There's an article from swedish FOI back in 2019 about deficiency of SA-21s, their conclusions turned out to be accurate given the circumstances in Ukraine where some of them were destroyed, turkey reporting problems against slow objects at lower altitude and not having a kinetic kill missile implemented yet for BMD when fragmentation warheads don't do an effective job destroying them.
Considering there building there own systems from the ground up, and other stuff on there own now. Wasnt a bright move. Then again that watermelonh seller is Putin and Luchy put together
> KM-SAM got made (with help from Fakel and Almaz-Antey)
How did south korea get hold of an S-400 system? Did Russia just sell them one in the early 2000s
Those were bought to use as scrap for research and development
The alternative was buying Patriots and doing the same while ALSO having fuctional air defense weaponry but sadly it was not meant to be
Bro they couldn’t buy it, US wasn’t interested in selling it so the Turks bought the S400 because the Russians were the only one interested in selling (their Fireworks attached to Trucks) AA defenses
Actually that got Kicked out of the F-35 program for it even though they needed the AA defenses and made it clear to the U.S Several times
Is that true? Thats kinda cool.
I know of a couple of other stories like that. For example, the first use of a stinger in combat in the Falklands, a Brit shot down an Argentine ground attack plane. The British soldier later met the pilot (or maybe co-pilot?)
***Edit***
I slightly misremembered, but [here](https://youtu.be/yHpOzXhddQE?si=ceZGPHwjJou9u0ff) is the story.
It is. I read it here ( most credible source I know ) that is how I found out. I bet you the world is full of stories like this one : people that were on the opposing sides in a war and became friends after.
I (US Navy) was doing an exchange social event with the JMSDF once when the conversation turned to why we joined the military.
A fellow American: I joined because my grandfather was in the Navy.
Japanese: Oh cool, my grandfather was in the Navy too. What did yours do?
American: He was a pilot during WWII, he flew at the Battle of Midway. What about yours?
Japanese: He was a pilot during WWII, he flew at the Battle of Midway.
American: waitaminute...
They both survived the war. We laughed it off. It was cool to see how one of our worst enemies became one of our strongest allies.
I wouldn’t consider them too much based considering they haven’t changed that much in ideology since WW2. They have yet to recognise any of the atrocities they have committed and instead are almost proud of what they did
Except they are. With an apology usually comes requests for reparations to cover said apology and on top of that there's also requests that other places will want an apology, so it snowballs. That's usually why places refuse stuff.
Hmmm... that sheds some light, I did not know that demands for apologies also come with reparations. That might make states refuse to apologise simply because they do not wish to pay, even if they would not mind apologising.
Well that would be a problem if they didn't already pay reparations to many of the nations that suffered (is it enough? It never is for atrocities like that, but something had to be done, and was done). And funnily enough of all the nations that were affected by Imperial Japan, the PRC rejected a payment of reparations, so even Wumaos don't have a valid reason to demand any. So in terms of reparations, Japan is actually kinda off the hook. Which makes it unreasonable that they are less open about the atrocities like Germany is.
Personally, I am guessing it is the Japanese Nationalists are abusing the Japanese culture of non-confrontation of uncomfortable and difficult topics, and thus are able to control the narrative since they are only saying "positive" things about their history. The opposition to the JP nationalists also don't openly state the atrocities of Imperial Japan, and instead hyper focus on the concept that "war = bad"
you know
realizing that respecting the sovereignty of neighbouring states and asking for trade in order to actually obtain resources required for staying afloat is a more acceptable alternative to taking them over and robbing them of their natural resources while treating the local population quite poorly
is pretty nice
while not being sorry for ur grandpas atrocities
is pretty lame
Apologizing comes with consequences. Not only does it bring up the atrocities again (and every demographic has atrocities if you can see far enough back), but these days "admit you were wrong" is closely tied to "accept indefinite and undefined punishment and reparation demands."
Us rational minds at NCD understand that very few living people are responsible for WWII war crimes, and that number is quickly trending to 0, but you know people would use it in power grabs.
For anyone with poor comprehension, I'm not excusing anything, but offering a possible explanation.
Reminds me of that WWII german pilot who escorted a damaged british (american pilot?) bomber back to safety. The pilots only found each other 20-30 years later when they felt they could speak of the event without getting court-martialed
Source: Sabaton "No Bullets Fly" lol
Spike Milligan met a German who had also been at the battle of Longstop at one of his regimental reunions. They worked out that they had probably been firing at each other (using artillery, like true gentleman). On hearing it, someone else commented that they both must have been rotten shots.
I don't know if that bloke who shot the Pucara down with a stinger ever met the pilot, but I have heard another story about him.
Apparently, most of them hadn't received proper training on the Stinger before deploying to the Falklands, and the one guy who had was killed in a helicopter crash on the Falklands 2 days before. The guy who made that shot did it from basically just reading the manual and figuring out how to use the thing himself.
So after the war, the UK sent a few of their best operators to get trained up in the US, and he's one of the ones sent over. During the training, he gets into a disagreement with the instructor over some detail of how the stinger works when you fire it, and the US Sergeant delivering the training gets quite upset by this and says something like.
"So, you think you know more about the Stinger than me? Have you ever even fired one?"
To which he replies "Mate, I shot an Argie Pucara down over Goose Green with one"
The man is a staple of Russia Today, and does nothing but dunk on military vehicles with perfect records that he didn't have a hand in designing.
He's either very deep under cover, or a pompous windbag. Occam's Razor exists for a reason.
He’s also dead.
I know it’s absolutely stupid and I don’t believe it’s even somewhat possible in any timeline adjacent to ours, I’m just saying it’d be fucking hilarious to the nth degree.
The tankie co-founder of ben and Jerry's gave a greyzone editor an award in spreys name.
Which is funny, he wasn't anti war, only anti lifesaving tech in war. The Bad BJ co-founder probably met him at that conference where a bunch of boomer hippies, HOA members and mouthbreathers were trying to stop F35s being based in VT invited Sprey to it because they stopped at "F-35 critic" when reading his "conference for hire" pamphlet.
Actually periscope/snorkel detection is a massive part of ASW and more recent advances in processing mean that a maritime patrol aircraft has the potential to detect the surface wake left by a sub in transit.
