Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Experimenting The F-35 Against SAMs

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • panzerfeist1
    Rank 6 Registered User
    • Feb 2018
    • 413

    Experimenting The F-35 Against SAMs

    SAMs never come alone they will have land based EW systems, short range to medium range SAMs, lasers, microwave weapons, decoy emitters basically anything that is designed to be against SEAD or DEAD weapons. We will discuss these airborne weapons and what systems or countermeasures SAMs have against them. Hope I don't offend anyone if I am treating the F-35 like a lab rat but I will use it as an experiment. I will also make a thread unless someone here wants to make one after the maks 2019 airshow of the SU-57 going against the US air defense systems but that will be later on.

    GBU-53/B and SPEAR 3: 1 has a 110km and the other has a 130km+ range but their ranges are dependent on altitudes and the ranges for these to be achieved is definitely high altitude releases. So the safest requirement in my opinion is have these as an internal carry because: 1.An additional external carry will spike up the RCS because high altitude requirements raise the radar horizon for long range SAMs to track the F-35.

    2.Ventral RCS is exposed the depression angle arc gets bigger when aircrafts get closer to SAMs. Those that have heard of the fabled .0001m2 RCS from the front will realize that SAMs are not directly looking only at the front but the underbelly of aircrafts as well which significantly reflect more RF waves than the front.

    3. Just for the fellow fanboys(opinions definitely vary on this board) that believe the F-35 is stealthy enough for the mobile radar of the S-400. Remember it is very possible for a system like the S-400 launchers to use ground radar sources like a claimed 5m2 at 3000km range radar from Russia's army forum in 2019 where 100-130km range is more than plenty enough to send a missile at an F-35 and this is not even including if there was a Voronezh-SM nearby.


    JSM: Comes with a low-low-low profile range of 185kms and a high-high-low profile range of 555kms. Meaning even if this weapon used a high altitude release it would still be under the radar horizon. This definitely sounds like a super weapon to have because these strike distances would help the F-35 and it can carry 2 of these internally so I am assuming 4 externally because it will not matter what altitude its launched the aircraft will still be below radar horizon. Again I don't know if I am correct with the numbers so for those reading my post correct me if it can carry more or less?

    AARGM-ER: a anti-radiation missile with a 300km range. 2 of these can be carried internally assuming the size is the same in length and diameter as its previous counterpart. Also risky to carry 4. Limitations:

    1.Because its supersonic it's safe to assume it does not have a low altitude cruise profile which gives short, medium or long range SAMs enough time to track these targets.

    2.Can be fooled by decoy emitters but again this depends on the passive tracking capabilities of the missiles to determine if the decoys are considered low or high fidelity in plain terms easy or hard to figure out.

    3.Because its supersonic it is more than likely not claimed that a low altitude profile can be used and if it does the range would be short. AARGM-ER would have to be launched below a 5.5km altitude and I believe this will affect the max 300km range to be a shorter distance. I will agree that the F-35 with a stealth profile can still launch these missiles from being targeted by long range SAMs but to me the current internal HARMs with 150km ranges are debatable for those that think the F-35 will be targeted and by those that think it won't be. But just like the SPEAR 3 and GBU-53 I would not advise to launch them at long range SAMs near ground radars.5m2 at 3000km would mean a .0005m2 RCS again this is debatable between pro-aviation or pro-air defense fans but a minor exposure to ventral RCS because of distance. However depending what high altitude is required to achieve a 300km range strike range there is no doubt at that range that an S-400 near a Voronezh-SM can target stealth aircrafts.

    JSOW-ER: The regular versions of JSOW to me makes it no different for it to be categorized with SPEAR 3 and GBU-53. I have heard the latest can use both external and internal but the extended 560km range means the F-35 does not have use stealth because the high altitude needed will still be below radar horizon so I am assuming up to 4 can be launched. Again just like the JSM please anyone let me know if more or less can be carried? SOM-J: As of now I would not count going into detail about the weapon because of two countries certain relationships with each other.

    JDAM-ER: Up to 40 miles with high altitude launch. Not a wise idea to use against long range air defenses present but a good use to target short range SAMs like pantsirs not defended or integrated with long range air defenses.

