What's new

China’s claim it has ‘quantum’ radar may leave $17 billion F-35 naked

Nan Yang

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 1, 2010
Messages
5,269
Reaction score
1
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
China’s claim it has ‘quantum’ radar may leave $17 billion F-35 naked

CHINA claims it has a radical new ‘quantum’ radar capable of detecting stealth fighters at great distances. Does this mean our ultra-expensive new F-35 is obsolete, even before we get it?

The RAAF’s first F-35’s will be making their debut Australian appearance at the Avalon air show this week. It’s not a combat-capable aircraft, yet, though the first partially operational US squadron of the type was deployed to Japan earlier this year.

But Beijing state media has boasted its scientists have successfully tested a new type of radar capable of defeating stealth technology at ranges out to 100km.

With a single stroke, such a capability would render the $US1 trillion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program obsolete. This includes Australia’s $17 billion investment in some 72 examples of the controversial aircraft.

Existing radars cast beams of radio waves into the sky, with sensors detecting reflections from aircraft or ships. The whole point of stealth technology is to minimise such reflections.

But what if the beam was something other than a radio wave?

What if Albert Einstein’s mysterious “spooky action at a distance” could be harnessed?

Billions of dollars and decades of research invested in developing radio-absorbing materials and airframes optimised towards reflecting such waves away from a receiver would be made meaningless overnight.

For the first time, early warning could be given of an approaching stealth aircraft.


This would give defenders time to prepare and counter-attack.

So is it even possible?

QUANTUM QUANDARY

The new sensor technology uses concepts on the edge of our scientific understanding.

And a Chinese state-owned technology group late last year declared it had mastered it.

The new technology had “important military application values” because it could identify aircraft and ships “invisible” to conventional radar systems, a press statement read.

Understanding that technology exposes its full potential.

A photon is a particle with wavelike properties that carries energy without mass. We usually hear of it in terms of light, but it is the basis of all electromagnetic radiation.

Where radar sends out a beam of photons as radio waves, quantum radar uses entangled photons.

Put simply, entangled photons are two separate photons that share a deep quantum link. The upshot is the photons mirror each other’s behaviour when one of them is influenced in some way.

DELVE DEEPER: Wargames explore a war with China

In terms of radar, a crystal can be used to ‘split’ such entangled photons and cast one into the sky.

For a time at least, the twin photons retain their ‘spooky’ link — mirroring the same responses to the environment the other encounters.

It’s a quirk of quantum physics which strained the understanding of Albert Einstein when he grappled with the idea in the 1930s.

Quantum radar would send out bursts of photons while retaining their ‘pairs’. The changes in behaviour of the retained photon would then reveal what’s happening to the photon in the beam.

Ultimately, the point is the same: the entangled photons bounce back to a sensor which can then compute course, speed and size.

But the use of tangled photons has a second major benefit over radio waves.

It’s not likely to be jammed.
UNBREAKABLE LOCK

Apart from absorbing or reflecting away its radio beams, conventional radar can also be jammed by transmitting ‘white noise’ on the same frequencies.

This isn’t possible with entangled photons.

While the photons are separated by their beam, they retain their quantum link.

Attempting to break that link would be a giveaway. And any attempt to distort the behaviour of one of the pair would be equally noticeable.

The same applies to advanced materials.

Where modern composites can ‘trap’ radio waves within their molecular structure, whatever happens to an entangled photon would be replicated — and measured — in its paired mate back at the radar site.

And different materials affect protons in different ways.

Because of this, analysts say quantum radar could ultimately be capable of determining what an aircraft is made of — or even carrying.

At one level this would eliminate the effectiveness of decoys. At another, it could identify which aircraft — or missile — is carrying nuclear warheads.

And, unlike existing radar, their transmissions would not be detectable.

Any stealth aircraft would not know it had been ‘seen’.
STEALTH SHOT-DOWN?

The implications of such quantum radar are enormous.

If true, it could negate the effectiveness of the single aircraft in which all the West’s defence hopes lay — the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

This controversial aircraft is 10 years overdue and billions of dollars over budget.

And this is all due to its complete reliance on an ability to fly unseen.

What if it was visible?

It carriers fewer weapons, flies slower and is less manoeuvrable than its predecessors. But all this was justified on the basis that its design was optimised to be invisible to radar.

Take that invisibility away and the F-35 looks much less capable than its counterparts.
REALITY CHECK

Despite the ominous sounding properties of this unbeatable radar, the foibles of quantum mechanics make the actual exploitation of such technology incredibly difficult.

Photon pairs degrade. The longer one photon remains in the outside environment, the more stress is placed on the link with its partner. It’s called quantum decoherence.

This has implications for a quantum radar’s maximum range: keeping the photons paired for the time it takes one to cover 100km represents an enormous technical challenge.

Maker of the F-35 Lockheed Martin has itself been attempting to develop the new technology over the past decade. Its progress remains unreported.

Beijing media asserts successful tests of China Electronics Technology Group Corporation (CETC) quantum radar has produced results “500 per cent” better than Western examples.

