its RF window, which is required in order to pressurize that.

 

So...the question is...how does one generate a plasma field with an electronic device without, in turn, killing the device that generated it in the first place? Could you encase the aircraft in some sort of evacuated vessel? That's one of the major problems with the plasma stealth concept. ;)

[jabog32_zillion]

Where did that theory come from? A candle's flame isn't plasma...LOL.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma --> Common plasmas ---> Flames (ie. fire)

 

and for the microwave...

 

http://apache.airnet.com.au/~fastinfo/microwave/ball.html

 

http://van.hep.uiuc.edu/van/qa/section/Everything_Else/Microwave_Ovens/20021010223728.htm

 

Even I don't really know anything about it, after 5 minutes of using google i wonder if the so called:

 

Incoherent scatter effect

 

has anything to do with it...

[DaveRindner]

Active Stealth technology: i.e. plasma generator

 

If it could be made to work.No doubt the wizards at Zshukovsky, at LM Skunk Works, and Boeing Phantom Works, have tried. So far it seems failiure or non-practicality is the result.

Anyway, US technology tradition, espouses passive techniques.

Any kind of active 'stealth' technique is bound to be detectable by alternate sensor or side effect. Hell, even bi-static, or Nnode radr techniques likely gave American stealth gurus the fits. Until they , obviously figred out a way to deal with it. The pundits were saying that China and Iran were upgrading S300 and S300PS systems with Nnode network surveilance radars, and B2 could no longer be counted on to penetrate the airspace. Turned out that, the theory worked in lab, in real world the aspect of primenode (emmitter) to reflector(target) gave different results. So by changing course, and aspect, the B2 effectively created a circular probablity of location, so huge, that by the time the supercomputer spat out the proable position of relfector, it was no longer valid. Now this is for subsonic (600 knots or less) hi profile. It can;t be used for targeting, unless you count in megaton airburst saturation of CPL area. It may be used for vectoring interceptors, but I doubt that in real world, a SU-37 onboard sensor can detect it, much less track it. There was talk of utilizing bistatic or Nnode radars as enhanced weather patern detection, such as ultra-hightech dopplers, to detect wind vortices and air displacement (wake) of the penetrating aircraft. That went nowhere. To complex in real world. For wake detection and tracking, you would need satelites or very hig altitudes assets. All targets in case of conflict.

I can't say what is the deal with LADAR surveilance. That went black.

 

So far, it seems to me, that passive stealth approach, by the Americans, is the correct one. If nothing else, everyone knows that it works.

 

Two said days in US Defense policy.

JSF greenlighted

Comanche canceled.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Yup...ironically, much of the stealth technology the US uses today was created, in theory, by a Russian. He was basically dismissed as a crackpot and his research papers and theories were never deemed important enough to classify. I think one of the fore-fathers of the American stealth program managed to find these secrets at a public library. :D

[jabog32_zillion]

reading this i have become tired at 5 o' clock in the morning:

 

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/plasma/

 

no working on the ATC today... :)

[Guest IguanaKing]

I agree...plasma stealth is a real concept...it CAN work, in theory. The problem, as previously stated, is how do you generate such a field over the entire surface of an aircraft while, at the same time, keeping it pneumatically AND electrically isolated from the device which produced it? If anybody can figure that out...they'll have quite the new technology on their hands. ;)

[Yellonet]

Because if you knew jack about ECM and jamming that with the APG-77's freq jumping it's almost unjammable. It changes freqs so fast that ECM's can't lock on and jam it, and if it does lockon the freq changes a millesecond later. This is compared to the F-16's four frequencies with the APG-66.

RWS doesn't need to lock on anything to work, it's a passive system.

 

What the Raptors radar does is that it beams all of its radar energy directly at its target, scrambling all of its electronic sensors with so much data it overloads them.

That would work against 'open sensors'.

Modern day sensors should be able to just take in what they want.