    HAWC: Hypersonic missiles with a safe to assume because of range and speed 500km+ range and considering the image of the missile being carried it can carry 2. The only limitation to this missile is the amount carried but this would still pose to be a more difficult target to intercept because scramjets fly lower than ballistic missiles which means this can only be intercepted by s-350s, buk-m3s, s-300, s-400, s-500 and A-135 or soon to be A-235 against hypersonic targets.

    CHAMP: deagel or wiki do not show me that the F-35 is a carrier of this missile but I am assuming if it was the size and 1000km range will make me say that 2 of these can be carried which of course same limitation as HAWC. Uses EMP by shooting a projectile which range is unknown supposedly it is different from the Alabuga because of this.

    MALD-X: Jamming capabilities decoy with a 925km range and the capability to fly lower altitudes. Don't know the exact amount but I will guess 8 for internal and external remember correct me if I am wrong. Limitations are:

    1.Just like HARM missiles we do not know the capabilities for example like the Moskva-1 to determine if its a high or low fidelity decoy before allowing command centers to tell for example pantsir systems to use only 30mm rounds against them, etc.

    2.Only effective against countries that do not have OTH radars or very poor OTH radars to better distinguish targets. For example I believe the Container radar which was built in 2014 and further upgraded in 2018 would outperform australia's 80 meter resolution OTH radar using doppler shifting with its 5,000 target detection and tracking. Decoys can use RCS characteristics but not against HF waves. Some countries developing OTH radars like Iran might not have either of these mentioned capabilities.

    My analysis based on the operations these weapons will be used in:

    1.A 4th gen aircraft using HAWC and CHAMP achieves exactly what a F-35 would accomplish against SAMs.

    2.Because of internal and external carry(remember I could be wrong about numbers so please correct me) an F-35 carrying JSOW-ER, MALD-X and JSM will achieve exactly what 2 4th gens aircrafts will accomplish in an operation against SAMs.

    3.Only a F-35 can use 2 AARGM-ERs internally to not be targeted by long range air defenses but questionable against ground based radars. Can use 4 but questionable if it will be targeted by long range air defense systems, not recommended if near ground based radars. 4th gens carrying these are definitely not recommended to do so but they can if it's any s-400 or below air defense because 48N6DM has a 250km range meaning an F-35 can accomplish what 2 4th gens can accomplish against S-400 or below long range air defenses. But the target engagement for S-500 can be higher against maneuverable targets and if it is at least for s-500s any 4th gens carrying AARGM-ERs is not recommended because the S-500 supposedly intercepted a target at 480kms but we don't know what type yet. The 40N6 despite the 400km range is not recommended since its suitable for less maneuverable targets.

    4.F-35s can carry GBU-53, JDAM-ER, SPEAR-3s and regular JSOW can be carried internally but questionable because of ventral RCS exposure against long range air defenses, not recommended near ground radars. External carry not recommended against just long range air defenses. 4th gens carrying them not recommended against long range air defenses. F-35s and 4th gens can use them against medium to short range air defenses but not long range air defenses.

    I know airborne EW systems should be added but the same goes for land mobile based EW systems supporting SAMs. I could also include how Russias SAMs can engage every weapon on the F-35 mentioned but I do not want my post to be more than twice as long.

    Future Threats: Photonic radar balloons will raise the radar horizon significantly. And depending on RTIs radar satellite constellation radar horizon for air defenses might not exist at all with shared communication to air defenses through control centers since they are claiming interference would no longer be an issue because of software and supercomputers. But tracking performance has yet to be determined against low altitude targets despite being able to track a low altitude target according to their claim. Air defenses in the future because of FICs will lower the background noise 100 times for tracking targets.

    If people need sources I will gladly provide them. If people have ideas please post them in case I have not included them for example additional weapons of the F-35. If I am wrong please correct me, but if your wrong I will respond why. Emotions are prohibited please act like grown ups. If this topic gets deleted I will post it another aviation forum.
    Last edited by panzerfeist1; 9th August 2019, 18:34.
    I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.
  • djcross
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Jan 2000
    • 5464

    #2
    Another factor in the SAM vs airplane issue is the ability of modern SAMs to rapidly relocate. This design feature was implemented to break the kill chain (Find, Fix, Target, Track, Engage, Assess). It takes time to sort through the camouflage, concealment and decoys to geolocate the SAM with enough accuracy for a kinetic attack with PGMs. The SAM-hunting game can devolve into a game of whack-a-mole.

