Chinese missile could shift Pacific power balance

[gambit]

At least he is no "traitor" as he is proud to show everyone who he is, not like some self-hating "fakers" feeling damn small once his white man mask is off. am i right?

He is proud that he admit to everyone he is a coward and a hypocrite? Now that is refreshingly honest for a commie. Am shocked. Honesty do not come easy to commies.

 

[below_freezing]

I am a mechanical engineer?

You know who designs these missiles and planes?

Engineers

Real engineers, the ones who actually went to university not "army engineers" who are not allowed to design anything

now the name calling and insults begin. since americans have a 3 step denial process:

1.) irrelevant information 2.) denying reality 3.) insults

 

[chauism]

Yeah...Just as I thought...You cannot even understand the wiki source that YOU brought on. Get some crayons and entertain yourself.

Just as I thought, you have no clue what a true bi-static configuration is.

Give you a hint. If two aircrafts are heading towards each other, and one fires a semi-active missile, and both aircraft do not change their directions. During the whole flight of SARH missile, it is in a pseudo-monostatic condition rather than bi-static.

 

[gambit]

Just as I thought, you have no clue what a true bi-static configuration is.

Give you a hint. If two aircrafts are heading towards each other, and one fires a semi-active missile, and both aircraft do not change their directions. During the whole flight of SARH missile, it is in a pseudo-monostatic condition rather than bi-static.

I will educate you instead of giving you any 'hint'.

When a system is considered to be 'pseudo mono-static' the system is referring to the physical location angle between the antennas, NOT data processing. A body reflect and if there any receiver in the area, no matter its proximity to the transmitter, it will pick up target echoes. That make it a bi-static triangle.

 

[chauism]

I will educate you instead of giving you any 'hint'.

When a system is considered to be 'pseudo mono-static' the system is referring to the physical location angle between the antennas, NOT data processing. A body reflect and if there any receiver in the area, no matter its proximity to the transmitter, it will pick up target echoes. That make it a bi-static triangle.

In my scenario the angle is 0 between the transmitter, receiver and the target, which make it pseudo monostatic.

I guess I really do have to draw a picture for you to understand then.

Enough with you.....

 

[gambit]

In my scenario the angle is 0 between the transmitter, reciever and the target, which make it pseudo monostatic.

I guess I have to draw a picture for you to understand then.

We are talking about DATA PROCESSING, not physical locations. In an air-air scenario with a lock on after launch semi active radar homing missile, we have what is called a 'receiver centered' bi-static data processing situation. If we are watching a location for any movement using physically distinct antennas, then we have a 'transmitter centered' bi-static data processing situation. If we have an air-air scenario with a lock before launch semi active radar homing missile, then we have a 'cosite' bi-static data processing situation.

Data processing. Not physical locations.

 

[chauism]

We are talking about DATA PROCESSING, not physical locations. In an air-air scenario with a lock on after launch semi active radar homing missile, we have what is called a 'receiver centered' bi-static data processing situation. If we are watching a location for any movement using physically distinct antennas, then we have a 'transmitter centered' bi-static data processing situation. If we have an air-air scenario with a lock before launch semi active radar homing missile, then we have a 'cosite' bi-static data processing situation.

Data processing. Not physical locations.

Now you are just deflecting. What is the point of talking about data processing without first identify the physical position of bi-static radar. Don't bother reply as I am really not interested in your comment.

 

[gambit]

Now you are just deflecting. What is the point of talking about data processing without first identify the physical position of bi-static radar. Don't bother reply as I am really not interested in your comment.

Talk about one big ego. This is a publicly accessible forum where everyone's comments are available for all to see. So just because you are not interested that does not mean others are equally disinterested.

Data processing is an integral part of radar detection, unless there is something called 'Chinese radar'? Nice pun with that 'deflecting', by the way. Very appropriate. When the physical location angle between two antennas are zero IN RELATION to target distance as well as being physically zero, then the physical DESCRIPTION is rightly called pseudo mono-static, but as far as real physics goes, we still have a receiver that receive and that make it bi-static.

