@garryA, have fun with detection/jam of PDUs that each reside on a different carrier segment while you don’t know the a) initial seed b) sequence number.

Jammer can still jam radar without knowing PRF or frequency range , every single characteristics that you can include into your communication datalink to make it harder to be jammed can also be included into radar, and no radar is immune to all kind of jammer.And FYI, a barrage noise jammer doesnt give a damm about frequency hoping or waveform , it simply flood your receiver with noise.If your datalink signal is too weak to be distinguished from background noise then whatever seed or sequence you use is irrelevant.

You have argued that a fighter’s RWR can detect and triangulate data links between S-300 parts. Now you’re speaking of barrage jamming, are you serious? You are running around your point because it’s moot.

Do you follow the discussion at all ?
I initially said that datalink can be detected and geolocated by RWR , just like any other electronic signal.
Then haavarla suggest that it would be very hard for RWR on fighter to distingusish between Military datalink and cell phone signal.
Which is why i said If military datalink use the same frequency range as normal cell phone, i can use a normal communication jammer ( yes they do exist) to increase background noise level at that frequency range (literally how the AN/USQ-113 communication jammer work), if the military datalink transmit signal weaker than the noise level then they cant communicate , if they transmit more powerful than the noise level then it rather simple to pick them out from normal cell phone signal.

We weren’t talking about jamming the said data link, we were talking about detecting the presence and location of S-300 system by means of interlink detection. If you don’t have ELINT, something that can fly close and over the said data links, you won’t detect them, simple as that. Which would be a one way trip for the ELINT crew

Nonsense, the data link signal (wave) wont just stopped when it reached your reciever , it will keep travelling unless you can somehow blocked everything (so the RWR doesn’t need to be stationed between the datalink transmitter and the datalink receiver to detect such datalink) . Especially if you are talking about datalink at low frequency , your beam width would be enormous in angle to begin with. Regarding signal strength, if a cell phone antenna with gain of 0dB can detect GPS signal from few hundred thounsand kilometer aways , nothing really stop RWR antenna with gain of 10-15dB atleast to detect datalink signal from 200-300 km aways

you’ve wrote yourself ‘you don’t know how RWR works’, then how can you claim one’s features?.

I didnot say i dont know how a RWR work , in fact iam confident enough to say that i know more about how it work than many in this forum. I simply said ” i dont think the method proposed by Tomcat is how RWR distinguish cell phone form military datalink ”

Are you suggesting that ‘lag’ in digital communications depends on the definite size of data to be transferred?
Latency has nothing to do with either bandwidth or transfer size.

Nonsense , so according to you the total buffering , delay would be the same whether you try to download a 1000 TB file or 1kb file (assuming data transfer speed is 1 Mb/s) ?. And iam not suggesting download/upload time only depending on the size of the files , it also depending on others factors such as distance , but those has small effect if compared to the time you have to download or upload files with large size.If you take an minutes to upload a file then an extra 1 -2 seconds delays due to distance would be irrelevant, hardly worth mentioning.

From the Wiki

So the question is simple, what was the “then” AMRAAM in the mid to late ’90s in Europe? Answer, AIM-120B.

I am not saying that the AIM-120D has a larger NEZ than the Meteor, just that the NEZ of the Meteor (in the applicaiton of a “deep magazine” asset for 5th gen spotters) is not far enough to keep them immune to return fire.

btw, The D does not gain it’s expanded NEZ by simply “tweaking”, its flight profile, it changed the profile completely (yeah I know, not new motor yet post C4). Previous BVR AAMs relied on an INS that had to use gyroscopes to maintain its vector and to track the target. The longer the flight, the greater the deviation and lower the chance of intercept. The D introduces two technologies to counter that, a two way datalink and a GPS backed up INS. Now, the missile will know precisely where the target is, its vector, and its own location with much greater detail. It will also be able to relay that info back to friendlies in the area.

This ability to precisely know one’s location and the target’s location allows the D’s flight profile to take a much more arching path that serves two purposes, increased range and increased energy in the endgame (thanks to gravity).

TBH, i cant see Meteor surpassed AIM-120D in end game energy
According to this http://irbis.gosniias.ru/source/analytic/Review_UR_VV_2004.pdf Meteor range is much longer than AIM-120

I’ve worked with civilian datalinks that feature frequency hopping, the carrier channel is split into segments and segment sequence is determined from a pre programmed value. Scenario that garryA is talking about is Hollywood stuff, at least without proper ELINT platform.

So what ? Radar can use frequency hoping too you know ? and they can still be jammed with a barrage noise jammer. It is not a Hollywood stuff , the Interpid tiger pod i mentioned earlier is literally used to jam cell phone frequency range so that terrorists cant detonate IED.
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-the-marines-cheaply-and-quickly-built-precision-com-1577979656

Probably..? So a Rafale, Growler or F-35 would have half of the world cell phone up in the clouds, just a few sec from a radio signal is detect and a little upload/download and badabingbadabong, gottcha!!
LMAO!! Riiiight.
That is exactly what a dedicated ELINT platform is supposed to do, only that it dosn’t take seconds
Too much James Bond, Tom Clancy with y

I dont think that how RWR will distingush cell phone signal from military one but technically speakingdata can be stored onboard , hardly a problem with today technology ,after all you can have a memory card smaller than your finger and stored 64 Gb of information. Alternatively , APG-77 radar has demonstrated ability to transfer datalink with rate of 275Mb/s ways faster than datalink on RC-135

The frequency that is used between an SAM system inhouse like NASAM is both encrypted and most likely at UH frequency and at a very low watt output.

Sure you could potential jam it, but then you would be sending out noise like which goes both ways.. and you would still need know the SAM location beforehand.

Not really, you dont need to know SAM location before hand because it not like you can focus your beam at (800-1900 MHz) with aperture of that size any way( the beam would be massive to start with).The purpose of the communication jammer wasnt really to jam the SAM datalink but rather just to force it to transmit more powerful signal than cell phone or use a different frequency , thus allow SEAD platform to distingush and geolocate them easily. And iam aware that the aircraft will have to transmit but geolocate a airborne moving emitters is just much harder than a ground stationary one. Moreover the main advantage of air assets is that they can keep moving ,at one moment their location can be revealed (assuming they transmit ) but if you lost track (assuming they turn their jammer off) then the next moment they are not there anymore. On the other hand, ground asset move very very slow ,once their location is revealed , it pretty much it.There are several ways to deal with HoJ SAM too such as blinking jamming or terrain bounce jamming