Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brain32

'Passive radar' could render stealth planes obsolete

Recommended Posts


Well, the groundwork for that dates back at least 20 years now, however it's only recently that we've reached the point where processing power and more efficient algorithm (and battlefield networks for military applications) may make this a practical real-time solution and not just an early warning system (also, we now have a larger number of emitters and over a wider spectrum to work from than before, making the system that much more efficient and less susceptible to failure or attack).

 

Also, while it may render current stealth technology obsolete, it is still theoretically sensible to jamming.

Edited by Gunrunner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion: Way too recent technology, long time till perfection.It's a good step forward though, for dealing with aircraft such as the PAK-FA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion: Way too recent technology, long time till perfection.It's a good step forward though, for dealing with aircraft such as the PAK-FA.

 

And F-22 and F-35 and B-2 as well.

 

i think Pak-Fa is not even ready.

 

and well, they mey as well invent new tech that can countermeasure it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And F-22 and F-35 and B-2 as well.

and well, they mey as well invent new tech that can countermeasure it.

 

Rafale as well, although to a lesser extent.

 

Aside a specific jamming device, which would still fail at keeping the plane presence undetected, I don't see how they could prevent a physical object in the air to not alter any surrounding signal passing through.

 

Moreover theorically, it would also render active radar much more efficient to detect stealth planes as stealth technology used to absorb waves without reflecting them, but still stop them.

Edited by Nixou

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems interesting but it seems that it could be countered pretty easily. flooding an area with inexpensive decoys could confuse the hell out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems interesting but it seems that it could be countered pretty easily. flooding an area with inexpensive decoys could confuse the hell out of it.

Could be just as cheap to flood the area with inexpensive sensors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WK, given the wide range of frequencies usable and the ability to deploy a large number of cheap receivers, using active radars as confirmation sources, with enough processing power, good algorithm and connection between the elements, even jamming and decoys may be of limited use, but we probably are far from that point yet.

 

Nixou, it would only help for planes interconnected, because the active radar would illuminate a zone and the passive receivers on other planes or other parts of the network will not receive the expected echoes, therefore deducing the presence of something.

So basically it's the active radars increasing the efficiency of the passive system, not the other way round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

true it will just change the "move_counter move dynamic" not end it. nothing stays "invincible" for ever. so stealth will get countered eventualy and that in turn will be countered. it will pretty much keep going as longs as technology dosn't plateu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except this is useless for where it counts...SAMs. Sure, you could GCI direct an interceptor to the area to look for it, but you couldn't launch a SAM.

 

There's a big difference between search and track, and while this technique can defeat stealth in the search area, it's far too coarse for tracking. So you'd know a plane was there, but anything you'd fire at it would miss by a mile (or more).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, I had a busy day just sat down and my a** is like on fire lol

 

Anyway while this is early technology and works only in certain aspect it supports what I have been suspecting for a while stealth might be getting just too freakin expensive and maintenance intensive for what it gives over the years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the number of comm and nav sattelites hanging up there, a widely spread grid could turn out quite accurate in determining contact position going just by the interference with their signals.

The old ways, i.e. hugging the terrain, will probably remain the best for penetration no matter what tech. Could be fun to couple this system with sound-activated AA mines.

Edited by Gr.Viper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty dubious really - Various sensors over the spectrum (such as IR) can detect stealth, certain active radars claim to be able to at long range - this has the same problem as them - unless you are happy to watch the jet fly in, bomb its target then fly off again - only useful as early warning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old ways, i.e. hugging the terrain, will probably remain the best for penetration no matter what tech. Could be fun to couple this system with sound-activated AA mines.

 

Then lets hope the attacks come over the 0.1% of the territory you could actually afford to, and safely put mines in. :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems interesting but it seems that it could be countered pretty easily. flooding an area with inexpensive decoys could confuse the hell out of it.

 

So true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The passive radar is not a new development. Germany used passive radarstations during WW2 along the English Channel.

 

When the F-117 was shot down over Serbia in 1999 was detected and tracked by passive radar methode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as i figured out, the big step into the next generation of combat aircraft should have an implemented suit of sensors, and processors to provide the pilot, either remote or aboard the aircraft, with a comprehensive tactical presentation, based on the data received from all sensors, after the computers makes up an hypothesys with all the data collected by it´s whole sensors-datalinks, insead of different displays overloading the pilot with information.

 

Different passive-active configurations, wich would however require an extensive work by the intelligence community to get the data on any potential enemy weapons system. Basically, a greater integration of information within the own aircraft and any datalinked systems.

 

The aircraft would have, of course, different degrees of stealthyness, powerplant, performances, weaponry etc, but it would be throught those systems that future air combat should be decided given the lethality of modern AA weapons. As allways has been in air combat, first to see, first (at last) to kill.

Edited by macelena

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is what the F-35 will have, and one of the things that's driving the cost. This is called sensor fusion, where the pilot sees it like you have Star Trek-style "sensors" that tell you everything.

 

This is not the same as hyperspectral sensors, which the F-35 won't have, but which recon planes should get not too far away. The idea there being hiding facilities/units/movements may be possible in one wavelength (ie visual) but not in others (infrared, UV, radar). So you scan an area with all those wavelengths and hidden things will be revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..