BluewingsOfficial Russian sources claim:
RCS Su-27 – 5 square meters, without weapons, 15 square meters, with 10 missiles.
Source please ?
Cheers .
Bluewingshopsalot :
The Rafale is a 4th generation fighter with some moderate RCS reductions.
A couple of things , the Rafale is 4++ gen fighter and while not being a LO aircraft , it has some very important features to reduce its overall RCS . I am not going to describe them all as it would need a rather big post and numerous pictures , pdf , etc , so please spare me and don ‘t ask me to post it , thanks . Suffice to say that what Dassault said years ago about its RCS clean is true and can be trusted .
“1/10 of the frontal RCS of MIRAGE-2000” (about 0.1~0.2 m2), declared by Dassault in 1999.
What I contest is the true work done from the Su-27 to the Su-35 to lower the overall RCS . What did they do ?
-1) they used more composites in the airframe (what % of the overall airframe is made of composite ? How much more from the original Su-27 ?)
-2) They worked on the inlets , the basic solution has been to apply ferro-magnetic radar absorbent material (RAM) to the compressor face and to the inlet duct walls . A layer of RAM between 0.7mm and 1.4mm thick is applied to the ducts and a 0.5mm coating is applied to the front stages of the low-pressure compressor . The result is a 10-15dB reduction in the RCS contribution from the inlets.
And that ‘s it . The frontal RCS of the Su-27 is given at around 12 m2 .
Until I have some better numbers , let ‘s say that they increased the composites by 10% (see the empty weight of both aircraft , Su-27/35) , resulting in a more or less 5dB reduction in the overall RCS , plus 10-15dB reduction for the inlets . That gives us a overall frontal RCS of around 8-10 m2 , clean . Add to that , let ‘s say 6 missiles and we end up with around 12 m2 .
Almost 10 times more than the Rafale with 6 missiles and a supersonic fuel tank . This has an impact on radar acquisition at long range and since the echo will be feeble , Spectra will be at ease if jamming is choosen .
And if Spectra gets a track on the Russian Pesa , the Su-35 is in trouble because passive firing will be available and a Meteor , or two , could be fired at near to max range , let ‘s say 120-130km head-on , Rafale would then turn away and accelerate to escape a possible (?) response , leaving the Su-35 to try to escape the threat . During that time , the Rafale gained some time to decide what to do next .
This is a very likely scenario if you ask me , don ‘t you think ?
Anyway , in this scenario , if the Su-35 Driver truely understand what ‘s going on , he will switch his radar off to make sure that no midcourse updates are going to be given to the Meteor(s) by Spectra and evade the missile(s) by manoeuvring . But , will he switch his radar off when chasing a Rafale who ‘s trying its best to jam his radar and loose all awareness for a while (the Rafale is still 100km away , outside the range of IRST) ?
Cheers .
Bluewingshopsalot , from head-on , a Rafale loaded with a supersonic 1250 L. droptank and 6 Micas has a RCS of around 2 square meter .
Do you think that a clean Su-35 has a 2 square meter RCS (which is about the RCS of a clean Mig-21) ?
Cheers .
BluewingsThis Rafale has a lower RCS than a Su-35 clean :
Cheers .
BluewingsYou ‘re right DJ but we should not put “detection” and “jamming” in the same basket , only the former is the RWR ‘s job .
It is true that AESA and to a lesser extent PESA radars are more robust vs sidelobes jamming than older mechanical radars .
Everybody ‘s having the same problem : the enemy ‘s data fusion , AWACs and 3rd part targeting .
-First example : your RWR tells you that a big , powerful and rotating radar (AWAC) is at your 11 O ‘clock , 300km away . Even if you have a powerful EW suite , you may not have the needed output power to jam such pulse trains signals that far away . How are you going to hide if you ‘re not a true 5th aircraft ?
-Second example : your RWR tells you that for a micro second , an AESA radar (at your 11 O ‘clock , 110km away) painted you , then , nothing more from your RWR . 2 seconds later , your MAWS tells you that 2 missile flashes are detected at your 2 O ‘clock (!?) , 100km away . Then , it ‘s the other way around , radar painting at 2 O ‘clock and missile flashes at 11 O ‘clock .
