Prop plane could be also able to fight in aerial combat…albeit better suited for COIN operations.
See my point above regarding who dictate the engagement.
Paralay suggested this in another thread 2015.
Is that even for air-to air combat ?
looks to me more like those Stavatti COIN’s
The thing is that Propeller fighter may no longer able to dictate the engagement compared to the fast jet. The gap becomes bigger with missile armament.
The faster jet aircraft have leisure of forcing the fight to the prop aircraft and can disengage/escape as soon as situation get tricky without the prop aircraft able to properly match.
or it’s because the stocks are available at that time and might as well use it. probably near end of service life missile.
I swear this will be my last time asking a question regarding the AESA calculator. I do not know if its a user error on my part or this sheet does not calculate RCS distance when narrowing or widening beams.
You can specify the scan sector easily in the sheet.
[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:tscan sector.png Views:t0 Size:t140.8 KB ID:t3852410″,”data-align”:”none”,”data-attachmentid”:”3852410″,”data-size”:”full”}[/ATTACH]
Reducing scan sector however may help extending the range. But one must also consider the increasing amount of integration loss which will wash the range advantages.
Your sources also does not specify many things considered in the calculator. E.g they don’t specify their detection probability. and dwell time (how long the beam stays in the search sector) So you can’t really “re-create” the same condition mentioned in your source with the calculator.
[USER=”70376″]stealthflanker[/USER]
just 2 things I need to know before downloading your excel sheet. What is the typical radar pulse repetition frequency and pulse width used by radar? Is there a way to determine these based on other factors(in layman terms)? Either way can you give me an average estimated range for radar pulse repetition frequency and pulse width for modern aircrafts?
That depends on operating mode. Selecting what’s necessary is actually a complex process involving many factors. The best one can do in layman’s term is to find data for other radar and apply it.
The data however can be easily found in good forum such as Secret Project’s avionics section. Or you can find it on books about radar. I also hosted a table containing modes of typical fighter radar which you can see typical PRF and pulsewidth used.
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”data-attachmentid”:3852213}[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”data-attachmentid”:3852214}[/ATTACH]
forgive my ignorance but do u mean by “acceptable 200 hr” ?
The early N001 set only had MTBF of 5 hours. Only then it managed to get fixed and reliability improved to 200 hr.
To do estimate one must use the good value for the radar. For the Standoff jamming case. We need to know the Sidelobe level of the Irbis and Zaslon. This information however is kinda hard to find but estimates are available. a Good generic rule of thumb to estimate sidelobe level of an array antenna is to divide 1 with number of elements, this rule of thumb however assume uniform illumination. The elements itself can be easily estimated with the AESA radar calculator’s “TR Module number” spreadsheet. All need to be done is to input the antenna vertical and horizontal diameter to antenna area finder. and From there one can work out the estimate frequency band for the radar, which in here we take as 9300 MHz, as can be seen here :
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”data-attachmentid”:3852144}[/ATTACH]
Then we can estimate the number of radiating elements of the Irbis and Zaslon with following result :
Irbis-E : 1960
Zaslon : 3267
From there we then can estimate average sidelobe level as follows :
Irbis : 10*LOG(1/1960) = -32.9 dB
Zaslon : 10*LOG(1/3267) = -35.14 dB
The emitted power would be :
Irbis-E : 20 Kilowatt or 20000 Watt or about 73 dBm
Zaslon : 10 Kilowatt or 10000 Watt or about 70 dBm
The antenna gain can be estimated from the number of elements or findings in open source.
Zaslon : 37 dB
For Irbis tho, some other estimate have to be made. We only know its diameter. then we need to calculate beamwidth. Easily be done through number of elements :
We assume uniform illumination, thus the beamwidth coefficient would be 0.886. The antenna beamwidth is then calculated to be :
BWirbis=0.886*(100/SQRT(1960))
BWirbis= 2 Degrees
Then using K barton’s approximation, we can calculate the antenna gain as following 10*LOG(30000/(2*2)) = 38.7 dB.
Armed with those values. We can then estimate burn through range. With following result.
Irbis-E
[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:tIrbis.png Views:t0 Size:t12.9 KB ID:t3852142″,”data-align”:”none”,”data-attachmentid”:”3852142″,”data-size”:”full”}[/ATTACH]
Zaslon :
[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:tZaslon.png Views:t0 Size:t12.7 KB ID:t3852137″,”data-align”:”none”,”data-attachmentid”:”3852137″,”data-size”:”full”}[/ATTACH]
You can download the spreadsheet i made for above calculation here :
Oh and the vid was composite but it’s from 1980’s when early batch of flankers are in service or being tested.
in the pic on the website there are no dummy stripes on the R-27
Then it’s a live munitions. No doubt.
and the Radar is of course designated as N001. The problem so far was that the reliability was low. Only later at 1990’s it brought to acceptable 200hr.
If it were dummy it would have 3 strips. and they did. This is composite but Su-27, R-27 firing is at 1:35.
Yes. where did you read that O-o ?
Remember Vasily Tsymbal vs P-3 incident ? His Su-27 carries full complement of AAM’s
The answer is yes. VVS/VKS Used a radar they haven’t certified for until 1990’s. and yes it comes by default with R-27R and RE. and it also have datalink too.
So, how large is “large” ?
What if the ECM pod uses noise jamming? i remember that mode is available on ALQ-184 and ALQ-131 pod?
What if there is a MALD-J nearby and it use noise jamming to protect F-16? what is the option to break through the noise jamming?
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”large”,”data-attachmentid”:3851968}[/ATTACH]
Then it can be burned through as standoff jamming. Except this time the jammer is co-located.
The Multiple number of noise jamming can be countered through processing. like say generation of jammer strobes, with hope that some targets is not covered.
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”data-attachmentid”:3851976}[/ATTACH]
Other countermeasures are available in this list :
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”data-attachmentid”:3851977}[/ATTACH]
Otherwise is to engage the jammer, which is why we have trend of increasing munitions quantity in today’s ground based SAM’s