Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 8 of 14 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14
#4284930 - 08/05/16 07:09 AM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) ***** [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
My favorit one...
... they are doing manual tracking.
biggrin



Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4294434 - 09/08/16 12:36 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Alien_MasterMynd Offline
Member
Alien_MasterMynd  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Czech Republic
From CS forum:


#4294435 - 09/08/16 12:37 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Alien_MasterMynd Offline
Member
Alien_MasterMynd  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Czech Republic
Another:


#4294437 - 09/08/16 12:38 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Alien_MasterMynd Offline
Member
Alien_MasterMynd  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Czech Republic

#4298856 - 09/25/16 08:24 AM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Iranian S-300PMU




Last edited by Hpasp; 09/25/16 08:31 AM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#4317427 - 12/05/16 12:17 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Auch...
oops





Last edited by Hpasp; 12/05/16 06:47 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#4318716 - 12/09/16 08:24 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Very nice and detailed info about the S-400 export version, offered for India...

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.hu/2016/10/s-400-triumf-lr-sams-arriving-by-2018.html

thumbsup









Last edited by Hpasp; 12/09/16 08:39 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#4318753 - 12/09/16 11:03 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 179
KJakker Offline
Member
KJakker  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 179
Michigan, USA
Hpasp, do you believe the maximum engagement ranges listed above, 380km against aircraft and 60km against ballistic missiles is accurate?

In your MIM-104 Patriot thread your missile comparison list says, "48N6E2 missile 200km range", "48N6DM missile 250km range". I have some ideas as to how the 9M96E2 can have double the range of the 9m96 but do you have any idea as to how the Russians got another 120 to 180 kilometers of range out of the 48N6E2 and 48N6E3 missiles?

#4318837 - 12/10/16 03:53 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
40N6 is a completely new missile, compared to the 48N6 family, and it had a long protracted development.

missile type - weight - range
5V55R - 1665kg - 75km
48N6 - 1800kg - 150km
48N6D - 1835kg - 200km
48N6DM - 1835kg - 250km
40N6 - 1893kg - 380km

Missile weight is continuously increased, and using more powerful propellant, or carbon fiber missile body, the extra gain of impulse could be much more than the weight difference would suggest.

Do not forget, that these are basically end phase guided ballistic missiles.
A quick math* of the required burnout speed for ballistic missiles reveals...
range - required speed
250km - 1400m/s
380km - 1750m/s
... and the 48N6 family could already achieve 2100m/s, so IMHO the maximum range of the system is rather limited by the fire control and target acquisition radars tracking range, than missile kinematic.


*some quick thumb rules for calculating approx. ballistic missile parameters:

Flight Times of Ballistic Missiles lofted in Maximum-Range Trajectories
FlightTime = SQRT (Range) * 14
where
FlightTime is in seconds
Range is in kilometers

Speeds of Ballistic Missiles lofted in Maximum-Range Trajectories
Speed = SQRT (Range) * 0.09
where
Speed is in km/sec
Range is in kilometers

Apogees of Ballistic Missiles lofted in Maximum-Range Trajectories
Apogee = Range * 0.25
where
Apogee is in kilometers
Range is in kilometers

Last edited by Hpasp; 12/10/16 04:23 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#4318887 - 12/10/16 08:05 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Alien_MasterMynd Offline
Member
Alien_MasterMynd  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Czech Republic
Nice thumbsup

#4318889 - 12/10/16 08:11 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
Portugal
Interesting pictures about the S-400 specs, thanks for sharing Hpasp.

What I find interesting the most is the Maximum target designation range, which for the S-400 is 390Km for a 4 Square Meter RCS target.

This means that the S-400 should only be able to detect (or at least designate) a F-35 Stealth Fighter aircraft which has a RCS of around 0.001 square meter (on average) at a maximum range of around (and only) 49km or for those more used to Western military aircraft, at around 26.5 Nautical Miles (and this without the F-35 using its jamming/EW techniques).

