Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Radar systems

    Share

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Stealthflanker on Fri May 06, 2011 3:47 am

    SerbNationalist wrote:Tell me Garry, is Buk equipped with an AESA radar, or if it isn't, can it be equipped? And by Buk I mean do TELARS have it, I know that it can be used as a surveillance radar! And tell me what is the difference between PESA and AESA, which is better? Sorry for the question but trying to learn that stuff, am really interested in it.

    mind if i tag along Very Happy ?

    related to Buk.. well Buk-M1 is likely equipped with typical Slotted Planar Array RADAR, not PESA or AESA, only BUK-M2 equipped with PESA Engagement RADAR .

    and yes every BUK Launcher have Engagement RADAR's on its own.


    Related to PESA or AESA , the primary differences between them is their power source , PESA RADAR uses Single transmitter to transmit their beam , their Antenna elements contains no "Active" elements, only Phase Shifters for their electronic Scanning .

    Example is Irbis-E RADAR which uses 2 Travelling Wave Tube to form its transmitter system, it's antenna contains nothing but a beam steering controller and phase shifters .

    as for AESA every antenna elements mounted on it have their own transmitter in shape of MMIC (Monolithic Microwave Integrated Circuit) along with power amplifier , thus every element can transmit power by itself , and those devices are mounted in the Antenna (PESA transmitter is NOT in the Antenna but in separate module/LRU) .

    as for AESA Vs PESA comparison , the primary advantages held by AESA over PESA is in the Reliability of the transmitter, PESA transmitter (Travelling Wave Tube, Klystrons, Magnetrons ) are usually "short lived" due to the fact that they often handle very high amount of Microwave power in often very confined or small space, like say fighter RADAR's , their MTBF (mean Time Between Failure) is somewhere between 200-300 Hrs , and can be as low as 5 hours (early Su-27's N001 Myech RADAR's) once the transmitter fail , the entire RADAR will cease to function .

    AESA RADAR in other hand , since MMIC modules handle lower power (5 watts till some 100 watts) their reliability is higher , APG-79 MMIC T/R Modules may last with MTBF up to some 20.000 Hours , another advantage is since each modules have its own transmitter, failure of some modules may not hamper the RADAR's performance, however there is a "safe limit" of 10% .. more than it entire RADAR's may fail .

    as for PESA type RADAR, the primary advantages over AESA is price .. AESA is EXPENSIVE.. cost of the AESA can up to millions of $ , primarily determined by emitted power and numbers of transmit and receive modules .

    You can try calculate it using following equation, for generalized phased Array system (AESA or PESA) :

    Ch=Ct*Nt+Cpav*Pav*Nt+Cr*Nr


    Ch=Cost of Hardware ($)
    Ct=Cost of Transmitter module
    Nt=Number of Transmitters
    Pav=Average emitted power (PPeak*Duty Cycle)
    Cr=Cost of Receiver Module
    Nr= Number of Receivers
    Cpav=Cost of producing average power (U$/watt)

    Let's have an example.. now we have AESA RADAR with 2000 T/R Modules with peak power of 20 Kilowatts and duty cycle of typical Russian fighter jets (25%), cost of the T/R modules is U$ 500

    In the other hand we have a PESA RADAR with single transmitter having 2 Travelling wave tube each delivering 10Kw of power thus Peak power of the RADAR's is 20Kw .. cost of the transmitter is U$ 250.000 , the PESA have 2000 receive module with cost of U$ 300 each .

    duty cycle is same .

    cost of producing average power for both RADAR is assumed to be the same U$ 0,1/watt

    so which one is cheaper ?

    AESA RADAR
    Pav= 20.000 watt* 0.25 = 5000 Watt
    Cost of AESA : U$ 3.000.000

    PESA RADAR
    Pav= same as above (5000 watts)
    Cost of PESA : U$ 850.500

    the PESA RADAR with same power and same duty cycle comes in much cheaper .

    perhaps that is why SAM engagement RADAR's which may consist of some 10.000 antenna modules uses PESA scheme instead AESA.



