We have bought more than 1 right?
The VHF APAR in Pakistan appears to be under Air Force evaluation. If it performs under par, will be sent back.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We have bought more than 1 right?
Finally got some time.I completely understand what you are saying but you are missing my point.
Even if F-22A Raptor settle around 0.001 m^2 rcs mark in VHF band, it is still exceedingly difficult to track because YJ-27 types cannot obtain a lock on it or even tell with certainty that this is F-22A Raptor (they are very good but cannot offer clarity of X-band while operating at VHF band due to massive difference in frequencies across these bands). One will notice something unusual happened at a particular spot and alert operators (hey take a look). By the time, operators will notice and decide to interpret, F-22A Raptor would be at a different spot and wrecking havoc. Now imagine dealing with a squadron of these jets. Although I must tell you that these radar systems will be among the first targets to be taken out - if you understand tactics of USAF.
I am happy that Pakistan is testing decent radar systems but come on, do not overblow the stuff just because it is in our hands.
link
Tham Wai Keong, studied at Victoria Institution
Updated Apr 6
Very unlikely.
This simulation, without taking into account radar absorbent material coatings, shows the F-22's airframe to have an RCS of - 8.78 dB, or 0.13 square meters, with a 10.5 Ghz X-band radar.
10 ^ ( -8.78/10 ) = 0.132 square meters
This is in line with what the Russians have estimated.
Radar Cross Section of a stealthy aircraft using electromagnetic simulation in the X and in VHF/UHF Bands
Convert dB to square meters with the formula here.
Decibels and Radars
If one takes the best case RCS reduction, frontal aspect, at Table 2 here with RAM, it is -
Frontal, Scenario 1 :
- (15.2 + 5.42 ) = - 20.62 dB.
Analysis of Radar Cross Section Reduction of Fighter Aircraft by Means of Computer Simulation
Thus the peak RCS of the F-22, best case, against an X-band radar would be -
- (8.78 + 20.62) = - 29.4 dB
Converted = 10 ^ (-29.4/10)
= 0.001 square meters
However, a more realistic reduction would be that in Table 3.
Frontal, Scenario 1 = 10.2 + 1.11 = 10.31 dB
So the likely RCS of the F-22 would be -
- (8.78 + 10.31) = - 19.09 dB
Converted = 10 ^ ( -19.09/10)
= 0.012 square meters
The Russians estimate it to be 0.3 square meters.
The data of Russian specialists suggest that the F-22A’s RCS ranges between 0.5 and 0.1 square meters, while the radar Irbis mounted on the Sukhoi Su-35S fighter jet can detect the Raptor at a distance of no less than 95 km (59 miles) .
World’s most famous stealth aircraft
Russian assessment of the rcs of F-22A Raptor is utterly pointless. They do not have this design and its minute details at their disposal. They can only estimate on the basis of crude parameters and assumptions.Finally got some time.
I have a few points to make regards you claims.
1. I assume your graph is from here: https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-Low-Band-Radars.html
In short I don't see how much relevant is this report for this topic JY-27A.
- First it's a very old report which was published at 2007.
- Second, it didn't say how they calculated these number at all.
- Last, they didn't say how they get the performance data of each Russian/Chinese radar.
2. You claim F-22A's RCS is 0.0001 m^2 which I can't find any credited source to prove it.
Instead this guy's answer is far more trustworthy:
link
More importantly, he pointed a paper which studied F-22 from Russia: here
Russian assessment of the rcs of F-22A Raptor is utterly pointless. They do not have this design and its minute details at their disposal. They can only estimate on the basis of crude parameters and assumptions.
Only Lockheed Martin can tell you exact RCS of F-22A with or without RAM coating treatments.
Yes, graphs are from that source, and they do mention how they obtained such information. Does it occur to you that Russia developed these systems earlier than China?
Then why do you claim F-22's RCS is 0.0001 m^2 then?Only Lockheed Martin can tell you exact RCS of F-22A with or without RAM coating treatments.
SUBJECTIVE therefore! Your perception of 'modern' is different from mine.
I evaluate 'modern' on the grounds of advances in technologies, and not on the grounds of names and/or perceptions. US is far ahead of both Russia and China in these matters.
