I’ve asked for official specs of ANAPG-77, including its power characteristics. Still waiting for them.

Your source tells pure and obvious bull****. That’s why i said i’m pretty sceptical towards Western sources. Its author don’t know **** about subject he’s writing about. MIG-31M was a very different plane, in comparison to original MIG-31, with a much larger nose cone, changed specially for the bigger antenna of the old Zaslon-M. Person who isn’t aware even of this well known fact – can’t be taken seriously.

Sorry, but you cited a bull****.

No, you didn’t. Here are three respected Russian sourcers. All of them are saying “MIG-31M had larger nose cone to fit larger Zaslon-M antenna”.

http://testpilot.ru/russia/mikoyan/mig/31/m/mig31m.htm
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-651.html
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig31m.html

It’s very sad, that you didn’t know that MIG-31M was completely different plane, than original MIG-31.

Really?! Coz index Sh135E says it all.

It’s obvious, already, that you’re using pretty bad and unreliable sources – full of misinformation. Story with Zaslon-M is a nice example.

Really?! So, you’ve change one speculation on another?!

Let me refresh you memory, then…

If you think it’s easy to find something in the area of thousands sq.kilometers, well…you’re delusioned one.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/APG-77

…unsourced, arbitrary denials.

…ditto

All those sources tell me is that the -M version is indeed bigger than the -A and that the diameter is 1.4m, which is what I said. You’re arguing with me by proving I’m right, which is a very odd tactic to say the least.:confused:

It actually says very little. They make no mention of a domestic variant having 400km range anywhere on their site, nor do they state that the 350km is export only. That said, none of this actually makes any odds to the original analysis you refuted, the numbers work out either way.

Every source states 13km for the shoot down, which is something an A-10 with sidewinders on the rails could easily manage with no radar, especially against a non-evasive target with no EW. So unless you think a sidewinder equipped A-10 or R-73 equipped Su-25T makes a good air defence solution this incident is in no way a rebuttal of the effectiveness of stealth. Much closer and a ZSU-23-4 could have shot it down.

Not my speculation:

http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/02/how-was-f-117-shot-down-part-1.html

The SAMs were most likely guided manually with the help of thermal images and laser rangefinders included in the Pechora-M variant of the SA-3s believed to have been used. Reportedly several SA-3s were launched, one of which detonated in close proximity to the F-117A, forcing the pilot to eject.

You have to admit that given the distance, it would have been well within the realms of optical designation and a 60kg proximity-fused blast fragmentation warhead wouldn’t have to get particularly close for a kill. And that’s why this example is silly, radar or not, a radar wouldn’t be needed at that kind of range… for any aircraft, so it makes a rather silly anti-stealth radar case.

Well:

a) If not emitting it isn’t very useful.

b) I stand by the statement. An S-300 launcher has a huge RCS, probably not far short of that of a barn, or even a small farm if you take the complex in total (all units) and a fast scanning AESA radar would be very capable of detecting such a target from a long way off, as would passing satellites.

Lets face it here, you’ve criticised an analysis, even though all the numbers available seem to imply that it’s ballpark correct especially given that the F-22 reportedly has an even smaller RCS. You could argue that the f-22 and F-35 may not be the right way round but other than that it’s spot on.

https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/03/04/stealth-techniques-and-benefits/

F-117 campaign in yugoslavia was unsuccessful, it flew far less sorties than f-16, yet sustained more losses.

the conclusion from the iraq campaign is that it was on par with f-16, except f-16 flew far more sorties,
cheaper, and with more sloppy planning

In total it flew 2,055 missions over 4 separate conflicts with one WVR loss. I hope people also realise that SA-3s were present in both Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom and netted exactly zero F-117 kills over 1,306 sorties.

Over the same period, 5 F-16s were lost and 25 other aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_combat_losses_of_United_States_military_aircraft_since_the_Vietnam_War#1991_.28Operation_Desert_Shield.2FDesert_Storm.29

It seems me that there we are at the usual confrontation going nowhere in which what The things my own part have to do is the easiest and would always work flawless and the ones that your have to do are actually impossible or won’t actually work.

About the F-117 thing in particular, just two considerations:
It was not Russia, it was not China, it was neither India, Iran or even North Korea, it was just Serbia (and Montenegro still).
And it was not S-400, nor S-350, neither S-300v, nor BUK and even KUB, it was Sa-3/S-125 Neva.
The same fact that someone has get to keep that old piece of scrap on the move for 78 days and operational would be worth for itself the highest decoration of valor, let’s imagine being able to shot down a stealth plane.