    SerbNationalist
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 37
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2010-09-03
    Age : 28
    Location : Београд

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  SerbNationalist on Fri May 06, 2011 7:27 am

    Stealthflanker wrote:
    SerbNationalist wrote:Tell me Garry, is Buk equipped with an AESA radar, or if it isn't, can it be equipped? And by Buk I mean do TELARS have it, I know that it can be used as a surveillance radar! And tell me what is the difference between PESA and AESA, which is better? Sorry for the question but trying to learn that stuff, am really interested in it.

    mind if i tag along Very Happy ?

    related to Buk.. well Buk-M1 is likely equipped with typical Slotted Planar Array RADAR, not PESA or AESA, only BUK-M2 equipped with PESA Engagement RADAR .

    and yes every BUK Launcher have Engagement RADAR's on its own.


    Related to PESA or AESA , the primary differences between them is their power source , PESA RADAR uses Single transmitter to transmit their beam , their Antenna elements contains no "Active" elements, only Phase Shifters for their electronic Scanning .

    Example is Irbis-E RADAR which uses 2 Travelling Wave Tube to form its transmitter system, it's antenna contains nothing but a beam steering controller and phase shifters .

    as for AESA every antenna elements mounted on it have their own transmitter in shape of MMIC (Monolithic Microwave Integrated Circuit) along with power amplifier , thus every element can transmit power by itself , and those devices are mounted in the Antenna (PESA transmitter is NOT in the Antenna but in separate module/LRU) .

    as for AESA Vs PESA comparison , the primary advantages held by AESA over PESA is in the Reliability of the transmitter, PESA transmitter (Travelling Wave Tube, Klystrons, Magnetrons ) are usually "short lived" due to the fact that they often handle very high amount of Microwave power in often very confined or small space, like say fighter RADAR's , their MTBF (mean Time Between Failure) is somewhere between 200-300 Hrs , and can be as low as 5 hours (early Su-27's N001 Myech RADAR's) once the transmitter fail , the entire RADAR will cease to function .

    AESA RADAR in other hand , since MMIC modules handle lower power (5 watts till some 100 watts) their reliability is higher , APG-79 MMIC T/R Modules may last with MTBF up to some 20.000 Hours , another advantage is since each modules have its own transmitter, failure of some modules may not hamper the RADAR's performance, however there is a "safe limit" of 10% .. more than it entire RADAR's may fail .

    as for PESA type RADAR, the primary advantages over AESA is price .. AESA is EXPENSIVE.. cost of the AESA can up to millions of $ , primarily determined by emitted power and numbers of transmit and receive modules .

    You can try calculate it using following equation, for generalized phased Array system (AESA or PESA) :

    Ch=Ct*Nt+Cpav*Pav*Nt+Cr*Nr


    Ch=Cost of Hardware ($)
    Ct=Cost of Transmitter module
    Nt=Number of Transmitters
    Pav=Average emitted power (PPeak*Duty Cycle)
    Cr=Cost of Receiver Module
    Nr= Number of Receivers
    Cpav=Cost of producing average power (U$/watt)

    Let's have an example.. now we have AESA RADAR with 2000 T/R Modules with peak power of 20 Kilowatts and duty cycle of typical Russian fighter jets (25%), cost of the T/R modules is U$ 500

    In the other hand we have a PESA RADAR with single transmitter having 2 Travelling wave tube each delivering 10Kw of power thus Peak power of the RADAR's is 20Kw .. cost of the transmitter is U$ 250.000 , the PESA have 2000 receive module with cost of U$ 300 each .

    duty cycle is same .

    cost of producing average power for both RADAR is assumed to be the same U$ 0,1/watt

    so which one is cheaper ?

    AESA RADAR
    Pav= 20.000 watt* 0.25 = 5000 Watt
    Cost of AESA : U$ 3.000.000

    PESA RADAR
    Pav= same as above (5000 watts)
    Cost of PESA : U$ 850.500

    the PESA RADAR with same power and same duty cycle comes in much cheaper .

    perhaps that is why SAM engagement RADAR's which may consist of some 10.000 antenna modules uses PESA scheme instead AESA.