You ‘ll better be able to handle those threats and your EW suite capable of very precise multithreat jamming .
-(find your own third example)
AWACs are a nightmare for enemy fighters . For example , if France was at war with Russia , I would happily loose 4 Rafale to shootdown ONE Russian AWAC .
Cheers .
BluewingsAh , ok .
Cheers .
Bluewingsmoon_light :
however 3rd data is completely undetectable
Not so , not so . It is detectable by AWACs , the problem is : who ‘s talking to who ?
Cheers .
Bluewingshopsalot :
If your bottom line is that RWRs always detect first because that is what you prefer to believe… then I suppose that is your right. Just don’t presume to lecture others on that basis.
I am not responding for Mercurius but you are most probably alone in this world to disagree on this matter . You can ‘t cheat physics . If one listen the whole X Band (or any Band) with a low enough threshold , not a single signal on this Band will be able to hide .
hopsalot , why do think everybody is trying to minimize its radio emissions ? Why most fighters try to get 3rd part data before to do anything else ? Why Fighters like F-22 , Rafale , Typhoon , Su-35 , F-35 , Pakfa , J-20 (?) rely primarely on passive sensors first ?
Because as soon as you start emiting , we can catch you , however “LPI” you are . We only need to listen to the right radar Band .
My original point, that one can not assume that a RWR will always detect a radar before the radar itself can detect its target stands.
No it doesn ‘t . As soon as you will accept this fact , easier it is going to be to carry on the discussion .
EPAWSS sounds like a very capable system . Good link , thanks 🙂
Cheers .
BluewingsI don ‘t know if the Falcon Edge can do passive ranging/targeting . I haven ‘t seen anything yet who proves the capability .
F-35 sure can but it ‘s not an operational fighter yet .
Cheers .
Bluewingsmoon_light :
2- is the information provided by RWR or ELINT system enough to get firing solution with only one aircraft available ( mean not by triangulation ) ,( against LPI radar this is even a bigger problem )
This has been debated to death and as far as we know , only 2 systems seems to be capable of passive ranging/passive targeting : Rafale ‘s Spectra and F-22 ‘s ALR-94 (Russian RWRs are still an unknown quantity for most of us) .
For Spectra , the info is presented by Thalès in a not very known pdf :
http://www.megafileupload.com/en/file/384302/dia2desetembro-EW-THALES2-PRINT-zip.html
(page 4 and 8)
Then , the capability has been demonstrated by the Rafale in a couple of occasions during exercises .
During our assessments, duelamos in sets of scenarios where BVR and WVR engage the Mirage 2000-5 (analyzed in more detail in Part 3 of this test), where we were able to confirm the SPECTRA EW combination with the handling characteristics and acquisition of MICA ER , which allowed us to catch the target from the EM / IR / Laser Threat Detection – Electromagnetic Threat Detection / Infrared / Laser – when the bubble of security around the Rafale was invaded and execute the launch of the missile over the shoulder – on top the shoulder, or the firing of a MICA against a target located at position six (behind the aircraft) without even changing the direction of flight of our hunting.
For ALR-94 , at Red Flag , the Raptor drivers said that they were able to detect and track Rafale RBE2 Pesa with RWR and they could have fired from BVR . While I have never read any paper demonstrating the capability , I take their word .
Some time ago , Blue Apple and I talked about it on Air-Defense (in french) and he explained to me how it is done thanks to advanced interferometry and very special captors placed on various part of the aircraft .
Anyway , if you use your RWR to fire a missile and if the opponent switches its radar off (for some reason) , you can ‘t provide to your missile mid course updates since your RWR has no more something to chew on . If the opponent doesn ‘t change course , the missile will find it just by inertial navigation (basket) but if the airplane turns , your missile is lost unless you light up your own radar to re-lock but this is not passive anymore .
Cheers .
BluewingsVery good starting post Mercurius , +1 .
Haavarla :
About LPI. Isn’t it possible to achieve this mode with Modern PESA radars as well?
Of course it is . Mirage 2000-5 ‘s radar (the RDY) is a LPI mechanical radar .
While Aesa offers the best LPI capability , the LPI capability has very little to do with active or passive electronic arrays in fact . It has more to do with power management and frequency shifting/hoping (which Aesa radars are very good at) .
Cheers .
BluewingsObligatory :
in 1994 a trial round scored a kill at a range of 162 nautical miles (300 km)
Cheers .
BluewingsAndraxxus ,
AFAIK , no aircraft from the Flanker family including the Su-35 is cleared to use the R-37 , none . It is reserved to the Mig-31BM . Then , it is designed to attack airliner size aircrafts and not a fighter because the missile ‘s end game agility is simply not good enough . I don ‘expect such missile to be a real threat to 4 or 4.5gen aircraft .
I agree that if we give Meteor/Mica to the Rafale and R-27/R-77 to the Su-35 , they both have similar ranged weapons . But something is telling me that I should give more credits to the European weapons as far as efficiency goes .
Secondly , Rafale flew at Mach 2 but is limited to Mach 1.8 to preserve engines lifetime . From Mach 1.5 to Mach 2 , the Rafale keeps accelerating so the 1.8 limitation is not a burden . When you say , I quote :
“ With equivalent 6 missile payload, Rafale will likely struggle to climb or accelerate or sustain a turn at anywhere above M1.5“
you are mistaking , clearly .
Anyway , it doesn ‘t really matter . You also said :
Irbis/R-37 (NO , R27/77)combination will outrange RBE-2/Meteor combination irrelevant of the miniature RCS differences on a two non-stealthy fighters.
This is HIGHLY debatable to say the least . “Miniature RCS difference” ? What is the Su-35 ‘s RCS ? Twice less than a Su-27M , thanks to the bit of work done by Sukhoi ? That gives us 10m square clean , 100 times bigger than Rafale ‘s 0.1m square .
I am not going to teach you that smaller your RCS is , easier it is for your own ECM/ECCMs to do the job . Also , the deceptive jamming can start later than if you fly a 10m square RCS aircraft which has an impact on discretion . You also need less output power for the same result .
Then you say :
As soon as RBE-2 enters STT it will have to give up LPI mode and focus on target to get vector data, and be detected to EW on Su-35
:rolleyes: First , you don ‘t need to “focus” to get vector data and secondly , the radar doesn ‘t have to give up LPI either . In fact , closer the target is , easier it is for the radar to use LPI simply because the output power of the train-pulses can be very weak and still get a clear echo .
Basicaly , who will see the other first and more importantly , who ‘s gonna be the first to fire with a close to decent probability of kill (pk) ?
We know that good deceptive jamming can divide the range where a lock is possible by 2 or more (depending on the capability of the ECMs) .
Add to that a low RCS and a good Aesa radar (and Spectra) and I bet that the first to leave the rail will be a Meteor .
Because if you think that a Su-35 with Irbis can fire at a Rafale at 100km , you are again mistaking .
Cheers .
BluewingsIn air to air , Rafale vs SU-35 is a very hard call …
In fact , it is a very very hard call … I ‘m not gonna debate about both fighters as we know them well enough I guess . In the end , it ‘s the weapon who does the killing even if it is the last cannon round . So , the real question is who ‘s the best survivor . Which plane has the better chance to survive the BVR engagement and the better chance to survive the WVR knight fight .
In BVR , I think the Sukhoi ‘s gonna have a hard time to score a kill , thanks to Rafale ‘s general awareness and defensive systems . Same difficulties for the Rafale to score a kill . But , the Su-35 Pilot has to keep in mind the IR Mica which is not easy to deal with .
WVR , the Rafale has to score real quick or it ‘s in trouble . By that , I mean that after few turns and verticals , the energy favors the Su-35 .
Anyway , both aircraft are deadly opponents .
Just my 2 cents …
Cheers .
BluewingsThiazi , I can only agree with what you say .
It ‘s not me who underestimate the F-35 , it ‘s other people who overestimate it .
heers .
Sign In
