LMFSNice video, that should be close to 90 deg/s, and still the F-35 fandom is loosing their s… over the so called “Dojo drift” with some 45 deg/s, at high speed of course, to get the control surfaces working in absence of TVC…
LMFS[USER=”77174″]panzerfeist1[/USER]
Thanks for the table, it shows how the performance at different frequencies depends on the design. Current fighters are all thought to be detected much easier in lower frequencies (VHF and lower), Russian radar designers say just that, too. The L band arrays on the Su-57may be of help? I am not sure because the decimetric band wavelength is probably not big enough to make a substantial difference. The power of those arrays is unknown to me too, nut the number of transmitting modules is relatively low. But if the approach meme_expert said is workable, why not putting VHF antennae (I mean, even very few, like 1-3 modules) on the leading edges of the planes and using cooperative detection? This would actually render VLO shaping in small targets useless or in other words remove two orders of magnitude from the RCS reduction from VLO targets. The same way, numerous cooperative arrays of each time bigger wavelengths but smaller count of modules could address the upcoming broadband VLO designs.
ROFAR: I guess it will work differently from today’s radars in that it will allow for much improved processing techniques, concentrating energy returned by the target over a VERY wide frequency band and hence fundamentally altering the amount of information (energy) recovered and the ability of the EW to jam in such wide band. But if radar can be made wide band with photonics, I have to suppose that a similar technology can be used for EW too. It is too early for me to understand all the implications, but I guess it will just make it harder for VLO.
A radar in the K band is not known to me in the Su-57 to be honest. It should be strongly attenuated by water vapor in the atmosphere so it would probably not help too much with long range detection.
LMFSAll good mate!
regarding integration , i am interested in the effect of real time data exchange on the usage of L-band radars. Obviously they are not mere IFF arrays, they function as a radar thus being part of the byelka complex , there are modern techniques to overcome the resolution issue of the L-band radars but there is no official info regarding the exact accuracy , with that being said , i am wondering if a flight of Su-57’s , lets say 4 of them , thus 8 L band arrays , could perform some sort of a composite track to enhance resolution , in combination with signal processing methods i see *potential* (i say potential to not pass my personal opinion as confirmed fact) to effectively use the L-band radars to either track VLO targets at reasonable ranges or to at least designate portions of the airspace where the X-band radar can focus its search in that small sector, like nebo-m.
This isn’t a silly idea at all, in fact modern Chinese VHF radars do exactly that to improve their precision locating targets. Since the L band arrays in the Su-57 have only one row of transmitters, this would provide a vertical location capacity that would be absent otherwise. What I don’t know is how much more effective the L band is compared to X band to detect VLO targets, especially considering that the L-band arrays are way smaller than the X band one in the nose. Maybe small targets like AAMs could be detected better since their physical features have a size in the region of decimeters as the wavelength.
Thinking further about the directional communication links, I am inclined to believe they should be available, more even after seeing today the Su-57 paired with the VLO Okhotnik. It would not make sense to create such a stealthy pairing and then ruin it all via omnidirectional communications. X-band radar arrays should be the selected emitters and the tail cone should include one transmitting unit, too. This is more logical/economical than having additional transmitters operating in other frequencies I think.
LMFS[USER=”76593″]meme expert[/USER]
Many thanks.
True, there is no confirmation in those links that the system is directional, but they speak about synergistic effects and high levels of integration with the rest of the avionics and radioelectric systems of the plane. We know the radar and ECM work together, given the communications also work in X band the nose and cheeks radars could (IMHO) potentially be used for creating directional beams with 300º coverage
LMFSInteresting.
An article i saw a long time ago translated from russian said that S-111 worked in the X-band , had a range of 1500 km and could form beams in selected directions , (thus being like MADL).
Link -16 is analogous to S-108 , at least in beam pattern (omnidirectional).From paralay : http://www.electron.spb.ru/Products/matrix.htm
It seems this company makes multiband sensors that are UV/IR at the same time.
Good information, do you have any link confirming that capacity for the S-111?
LMFSI am not hurry, only we are talking about it, and this thread is the perfect place)
True!
IMO it´s impossible is any kind of DAS System. You need 5-6 Irst with IIR for covering 360º; on a F-35 a field of regard of 1 eodas is around 90-95º. That is not the case with only 2 DIRCM, but also i dont think these 2 Dircm have any IIR capability. Of course, in future we will know exactly features of these dircm.
The only sensor on Su-57 covering 360º is the MWS KS101-U, for this it needs 5-6 sensors. IMO the Dircm on Su-57 is slaved to the KV101-U.