    First of all I never mind, it would be nice to come and read this topic tomorrow and find 50 more responses from different people. Very Happy
    Second, thank you for that post, it is very educational and is something I looked forward to!
    So generally they have the same effectiveness? I mean they both have the same quality in waging war. PESA will need more maintenance and more spare parts in high level battles while AESA will need less but costs over 3 times more than PESA? They are both LPI (Low Probability of Interception) if I'm not mistaken, and they more or less have the same performance? If I'm not mistaken most if not all AD systems use PESA? I'm guessing that in combat it is as reliable as AESA, just needs more maintenance and spare parts?
    I said as reliable having in mind that strategy will be multiple radars scanning areas when they spot groups or individual targets they track, then they shut down and leave the job for Buk's guidance PESA radar's, guidance radars work for few seconds until they launch (for ARH) or few extra seconds while they guide the target if its SARH! I knew that every Buk has its on radar I just didn't know weather they were PESA or something else.
    And since I really love Buk, I'm interested in your opinion would a good combo be something like AESA radars for surveillance and acquisition radars and PESA as guidance radars, and of course a good command and control center...mobile of course_!
    Thank you in advance and sorry for being boring, I just really like Buk and want to learn everything about it, and I also like radars, and am about to serve on one in few months when I report for military duty after I'm done with college!
    And by Buk I always mean M2 or M2E or M3, although no one knows anything exact about the M#, just guesses and small info that has been released.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  GarryB on Fri May 06, 2011 10:29 am

    Tell me Garry, is Buk equipped with an AESA radar, or if it isn't, can
    it be equipped? And by Buk I mean do TELARS have it, I know that it can
    be used as a surveillance radar! And tell me what is the difference
    between PESA and AESA, which is better? Sorry for the question but
    trying to learn that stuff, am really interested in it.

    The difference between Kub and Buk is cost... having a radar on every TEL made the system much more capable and much more survivable, but also much more expensive.

    PESA and AESA are both electronically scanned arrays and share many advantages over mechanically scanned radar.
    AESA is best but expensive. PESA is 70% as good and much cheaper. In terms of guiding missiles all the advantages of low sidelobes is shared by both ESAs.
    PESA is much cheaper.

    Interesting , Source ?

    That book that I mentioned that showed the US turned off civilian GPS over Georgia during the conflict in 2008 to make it harder for the Russians (the Georgians were using military navstar receivers) mentioned it from memory, or it might have been in a CAST article... I will have a look.

    Related to PESA or AESA , the primary differences between them is their
    power source , PESA RADAR uses Single transmitter to transmit their beam
    , their Antenna elements contains no "Active" elements, only Phase
    Shifters for their electronic Scanning .

    In many ways the difference is like the difference between having a grid array of lenses with optical fibres leading to a single bulb where the bulb can electronically send light down one or all of the fibres to shine light in a different area. It can electronically scan the field of view in milli seconds and then examine the results.

    That is a PESA.

    An AESA is a grid array of flashlights where each has the power to transmit and receive light. Obviously it is an order of magnitude more expensive and complicated but each element can do some preliminary processing to reduce noise and lower power settings can be used.

    perhaps that is why SAM engagement RADAR's which may consist of some 10.000 antenna modules uses PESA scheme instead AESA.

    To add to this the Russians have been using PESA radars for 30 years and have improved them over time so their performance is actually very impressive. Their technology with regard to AESA radar antennas is much more limited and "new".
    In performance terms a Russian PESA vs a Russian AESA the Russian PESA is probably a better choice for now and not just because of cost. A Good PESA is likely better than an average AESA.

    The Russians have invested a lot of money and effort into AESA technology and some of the PESA technology can certainly be applied to AESAs so they are not starting from square one.

    Soon next gen SAMs and ships and aircraft etc will be fitted with AESAs as standard.

    So generally they have the same effectiveness? I mean they both have the same quality in waging war.

    Think of it in terms of stealth. For some roles... like air policing duties or intercepting unescorted bombers stealth is pretty pointless. For other duties like penetrating enemy air defences, or shooting down enemy fighter aircraft stealth is pretty useful to have... though C4IR and net centricity and situational awareness is just as important.

    The thing is that PESA is almost as good as AESA and most of the time it is good enough. There are some roles where AESA makes a real difference... for instance using powerful radar emissions as jammers is much easier with 2,000 emitters than with one emitter through 2,000 lenses.

    AESAs tend to be better in low probability intercept modes (LPI) where very low energy beams are used to scan and track targets using different frequencies and wave shapes to find different targets. The use of the right frequency and the right wave shape means you look sharper... the alternative is raw power which makes your scan or track signal like a lighthouse beam to a man with a pair of binoculars.

    Because each of the antenna elements is a complete transmit receive module it can form complex signals and process the return signal to remove noise and unwanted data, which means less powerful emissions are required and the correct signal can be used to get the best data on the target.

