i heard that the s-400's radar can detect stealth targets like the f-22. how accurate is this. can this give the SU-35/37 an advantage over the f-22 since it can detect it and out maneuver it(and dont say it cant it has angles of attack of 90 degeres as opposed to the f-22's 75.
S-400's radar capabilities
- Thread starter eaf-f16
- Start date
- Status
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
No "stealth" aircraft is completely undetectable. Any radar given enough power will detect a "stealth" aircraft.
The difficulty is that an aircraft with a LOW radar cross section such as an F-22 (what is commonly called "stealth") requires an exponentially more powerful radar system to detect and track, than is currently available.
Radar's would have to put out FAR more power and be far larger than ANY have yet been devised to overcome the RCS advantages F-22 and similar aircraft possess.
What the reduced RCS does for an aircraft is allow it to get close enough to a target to employ it's weapons before the target systems can track (necessary for fire control - detection ONLY means you know it's there, tracking is more important if you want to HIT it) and fire upon it.
I seriously doubt ANY radar system (with the possible exception of that ridiculously large floating X band radar system the US is trialling) has the necessary power and discrimination to track an target an F-22 beyond it's own weapon ranges.
No surface bound radar is going to track the F-22 at the maximum range of the S-400 missile system either. Read up on the curvature of the Earth some time if you don't believe me.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #3
the S-400's radar can detect and track targets with RCS of 0.02 m sq. within 400 Km and guess how big the B2's(stealthier than the F-22) RCS is thats rite 0.02 m sq.
i was just asking how much help this would give the Su-35 against the F-22 can the radar send info to the Su-35 so that it locks on to it easily(effectively stop its "stealth" from being any use).
and lets not forget it can track "stealth targets" at 120,000 ft i think significantly higher than the f-22's service ceiling
Last edited:
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Two key points to keep in mind.
1. The actual RCS of aircraft (especially LO aircraft) isn't disclosed publicly with any degree of accuracy. The number given might be spot-on, or could be wildly too large or small an RCS, most of us don't know, and those that do aren't (with good reason) telling. I've heard the RCS of the B-2 being the equivalent of the RCS of a golf ball... Not sure what the surface area of that is, but I don't think it's as much as 0.02 m sq...
2. The actual performance of radar systems is similarly classified. Though with radar there is the caveat that, depending on who is discussing the radar system and why, the numbers can be understated or exagerated. If the manufacturor is trying to sell the system, the theoretical/best-case performance might be used to sell the system. The worst-case or understated performance might be given in equipment reviews in hopes of additional funding for even better systems (like in US, etc.) and/or to keep potential enemies in the dark about the actual capabilities.
As of right now, the only system I know of which has demonstrated an ability to detect LO aircraft is the Australian JORN. Which was/is able to detect LO, but not track it given that it doesn't provide a precise, only approximate location.
-Cheers
Last edited:
This is very weak argument and you know it. As for question... i dont know RCS of F-22 or F-117, i dont know S-300 and S-400 capabilities, and i pretty much doubt you can find any facts about it. But once F-22 become more widespread in West Europe eventually we will start to hear some bit of information from peoples who serve on S-300/S400 radar posts about tracking (or not) F-22.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
For starters Wiki is hardly a reliable source. I could go there and submit an article stating that the F-22 can fly at the speed of light. Does that make it true?
Second, whilst I have no doubt the radar can scan at 400k's the idea that it can detect and target an F-22 at that range is dependant on circumstances dictating that the F-22 is flying at sufficient altitude.
Curvature of the Earth affects the range a radar can detect an aerial target. The higher above ground the radar is mounted, the further the radar horizon is, but even the tallest surface based radars (ship mounted radars) are limited to horizon radar ranges of about 40k's.
Why do you think AWACS aircraft were invented?
The only possible way any surface based radar system could detect an F-22 at 400k's is IF the F-22 was flying at maximum altitude AND the radar system had the radar power and processing capacity to overcome the radar cross section reduction measures a VLO aircraft like the F-22 employs.
To suggest any current surface based radar system will detect a VLO aircraft at 400k's is fanciful I'm afraid and is nothing more than propaganda put out by the SAM system manufacturer desperately trying to sell it's system.
The S-400 is a capable SAM system by all accounts. There is no need to try and pretend it's something that it's not.
Would Russia deliberately leave itself vulnerable to US strike aircraft? No, of course not. I am certain they are doing everything possible to reduce these "gaps" however it hardly has the research and development capabilities and funding to match the USA does it?
Or do you think it coincidence that Russia is attempting to "ape" many of the F-22's features in it's PAK-FA 5th Generation aircraft?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #8
The SU-47 could acheive 75 degree AOA with out thrust vectoring the F-22 can achieve that for certain amounts of time with thrust vectoring. and thrust vectoring is a Russian thing or have u forgotten the only thing thats making the f-22 "super maneuverable" is thrust vectoring in term of R&D the Russians are years ahead of the US but the the funding is just not there.
Mod edit: Gents the moratorium on F-22 topics has lasted all of a few days I see. These threads are being closed because of the breach of this request. See "announcements" if you wish to read further.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status