Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 41 of 45  [ 442 posts ]  Go to page « 139 40 41 42 4345 »
Author Message
Blackbuck
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: February 20th, 2015, 12:51 am
Offline
Posts: 2741
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 9:15 am
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom
RDY and RBE are both X-band sets. It wouldn't be a simple job to re-engineer a radar set to a completely new band either especially into one that's predominantly used by ECM/EW systems. If you want to counter stealth you're best off looking at developing powerful IR sensors.

_________________
AU Projects: | Federal Monarchy of Tír Glas| Other Ivernic Nations | Artemis Group |
Blood and Fire


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: February 20th, 2015, 5:01 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3580
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
The F-35 automatically brings any X/Ku radar useless, even the shipborne APAR. The old SPS-48 works in E/F band, so it perhaps can see the F-35. This the reason I thought both going for Sukhoi Su-35 and creating an AU shipborne radar of my own working in L-band, using technology from the ELTA EL/M 2075 and M271A ( AC-122 AEW).

The F-35 seem to carry only 2 AIM-120, so a jammer or something to avoid these is needed (and I need to have also the missile to create a counter sustem for that). Then probably with a powerful IR sensor and IR missiles something can be done, particurarly from behind, if its pilot switch on the reheater.

On ground, the AU E-80 SAM is based on shipborne technology (with air searching radars M391-an AU indigenous development of SPS-39) and L-band phased array M421. Also a network of VHF/UHF/HF radars is alraedy been installed.

For fighter radars everything X-band and Ku-band goes directly to the museum. So, for Gripen-HL something different is needed (and for Rafale-HL, if the RBE2 is X-band). For other fighters (F-16 and F-4E) there is no problem. An I-band rabar is that I need for these aircraft or an S-band.

The most powerful IR sensor today is available with the Su-35 (if remember right 50km range) and second os the systems on Eurofighter and Rafale.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: February 20th, 2015, 6:28 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
odysseus1980 wrote:
The F-35 seem to carry only 2 AIM-120
That is only if you've also loaded two 2klb class munitions. In a pure air to air role, with the proposed launch rail modifications, the F-35 will be able to carry eight AMRAAMs, or a combination of AMRAAMS and shorter range missiles.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: February 20th, 2015, 7:33 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3580
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
The main problem is that the F-35 is difficult to counter with convectional way. Su-35 also has X-band radar, but also two wing-mounted L-band, so it can detect F-35. On the other hand, RCS of a target differs with angle, so in sides and rear things are different (usually head on RCS is the smallest). In the rear hemisphere also there is a very good heat source. A shipborne radar sees larger RCS than a airborne, because of seeing belly and wings also, but I am not sure if APAR can detect F-35 (being X-band). I believe that Turkey wants the F-35 for penetration and bombing (perhaps also they will integrate stand off attack weapons on it), they have F-16 for air superiority. It is unknown how downgraded would be the export F-35 from that of USAF.

Even with an convectional X-band radar-equipped fighter, any head on approach should be avoided. Having an L-band AESA airborne platform (I also think that the Erieye S-band radar could see something) a counter meausure would be an approach from sideways with radar closed and fire MICA IR missiles when enter on range. With an IR sensor, thinks are easier (both Gripen and Rafale can have) but again the aircraft should be out of the range of AIM-120. The Rafale can fire Meteor missile in "fire and forget" mode, perhaps the Meteor can then lock on the target. Latter has also great "no-escape zone" for other missiles, this is a plus. Of course, when F-35 opens its radar is clearly visible-the problem for the target is to survive.

I read also that Turkish F-35 would have Meteor, this is real problem.

Other thoughts for my AU is to involve also in JAS-39 Gripen development for developing a variant with some differences (such as a I-band radar, one way-link for Meteor missiles (or fire and forget, like Rafale, which also have). If remember from my European Programs Involvement, HLK entered in Meteor development. Also, the AU AAM-80 missile is a long range ramjet variant of MICA, based on an older French design.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Blackbuck
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: February 20th, 2015, 11:47 am
Offline
Posts: 2741
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 9:15 am
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom
An X-band radar is perfectly capable of detecting an F-35 with the right parameters. Just because it's made to be LO in that part of the spectrum doesn't mean it's invisible to it, not by a long shot. Added to which lower band radars lack the accuracy of K and X band sets which is why you see on the Flanker a combination of L and X.

You still need to fire the missile at an actual target for it to hit it, firing it off in the general direction you think there might be an F-35 and hoping it finds something is a waste of €1M...

Gripen and Rafale both have top-notch EW systems but are constrained by the physically small area they have for radar which is no matter how you cut it going to affect its performance against LO targets. (There's a reason that Sukhois, Eagles and Tomcats have mahoosive radomes).

IMO if you're so paranoid about the threat that F-35 poses you should look into either a multi-frequency system comprising of an X-band FCR with L or S band arrays in your leading edges (wing and tailplane) and fuse that into your combat system or, Start buying your own LO aircraft...

_________________
AU Projects: | Federal Monarchy of Tír Glas| Other Ivernic Nations | Artemis Group |
Blood and Fire


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: February 20th, 2015, 3:26 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3580
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
These cover me completely.

The Sukhoi Su-35 has two band array (X and L) built in, plus its weaponry which is useful to have, even an anti-AWACS missile. Somewhere in my library I have an analysis on the F-35 and its RCS- which I will read carefully.

The Early Warning System on ground is being installed gradually, as I referred above.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: March 18th, 2015, 7:39 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3580
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
Something from the 1950's-Please comment.

Since RHAF (AU) had Gloster Meteors, I thought that considerable interest in the P.1081 was shown by RHAF, together with Australia. In the end, the project was purchased from HLK and became the base for an indigenous scale up version, powered by Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire. Hawker Sea hawk also assembled under license, these 60 airframes were similar with the export Mk100 for German Navy. The SHAF AC-10 (design number R.54) had a radar derived from that of Gloster Meteor NF.11 and was capable of launching AIM-9B missiles and IR Falcon.

On the other hand, Hellenic State Electric Company together with Mining Industry ordered several Metrovick Gas turbines in early 1950's. The Project was given to Aerodyne Company under license, as the Sapphire engine, resulted in the Aerodyne GT3 gas turbine in late 1960's.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
eswube
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: March 18th, 2015, 6:54 pm
Offline
Posts: 10635
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Well, P.1081 derivative sounds more plausible than some local design made with UK's help.
Btw. I'm not sure if the IR Falcon would offer sufficiently higher performance than AIM-9B to use for it relatively limited resources of HLK? (it would be different if You were using radar-guided AIM-4, but then I don't think Meteor's radar - even upgraded could handle them)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: March 19th, 2015, 8:46 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3580
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
This Falcon was based on Swedish Rb28 and entered service in late 1960's. Radar had been improved further from original. Newer versions of Sidewinder ordered also.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some questions about Ships and WeaponsPosted: March 22nd, 2015, 7:47 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3580
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
Take a What if Hellenic Air Force SAAB JAS-39C Gripen:

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php ... ew;id=1302

The Gripen was proposed to real Hellas, but did not bite.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 41 of 45  [ 442 posts ]  Return to “Off Topic” | Go to page « 139 40 41 42 4345 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]