    For instance some radar frequencies bounce off rain clouds and are used by weather radars to monitor weather... other frequencies go through clouds and moisture but tend to bounce off the ground and aircraft. Different materials reflect different frequencies differently... and of course there is Doppler shift which will tell you if the target is moving and in which direction.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3054
    Points : 3152
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  medo on Fri May 06, 2011 10:33 pm

    And since I really love Buk, I'm interested in your opinion would a good combo be something like AESA radars for surveillance and acquisition radars and PESA as guidance radars, and of course a good command and control center...mobile of course_!

    Actually this combination already exist. Buk-M1-2 or Buk-M2 could be networked with AESA early warning radars like Gamma-DE, Nebo-SVU or maybe even with Nebo-M if it is in production now. They could also work with passive detecting system Orion, which detect planes and triangulate their positions with any emission from plane (radar, IFF, voice com, data com,...).

    For the needs of air defense PESA radar is more than enough. They could engage more targets simultaneously and are very good against jamming with frequency hoping, very limited side lobes, etc. SAM radars don't need jamming capabilities, although air defense have their own jammers, but good jamming resistance to operate in environment with high jamming. For sure AESA radars will be soon in SAM systems, when they will be more cheaper and more mature.

    SerbNationalist
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 37
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2010-09-03
    Age : 28
    Location : Београд

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  SerbNationalist on Sat May 07, 2011 1:27 am

    medo wrote:
    And since I really love Buk, I'm interested in your opinion would a good combo be something like AESA radars for surveillance and acquisition radars and PESA as guidance radars, and of course a good command and control center...mobile of course_!
    They could engage more targets simultaneously and are very good against jamming with frequency hoping, very limited side lobes, etc. SAM radars don't need jamming capabilities, although air defense have their own jammers, but good jamming resistance to operate in environment with high jamming.
    Tell me is PESA considered an LPI (Low Probability of Interception)radar? (question inspired by your comment on side lobes, which is the characteristic of LPI radars, low side lobes ) I know that SAM's don't need jamming capabilities, but LPi is very important these days, that's why I asked about AESA and PESA.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Austin on Sat May 07, 2011 1:47 am

    Updates on BUK from APA

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K37-Buk.html

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat May 07, 2011 5:44 am

    Austin wrote:Updates on BUK from APA

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K37-Buk.html

    well i think there's nothing new..except some extra images of Belarus's upgraded BUK .


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  GarryB on Sat May 07, 2011 6:51 am

    Low (energy) side lobes is a feature of ESA radars, so both PESA and AESA radars benefit.

    In many ways sensor fusion can offer LPI modes to any radar in the sense that the combination of an IRST with any type of radar means that a target that is detected by the IRST can be tracked by a radar without needing a full field of view scan or high energy pulse.

    For a conventional dish radar to find targets it transmits radar beams and mechanically scans one side to the other top to bottom or bottom to top. As it transmits it listens for return signals so the scan has to be slow enough to allow the signal to go out and come back from the target.

    With an AESA or PESA each element covers an area of the field of view so to scan the entire FOV at once you just turn the elements on and off and then listen for the return signal.

    In both cases the return signals for targets are remembered and to "track" the target you occasionally send another pulse in the area of sky the target was to see if it is still there or if it has moved.

    With an IRST detecting targets the radar no longer needs to scan and send out energy in random directions that can be detected by an enemy... the IRST finds the target but cannot give a precise range so using the angular information from the IRST the radar can send a tracking pulse directly at the target and get range and speed and other information in a single fraction of a second pulse that might be missed by the enemy in the noise of other radars and jammers etc.

    SerbNationalist
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 37
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2010-09-03
    Age : 28
    Location : Београд

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  SerbNationalist on Tue May 10, 2011 1:52 am

    One question Garry, it is related to the SAM systems. Can a Buk or some other system be able to fire both ARH and SARH missiles? For example, you have a Buk-M2E TELAR and 4 ARH missiles on it, you fire them at targets, they do usual, you have a lock, launch it and then the missiles radar takes over, you load SARH missiles and then launch them on targets and of course guide them with your radar until they hit(or miss), all from the same vehicle (TELAR)? Or would ARH and SARH missiles require 2 compleetly different systems/TELAR's and equipment?
    What I mean is can a guidance and illumination radar of the Buk TELAR be used for both ARH and SARH missiles, with ARH it would do less work, while with SARH it would guide the missile al the way, like it's supposed to!
    By this I don't mean like have 2 missiles on the TELAR that are ARH and 2 that are SARH and then use them at the same time, but use one, reload and use the other type, or launch the other tipe from the transloader which with Buk-M2E has that ability!