The truth of this is likely to remain unknown for some considerable time, given the defence and corporate secrecy attached to such projects.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/i...d/news-story/207ac01ff3107d21a9f36e54b6f0fbab
 
. .
CHINA claims it has a radical new ‘quantum’ radar capable of detecting stealth fighters at great distances. Does this mean our ultra-expensive new F-35 is obsolete, even before we get it?

The RAAF’s first F-35’s will be making their debut Australian appearance at the Avalon air show this week. It’s not a combat-capable aircraft, yet, though the first partially operational US squadron of the type was deployed to Japan earlier this year.

But Beijing state media has boasted its scientists have successfully tested a new type of radar capable of defeating stealth technology at ranges out to 100km.

With a single stroke, such a capability would render the $US1 trillion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program obsolete. This includes Australia’s $17 billion investment in some 72 examples of the controversial aircraft.

Existing radars cast beams of radio waves into the sky, with sensors detecting reflections from aircraft or ships. The whole point of stealth technology is to minimise such reflections.

But what if the beam was something other than a radio wave?

What if Albert Einstein’s mysterious “spooky action at a distance” could be harnessed?

Billions of dollars and decades of research invested in developing radio-absorbing materials and airframes optimised towards reflecting such waves away from a receiver would be made meaningless overnight.

For the first time, early warning could be given of an approaching stealth aircraft.


This would give defenders time to prepare and counter-attack.

So is it even possible?

QUANTUM QUANDARY

The new sensor technology uses concepts on the edge of our scientific understanding.

And a Chinese state-owned technology group late last year declared it had mastered it.

The new technology had “important military application values” because it could identify aircraft and ships “invisible” to conventional radar systems, a press statement read.

Understanding that technology exposes its full potential.

A photon is a particle with wavelike properties that carries energy without mass. We usually hear of it in terms of light, but it is the basis of all electromagnetic radiation.

Where radar sends out a beam of photons as radio waves, quantum radar uses entangled photons.

Put simply, entangled photons are two separate photons that share a deep quantum link. The upshot is the photons mirror each other’s behaviour when one of them is influenced in some way.

DELVE DEEPER: Wargames explore a war with China

In terms of radar, a crystal can be used to ‘split’ such entangled photons and cast one into the sky.

For a time at least, the twin photons retain their ‘spooky’ link — mirroring the same responses to the environment the other encounters.

It’s a quirk of quantum physics which strained the understanding of Albert Einstein when he grappled with the idea in the 1930s.

Quantum radar would send out bursts of photons while retaining their ‘pairs’. The changes in behaviour of the retained photon would then reveal what’s happening to the photon in the beam.

Ultimately, the point is the same: the entangled photons bounce back to a sensor which can then compute course, speed and size.

But the use of tangled photons has a second major benefit over radio waves.

It’s not likely to be jammed.


UNBREAKABLE LOCK

Apart from absorbing or reflecting away its radio beams, conventional radar can also be jammed by transmitting ‘white noise’ on the same frequencies.

This isn’t possible with entangled photons.

While the photons are separated by their beam, they retain their quantum link.

Attempting to break that link would be a giveaway. And any attempt to distort the behaviour of one of the pair would be equally noticeable.

The same applies to advanced materials.

Where modern composites can ‘trap’ radio waves within their molecular structure, whatever happens to an entangled photon would be replicated — and measured — in its paired mate back at the radar site.

HYPOTHETICAL: Can Australia put up a fight?

And different materials affect protons in different ways.

Because of this, analysts say quantum radar could ultimately be capable of determining what an aircraft is made of — or even carrying.

At one level this would eliminate the effectiveness of decoys. At another, it could identify which aircraft — or missile — is carrying nuclear warheads.

And, unlike existing radar, their transmissions would not be detectable.

Any stealth aircraft would not know it had been ‘seen’.

STEALTH SHOT-DOWN?

The implications of such quantum radar are enormous.

If true, it could negate the effectiveness of the single aircraft in which all the West’s defence hopes lay — the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

This controversial aircraft is 10 years overdue and billions of dollars over budget.

And this is all due to its complete reliance on an ability to fly unseen.

What if it was visible?

It carriers fewer weapons, flies slower and is less manoeuvrable than its predecessors. But all this was justified on the basis that its design was optimised to be invisible to radar.

Take that invisibility away and the F-35 looks much less capable than its counterparts.

REALITY CHECK

Despite the ominous sounding properties of this unbeatable radar, the foibles of quantum mechanics make the actual exploitation of such technology incredibly difficult.

Photon pairs degrade. The longer one photon remains in the outside environment, the more stress is placed on the link with its partner. It’s called quantum decoherence.

This has implications for a quantum radar’s maximum range: keeping the photons paired for the time it takes one to cover 100km represents an enormous technical challenge.

Maker of the F-35 Lockheed Martin has itself been attempting to develop the new technology over the past decade. Its progress remains unreported.

Beijing media asserts successful tests of China Electronics Technology Group Corporation (CETC) quantum radar has produced results “500 per cent” better than Western examples.

The truth of this is likely to remain unknown for some considerable time, given the defence and corporate secrecy attached to such projects.
 