We outlined the alternative possibility in posts #1866 and #1869. You can have a permanent UV coverage, which obviously is not going to have a huge reach, and (why not?) two additional IRSTs mounted in turrets (ideal location), scanning the airspace long-range (that is actually what IRSTs do) in two hemispheres above and below the aircraft. Not only I see it possible but in fact I think it would be a great idea :eagerness:
LMFSA NC propulsion still takes lot of time and $$$ to build, and believe it or not they have just as much if not higher maintenance cost vs Diesel engines.
NPPs are certainly not for third world navies I know, but VMF is not one of them and they already have a sizeable fleet of nuclear submarines and right now probably the best nuclear technology all around. New reactors are apparently not going to need substitution of the nuclear fuel almost for the entire life of the ship, so they associated costs will decrease notably.
Two 15kt LHD-esques to be laid down at Zaliv:
https://flotprom.ru/2019/%D0%93%D0%B…D0%B0%D0%B746/
Sounds definite, and like a bit of Mistral redux.
Good find, maybe we get to see these two sooner than expected (construction was scheduled for 2021)
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6592830
Now they say 15 kT and > 10 helos, before they said 15-20, which would be a lot for that displacement but still possible, if they use their new semi-catamaran hulls for the LHDs. It would be an ideal application.
LMFS[USER=”76365″]RALL[/USER]
a Russian speaker is confirming that the translation is correct. I know how other DIRCM systems work but this description goes beyond that functionality. I suggest that we wait for more information.
LMFSAn (IMHO) good analysis of the MiG-35 saga:
iz.ru/919501/aleksandr-ermakov/starye-voprosy-novogo-oblika-chego-zhdat-ot-mig-35
Specially for panzerfeist1, news about ROFAR:
iz.ru/914404/roman-kretcul-aleksei-ramm/byt-3d-novye-lokatory-sozdadut-trekhmernuiu-kartinku-tceli
LMFS[USER=”76365″]RALL[/USER]
I am only passing the info I found. The one you post was already known, the newer one contains some new data that we were not aware of. I understand your point, but I don’t have any more answers for what the manufacturer is stating. What do you think they mean?
LMFSFor what do you think exist 101KS-U? It does not have any sense to bring 2 different MWS systems with similar range capacities. Track of incoming missiles will be mainly with the 101KS-U. IR sensor of the 101KS-O will have very limited range, surely on the terminal phase of the incoming missiles. It is not a IRST/DAS System with a longer range. If it had long ranges, then 101KS-U would not have reason to exist.
First of all, we don’t exactly know how 101KS Atoll works and what the capabilities of the different subsystems are. UV MAWS is said to produce less false alarms than IR so 101KS-U may be the right approach as an all around missile detection system, but otherwise a IR DAS is more potent for general observation. An all-around IRST is no foolish idea to me and may be combined with the DIRCM turrets with low cost and platform impact, but we have not enough info, just that hint I posted. Another option is that the IR receiver is just there to help directing the the laser turret, I previously thought the missile location would be done by the 101KS-U alone.
LMFSWhy do you think this? on this attached picture only tell it is a Dircm, do not talk nothing about any Irst funtionality.
It says function analogous to 101KS-V + DIRCM. But I have to rely on online translators, so this is not 100% sure. It would make sense in any way, to have optical coverage of the plane’s surroundings, so it looks like a sound possibility to me.
LMFSThis is cool, I don’t know if it was known until now: apparently the 101KS-O DIRCM turrets on the Su-57 also have IR surveillance function, similar to the frontal IRST (101KS-V)
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”title”:”ED2iPUoU0AEVZKx.jpg:large.jpg”,”data-attachmentid”:3873000}[/ATTACH]
It would makes sense that they would form some kind of DAS supplementing the 101KS-U apertures instead of having a very narrow FoV, anybody has any info on that?
LMFSMenaDefence and now Vedemosti report the signature of a $1.8 billion contract at MAKS for 14 MiG-29M/M2 and 16 Su-30MKI (A) for Algeria
https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2019/09/09/810856-alzhir-kupil-istrebiteli
LMFS“Unimaginable acceleration to supersonic”: test pilot about the characteristics of the Su-57
I am going to suppose it is better than Su-35S by some margin, Bogdan should know both inside out and not be impressed if there was no clear difference.
Izd. 117 is not thought to be much more powerful than 117S, so weight and/or drag of the Su-57 should be a good step forward compared to Su-35.
Sign In
