F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread

Discussion in 'World Armed Forces' started by Jeff Head, Dec 1, 2011.

  1. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    22,995
    Likes Received:
    27,439
    funnily,
    #594 Brumby, Yesterday at 9:45 PM
    spun the other way (suggesting "the F-35 vacuum up every emission from" the S-400)

    anyway, stealth-is-a-must-against-S-400 stealth-is-a-must-against-S-400 stealth-is-a-must-against-S-400 PR campaign has worked sort of too well
     
  2. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    22,995
    Likes Received:
    27,439
    TerraN_EmpirE likes this.
  3. Brumby
    Offline

    Brumby Major

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    3,575
    Likes Received:
    3,680
    We are now in the digital age where information is king. A S-400 vs F-35 is about sensor shooter equation and how that is brought into play in electronic warfare. An informed conversation requires at least a basic understanding of their respective underlying electronic capabilities or else it is simply misguided opinions.

    As an example prior to the mid 90's, all RWR lack ranging capabilities and can only provide bearing of emission but the error rate was as much as 10 degrees. Today capable US digital RWR can provide ranging capabilities to within less than 1 % of range and bearing. The F-35 can geolocate an emission without requiring multi-ship triangulation. Anything that emits has a limited lifespan.
     
    Air Force Brat and TerraN_EmpirE like this.
  4. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    22,995
    Likes Received:
    27,439
    Apr 14, 2019
    now
    Turkey Formally Dropped From F-35 Program; DoD Estimates $500M to Retool Supply Chain https://news.usni.org/2019/07/17/tu...ram-dod-estimates-500m-to-retool-supply-chain
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  5. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    22,995
    Likes Received:
    27,439
    LOL what's needed is a pass of the Growler to just jam an S-400 installation (if not destroyed by cruise missiles yet), not 300 or so billion dollars for so called stealthy F-35
     
  6. Anlsvrthng
    Offline

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,203
    Likes Received:
    284
    I love so much the inconsistency of the logic :)


    So, the small, light and cheap RWR on the F35 can generate weapon quality track from the emission of the S-300 (without specifying the radar in question , considering there is a lot of different radars in the battery on magnitude different frequency ) but the big , heavy and expensive (each flap lid cost as much as an F-35) s-300 radars can not make weapon quality track from the Growler emission.

    And of course a Growler works like a magic wand, it has just dispense the fairy dust to make the S-400 installation incapable to do anything. : )

    Poor Euclid ,so much work for nothing : )
    Suggested reading:
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Foundation-Licence-Now-Alan-Betts/dp/1872309801
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclid's_Elements
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phased_array

    Just a hint:
    - the radar/ RWR / jammer performance depending on the antenna size and geometry . Everything else just has small effect compared to the antenna size.
    -The Growler can degrade of any radar in no bigger area than the high gain beam angle of the antenna.Means if there is more than one radar then to protect one bomber you need one Growler for each radar, if the position of the radars not known then you need infinite amount of Growlers.


    Interesting, no one start to see a pattern in the design of s-300 to counter a Growler/stealth plane combination ?

    And no one can see how useless is the Patriot ?
     
  7. Brumby
    Offline

    Brumby Major

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    3,575
    Likes Received:
    3,680
    The reason S-400 is deadly is because they are highly mobile IADS. Reportedly, they can shoot and scoot within a 5 min window. Stand off range cruise missiles are useless against them because as highly mobile, they would be gone by the time the cruise missiles get to its intended targeted grid.