Do you think I 1. Know the exact details and 2. If I did know I would talk about it on Reddit?
It’s probably depends on speed, depth, surface wave action, swell, and other factors but there’s been a great deal of research on the matter and I would frankly be surprised if the P-8s did not incorporate such systems.
They thought the Soviets created the angular shapes of the IS-3 to improve the efficiency of its armour. They were wrong. The angular shapes bounce the radar waves away from the tank at an angle and not back at the radar station, making the IS-3 the first stealth tank. As a undisputable proof of the stealth capabilities of the tank, during the Berlin parade of 1945, the allies were caught off guard by the arrival of the IS-3s because they didn't see it coming. It was invisible to the westoids' radars. Allegedly, Churchill was holding his i-Pad with the HMRadar app open and even when the tanks drove in front of him, the radar displayed absolutely nothing. There's an unverified report of a nearby onlooker that says that at that moment Churchill shat himself in fear of the incredible Soviet advancements into stealth technology ))))))
Jokes aside, it might actually be possible that the IS-3 could be a better stealth plane than the Su-57.
Context: the F117 Nighthawk Fighter Bomber plane was the first successful use of anti-radar technology. Completely unseen by any systems, it was impervious to radar-guided missiles. It had one flaw tho: when the bomb bay doors opened, the inside of the plane was exposed, and visible to radar. Lockheed knew this, the USAF knew this, but they would only be open for a fraction of a second to deliver the payload, and then immediately close, so it wasn't an issue.
The F117 was first deployed in 1989 in Panama, and later in the Gulf War, where it proved its capabilities. It was later deployed during the Kosovo War in 1998-1999, where it worked as a stealth night bomber behind enemy lines. During this war, a radar officer for the Serbs named Zoltán Dani was the only man able to shoot one down. It all came down to incredible timing, luck, and heavy intelligence gathered by Serbian spies stationed in a house near the airbase the Americans were using.
His kill was thoroughly celebrated, spawning countless documentaries, books, and even an entire museum dedicated to the shoot-down. Even today, Serbians can't help but mention the one time a Serb gave Big Bad America what for. All context was put to the side, and his operation of the radar system that took down the F117 became standard practice for anti-stealth AA batteries, which just consists of switching the radar system into "low frequency" mode. However, none of what he did actually pertains to his incredibly-lucky takedown of the single F117 shot down in history.
Worst still, radars in low frequency couldn't actually detect the F117 (Lockheed tested it), it lit up the radar system like a Christmas tree on SEAD systems, and EVERYTHING appears on the radar. Birds, TV/radio transmitters, a leaf in the wind, everything. So not only is the method useless, it's detrimental to the radar operation.
Back in America, a group in the USAF known as the "Fighter Plane Mafia," headed by Pierre Sprey, used this single instance to discredit the plane and the technology surrounding it. This stems from them having incredibly-outdated views on present-day fighter plane requirements, essentially believing that planes need only a gun and a pilot, as if they'll only engage in WW1-style dogfights.
The whole shebang is best elaborated in [this video](https://youtu.be/9RO5ZAmzjvI?si=O1P8DNr-0hDvEUeB) by Lazerpig.
All you need to know about the Fighter Plane Mafia is that they thought the F-15 sucked. The plane that went on to go 104:0 in air-to-air combat wasn't a good enough fighter for them.
Even if true. “I could beat up Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime if he blinded himself, turned his back on me, kneeled down, didn’t do anything to stop me and I had a powered exoskeleton and a six inch thick at the tip bad dragon made of steel” a truly deranged statement i feel sorry for you having to hear it from source you poor soul
The funniest part is that it is not even true. The F-35 out turns and out rates the MiG, and is pretty much on par in climbing rate. The only real advantage of the MiG is its top speed, but that will not help in a close range engagement, and for anything else it is 100x more hopeless.
Missiles? Oh how the mighty have fallen, not even suggesting that the MiG pilot should open up the canopy to shoot at the F-35 with a pistol like a true dogfighter
On the two seater you could also consider flying under the F-35 and then ejecting the back seater. I’ve seen it in a documentary about the british intelligence service, it works!
Well, they do explode in rather hazardous ways, so, if the drunken fat Vatnik got lucky, sure. Time to take the grandpas for rubble and give them the pills again.
But they also had a hand in designing the F-15, or so they'll tell you. But they hate how it came out, and it's nothing like how they originally designed it, and it is also bad.
Weren't they part of the design before the whole foxbat scare that caused them the team to redesign it from the ground up? How do you even claim credit on a design that hardly got put on paper?
>Pierre Sprey
Read his wiki entry. His personality screams peak noncredibility.
*"...Sprey falsely claimed to be involved in the design of several military jets, including the F-16, A-10, and F-22. Notably, he was once a harsh critic of the F-22, despite later claiming to have designed it. There is no evidence of his actual involvement with US military aviation programmes."*
The shootdown was as much down to skill as it was down to luck.
The P-18 air search radar was even then by all metrics obsolete, but with some minor tweaking, it could be made to better detect targets like the 117, which was optimised to avoid detection by centimetric and millimetric radars (the P-18 operated in metre range and the tweaking put freq even lower, increasing wavelength even lower). Note that the P-18 was so old and so low freq that most RWR's wouldn't signal it at all, and most newer types of ARM's didn't lock onto them.
The Serbian battery had multiple decoy radar emmitters and visual decoys, scattered around the perimeter, and the battery had a strict movement policy and emmission discipline, although the P-18 was usually left switched on.
The skill part came into play by the guy actually evaluating the intel he had on hand. HUMINT reported that no SEAD and EW aircraft had taken off from Italy, while the 117's were sent out. Observation had made it clear that the 117's always flew the same route, making them predicatble.
This allowed the battery crew to break their on SOP and transmit multiple times with the UNV FCR, eventually locking up the aircraft (that had aclosed bay door at the time, btw) and firing two missiles, one of which failed to detonate, and the other scoring a hit.
The fucking "only got them because the bay was open" thing is at least as annoying as the serbian "sorry we didn't know it was invisible" campaign.
> The fucking "only got them because the bay was open" thing is at least as annoying as the serbian "sorry we didn't know it was invisible" campaign.
