Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

They found one and guess what, it is apparently within 1300 metres of the second RuAF S-400. No doubt sharing the Pantsir protection.

Wonder if it will have its own radar there, if not wonder where they will site it?

I would say those are fake ones. Russia produces since soviet times fake s-300 to confuse satellites. They would never park them so close each other while Israel said they want to destroy them. Real ones must be underground until they are operational.

F-22/-35s vs S-300:
https://politpuzzle.ru/117992-leonkov-o-legkoj-pobede-s-300-v-dueli-s-f-35-dlya-naglyadnosti-mozhem-sbit-paru-samoletov/?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=1637&utm_content=1892796&utm_campaign=2607

Isos wrote:

They found one and guess what, it is apparently within 1300 metres of the second RuAF S-400. No doubt sharing the Pantsir protection.

Wonder if it will have its own radar there, if not wonder where they will site it?

I would say those are fake ones. Russia produces since soviet times fake s-300 to confuse satellites. They would never park them so close each other while Israel said they want to destroy them. Real ones must be underground until they are operational.

If you cover a dummy air inflated S-300 or S-400 with the clothing camouflage thing ,it will be impossible
for a satellite to know the difference. of whether or not is a real one. They will look for marks of tracks in the sand for any sign of weight but Russia will for sure will think about that.  A drone camera neither will know the difference
unless is very close withing 20 meters or so..  if Russia deploys a hundred of dummy s-300s across all Syria and keep moving them . It will be very difficult for NATO or Israel to know exactly where the real S-300s are.

Because the Dummy air inflated S-300 and S-400 are designed to look very similar  to a real S-300/s-400 from  radar or plane. when their radars are turned on..   And also their heat signature is also crafter to be very similar too. and if they covered , not even with your eyes you will differentiate unless you are close.  And since Russia Military base ,can share their radars data with Syria , they not even need to turn on ,their own radars.. What will make not easier things either is the fast response time of S-300s.. they can launch withing 3-5 seconds of spotting a plane.  So those Hit and Run tactics Israel did in the past will not work that well ,with so quick reaction missiles and with very fast speed.  Israel will have to launch missiles from long distances if want a chance to escape. Any experienced operator can even make an S-200 to hit consistently any Israel or NATO plane ,if he fly the missile
ahead of the flight path of their planes.. and use them like Road Mines/air mines.. Any missile defense no matter how old can be dangerous in experts hands. We all know how US got 2 x F-117 hit in yugoeslavia to a very old air defense that was not designed to target them..with one crashing and the other doing an emergency landing.  

Whatever is the case.. i believe it will take Russia many months..3-5 to fully setup an S-300 network 96 launchers?
in Syria , fully calibrated ,with their rings of defense around it.. with electronic warfare in place , with the dummies too , all automated. and with positions well entrenched in the ground..

the major problem will be how to train the Syrian army with S-300s in Syria ,with Israel and NATO watching , it will
reveal the positions , so they will need to be trained in Russia away from NATO intelligence planes monitoring. It could take some long time 3 to 5 months before Syrian army can get well trainned in the S-300 use. a well trainned operator is as important as the air defense.. but they will be automated i guess , SO the system could be configured to fire automatically at foreign planes. or fired by Russia military by control remote.

Tsavo Lion wrote:F-22/-35s vs S-300:
https://politpuzzle.ru/117992-leonkov-o-legkoj-pobede-s-300-v-dueli-s-f-35-dlya-naglyadnosti-mozhem-sbit-paru-samoletov/?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=1637&utm_content=1892796&utm_campaign=2607

Interesting article .... says that if one S-300s radar don't see an F-22 from one angle at far distance , Passive radars or other radars from another place will feed information ,share information and enhance the picture and targeting positions of any stealth plane.  So the way i see it ,is if for example an S-300 in Russian base don't see an F-22 100km to 200km away , any passive radars or active radars from another S-300 close to the F-22 could triangulate and enhance the signal and allow an S-300 to hit an F-22 , at max ranges... because the radar signature is smaller or because the plane is covering behind a mountain..   The article also say that a duel between an S-300 and F-22 will be an easy kill for the S-300. So effectively an Stealth Plane will have its maximum possible stealth performance by attacking the borders of any country.. But once that stealth plane gets at least withing visual distance ie.. ~30km of an S-300 radar,or Pantsir or Tor , then every other Air defense system will be alerted
of the position of an F-22. and it can be hunted.