 

[chauism]

Talk about one big ego. This is a publicly accessible forum where everyone's comments are available for all to see. So just because you are not interested that does not mean others are equally disinterested.

Data processing is an integral part of radar detection, unless there is something called 'Chinese radar'? Nice pun with that 'deflecting', by the way. Very appropriate. When the physical location angle between two antennas are zero IN RELATION to target distance as well as being physically zero, then the physical DESCRIPTION is rightly called pseudo mono-static, but as far as real physics goes, we still have a receiver that receive and that make it bi-static.

Then you can explain how is being pseudo monostatic any useful in this case according to your "Vietnamese radar".

Pseudo-monostatic radars

Some radar systems may have separate transmit and receive antennas, but if the angle subtended between transmitter, target and receiver (the bistatic angle) is close to zero, then they would still be regarded as monostatic or pseudo-monostatic. For example, some very long range HF radar systems may have a transmitter and receiver which are separated by a few tens of kilometres for electrical isolation, but as the expected target range is of the order 1000-3500 km, they are not considered to be truly bistatic and are referred to as pseudo-monostatic.

Also explain how bistatic is being very useful in anti ballistic operation and with its advantages over regular radars.

Advantages and disadvantages

The principal advantages of bistatic and multistatic radar include:

* Lower procurement and maintenance costs (if using a third party's transmitter)
* Operation without a frequency clearance (if using a third party's transmitter)
* Covert operation of the receiver
* Increased resilience to electronic countermeasures as waveform being used and receiver location are potentially unknown
* Possible enhanced radar cross section of the target due to geometrical effects

The principal disadvantages of bistatic and multistatic radar include:

* System complexity
* Costs of providing communication between sites
* Lack of control over transmitter (if exploiting a third party transmitter)
* Harder to deploy
* Reduced low-level coverage due to the need for line-of-sight from several locations

 

[gambit]

Also explain how bistatic is being very useful in anti ballistic operation and with its advantages over regular radars.

Easy. Look at the illustration below...

File:MIM-104 Patriot Radar unit JASDF Iruma Airbase 2006-2.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The main radar is much larger than the individual missile's radar and you can see how small just from looking at the missiles themselves. I have said it many times before here that the larger the antenna, the greater the reach and the greater the target resolutions. For anti-ballistic missile defense, it would be good for the interceptor missile to have as high target resolutions as possible. The main radar and the missile launch platform do not have to be so close to each other. Blast safety is one reason why.

 

[chauism]

self delete

 

[chauism]

Easy. Look at the illustration below...

File:MIM-104 Patriot Radar unit JASDF Iruma Airbase 2006-2.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The main radar is much larger than the individual missile's radar and you can see how small just from looking at the missiles themselves. I have said it many times before here that the larger the antenna, the greater the reach and the greater the target resolutions. For anti-ballistic missile defense, it would be good for the interceptor missile to have as high target resolutions as possible. The main radar and the missile launch platform do not have to be so close to each other. Blast safety is one reason why.

Any long range modern SAMs use SARH configuration, so what is so special about PAC? Who argued that radar is not being able to track the missile? Chinaowns was talking about the boosting phase of the missile which radar of PAC is not able to track anyways since maximum range of AN/MPQ-65 Radar for RCS of 3 m^2 is only 100km.

 

[Thomas]

Chinaowns was talking about the boosting phase of the missile

Chinaowns was also saying that there is no defense against Ballistic missiles. We all know that's simply nonsense.

 

[chauism]

Chinaowns was also saying that there is no defense against Ballistic missiles. We all know that's simply nonsense.

That he was just daydreaming. It is difficult but not impossible.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Chinaowns was also saying that there is no defense against Ballistic missiles. We all know that's simply nonsense.

The patriot system has yet to shoot down any ballistic missile that is NON SCUD.

I have never claimed impossibility, just that as of now there is no defense against ballistic missiles currently other than SCUD