That's extremely low/short ranged and even more so considering that the S-400 is one of the best and most powerful air defence systems in the world so no wonder why Israel is so keen to procure the F-35 to counter potential and future S-400 deployment on nations around (and hostile to) Israel.

What's funny is there are still many people out there who doubt the usefulness of Stealth aircraft (namely about the F-35).

#4318893 - 12/10/16 08:22 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Hpasp
40N6 is a completely new missile, compared to the 48N6 family, and it had a long protracted development.

missile type - weight - range
5V55R - 1665kg - 75km
48N6 - 1800kg - 150km
48N6D - 1835kg - 200km
48N6DM - 1835kg - 250km
40N6 - 1893kg - 380km

Missile weight is continuously increased, and using more powerful propellant, or carbon fiber missile body, the extra gain of impulse could be much more than the weight difference would suggest.

Do not forget, that these are basically end phase guided ballistic missiles.
A quick math* of the required burnout speed for ballistic missiles reveals...
range - required speed
250km - 1400m/s
380km - 1750m/s
... and the 48N6 family could already achieve 2100m/s, so IMHO the maximum range of the system is rather limited by the fire control and target acquisition radars tracking range, than missile kinematic.




Indeed and from what I read in terms of guidance the 40N6 missile is or can be equipped with an Active Radar Seeker, is this correct?
If this is the case than an Active Radar Seeker would certainly increase the missile engagement range capability since it would be less dependant on the ground based fire control and acquisition radars.

#4319008 - 12/11/16 01:42 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
What I find interesting the most is the Maximum target designation range, which for the S-400 is 390Km for a 4 Square Meter RCS target.
This means that the S-400 should only be able to detect (or at least designate) a F-35 Stealth Fighter aircraft which has a RCS of around 0.001 square meter (on average) at a maximum range of around (and only) 49km or for those more used to Western military aircraft, at around 26.5 Nautical Miles (and this without the F-35 using its jamming/EW techniques).
That's extremely low/short ranged and even more so considering that the S-400 is one of the best and most powerful air defence systems in the world so no wonder why Israel is so keen to procure the F-35 to counter potential and future S-400 deployment on nations around (and hostile to) Israel.


I would not see this picture so bright.
Let me use a target with RCS of 0.006 square meters (this is what I knew for the F-35).

Lets cut the threat the S-400 poses into two scenario:

Scenario-1 (as of today, while the F-35 is under testing)
Most of the fielded batteries in Russia, including the unit in Syria have the following equipment:
S-400 battery with (usually eight) 5P85S3 (like in Syria) or eight 5P85T3 missile launchers.
These units are armed with the 250km ranged 48N6DM missiles.
After the 96L6 all-altitude target detection radar acquires the stealth (with the RCS of 0.006 square meter), the 92N6 multi-functional radar can start engaging it only from 49km. (as you caltulated correctly)

Scenario-2 (proposed for India, future option when the F-35 will be a threat)
S-400 battery having 51P6 missile launchers.
Unit is armed with the 380km ranged 40N6 and the 120km ranged 9M96D missiles.
After the 91N6 target detection radar (in mode M2/M3/M4) acquires the stealth from 94km, the 92N6 multi-functional radar can start engaging with the 9M96D missiles as it has inertial guidance with mid-course datalink and active radar seeker for the last few seconds of the engagement.

Last edited by Hpasp; 12/11/16 04:44 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#4319041 - 12/11/16 05:00 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
Portugal
Hpasp,

I believe you have a typo in your second situation, you mentioned that 91N6 target detection radar can acquire the F-35 at 94Km but I think you mean 49Km instead (you have it correct in the first situation).

