Libyan Crisis

magnumcromagnon wrote:
It depends on the fighter, the weapons, the country of it's origin, and that nation's doctrine. The Federation put heavy emphasis developing inertial guidance for that very reason. It's unlikely the French have this doctrine.

From your argument it sounds like the Federation has also found a way to bend the laws of Physics.

Because normally no aircraft, Federation or otherwise can carry out such interleaving actions simultaneously. They can either use their EW systems or they fire their missiles.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

It's sectarian, just not Sunni vs Shia. It's Salafists (GNA/Muslim Brotherhood) vs Wahaabists (LNA/Saudi aligned).

Wahabists are Salafists too .

Salafists originally means "’My predecessors " ,those who saw the prophet Muhammed and his companions . Wahabists followed a religious leader "Muhammad Ibn Abd-al Wahab " , that's why we called them Wahabists and most of Muslims in Arab World are against the Wahabi school , specially Al-azher university in Egypt .

Muslim Brotherhood combined between all of this to gain more support but basically they are near to the Wahabist school .

The war in Libya is more about geo-politics and control and Clash of influence of two powers , Egypt +SA+UAE against Turkey +Qatar +Muslim Brotherhood .

From the begining ,Turkey wished that MB would rule Arab countries and make a free trade market for the Turkish products just like what happened in Tunisia which was fulled with the Turkish products and some factories were closed there because of that and demonstrations raised there too. Sisi came and removed MB from Egypt ,MB became weak in Syria and Libya and everywhere because their main leadership was in Egypt .

Turkey quickly received the MB ,opened TV channels with Qatari funding for them to try to make a coup in Egypt but this failed . Now Erdogan needs the MB to rule Libya by any way .

RTN wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:
It depends on the fighter, the weapons, the country of it's origin, and that nation's doctrine. The Federation put heavy emphasis developing inertial guidance for that very reason. It's unlikely the French have this doctrine.

From your argument it sounds like the Federation has also found a way to bend the laws of Physics.

Because normally no aircraft, Federation or otherwise can carry out such interleaving actions simultaneously. They can either use their EW systems or they fire their missiles.

They can. Nato Air to ground missiles use either GPS or Laser guidance and their EW is mostly against radars to achieve air superiority.

Libya has nothing that would oblige a Rafale to do both.

Russian su-35 could also easily jamm radars with Khabiniy and use laser guided kh-25 or other missiles in the same time.

Isos wrote:
They can. Nato Air to ground missiles use either GPS or Laser guidance and their EW is mostly against radars to achieve air superiority.

How? How are they using their EW systems and simultaneously firing their missiles. EW systems on aircraft are meant to jam sensors of incoming hostile missiles and radars of hostile aircraft.

So you do realize that when on active mode the aircraft's onboard EW system will also hamper the performance of missiles on board the aircraft.

Isos wrote:Russian su-35 could also easily jamm radars with Khabiniy and use laser guided kh-25 or other missiles in the same time.  

Jam which radars? I presume you mean radar's of hostile enemy aircraft. Radar's of aircraft cannot jam a ground based radar because they are too large to be jammed.

RTN wrote:

Isos wrote:
They can. Nato Air to ground missiles use either GPS or Laser guidance and their EW is mostly against radars to achieve air superiority.

How? How are they using their EW systems and simultaneously firing their missiles. EW systems on aircraft are meant to jam sensors of incoming hostile missiles and radars of hostile aircraft.

So you do realize that when on active mode the aircraft's onboard EW system will also hamper the performance of missiles on board the aircraft.

Isos wrote:Russian su-35 could also easily jamm radars with Khabiniy and use laser guided kh-25 or other missiles in the same time.  

Jam which radars? I presume you mean radar's of hostile enemy aircraft. Radar's of aircraft cannot jam a ground based radar because they are too large to be jammed.

Can you precise what missiles ?

Modern systems prevent its own jammers to jamm its own missiles. Specially if they don't work on same frequencies as enemy missiles which should be the case most of the time. Modern EW system are smarter than you think.

Air to ground missiles can't be jammed by fighter's jammer as they use laser guidance or gps guidance.

Jamming ground radars is possible. Depend what jammer you carry. The big radar you are talking about are early warning radar and work on lower frequencies and need big antennas, making jamming very difficult (maybe Growler can do it). But ground fire control radar work on X band , the same as fighter's radar and can be jammed by fighter's EW systems pretty easily.

No it can't.  Ground based systems generate far more power these days.  Best the jets jamming systems can do is attempt to spoof the radar but not jam it.  You would be needing MW of power to effectively jam it and that's something a fighter jet doesn't have.  Like the test against S-300 radar systems done many years ago in Greece and Slovenia resulted in nothing. Only known system able to be effective was a Il-76 built around jamming and it ended up jamming itself as well.

