Just to give another insight of SPECTRA performance, there was the answer of captain Romain on his blog. For the record Captain Romain wrote a book of rafale engagement in afghanistan.
http://blog.francetv.fr/capitaine-romain/index.php/2010/11/11/228808-la-question-de-corentin
I am not saying like anyone here (which is why it is more a deaf discussion) that relying on RWR is the panacea and ideal in all situations but it seems nevertheless according to the discussions I had and other testimonies such as this one that SPECTRA is quite effective and at longer range that some would expect. Probably your PK will be lower than with a radar at long range but it is considered as operationally relevant by french forces
Rafale is not the only a/c with such capabilities:
A basic use of the datalink is “silent attack.” An adversary may be aware that he is being tracked by a fighter radar that is outside missile range. He may not be aware that another, closer fighter is receiving that tracking data and is preparing for a missile launch without using its own radar. After launch, the shooter can break and escape, while the other fighter continues to pass tracking data to the missile. In tests, Gripen pilots have learned that this makes it possible to delay using the AMRAAM’s active seeker until it is too late for the target to respond.
But the use of the link goes beyond this, towards what the Swedish Air Force calls “samverkan,” or close-cooperation. One example is the use of the Ericsson PS-05/A radar with TIDLS. An Ericsson paper compares its application, with identical sensors and precise knowledge of the location of both platforms, to human twins: “Communication is possible without explaining everything.”
“Radar-samverkan,” the Ericsson paper suggests, equips the formation with a super-radar of extraordinary capabilities. The PS-05/A can operate in passive mode, as a sensitive receiver with high directional accuracy (due to its large antenna). Two PS-05/As can exchange information by datalink and locate the target by triangulation. The target’s signals will often identify it as well.
The datalink results in better tracking. Usually, three plots (echoes) are needed to track a target in track-while-scan mode. The datalink allows the radars to share plots, not just tracks, so even if none of the aircraft in a formation gets enough plots on its own to track the target, they may do so collectively.
Anyway, sensor fusion is important, and RWR is not the only sensors; I am sure that just like Gripen, Rafale will use it’s antenna to listen to emissions from e.g. the Su-35.
These days, sensitivity and quality of sensors, image processing, sensor fusion, and networking are more important than ever.
Most likely the SU-35 will operate it’s radar in LPI mode.
It can be seen from Table 2 that the PILOT radar with 1W output power can
detect its 100m² RCS target at 28km, whereas its transmissions can only be intercepted at 0.25km with -40dBmi sensitivity. It can also be seen that ES receiver interception range is coming closer to radar’s maximum detection range with -80dBmi sensitivity. ES receiver interception range can be calculated as 250km, too much above radar’s maximum detection range, if the sensitivity of ES receiver were -100dBmi.Table 2 also shows that the effectiveness of LPI radar performance is strongly influenced by the radar cross-section of the target to be detected. If the PILOT radar were required to detect a smaller target, for example an aircraft, with an RCS of 1m², transmitted power of 1W would give 8.8km radar detection range and the ES receiver with -80dBmi sensitivity would intercept PILOT radar much before it detects aircraft.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a456960.pdf
Since Western fighters (including Rafale) still has a lead in several areas when it comes to electronics, signal processing, sensor fusion, Rafale has several advantages over the SU-35. If those advantages are used in a tactically useful manner, Rafale would in most cases come out on top.
Sign In