Saint Petersburg, October 16, "Pritpal". Military expert Alexei Leonov appreciated the statement of Vladimir Zhirinovsky about the presence of Russian s-600 and S-700, and also told about the easy victory of the s-300 in a duel with the American aircraft invisible in Syria.

LDPR leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky TV channel "Russia-1" announced the presence of Russian air defense systems S-600 and S-700. In his opinion, they, together with the s-300, s-400 and s-500 is able to close the sky over the entire planet so that countries will have to ask Moscow permission to raise the aircraft into the air.

Are there S-600 and S-700
In conversation with the correspondent "Polital" the military expert of the magazine "Arsenal Fatherland" Alex Levkov commented on Zhirinovsky's words and noticed that the policy failed to attract the attention to the person and surprise the world, but in fact such complexes in Russia is not developed. In addition, in order to close the sky over the entire planet, Moscow needs to put its facilities in all countries of the world that will last for years.

Currently, according to experts, the extreme development are systems s-500 "Prometheus", which will fill the gap between earlier s-400 and missile defense complex A-145.

"Space and the airspace of Russia will be closed by various means of attack: aircraft — missile complexes, aircraft, and space that can fly to Moscow — is part of the ballistic missiles and can fight with the weapons that the Americans are going to bring into space," explained Leonov.

Thus, due to the complex s-500 Russia will fully close the issues on the organization of a layered system of aerospace defense.

The capabilities of existing s-300 and s-400


Photo: VistaNews.ru

Contrary to statements of Western experts and the American military that the US air force are not afraid of Russian air defense systems, these statements are false. Vaunted stealth aircraft — it's PR, says Lenkov. In fact, the maximum amount of reduced radar visibility is about 30%. However, the radar air defense systems are working so that if the aircraft is not detected by one station, it will see the other thanks to the technology of active and passive phased antenna arrays.

"They work simultaneously in several ranges and the goal will be to irradiate from different angles, and if somewhere it is not visible, you will see another projection," — said the expert.

All loud statements about stealth aircraft Leonov praised as advertising and attempt to save the program "Stealth", which Americans spent over two hundred billion dollars.

American planes will lose a duel with the s-300 in Syria


Photo: Military review

The incident resulted in the crash of a Russian reconnaissance aircraft Il-20 in Syria from a missile system With-200, when Israeli aircraft carried out bombing and was covered aircraft VKS RF, the Ministry of defence has put into service more new SAR system — C-300. Thus was closed a single circuit command and control, strengthened the means of defense from the databases of Hamim and Tartus.

Leonov noticed that the Russian military simply does not attempt to shoot down an American stealth aircraft to prove the effectiveness of the s-300.

"But if they really want to, then those systems that are delivered to Syrian air defenses (s-300 — approx. ed.) can, in principle, to hold a public lesson. However, would the Americans sacrifice their F-22 and F-35 is still a big question. Dare Israel to send its F-35 order to show that they are major in the middle East — the same question. If there will be people who will succumb to this self-promotion, published in many media, well... will be minus one or two aircraft", warned the expert.

Talk about the effectiveness of stealth technology are used as propaganda and as an excuse for bragging rights trump the citizens and American arms manufacturers, but in reality things are not so rosy.

"I would not advise them to check this invisibility into reality. I think for them it will end very badly", — concluded Alexey Leonov.

Thus, despite the invented by Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the existence of the S-600 and S-700, West in case of aggression "enough" of a real C-300, which will easily win in a duel with F-22 and F-35 in Syria....

