Chief scientist told China's anti-stealth radar identify F-22 flying 450km away

[Brainsucker]

In this case ...Why china is wasting time and money on making stealth aircrafts !!

It just like sword and shield. Can your best sword destroy your best shield? If you can't, then why do you even need sword in a battle then? Don't you think that a shield alone is enough for you?

 

[Hellfire]

So, are you claiming that you know better than that Chinese Scientist?

Of course not. I am claiming exactly what the status of the RADARs today is. And yes, I do have a solid "scientific" background ..... so am technically a "scientist" too.

Remember, That Scientist talk in a Research Workshop event. It is not a propaganda news for worldwide audience consumption. And he's not a front lines grunt nor pilot. But a respectable Scientist from a CETC. And his audience at that workshop are not your average Joe or forum trolls like us. He talks to his fellow Chinese Scientists, or even with important figures from CCP and PLA. So are you suggest that that Scientist is bullshitting in front of his audience? His claim has been backup with proof from Research and Experiment, that the data are not available for both of us.

Do cite the data.

And it is not only that, he has multi billion dollars equipments for his research and experiment. If he just bullshitting, his company name, and his own credibility will be in jeopardized. Will he sacrifice his everything for just bullshitting in a Research Workshop?

What do you think is the funding status of US Armed Forces and Intelligence Acquisition?

I am sure he has a higher allocation!

Or, are you suggesting that the scientist is an idiot who don't know anything about stealth technology? When you, an outsider who don't even study about Stealth principle / technology know what "Luneburg" is.

Oh, I know nothing. But am certainly no 'idiot' like him, if that is your inference.

So, where CETC can get data about F-35 and F-22?

What data has been presented? Have you seen it?

Ask them yourself. They have more resource and capability more than you or me, civilians can imagine. They also have everything they need to send their scientists and their protectors to war torn Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, where F-22 and F-35 are operated without Luneburg.

So, is he right? Maybe. He can also be wrong, but he's not bullshitting when he talk at that podium.

So, you know my background now, is it?

My original posts remain as under:

If stealth can be 'detected' at 450 kms, that beats the detection range of most AWACS for a conventional aircraft. I hope you are able to comprehend what it means.


Shooting sh1t with confidence is one thing, but expecting others to not call it as sh1t, is a different ball game.

Had you claimed a range of 40 kms, I would have still grudgingly granted it to you - claiming 450, either you are too much of a fanboy to understand the incredulity of your claim or you are a typical troll which infests the PDF.

In today's capability as existent with all militaries, even 40 Kms to detect a stealth aircraft in clutter in air space (commercial and otherwise) is a joke.


Been hearing of Chinese claims since 2016!

Have you, by some scant chance, had the opportunity to sit in an AWACS? It shall be a great 'eye opener' for you.

Serbians used 1960s model Russian anti aircraft missile to defeat steqlth

Inaccurate summation of the incident. It was a combination of Intelligence, reading the egress routes post strike and lot of ingenuity and pure luck.

 

[LeGenD]

That CETC JY-27 is not the one that the Scientist Claim. It is CETC JY-27A. Also, the tech that the Scientist talk about is actually their newly invented quantum radar and Shadow Imagine Satellite. "Can" and "Effectively against" are two different things. That's why they still continue their research on "Anti Stealth detection system".

Thanks for the pointer.

CETC JY-27A is experimental work at present. Details in here:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...m-resistant-and-counter-stealth-quantum-radar

Quantum radar mechanics have its share of problems:

"While photons experience quantum entanglement, they also suffer from a related phenomenon known as quantum decoherence. At extended ranges, the link between the particles becomes less pronounced and they may break free entirely, eliminating any potential benefits from recording the movements of the shared streams."

Secondly, F-22A and F-35 variants are made to fly with lensberg devices even over contested environments such as Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan on a regular basis. VLO configuration flights will not be advertised and/or hinted in open-source platforms for any operation.

Either the scientist's statement is being misreported or the context of his revelation not clear.

 

[gambit]

@gambit can you please explain the graphs in the last two pics in OP? Ignore the Chinese, but they look like they should be standard 'equipotential' graphs, right? I can see they convey information about various angles of reflection, and distances. But what is the y axis and what are the units? Joules of energy reflected?

For starter, am on a 2-weeks vacation, so my responses will be slow.

Second, I do not speak Chinese so this thread is an excellent example of the dishonesty of the Chinese members of this forum. Why are there no Chinese members willing to illuminate the subject by translating their language? What are they afraid of? That someone may have relevant technical experience to explain and perhaps even debunk what is claimed.