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  GarryB on Tue May 10, 2011 9:28 am

    I don't actually know for sure, but if we look at fighter aircraft it is clear that aircraft that can operate SARH missiles can also operate ARH missiles including in mixed loads.

    Very simply there are things that are exactly the same for both seeker types and there are things that are different.

    The target needs to be detected, and tracked and identified as hostile.
    Based on target data like target height, speed and flight direction with ARH missiles the launch platform needs to determine based on the distance to the target and the targets flight attributes how long your missile will take to get to the general interception airspace. Using that time estimate the future position of the target can be calculated and so the missile is launched towards that estimated airspace with the seeker off till it gets within the seeker radars range limit which is where it turns on its radar to look for and lock on to the target.

    With modern SARH missiles the process is very similar except because the SARH missile has a passive radar seeker looking for a projected by the launch platform and reflected off the target it doesn't need to "turn on" its radar.

    Some SARH require the target be illuminated before missile launch and others will fly on inertial navigation system control (basically a simple autopilot) till it is closer to the target and by then if the target is not illuminated then the missile will fail.

    Anyway for BUK scanning and finding targets and then tracking those targets will be the same for both types of missile. Once an engagement starts however both types of missile might be used for a single engagement where one missile is ARH and the other is SARH. Both missiles will be fired towards the target intercept point while the BUK continues to track the target. If the target turns then a new interception area will be calculated and new course correction data will be sent to both missiles to send them in the new direction. As both missiles approach the target the BUK will illuminate the target for the SARH missile, while the ARH missile will turn on its radar and scan for the target itself. Both missiles will home in on the target.


    Obviously a powerful large PESA radar on a BUK will likely be more capable than the little radar set and electronics that can be fitted into the nose of a missile, but ARH missiles are practically fire and forget which is good for attacks by large numbers of cruise missiles for example. The ARH missile also has the advantage of closing in on its target whereas the SARH missile relies on rather long distance use of the target illumination radar of the BUK.
    Of course SARH missiles are cheaper too.
    In some roles one is better than the other, and in some roles the difference in performance is not important. In such a case having a mix of missiles is probably best.

    SerbNationalist
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 37
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2010-09-03
    Age : 28
    Location : Београд

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  SerbNationalist on Tue May 10, 2011 7:08 pm

    GarryB wrote:I don't actually know for sure, but if we look at fighter aircraft it is clear that aircraft that can operate SARH missiles can also operate ARH missiles including in mixed loads.

    Very simply there are things that are exactly the same for both seeker types and there are things that are different.

    The target needs to be detected, and tracked and identified as hostile.
    Based on target data like target height, speed and flight direction with ARH missiles the launch platform needs to determine based on the distance to the target and the targets flight attributes how long your missile will take to get to the general interception airspace. Using that time estimate the future position of the target can be calculated and so the missile is launched towards that estimated airspace with the seeker off till it gets within the seeker radars range limit which is where it turns on its radar to look for and lock on to the target.

    With modern SARH missiles the process is very similar except because the SARH missile has a passive radar seeker looking for a projected by the launch platform and reflected off the target it doesn't need to "turn on" its radar.

    Some SARH require the target be illuminated before missile launch and others will fly on inertial navigation system control (basically a simple autopilot) till it is closer to the target and by then if the target is not illuminated then the missile will fail.

    Anyway for BUK scanning and finding targets and then tracking those targets will be the same for both types of missile. Once an engagement starts however both types of missile might be used for a single engagement where one missile is ARH and the other is SARH. Both missiles will be fired towards the target intercept point while the BUK continues to track the target. If the target turns then a new interception area will be calculated and new course correction data will be sent to both missiles to send them in the new direction. As both missiles approach the target the BUK will illuminate the target for the SARH missile, while the ARH missile will turn on its radar and scan for the target itself. Both missiles will home in on the target.