RTN wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:
It depends on the fighter, the weapons, the country of it's origin, and that nation's doctrine. The Federation put heavy emphasis developing inertial guidance for that very reason. It's unlikely the French have this doctrine.

From your argument it sounds like the Federation has also found a way to bend the laws of Physics.

Because normally no aircraft, Federation or otherwise can carry out such interleaving actions simultaneously. They can either use their EW systems or they fire their missiles.

Inertial guidance doesn't require active guidance, it's programmed algorithms and mathematics, not magic! Iskander-M has both inertial guidance and the ability to deploy active jammers. So by your argument it (Iskander-M) should fall out the sky every time it deploys it's active jammers. BTW Belarus developed wing-tip mounted jamming pods that have side protruding hardpoints to be used in tandem with AAMs.

magnumcromagnon wrote:[So by your argument it (Iskander-M) should fall out the sky every time it deploys it's active jammers. BTW Belarus developed wing-tip mounted jamming pods that have side protruding hardpoints to be used in tandem with AAMs.

We're talking aircraft here, not ballistic missiles.

Isos wrote:Modern systems prevent its own jammers to jamm its own missiles.

That's the point I was trying to make. It doesn't. How can they even do that?

Apart from the impossibility of it where a fighter pilot is trying to jam an enemy aircraft using his EW system plus trying to fire a missile at it.

So if your EW system is active it's bound to interfere with the functioning of a missile that you are trying to fire.

Re aircraft take any aircraft you like. Take Rafale for instance. You are using SPECTRA's phased array radar jammer to interfere with the operation of radar of a hostile aircraft. And while you are at it can you fire a Meteor BVR air to air missile or even a SCALP cruise missile?

You can't because then the noise/false information being emitted from SPECTRA's phased radar jammer will blanket the sensors of the Meteor and the Scalp as well.

miketheterrible wrote:No it can't.  Ground based systems generate far more power these days.  Best the jets jamming systems can do is attempt to spoof the radar but not jam it.  You would be needing MW of power to effectively jam it and that's something a fighter jet doesn't have.  Like the test against S-300 radar systems done many years ago in Greece and Slovenia resulted in nothing. Only known system able to be effective was a Il-76 built around jamming and it ended up jamming itself as well.

Of course missiles could be jammed by the EW suite of a fighter! If the missile is guided by it's own radar seeker. If the missile comes closer to an aircraft with active jamming pods it tastes more and more of the power of the jamming pods. The power of the radar seeker of an missile is less, than for an aircraft. And it's not that the missile is complete blinded for the whole time, it's enough for a part of a second that the missile seeker lose the aircraft, because the field of view for a missile seeker is very low. You are correct for semi-guided or guided missiles from ground, they are really really difficult to jam.

The old AN/ALQ-99 jamming pods had a power output of 10.8 KW. The EA-18G can carry 2 or 3 AN/ALQ-99 jamming pods. At all (with other EW pods) it should have estimated ~50 KW of power output over nearly all frequencies required. In the sum it's not bad, the EA-18G can jam ground based radar, but.... If we talk about S-300 and/or S-400 we talk about 300 KW to 1,2 MW of power output, that's much more. And S-300/400 radars don't work lonely , they are part of a network (AWACS, other AD-Systems etc.). Yes of course the EA-18G can direct the jammer power output at a single target, but that wouldn't be enough for a whole system. Main weapon for western countries against ground based radar system is the AGM-88 HARM, the Tornado ECR and the EA-18G use it. The range of the AGM-88 is 150 km, wouldn't be enough for S-300 or S-400 but for smaller systems okay. Conclusion...S-300 and S-400 are nearly impossible to jam from air, even the active connection between missile and ground station is really difficult to impossible to jam.

RTN wrote:That's the point I was trying to make. It doesn't. How can they even do that?

Apart from the impossibility of it where a fighter pilot is trying to jam an enemy aircraft using his EW system plus trying to fire a missile at it.

So if your EW system is active it's bound to interfere with the functioning of a missile that you are trying to fire.

Different frequency! Pretty easy!!! Would be stupid if USA and Russia would use the same frequencies and same information codes You can open a gap in your EW measures, in this gap you can operate.

miketheterrible wrote:No it can't.  Ground based systems generate far more power these days.  Best the jets jamming systems can do is attempt to spoof the radar but not jam it.  You would be needing MW of power to effectively jam it and that's something a fighter jet doesn't have.  Like the test against S-300 radar systems done many years ago in Greece and Slovenia resulted in nothing. Only known system able to be effective was a Il-76 built around jamming and it ended up jamming itself as well.