[Yellonet]

I suggest if you want guaranteed results, google 'microwave plasma' :D

Check this out... there's a video too. Pretty cool.

http://apache.airnet.com.au/~fastinfo/microwave/videos/globe.html

[23rd_Drago]

I agree...plasma stealth is a real concept...it CAN work, in theory. The problem, as previously stated, is how do you generate such a field over the entire surface of an aircraft while, at the same time, keeping it pneumatically AND electrically isolated from the device which produced it? If anybody can figure that out...they'll have quite the new technology on their hands. ;)

 

Ever read about "Shkval" torpedo... and even now, do you think it's possible for an object to travel at 230+ mph underwater? Do you think people thought it was possible 20 years ago?

[TucksonSonny]

Even without facing plasma technology I have doubt that the F/A-22 will do the job.

 

I read somewhere that the Su-27 upgrade program (finished by now/in progress?) also includes a radar-absorbent paint.

together with N011M radar, GPS, refuelling probe, provision for targeting pods, VOR, DME, new navigation computer. (Missile support includes R77, Kh31, Kh59T, Kh29T, KAB 500 and 1500 TV guided bombs).

 

Russian SU-27/30 BM (Big Modification. this upgrade brings the SU-27s to the SU-30MKI standard)

and SU-27UBM (Parallel upgrade to the SU-30KN)

 

My point is the F-22 could face a complete different kind of Su-27 fleet using multiple jamming and of course data link similar with western Link 16.

 

How would the F-22 deal with this kind of opponent? One Su play the AWACS role and the others shut off radar. Once the AWACS role playing SU is under attack it could switch off his radar and another su would take over the AWACS role.

 

I understand that the F-22 uses also the same tactic. One F-22 plays AWACS role (and would be vulnerable with radar on) and the others go in stealth mode using the data link.

 

Take into account that the F-22 fleet will be outnumbered in each hypothetical conflict.

 

Of course this is just speculation from my part..:icon_supe

[GGTharos]

They thought it was possible the moment they observed subsonic bullets moving under water. They probably also thought it impractical ...

 

That doesn't prove anything about plasma stealth, however ;)

 

The Shkval is a last-ditch revenge weapon since it isn't really guided, and requires a nuclear warhead or loads of luck to actually accomplish anything other than forcing the enemy sub (or boat) to attempt maneuvering out of its way (which is pretty easy ... they can simply change speed, and it will likely pass outside of magnetic influence radius)

[jabog32_zillion]

hypothetical conflicts... beware sane world... extreme speculation to follow...

 

and I don't mean to start any political discussions....

 

will israel start the nuking or will america ?

 

will pakistan and then of course india on the other side enter the mess once the war has truely become a religious one between west and middle east ?

 

what will north korea do after their american friends are so busy fighting in two countries and start tossing around with cute micro nukes ? Exploit the chaos and take a close look at south korea.

 

mhh... china ?

 

edit:

 

aehh.. after pressing the button labeled "post" I might add...

>> Please don't answer... << worrying, if you do these kind of things is a burden already

[GGTharos]

Even without facing plasma technology I have doubt that the F/A-22 will do the job.

 

I read somewhere that the Su-27 upgrade program (finished by now/in progress?) also includes a radar-absorbent paint.

together with N011M radar, GPS, refuelling probe, provision for targeting pods, VOR, DME, new navigation computer. (Missile support includes R77, Kh31, Kh59T, Kh29T, KAB 500 and 1500 TV guided bombs).

 

Russian SU-27/30 BM (Big Modification. this upgrade brings the SU-27s to the SU-30MKI standard)

and SU-27UBM (Parallel upgrade to the SU-30KN)

 

My point is the F-22 could face a complete different kind of Su-27 fleet using multiple jamming and of course data link similar with western Link 16.

 

How would the F-22 deal with this kind of opponent? One Su play the AWACS role and the others shut off radar. Once the AWACS role playing SU is under attack it could switch off his radar and another su would take over the AWACS role.

 

I understand that the F-22 uses also the same tactic. One F-22 plays AWACS role (and would be vulnerable with radar on) and the others go in stealth mode using the data link.

 

Take into account that the F-22 fleet will be outnumbered in each hypothetical conflict.

 

Of course this is just speculation from my part..:icon_supe

 

A lot of aircraft are using partial head-on RCS reduction now ... however they are not stealth as the F-22 is. This means that the 22 STILL gets the first shot, and it's weapons get a greater chance to track and hit.

 

It's not an equivalent to stealth in other words ... but it will certainly give them an advantage against older, high RCS aircraft.