    Obviously a powerful large PESA radar on a BUK will likely be more capable than the little radar set and electronics that can be fitted into the nose of a missile, but ARH missiles are practically fire and forget which is good for attacks by large numbers of cruise missiles for example. The ARH missile also has the advantage of closing in on its target whereas the SARH missile relies on rather long distance use of the target illumination radar of the BUK.
    Of course SARH missiles are cheaper too.
    In some roles one is better than the other, and in some roles the difference in performance is not important. In such a case having a mix of missiles is probably best.

    That's pretty much what I thought...if not 2 SARH and 2 ARH, then at least the same type in one load and the other type in the other load. As much as I know missiles are different, but the vehicle firing them and the guidance radar are the same...just like you said, find the target, identify it's status, speed, height, distance, etc. and then SARH will have a lock and be guided until the destruction of the target, or jamming or fooling the missile somehow, or it loosing lock...and ARH will be launched, travel, then it turns on its own radar, searches and locks and engages the target. So I'm on the same page, Buk-M2E/M2 should be able to use both without any changes to the system itself, maybe few different algorithms and protocols in the computer, but those can exist both for ARH and SARH, today's computers are powerful enough! But if someone else has any info or knowledge on this, he/she would be very welcome on it! Very Happy

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3054
    Points : 3152
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  medo on Tue May 10, 2011 10:13 pm

    One question Garry, it is related to the SAM systems. Can a Buk or some other system be able to fire both ARH and SARH missiles? For example, you have a Buk-M2E TELAR and 4 ARH missiles on it, you fire them at targets, they do usual, you have a lock, launch it and then the missiles radar takes over, you load SARH missiles and then launch them on targets and of course guide them with your radar until they hit(or miss), all from the same vehicle (TELAR)? Or would ARH and SARH missiles require 2 compleetly different systems/TELAR's and equipment?
    What I mean is can a guidance and illumination radar of the Buk TELAR be used for both ARH and SARH missiles, with ARH it would do less work, while with SARH it would guide the missile al the way, like it's supposed to!
    By this I don't mean like have 2 missiles on the TELAR that are ARH and 2 that are SARH and then use them at the same time, but use one, reload and use the other type, or launch the other tipe from the transloader which with Buk-M2E has that ability!

    I'm sure all Buk variants could work with missiles with both SARH ans ARH homing head. Maybe some older radars need a software update, but they are able to use ARH missiles. In both case radar send in missile data of target location, before launch and in time if inertial flying, radar still send to missile corrections if target change curse and is not in place for missile intercept. When missile reach a distance of using its own radar, than tracking radar illuminate target for SARH missile, while ARH missile find target with its own radar. The only difference in older Buks and Buk-M2 is how many targets it could engage simultaneously. Older Buks with mechanical radar antenna could engage only one target, because radar antenna could look and lock on only in one target. Buk-M2 have radar with PESA antenna and could simultaneously engage 4 targets, be it with SARH missiles or with ARH missiles.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3054
    Points : 3152
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  medo on Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:47 pm

    http://npostrela.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=36&sectionid=2&catid=7&Itemid=13

    http://npostrela.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=61

    More informations about radar Credo-1E and other radars of that type.

    Pervius
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 259
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2011-03-08

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Pervius on Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:00 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:I don't find that to be a very sensible recon asset. It was designed to pull up well behind the front line and launch missiles, not go behind enemy lines and scout. That ZIL chassis is know for its lack of off-road mobility.


    Do the wheels fall off like a certain American model because the wheel hub was casted and can't bear the load it was designed for?

    ....They'll just restrict them to on-road use and hope and pray they work for awhile when real combat starts....

    Everyone does things on the cheap...Besides when the certain American model has a wheel roll off as the hub fractures...they just chain up the suspension and keep driving. It drives ok with 1 less wheel.

    That Russian Tire Inflation system looks like it's working very well.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:49 am

    Older Buks with mechanical radar antenna could engage only one target, because radar antenna could look and lock on only in one target. Buk-M2 have radar with PESA antenna and could simultaneously engage 4 targets, be it with SARH missiles or with ARH missiles.

    Actually the old Kub only had one radar vehicle and was limited in engagements to one at a time.

    The BUK has a tracking and engagement radar on each TEL and so with 6 vehicles per unit that means 6 targets can be engaged with the older missiles. The BUK is compatible with KUB so old SA-6 missiles could be used with a BUK battery too.