Not so simple. Rafale spectra did very well against slovak s-300. It depends on many thing like range, power or technology and methods used. Also a jammer will concentrate its energy a bit like an engagement radar while the early warning radar even if more powerfull will spread its signal/power to scan a greater area of the sky. At the end the jammer can end up with more power than the early warning radar.

It's not only a question of power. You can do it smart way.

But overall, it's a game where you need to constantly upgraded your database of enemy radar signals and use updated tactic/ algho for jamming.

Russian made their s-400 work in cooperation to triangulate Growlers because they are very good at jamming. Don't underestimate them.

That's the point I was trying to make. It doesn't. How can they even do that?

Apart from the impossibility of it where a fighter pilot is trying to jam an enemy aircraft using his EW system plus trying to fire a missile at it.

So if your EW system is active it's bound to interfere with the functioning of a missile that you are trying to fire.

Re aircraft take any aircraft you like. Take Rafale for instance. You are using SPECTRA's phased array radar jammer to interfere with the operation of radar of a hostile aircraft. And while you are at it can you fire a Meteor BVR air to air missile or even a SCALP cruise missile?

You can't because then the noise/false information being emitted from SPECTRA's phased radar jammer will blanket the sensors of the Meteor and the Scalp as well.

Modern fighter computers will know that the jammer is active and if the fighter launches missiles it won't jamm on their frequency. With datalink btw aircraft you can even be protected by friendly fighter's jammers, something already integrated in most russian jammer. Go see the ad videos on youtube.

Meteor has a datalink with the Rafale and it won't jamm it too because it knows it is it's own missile. Scalp uses inertial navigation with gps updates, spectra doesn't jamm gps and inertial navigation can't be jammed by an EW system.

A jammer in a fighter won't work alone. It is connected the main computer that acts like a battle management system. What you say is true for mirage, Mig-29, Su-27.... Modern system are far more smarter than you think.

Isos wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:No it can't.  Ground based systems generate far more power these days.  Best the jets jamming systems can do is attempt to spoof the radar but not jam it.  You would be needing MW of power to effectively jam it and that's something a fighter jet doesn't have.  Like the test against S-300 radar systems done many years ago in Greece and Slovenia resulted in nothing. Only known system able to be effective was a Il-76 built around jamming and it ended up jamming itself as well.

Not so simple. Rafale spectra did very well against slovak s-300. It depends on many thing like range, power or technology and methods used. Also a jammer will concentrate its energy a bit like an engagement radar while the early warning radar even if more powerfull will spread its signal/power to scan a greater area of the sky. At the end the jammer can end up with more power than the early warning radar.

It's not only a question of power. You can do it smart way.

But overall, it's a game where you need to constantly upgraded your database of enemy radar signals and use updated tactic/ algho for jamming.

Russian made their s-400 work in cooperation to triangulate Growlers because they are very good at jamming. Don't underestimate them.

As I wrote above...the EA-18G is a really good EW aircraft, but USA made a mistake...they reduced the power output of their new jamming pods. They are better in many ways, but have a reduced range. The power output is not ~11 KW anymore, it's now  ~7 KW.

They want to make the F-35 an EW platform, but this will take many many years, due to the bugs of the F-35.

As I wrote above...the EA-18G is a really good EW aircraft, but USA made a mistake...they reduced the power output of their new jamming pods. They are better in many ways, but have a reduced range. The power output is not ~11 KW anymore, it's now  ~7 KW.

That's a good news for the pilot's balls .

You don't need to blind the whole system. If your jamming is smart enough to not allow the fire of missile it's still very good. Specially against s-300/400. But then the most common system would be buks and pantsirs which are less powerfull.

Turkish military HQ in Libya engulfed in flames after alleged Libyan Army attack

Several fires erupted at Mitiga International Airport in Tripoli, Libya after its jet fuel tank farm was “attacked”, Libya’s National Oil Corporation said on Facebook. The company provided no further details on the attack.

According to the corporation, a firefighter crew has arrived at the scene to contain the blazes.

Al Jazeera earlier reported that the airport had come under a rocket attack that hit a civilian plane.

The incident comes following a spate of attacks in the Libyan capital on Thursday, which was blamed on the Libyan National Army, led by Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar. The LNA has denied any involvement in the attacks.

In late April, the Haftar-led force announced it would cease hostilities during the holy month of Ramadan.

Libya has been torn apart between two rival governments, an elected parliament in the country’s east, supported by the LNA, and the GNA in the country’s west, for years since the assassination of the country’s long-time leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.