Since Russian armed forces are stationed and active in Syria, this theater have provided very clear glimpses of how Russian technologies would fare against American and/or Israeli when either of the two will try to attack assets of Syrian regime, and respective outcomes are in front of you. Russian armed forces in Syria are supposed to shield Syrian regime from external attacks and threats of all manner, and they have utterly failed to deter either US or Israel from humiliating Syrian regime from time-to-time. So WE already have a demonstration.
Do you want me to compile incidents for you?
This is childish talk, devoid of logic.
1. US is not supposed to protect Ukraine.
2. US will not invade Russia because this war will turn nuclear at some point.
3. Russian military stand no chance against American in direct clashes but Russian nuclear arsenal is massive and potent...
Chinese defense-related tech is largely based on Russian designs because Russia sell its weapons to China but US does not sell its weapons to China.
You got this wrong, friend.
The technologically superior side will absolutely dominate either Russia or China in a conventional war but not sure about subsequent occupation phase - how long US can last in the capacity of being an occupying force in either country.
China have a massive population so it might give US much harder time than Russia in occupation phase, probably to the point of routing Americans from Chinese mainland if they are really determined. But nothing is certain in imagined scenarios.
US have a much larger population, and higher fighting capacity, than Russia nevertheless. You are mistaking Russia for being USSR which is not the case. USSR was a collection of 16 Soviet Socialist Republics, and therefore had lot of manpower and resources at its disposal. Germans slaughtered Soviets by the millions (crores) back in the days of World War II but Soviets would keep coming at them, and Germans also had to contend with Allied forces on the WEST. However, it would be foolish to assume that Russians have never tasted defeat in history; refer to Mongolian-Russo wars in earlier times.
1. You completely missed the point here.*
*Do you understand the concept of HISTORICAL ANALOGUES?
All of those American conflicts were with peer and near-peer adversaries when they happened, and Americans managed well in each of those conflicts.
OR
Do you think US had a 21st century army when it fought each of those adversaries at different points in time?
Since you think that US cannot defeat a near-peer adversary in a war at present - you are sadly mistaken. This is why I alluded to a series of American conflicts with peer and near-peer adversaries as historical analogues to counter your assumption. This bring me to the next point:
2. Your knowledge of each war is TERRIBLE.**
**This is my expression:
You do not even know which country was subjected to nuclear strikes by US in World War II. Mashallah.
Nevertheless, silly hormonal reactions from you (labeling me brain-dead) show your character as well as how sound your knowledge is in relation to these topics. Pathetic.
These are asymmetric threats, and I do not consider these as historical analogues for your argument that US cannot defeat Russia or China in a war.
"Even a little modern army like Iran Shot American modern drone with their SAM, I would love to see how S-300/400/500 and Chinese AD systems will work, and results might surprise you .."
First world countries is a useless point. There are first world countries which pack considerable punch and there are first world countries which have minimum level of defenses.
Iraq had a modern army, proper AF, AD systems with net centric environments as you put back in 1991.
Serbia had a modern army, proper AF, AD systems with net centric environments as you put back in 1998.
Iraq had one of the largest and finest armies in the world back in 1990; better equipped than Chinese at this point in time (ignoring Chinese nuclear arsenal of-course). Then Pakistani COAS Mirza Aslam Beg had a very high opinion of Iraqi military might; when he was questioned about the prospects of US-Iraq war in an interview, he felt that Iraq will become another Vietnam for US in 1991, but his assumption proved wrong.
If a Pakistani COAS - with all manner of intel-related briefings to him at this post - can still get it wrong about something (an expected conflict - his forte). How do you compare? You would take the word of a Pakistani COAS at face value, and over mine at any point in time, right? But I have shown you the door right now.
Oh yes! I have no clue. I have been living in a cave all these years. Oh please! Help me navigate this such modern world around me...
WW2 = Victory (US-led forces soundly defeated Japan in the EAST as well as Germany in the WEST by 1945)
American Public supported this war-effort in full capacity, and US-led forces were led by able commanders in all theater of operations. Americans really wanted to win, and were willing to do everything to ensure the desired outcome. Well, Allah Almighty rewards determined people.
Korean War = Stalemate [US-led forces successfully liberated South Korea from North Korea (primary objective accomplished) but failed to occupy North Korea because China dispatched its armed forces to save North Korea from potential occupation (secondary objective failed), and Korean peninsula remain split to this day.]