    Russian Patriot
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1168
    Points : 2062
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 25
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Russia develops new long-range mobile radar

    Post  Russian Patriot on Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:41 am

    Russia develops new long-range mobile radar

    Russian scientists have developed and tested a new mobile radar which will soon become part of the country’s aerospace defenses.

    The new radar, dubbed 55Zh6ME, is capable of detecting targets at the distance of up to 1,800 kilometers and an altitude of up to 1,200 km.

    “The radar has been developed for the Russian Armed Forces, especially for aerospace defenses,” a spokesman for the Nizhniy Novgorod Research Institute of Radio Engineering (NNIIRT) said on Monday.

    “The deliveries of the first batch of new radars to the [Russian] military are expected soon,” the official said, adding that the product has strong export potential.

    Russia is planning to set up a unified strategic aerospace defense command that would integrate existing air defense and missile defense networks, early warning systems and aerospace monitoring systems.

    http://www.en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20111017/167774318.html

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Austin on Sun Oct 30, 2011 4:21 pm

    Here is Almaz-Antey press on it

    http://www.almaz-antey.ru/about/press/news/789.html

    ###

    Completed testing multi-radar complex of new generation. In the Russian army enters a highly effective means of reliable control of air-space with a detection range of aerodynamic and ballistic objects up to 1,800 km and a height of 1200 km. The innovative design of the Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Radio Engineering (JSC "FSPC" NNIIRT ") is characterized by high mobility and their capacity is capable of replacing the whole radio engineering division. The complex has no domestic analogues.
    Press-service of "FSPC" NNIIRT "
    ###


    So this system has 3 types of radar a metric radar (VHF ), a decimetric radar ( L band ) and Centimetric Radar ( X band AESA ) , All looking at the target in unision and the data is fused from all 3 radar to give a single picture.

    This will be very effective in dealing with LO targets at long range , the only thing they need to add is a Bi-Static Radar like Barrier-E , Passive Radar Detection Kit and Passive EO system.

    I am just wondering if Russia managed to detect a B-2 aircraft so far ?

    Mindstorm , Garry any thing on this ?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:17 am

    This will be very effective in dealing with LO targets at long range , the only thing they need to add is a Bi-Static Radar like Barrier-E , Passive Radar Detection Kit and Passive EO system.

    Technically any radar system can simply listen and be used in the passive radar mode.

    The system would need to operate with other similar systems so one radar emits radar waves scanning for targets while the other radars simply listen... tricky to do without a C4IR system.

    This way the radars will act as passive radars and also as bi static radars.

    I am just wondering if Russia managed to detect a B-2 aircraft so far ?

    Do you think the US would fly their B-2s close to Russia to let them test their radar equipment against them?

    Would the Russians reveal that they could detect a B-2 if they did?

    A British team detected a B-2 at the Farnborough Airshow with EO/Thermal equipment for the Rapier 2000 system, and the Aussies claim to have detected a B-2 with their OTH-B radar at Jindalee.

    I don't think everyone but the Russians will be detecting B-2s...

    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon Oct 31, 2011 9:41 am

    Offcourse they can detect it...question is at what range.


    Zoltan Dani's crew claim they could detect the B-2 with their modified P-18 radar. In the book about the war he says it left a similar signal on the radar screen as the F-117 (very faint and different from regular aircraft) but it was clear that it was a much larger aircraft.


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:25 am

    Yes, detection with longer wave radars is one thing, but most engagement and tracking radars use higher frequencies that these stealth aircraft are less visible to.

    A bit like the Early 1960s with the U-2... detecting it is not enough, you need something that can go up and kill it too to be a proper air defence.

    Certainly even an Su-25 could be used to intercept either the B-2 or F-117 let alone a real fighter, but the problem is what if it turns out to be an F-22?

    The solution is obviously coming with the S-400, Su-35S, and PAK FA.

    This radar however is an important piece in that finding the target and following its movements and passing that info to S-400 batteries and flights of Flankers and PAK FAs is the first part of a successful interception.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Austin on Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:18 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:Offcourse they can detect it...question is at what range.


    Zoltan Dani's crew claim they could detect the B-2 with their modified P-18 radar. In the book about the war he says it left a similar signal on the radar screen as the F-117 (very faint and different from regular aircraft) but it was clear that it was a much larger aircraft.


    That would be very interesting if he truly managed to detect the presense of B-2 , most certainly he managed to track and beat a F-117.

