Iran successfully used Russian-made radar to track US F-35 jets — designer

[TheImmortal]

Iran successfully used Russian-made radar to track US F-35 jets — designer

https://www.google.com/amp/s/tass.com/world/1193281/amp

 

[Khan vilatey]

I keep seeing threads like this. There seems to be a conceptual gap. Stealth rarely means no radar signature rather it means low radar signature detectable at closer ranges.
Even the best ground radars have a hard deck where they can not see aircraft due to the curvature of earth.

So if a Russian radar saw an f-35 or not is not an interesting question. The question to ask is how far out did it see the aircraft and what orientation was it flying in

kv

 

[PeeD]

Rezonans/Ghadir is Irans insurance that no LO F-22/F-35/B-2/RQ-4 enters Iranian airspace at high to mid altitude.
24/7/365

1-2 more stations and Iran has this coverage national-wide.

At mid to low altitude they can't help but forcing those aircraft down severely reduces their range/sensor coverage.

As IRGC's own EW network they also warn against ballistic missiles.

 

[TheImmortal]

Rezonans/Ghadir is Irans insurance that no LO F-22/F-35/B-2/RQ-4 enters Iranian airspace at high to mid altitude.
24/7/365

1-2 more stations and Iran has this coverage national-wide.

At mid to low altitude they can't help but forcing those aircraft down severely reduces their range/sensor coverage.

As IRGC's own EW network they also warn against ballistic missiles.

So is this produced under license? Or completely imported from Russia?

 

[PeeD]

They are to an Iranian built method/style, compared to e.g Algerian version that is exactly the Russian version offered in the catalog.

I guess some critical components come from Russia but the stations and much equipment is provided by IRGC-ASF SSJ, without support from Shiraz.

 

[VEVAK]

So is this produced under license? Or completely imported from Russia?

It took Iran only 5 years to design and build so no doubt it's likely made up of various imported components!

 

[LeGenD]

This proves nothing.

More information in the following link: https://www.newsweek.com/russia-iran-qassem-soleimani-1527723

1. Some American F-35 variants were spotted operating over Iraqi airspace at the time of assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani with a drone strike in Baghdad on 03-01-2020.

FYI: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-luneberg-radar-cross-section-russia-estonia-2017-5

2. Typical Russian spin and marketing hype added to the half-baked story.

Recommended read: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/misconceptions-about-the-global-hawk-uav-and-vlo-concepts.675960/

 

[gambit]

I keep seeing threads like this. There seems to be a conceptual gap. Stealth rarely means no radar signature rather it means low radar signature detectable at closer ranges.
Even the best ground radars have a hard deck where they can not see aircraft due to the curvature of earth.

So if a Russian radar saw an f-35 or not is not an interesting question. The question to ask is how far out did it see the aircraft and what orientation was it flying in

kv

Am going to clarify that...

These are the main target resolutions...

- Altitude
- Airspeed
- Heading
- Range
- Aspect angle

The foundation of those resolutions is the pulse. To generate a pulse, you apply power then you cut off power. Like this...

Each pulse have a leading edge (LE) and a trailing edge (TE). Each pulse that reflects off a body produces a return pulse which also have an LE and a TE. The radar then uses the LEs and TEs to calculate the above five target resolutions.

If you send out 100 pulses and you receive 75 return pulses, some consecutively and some scattered, you would still have a target as defined by the radar.

But what the 'stealth' aircraft does is instead of giving you 75 pulses, you get something like 5 return pulses and not consecutive. In other words, because those five pulses are scattered throughout the pulse train, the radar will classify those five pulses as background noise.

Is there such a thing as a 'pulse train' or is it a made up phrase?

https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/41030

In this study a linear frequency modulated chirp signal is approximated using two stepped-frequency pulse train waveforms, a continuous wave pulse train and a linear frequency modulated pulse train.​

​

A pulse train can contain one pulse or one million pulses, depending on the system's sophistication. But there is a negative side to having one million pulses in a single burst. Each pulse can be seen as a packet of energy because of the LE and TE. Energy on/off. The shorter the pulse, the less energy. The lower the energy, the lower the distance the pulse can travel without signal loss.

So when you get less than %.001 of your pulse train, the target is essentially 'invisible'. Not because the 'stealth' aircraft does not reflects but because the reflections are extremely sporadic and scattered.

As the 'stealth' aircraft gets closer and closer, more and more packets of energy hits the 'stealth' aircraft and the reflected pulses would begin to cluster, in other words, more and more reflected pulses would appear consecutively. A sequence of anything is a pattern and in radar detection, patterns are good. For the 'stealth' aircraft, patterns are not good.

So when we see claims like these in the public domain, those who understand radar detection principles, design, and operations, usually roll their eyes. Like this --

 

[Khan vilatey]

Am going to clarify that...

These are the main target resolutions...

- Altitude
- Airspeed
- Heading
- Range
- Aspect angle

The foundation of those resolutions is the pulse. To generate a pulse, you apply power then you cut off power. Like this...