I do not think that the charts are 'equipotential' but rather power output. On the last image from post no. 1, the image with an airplane, it is an illustration of low grazing angle. The image illustrate what is called 'multi-paths propagation'...

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...opagation-in-low-grazing-angle_fig2_284102877

The x-y chart seems to represents x=elevation of the radar and y=distance of the target.

Multi-path propagation is problematic in radar operations. It is when the seeking radar is forced to 'look' lower than optimum. The results are that the seeking radar and reflection signals are reflected (bounced) many times from the surface, be it land or water. The final result is that the seeking radar can be confused or even misled because the target (attacker) is flying too low. The attacker can be perceived to be at different altitudes -- higher or lower -- than it actually is.

When I was on the F-111, that is what F-111s from RAFs Upper Heyford and Lakenheath trained for -- low altitude penetration.

Again...Why are there no Chinese members willing to translate if they are so confident of what this Chinese scientist said about defeating 'stealth'?

Either the scientist's statement is being misreported or the context of his revelation not clear.

Ask yourself -- Why no Chinese members of this forum translated the original article?

1- They are technically ignorant.
2- They know that if they DELIBERATELY mistranslate, they will be caught. They cannot change the laws of physics and common sense.

All these pages, and not one Chinese members willing to be objective. That says something about them, ain't it?

 

[Brainsucker]

Thanks for the pointer.

CETC JY-27A is experimental work at present. Details in here:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...m-resistant-and-counter-stealth-quantum-radar

Quantum radar mechanics have its share of problems:

"While photons experience quantum entanglement, they also suffer from a related phenomenon known as quantum decoherence. At extended ranges, the link between the particles becomes less pronounced and they may break free entirely, eliminating any potential benefits from recording the movements of the shared streams."

Secondly, F-22A and F-35 variants are made to fly with lensberg devices even over contested environments such as Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan on a regular basis. VLO configuration flights will not be advertised and/or hinted in open-source platforms for any operation.

Either the scientist's statement is being misreported or the context of his revelation not clear.

Yes, I've read it.
For the F-22A and F-35, how do you sure that they fly with lensberg device in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan?

 

[LeGenD]

Yes, I've read it.
For the F-22A and F-35, how do you sure that they fly with lensberg device in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan?

Lot of pictures and reports on the web.

[1] http://www.chinatopix.com/articles/...ters-evade-detection-device-makes-visible.htm

[2] https://theaviationist.com/2018/01/...pan-about-to-launch-without-radar-reflectors/

"F-35s deployed abroad usually feature their typical four radar reflectors: to exaggerate their real RCS (Radar Cross Section) and negate the enemy the ability to collect any detail about their LO “signature”. As happened during the short mission to Estonia and then Bulgaria, carried out by the USAF F-35As involved in the type’s first overseas training deployment to Europe or when, on Aug. 30, 2017, four U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II joined two USAF B-1B Lancers for the JSF’s first show of force against North Korea: the F-35Bs flew with the radar reflectors, a sign they didn’t want their actual radar signature to be exposed to any intelligence gathering sensor in the area." - The Aviationist

Operators of F-22A and F-35 variants are UNLIKELY to utilize these aircraft in VLO configuration on a frequent basis, around the world. VLO configuration missions will not be advertised in the public domain [during the course of relevant EVENTS] regardless.

US have a fairly good idea of RADAR COMPOSITIONS and their SCANNING HORIZONS across the world anyways. I have access to an article in which Chinese long-range surveillance capabilities for the Pacific region were explained in detail, and their "radius of uncertainty" was also highlighted.

 

[jhungary]

@gambit can you please explain the graphs in the last two pics in OP? Ignore the Chinese, but they look like they should be standard 'equipotential' graphs, right? I can see they convey information about various angles of reflection, and distances. But what is the y axis and what are the units? Joules of energy reflected?

I read Chinese, they are nothing more than a "Presentation"

Talking about something called "Multiple Freedom" core theory

It said Millimeter Radar create interference and is the core problem for 3 typical situation (Did not explain the problem nor the situation)

Separate Bandwidth conform theory would increase coverage range.

Work with actual terrain to get the best estimate

Graph in the Left is about the Sperate Bandwidth. Graph in the right is a demonstrate on how the radar work with terrain.

Result

-Compare with 3rd generation radar, Millimetre Radar increase the ability of detection, and work against the "Clear Zero" stealth bring.

I read thru all the slide, and none of them detail how they can defeat a stealth, nor did it mentioned the core-parameter of what F-22 would be, in fact, all their wording contribute to "Estimation" and "Guess" and with what they reference F-22 capability is on this "Guess work" and "Estimation", it is unknown.

Hence, I would say, take this with grain of salt.

Ask yourself -- Why no Chinese members of this forum translated the original article?