The RCS of the F-35 is said to be in the order of 0.0014 square meters which is area of a standard a golf ball. So rounding the number it gives 0.001 square meters.
However this RCS value is an average value considering all angles (frontal, sides, rear) of the F-35 and it's known that for example the F-35 RCS in its frontal arc is below that 0.001 square meter value.
Actually it was officially acknowledged by the USAF that the F-35 is stealthier than the F-22 when both aircraft are compared in their respective frontal arcs (This was mentioned my USAF Gen. Hostage if I'm not mistaken).
So if the F-35 is traveling towards a S-400 site, the F-35 RCS to be considered (if we would want to be extremely rigorous) should be much lower than 0.001 square meters.

But even considering the "conservative" 0.001 square meter RCS number (which favour "less" the F-35) there are large (I would say huge) problems with any of your scenarios for the S-400 side. For example:
- At just above 49Km there are a number of weapons that the F-35 can employ well outside the 49Km range. Most notably, is the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) in both it's variants, the SDBI and the SDBII (the later, granted is still in development but soon to be deployed and the SDBI is ).
JSOW is an another (and current) weapon that the F-35 could easily employ against the S-400 and well outside its detection range.
- The F-35 has it's own EW suite which can perform EW warfare against any radar (including the S-400). The F-35 with its stealth and EW could likely employ the shorter range JDAMs against the S-400 without the S-400 ever detecting it, or resuming it's extremely possible that the F-35 with its stealth and EW combo wouldn't be detected at the "theoretical" 49Km "maximum" range but well below (shorter) than that!
- The F-35's DAS (Distributed Aperture System) would detect any incoming missile launched by the S-400 granting it early warning and a much better ability to avoid and evade incoming missiles.


I can only see the S-400 having some success against the F-35 in an ambush style tactic where the S-400 radars would only be turned on when an incoming F-35 is flying well within the 49Km detection radius. Of course the challenge would be knowing where the incoming F-35 really is and as such if any F-35 is or not within the "effective" range of a certain S-400 system.

However I do agree that the S-400 would be a "killer" or extremely dangerous for any 4.5gen fighter aircraft (like the Super Hornet, Typhoon or Rafale).

Last edited by ricnunes; 12/11/16 05:06 PM.
#4319049 - 12/11/16 06:26 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
I believe you have a typo in your second situation, you mentioned that 91N6 target detection radar can acquire the F-35 at 94Km but I think you mean 49Km instead (you have it correct in the first situation).

No typo, but two different target acquisition radars in those two situations.
biggrin

96L6 all-altitude target detection radar (Scenario-1)


91N6 target detection radar (Scenario-2)


In mode M2, M3, and M4, its target detection range against 1 sqrm target is 338km.
If you calculate it against 0,006sqrm you will get 94km.

For me to use different F-35 RCS value, I would ask you to provide source.
winkngrin

Last edited by Hpasp; 12/11/16 06:33 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#4319285 - 12/12/16 06:30 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
Portugal
Regarding the F-35 RCS and according to publically released information by the USAF itself, the F-35 RCS is equivalent to the area of a golf ball.
This released information can be found on several websites across the web, including this one:

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20051125.aspx

Excerpt from the news (can be read in the website above):
Quote:

The U.S. Air Force, in its effort to get money to build more F-22s, has revealed just how stealthy the F-22 is. Its RCS (Radar Cross Section) is the equivalent, for a radar, to a metal marble. The less stealthy (and much cheaper) F-35, is equal to a metal golf ball. The F-35 stealthiness is a bit better than the B-2 bomber, which, in turn, was twice as good as that on the even older F-117.



Considering that a standard golf ball has a Diameter of 42.67mm or a Radius of 21.335mm (this can be read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golf_ball ) and knowing that the area calculation of a circle is:

A = Pi * Radius * Radius (Or square of Radius) we have:

A = 3.1415 * 0.021335 * 0.021335

Which means that:
A = 0.00143 square meters ---> This is the approximate RCS of the F-35.

Rounding it, we have the 0.001 square meters which I (and most people by the way) have been using as a value for the F-35 RCS.