Each pulse have a leading edge (LE) and a trailing edge (TE). Each pulse that reflects off a body produces a return pulse which also have an LE and a TE. The radar then uses the LEs and TEs to calculate the above five target resolutions.

If you send out 100 pulses and you receive 75 return pulses, some consecutively and some scattered, you would still have a target as defined by the radar.

But what the 'stealth' aircraft does is instead of giving you 75 pulses, you get something like 5 return pulses and not consecutive. In other words, because those five pulses are scattered throughout the pulse train, the radar will classify those five pulses as background noise.

Is there such a thing as a 'pulse train' or is it a made up phrase?

https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/41030

In this study a linear frequency modulated chirp signal is approximated using two stepped-frequency pulse train waveforms, a continuous wave pulse train and a linear frequency modulated pulse train.​

​

A pulse train can contain one pulse or one million pulses, depending on the system's sophistication. But there is a negative side to having one million pulses in a single burst. Each pulse can be seen as a packet of energy because of the LE and TE. Energy on/off. The shorter the pulse, the less energy. The lower the energy, the lower the distance the pulse can travel without signal loss.

So when you get less than %.001 of your pulse train, the target is essentially 'invisible'. Not because the 'stealth' aircraft does not reflects but because the reflections are extremely sporadic and scattered.

As the 'stealth' aircraft gets closer and closer, more and more packets of energy hits the 'stealth' aircraft and the reflected pulses would begin to cluster, in other words, more and more reflected pulses would appear consecutively. A sequence of anything is a pattern and in radar detection, patterns are good. For the 'stealth' aircraft, patterns are not good.

So when we see claims like these in the public domain, those who understand radar detection principles, design, and operations, usually roll their eyes. Like this --

thank you an excellent explanation. You brought back Old memories of my antenna design class

kv

 

[Philosopher]

A PR stunt by the Russians to advertise their systems. In reality, there is nothing difficult about detecting a stealthy target. Any defence analysts, not counting the pseudo-experts are fully aware of this fact and have been for decades. Therefore this claim by the Russians should not come as a surprise to anyone with even a small level of understanding around this topic.

As a side note, this highlights how important it is for nations like Iran to rely on their own indigenous systems whenever possible, because as you can seem other nations will take any opportunity to advertise their own systems. Iran is fortunate that is one of the top nations in the field of air defence today and it should be focusing a lot on advertising its own capabilities on the world stage, this is especially important given after the lifting of the embargo, Iran could become a weapons exporter and compete with the likes of Russia. The downing of the likes of RQ-4 was a good demonstration. Iran should not allow others to use it to advertise their systems. Focus on advertising its own capabilities only.

 

[PeeD]

The Rezonans system is something special because its extreme long detection range against LO targets.

Its wavelength is more than twice as large as those of typical VHF-band radars.
It has extrem high power levels and its wavelength almost negates RAM and RAS.

For Iran its the long range early warning 24/7 feature that makes it so important.

So the respect is deserved. It allows Iran to be safe from high flying LO systems and thus keep its tactical radars switched off.

 

[Pandora]

We have efficiency of Russian Radar and EW capabilities in Syria. Both Israel and Turkey had a field day knocking out Russian made air defense infrastructure. They even failed to detect aircraft's and drones at close ranges.

 

[TheImmortal]

The Rezonans system is something special because its extreme long detection range against LO targets.

Its wavelength is more than twice as large as those of typical VHF-band radars.
It has extrem high power levels and its wavelength almost negates RAM and RAS.

For Iran its the long range early warning 24/7 feature that makes it so important.

So the respect is deserved. It allows Iran to be safe from high flying LO systems and thus keep its tactical radars switched off.

One one hand you (@PeeD) say that the OTH Radar nearly negates RAM and RAS on the other hand @gambit says that his F-35 scatters the Radar pulses in such a way to make the OTH Radar system algorithm, think it’s mere background noise or inconsequential object. The user makes the claim that this is due to lack data returned back to the OTH Radar due to various methods employed by LO objects.

Opposite ends of the opinion spectrum here when it comes to stealth detection between you and the other user.

Just an observation

 

[PeeD]

I seriously doubt Rezonans can operate as OTH radar.

On the rest: Its physics --> any object will have a RCS --> that object will be detected if sufficient energy is transmitted and reflected back.

Rezonans defeat mechanism against stealth is: making RAM/RAS ineffective and use very high energy RF signals to defeat shape-based LO.

So its a brute force technique.

One could also use a very high gain radar to achieve that goal or a very sensitive one.

Physics is all that counts, numbers, not magic.

 

[TheImmortal]

I seriously doubt Rezonans can operate as OTH radar.

On the rest: Its physics --> any object will have a RCS --> that object will be detected if sufficient energy is transmitted and reflected back.

Rezonans defeat mechanism against stealth is: making RAM/RAS ineffective and use very high energy RF signals to defeat shape-based LO.

So its a brute force technique.

One could also use a very high gain radar to achieve that goal or a very sensitive one.

Physics is all that counts, numbers, not magic.

My point was user is saying brute force technique does not work on F-35 at LR. He seems to think energy can be sufficiently dissipated at the longer ranges.