agreed long range cruise missiles like kh series or yakhont are better to 300km offshore ,quite a long way. ….
but howabout combining stealth with ground effect flying ,like stealth flying boat.

much faster then this.

Can you provide the reference for the data on this “ghost” missile? Interestingly 2.3tn is the mass of a 9M83 missile.

ah ? it around 3600 kg and antibalistic with big 150kg warhead.part of s-300V.
might be tough as i know some testing is frozen for a while but it will have lifting surfaces that are bend and cover booster on mid section ,then open and look like on buk-m2 9M317. might be bent in gaps in outed body tail connection bars and booster.

What happens to a ‘beam’ of RF energy as it gets further from its source?

yes it spreads wider and loses some energy in atmosphere and its a perfect signal for aircraft location thanks to several things about newest s-400,and some of its multi-channel passive onboard detectors.
thats why i dont understand people making claim about pencil beams being good…you just gave your perfect position away ,ofcourse for 60s 70s radars its ok ,but pesas can also focus and burn trough at great distances.
also passive detectors like kolchuga and vera will get radiation emmited on ground and site will know its jammed and compare it from signal it got of vera (it works at higher bands) and get your position like i said.

Also second point – how he going to confuse a s-300 site with track via missile or even -seeker aided guidence?
the missile geting update from reflected beams of aircraft and giving position to sam-site.
also a nice way to compute jamming signal source position.
jam all missiles too?
1 missile ,2 coming, perhaps more? when will you detect them and jam them efectivly? 😮
survailance radars can get good enough location now ,jam them too? active radar missiles also?
oh man you i a lot of trouble…:diablo:

No, in fact it’s very well suited and more important for non-stealth aircraft.
So, for a radar to steady illuminate and therefore track a target (required to fire), the radar (both, ground and airborne) must emit a signal and wait for target’s reflex in a passive portion of scanning. So, the returning signal is very much weaker than sent one, because it must travel two ways (to target and back).
Consequently, target’s RWR is able to “see” emitting radar at ROUGHLY double the range of that radar’s detecting range, because it doesn’t have to wait for the beam to return.
So, having good RWR suite is very much of an advantage, because it allows a potential target to “see and hear” before it gets threatened and plan its next action, accordingly.

Cheers, Cola

ok, one last quote i think you got confused or its me ,but on 2 fronts you lose -again,
first is how much GAIN or sensitivity your few centimethers across RWR , which is an antenna have?
compare it to several mether squared of ground based antena?_;)

especialy with sidelobe tracking where outer boundary of radar beam is just touching you from 1 side to another in a sweep()_?
with radar shuting down its beam to prevent illuminating whole plane while switching sides?
and also power available to ampplify the weak signal does you airfighter have available ,and processing powere available ,and number of operators you have onboard???
starting to get picture? 😎

Well, spectra in the case of the Rafale can not only detect emmitters with less than 1° accuracy, but it can jam the emmitter with a pencil beam thanks to it’s AESA jammers.

Nic

its nice how that pencil beam is going to jam a 4 mether square antena of pesa guidance radar…:D
actually i think its a good comparison just how innefective it is ,ofcource 60s ,70s ,sam systems it does work, most of time.
and emmiters just might be chaff and decoy nearby that radar operator has decided to illuminate…

In reality, it would have been convoy after convoy, as something like 100 000 tonnes of supplies would have been needed by NATO forces every day. .

from where? north amerika doesnt exist ,anymore….:diablo:

so ,you have agreed with me.
heres some example of forward basing at franz jozef land icefield airport with no infrastructure,and landed and take off and rearm ,refuel ,thanks to aircraft in the background 😉 ,or ship in summer. functioning good in harsh cold weather.

that is ok as you say but those are main resuply and repair bases ,there are lot of forward airfiels usable by rough field operating aircraft mig-31.even ice bergs fields are drawn as legitimate airworth bases at arctic sea. not that you would keep you base so far out forward but this main ones likes monchegorsk a bit held back ,and thats why low level penetration was so terible for airdefence units when they realised their radars cant find them untill they got too close.thats the reason for air interceptor with big and good look- down radar.