The real disadvantage for Russia and Syria will not be weather NATO use an F-22 or an F-35 or a world war 2 plane. The real disadvantage for Syria will be Putin's Rules of Engagement.. when he will order an attack and when
not.. If Putin rules will be Return fire policy.. to wait for an attack first and retaliate later ,what Syria was allowed to do in the past.. it means Israel will be allowed to hit first..and will get some 10 to 20 seconds of headstart..to escape..the response.. and this is not the way , So this is using the S-300s in a retarded way..  because is allowing
an Enemy to get very close ,and try to hit and later some valuable time to escape.

IF the Policy was to hit any Israel or NATO plane as soon they get in 200 to 250km range of the missiles. then this is a totally different thing.. Russia S-300s will NOT allow enemy airforces to even Try and launch a missile ,because will be chasing their planes ,even before they are in range of combat and THIS IS is the real way ,the S-300 will operate in case of war..this is how air defenses are supposed to be used.. and Russia was targeting Israel planes as soon they take off from their bases.. This will create huge problems for their airforce.. because will be flying in the direction missiles are flying towards them.. So they will want to evade those missiles and will have to Interrupt their operation ,and go in defense ..even before they fire any missile.. and if they have full loaded weapons. it will be very difficult to do maneuvers with full load of weapons and very dangerous for them ,fly with bombs while fragmentations bombs are exploding near them.  So this is when you create a NO FLY Zone..this is how Syria can be really protected at least from NATO and Israel airforces.

with an enforced no fly zone that go far beyond Syrian borders , and targeting any Israel combat planet flying over Northern israel in Syria direction.. Targeting any israel plane that fly over Jordan or any part of mediterranean sea ,withing 200km to 250km of Syria. If Israel fire ballistic missiles , to Syria ,then return the fire to their bases..with ballistic missiles.

So the performance of any air defense ,whether is S-300 or any other will be significantly lower , no matter how good  they are ,because of Putin's Rules of Combat..   that allow NATO and Israel to fly withing 30km or even 15km from their targets without shooting down them. So this give a HUGE head start to the enemy ,and a huge help in their precision of their missiles.  When the Il-20 was shut down, a British combat plane and israel planes were allowed to fly over Latakkia , so is putin soft hand ,what killed his soldiers. If he had zero tolerance and a no fly zone ,NATO will not have a chance to even get close or even try. So Syria will continue having problems..regardless if you give them S-700s that target planes 3 thousand kilometers away ,will be useless if the enemy allowed to get close and fire first.. unless a real BIG No Fly zone enforced and No NATO plane and no Israel plane allowed to get close to Syria to even try.

many of this weak policies of Putin is consequences of his short sight vision of Russia.. he developed the nation economy to become the Saudi Arabia of Europe ,an economy highly dependent on energy business with Europe. If Russia was a self sufficient fully independent nation and did not depended on business with Europe for its economy.. it can simply show the middle Finger to Britain or NATO or Israel and start shooting down their planes whenever they show up to attack Syria . with no fear of breaking any business relation or fear for any sanction ,since Russia will not need them. But for fear of totally breaking relations with Europe and America business ,which control the internet that Russia use and depends ,and can harm Russia economy with sanctions ,because Putin developed Russia in that way ,as dependent nation of the western business. then Russia cannot defend properly its interest ,for its dependence on the west.

the major problem will be how to train the Syrian army with S-300s in Syria ,with Israel and NATO watching,..

They could probably be trained in Syria on electronic simulators, on VMF ships in E. Med. Sea, or on Iranian S-300s.

Fakel MKB engineers, however, developed an even more effective solution in the aftermath of DESERT STORM: a special warhead designed to cause the inbound warhead to detonate in-flight. The first test firing of the modified warhead occurred in August of 1995 at Kapustin Yar. The missile's warhead successfully caused the warhead of the 8K14 target to detonate in the atmosphere. The missile employed a directional warhead, which is roughly analogous to a shaped charge system insofar as it is able to direct the bulk of the explosive force of the warhead towards the target. http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3900842/all/S_300PS_PMU_SA_10B_Grumble

So, they may detonate all the missiles & bombs on enemy fighters, before they launched!

