Yeah, but the Su is the only one flying.

Is still flying?

You are aware the main reason the F-22 would be able to spot the A-50 is because it will be using its rather large radar to do its job. That rather large radar can not only track manned aerial targets like aircraft, but it can also detect and track small unmanned targets like missiles… whether they are emitting radar waves or not.

Wait a minute…If the A 50 can detect stealth targets (my “educated assumption” is that it can’t, but let suppose so) that radar must work in longer waves. If so, how would such a radar detect a missile??? It shoud work in higher frequencies for that. But, in this case, it wouldn’t detect a stealth A/C… :confused:

You pretty much suggested that one particular company can create an IRST worth having. (I guess being able to detect and track a target a 3 quarters of the maximum range of Phoenix would be useless).

I suggest only that LM product is the best in its class (it was put only on some 2-3 dozens of F 14D and it cost as much as a good A/C radar). And yes, if an IRST could detect a target bat 3/4 of the max range of a Phoenix I wouldn’t be a small achievement at all (to be entirely objective, this detection range was for a target with the IR signature of a Tu 22; that means that for a fighter the detection range would be less). However the only IRSTs that could claim ~ 3/4 of the AAS 42 capablities would be the Pirate (EF) an OSF (Rafale).

What I find amazing is that they had such an effective system yet they dump it despite being an ideal weapon sensor for a stealth aircraft. Why waste time with LPI radar that emits even if ever so secretly when they could have simply fitted the seeker of the AIM-9X to a Phoenix missile with the same datalink and had a 150km plus range air to air missile that would be near impossible to defeat passively.

There are at least two resons US did not give IRST full trust: 1) it doesn’t tell the range 2) (and most important) it’s not an all-weather system. Not only clouds, but even the slightest moisture reduces dramatically the performances. So you pay $ 3-4 million for a weapon system you can’t rely 100%. A LPI radar will detect dozens of targets, at longer ranges, give the pilot all the coordinates for missile launch (bearing, range and speed) without triggering the enemy RWR; also they work superbly in A-G (SAR) which is not the case for IRSTs. BTW, the Phoenixes did not have a datalink. They were semi-active guided up to the target proximity, that they became active.

He has never heard of datalinks? And of course he is making an assumption based on current western AWACS…

Probably he heard of, but he is right: an AWACS is limited by horizon.

There was a video interview with a Raptor pilot on http://www.f-22raptor.com/ who made the 40% / 60 % claim and he was talking directly about the aircrafts passive detection techniques(Not the LPI 77) being the truely impressive and top secret aspect of the Raptor, over the stealth, supercruise and maneuverability aspects.

Inded, the article in JED I was quoting, said that the ALR 94 is the most sophisticated system on the F 22.

So manouverability and acceleration are what is needed for air to air engagements? Interesting. Mig-31 has plenty of acceleration but poor manouverability… I guess it would be crap in air to air engagements.

Yes, it would be when facing fighters, not planes like strategic bombers or SR 71s. That’s why the 31 were supposed to be protected by dedicated fighters like Flankers…

I have tried being fair and nice and respectful… all I got was “russian fanboy” sht and US basher acusations. It is not worth the effort.

Well in this case, I respectfully sugest you to direct your anger towards the forum members who called you this way, not to me.

The main point is that the F-22 could have launched the AMRAAM from 50km away… if the target can defeat the AMRAAM then the F-22 has to try to get much closer where it might be detected before it can launch another weapon type.

Maybe you can explain how an AWACS (no mather is Russian, Chinese or US) could defeat a missile like AMRAAM.

Also the AWACS in question was not a Russian or Chinese AWACS, which is what we are actually discussing.

And what makes you so sure that a Russian/Chinese AWACS can detect an F 22 far enough to escape destruction? Are these ones so much better thatn the E 3?

If the F-14 had an IRST that could detect and track cold objects from Phoenix range all those years ago then why can’t it be possible for an F-22 to be detected by current versions of the same thing.

It could be, if produced by the same company that produced the AAS 42–that would be LockheedMartin Missile and Fire Control.

The fighters assigned to protect the AWACS will likely have jammers.

If the AWACS did not detect the F 22 or the missile lauched by this one, how would an escorting fighter? Because, I figure you know that in order to jamm an emmtiter source you had to detect it…

So over the horizon backscatter radars don’t actually work?

What have OTBs to do with AWACS? Do you even know how a OHB looks like? This is one of therm, the Australian Jindalee (http://defence-data.com/features/fpage37.htm):

The receivers consist of two “arms”, each 3.4 kilometers long, and each site consists of 960 individual antenna masts that must not be more than 10mm out of line along the whole length.

Transmitter and receiver sites near Longreach and Laverton are located about 100km apart to prevent electronic interference. The system is linked to 17 beacon stations across northern Australia, which are used to measure ionospheric conditions and calibrate transmissions from Longreach and Laverton.

Do you believe that something like this can be mounted on the back of an IL 76?

Question : It was claimed that the RWR on the F-22 can provide guidance data to AMRAAMs. So, how does the set on a single F-22, calculate the height of a target?