    The Growler conversation is a lot more complex because there are numerous dynamic variables that determine its effectiveness against the S-400..Some variables are :
    1)The Nebo-M is an AESA radar and is a lot more difficult to jam using deceptive jamming due to agility. It would probably require barrage jamming against the full 4 GHz X bandwidth and this means a lot of jamming power is needed
    2)The Nebo-M being ground based would likely have both antenna and processing gain against the Growler's AN/ALQ-99E jammer. J/S burn through requires around 8 to 12 dB advantage. At what distance the Growler can maintain effectiveness jamming is unknown against the Nebo-M.
    upload_2019-7-18_20-27-24.png

    3)The AN/ALQ-99E is basically analog and old technology with field programmable components for easier update to the threat library. It is the reason why the US is developing the NGJ which is fully digital with GaN T/R to take on the proliferation of AESA acquisition radars. Increment 1 will only deliver 18-27 GHz bandwidth jamming by 2021. X band is between 8-12 GHz and that will be part of increment 2.
    4)What is not commonly appreciated is the synergic relationship between jamming and RCS. The F-35 because of its RCS can deliver an immediate 30dB advantage against say either a F-18 or a F-16. In other words, a F-35 at say 50 km from target requires 16 times less jamming power to achieve the same jamming effectiveness for protection if all else remains equal.

    It is an ongoing contest between jamming and sensor capabilities. Threats like the S-400 will continue to improve in capabilities and so are the ongoing EW capabilities to counter such present and future threats. There are significant EW developments expected in Block 4 including EA and cognitive EW.

    upload_2019-7-18_20-54-30.png .
     
    Air Force Brat and Max Demian like this.
  8. Brumby
    Offline

    Brumby Major

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    3,575
    Likes Received:
    3,680
    Mate,

    Don't direct it to me. Jura is the one advocating jamming.
     
    TerraN_EmpirE and Air Force Brat like this.
  9. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    22,995
    Likes Received:
    27,439
    OK then what the US Military needed would be a big attrition reserve, and commanders with "guts" to send a second squadron to the fray right after a first was splashed

    sounds creepy even in my chair
     
  10. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    12,282
    Likes Received:
    10,628
    Not “The” as in one. F35 has 10 built across the Aircraft. I know but the dish sizes... except if you cluster a number of smaller dishes together you get the same effect a larger dish.
    This is commonly used in ground based radio telescopes.

    I love your logic that just because it costs more and is heavier means it is more effective.... yeah.... most of the weight of older systems was the processor technology. Yet modern computers are just as powerful yet far smaller and lighter. A modern smartphone has more computer processing than the entirety of NASA and the Soviet Space program in the Apollo era.

    S300 that you mentioned is a family of Systems.
    Some versions are very modern some date back to the late 1970s.
    Same holds true for S400 a family of systems and this is one thing a lot of people skip over. Because some elements are a potential threat some are totally useless against a fifth gen. Some parts of S400 date back to the 1990s some are brand new.

    At the heart of this debate is electronic warfare. Well the problem for some people is that EW has improved as Electronics have improved and today we are doing things with electronics that we’re unimaginable back int the 1980s.
    @Jura hyped the EA18 growler yet it’s jamming pod it an improved model of a Jamming pod that dates back to the late 1970s. Those Jamming pods flew on EF111 and EA6 in the first Gulf war!

    They are still flying as in the period between the US really didn’t make a huge investment in new pods because in the intervening period we were still mostly dealing with third world Soviet leftovers and have Stealth tech.

    EF18G was developed because the Navy couldn’t maintain EA6 anymore. They transferred the pods over but realized it was way beyond time to start a replacement.

    However Fifth generation fighter take a different approach to dealing with IAD.
    The F117 needed an assist from a external RWR on a EA6. The one successful shoot down of F117happened on the day when the supporting Jammer that could tell the Nighthawk to stand off from a missile site was rained in.
    Since 1999 Fighters across the world have gained their own add on RWR and threat detection systems. EW equipment has shrunk so that some 4.5 gen fighter like the grippen have a fully organic EW capability. F22 and F35 take this track but farther augment it by being VLO. It’s not Stealth plan and growler in combination it’s Growler as Stealth plane in one. Using a number of smaller receivers and emitters spread across the airframe to in essence act as larger dishes. Using the VLO Radar return to pass when able and Jamming ability to attack when needed. Because of the smaller return the coverage doesn’t need to be as large. It’s more surgical than the Growlers broad sword approach.
     
    Air Force Brat and Brumby like this.
Loading...

Share This Page