Wow things are changing very fast ,towards a WW3 it seems...

In RT Russia government is accusing United States of being behind the Attack on Russia base in latakkia
early on the year with 13 drones..  

https://www.rt.com/news/442219-kremlin-attack-us-syria/

The minister of defense of Russia military , his investigation of the incident ,
shows what we all suspected. That an American Poseidon Spy plane was guiding the drones ,helping
the signal from over 100km of distance the attack happened.

When Russia is in public accusing United States on an act of war , this is very serious.. because
Now Russia will have to take actions or they will look really bad if do nothing . and continue tolerating
American Planes in Syria or worse their spy planes.  What im sure is that.. Before Russia did such announcement
Exposing UNited States ,in an act of war against a Russian military base.. then this scandal they had to plan in advance what will they do next , and what new policies if any they will be implementing in Syria...
They need to  declare the sooner the better a no Fly Zone for American and NATO over all parts of Syria.
and Pressure Trump to remove his Troops from there.  

and now another interesting thing.. people not paying attention..

On CNN , which is CIA media , make no doubts about this.. is very closely connected with them..
The Former CIA director ,under Obama ,that now was recruited by CNN for advisor.. was on record
saying that Bin Salman Al Saud ,the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia ,that now leads the country.. that
the scandal with the assassinated american journalist in an embassy ,will bring down , him..

So effectively ,when he says that.. is officially saying the CIA no longer will backup him and he will be
a target to hit.. Now i think, it is possible the assassination of the journalist could have been a false flag..
by the CIA to frame him.. He could very well have ordered it.. but at the same time ,there is very little to gain
for Saudi Arabia to assassinate him ,other than revenge. SO this could be a plot ,a false flag to force Saudi Arabia
to PAY United States for protection.. or else be accused of the murder of the american journalist who worked for the Washinton Post.. The Fact that all Liberal propaganda media is against Him... including hollywood.. is suspicious.. it looks like a Trap ,the CIA created against him.. and they could have bribed people inside the Saudi Consulate in Turkey to Assassinate him.. for Big money.. not knowing they were staging a crime , with real people killed to frame the Saudi Prince.

Also This scandal could serve for United States if not paid well for protection.. blame all the terrorism in Syria
to Saudi Arabia..and then they could use the incident to claim Saudi Arabia hired American contractors to evacuate
ISIS Leaders... But now Russia is accusing Americans Airforce of participating in the attack on a Russian base.

and now you have Saudi Arabia journalist or people close to the government ,throwing a bait to Russia
to become the new protector of them...with the ideas throw to the media of a Russian base in Saudi Arabia..
and now Saudi Government is throwing $500 millions to Russia ,this are signals of Saudi Arabia baiting Russia
to take action and protect Saudi Arabia in a confrontation with United States.  

https://sputniknews.com/world/201810251069214161-saudi-fund-russia-china/

But all this could go deeper ,,,and even be a trap against Putin ,because if Putin support the Saudis
and Provide protection. .Americans can say Russia is aiding Terrorism. and is a terrorist state. bla bla bla.
Whatever is the case.. it will be on the interest of Russia to kick United States from the Middle east. For same
reasons they doing it in Syria .because US and UK and ISRael is using middle east ,to finance their economies and
to help organize Radical Extremist all over the world..

SO the cards are already in play.. The US is hinting ,very bad things for Saudi Arabia.. the CIA saying
his days are over.. this could be a way to force Saudi Arabia to pay for protection.. and finance significantly more US declined Economy.. a warning to him ,that if dont pay more will be replaced.

Tensions will be all time High after this.

Russia Gov accuse US of drone attack on their base..