Mitiga International Airport in Tripoli, Libya has been forced to suspend its activities several times over the past several months due to shelling amid a confrontation between warring factions in the conflict-torn nation.

The airport itself serves as the headquarters for the Turkish Armed Forces inside Libya.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/turkish-military-hq-in-libya-engulfed-in-flames-after-alleged-libyan-army-attack/

Azi wrote:
As I wrote above...the EA-18G is a really good EW aircraft, but USA made a mistake...they reduced the power output of their new jamming pods. They are better in many ways, but have a reduced range. The power output is not ~11 KW anymore, it's now  ~7 KW.

But according to the below article , the new NGJ will implement AESA technology and has ten times the power of AN/ALQ-99 .

https://armadainternational.com/2018/08/blinding-the-enemy-with-science/

ahmedfire wrote:

Azi wrote:
As I wrote above...the EA-18G is a really good EW aircraft, but USA made a mistake...they reduced the power output of their new jamming pods. They are better in many ways, but have a reduced range. The power output is not ~11 KW anymore, it's now  ~7 KW.

But according to the below article , the new NGJ will implement AESA technology and has ten times the power of AN/ALQ-99 .

https://armadainternational.com/2018/08/blinding-the-enemy-with-science/

I don't know if I can take a site seriously that paints the Federation as the villain in the Donbass, and pretends like the Nazi salutes of the Pukes isn't ubiquitous. It's like the claims of Afghan jihadists in the 80's were hero's and freedom-fighters. In fact the site reminds me of 'The Drive'; the site basically reads like a crony stenography for US MIC's practice of plutocracy/kleptocracy.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

ahmedfire wrote:

Azi wrote:
As I wrote above...the EA-18G is a really good EW aircraft, but USA made a mistake...they reduced the power output of their new jamming pods. They are better in many ways, but have a reduced range. The power output is not ~11 KW anymore, it's now  ~7 KW.

But according to the below article , the new NGJ will implement AESA technology and has ten times the power of AN/ALQ-99 .

https://armadainternational.com/2018/08/blinding-the-enemy-with-science/

I don't know if I can take a site seriously that paints the Federation as the villain in the Donbass, and pretends like the Nazi salutes of the Pukes isn't ubiquitous. It's like the claims of Afghan jihadists in the 80's were hero's and freedom-fighters. In fact the site reminds me of 'The Drive'; the site basically reads like a crony stenography for US MIC's practice of plutocracy/kleptocracy.

And your evaluation is not just some "ad hom" "shoot the messenger".   Propaganda lie orifices simply have zero C-R-E-D-I-B-I-L-I-T-Y.

Funny how all pro-western lemmings demand pro-western media sources for "objectivity".   Pure 1984 prole behaviour.  

But we have plenty here who think that Russia testing autonomous submersible drones 10,000 km below the surface of the ocean is
merely "propaganda".   These same clowns also must believe that Avangard, Burevestnik, etc. are all Russian propaganda fakes too.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

I don't know if I can take a site seriously that paints the Federation as the villain in the Donbass, and pretends like the Nazi salutes of the Pukes isn't ubiquitous. It's like the claims of Afghan jihadists in the 80's were hero's and freedom-fighters. In fact the site reminds me of 'The Drive'; the site basically reads like a crony stenography for US MIC's practice of plutocracy/kleptocracy.

I agree regarding their shit politics but this shouldn't lead us to underestimate all their capabilities .

They will use a ducted turbine embedded within the pod, with inlet and exhaust doors for high power when open and low drag when closed .

​​​​​​​Libyan army: Tripoli militias killed intelligence chief in GNA

@StrategicNews2


New stage of the UAE's involvement in Libya.  The #UAE deploys 6 Mirage type fighter aircraft to Sidi Barani base in Egypt to support #LNA operations in #Libya.

It could be Egyptian too .

But we have plenty here who think that Russia testing autonomous submersible drones 10,000 km below the surface of the ocean is
merely "propaganda".

10,000km below the surface of the ocean is very deep... actually rather near the core of the planet...

GarryB wrote:

But we have plenty here who think that Russia testing autonomous submersible drones 10,000 km below the surface of the ocean is
merely "propaganda".  

10,000km below the surface of the ocean is very deep... actually rather near the core of the planet...

10km is over the distance from the surface to the core, the actual number is like 6500K

10KM would have to be the challenger trench which is the deepest known point of earth oceans and no military is testing drones there.

The Russians have manned subs that can go to about 6-7km depth so 10km depth sounds reasonable and sensible.

10,000 km is way too deep for anything....

JohninMK wrote:Stand well back guys

Here we go

Only 4 missiles instead of 6 per side? In war time ? They seem more stupid than syrian crews ...