This could well be a counter move to stop Turkish’s intention to get the S-400 that accord to some sources interested them a lot (some sources said Turkish Air Force is halved on interested between S-400 and the more advanced Patriot systems)

– I repeat, a PESA, no mather how powerful it is, will never match an AESA/stealth combination

Put AN/SPY-1D of the last baselines (that’s a PESA one!) against any “stealth” blub…

If it flies it dies :diablo:

Interesting Jonesy, I share similar ideas after all, Iskander-M for the Russian Army uses an optical seeker, probably a DSMAC kind, and I don’t know if there is the possibility to target a moving target, althrough I don’t know enough about the full cabalities of the system.

Is interesting we always discuss the anti-CSG battle (CVBG??, what’s that??:D ), but we never take into account other more interesting, and potentially dangerous adversaries that are also more suitable to counteraction, per example the ESG centered around a multirole group of LHD/LPD, DDG, CG and FFG plus SSN support…

They’re more vulnerable just because for they to accomplish its mission (deliver the *******s on the ground) they NEED to close in to the cost, off course, we know the advanced vertical envelopment capability of LHA/LHD, but you can’t put hevay lift equipment on the beach without using LCM, LCU and LCAC and similar deployable system from the big anfibs, and that means, you’re closing it to less than 50 nm…

That means, you’re a damn big one target, and every boy who reads Hughes knows, that no ship likes to fight a fort, and you can turn a beach very easily into a fort with lots of coastal based AShM along ESM gathers and other methods of ISR….

Combine that with mine deployment (not only your typical 5.000 bucks mine but those ones along that nasty stuff like MDM-1 Mod.1 with acoustic/magnetic/pression imploders) and agresive SSK use near the beaches (a 20×20 nm box pattern is useful for a SS to search accord to Soviet tactics for ASW and ASUW) and you can have a very nice way of getting a lot of problem to any invader force…in theory of course.

Should mean that ESG acts alone?, no, not at all, but the CSG acting as the core of the Maritime Strike Force concept, would never likes to close ashore, why would they?, they would try to attrite the enemy with air strike (don’t think even your Tactom is useful for this kind of so critical target environment against highly mobile SSM coastal launcher, remind Iraq/Scud hunter in the 1991) from far back from where they can play in transit in such a way to make: a) difficult to any enemy air force to track and engage beyond 500 nm, b) difficult to any SSK force to get the kinematical position to engange the CSG at any other than head-on profile…

Yes, we know that ESG have its own pretty decent attack capability (AV-8B) and strike capability (DDG, CG and SSN with Tomahawk) but if they’re fighting for the beach, they would use most of the attack sorties for that (not easy to fight people entrenched with good anti-landing disposition with heavy engineer support and mine deployment!) and they would have to risk, short range ISR assets (UAV) to enemy fire from the shore, specially from MANPAD (of course, limited to no more than 20.000 feet)…

Problem for the defender force is always to mantain staying power for the whole deployment (not to lose your coastal batteries before deployment to bad ass B-2 or F-22A attack, nor to lose your SS at pier or harbour entry to bad ass Virginia nuke boat on ambush near your base), but if you mantain on the move and try to sistematically try atrittion over the “invader” force, I think you can try to get much more sucess than against any CSG force wathever…

Always remind the Turkish scenario from Hughes book, althrough I have to admit, the Aegean sea is the most beatiful place for coastal combat in such a way, and your ideal missile should be a NSM-kind!!

1. Averange power depends on duty cycle! First must you increase the Pulspower (peak power).

2. Great is better.
Not always.
Nmax = 100* 0,5/(df/fo)!
Or the bandwidth degrade!
It’s no magic it’s physic!

Captor M; Source Manufacturer
Monopulsradar
Antenna gain 42 dB
* Antenna gain is 6 dB higher for Captor M as for a 1 mtr Bars!

The antenna gain counts!

Russians already have a working AESA prototype – from Phazotron Zhuk AE.
How many T/R module? It’s a corse grid array!

How did Captor-M antenna’s gain is so high?, where is the tradeoff? could be the aperture efficency of the slotted array so high?, what about the beamwidth? or the sidelobes level?

Can’t really believe those numbers, could you point a direct document so I can see it?…

Radiating is the very last thing you want to do. Remember the mantra “If it radiates, it dies”. Radiating is a huge beacon that says “Here I am, come kill me!” This is why the Missile Approach Warners on Eurofighter are probably the dumbest idea incorporated onto a jet in the last 15 years. All the enemy has to do is listen for the MAWs and you know where the Eurofighter is. F-22 uses ALR-94 to rack up kills while never using its radar.

But actually, the Eurothingie is working on MMW (K or Ka band) so atmosferic atenuation would not allow that at very long ranges.

That also means that those claims “100 km range vs missiles” are just rubbish 🙂

Would be interesting to see how the final “for export” F-35 will end in the RCS area, because no way in hell would be similar to the US kit. You don’t spent nearly one billion of US$ to “downgrade for export” a so much advanced plane as F-35 and let the same LO characteristics when they’re the most secret asset of the design 🙂

If I remember well, Mikhail Pogosyan in December 2006…
The KS-172-1 was never flown, it´s a cardboard weapon.
But if you have ANY proof that I´m wrong, I´l be more than happy to acknolege my wrong assumptions…
Of course that it would a bit strange that such a weapon had passed such an important development step without one single RUMOUR, let alone any press conference.

I was forgeting, i´m not Brazilian, i don´t have a nationalist bias in this question…

There is a long difference between been a “mockup” and “never have fly”.

Izdeliye 172S-1 (K-100-1), better said, its initial design flight as unguided (rocket test, telemetry test) in the 90s, and R&D have been continued since early 2000, with GNPO Agat researching the “Shayba” seaker head for it (and you have just to look at the different number of JMR articles on the issue the last two years, mainly this one)

That applies pretty well in my book as “under research” and not exactly just a CAD/CAE idea (that would be just feasibility study, and early one!)

And again, why in hell we would want to attack Brazilean boys at all?, stop to dream, we don’t care about the Brazileans, or at least, don’t care about you as much as you care about us 😮 😀

As per the arguments here, nice and fine…no matter of how much correct or false they’re.

Where on earth did you hear that Pit?.

From a theoretical PoV, opinion of one INDRA’s PhD Radar designer, talking about the topic.:)

Let me ask him again, just to be clear, and will pass again his conclusions.

Red Star and algerian roundel?

Looks like a fake to me.