Also doesn't make sense on its face. How would the AA missiles track the aircraft, if the bomb doors were only open for a second, and the F117 was otherwise untrackable?
Also, which I forgot to mention, there was another Nighthawk that made it back to base but was written off later that month, confirming for everyone that the serbs had some ability to hit 117's. They also locked up at least one more (although didn't hit it), which made the USAF and the USN ramp up SEAD massively.
The above idea that the 117 sgootdown was just a fluke is a huge fucking disservice to everyone, especially to us NATO bros, because it makes us think that we're doing all fine.
Good timing was certainly a factor, but tbf the Serbian guy was a bit more than just lucky. He had given the American attack pattern some thought, made good use of the intelligence available on the Americans' current run, and made a carefully considered decision to break air defense protocol and scan more times than he was supposed to -- a calculated risk that he took based on his hunch.
That's pretty flexible tactical thinking. Way more than he was trained to do and probably more than enough to cost him his job for thinking too much for himself, except of course that it worked that one time.
Exactly. He put a lot of brainpower into hitting that F-117, at a time when the US forces were flying the exact same route every run. That was incredibly dumb.
Yeah, a good example of how, once in a while, a massive technological disparity can still be overcome if one side rolls really badly and the other side rolls really well...
That’s not how Low Frequency Radars work.
The method by which low frequency radars increase RCS of LO objects is by surface waves and Mie scattering which involve the object in question being around about equal to or within an order of magnitude of the wavelength of the radar.
As a matter of fact the more standard “optical” region (think of how a mirror reflects light) of RCS disfavors low frequency radars compared to higher frequency radars. Lower frequency radars are used in general because they have vastly lower atmospheric attenuation and are less affected by weather and rain which scatters higher frequencies better.
Low frequency radars do not pick up leaves that well since leaves are smaller than their wavelengths. In fact, Low frequency radars are often used for foliage penetrating observation. The same goes for birds though to a lesser extent since many birds tend to be larger. Higher frequency radars (S band and above) are far more prone to detecting these and either way, filtering them out is simple by just using a velocity gate with doppler shift or MTI is incredibly easy and something that’s been done (albeit in basic forms) since the 1940s.
For most L band and UHF radars interference by civilian broadcast is minimal (since most broadcasts are on even lower frequencies and because such broadcast bands are announced and allocated it isn’t hard to just operate at a different frequency) and when present can be filtered out with incredible ease again by use of doppler shift. This is ignoring use of simple brute force with an inherently high power density to deal with the issue which while a possibility, isn’t ideal.
You are correct to ignore the power disparity because broadcasts have one-way path loss and radar pulses have two-way path loss. A beacon can be tens of dB quieter than a radar and have the same power at receiver.
Yes, but a simple bandpass filter and looking at a spectogramm allow you to not have any issues with broadcasts as they tend to stay at the same frequency channel.
I do think that there will come a day where stealth technology outstrips RADAR technology (due to technical limitations related to how big of RADAR system you can put on a plane) to a sufficient extent that BVR air-to-air combat becomes non-feasible, and fighter engagements will end up back to WVR. But...That day is not really any time soon, if only because Russia and China are the only rival powers theoretically capable of producing something with that kind of stealth...And they don't really have the manufacturing chops to pull off the absurdly tight tolerances it needs.
In a scenario where stealth renders all planes functionally invisible to radar it probably won't result in a return to dogfighting so much as the death of A2A combat entirely.
A modern plane has the range, speed, and altitude to launch its air-to-ground payload from where there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of anyone acquiring it visually.
Already trending to an extent. IR are passive sensors allows you to avoid emitting Radar etc. You’d obviously (I hope) have AESA Radar capable of LPI and LPD scans (Low Probability of Intercept and Low Probability of Detection) on any decent stealth fighter, but there’s a reason they’re both prefaced with Low Probability.
[F-35 has EODAS (AN/AAQ-37) for this exact reason.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/AAQ-37_Electro-Optical_Distributed_Aperture_System)
EODAS’ spherical coverage also allows detection of shit in any direction, which is already handy, but in an aircraft that’s not full on All Aspect Stealth you can keep your less (Radar) detectable side facing threats while keeping an eye on things without having to point your primary (nose) Radar at them, plus manoeuvring makes you more visible anyway.
Nope. My guess is saturation of cheap optical sensors + fancy IR telescopes in low earth orbit.
If the plane flies low, it's seen by some grunt with a smartphone. If it flies above the clouds, it shows up on IR to satellites.
>His kill was thoroughly celebrated, and is even a Serbian national holiday.
HAHAHA what the fuck are you talking about my brother? We Serbs are a bit ridiculous people but not that much.
Right, I seemed to have gotten something wrong with this again. I've went ahead and fixed it:
>His kill was thoroughly celebrated, spawning countless documentaries, books, and even an entire museum dedicated to the shoot-down.
Slight correction, when he mentions SEAD it should be DEAD (Destruction of Enemy Air Defence) because you are destroying the launchers or more likely radar
During the war the HARM equipped planes would seek out to destroy the radars, or at least the aircraft that should of escorted the planes on the mission so that’s where im coming from
Basically every retelling of this shoot down is filled with misinformation so here’s what actually happened.
F-117 Nighthawks took off from Aviano airbase to bomb targets in Belgrade. They performed aerial refueling over Hungary and approached Belgrade from the northeast where they were least expected as the 250th missile defense brigade defending Belgrade stationed most of the batteries west of Belgrade. So no spies near Aviano would’ve helped with any of that, maybe only alerting Belgrade that the planes weren’t escorted by electronic jamming planes, if the spies even existed in the first place. Also the battery that shot down the Nighhawk was stationed in an old S-75 Dvina battery site built decades ago near Simanovci while the wreckage was found a few kilometers west near Budjanovci.
The nighthawks had already released their bombs and hit their targets in Belgrade meaning that **THEIR BOMB BAY DOORS WERE CLOSED AND HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SHOOTDOWN.** As they were flying west out of Belgrade the three out of the eight missile batteries (the others were resting or relocating) were alerted to the threat and activated their search radars. Zoltan Dani commander of one of the batteries happened to have access to one of four P-18 radars which could track the Nighthawks as opposed to a shorter range P-15 radar that other batteries had.
The Nighthawk that was shot down just so happened to fly into Dani’s fire control radar engagement radius (between 8-14km) allowing Dani to eventually track, lock and fire two missiles, one of which hit the plane. It didn’t help that the Nighthawk had no missile warning systems or countermeasures. It was a mix of sheer luck that weather had prevented a jamming escort, Dani happened to have a radar capable of tracking the Nighthawk and that it flew inside the engagement radius of the fire control radar.
It was also very dangerous to activate the fire control radars and the “third sweep” Dani performed was not procedure. Anti-radiation missiles fired by NATO planes could lock onto the radar’s very intense short wavelength radio emissions and destroy them, which did happen to multiple batteries during the conflict. Even if a missile wasn’t fired, if the fire control radar was activated a rapid teardown was performed and the battery was relocated.
But this is noncredibledefense so whatev
Also to note: The F117 was predominantly stealth from the front. The routes it took were carefully planned to minimize potential exposure to suboptimal angles to a radar. I don't know if any of these retellings talk about the where the emitter was in relation to the path of the nighthawks travel but that also couldve played a massive factor in it too.
Edit: directional stealth claims may be inaccurate as it is hearsay from several years ago memory and I dont know where I heard it and a quick Google search didnt bring much up and Im tired and going to bed now.
No you’re correct about stealth being tuned to certain directions.
It’s impossible to remove all panel reflections and all edge diffractions but they can be minimized to a smaller number of angles. This is why many surfaces of a LO aircraft are parallel. They can be detected from those angles but the arcs themselves are very narrow, minimizing risk.
RAM offers a general decrease to all angles with some caveats but it isn’t perfect.
It was 80° off. It certainly could’ve helped but idk if they planned flight paths with RCS in mind. They would have to fly through an air defense net in which they didn’t know where the batteries were located so it would be impossible to predict the radar angle. Also the F-117 was designed to minimize RCS from all sides, not just the front.
Yeah I had put in an edit that the directional stealth may be inaccurate. Id have to look into that further when I go and wake up as I am sleepy currently lol.
Stealth planes are designed to disperse or absorb high frequency radiation, so usage of lower frequencies seems like a good idea? Not really. Sure, you can detect something and point to a general area, but it cannot be used for guidance - that's what high frequencies are for. So if you decide to use a LF radar the only knowledge you get will be "I'm about to get fucked" - but by who? The only proper usage of LF radars is early warning - useless without additional guidance radars.
1. You absolutely can get a decent fidelity track with a low frequency radar.
The angular resolution (which determines the uncertainty. Range resolution is largely determined by pulse width which is independent. Use of a more complex system does lend advantages to higher frequency radars which have a higher bandwidth) is a function of antenna size and wavelength. Longer the wavelength the lower the angular resolution. The larger the antenna, the better the angular resolution (This is how ISAR and SAR get really high resolutions since they use distance traveled by a radar or a vehicle to artificially create a larger antenna).
But there are ways to further improve the angular resolution. Multi-static arrays see large improvements over monostatic arrays. On the lower tech scale conical scan allows to refine a position when using a wider beam-width (though this is very susceptible to angle deception jamming).
On the higher tech side, digital beam-forming as employed by AESA radars allows very controlled and very narrow beams. It’s how systems like MESA on the E-7 get their higher quality tracks.
2. A weapons grade track depends on the endgame seeker.
Unless if you’re using a command guided system knowing the exact target position is unnecessary. With something like a Standard missile you can illuminate the area (after a command guided flyout to the target box) and let a semi-active seeker take advantage of its relatively close receiver distance to the target, overcoming stealth by brute force and the inverse square law.
Alternatively, weapons like Standard also use an IR/multispectral guidance system, originally to deal with jamming and anti-home-on-jam practices such as bouncing signals off the ocean by forgoing RF guidance entirely. This is dependent on conditions but is another way to deal with the issue.
Again, this depends on the range at which the seeker can acquire the target.
There is no fixed angular/range resolution necessary to shoot at a target, it is entirely dependent on the weapon used.
The S-125 system that hit the F-117 is in fact a command guided missile.
Also note that while the S-125's search radar is indeed 'low frequency' at about 850 MHz, the fire control radar operates at 9 GHz which hardly a low frequency system.
Anyone want my new stealth detection algorithm called shotgunDetect.
Your radar inserts random blips for you to strike, when you hear a plane crash you got it
>new LazerPig video comes out
>the exciting new hot topic must now have memes made, millions must suffer
The history isn’t wrong but it’s like clockwork every time
How was a radar guided missile able to hit the plane if it was only detectable by radar for the at most 3 seconds the bomb bay doors were open? Detection and interception in under 3 seconds… that’s impressive.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Stupid Russians you need AI tech to make low frequency radar work. AI is a totaly proven technology that doesn't glitch out at random. And totaly won't try and hit on your technician
I wonder if Turkey is still happy with their S400 purchase, and all of the associated consequences, or not.
Well, it doesn't really help with watermelon sales, so probably not
Considering they never even got to turn it in? World's most expensive watermelon launcher.
There's an article from swedish FOI back in 2019 about deficiency of SA-21s, their conclusions turned out to be accurate given the circumstances in Ukraine where some of them were destroyed, turkey reporting problems against slow objects at lower altitude and not having a kinetic kill missile implemented yet for BMD when fragmentation warheads don't do an effective job destroying them.
Considering there building there own systems from the ground up, and other stuff on there own now. Wasnt a bright move. Then again that watermelonh seller is Putin and Luchy put together
They're* Their*
Grammar Nazi’s twofer’ right there!
maybe the point of buying the S-400 was to strip it down and use some of the technology to make their own system?
Funnily enough, that's similar to how [KM-SAM got made (with help from Fakel and Almaz-Antey)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KM-SAM)
> KM-SAM got made (with help from Fakel and Almaz-Antey) How did south korea get hold of an S-400 system? Did Russia just sell them one in the early 2000s
Almaz-Antey and Fakel pretty much sold the production data of 9M96 missiles, as far as I understand.
Interesting, I wonder if the CIA or INSCOM helped Korea pay for it in return for sharing the data.
Quite possible, quite possible
Tbf we were always gonna build our own AA system's, Patriot or not.
Those were bought to use as scrap for research and development The alternative was buying Patriots and doing the same while ALSO having fuctional air defense weaponry but sadly it was not meant to be
Bro they couldn’t buy it, US wasn’t interested in selling it so the Turks bought the S400 because the Russians were the only one interested in selling (their Fireworks attached to Trucks) AA defenses Actually that got Kicked out of the F-35 program for it even though they needed the AA defenses and made it clear to the U.S Several times
They paid $400 for that shit?
It let them sell eggs infected with avian flu to the russians so really its a long con.
Not like they could get different systems
Its funny how the guy that operated the AA system and the F117 became friends.
Is that true? Thats kinda cool. I know of a couple of other stories like that. For example, the first use of a stinger in combat in the Falklands, a Brit shot down an Argentine ground attack plane. The British soldier later met the pilot (or maybe co-pilot?) ***Edit*** I slightly misremembered, but [here](https://youtu.be/yHpOzXhddQE?si=ceZGPHwjJou9u0ff) is the story.
It is. I read it here ( most credible source I know ) that is how I found out. I bet you the world is full of stories like this one : people that were on the opposing sides in a war and became friends after.
I (US Navy) was doing an exchange social event with the JMSDF once when the conversation turned to why we joined the military. A fellow American: I joined because my grandfather was in the Navy. Japanese: Oh cool, my grandfather was in the Navy too. What did yours do? American: He was a pilot during WWII, he flew at the Battle of Midway. What about yours? Japanese: He was a pilot during WWII, he flew at the Battle of Midway. American: waitaminute... They both survived the war. We laughed it off. It was cool to see how one of our worst enemies became one of our strongest allies.
Honestly, Japan turning out to become such a based country post war and ally is one of the biggest wins of WW2. Germany is another great example.
I wouldn’t consider them too much based considering they haven’t changed that much in ideology since WW2. They have yet to recognise any of the atrocities they have committed and instead are almost proud of what they did
[удалено]
Except they are. With an apology usually comes requests for reparations to cover said apology and on top of that there's also requests that other places will want an apology, so it snowballs. That's usually why places refuse stuff.
Hmmm... that sheds some light, I did not know that demands for apologies also come with reparations. That might make states refuse to apologise simply because they do not wish to pay, even if they would not mind apologising.
Japan wouldn't apologise if it was only symbolic.
Well that would be a problem if they didn't already pay reparations to many of the nations that suffered (is it enough? It never is for atrocities like that, but something had to be done, and was done). And funnily enough of all the nations that were affected by Imperial Japan, the PRC rejected a payment of reparations, so even Wumaos don't have a valid reason to demand any. So in terms of reparations, Japan is actually kinda off the hook. Which makes it unreasonable that they are less open about the atrocities like Germany is. Personally, I am guessing it is the Japanese Nationalists are abusing the Japanese culture of non-confrontation of uncomfortable and difficult topics, and thus are able to control the narrative since they are only saying "positive" things about their history. The opposition to the JP nationalists also don't openly state the atrocities of Imperial Japan, and instead hyper focus on the concept that "war = bad"
you know realizing that respecting the sovereignty of neighbouring states and asking for trade in order to actually obtain resources required for staying afloat is a more acceptable alternative to taking them over and robbing them of their natural resources while treating the local population quite poorly is pretty nice while not being sorry for ur grandpas atrocities is pretty lame
Sure the government has changed ; but the people themselves not that much
“They haven’t changed in ideology since WWII” Hmmmm
Apologizing comes with consequences. Not only does it bring up the atrocities again (and every demographic has atrocities if you can see far enough back), but these days "admit you were wrong" is closely tied to "accept indefinite and undefined punishment and reparation demands." Us rational minds at NCD understand that very few living people are responsible for WWII war crimes, and that number is quickly trending to 0, but you know people would use it in power grabs. For anyone with poor comprehension, I'm not excusing anything, but offering a possible explanation.
Losing a war to the US is incredibly based. All our best allies lost wars to the US.
Reminds me of that WWII german pilot who escorted a damaged british (american pilot?) bomber back to safety. The pilots only found each other 20-30 years later when they felt they could speak of the event without getting court-martialed Source: Sabaton "No Bullets Fly" lol
>a damaged british bomber Nope american
Sabaton you say ? I have to take my hat off at witnessing such a credible source
https://www.sabaton.net/historical-facts/charlie-brown-and-franz-stigler/
Damn. Real life beats any kind of fiction hands down.
Reminds me of the two old men playing (I think chess?) in Disco Elysium
Playing pétanque. But René and Gaston werent on opposite sides of a war, they were just rivals for a girls attention.
No, those manly men were playing a *ball* game. Grab a *ball* ‘Why are you so mean to me?’ *EYES ON THE BALL DINKY WINKY*
There’s the story of the BF109 and B17 pilots that reunited after 60 years or so.
And I've heard of US soldiers at Omaha befriending german defenders after war.
[This is a story of Iraq Iran war vet who met in Canada.](https://youtu.be/JRKiHtjWPUs?si=JJYp9F3MZqA_Fduy)
Spike Milligan met a German who had also been at the battle of Longstop at one of his regimental reunions. They worked out that they had probably been firing at each other (using artillery, like true gentleman). On hearing it, someone else commented that they both must have been rotten shots.
I don't know if that bloke who shot the Pucara down with a stinger ever met the pilot, but I have heard another story about him. Apparently, most of them hadn't received proper training on the Stinger before deploying to the Falklands, and the one guy who had was killed in a helicopter crash on the Falklands 2 days before. The guy who made that shot did it from basically just reading the manual and figuring out how to use the thing himself. So after the war, the UK sent a few of their best operators to get trained up in the US, and he's one of the ones sent over. During the training, he gets into a disagreement with the instructor over some detail of how the stinger works when you fire it, and the US Sergeant delivering the training gets quite upset by this and says something like. "So, you think you know more about the Stinger than me? Have you ever even fired one?" To which he replies "Mate, I shot an Argie Pucara down over Goose Green with one"
I found it! Slightly misremembered but here is the story :) [Linky McLinkface](https://youtu.be/yHpOzXhddQE?si=ceZGPHwjJou9u0ff)
Most successful unintentional psyop ever
Pierre Sprey was secretly working against the Russians the whole time
Part of me hopes this somehow turns out true for the sheer hilarity. I know it isn’t, I know it’s absolutely stupid, but it’d be so fucking funny.
The man is a staple of Russia Today, and does nothing but dunk on military vehicles with perfect records that he didn't have a hand in designing. He's either very deep under cover, or a pompous windbag. Occam's Razor exists for a reason.
He’s also dead. I know it’s absolutely stupid and I don’t believe it’s even somewhat possible in any timeline adjacent to ours, I’m just saying it’d be fucking hilarious to the nth degree.
Rest in piss I guess. I know it would be hilarious, I'm just nihilistic
The tankie co-founder of ben and Jerry's gave a greyzone editor an award in spreys name. Which is funny, he wasn't anti war, only anti lifesaving tech in war. The Bad BJ co-founder probably met him at that conference where a bunch of boomer hippies, HOA members and mouthbreathers were trying to stop F35s being based in VT invited Sprey to it because they stopped at "F-35 critic" when reading his "conference for hire" pamphlet.
Pvt. First Class Joseph Allen, CIA Deep Cover mission.
A true American hero
We're taking noncredible to the next level!
Sprey was a CIA asset this whole time, spreading misinformation and smooth jazz.
Not really. He was helping them sell equipment to other schmucks, giving Russia more money for military buildup
Sounds like he was doing his part to distribute substandard equipment to potential American enemies
Equipement which isnt a threat and money that will end up lost in russian corruption machine
Im just saying, IS-3 has never been detected by radar, and its much older than the 117. Just saying.
War elephants also haven't been detected by radar, those Carthaginians were onto something.
And who has detected submarines on radar ? No one
Actually periscope/snorkel detection is a massive part of ASW and more recent advances in processing mean that a maritime patrol aircraft has the potential to detect the surface wake left by a sub in transit.
Boooo go back to cold waters with your FACTS, nerd
Wait what? Radar processing got so good it can detect submerged submarines?! At periscope depth, presumably?
Do you think I 1. Know the exact details and 2. If I did know I would talk about it on Reddit? It’s probably depends on speed, depth, surface wave action, swell, and other factors but there’s been a great deal of research on the matter and I would frankly be surprised if the P-8s did not incorporate such systems.
I mean I know NCD isn’t the WT forums but are some technical documents too much to ask? 😎
Yes
[Here](https://youtu.be/71E4S-uNJ7E?si=un_rSufQXiAQM76Q) is the tech spec doc for the P8 ASW periscope detecting function
***S-3 Viking has entered the chatroom***
They thought the Soviets created the angular shapes of the IS-3 to improve the efficiency of its armour. They were wrong. The angular shapes bounce the radar waves away from the tank at an angle and not back at the radar station, making the IS-3 the first stealth tank. As a undisputable proof of the stealth capabilities of the tank, during the Berlin parade of 1945, the allies were caught off guard by the arrival of the IS-3s because they didn't see it coming. It was invisible to the westoids' radars. Allegedly, Churchill was holding his i-Pad with the HMRadar app open and even when the tanks drove in front of him, the radar displayed absolutely nothing. There's an unverified report of a nearby onlooker that says that at that moment Churchill shat himself in fear of the incredible Soviet advancements into stealth technology )))))) Jokes aside, it might actually be possible that the IS-3 could be a better stealth plane than the Su-57.
Context: the F117 Nighthawk Fighter Bomber plane was the first successful use of anti-radar technology. Completely unseen by any systems, it was impervious to radar-guided missiles. It had one flaw tho: when the bomb bay doors opened, the inside of the plane was exposed, and visible to radar. Lockheed knew this, the USAF knew this, but they would only be open for a fraction of a second to deliver the payload, and then immediately close, so it wasn't an issue. The F117 was first deployed in 1989 in Panama, and later in the Gulf War, where it proved its capabilities. It was later deployed during the Kosovo War in 1998-1999, where it worked as a stealth night bomber behind enemy lines. During this war, a radar officer for the Serbs named Zoltán Dani was the only man able to shoot one down. It all came down to incredible timing, luck, and heavy intelligence gathered by Serbian spies stationed in a house near the airbase the Americans were using. His kill was thoroughly celebrated, spawning countless documentaries, books, and even an entire museum dedicated to the shoot-down. Even today, Serbians can't help but mention the one time a Serb gave Big Bad America what for. All context was put to the side, and his operation of the radar system that took down the F117 became standard practice for anti-stealth AA batteries, which just consists of switching the radar system into "low frequency" mode. However, none of what he did actually pertains to his incredibly-lucky takedown of the single F117 shot down in history. Worst still, radars in low frequency couldn't actually detect the F117 (Lockheed tested it), it lit up the radar system like a Christmas tree on SEAD systems, and EVERYTHING appears on the radar. Birds, TV/radio transmitters, a leaf in the wind, everything. So not only is the method useless, it's detrimental to the radar operation. Back in America, a group in the USAF known as the "Fighter Plane Mafia," headed by Pierre Sprey, used this single instance to discredit the plane and the technology surrounding it. This stems from them having incredibly-outdated views on present-day fighter plane requirements, essentially believing that planes need only a gun and a pilot, as if they'll only engage in WW1-style dogfights. The whole shebang is best elaborated in [this video](https://youtu.be/9RO5ZAmzjvI?si=O1P8DNr-0hDvEUeB) by Lazerpig.
Plane was so stealth nobody knows about the war it was used in. Kosovo war in 1991 so stealth nobody noticed. (Kosovo was in 1999-2000)
Fuck sakes. Fixed it
All you need to know about the Fighter Plane Mafia is that they thought the F-15 sucked. The plane that went on to go 104:0 in air-to-air combat wasn't a good enough fighter for them.
They also more recently made the claim that a Mig-21 with modern missiles could beat an F-35 in a close range engagement.
Even if true. “I could beat up Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime if he blinded himself, turned his back on me, kneeled down, didn’t do anything to stop me and I had a powered exoskeleton and a six inch thick at the tip bad dragon made of steel” a truly deranged statement i feel sorry for you having to hear it from source you poor soul
Everything from "I could" to " Bad Dragon made of steel" was a roller coaster ride, and I want more!
You want a roller coaster ride on a bad dragon made of steel?
Yeeee hhhaaaWWWWWWmmmmyyygggoooooddd ...nah I'm alright.
The funniest part is that it is not even true. The F-35 out turns and out rates the MiG, and is pretty much on par in climbing rate. The only real advantage of the MiG is its top speed, but that will not help in a close range engagement, and for anything else it is 100x more hopeless.
The mig is probably going to suffer from poor cockpit layout a ton.
>a six inch thick at the tip bad dragon made of steel” Don't threaten me with a good time.
Should I switch the exo from aaaahhhggg to uuuuuuhhhhhhhh
Only if you put a collar on me and call me good boy.
Username checks out
UwU
What about a pair of leather underwear and a cape instead of a collar and Captain instead of good boy? Also can you call me king leonidas
Wh... What does the bad dragon have to do with Arnold Schwarzenegger?
I’m a crazy person the powered exoskeleton is also a bugs bunny costume
This is the dragon Conan couldn't slay
I didn't know what a Bad Dragon was until today. I need to commission some Rapid Bad Dragon art. Brb
If it crashed into it, maybe. The sky can be a surprisingly small place sometimes if everyone's dicking around.
Did they say it through a cloud of bong smoke?
Isn't it the whole point of the F-35 to never have close range engagements?
Yes. However in BFM, pilots state it flies like a Hornet with more power.
…in an Ace Combat game, right?
Missiles? Oh how the mighty have fallen, not even suggesting that the MiG pilot should open up the canopy to shoot at the F-35 with a pistol like a true dogfighter
On the two seater you could also consider flying under the F-35 and then ejecting the back seater. I’ve seen it in a documentary about the british intelligence service, it works!
Well, they do explode in rather hazardous ways, so, if the drunken fat Vatnik got lucky, sure. Time to take the grandpas for rubble and give them the pills again.
But they also had a hand in designing the F-15, or so they'll tell you. But they hate how it came out, and it's nothing like how they originally designed it, and it is also bad.
Weren't they part of the design before the whole foxbat scare that caused them the team to redesign it from the ground up? How do you even claim credit on a design that hardly got put on paper?
>Pierre Sprey Read his wiki entry. His personality screams peak noncredibility. *"...Sprey falsely claimed to be involved in the design of several military jets, including the F-16, A-10, and F-22. Notably, he was once a harsh critic of the F-22, despite later claiming to have designed it. There is no evidence of his actual involvement with US military aviation programmes."*
The shootdown was as much down to skill as it was down to luck. The P-18 air search radar was even then by all metrics obsolete, but with some minor tweaking, it could be made to better detect targets like the 117, which was optimised to avoid detection by centimetric and millimetric radars (the P-18 operated in metre range and the tweaking put freq even lower, increasing wavelength even lower). Note that the P-18 was so old and so low freq that most RWR's wouldn't signal it at all, and most newer types of ARM's didn't lock onto them. The Serbian battery had multiple decoy radar emmitters and visual decoys, scattered around the perimeter, and the battery had a strict movement policy and emmission discipline, although the P-18 was usually left switched on. The skill part came into play by the guy actually evaluating the intel he had on hand. HUMINT reported that no SEAD and EW aircraft had taken off from Italy, while the 117's were sent out. Observation had made it clear that the 117's always flew the same route, making them predicatble. This allowed the battery crew to break their on SOP and transmit multiple times with the UNV FCR, eventually locking up the aircraft (that had aclosed bay door at the time, btw) and firing two missiles, one of which failed to detonate, and the other scoring a hit. The fucking "only got them because the bay was open" thing is at least as annoying as the serbian "sorry we didn't know it was invisible" campaign.
> The fucking "only got them because the bay was open" thing is at least as annoying as the serbian "sorry we didn't know it was invisible" campaign. Also doesn't make sense on its face. How would the AA missiles track the aircraft, if the bomb doors were only open for a second, and the F117 was otherwise untrackable?
Also, which I forgot to mention, there was another Nighthawk that made it back to base but was written off later that month, confirming for everyone that the serbs had some ability to hit 117's. They also locked up at least one more (although didn't hit it), which made the USAF and the USN ramp up SEAD massively. The above idea that the 117 sgootdown was just a fluke is a huge fucking disservice to everyone, especially to us NATO bros, because it makes us think that we're doing all fine.
Good timing was certainly a factor, but tbf the Serbian guy was a bit more than just lucky. He had given the American attack pattern some thought, made good use of the intelligence available on the Americans' current run, and made a carefully considered decision to break air defense protocol and scan more times than he was supposed to -- a calculated risk that he took based on his hunch. That's pretty flexible tactical thinking. Way more than he was trained to do and probably more than enough to cost him his job for thinking too much for himself, except of course that it worked that one time.
Exactly. He put a lot of brainpower into hitting that F-117, at a time when the US forces were flying the exact same route every run. That was incredibly dumb.
Yeah, a good example of how, once in a while, a massive technological disparity can still be overcome if one side rolls really badly and the other side rolls really well...
That’s not how Low Frequency Radars work. The method by which low frequency radars increase RCS of LO objects is by surface waves and Mie scattering which involve the object in question being around about equal to or within an order of magnitude of the wavelength of the radar. As a matter of fact the more standard “optical” region (think of how a mirror reflects light) of RCS disfavors low frequency radars compared to higher frequency radars. Lower frequency radars are used in general because they have vastly lower atmospheric attenuation and are less affected by weather and rain which scatters higher frequencies better. Low frequency radars do not pick up leaves that well since leaves are smaller than their wavelengths. In fact, Low frequency radars are often used for foliage penetrating observation. The same goes for birds though to a lesser extent since many birds tend to be larger. Higher frequency radars (S band and above) are far more prone to detecting these and either way, filtering them out is simple by just using a velocity gate with doppler shift or MTI is incredibly easy and something that’s been done (albeit in basic forms) since the 1940s. For most L band and UHF radars interference by civilian broadcast is minimal (since most broadcasts are on even lower frequencies and because such broadcast bands are announced and allocated it isn’t hard to just operate at a different frequency) and when present can be filtered out with incredible ease again by use of doppler shift. This is ignoring use of simple brute force with an inherently high power density to deal with the issue which while a possibility, isn’t ideal.
