.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $8.00
winSPMBT- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPMBT
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 17th, 2021, 08:17 AM

Isto Isto is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 113
Thanks: 0
Thanked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Isto is on a distinguished road
Default Stealth Plane vs Air Defence

Can various Area SAM systems shoot Stealth Planes down ?

At least Russian S-400 Triumf tells to have: "The Protivnik-GE is an anti-stealth UHF radar with a 400-kilometre (250 mi) range."

Will this really detect a stealth plane ?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old December 17th, 2021, 12:45 PM
Mobhack's Avatar

Mobhack Mobhack is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dundee
Posts: 5,750
Thanks: 197
Thanked 1,665 Times in 1,105 Posts
Mobhack is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Stealth Plane vs Air Defence

In the game or in real life?

The game is simplified from reality - a stealth plane has more EW factor is all, really.

The HF radar noted above may well give an indication that something is there since "stealth" is aimed at the higher radar frequencies required for targeting. Targeting is the important thing, not the mythical "invisibility" the public might think of as the advantage of stealth. An HF radar is probably going to give a "fuzzy blob" indicating the general presence of something on a stealth plane target to a couple of kilometers or so, but insufficient precision to actually target the thing, however enough to say direct a fighter its way.

Missiles, especially smaller ones carried by planes have itsy-bitsy teeny weeny radars so they are the most affected by "stealth". Which is the main point really, if it say reduces the plane's radar detection range by half and also the plane's missile radar acquisition by half (or 3/4!) then the stealth plane has reduced the range by about 75% that the opposition fighter can engage it - while the opposition non-stealth plane is still as vulnerable to the the stealth platform's missiles as before. Same goes for SAMs, which can have better radar ranges due to size c/f an airborne platform as the SAM radar is way bigger than a fighter's and the SAM it fires can be much larger than the interceptors (unless say Tomcat and Phoenix, now history).

HF and even more so LF radars are "target indicators" to use the old Royal Navy terminology of WW2 - RN ships had HF radars that gave a fuzzy blob type indication of long range threats, the ship then pointed a more precise radar (higher frequency) at it as the blob got closer. That was because the RN radars technology was early 1930s radar and it was difficult to get power into shorter waves till the magnetron came along in 42-43ish.

Modern use of HF and UHF as an indicator for "stealthy" targets is a bit of a retro technique that should work to guide the defenders in the general direction of stealth threats. But I cannot see HF radars being put in the pointy end of even relatively large (Phoenix type) missiles since these would only give a "fuzzy" idea of the actual target location. But a SAM site could use HF to designate a "blob" in space and then saturate it simultaneously with several SAMS operating at say 1/4 of the detection distance they enjoy on non-stealth planes. A bit like depth-charging a submarine. where one uses the "shotgun technique"!.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mobhack For This Useful Post:
  #3  
Old December 17th, 2021, 03:45 PM
Aeraaa's Avatar

Aeraaa Aeraaa is online now
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 549
Thanks: 152
Thanked 315 Times in 187 Posts
Aeraaa is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Stealth Plane vs Air Defence

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobhack View Post
In the game or in real life?

The game is simplified from reality - a stealth plane has more EW factor is all, really.

The HF radar noted above may well give an indication that something is there since "stealth" is aimed at the higher radar frequencies required for targeting. Targeting is the important thing, not the mythical "invisibility" the public might think of as the advantage of stealth. An HF radar is probably going to give a "fuzzy blob" indicating the general presence of something on a stealth plane target to a couple of kilometers or so, but insufficient precision to actually target the thing, however enough to say direct a fighter its way.

Missiles, especially smaller ones carried by planes have itsy-bitsy teeny weeny radars so they are the most affected by "stealth". Which is the main point really, if it say reduces the plane's radar detection range by half and also the plane's missile radar acquisition by half (or 3/4!) then the stealth plane has reduced the range by about 75% that the opposition fighter can engage it - while the opposition non-stealth plane is still as vulnerable to the the stealth platform's missiles as before. Same goes for SAMs, which can have better radar ranges due to size c/f an airborne platform as the SAM radar is way bigger than a fighter's and the SAM it fires can be much larger than the interceptors (unless say Tomcat and Phoenix, now history).

