Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Stealth and anti-stealth technology arms race

Discussion in 'The Americas' started by BMD, Aug 9, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    9,637
    Likes Received:
    2,707
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Stealth planes are never completely invisible, as they will always generate a radar signature in the end according to Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. If you are seen five miles from your target, compared to be being spotted 100 miles away, then it will have done its job.

    Anti-stealth countermeasures are now "proliferating". Whereas most radars operate between 2GHz and 40GHz, a low-band equivalent such as VHF radar operates between 1MHz and 2MHz and is able to pick out most stealth planes that are known to be flying today.

    The Russians persevered with low-band radar due to their technological conservativism.

    VHF can pick up "noise" such as clouds and rain, which was a reason why the West abandoned it – it does have basic physics on its side: its wavelength is the same magnitude as the prominent features on many stealth planes, so that its signal bounces back.

    Russia and China (UK, USA, Australia, Israel, South Korea and basically any country with a modern air force) have VHF-Aesa (Actively scanned electronic array) radars.

    [​IMG]

    Aesa (Actively scanned electronic array) radars like those supposedly on China's Divine Eagle drone are made up of a large number of solid state, chip-like modules that each emit an individual radio wave; these meet in front of the antenna to form a beam that can be easily aimed at a very specific target – and, combined with VHF, are an effective stealth-hunting tool.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    he image which allegedly describes the number of TR modules within the J-10B, J-16, and J-20 has been posted on numerous defense forums since at least December of 2013.

    [​IMG]
    APG-63(V)2 radar installed on an United States F-15C. The APG-63(V)2 was the first fighter mounted AESA radar to enter service worldwide. The first American F-15C unit to receive the new radars were stationed at Elmendorf in 2000. In comparison, the first European AESA entered operational service in 2012 and the first Russian AESA equipped fighters (Mig-35) will not enter service until 2016

    Three main determinants dictate the maximum number of transmit receiver modules a fighter radar can accommodate:

    1. the volume of the aircraft’s nose,
    2. the technological maturity of the firm/country’s T/R module packaging technology, and
    3. the effectiveness of the radar's thermal management system(s).

    The volume of the nose is a fairly intuitive constraint, the larger an aircraft’s nose is, the larger the radar can be. For example, the F-15C’s nose cone is able to accommodate the much larger 1,500 T/R element APG-63V(3) radar vs. the F-16C Block 60 with its comparatively smaller nose cone and its 1,000 T/R element APG-80 AESA.

    Packaging technology refers to how many individual T/R modules can be installed within the finite space usually accomplished by reductions in size of the individual T/R modules. The more technologically advanced a firm’s T/R packaging technology is, the smaller the individual T/R modules will be resulting in an increase density of the layout of T/R modules within the array.

    Thermal management systems are instrumental for the operation of high power AESA radars. Unlike MSA systems, air cooling systems are insufficient to prevent heat related system failures and frequent maintenance issues.

    Chinese defense forums have posted copies of the image above which claim to cite the J-20’s AESA T/R module count at 1,856, the J-16’s at 1,760, and the J-10B at 1,200 T/R modules. It is likely the J-10B is the first Chinese fighter aircraft to feature an AESA; J-10B units achieved initial operational capability (IOC) in October of 2014. The volume of the J-10s nose cone is not substantially different from that of the F-16 or the Israeli Lavi from which the J-10 is partially based. Therefore, if one were to assume China had reached parity with the United States in packaging technology, the 1,200 T/R module figure would be plausible but slightly high.

    Russia’s first fighter mounted AESA radar, the Zhuk-AE, contained 652 T/R modules and was unveiled in 2007. The Israeli ELM-2052 AESA radar, which has been marketed for both the F-16 and the FA-50 – a joint Korean Aerospace Industry and Lockheed Martin F-16 derivative, has roughly 512 T/R modules.

    With high quality AESA radar detection ranges go up to 50-300 miles.