1- They are technically ignorant.
2- They know that if they DELIBERATELY mistranslate, they will be caught. They cannot change the laws of physics and common sense.

All these pages, and not one Chinese members willing to be objective. That says something about them, ain't it?

Well, as you know, and many of the Chinese PDF poster know, I do read Chinese and Speak Chinese, I can tell you this, all the material they 'Present" does not include anything (reasons, ways, how) to detect stealth (or F-22 as they claim) but rather, "If I could do something, something, I can detect F-22 at XX range" (The last bit is actually written in one of the presentation.

As I said before, if the Chinese really does SPECIFICALLY capable of targeting F-22, they would shut up about it and not going to advertise they have the capability.

 

[gambit]

I read Chinese, they are nothing more than a "Presentation"

Guess that is why the Chinese fled this thread.

 

[52051]

I read Chinese, they are nothing more than a "Presentation"

LOL, usually I don't reply a retarded no-lifer with endless time at hand such as you.

OK, I waste some of my time here: Of cause it is a PPT and why you think they will give any detail of their tech in an unclassified conference? is that your reasoning to verifying the claim you made? Then following your logic, I don't believe any of the US "advanced weapon techs" since they don't show me any of the tech details, it is all hype thats why the US army with their bestest tech get beaten by cavemen wielding AK-47s

 

[TruthTheOnlyDefense]

Chinese scientist proving how stupid they are by opening their mouths LOL, soon the Chinese will be claiming that they can detect a stealth aircraft from 2000ks away, just like they called they built an underwater train that can travel at Mach 7.

 

[jhungary]

LOL, usually I don't reply a retarded no-lifer with endless time at hand such as you.

OK, I waste some of my time here: Of cause it is a PPT and why you think they will give any detail of their tech in an unclassified conference? is that your reasoning to verifying the claim you made? Then following your logic, I don't believe any of the US "advanced weapon techs" since they don't show me any of the tech details, it is all hype thats why the US army with their bestest tech get beaten by cavemen wielding AK-47s

Yes, Please don't believe any advance US tech.

Chinese scientist proving how stupid they are by opening their mouths LOL, soon the Chinese will be claiming that they can detect a stealth aircraft from 2000ks away, just like they called they built an underwater train that can travel at Mach 7.

They actually did, because they said XXX (which is an unspecified amount of range) so potentially, they are already claiming they can detect F-22 (Noticed that was singled out) in any range, hell, they probably can detect it before they got into air, judging by the presentation.

 

[TruthTheOnlyDefense]

Yes, Please don't believe any advance US tech.



They actually did, because they said XXX (which is an unspecified amount of range) so potentially, they are already claiming they can detect F-22 (Noticed that was singled out) in any range, hell, they probably can detect it before they got into air, judging by the presentation.

They probably detected it when I was just a thought in the developer's mind.

 

[Sanchez]

Chinese scientist proving how stupid they are by opening their mouths LOL, soon the Chinese will be claiming that they can detect a stealth aircraft from 2000ks away, just like they called they built an underwater train that can travel at Mach 7.

Isn't the field beyond your touch as milk powder producer or miners? Do Aussie even have something close to engineering science, boy?

Have Aussies made anything big in S&T?

 

[TruthTheOnlyDefense]

Isn't the field beyond your touch as milk powder producer or miners? Do Aussie even have something close to engineering science, boy?

Have Aussies made anything big in S&T?

We are doing quite well for a poor agricultural nation, but thanks for asking.

 

[BringHarmony]

During a talk holding in a research workshop, the chief scientist of the China's largest radar group, CETC, Dr Wu Jianqi, told the audience that China's anti-stealth radar is the world most advanced anti-stealth radar.

It solved all the tech difficulties that other countries failed to solve and the 4th generation anti-stealth radar CETC developed, their radar, is the world's only anti-stealth radar that can not only spot but also track and guide fire-control radar to attack enemy stealth aircrafts in a range of over 500 km.

During the talk, he give an example that their last generation anti-stealth radar track F-22 fighters in East Asia flying 450 km away.

And he told the audience China airforce now cover the entire China coastline with such highly advanced anti-stealth radar, such that US stealth fighters will be meaningless.

Just like I said it before, China's radar tech is likely leave the US in the dust.

What I learnt from purchasing potatoes is that you don't trust the farmer about their quality of potatoes. But then, this is China. Here if the Party says its good potatoes, its good potatoes. Don't mind if it is a goat.

We are doing quite well for a poor agricultural nation, but thanks for asking.

Dont bother about this guy, for him Canada and Australia are one and the same country. That shows how well equipped these young pioneer minds are. Thats how they train them.