.
They made it years ago. They detected two f-22s using quantum radar.China has everything to counter stealth technology.
 
.
When it comes to next-generation defence technologies, all the actually useful information is classified.

The stuff we hear here, is only what they feel comfortable in releasing to the public domain.

The only way to know for sure is to actually see it being used during wartime.
 
.
The US made F 117 is more stealthier than F 35 but the dam thing was shot down by Serbians in the war so F 35 is more of a strategy than a stealth fighter.
 
. .
This kind of much touted story about such technology marvel being conquered by China is impossible, sounds more like a sci-fi, even the world's sole superpower and technological leader has yet mastered it... then how can be possible the Chinese has been achieving it??? Just impossible!

Following public statement by the USAF General and Chief of Staff (posted in other thread) should convince readers of such impossibility.

"At a recent Center for Strategic and International Studies conference, US Air Force General and Chief of Staff David L. Goldfein laid out how the US would use F-35s to fight against high-end threats like China's J-31 or J-20 — and he made it clear that the F-35 could dominate."

Be rest assured nothing beat the stealthiness of F-35... eat well sleep tight, the Chinese is definitely not a threat, and won't possess such capability either within near decades.

Pssst, don't want to see the unnecessary ill-feel among the F-35 adopters. Let them enjoy their feeling of superiority and dominance! :p: (don't want to hurt Abe and his nationalistic friends either)
 
.
you heard that @gambit @Hamartia Antidote @James Jaevid murica is doomed!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah...These guys have the simple minds that if is workable in the lab under tightly controlled conditions, it will be field deployable next yr combat stress tested. :rolleyes:

The US made F 117 is more stealthier than F 35 but the dam thing was shot down by Serbians...
Yeah...Only one. In the mean time, the larger B-2s were flying from CONUS and dropped bombs and the Serbs could do nothing. :lol:
 
.
Yeah...Only one. In the mean time, the larger B-2s were flying from CONUS and dropped bombs and the Serbs could do nothing. :lol:
B2 was based on whose tech and who has designed F-117 and F35. Serbs never had the missile reach to shoot down B-2 at the altitude but Russians did that is why U2 and B2 are never used over Russia but SR71 was used. Here we are talking about Chinese they are better than Serbs with all the purchased Russian Tech and hacked US tech plus their own development.
 
.
B2 was based on whose tech and who has designed F-117 and F35. Serbs never had the missile reach to shoot down B-2 at the altitude but Russians did that is why U2 and B2 are never used over Russia but SR71 was used. Here we are talking about Chinese they are better than Serbs with all the purchased Russian Tech and hacked US tech plus their own development.
The F-117 continued to fly combat missions after that single F-117 loss. If whatever Zoltan Dani did worked so well, why did the US lost only two fighters, one F-16 and F-117 ?

NATO flew over 30,000 combat sorties. Lost only two. That is not an air defense combat record to boast about.
 
. .
They detected he F-22s because the F-22s had Luneberg lens attached to its belly :lol:
When I was active duty and stationed at RAF Upper Heyford, sometimes we flew EW provocative missions against friendly radar stations. There were many flight profiles and each was designed to gauge many things regarding air defense, from human responses to specific radar freqs.

It is known that an air defense station have different radars operating at different freqs designed to provide information at different levels of alertness. High powered long wavelengths with periodic cycling means volume search. On the other hand, high chirps, complex pulses, and short wavelengths that came out of nowhere means focused tracking and even weapons targeting radars.

Usually, if my radar warning receiver (RWR) detect a faint signal at 100 km, it means at 90 km I should be visible on the volume search scanner. So at this point, I should expect to be scanned by high chirps of complex pulses of weapons tracking and targeting freqs. But if my RWR does not indicate anything of those complex pulses until I am nearly %40 of penetration of this radar net, that indicate I facing a shrewd air defense commander. In other words, human behavior.

An inexperienced crew lead by an inexperienced commander will turn on the radar's complex signals the moment the volume search radar detects 'something'. An experienced, or at least a wise commander, will wait until the intruder is well within the volume search region before he turns on his weapons tracking/targeting freqs. We did this against allied as well as against Soviets. We know we are inside their net. They know we want what they have but they cannot deny US what we want because their orders expects them to react to intrusions.

Just like how telegraph operators can 'read' and 'know' other operators by the rhythms of the pulses, knowing how a particular air defense region will respond contribute to how we plan to attack that air defense region. The clueless people on this forum have no idea on why we fly and do things. And when war comes, they were shocked at how swiftly they were defeated -- or bypassed.
 
.
The F-117 continued to fly combat missions after that single F-117 loss. If whatever Zoltan Dani did worked so well, why did the US lost only two fighters, one F-16 and F-117 ?

NATO flew over 30,000 combat sorties. Lost only two. That is not an air defense combat record to boast about.
When a missile lock on to a stealth and makes an interception that is something to talk about. I am not boasting about the kill it was Russians, I have nothing to do with it but just adding reference that it can be done. In regards to China they can bring down F 35. Just try flying one over Beijing and you will get your answer lol
 
. .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom