Counterstealth radars

New and old developments in aviation technology.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

michaelemouse

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2017, 10:29

Unread post05 Jun 2019, 23:43

hornetfinn wrote:Sure long wave radars have better ability to detect stealth aircraft. In the F-117 shootdown in 1999 the VHF P-18 managed to detect the F-117s at 30 km away or closer. P-18 can detect regular small fighter at about 120-160 km away at the altitude the F-117 was flying. So the stealth properties definitely affected that VHF radar significantly.

So yes such low frequency radars can be useful for early warning because high frequency radars are more affected by shaping and RAM. Problem is that such low frequency radars are large and rather expensive and prone to jamming and hard kill measures due to their size and high power transmissions.



Low-freq radars also have the disadvantage that even if you can see the enemy, you know what type of unit it is, you have a pretty good idea of its range, speed etc. That doesn't mean your missile is going to hit. You need frequently updated precise targeting data if you want to hit something from 50km away while that something is trying to avoid dying and then kill you. I'm not sure a targeting quality track could be had with VHF or UHF radar. The impression I get is that it would be like trying to shoot someone with a rifle at 300 meters by hip-firing. It's romantic in its enthusiasm.

I understand why low-freq radars would have higher SWAP requirements than high-freq ones and be more vulnerable to hard-kills but why is it more prone to jamming? I would have thought their large size and high power transmissions would give them an edge so there's something I'm not getting.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2993
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post06 Jun 2019, 06:55

michaelemouse wrote:I understand why low-freq radars would have higher SWAP requirements than high-freq ones and be more vulnerable to hard-kills but why is it more prone to jamming? I would have thought their large size and high power transmissions would give them an edge so there's something I'm not getting.


That's mostly because the frequency range is significantly smaller and jamming power does not need to be spread over large frequency range. For example VHF frequency range is only 270 MHz (30 to 300 MHz) whereas X-band frequency range is 4000 MHz (8 to 12 GHz). So 10 kW jamming power would mean only 2.5 Watts for each MHz in X-band case and 37 Watts in VHF case meaning about 15 times higher effective jamming power. So comparatively low frequency radar will be more affected by jamming if similar power levels are used.

Another thing is that there will be a lot lower number of VHF radars than say X-band radars in the battlefield. So jammers can concentrate on smaller number of threat radars which will further increase the jamming effects.

Larger size and high power does give some advantages in jamming resistance which will counteract those above things somewhat. But still low frequency radars will likely be more affected by jammers.
Offline

michaelemouse

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2017, 10:29

Unread post06 Jun 2019, 20:20

hornetfinn wrote:
michaelemouse wrote:I understand why low-freq radars would have higher SWAP requirements than high-freq ones and be more vulnerable to hard-kills but why is it more prone to jamming? I would have thought their large size and high power transmissions would give them an edge so there's something I'm not getting.


That's mostly because the frequency range is significantly smaller and jamming power does not need to be spread over large frequency range. For example VHF frequency range is only 270 MHz (30 to 300 MHz) whereas X-band frequency range is 4000 MHz (8 to 12 GHz). So 10 kW jamming power would mean only 2.5 Watts for each MHz in X-band case and 37 Watts in VHF case meaning about 15 times higher effective jamming power. So comparatively low frequency radar will be more affected by jamming if similar power levels are used.

Another thing is that there will be a lot lower number of VHF radars than say X-band radars in the battlefield. So jammers can concentrate on smaller number of threat radars which will further increase the jamming effects.

Larger size and high power does give some advantages in jamming resistance which will counteract those above things somewhat. But still low frequency radars will likely be more affected by jammers.



That's a good explanation, thanks. I hadn't thought about it in terms of Jamming power divided by the number of MHz in the relevant frequency bands. Frequency hopping can only take you so far when you have a limited number of hopping options.
Offline

wil59

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 227
  • Joined: 05 May 2015, 09:50

Unread post30 Jan 2020, 13:11

hornetfinn wrote:
michaelemouse wrote:I understand why low-freq radars would have higher SWAP requirements than high-freq ones and be more vulnerable to hard-kills but why is it more prone to jamming? I would have thought their large size and high power transmissions would give them an edge so there's something I'm not getting.


That's mostly because the frequency range is significantly smaller and jamming power does not need to be spread over large frequency range. For example VHF frequency range is only 270 MHz (30 to 300 MHz) whereas X-band frequency range is 4000 MHz (8 to 12 GHz). So 10 kW jamming power would mean only 2.5 Watts for each MHz in X-band case and 37 Watts in VHF case meaning about 15 times higher effective jamming power. So comparatively low frequency radar will be more affected by jamming if similar power levels are used.

Another thing is that there will be a lot lower number of VHF radars than say X-band radars in the battlefield. So jammers can concentrate on smaller number of threat radars which will further increase the jamming effects.

Larger size and high power does give some advantages in jamming resistance which will counteract those above things somewhat. But still low frequency radars will likely be more affected by jammers.

https://www.janes.com/article/87101/raf ... nce-system
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2993
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post30 Jan 2020, 13:29

I have to add that low frequency jammer needs to be much bigger than high frequency jammers due to needing larger antenna. Just like low frequency radar needs to be physically big to be effective, same is true for jammers also. This is also one reason why self protection jammers concentrate on higher frequencies. Of course those frequencies usually also present far bigger threat to aircraft than low frequency systems. Even dedicated jammer pods generally concentrate on certain frequency bands. For example NGJ will probably have three different configurations to counter different frequency ranges.
https://www.janes.com/article/88961/usn ... on-growler
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post30 Jan 2020, 22:59

Hornetfinn, useful details on NGJ via Jane's thanks, that shows the LB version will specifically target VHF. I get the feeling that the Growler is still a WIP until these three new AESA pods are developed in Block III.

The NGJ system will replace the current AN/ALQ-99 Tactical Jamming System (TJS) that dates back to the closing stages of the Vietnam War.

With the TJS operating in the 509 MHz- to 18 GHz-waveband, NGJ will be developed as three separate capabilities, which will include LB, Mid-Band (MB), and High-Band (HB). NGJ-LB (also known as Block/Increment 2), NGJ-MB (Block/Increment 1), and NGJ-HB (Block/Increment 3) are directed specifically against the low- (100 MHz to 2 GHz waveband), mid- (2 GHz to 6 GHz), and high-band (6 GHz to 18 GHz) sections of the overall threat spectrum.
Previous

Return to Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests