Spudman , do you have any idea on how long it takes to write a software for a system like EODAS ?
Just the “false alarm rate” coupled to real time multiple tracking with multiple sensors is simply enormous ! 😮
Imagine : EODAS detects 31 IR sources all around the aircraft at up to 50km , after filtering priorities , it tracks 13 of them (adverse aircraft , inbound missiles , etc) . Suddently , it detects 2 SAM launches , one in the front , one in the rear . The F-35 is manoeuvring , jamming , launching flares/chaffs while the various EODAS sensors (working together) must keep an eye on pretty much everything around unless the system prioritize the SAMs .
The software must be very advanced to do that , very advanced .
The amount of work is astonishing .

Cheers .

Thank you djcross , I got it . 🙂

But it doesn ‘t answer the question : can the system mimic any adverse radar ?
Obviously , the answer is no . No system on Earth can do that and none ever will .
Most of the time you underestimate or overestimate the adverse technology . You rarely got it right . A Viper can ‘t “mimic” a Su-30 , a M2000 can ‘t “mimic” a Fulcrum , etc . They can try to but the results must be taken with a CISTERN of salt .
We should never forget that exercises like Red flag , Nato Tigers , etc , are made to train the various participants into a kind of NATO workframe : how to work with each other .
The “adverse systems” used for such exercises are there to provide a “threat bubble” for the participants : a danger zone .
In real war , they will find different “danger zones” but they will know how to work with each other to counter the threats .

Cheers .

You first. The Su-30MKK does not use a Zhuk-AE or any other AESA radar.

Ah , Ok . 😮 Not fielded yet ?

Cheers .

Oh , and by the way , how this can be simulated ? :

– six F-16 simulate 10 agressors Su-30MKK with R-27ER/ET

Since when the F-16 uses the Phazotron Zhuk-AE AESA radar ?? 😀

Cheers .

Tu22m , you let yourself go and you end-up going too far . 🙂

I don ‘t wanna quote multiple sentences but you WANT to forget that onboard systems and real sensor fusion is more or less equal to carrying pods with pilot workload . It is wrong my friend ! And you know it ! 😉

Then , yes the F-35 brings a lot of novelties (which is not surprising) and you seem to look down on them (the novelties) just for the sake of the 4.5 gen fighters .
I tell you what the problems is with the F-35 : it ‘s a too small airplane with only one engine . Change that and you ‘ve got a winner .

Cheers .

@ Mildave ,

With all due respect , some of what you write doesn ‘t hold water .
Most of what you say on stealth is , well … wrong . Things like :

An F-22 radiating will be far less “stealthy” than an F-15 that doesn’t.

False .
or :

That can be said of the B-2 due to the inherent proprieties of the flying wing,

False . A flying wing has no fuselage , no tail , so no “angles” to speak off to avoid radar spikes . This has nothing to do with what radar bands the enemy is using .
Hiding from 2 or 3 carefuly chosen bands is the RAM ‘s job , mostly . You can design your RAM to “absorb” whatever band you want (more or less) .
So , the sentence :

it can be said in a far lesser extent to the F-22… when it comes to the F-35, it should be taken with a bucket of salt.

is also wrong .
But this is correct : 🙂

In order to improve NEZ of its missiles the stealth aircraft will have to launch much closer than its “first look, first shot” should allow it to do, meaning both aircraft will be able to use their ESM/ECM to their fullest, shortening even further the distances at which Pk will be significant

At what range a clean F-35 is detectable by a good AESA radar ?
(Huge and hot debate :D)
Let ‘s say 30km (?) , ok ? (maybe it ‘s more , maybe it ‘s less)
At what range a clean J-20 is detectable by a good AESA radar ?
(same hot debate)
Let ‘s say 30km (?), ok ?
Do you see where I ‘m going ? 😉
WVR combat
If we can fool electromagnetic waves , human eyeballs MkI will dictate the fight as they always did . Surely , IR systems will also have their word to say .

Cheers .

djcross :

It shows a radar image of a mixture of tanks, APCs and trucks of Warsaw Pact, NATO and civilian origin at Aberdeen Proving Grounds. In just a few seconds, the test suite correctly identified the vehicles by type/model and foe/friend/neutral.

What ?! 😮 Prove it , I demande a link .
To do that , one needs a decametric or centimetric resolution and yet , the error margin would still be … very high .
You are telling me than from altitude , the system can tell you if you ‘re looking at an Abrams or at a Challenger or at a Leclerc or at a T-80 !?? :confused:

Even the formidable long range TV on Rafale would struggle to do that at more than 15-20km ! It is possible because THE PILOT is trained to recognize various targets ‘s shapes but to do that by software seems to me impossible at this stage . Prove me wrong .

You also said :

But let’s forget about Gen 4’s inability to discriminate decoys and think of what it takes to locate and identify your adversary’s kit when it is hidden under multi-spectral, anti-IR, anti-radar camouflage netting. You can also find sophisticated netting with a Google search. What clues does your RBE-2/ Captor-E or OSF/Pirate/Damocles or Spectra/DASS use to find the netting and determine what is under it? F-35 has an answer, Gen 4 jets do not.

What ??:confused:
Anything hidden under such netting would be invisible unless the F-35 (or whatever aircraft) has some kind of X-Ray sensor . Period .
Even the Onera Sethi pod couldn ‘t do it .

Cheers .

Yeah , DDM-NG is the poor man ‘s EODAS but hey , check the cost ! 😎 😉

Cheers .