F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Select only what you wish to quote and only quote that at a time.
It will "chop up" the post and let you counter each point.
Also watch for open quote boxes the site will 'fix' your BB code creating a boxes in boxes. By adding /quote boxes at the end.
Jura The idiot
General
just to finish reading, the new inside
#6470 Brumby, Today at 6:48 AM
is
"Below is another representation from an article of Aviation Week which shows range detection using X-band. The results are the same. For VLO planes like the F-35 or F-22, detection is below 50 kms. It should be noted that the Russians in their claim over the SU-35 radar uses a pd of 50 %. Using western standard of 80-90%, that range will be worst. A 50 % pd cannot establish a track but this point is not generally understood or intentionally ignored."
and related charts are:
#6469 Brumby, Today at 6:40 AM
#6470 Brumby, Today at 6:48 AM
is
"Below is another representation from an article of Aviation Week which shows range detection using X-band. The results are the same. For VLO planes like the F-35 or F-22, detection is below 50 kms. It should be noted that the Russians in their claim over the SU-35 radar uses a pd of 50 %. Using western standard of 80-90%, that range will be worst. A 50 % pd cannot establish a track but this point is not generally understood or intentionally ignored."
and related charts are:
#6469 Brumby, Today at 6:40 AM
Jura The idiot
General
here's my reaction right after I've heard of a possibility of Turkey getting S-400:
Jul 19, 2017
Jul 19, 2017
I mean for Internet warriors it'd be cool to know 'kill ratios' LOL
Jura The idiot
General
Today at 6:40 AM
Measuring Stealth Technology's Performance
Jun 28, 2016
(behind paywall)
?
charts from
Measuring Stealth Technology's Performance
Jun 28, 2016
(behind paywall)
?
I can't quote properly box of boxes.
So excuse me in advance if i miss something.
1, radar cross section depends on wavelength.
L band isn't a silver bullet(it doesn't allow engagement on its own), but "marble" return won't work anymore.
When not on its own - it works. For example, when engagement is done by a missile with an active seaker(if seaker is going to search in the right place). Or when L band track is used to que X band engagement radar on target, to search in a narrow sector.
2, numbers for S-400 radar are appliable only for generic airspace observation mode. And they are for illustrative purposes only(if anything, because f-35 and f-22 ratio doesn't change at all between two pics)
Engagement can be performed much further if target is tracked by other radar(including L), because, again, narrow sector scan.
3, higher sensitivity(50/80-90) matters when there are false objects to see, i.e. there is a significant signal interference. Original talk, as you've just quoted, was not about whenever s-400 can or not engage f-35, it was about necessity of ew support for f-35 force.
4, 50km range woupd be a signal what heavy AA system is almost pointless waste of money, for it can't even stop glide bombs from being used.
Yet there is no apparent push to scrap s-300/400 family of systems.
So excuse me in advance if i miss something.
1, radar cross section depends on wavelength.
L band isn't a silver bullet(it doesn't allow engagement on its own), but "marble" return won't work anymore.
When not on its own - it works. For example, when engagement is done by a missile with an active seaker(if seaker is going to search in the right place). Or when L band track is used to que X band engagement radar on target, to search in a narrow sector.
2, numbers for S-400 radar are appliable only for generic airspace observation mode. And they are for illustrative purposes only(if anything, because f-35 and f-22 ratio doesn't change at all between two pics)
Engagement can be performed much further if target is tracked by other radar(including L), because, again, narrow sector scan.
3, higher sensitivity(50/80-90) matters when there are false objects to see, i.e. there is a significant signal interference. Original talk, as you've just quoted, was not about whenever s-400 can or not engage f-35, it was about necessity of ew support for f-35 force.
4, 50km range woupd be a signal what heavy AA system is almost pointless waste of money, for it can't even stop glide bombs from being used.
Yet there is no apparent push to scrap s-300/400 family of systems.
Jura The idiot
General
oh thanks anyway LOL
inside
02.15.2019
Story by
you linked
:
"... a brand new F-35A pilot, seven or eight flights out of training ...
The young pilot then “killed” the enemy aircraft and had three more kills in the hour-long mission."
what's the number of the young pilot's missiles?
I'm guessing ZERO to score FOUR kills for the Pentagon to kid itself
Jura The idiot
General
LOL but I was just thinking about that
02.15.2019
Story by
and I would've hoped it'd been concocted for PR reasons, and it hadn't meant to create an illusion for F-35 pilots of them being impervious in their aircraft