    Combining different radar and multiple large drones with radar to blanket an area

    The final trick is "to combine together different radars into an integrated air-defence system and a central information-processing centre that can make life very difficult for any stealth fighter or bomber", Sutyagin says. And stealth planes are not always stealthy from every angle (it costs too much money). So if you have radar in front, at the sides and above – with a high-altitude drone such as the Divine Eagle – along with satellite tracking of any target, then it might well be a case of RIP stealth.

    Popular Science has coverage of China's stealth hunting drones and radar


    [​IMG]

    Divine Eagle has 7 radars include a X/UHF AMTI Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar on the front, two X/UHF AMTI/SAR/GMTI AESA radars on the twin booms, two X/UHF AMTI AESA radars on either side of the engine nozzles, and two more radars on the end of the booms. AMTI and GMTI radars are used for tracking air and surface targets, respectively, while SAR is used to provide detailed imagines of ground targets like bases and infrastructure.

    [​IMG]

    Sina Defense. The JY-26 "Skywatch" AESA Radar, operates in the long wave band to detect stealth aircraft, which are often optimized against detection by shorter wavelenghts. The JY-26 is claimed to have a range of 500km and Chinese media claimed it detected F-22 Raptor fighters off the South Korean coast in mid 2014. The Divine Eagle is likely to have similar radar technology to detect stealth bomber and fighters at long range.

    Countering the counter measures with next level stealth

    However, not everyone has these capabilities and centralised air defences are also vulnerable to hacking, or even special forces. While one response might be to reduce the profile of the plane – using electronic warfare systems and stand-off weapons to increase survivability instead of stealth – there is, according to Sweetman, another option: develop weapon systems like that of the Dassault nEURon drone, which can be programmed to visually seek out large radar arrays.

    Not yet, though, Sweetman says. "You can take stealth to the next level," he says, meaning a large, flat, tailless subsonic flying wing and active stealth technology. "In theory, by transmitting a signal just half a wavelength off the wavelength of the radar, your plane can disappear."

    The US might have already reached the next level, even though the decision on its new stealth Long Range Strike Bomber is still some way away.
     
    arulcharles likes this.
  2. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,794
    Likes Received:
    5,519
    Country Flag:
    France
    After denying the possibility to the French, you post to give the US the active cancellation capability?:cheers:
     
  3. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    9,637
    Likes Received:
    2,707
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Because your plane is:

    a) Not stealth to begin with.

    b) Isn't coated in arrays.

    c) Too many external stores and awkward parts.

    And:

    d)
    Active stealth on a crude non-stealth aircraft is pissing in the ocean.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2015
  4. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,794
    Likes Received:
    5,519
    Country Flag:
    France
    :rofl::rofl:
    Your main argument is it's impossible due to physic laws, but I suppose physic laws are different for US planes.
     
    randomradio and vstol jockey like this.
  5. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    9,637
    Likes Received:
    2,707
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Your claims wrt it giving the Rafale the same frontal RCS as an F-22 are impossible and I've explained why.

    1) The plane is not covered in arrays, therefore you can't cancel the reflection at source and are limited to trying to cancel it back at the enemy antennae.

    2)The overall reflection to be cancelled is too large.

    3) You can't predict where the enemy antennae is.

    4) You can't account for the effect of secondary reflections.

    5) You can't account for multiple sources simultaneously.

    6) Can account for AESA.

    7) Your radar, which is a large source of reflection, does not do electronic attack/jamming.

    Basically, using active cancellation with an F-35 is like hiding a small lump of soil, using it with the Rafale is like trying to hide the Eiffel tower.
     
  6. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,718
    Likes Received:
    4,725
    You obviously forgot the news.
    Rafale Upgrade Ready in 2012
    http://s25.postimg.org/631v430rz/Activating_AESA_2.jpg
    At the time the Typhoon is expected to get an AESA radar, the Rafale is expected to lose the nose mounted radar and carry fuselage mounted radars with 360 deg capability. Something like the FGFA.
     
  7. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    9,637
    Likes Received:
    2,707
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Oh shut up. The F4 upgrade isn't coming until 2023 and conformal arrays won't be coming until the MLU in 2030. This is up-to-date information from a July 2015 issue of Combat Aircraft, written by a French guy.