Regarding the F-35 versus the F-22 stealth comparison, there's the following comment from USAF Gen. Mike Hostage which you can read here:

http://aviationweek.com/blog/f-35-stealt...;cl=article_4_b

which says:
Quote:

The F-35 cross section is much smaller than the F-22. The F-35 doesnt have the altitude, doesnt have the speed [of the F-22], but it can beat the F-22 in stealth.


It is known that the average RCS of the F-22 is smaller than the average RCS of the F-35.
But it is also known that the F-35 in it's frontal arc is extremely stealthy, perhaps (and likely) the stealthiest of all aircraft in existence.
So and in my opinion have no doubts that what Gen. Mike Hostage is referring to is in terms of stealth comparison is regarding both aircraft frontal arc/sector. Which means that the F-35 is certainly to have a RCS much smaller than the 0.001 square meter value (which I mentioned before) in its frontal sector/arc.

On top of this the F-22 seems to use variable air intakes in order to reach speeds above Mach 2. Variable air intakes have the advantage of giving some aircraft the ability of reach speed well over Mach 2 however variable air intakes have an impact on RCS -> They increase the aircraft's RCS in its frontal sector/arc.
Lockheed Martin/USAF/US Military seems to have been successful in substantially reducing the toll that variable air intakes have on RCS with the F-22 however I believe that it's safe to assume that this increase on RCS still occurs nonetheless.


Regarding the S-400 system and your best case scenario which is using the M2 and M4 modes (capable of detecting a target with 1 square meter at 338Km) we have a maximum detection range against the F-35 considering its average RCS to be 0.001 square meter (which again would be smaller if F-35 is flying towards the S-400 site) of being around 60km (quite far from the 94km in your scenario).

And even thou, a Small Diameter Bomb still has a range in excess of 110km.


I hope this is enough info for you wink

#4319345 - 12/12/16 09:40 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 40
Jonas85 Offline
Junior Member
Jonas85  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 40
Ontario
Here it goes the flame war about RCS numbers that nobody really knows in public...

I am very skeptical about taking the golf ball RCS speculations seriously (you know that the interviews of many star generals are always approved before the release, don't you?). It might serve more as a PSYOPS measure to convince your enemy in not usefulness of radar based defense and waste the money on "alternatives" rather than reflect the reality accurately.

What makes me think that Hpasp's value of 0.006m2 is much more reasonable is a comparison to the RCS of birds, which are said to be around 0.01m2 range. Also, this specific RCS value most likely holds only for a particular frequency bands, like X band. I've read somewhere that L-band radars have better capabilities in this regard.

Also, none of the scenarios considered included the possibility to couple a long-wave radar for search and then active guidance on the last few seconds of a missile flight. That would be the most interesting scenario for me.

#4319485 - 12/13/16 12:47 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
And what can you tell us about the RCS of the B-2A?
The F-117A was already measured to be -30dBsm in a competitive environment.
biggrin

Meanwhile...

Last edited by Hpasp; 12/16/16 11:31 AM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#4319585 - 12/13/16 06:54 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Originally Posted By: Hpasp
And what can you tell us about the RCS of the B-2A?
The F-117A was already measured to be -28dBsm in a competitive environment.
biggrin

Meanwhile...



http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-us-air-force-too-stealthy-2016-8

Quote:
During an exercise at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho, US Air Force F-35A pilots set out to practice evading surface-to-air missiles.


screwy

#4319853 - 12/14/16 07:40 PM Re: S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B Grumble) [Re: Jonas85]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,831
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Jonas85
Here it goes the flame war about RCS numbers that nobody really knows in public...

I am very skeptical about taking the golf ball RCS speculations seriously (you know that the interviews of many star generals are always approved before the release, don't you?). It might serve more as a PSYOPS measure to convince your enemy in not usefulness of radar based defense and waste the money on "alternatives" rather than reflect the reality accurately.