Tsavo Lion wrote:
So, they may detonate all the missiles & bombs on enemy fighters, before they launched!

are you serious ? If you really understand the passage you quoted.. it's description of a Directional fragmentation warhead. and the way it works is far from blowing things before they are launched.

Well, if those S-300 missiles r using a directional fragmentation warhead instead of a proximity fuse, then they have better chance of blowing those planes out of the sky, since their nose radar &/ cockpit will be hit &/ ordinance under wings & fuselage will be detonated.
UAV attack update: https://politexpert.net/126185-baranec-ob-atake-dronov-ssha-na-khmeimim-v-sirii-amerikancy-narvalis-i-poluchili?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com

..what about an Iskander battalion moved to Syria in 8 months time each with 4 x 3,000km range cruise missiles on board...

There is no need to deploy such long range CMs there to target Israel. But giving/deploying MiG-25/31s could be an option- with their capabilities, it could dissuade the IAF from getting into trouble better! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-25#Soviet_Union
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-31#Export - it can also shoot down CMs & UAVs.
Does Israel have a chance to destroy the C-300 in Syria?
https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2508882.html

Wow this is a mind blowing report..  
Americans are more doomed than i thought.. the next report  explain why Trump
can't stop the war in Syria.. and why Trump can't stop either US military and CIA
from aiding Alqaeda and ISIS.. He is very powerless ,and the only thing he influence
is domestic Policy of how to develop the nation internal economy.

https://russia-insider.com/en/military/why-trump-cannot-control-american-military/ri25151


So Russia also have a big problem.. it can't develop a policy ,based on any Trump constructive or positive
step in the favor of Russia.  Because the Deep Government will be moving the pieces together ,with the aim
to destabilize ,weaken and Destroy Russia.


about the question of whether or Not Israel can defeat an S-300..
is like the question of whether or not you can kill a sniper soldier with a long range rifle..
with a knife.. Of course anyone can be killed with a knife.. it all depends on the position..
If Russia allows Israel airforce to be from 30km to 5km away of the S-300.. then any salvo of missiles
with decoys by a group of planes ,will leave little time for S-300s to react. Any system can be overwhelmend.
IF You only have a gun with 5 bullets , and 6 people are running in your direction to attack you. then the best you can do is to take down 5..but the last one will be not be stopped.

But Admiral Fallon (retired) succeeded in preventing a war with Iran!
https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2008/03/12/fox-fallon-fired/
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1721491,00.html
https://thinkprogress.org/centcom-commander-fallon-attack-on-iran-will-not-happen-on-my-watch-921d57aeb703/

Tsavo Lion wrote:But Admiral Fallon (retired) succeeded in preventing a war with Iran!
https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2008/03/12/fox-fallon-fired/
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1721491,00.html
https://thinkprogress.org/centcom-commander-fallon-attack-on-iran-will-not-happen-on-my-watch-921d57aeb703/

There is a deep state in America of military people in Control of America..
That controls foreign policy according to that report.. This of course does not means
that Presidents cannot convince those guys ,to change some of their policies.. Trump still
have a small chance to convince his bosses to change a policy.. anyone can be influenced..

And the ones that more can influence the Pentagon ,is the very same American people..
with Major Peaceful Protest ,millions around every major military base..nation wide.. demanding a detente with Russia. Demanding the end of the interference in Syria and demanding good relations with Russia.
and to end the wars..

Nixon was the last president of peace of US.. he managed to influence the powerful people in military
and look what he did.

1)Ended the war in Vietnam
2)Detente with Russia an era of starting good relations with Russia.
3)a peace deal with China..

all those things in just one administration.. it seems Nixon managed to influence
some of the deep state ,to end the wars.. and rebuild.. the nation..and this is why the Congress
kicked him from Power , with a totally fabricated case , the water gate scandal ,they used to
remove him.

President Carter didn't go to war with Iran, & President Obama also pulled all regular combat troops from Iraq. If it was up to the MIC, they would still be there. Trump wants to do the same in Afghanistan -so far unsuccessfully- & is reducing US footprint in S. Korea.
There r different interest groups here with their own agenda, like in any other big country.