    [​IMG]

    Radar 2 will be available 2019-2021.

    Pffft. FGFA, has that even flown yet, the actual FGFA, not the PAK-FA prototypes now.
     
  8. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,794
    Likes Received:
    5,519
    Country Flag:
    France
    Do not give credit to what BMD said. The plane do not need to be covered of array to perform active cancellation. And I will explain again how it works.

    First the airframe is not VLO, but it is LO at minimum with an original approach. People believes that only a facetted approach give good stealth results, but look at a B2 or a Neuron they arn't facetted because third approach to stealth is to prevent the radius of curvature of being constant. This treatment was applied to the Rafale and is part of the changes between Rafale A and Series Rafale. So almost all the airframe is treated for RCS reduction, but not all: the aircraft is designed to so that its untreated radar signature is concentrated in a few strong "spikes," which are then suppressed by the selective use of RAM.

    After that I have already explained how SPECTRA works:

    Eurofighter Typhoon v/s Dassault Rafale - Analysis | Page 864 | Indian Defence Forum

    Spectra's active jamming subsystem uses phased-array antennas located at the roots of the canards. Dassault has stated that the EW transmit antennas can produce a pencil beam compatible with the accuracy of the receiver system, concentrating power on the threat while minimizing the chances of detection.

    The complexity of active cancellation could account for Spectra's high price tag. One of four Rafale prototypes was dedicated to Spectra tests, along with a Falcon 20 flying testbed. Four new large anechoic chambers were built to support the Spectra project, including one which is large and well equipped enough to operate the complete system in a fully detailed electromagnetic environment.
     
    Picard and randomradio like this.
  9. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,718
    Likes Received:
    4,725
    In our previous discussions more than a year ago, I did accept that it is as you say so. What I don't understand is how LO is maintained with external weapons.

    BMD obviously doesn't understand how active cancellation works, and his statements only highlight his ignorance. But that wasn't the point of why I posted the conformal arrays part. I wanted to say that Rafale will be getting conformal arrays in the future, it wasn't related to how active cancellation is achieved.

    And you are right about the facetted approach being just one among many. Vstol said the same.
     
  10. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,718
    Likes Received:
    4,725
    There are multiple versions of FGFA planned for IAF. We will start by inducting an MKIzed PAK FA, followed by FGFA and FGFA Mk2.

    PAK FA already has conformal arrays.
     
  11. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,794
    Likes Received:
    5,519
    Country Flag:
    France
    Frankly, I don't know.
    But what I know is that all operational configuration of weapons and D/T did pass tests in anechoic chambers. Also there is rumors that Talios will be stealth. And MBDA & Thales were working for active cancellation for missiles. We already have Mica which are used before launch, so why not missile active cancellation too?
     
  12. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,718
    Likes Received:
    4,725
    Canards, wings and vertical fin can contribute pretty large RCS figures. The engine from the rear. The inlets don't contribute as much because of design. Jammers in the wing roots can handle the frontal part, while a jammer above the engine can take care of rear RCS.

    But put weapons on the wings, it becomes a whole different problem because missiles have no LO qualities. Big dirty fins spoil RCS. All aircraft advertised as 5th gen have weapons bays that take care of the problem. I'm not saying Thales doesn't know what its doing, it is just a question in my mind.

    Are you referring to active cancellation while the missile has been fired or when it is still connected to the aircraft?
     
  13. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,794
    Likes Received:
    5,519
    Country Flag:
    France
    Do you think that active cancellation for missiles are more useful before or after launch? or the two?
    But to localise emitter for a missile is hard, but it's a normal fiunction of SPECTRA. To work, active cancellation need to localise the threat to concentrate energy on it. It's easyer to have active cancellation for missile before launch than after!
     
  14. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,718
    Likes Received:
    4,725
    I have no idea what you mean here. I don't know if you are referring to a threat missile or your own missile.
     
  15. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    12,714
    Likes Received:
    13,386
    Country Flag:
    India
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page