    Comment

    • SpudmanWP
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jan 2009
      • 5292

      #3
      How will the F-35 do it... in a word "Tactics"

      DoD planners will look at the threat and approach it accordingly. If an F-35 detects a radar, it will calculate its own RCS in relation to the radar and take appropriate steps. It will not blindly flye straight & level to give the radar the best chance to detect it, it will use terrain to it's advantage, etc. There is no single solution to attacking RadarX as it all depends on dozens of factors such as terrain, range, etc.

      Opening the bay will only increase the RCS for a few seconds, not long enough for a fire solution and certainly not long enough for any SAM launched to be effective.

      5th gen aircraft have another advantage that you missed. Because they can get closer without detection, they can generate much better weapon's grade target tracks than 4th gen thereby enabling more accurate use of weapons against the threat while lessening the reaction time of defensive systems.
      "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

      Comment

      • moon_light
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • May 2012
        • 1033

        #4
        1. SPEAR is a cruise missile with a turbojet engine, it is not greatly dependent on altitudes like SDB
        2. "claimed 5m2 at 3000km range radar and Voronezh-SM", radar horizon vs a fighter at 50.000 ft is around 500 km, only 2500 km shorter than your proposed number because you are referring to anti-ballistic missiles radars. The issues are three folds:
        a) they are designed to detect and engage ballistic missiles with vastly different characteristics from a fighter aircraft such as significant Doppler shift, very high altitude with no clutter, you deal with a different kind of target the waveform you used is different and the Doppler rejection threshold is different. No one wants their ballistic missiles defense radar to track Mach 1 targets.
        b) the range don't take jamming into account.
        c) detection range come with the cost of size, powerful radar are more stationary and harder to hide. These radars will be attacked by very long-range missiles such as JASSM-XR or AGM-183A instead of JSM or SPEAR
        Click image for larger version  Name:	1.PNG Views:	0 Size:	51.8 KB ID:	3870492
        3. JSOW-ER is JSOW with jet engine and therefore not dependent on altitudes like GBU-53
        4. s-350s, s-300, s-400 , A-135 can intercept hypersonic targets as in ballistic missiles but they aren't designed to intercept hypersonic missiles like scramjet missile. I don't think buk-m3s can intercept either ballistic missiles or hypersonic missiles. Ballistic missiles can be as fast or much faster than scramjet missiles but they follow more predictable course and easier to intercept
        Last edited by moon_light; 10th August 2019, 02:28.

        Comment

        • panzerfeist1
          Rank 6 Registered User
          • Feb 2018
          • 413

          #5
          SpudmanWP

          Sorry if my post seems to be sort of disorganized but I believe I did make some mentions but sucked explaining them well. F-35 detects a radar so I am assuming your talking about passive/ESM sensors? Decoy emitters can imitate radars but I am not going to argue that they can easily sniff out decoys or not same as I am not going to argue if Moskva-1 can easily sniff out MALDs.

          "Because they can get closer without detection, they can generate much better weapon's grade target tracks than 4th gen thereby enabling more accurate use of weapons against the threat while lessening the reaction time of defensive systems."

          Sorry for the way my post is. But yes I am well aware that with stealth you can get closer than 4th gens. But lets say you are launching a 110km range glide bomb which in order to achieve this range you need high altitude. When there is a firecontrol radar with a 5m2 tracking range at 3000kms I am positively sure 5th gens will be targetted while 4th gens wll be targetted at a farther range if their weapons of choice were glide bombs. I am just trying to pickout what operations the F-35 would use with its weapons of choice.

          I am also still desperately waiting if anyone can correct my possible JSM/JSOWWER/MALD weapon load out error for the F-35 if I have one?


          .
          I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

          Comment

          • panzerfeist1
            Rank 6 Registered User
            • Feb 2018
            • 413

            #6
            @moonlight

            For points 1 and 3 I am trying to find sources for unless you got some of them being launched at low altitudes to achieve those ranges?
            "only 2500 km shorter than your proposed number because you are referring to anti-ballistic missiles radars."

            yes radar horizon limits their ranges I have take this into account they will still track aerial targets that are within 500kms depending what altitudes they are at.

            they are designed to detect and engage ballistic missiles with vastly different characteristics from a fighter aircraft such as significant Doppler shift, very high altitude with no clutter, you deal with a different kind of target the waveform you used is different and the Doppler rejection threshold is different. No one wants their ballistic missiles defense radar to track Mach 1 targets.

            S-400 radars are designed to detect and track cruise missiles, jets, ballistic missiles, etc. There are sources that show voronezh radars track aircrafts as well. What I am showing is simply its performance in detection and tracking.

            b) the range don't take jamming into account.

            OK I know you did not read what I posted at all but just like spudman i dont blame you. I stated before I did not include jamming from land radars like krasukha or airborne jammers like the barricuda.

            These radars will be attacked by very long-range missiles such as JASSM-XR or AGM-183A instead of JSM or SPEAR

            By all means tell me what kind of operation you will use to achieve this but I hope your not assuming its a simple task and that there is no air defense network protecting these radars.

            SBX is indeed a powerful radar and I will definetly include it next time after this upcoming maks airshow for the SU-57 like I will include the Voronezh-SM for the F-35. And just like the DM version I hope good old RTI gets there hands on them.


            4. s-350s, s-300, s-400 , A-135 can intercept hypersonic targets as in ballistic missiles but they aren't designed to intercept hypersonic missiles like scramjet missile. I don't think buk-m3s can intercept either ballistic missiles or hypersonic missiles. Ballistic missiles can be as fast or much faster than scramjet missiles but they follow more predictable course and easier to intercept

            Buk-m3 is designed for 3km/s targets is this speed hypersonic to you? Scramjets are basically ballistic missiles that can fly at lower altitudes to me similar to hypersonic glide vehicles. http://www.deagel.com/Artillery-Syst...000371001.aspx The 9M96 is an extremely maneuverable surface-to-air missile intended to engage both air breathing and ballistic threats at ranges of up to 120 km. Airbreathing is basically another name for scramjet missile designs http://www.deagel.com/Artillery-Systems/S-500_a002423001.aspx The Mars mobile advanced radar system has been identified as a key sensor associated with the S-500 missile system. The advanced radar system will make possible to engage stealth and unmanned aircraft as well as ballistic missiles, hypersonic cruise missiles and low Earth satellites


            Last edited by panzerfeist1; 10th August 2019, 02:49.
            I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

            Comment

            • moon_light
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • May 2012
              • 1033

              #7
              Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
              [LEFT][COLOR=#222222][FONT=Helvetica]"Because they can get closer without detection, they can generate much better weapon's grade target tracks than 4th gen thereby enabling more accurate use of weapons against the threat while lessening the reaction time of defensive systems."
              Sorry for the way my post is. But yes I am well aware that with stealth you can get closer than 4th gens. But lets say you are launching a 110km range glide bomb which in order to achieve this range you need high altitude. When there is a firecontrol radar with a 5m2 tracking range at 3000kms I am positively sure 5th gens will be targetted while 4th gens wll be targetted at a farther range if their weapons of choice were glide bombs. I am just trying to pickout what operations the F-35 would use with its weapons of choice.
              That is an anti-ballistic missile radar rather than an air defense radar and why use short-range glide bombs while in that case, they can use JASSM-XR, MALD-V or at least JSM

              Comment

              • panzerfeist1
                Rank 6 Registered User
                • Feb 2018
                • 413

                #8
                That is an anti-ballistic missile radar rather than an air defense radar and why use short-range glide bombs while in that case, they can use JASSM-XR, MALD-V or at least JSM

                yes and these radars can be used against cruise and aircrafts. anti-ballistic missile radars are not just limited to tracking only just ballistic missiles. Spudman says 5th gens can get closer which I agree with him but they can be in as much of a get 100% tracked if the right weapons are not used the same way as a 4th gen. I agree with you with the weapons of choice because I chose them in my post as well.
                I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                Comment

                • moon_light
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • May 2012
                  • 1033

                  #9
                  Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                  @moonlight

                  For points 1 and 3 I am trying to find sources for unless you got some of them being launched at low altitudes to achieve those ranges?
                  As explained by our colleague Gabriele from UK Armed Forces Commentary, it must be noted that SPEAR 3 is a powered weapon, while the American-made Small Diameter Bomb II only glides. SPEAR 3 has two small side intakes for its Hamilton Sundstrand TJ-150 turbojet, and the engine opens up a whole range of unique capabilities for a weapon so small. This 80 kg mini-cruise missile can be launched even when not facing the target (differently from SDB) and with more freedom regardless of launch height and weather conditions that affect gliding. The weapon is to be able to engage fixed and mobile targets alike, with a data link enabling post-launch control and retargeting.
                  https://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...faa-f-35s.html

                  Glide bomb to cruise missile
                  But its incursion in and importance to the Navys F-35C plans may help breathe added life into the program once again. Most notably, the service is once again exploring the possibility of a powered JSOW-Extended Range, or JSOW-ER, cruise missile variant.


                  https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...t-inside-f-35c


                  Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                  "only 2500 km shorter than your proposed number because you are referring to anti-ballistic missiles radars."

                  yes radar horizon limits their ranges I have take this into account they will still track aerial targets that are within 500kms depending what altitudes they are at.

                  they are designed to detect and engage ballistic missiles with vastly different characteristics from a fighter aircraft such as significant Doppler shift, very high altitude with no clutter, you deal with a different kind of target the waveform you used is different and the Doppler rejection threshold is different. No one wants their ballistic missiles defense radar to track Mach 1 targets.

                  S-400 radars are designed to detect and track cruise missiles, jets, ballistic missiles, etc. There are sources that show voronezh radars track aircrafts as well. What I am showing is simply its performance in detection and tracking.

                  b) the range don't take jamming into account.

                  OK I know you did not read what I posted at all but just like spudman i dont blame you. I stated before I did not include jamming from land radars like krasukha or airborne jammers like the barricuda.

                  These radars will be attacked by very long-range missiles such as JASSM-XR or AGM-183A instead of JSM or SPEAR

                  By all means tell me what kind of operation you will use to achieve this but I hope your not assuming its a simple task and that there is no air defense network protecting these radars.

                  SBX is indeed a powerful radar and I will definetly include it next time after this upcoming maks airshow for the SU-57 like I will include the Voronezh-SM for the F-35. And just like the DM version I hope good old RTI gets there hands on them.

                  1. S-400 radar doesn't track targets from 3000 km, you want longer range, there are cost you have to trade, one is waveform. Unless you can give a source state that Army radar is used to track aircraft and low altitude cruise missile, i believe it fills the same role as AN/TPY-2 or SBX
                  2. Voronezh is difference because it is a sky wave radar, sky wave radar is not limited by radar horizon but instead have a bind sector of 1500-2500 km right in front of them.
                  Last edited by moon_light; 10th August 2019, 03:00.

                  Comment

                  • panzerfeist1
                    Rank 6 Registered User
                    • Feb 2018
                    • 413

                    #10
                    Thank you for those weapons sources I only wish I was set with the load out carry for the JSOW-ER, MALD-X and JSM on the F-35

                    I will not insult you at all on the radars just like you were kind to not insult me on my mistakes of the weapons.

                    1. S-400 radar doesn't track targets from 3000 km, you want longer range, there are cost you have to trade.

                    Mobile radars do not have the power output ground radars have. Go find out the amount of power ground radar like the Voronezh draws in comparison to a S-400 radar. The more juice you have the better the range.

                    2. Voronezh is difference because it is a sky wave radar, sky wave radar is not limited by radar horizon but instead have a bind sector of 1500-2500 km right in front of them.

                    Voronezh radars are brand new ground radar installations for A-235 system and a great integration for their entire defense network. They are not skywave radars there is a radar for that which is developed by RTI called Container. Voronezh, sm, dm,vp,work in vhf, uhf and shf. Blind sectors exist but because of russias land mass distance I am sure far distant placed container radars can cover the blind spots the other container radars have missed.


                    I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                    Comment

                    • moon_light
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • May 2012
                      • 1033

                      #11
                      Originally posted by "[B
                      panzerfeist1"[/B]]Future Threats: Photonic radar balloons will raise the radar horizon significantly. And depending on RTIs radar satellite constellation radar horizon for air defenses might not exist at all with shared communication to air defenses through control centers since they are claiming interference would no longer be an issue because of software and supercomputers. But tracking performance has yet to be determined against low altitude targets despite being able to track a low altitude target according to their claim. Air defenses in the future because of FICs will lower the background noise 100 times for tracking targets.
                      They didn't lower background noise by 100 times, they lower the internal noise from frequency conversion by 100 times.
                      Background noise includes external noise from surface clutter and cosmic background radiation.
                      Photonic air balloons are so far into the future that they aren't even worth mentioning, nonetheless, all tactics have drawbacks, lifting them up in the air will increase your radar horizon, but it also harder to hide these ballons, they become juicy targets
                      Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                      Thank you for those weapons sources I only wish I was set with the load out carry for the JSOW-ER, MALD-X and JSM on the F-35

                      I will not insult you at all on the radars just like you were kind to not insult me on my mistakes of the weapons.
                      1. S-400 radar doesn't track targets from 3000 km, you want longer range, there are cost you have to trade.

                      Mobile radars do not have the power output ground radars have. Go find out the amount of power ground radar like the Voronezh draws in comparison to a S-400 radar. The more juice you have the better the range.

                      2. Voronezh is difference because it is a sky wave radar, sky wave radar is not limited by radar horizon but instead have a bind sector of 1500-2500 km right in front of them.

                      Voronezh radars are brand new ground radar installations for A-235 system and a great integration for their entire defense network. They are not skywave radars there is a radar for that which is developed by RTI called Container. Voronezh, sm, dm,vp,work in vhf, uhf and shf. Blind sectors exist but because of russias land mass distance I am sure far distant placed container radars can cover the blind spots the other container radars have missed.
                      1. Look at AN/TPY-2
                      2. There are only two ways to look over the horizon:
                      a) Sky wave, long range but with blind sector
                      b) Surface wave, no blind sector but can only be used at coast line and have very short range about 300 km
                      Konteyner radar is a massive stationary sky wave radar.
                      Last edited by moon_light; 10th August 2019, 03:18.

                      Comment

                      • panzerfeist1
                        Rank 6 Registered User
                        • Feb 2018
                        • 413

                        #12
                        "They didn't lower background noise by 100 times, they lower the internal noise from frequency conversion by 100 times.
                        Background noise includes external noise from surface clutter and cosmic background radiation.
                        "

                        I will ignore this because we have been over this already on another topic. https://forum.keypublishing.com/foru...-missile/page2

                        Photonic air balloons are so far into the future that they aren't even worth mentioning, nonetheless, all tactics have drawbacks, lifting them up in the air will increase your radar horizon, but it also harder to hide these ballons, they become juicy targets


                        Only 1 prototype from RTI exists on it because have went through a small fraction of their pdf articles because its tiresome using google translate. I have not read much into mig-31bms missile range dependency on altitude example But lets say there is a photonic radar balloon on a ship. I get more time tracking time against low altitude Kaliber missiles and anyone that needs to attack my balloon from a high altitude the an/spy-6 + SM-6 will take care of the target. if you fly at a low altitude and the balloon is high up your missiles will lose more range than they are when your at a high altitude. But if your at a high altitude to avoid the balloon you will make it easier for the an/spy-6 to track you....

                        I would not use a balloon radar as the only source. I will use another radar to cover the high altitude from below. This solution will definitely save the Navy a lot of money than just sending aircrafts out.



                        Sky wave, long range but with blind sector

                        Blind sectors exist because HF waves bounce up and down. Take a wide jump and from where you were standing to where you landed on your jump that is what you have covered. but the area that you have not covered was because your feet has not landed. but your clone that is 1ft away from you before you took the jump takes the same leap and covers the blind spot or area you have not covered.

                        That is one way to cover blind spots.
                        Last edited by panzerfeist1; 10th August 2019, 03:28.
                        I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                        Comment

                        • moon_light
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • May 2012
                          • 1033

                          #13
                          Huh with the ballons, everyone and their friend know exactly where you are from thousands of miles ?