Vann7 wrote:......
https://russia-insider.com/en/military/why-trump-cannot-control-american-military/ri25151
......

Why are you suddenly quoting pro-Putin source?

Tsavo Lion wrote:Well, if those S-300 missiles r using a directional fragmentation warhead instead of a proximity fuse, then they have better chance of blowing those planes out of the sky, since their nose radar &/ cockpit will be hit &/ ordinance under wings & fuselage will be detonated.

Oh come on. You can't confuse warhead and fuse. Fuse is the one needed to sense the target presence and detonate the warhead, regardless of types.  The original 48N6 use Blast fragmentation without any directionality meaning that the warhead fragments will spread evenly in any direction.  the Directional warhead in other hand focus its fragmentation to one particular direction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway. Seems Masyaf has very good EW coverage. But the 96L6 might suffer against low RCS target due to its operating wavelength and multipath. The same problem can also be seen for the 30N6.  Having Nebo SVU might alleviate problem as it allows the 30N6 to direct its resources (longer dwell time) to scan particular area where the possible low RCS target might reside.



This coverage chart assume 2000 m altitude target and low RCS (0.001 sqm in X or 0.00267 in C band and 0.094 sqm in VHF) Should Russia brought in Nebo SVU. There might be no hiding for stealths and conventionals.  The outer blue ring is 96L6 coverage against conventional target while the smaller light blue depict coverage against Stealth target.  it is smaller even than the 30N6 mainly because unfavorable propagation "lobes" on my estimate.  

Without Nebo SVU however it would be difficult should Israel attempt to use stealths or stealthy cruise missile. as it might "bypass" the coverage of the SAM's.

@stealthflanker: great thanks!

Some questions

1) How do you get the RCS at different bands?
2) You use a very low RCS value in X band that is known to be acceptable only in a very narrow frontal aspect, how do you think this would change when considering multiple radar stations?
3) How good can a radar see the radiation emitted from another one and scattered by the target in its direction? Can radars do that or only PCLs? How do you think a VLO design would perform in those conditions?

3) How good can a radar see the radiation emitted from another one and scattered by the target in its direction? Can radars do that or only PCLs? How do you think a VLO design would perform in those conditions?

Pretty good. Modern RWR like the one in rafale, spectra ECM system, can allow the launch of a missile on a target just by using data from its RWR which is a passive radar. In my opinion it could even work against LPI in the middle of nowhere where there is no other signals.

Most stealth design reject radar signal so if a su-35 use its radar in front of f-22 another su-35 flying a 50km on the right or left from the first one could see the radar return.

There is also ground passive radars that just listen. They use civil communication signals to do that. Still not mature tech however. The signal are not x band so VLO jets are not immune to it.

LMFS wrote:@stealthflanker: great thanks!

Some questions  

1) How do you get the RCS at different bands?
2) You use a very low RCS value in X band that is known to be acceptable only in a very narrow frontal aspect, how do you think this would change when considering multiple radar stations?
3) How good can a radar see the radiation emitted from another one and scattered by the target in its direction? Can radars do that or only PCLs? How do you think a VLO design would perform in those conditions?

1.I use the RCS-wavelength dependency. The equations and reasoning behind its use discussed here at my AESA radar calculator topic :

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?141862-AESA-Radar-range-calculator&p=2452967#post2452967


2.The enemy also know that and will make use of tactics to ensure that it is that low RCS section exposed to radar. This can be achieved by flying ahead to the radar station in question, making use of terrain masking so only a particular station and at the desired angle the fighter is exposed to radar.   Only with VHF or lower band radar then we can assure that suitable range of detection of enemy stealth fighter can be assured regardless of the approach tactics.  