If China had decided to not intervene in this theater or operations, US-led forces would have taken over North Korea and the Korean War would have concluded with unification of the Korean peninsula under American protectorate and reforms. But this was not to be.
Vietnam War = Defeat (This war was utterly mismanaged by American politicians).
Afghan War = ??? (Another war being mismanaged by American politicians)
Iraq War = Victory (This theater was prioritized over Afghanistan by American politicians)
Syria = Decent gains until American President Donald Trump damaged American foothold in this theater of operations by ditching US-backed SDF movement in Syria and ordering withdrawal of American troops from the theater.
Do you know anything about quality or you grew up with MADE IN CHINA only? A large number of people have a low opinion of Chinese goods in terms of quality but this does not guarantee that many will stop using Chinese goods. I will continue to buy and use Chinese goods from time-to-time as well, but I have tested and used many consumer goods of numerous brands over the course of years and I know better. I am being totally honest here.
You are trying to appease your Chinese overlords on the other hand. You even tagged a few here to make fun of me. You are being immature and disrespectful to a fellow Pakistani - shame on you.
You are trying to appease your Chinese overlords on the other hand. You even tagged a few here to make fun of me. You are being immature and disrespectful to a fellow Pakistani - shame on you.
You needed a soft reminder.
Then how do you know that China is catching up to Americans in the matters of defense? Are you privy to insider accounts of both? Because some Americans said so? Well, some Americans believe that Earth is flat.
You have a simple mind, friend.
CAPTION: A US ally shot down a $200 drone with a $3 million Patriot missile
In the case of Iranian swarm attack on Saudi Abqaiq oil refinery, Iranian UAV and cruise missiles flew towards the oil refinery from a direction which was not visible to the Patriot battery stationed there - the radar system of this battery was pointed towards Yemen whereas the intruding force came from a different direction. Therefore, Patriot battery could not engage the intruding force.
However, if you have doubts about the capabilities of Patriot defense system then read and learn: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/us-ballistic-missile-defence.373066/page-5
Saudi need to revisit their defensive arrangements and alert levels. They felt that Iran will not take its chances with them - they were wrong.
Saudi Arabia is officially at war with Yemen, not with Iran. It was logical for Saudi Arabia to have a defensive arrangement which could blunt strikes from Yemen, and it has to large extent. Although Iran support Yemeni Houthi in this war and provide know-how to this regime for the needful, they have never attacked Saudi Arabia until the Abqaiq episode. Now the Saudi know better.
Still, Saudi Arabia have a large geography, and it is possible for a potential intruder to slip through potential gaps in Saudi defenses and attempt to engage desired targets within. Every inch of a large geography is not possible to make intrusion-proof.
Majority of SRBM and MRBM in service around the world are SCUD derivatives.
Did I suggest that F-22A Raptor is literally invincible?
F-22A Raptor is simply better than any fighter aircraft in existence, and is much more likely to prevail in aerial clashes and/or wreck surface defenses during the course of conventional military operations.
F-22A proved its mettle over Syria as well: http://aviationweek.com/defense/how-f-22-deconflicting-us-russia-operations-over-syria
You will learn from pilot testimonials.
This is one mother phased array!. Beauty.
question will be how will they simulate a low rcs signature; there are ways but it will be interesting to see how they evaluate.The VHF APAR in Pakistan appears to be under Air Force evaluation. If it performs under par, will be sent back.
obviously no land based radar could cover himaliyan range .The Gaps will always be there. That's where Erieyes will plug in flying at an altitude of 30 thousand feet, they will detect before JY27A.
The Gaps will always be there. That's where Erieyes will plug in flying at an altitude of 30 thousand feet, they will detect before JY27A.
This is not the only radar. There are other types of radars that cover that same arc apart from airborne ones.
Pakistan should also induct aerostat based radars as well for additional coverage.
That can be done using cellphone towers. Had a friend in middle east working on this as his thesis project 12 yrs ago. So I don't see any reason why Pakistan's military has not looked into this and we might have such a system up and running. (pure speculation though)Does Pakistan operates Passive radar detectors from various areas to given them a frequency usage in the aerospace?