HF and even more so LF radars are "target indicators" to use the old Royal Navy terminology of WW2 - RN ships had HF radars that gave a fuzzy blob type indication of long range threats, the ship then pointed a more precise radar (higher frequency) at it as the blob got closer. That was because the RN radars technology was early 1930s radar and it was difficult to get power into shorter waves till the magnetron came along in 42-43ish.

Modern use of HF and UHF as an indicator for "stealthy" targets is a bit of a retro technique that should work to guide the defenders in the general direction of stealth threats. But I cannot see HF radars being put in the pointy end of even relatively large (Phoenix type) missiles since these would only give a "fuzzy" idea of the actual target location. But a SAM site could use HF to designate a "blob" in space and then saturate it simultaneously with several SAMS operating at say 1/4 of the detection distance they enjoy on non-stealth planes. A bit like depth-charging a submarine. where one uses the "shotgun technique"!.
I'd guess that given stealth proliferation in the future, world's AF will have AEW&C aircraft in as vital role as ground forces have artillery (meaning that any AF that does not have these assets is basically dead).
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old December 17th, 2021, 04:45 PM

Isto Isto is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 113
Thanks: 0
Thanked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Isto is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Stealth Plane vs Air Defence

There was a document, that the stealth properties are only effective on the planes front arc.

Suppose satellite targeting, and communicating it to the weapon system could be a solution ?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old December 18th, 2021, 03:55 AM
FASTBOAT TOUGH's Avatar

FASTBOAT TOUGH FASTBOAT TOUGH is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Kingsland, GA.
Posts: 2,366
Thanks: 576
Thanked 1,012 Times in 755 Posts
FASTBOAT TOUGH is on a distinguished road
Fallout Re: Stealth Plane vs Air Defence

I've already over the years pointed out who these "folks" are/were-the data is solid based on the tests run. The S-400 radar, and missiles have since been upgraded to support anti stealth ops, this upgrade would lead to the S-500 which is designed to shoot down "stealth" jets.
http://www.ausairpower.net/index.htm...Australia_Aims
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-S-400-Triumf.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-JSF-Analysis.html


I've read them years ago.

Some "light" reading.

The "rack" calls!!

Regards,
Pat
__________________
"If something is not impossible, there must be a way of doing it." - Sir Nicholas Winton

"Ex communi periculo, fraternitas" - My career long mentor and current friend -QMCM/SS M. Moher USN Ret..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old December 18th, 2021, 02:00 PM

Isto Isto is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 113
Thanks: 0
Thanked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Isto is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Stealth Plane vs Air Defence

Made some research on Finnish Military.

I found out that all of their other equipment combined (anti-air, apcs, IFV's, infantry weapons, tanks, helicopters, and so on) most likely costs less than the new F-35 Fighter Jets that their army is going to purchase.

Also, the army lacks long range anti-air. They dont have any at all. Their strategy is, that they only use Fighter Planes against other Fighter Planes.

So kinda strange.

This seems completely insane.

Finnish Air Force Commander also say in all seriousness in media, that all of the plane candidates had the same expenses. Also, they say that one of the main reason they chose F-35 was bigger motor.

They also say a lot of other strange things, like 100 of the countrys best advisors have thought about this for years, and that they made the choise based on computer game.

More so, they chose to sell 49,9% of Patria (their military industry) to Norway in 2016 with a purchase price of 272 millions.

Have to also keep in mind, that this is a country with government budget around 50 mrd in year, and still they put that kind of money to one asset. And it does not stop here, they are buying 4 new ships with 1,3 mrd. This could go on and on, making their military budget suddenly like 4 to 5 times more than before.

I also made some research on past, where there were a general who continuously and repeatedly wanted to gain attack Helicopters on Finnish army, which was denied by government every time. That they dont need them on their strategy of defending the country.

Also, they have made military purchases like this in the past:

100 Used Leopard 2a6 from Holland with 200 millions.
139 Used Leopard 2a4 from Germany with 120 millions.
147 MT-LB with 2,47 millions.

112 new NASAMS Middle Range Anti-Air from Norway with 325 million.

And now they buy 64 Fighter planes with 10 mrd and plan to put another 10+ on using them.

This seems completely insane. I think they have lost their mind.

I see a big vulnerability on lack of Area SAM.

Sweden for example, who produces Gripens, were delivered operational Patriot SAM just last month in this year.

So, there might be no end on Finnish military spendings in the future.

Its also a country with the highest tax rates in the world already, and where all people are poor, with no rich people whatsoever, because all of their money goes to government. Still the government have to take a lot of loan.

This seems like a pending disaster.

I think this development is what Canada was worried about.

Also, when they have put so much money on those planes, they HAVE TO put more to maintain their effectiveness in the future, so they will make many more purchases regarding them. They just have to, because they are so all in on them already.

It also seems like a gamble, all-in with too many unknown factors.

So in my point of view, Finnish government have gone out of control.

They also made a statement in the media (Ilkka Kanerva) that, they know in the world, that we are not a country to be messed with.

Also, 6/7 of the major political parties are lead by woman. Only one party (Kokoomus, which is the political party of Ilkka Kanerva) is led by men. I somehow think, that the government listens to so called "advisors" and makes their decisions almost solely based on their opinion. And of course, those advisors represent the current topic they are giving advise to. So of course they always want more on themselves and say that it is a good idea.

So what i gather, they will have the planes but might not have the money to fly with them, and the people who forced this through are left with a computer game.

This is of course also about NATO, this party (Kokoomus) have tried to force their way to NATO for tens of years. This have a strong resistance on the left wing, and because of the strategic position near Russia would surely create political turbulence.

One thing to notice is also, that in 90s when Finland bought the Hornets from US, Russian MiG was part of the competition. And in this purchase, they (or any other Russian or Chinese planes) were not.

Last edited by Isto; December 18th, 2021 at 06:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old December 20th, 2021, 12:08 PM

Isto Isto is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 113
Thanks: 0
Thanked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Isto is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Stealth Plane vs Air Defence

Ok so i researched more on this subject, and i think i noticed what is the reason behind this development. There are 4 generals that have retired from service due to old age just recently in Finnish Military. So, there are some younger (and most likely foolish) people who have taken their spot.

So this is what have happened, and the result is that Finnish Military spendings have gone off the charts, and somehow the Government is either pressured, or somehow fooled to apply.

These people have already shown the capability to lie or mislead with a straight face. Also, the prime minister seems somehow out of place when those guys were around her. Might just be, that she just dont like them, and i cant blame her for that.

So, a bad development for Finnish Nation in my opinion.

Also when i look back to 90's and so, the capabilities of Finnish leaders seem a lot higher. So also the politicians do not seem as capable as they were. (With people like Martti Ahtisaari, Mauno Koivisto and so on)

They are also known for feats like international peace negation (Martti Ahtisaari) and dramatically reducing the power of President while being a President. (Mauno Koivisto)

Also to mention, that Mauno Koivisto served under Lauri Törni in World War II. (Lauri Törni is the same person than US special force Larry Thorne that vanished in Vietnam)

So kind of the opposite on what they are doing now.


(On side note, Finnish government budget seems to have risen to 60mrd, but still its quite low compared to their current military expenses of 5mrd. I also noticed, that military budget have doubled already on a short notice and if i am right, it continues to rise. Its already something like 8% of the annual expenses.)

(The way i see it, there might be madness in their minds, the same kind than collectors, so they must always have the newest equipment and their mind wont leave them be if there is even one collectible missing on their collection, so they have to get it no matter what and are capable of discarding reason to acquire it. In Finnish case, they wont even preserve the old equipment, they seem to just destroy it. In Russia, they will keep it as reserve, but are plagued with the same madness.)

(There is also this same issue in Russia that is yet to come, so Putin will eventually retire, and there will be some new people.)

Last edited by Isto; December 21st, 2021 at 12:36 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2022, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.