Not only the ALR 94 can find the exact direction (azimuth and altitude) of the emitting target: every decent RWR can do this; it is the range of the target that is more difficult to calculate.

Where the ALR 94 is different is that it estimates the range and even calculate it precisely as the enemmy get closer. According to Journal of Electronic Defense (can’t post a link since the site is no longer free of charge!) the ALR 94 can detect a fighter radar at ~ 500 km. As the enemy get closer, in order to find the range, knowing the exact direction the ALR 94 tells the APG 77 where to look (that’s where sensor fusion pays off) and this one send a narrow beam towards this direction, for a fraction of a second (that’ where AESA pays off–no chance for the enemy RWR to detect it). In this way, the range and speed are calculated too. Closer, when the target is in AMRAAM firing range, the JED states clearly that the ALR 94 can offer a firing solution alone, without any help from the APG 77.

There is another operational system that can do this–the Falcon Edge on the F 16 blk, but I can bet at shorter range and less precisely that the F 22.

Also Raytheon claim that their latest (digital) RWRs, the ALR 69 (V) A (the initial order ordered for a dozen of F 16 C/D) and the ALR 67 (V)4 (already operational on F18 E/F) could be used in pairs on two fighters linked with MIDS datalink terminals, in order to triangulate the position of the enemy fighter.

More dedicated systems mounted on R 135, E3, E18G can geolocate emmiters entirely passive, at 360 deg. around the plane. Also the HTS (HARM targeting System) for the F 16 CJ can calculate the range, but only on a narrow FOV– 120 deg.

why they cant create there own criteria for 5th generation fighter? (like missile proof)

They can create their own criteria, but in this case we will compre apple with oranges.

Quote:
In A-G or A-A?

both.

agreed in A-G not in A-A.

Bit of a blanket statement. According to tests of NMD type radars the Russian radars consistently performed better than US radars on targets of RCS 10cms and smaller. Any lagging was in processor performance… processors which can currently be bought on the open market.

What test were those? What US and Russian radars were tested/compared?

Why do you think there is something wrong with being german? (And since when did leaving off english letters and putting in zs suddenly become the German language?)

Nice try. :diablo: But let me remind what you said:

But no… Ze E 3 iz zee greatezt aircraft in ze vorld. Zeig Heil! Star49… iz zat a Pink star by any chance?

You assume Nazi. Perhaps just German?

Short memory, hugh?

So Iraqis who have never had explosives strapped to their bodies before will fail in the face of experienced, well trained, well equipped, battlehardened US and UK forces? There is a saying that trained enemies are more predictible than amatures. You never know what an amature might try.

I’m sure that F 22 pilots would love to deal with “amature” AWACS operators flying AWACS produced by “amature” manufacturers.

so what do u think about Su-27SM and Su-34. there are plenty of statements associated with them. one of it is 1 Su-34> 12 Su-27

Su 34 has other job than the Su 27 that notoriously lack precision A-G capabilities. So yes in A-G probably su 34>su27 (i have some doubts about the 1:12 though). But can you say that 1 Su34/27SM> 12Su30MKI?

u cannot offere half baked stuff(without verfying the figures) for export. (thats why they put no less than ) and export technology is alteast a step below what industry can offer for domestic purpose.

And are you sure that the same figures you mention about the Irbis are the ones presented to potential foreign buyers? As for Russian stuff for Russian armed forces being superior to Russian stuff ofered for export, I doubt it. In this moment the best variant of Flanker, for example, is not flying in Russian AF.

the topic of thread is not AWACS vs 5th generation fighter. It is about F-22 threat to Russian/Chinese AWACS.

Excuse my ignorance…I assumed that the f 22 is the only operational 5th generation fighter :p …

I realise the US is in fairy land… spending billions to make planes like the B-2 and F-22 so they can win the cold war that has already been over for one and a half decades, while their soldiers are dying in a guerilla war in Iraq and Afghanistan where their fancy stealth planes are of zero use, but that doesnt’ mean we have to assume the Russians and the Chinese are in the same dreamland.

The Russians do the same as the Americans (of course, adjusted to their possibilities) The fact that thier soldiers died last time in Chechenia did not stoped them to upgrade the Flankers, the Tu 160, to introduce new strategic missiles, new submarines etc. In your opinion, nowadays US should buy only assault weapons/hand grenades/mortars because they are in Irak or Afg.

You assume Nazi. Perhaps just German?

And what’s wrong with being German? And in general, what has the etnicity to do with this topic? BTW I am from Romania.

So it is numbers of E3s in service that allows an F-22 to defeat A-50s…?

Don’t extarct my words from context. It is something that I see you do frequently on this forum. The discution was about the Alaska exercise that (even “staged” to qoute you) shows that AWACS are vulnerable. Then Star 49 said that the last upgrades improved the performances of A 50 (wich is something normal). But I responded that it is hard to compete with US in this field because of their experience. By experience I mean hundreds of AWACS type planes delivered to some 15 countries.

The AWACs the F-22 will have to deal with in Russia will be ground based and have thousands of radars of long wave able to track it easily.

I thought the topic was “AWACS aircraft type in danger?”