I guess I could use the same kind of skepticism that you display to say for example: how the hell will the S-400 be able to detect a small target (1 square meter) at 338km which is almost at the edge of the Earth's curvature??

Why would the golf ball RCS of the F-35 be false which by the way is an information officially given by the United States Air Force (USAF) while at the same "blindly" believing in Russian official information?!
Actually it's well known that the Russians trend to exaggerate much about the actual capabilities of their equipment specially when compared to western countries, namely the USA.

So if you want to doubt about the RCS of the F-35 being in the magnitude of a golf ball you must also doubt about the ability for the S-400 to detect a 1 square meter at 338km away.
Anyway, both data "F-35 with an RCS of a golf ball" and the "S-400 ability to detect a 1 square meter at 338km away" are official data and as such must be taken with at least a good degree of credibility!

For my part I'm willing to believe in both data about the F-35 and the S-400. Or at least this is the information what we have to make a "close as possible" analysis.
And remember that afterall it is you (and only you) that's "speculating" since again afterall these values being discussed are again, official data.

The fact that Israel just increased their F-35 (they are now ordering 50 F-35As with perhaps more in the future) and it's well known that one of the reason that Israel is buying the F-35 is clearly to be able to defeat and to have an edge over potential the S-400 Air Defence Systems that could be field by its enemies in the near future seems to back up my point of view.


Originally Posted By: Jonas85

What makes me think that Hpasp's value of 0.006m2 is much more reasonable is a comparison to the RCS of birds, which are said to be around 0.01m2 range. Also, this specific RCS value most likely holds only for a particular frequency bands, like X band. I've read somewhere that L-band radars have better capabilities in this regard.

Also, none of the scenarios considered included the possibility to couple a long-wave radar for search and then active guidance on the last few seconds of a missile flight. That would be the most interesting scenario for me.


What does a comparison with birds have anything to do with being reasonable regarding RCS comparisons?? Last time I checked birds or at least bird sized and shaped metal objects don't have RAM material coatings and neither their shape was "designed" to avoid/defeat radio waves!
Or are you also disputing the official USAF information that the F-22 Raptor RCS is around the size of a metal marble or resuming around 0.0001 square meters??

Independently of what radar wave you use, a stealth or very low observable (VLO) aircraft will always have the advantage. That talk of yours about X or L band reminds me the most about one of the "web arguments" from the F-35 critics, that VHF/UHF radars will "magically" detect stealth aircraft. Well we all know (actually it is modeled here in SAM Simulator) that the P-18 radar which is a VHF radar could only detect an F-117 at a distance less than 30km which isn't much better then what the SNR radar from an SA-3 system was capable of detecting the same F-117.

Anyway, any current analysis that you can read about the F-35 RCS points it being at around 0.001 square meters and not 0.006.

So the problem that I have with the 0.006 square meter RCS value for the F-35 is that such value is equivalent to a ball which is the double in terms of diameter compared to a golf ball (again OFFICIAL USAF data). Resuming:
0.006 square meters equals a ball with a diameter of around 87 millimetres (twice or double of a golf ball)
0.00143 square meters equals a ball with a diameter of around 42 millimetres (around the size of a golf ball)

See the problem with the 0.006 square meter RCS for the F-35?

Page 8 of 14 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14

Moderated by  Cat, Hpasp, RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
76 years ago today -- D-Day
by Sluggish Controls. 06/06/20 04:13 AM
Very educational F-22 video
by Zamzow. 06/05/20 11:35 PM
Justice for Maddie
by RossUK. 06/04/20 11:11 AM
Perhaps My Final Flight
by FishTaco. 06/04/20 02:59 AM
Blue Angel's will transition to the Rhino
by CyBerkut. 06/02/20 12:41 PM
The pancake chef...
by Mr_Blastman. 05/31/20 06:33 PM
DOSBox/MS-DOS6
by MarkG. 05/31/20 02:14 PM
Question for gun lovers
by Blade_RJ. 05/30/20 02:54 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0