I suspect that's how Israel has been playing around. Even with conventional fighters. They bypassed the Syrian Radar net using terrain masking and use stand off low RCS munitions en-masse like cruise missiles and GBU-39's.  With F-35 they can be more flexible in terms of employment.   They clearly realized the side aspect RCS so they behave accordingly by minimizing the possibility of their stealth be exposed from "problematic" side. Thus why having VHF radar would be advantageous.

3.Only PCL.  Radar can only tune to whatever signal it transmit.  You cannot turn, say 96L6 into PCL.  Not without major changes in receiver which.. if so have to be designed to accept very wide range of frequency as there are no TV or Radio station or other non cooperative emitter that works in 2.9 GHz. The antenna element must also change to accept the wide range of frequencies and from multiple angle which dictates spiral or conical antenna to be used.  and necessity to have at least 3 stations for DTOA angle finding Or having multiple antenna to allow interferometric angle finding method.

Regarding VLO. The PCL May have problem of actually getting the "good position" namely the place where the fighter's RCS spiked. This is difficult if the PCL works in high frequency as stealths's Specular RCS is expected to be narrow. Thus need bit of "luck" in terms of placement to be able to get this strong specular reflection necessitating multiple receive station. Low frequency improve situation, but then the PCL might have antenna gain constraint thus limiting range. Still having PCL would be useful.

In short, radar is baaad for PCL. If it wants to be PCL it has to be built as one.

Question regarding the discussion directly above^:

I'm not very knowledgeable about that topic, so certainly open to input. My understanding of one of the main benefits of an IADS is its greatly enhanced capability against stealth. One of the main reasons for that is that stealth objects reduce reflections partially through specialized, absorbent coatings, but mainly through shaping. The purpose of the shaping is to redirect the radiation sent toward it away from the originating transmitter-receiver.

However, although the radiation that isn't absorbed by the stealth object's coating is redirected away from the originating emitter-receiver, it still ends up going someplace, and that's where IADS comes into play. With IADS you have a distributed network of emitters and receivers that communicate with each other via encrypted channels. So a reflection from a stealth object can be picked up by a receiver in a different location from the originating emitter. With the aid of computer processing, and methods of location like triangulation, the outputs and inputs from the distributed network are combined to create a comprehensive picture of what is happening. Then the AD operators, assisted by battle management system software, can respond to stealth threats in a timely way.

So, I would infer from this that the IADS, almost by definition, isn't limited to the theorized detection range of a single node (transmitter-receiver) in the network. Amirght?

BKP wrote:

However, although the radiation that isn't absorbed by the stealth object's coating is redirected away from the originating emitter-receiver, it still ends up going someplace, and that's where IADS comes into play. With IADS you have a distributed network of emitters and receivers that communicate with each other via encrypted channels. So a reflection from a stealth object can be picked up by a receiver in a different location from the originating emitter. With the aid of computer processing, and methods of location like triangulation, the outputs and inputs from the distributed network are combined to create a comprehensive picture of what is happening. Then the AD operators, assisted by battle management system software, can respond to stealth threats in a timely way.

The thing is that can one assure that there is a receiver in that place ?

Stealthflanker wrote:

BKP wrote:

However, although the radiation that isn't absorbed by the stealth object's coating is redirected away from the originating emitter-receiver, it still ends up going someplace, and that's where IADS comes into play. With IADS you have a distributed network of emitters and receivers that communicate with each other via encrypted channels. So a reflection from a stealth object can be picked up by a receiver in a different location from the originating emitter. With the aid of computer processing, and methods of location like triangulation, the outputs and inputs from the distributed network are combined to create a comprehensive picture of what is happening. Then the AD operators, assisted by battle management system software, can respond to stealth threats in a timely way.

The thing is that can one assure that there is a receiver in that place ?  

I would assume the short answer is no. OTOH, the target isn't stationary. So, I would suppose that for the system as a whole the target may flicker in and and out of detection. How patchy that might be and the degree to which it may degrade effectiveness would depend primarily on the node density and composition of the IADS.