    But i was more keen to see how the radars like EW radars , OTH radars and VHF radars are effective against B-2 type target , B-2 is the golden bird in Stealth so far there is nothing in US inventory that we know off including F-22/JSF that can beat a B-2 in stealth.

    I am sure the Russians are not dumb and they must be worked out or atleast tried to work out tactics to detect a B-2 as they represent a real threat to them.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Austin on Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:23 pm

    GarryB wrote:Do you think the US would fly their B-2s close to Russia to let them test their radar equipment against them?

    Let put the question this way , Do you think the Russians have any thing in their inventory that can detect a B-2 even if it flew close to Russia ?

    Is there any statement from official that have hinted at it ?

    So its a moot point , what if they flew and Russia was clueless ?

    Would the Russians reveal that they could detect a B-2 if they did?

    Probably they wont , Probably they are clueless as well.

    A British team detected a B-2 at the Farnborough Airshow with EO/Thermal equipment for the Rapier 2000 system, and the Aussies claim to have detected a B-2 with their OTH-B radar at Jindalee.

    The Rapier system EO detecting a B-2 is no big deal becuase it over flew it in the airshow , it knew where and what to look at and they pointed the EO towards it.

    The Jindalee claim is interesting but there is not much information on that.

    I would say B-2 strategic bombers represent a far bigger challenge to RVSN or Strategic Forces then any Minuteman or Ohio does when it comes to first strike.


    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Cyberspec on Tue Nov 01, 2011 3:30 am

    Well if we go by the latest Almaz Antey marketing material they can detect the B-2 Smile


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:33 am

    That would be very interesting if he truly managed to detect the presense of B-2 , most certainly he managed to track and beat a F-117.

    What chance have the Russians of tracking B-2s when American marketing and propaganda are so strong? Twisted Evil

    I am sure the Russians are not dumb and they must be worked out or atleast tried to work out tactics to detect a B-2 as they represent a real threat to them.

    Only as a first strike weapon are they a threat.

    And in a first strike you can't send up air support as that would give away the surprise.

    We hear about how this stealth plane has a radar signature of a tennis ball or that stealth plane has the radar signature of a small bug.

    The Russians track paint chips in space.

    There are not that many tennis balls or insects for that matter that fly at 12,000m at 700km/h.

    OTH radars actually have several advantages in finding stealth aircraft... their low frequency plus the fact that they bounce off the atmosphere around the curvature of the earth means they likely wont hit the stealth aircraft front on, but from the top or bottom... angles from which they are not so stealthy.

    Let put the question this way , Do you think the Russians have any thing in their inventory that can detect a B-2 even if it flew close to Russia ?

    Their BMEW radars would detect them for the same reason the Aussie OTH-B radars detected them. All Russian fighters have IRSTs and IR guided missiles and cannon.

    The Rapier system EO detecting a B-2 is no big deal becuase it over flew it in the airshow , it knew where and what to look at and they pointed the EO towards it.

    The B-2 stood out clear as day in the IR system, the Russians have optical tracking systems in addition to radar systems too you know.

    I would say B-2 strategic bombers represent a far bigger challenge to RVSN or Strategic Forces then any Minuteman or Ohio does when it comes to first strike.

    I disagree. With Humint resources within NATO and the US as I said a B-2 would be incredibly vulnerable to even an old fighter like a Mig-21 let along a more modern one like a Mig-29 or Su-27 or Mig-31.

    An SS-18 is less interceptable than a B-2... there is no chance that a B-2 strike could wipe out Russians entire nuclear forces or even weaken it to the point that a retaliation could be survivable.

    It would just be one way to start the end of the world... despite their price they offer no silver bullet that the US can use to make demands or hold over the Russians.

    The Mathematics of stealth were created by a Russian and while the processing power of computers has increased enormously the maths hasn't changed much at all.

    The difference between the F-117 and the B-2 is that the B-2 has curves thanks to super computers processing power and manufacturing methods that can produce products to the level of accuracy required.

    If there were 100 B-2s then they might make a difference but there being only 20, and their locations being pretty much known and monitored they are not the threat in real terms you seem to think they are.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-07

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  TR1 on Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:35 am

    N-001VEP uses old antenna, not Pero.

    No production Pero has been retrofitted to Flankers.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Radar systems

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 11:01 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 11:01 am