http://www.lektire.me/prepricano/djordje-anicic-smena_945
P-18 wasn’t part of battery but it was part of division (somewhere you can find P-12 instead P-18 because P-18 was added to another division, so that isn’t clear), it tracked targets from +50km, but P-15 start tracking target from at least 23km (detailed info from book). Then they start tracking it with SNR-125, that is how procedure goes.

I just looked at the link you gave, can’t find “P-18 tracked target from +50km ” anywhere, and they didn’t specified the type of radar either.
Only the search radar (could be P-15 or P-18 or P-12) detect the aircraft from 23 km.
Then when the search radar indicate that the plane was at 14-15 km away, Dani ordered his crew to use SNR-125 fire control radar and illuminate the direction for target, they find it after the third search, so the aircraft must have gotten even closer.

BTW F-117 isn’t 0.001m2 it was during early pole measurement (compete with XST) but that was with early RAM (or maybe without RAM at all?), but RAM was improved trough service so RCS is very likely smaller probable lot smaller maybe 0.0001m2? So S-125 target and guidance radar couldn’t detect it from mentioned distance if it was same conditions as pole measurement but it wasn’t. So using best possible RCS numbers isn’t that useful. And modern SAM network (with fast datalinks) make things much harder even for VLO that is why Israel doesn’t want Syria to get S-300 even though Israel is getting F-35.

USAF said F-35 is stealthier than F-117, at that time they claimed F-35 estimated RCS to be 0.0015m2, so there is little reason to believe that F-117 RCS goes below 0.001 m2. I haven’t heard anything about F-117 changing RAM either. If i understand what they wrote correctly, according to the book, SNR-125 didn’t detect F-117 from distance >15 km, no clear information on whether P-12/18 or P-15 was used to detect F-117 at 23 km.SAM nowaday are much better than what they were in Serbia war, however modern VLO aircraft are not the same as F-117 either, they have RWR, Jammer, DIRCM, IRST, Radar and weapon with longer reach.

This is common myth. Radar which first detect was P-15 and then with second radar which guide missiles (SNR-125). This is what SAM crew members confirm couple times and this is logical if you check how S-125 works

All sources I can find about the incident said they used the P-18 to detect/track the F-117, I have seen the interview but I don’t think they mentioned the system used is P-15. So if you have some contrary evidence please show.

The estimated range of detection of a helicopter or aircraft, the radar means of a tank “Armata”, 20 – 25 km. This power allows you to intercept cannon shells at a range of up to 50 meters

That make absolutely no sense. If radar cross section of a cannon shell is 0.001 m2 and it is detected by ARMATA’s radar from 50 meters away, by radar equation we know the same radar will detect an aircraft with RCS= 10 m2 from 508 meters away, you just can’t get the “100 km” value and we haven’t touch the cooling, aperture and clutter issues. Logically, why anyone want their hard kill APS radar to have long range?

the 2nd source was from General hostage stating F-35 stealthier, the 1st source if I remember correctly the airforce stating both 5th gens previously before being golf ball and steel marble. Shania explained that the F-35 had a change in material, but a drastic 500 times decrease in size is hard to believe. I believe ActionJackson stated the F-35 was now the size of a Pea about a year ago from a thread saying .00001m2 if I recall correctly.

500 times is 25dB different.
Aspect and frequency are important, if you looks at the picture earlier, rcs at offbore spike is18 dBsm while frontal rcs is – 18dBsm. Total variation of 36 dB which is about 4000 times. For frequency, frontal rcs at 0.1 Ghz is 0 dBsm, at 1 Ghz is – 18dBsm, and rcs will down even further at 8 Ghz and higher.

-18dBsm without RAM, but yet it was tracked with S-125 from +20km (SNR-125 radar), one crew member even mentioned +50km, he was operator of P-15 radar in tv interview. I wouldn’t mentioned what Zoltan said becuase his statements aren’t back up by other members of battery (he said they tracked F-117 while it was still in Bosnia).

Pay attention, RCS is – 18dBsm in frontal arcs between 0.4-2Ghz. F-117 was tracked by P-18 which operate in VHF aka 30-300 Mhz.

LMFS: the thing is, anti-stealth radar tends to be L-band or lower

Radar need to operate at lower frequency to be effective against stealth
F-117 model without RAM:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]261936[/ATTACH]

A stealthiness augmentor composed of curved vanes ejectors is not exactly the same thing as a radar blocker

Again,

Pratt points out that the F119 and F135 are the only production engines with stealthy augmentors. Their design eliminates conventional spray bars and flame holders and integrates multi-zone reheat fuel injection into curved vanes that block the line-of-sight to the turbine.

Noone apart some forumers speculatin said it is a radar blocker… Did they?

No

Screech, the F135 and the JSF Engine War
Posted by Graham Warwick at 3/17/2011 1:33 PM CDT
For those of us who thought screech was the noise made by GE/Rolls and Pratt & Whitney in their war of words over the JSF second engine, here’s the background to comments made this week about screech problems with the F-35’s F135 engine.

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, JSF program executive officer Adm David Venlet said afterburner screech on the F135, which prevents the engine from sustaining full thrust, “caused us to avoid certain portions of the flight envelope.” Instead, F-35s have flown to other points in the envelope to keep flight-test going. Kits are being installed to overcome the problem, he said.

So what is screech and what’s the fix?

Pratt says screech is a phenomenon caused by pressure pulsations in the afterburner at low altitude and high speed. The problem was discovered during development testing around March 2009, having previously been encountered – and solved – in the F-22’s F119 engine, from which the F135 is derived.

Pratt points out that the F119 and F135 are the only production engines with stealthy augmentors. Their design eliminates conventional spray bars and flame holders and integrates multi-zone reheat fuel injection into curved vanes that block the line-of-sight to the turbine.

Building on its experience with the F119, the fix for the F135 includes “minor hardware changes to the fuel system, reduced aerodynamic leakages and upgraded software,” says Pratt, adding that the modified engine “now provides full max augmented thrust throughout the flight envelope.”

A kit has been developed for flight-test engines, and two have been modified. The production configuration will be validated this year in both the CTOL/CV and STOVL variants of the F135, Pratt says.

I have asked GE/Rolls whether their F136 has a screech-free stealthy augmentor. Watch this space for their answer.

And here it is:

GE/Rolls says the F136 has “no known” screech problem, but acknowledges it is four years behind Pratt in development. An augmented F136 was demonstrated recently to the JPO on its Evendale test stand without experiencing screech, but the engine has not flown yet.

GE/Rolls also points out that afterburner screech was a problem of fighters long before stealth came along