BKP wrote:

I would assume the short answer is no. OTOH, the target isn't stationary. So, I would suppose that for the system as a whole the target may flicker in and and out of detection. How patchy that might be and the degree to which it may degrade effectiveness would depend primarily on the node density and composition of the IADS.

Yes, you need the density of it, creating a "barrier" In Syrian context this could be useful as early warning in mountainous region. though need to ensure that roads are available to transport and establish the system.

This is the example Russian system for that purpose :
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-52E6MU-Struna.html

I wonder tho of Syrian or Russians would be willing to go with a dense network of bi-static radar. But having such would be wonderful mainly to save resource of the larger radar station.

Stealthflanker wrote:1.I use the RCS-wavelength dependency. The equations and reasoning behind its use discussed here at my AESA radar calculator topic :

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?141862-AESA-Radar-range-calculator&p=2452967#post2452967

Will read that  

2.The enemy also know that and will make use of tactics to ensure that it is that low RCS section exposed to radar. This can be achieved by flying ahead to the radar station in question, making use of terrain masking so only a particular station and at the desired angle the fighter is exposed to radar.   Only with VHF or lower band radar then we can assure that suitable range of detection of enemy stealth fighter can be assured regardless of the approach tactics.  

I suspect that's how Israel has been playing around. Even with conventional fighters. They bypassed the Syrian Radar net using terrain masking and use stand off low RCS munitions en-masse like cruise missiles and GBU-39's.  With F-35 they can be more flexible in terms of employment.   They clearly realized the side aspect RCS so they behave accordingly by minimizing the possibility of their stealth be exposed from "problematic" side. Thus why having VHF radar would be advantageous.

If the same old methods of terrain masking + stand-off weapons apply with VLO planes that with conventional ones for safe operation then the technology has been essentially defeated through lower frequency radars... the ranges you show in your chart exclude the use of anything but long range CMs (no glide bombs and much less released at high altitude) and then the missiles themselves would be vulnerable to interception due to low speed and long flight time to target.

EDIT: in fact the ranges you show are quite compatible with the ranges of modern Russian stand-off weapons, so that gives a good hint at such distances (>200 km) being the ones they consider safe for operation against moderns IADs even using "VLO" planes. For instance Kh-58UShKE anti-radiation missile intended for Su-57 ca. 250 km

3.Only PCL.  Radar can only tune to whatever signal it transmit.  You cannot turn, say 96L6 into PCL.  Not without major changes in receiver which.. if so have to be designed to accept very wide range of frequency as there are no TV or Radio station or other non cooperative emitter that works in 2.9 GHz. The antenna element must also change to accept the wide range of frequencies and from multiple angle which dictates spiral or conical antenna to be used.  and necessity to have at least 3 stations for DTOA angle finding Or having multiple antenna to allow interferometric angle finding method.

Regarding VLO. The PCL May have problem of actually getting the "good position" namely the place where the fighter's RCS spiked.  This is difficult if the PCL works in high frequency as stealths's Specular RCS is expected to be narrow. Thus need bit of "luck" in terms of placement to be able to get this strong specular reflection necessitating multiple receive station.  Low frequency improve situation, but then the PCL might have antenna gain constraint thus limiting range.  Still having PCL would be useful.

In short, radar is baaad for PCL. If it wants to be PCL it has to be built as one.

I was also thinking the way BKP explained in that a 96L6 can receive the signals emitted by another radar of the same type in other location. And when a spike appears, all radars concentrate power in that sector until they see their target. Wit a network of passive locators added to that it would be difficult to escape I think, especially if working on lower frequencies that make the return lobes wider as you explain. Especially the side aspect of VLO planes is not very clean in that regard, should be visible for a good while on the radars and not only in very brief spikes.

Additional question, regarding the effects of superposing several sources of radiation on a target: does the reflection on the aircraft surfaces operate as a linear phenomenon (resulting reflection = sum of individual reflections) or does any non-linearity exists that makes the VLO design less effective in that condition?