And that’s probably why it was successful. Optical lock capability.

http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/02/how-was-f-117-shot-down-part-1.html

Note:

1. This equates to a per sortie loss rate of <0.0005.

2. It was WVR. Nobody has ever claimed that stealth aircraft are invulnerable WVR, or even still stealthy at that kind of range.

3. It was a 33 year-old aircraft with next to zero SA or jamming, not an F-22 or F-35.

4. The loss was as much a result of bad tactics as anything else. They became predictable.

I don’t recognise the bombs under the intakes?? KAB-500SE?

Where did you get this bold part? Coz CEO of NIIP said nothing about scan mode.

For comparison, Zaslon’s peak-power is only 5kW while diameter of antenna is only slightly bigger than antenna of Irbis.

Well, well, well…so, we have another one adept of 0,000001sqm *********? Ok, LOL.

D2=D1/(RCS1/RCS2)^0.25
RCS2=1sqm – 400/(3/1)^0.25=304 км
RCS2=0.1sqm – 400/(3/0.1)^0.25=171 км
RCS2=0.01sqm – 400/(3/0.01)^0.25=96 км
RCS2=0.001sqm – 400/(3/0.001)^0.25=54 км
RCS2=0.0001sqm – 400/(3/0.0001)^0.25=30.4 км

Only if you believe in 0,00000000zerozerozerro1 bull****.

FYI information, S-125 is restricted by missiles range, not radar. Maximum range of the missile 5V27(V-601P) is….17km.

So, you’re completely wrong in your ‘analysis’.

Good luck with that, yeah.

The ‘narrow scan’ is concluded from the fact that an APG-77 with equal power only manages 200km for 1m^2.

The Irbis-E is 900mm in diameter, whereas the Zaslon-M is 1400mm in diamater. Now the power is actually far less important than the diameter. That 56% increase in diameter gives a 142% increase in gain and a 56% increase in range. The 4 fold increase in power would only give a 41% increase in range, except the figure you quoted is wrong for several reasons.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su-35/
http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2015/4/13/3068/?h

The average power of a Zaslon-A is 2.5kW but with a 25% duty cycle, giving 10kW peak power. Now that’s a -A not a -M. Now according to Combat Aircraft July 2015, the detection range of the Zaslon-M is twice that of a Zaslon-A and diameter was increase from 1.1m to 1.4m. Now the change in diameter only equates to a 27% range improvement on its own.

Really ? thought it’s 10 kW given that the average power is 2.5 kW. Pulse doppler radar typically operates at duty cycle of 15-25% To prevent/reduce effect of eclipsing.

5 kW peak means it has 50% duty cycle. that’s FMICW realm

Spot on.:eagerness:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html

The Russian’s snatched the leading position back with the early 1980s N007 Zaslon on the MiG-31 Foxhound, a massive phased array design twice the size of the US AWG-9 radar. Rated at 2.5 kiloWatts average power, with a 25% duty cycle peak power rating of 10 kiloWatts, this immense radar is claimed to be capable of detecting a 0.3 m2 RCS cruise missile at 35 nautical miles range.

You use 400km in your calculation but the manufacturer quotes 350km for 3m^2, which is what I used. That aside 26km or 30km is functionally useless, especially when that’s detection only.

http://www.niip.ru/eng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7:-q-q-35&catid=8:2011-07-06-06-33-26&Itemid=8

Well actually it depends what version of the SA-3 it was. It’s far more likely to have been a Volna-M given the date. Most sources also quote the slant range at 25km.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-S-125-Neva.html

Err… nope, other way round. You can actually work the range based off the Irbis-E system. [(50)^(0.25)] x 26.6km = 71km for detection.

Well err, if you think a huge truck and a 1MW radar are stealthy, good luck with that.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html

Maybe they could make an ASBM missile based on that THAAD-ER for the pacific pivot?…

Not big enough. It would likely be better to base it on the Sparrow missile family, which is already GPS/INS guided, then add terminal homing.

http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/1/1171.pdf

Let’s be real here.. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, which one didn’t end up in a mess?.. I have to think very hard to come up with a single op which really went smoothly. The last one was what, Grenada?

Panama.

Hi All,
18/18 although will admit the Meriln picture stumped me until I Googled the Kestral just a yank built version of the Merlin so I suppose 17/18 in all honesty…:D

Geoff.

I got that one by process of elimination.