                          Comment

                          • panzerfeist1
                            Rank 6 Registered User
                            • Feb 2018
                            • 413

                            #14
                            Huh with the ballons, everyone and their friend know exactly where you are from thousands of miles ?

                            I am going to go to sleep now. I will go look back at RTIs articles and I believe the max height is 1km for the floating balloon meaning it can't be tracked 1000 miles away because of below the radar horizon. If you want to attack the balloon I am sure a USN ship missile has more range than what your aircrafts carry.
                            I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                            Comment

                            • moon_light
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • May 2012
                              • 1033

                              #15
                              Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                              Huh with the ballons, everyone and their friend know exactly where you are from thousands of miles ?

                              I am going to go to sleep now. I will go look back at RTIs articles and I believe the max height is 1km for the floating balloon meaning it can't be tracked 1000 miles away because of below the radar horizon. If you want to attack the balloon I am sure a USN ship missile has more range than what your aircrafts carry.
                              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether...t_Radar_System
                              7 km Aerostat, 15 km aircraft
                              Radar horizon: 850 km.
                              LRASM range 1000 km
                              MALD range 925 km
                              SM-6 rang3 260-300 km

                              Comment

                              • SpudmanWP
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jan 2009
                                • 5292

                                #16
                                Part of "Tactics" is choosing the right weapon for the job & threat. Close means you can use a JSM, AARGM-ER, JSOW-ER, powered-JDAM, MALD-J, Spear3, etc from NoE in which case you will never expose the shooter to detection who btw does not have to be the spotter.
                                "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                                Comment

                                • moon_light
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • May 2012
                                  • 1033

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                                  "They didn't lower background noise by 100 times, they lower the internal noise from frequency conversion by 100 times.
                                  Background noise includes external noise from surface clutter and cosmic background radiation.
                                  "

                                  I will ignore this because we have been over this already on another topic. https://forum.keypublishing.com/foru...-missile/page2
                                  We have, photonic radar reduce internal noise rather than external background noise.

                                  Comment

                                  • panzerfeist1
                                    Rank 6 Registered User
                                    • Feb 2018
                                    • 413

                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by moon_light View Post

                                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether...t_Radar_System
                                    7 km Aerostat, 15 km aircraft
                                    Radar horizon: 850 km.
                                    LRASM range 1000 km
                                    MALD range 925 km
                                    SM-6 rang3 260-300 km
                                    MALD and LRASM. I mean a ship that has a photonic balloon radar will be targeted the same way as a ship that does not have one but the one with the balloon will have more reaction time to intercept low altitude targets.

                                    I hope your not referring the MALD and LRASM will be used against the balloon. I hope you have not forgotten the balloon is an aerial target and I don't think the MALD and LRASM are designed to engage aerial targets.
                                    I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                                    Comment

                                    • djcross
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Jan 2000
                                      • 5464

                                      #19
                                      Aerostats have shown to be resilient to gunfire because their ballonets don't lose helium quickly.

                                      I am aware of two aerostats which broke their tethers in Afghanistan. One was gunned by an F-16 until it was out of 20mm ammo (500+ rounds). The other was chased by a helicopter, which filled it with 7.62x51 NATO holes from its machine gun. Both aerostats continued to float away. They eventually came down a couple hours later, but it wasn't a quick, easy kill.

                                      Comment

                                      • moon_light
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • May 2012
                                        • 1033

                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post

                                        MALD and LRASM. I mean a ship that has a photonic balloon radar will be targeted the same way as a ship that does not have one but the one with the balloon will have more reaction time to intercept low altitude targets.

                                        I hope your not referring the MALD and LRASM will be used against the balloon. I hope you have not forgotten the balloon is an aerial target and I don't think the MALD and LRASM are designed to engage aerial targets.
                                        1. The ballon and the ship will be at the same location. You find the ballon then you know the ship exact location. The ship will ballon will be detected at longer distance.
                                        2. The ballon is a slow moving big target without any ability to maneuver. Attack it is no harder than a ground target on mountain height

                                        Comment

                                        Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                        Collapse

                                         

                                        Working...
                                        X