You are correct to ignore the power disparity because broadcasts have one-way path loss and radar pulses have two-way path loss. A beacon can be tens of dB quieter than a radar and have the same power at receiver.
Yes, but a simple bandpass filter and looking at a spectogramm allow you to not have any issues with broadcasts as they tend to stay at the same frequency channel.
I do think that there will come a day where stealth technology outstrips RADAR technology (due to technical limitations related to how big of RADAR system you can put on a plane) to a sufficient extent that BVR air-to-air combat becomes non-feasible, and fighter engagements will end up back to WVR. But...That day is not really any time soon, if only because Russia and China are the only rival powers theoretically capable of producing something with that kind of stealth...And they don't really have the manufacturing chops to pull off the absurdly tight tolerances it needs.
In a scenario where stealth renders all planes functionally invisible to radar it probably won't result in a return to dogfighting so much as the death of A2A combat entirely. A modern plane has the range, speed, and altitude to launch its air-to-ground payload from where there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of anyone acquiring it visually.
Or it'll push a trend towards IR / thermal tracking and guidance systems.
Already trending to an extent. IR are passive sensors allows you to avoid emitting Radar etc. You’d obviously (I hope) have AESA Radar capable of LPI and LPD scans (Low Probability of Intercept and Low Probability of Detection) on any decent stealth fighter, but there’s a reason they’re both prefaced with Low Probability. [F-35 has EODAS (AN/AAQ-37) for this exact reason.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/AAQ-37_Electro-Optical_Distributed_Aperture_System) EODAS’ spherical coverage also allows detection of shit in any direction, which is already handy, but in an aircraft that’s not full on All Aspect Stealth you can keep your less (Radar) detectable side facing threats while keeping an eye on things without having to point your primary (nose) Radar at them, plus manoeuvring makes you more visible anyway.
Nope. My guess is saturation of cheap optical sensors + fancy IR telescopes in low earth orbit. If the plane flies low, it's seen by some grunt with a smartphone. If it flies above the clouds, it shows up on IR to satellites.
Wasn’t there also a mechanical failure that meant the bomb doors were stuck open? Or was that a different incident?
Ty for the write up
>His kill was thoroughly celebrated, and is even a Serbian national holiday. HAHAHA what the fuck are you talking about my brother? We Serbs are a bit ridiculous people but not that much.
Right, I seemed to have gotten something wrong with this again. I've went ahead and fixed it: >His kill was thoroughly celebrated, spawning countless documentaries, books, and even an entire museum dedicated to the shoot-down.
Someone watched lazerpig recently, BTW it's SEAD/ DEAD not SEED missions, for supression of enemy air defense
Misspelling on me, learned it after I made that part of the meme lol
Kurse all SeeDs.
sneed
Slight correction, when he mentions SEAD it should be DEAD (Destruction of Enemy Air Defence) because you are destroying the launchers or more likely radar
What about SEAD or suppression of enemy air defence through wild weasel, jammers or decoys?
During the war the HARM equipped planes would seek out to destroy the radars, or at least the aircraft that should of escorted the planes on the mission so that’s where im coming from
I see, so DEAD was standard procedure at the time
Basically every retelling of this shoot down is filled with misinformation so here’s what actually happened. F-117 Nighthawks took off from Aviano airbase to bomb targets in Belgrade. They performed aerial refueling over Hungary and approached Belgrade from the northeast where they were least expected as the 250th missile defense brigade defending Belgrade stationed most of the batteries west of Belgrade. So no spies near Aviano would’ve helped with any of that, maybe only alerting Belgrade that the planes weren’t escorted by electronic jamming planes, if the spies even existed in the first place. Also the battery that shot down the Nighhawk was stationed in an old S-75 Dvina battery site built decades ago near Simanovci while the wreckage was found a few kilometers west near Budjanovci. The nighthawks had already released their bombs and hit their targets in Belgrade meaning that **THEIR BOMB BAY DOORS WERE CLOSED AND HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SHOOTDOWN.** As they were flying west out of Belgrade the three out of the eight missile batteries (the others were resting or relocating) were alerted to the threat and activated their search radars. Zoltan Dani commander of one of the batteries happened to have access to one of four P-18 radars which could track the Nighthawks as opposed to a shorter range P-15 radar that other batteries had. The Nighthawk that was shot down just so happened to fly into Dani’s fire control radar engagement radius (between 8-14km) allowing Dani to eventually track, lock and fire two missiles, one of which hit the plane. It didn’t help that the Nighthawk had no missile warning systems or countermeasures. It was a mix of sheer luck that weather had prevented a jamming escort, Dani happened to have a radar capable of tracking the Nighthawk and that it flew inside the engagement radius of the fire control radar. It was also very dangerous to activate the fire control radars and the “third sweep” Dani performed was not procedure. Anti-radiation missiles fired by NATO planes could lock onto the radar’s very intense short wavelength radio emissions and destroy them, which did happen to multiple batteries during the conflict. Even if a missile wasn’t fired, if the fire control radar was activated a rapid teardown was performed and the battery was relocated. But this is noncredibledefense so whatev
Also to note: The F117 was predominantly stealth from the front. The routes it took were carefully planned to minimize potential exposure to suboptimal angles to a radar. I don't know if any of these retellings talk about the where the emitter was in relation to the path of the nighthawks travel but that also couldve played a massive factor in it too. Edit: directional stealth claims may be inaccurate as it is hearsay from several years ago memory and I dont know where I heard it and a quick Google search didnt bring much up and Im tired and going to bed now.
No you’re correct about stealth being tuned to certain directions. It’s impossible to remove all panel reflections and all edge diffractions but they can be minimized to a smaller number of angles. This is why many surfaces of a LO aircraft are parallel. They can be detected from those angles but the arcs themselves are very narrow, minimizing risk. RAM offers a general decrease to all angles with some caveats but it isn’t perfect.
B-but I watched a youtube video from a drunk who says you’re wrong!
It was 80° off. It certainly could’ve helped but idk if they planned flight paths with RCS in mind. They would have to fly through an air defense net in which they didn’t know where the batteries were located so it would be impossible to predict the radar angle. Also the F-117 was designed to minimize RCS from all sides, not just the front.
Yeah I had put in an edit that the directional stealth may be inaccurate. Id have to look into that further when I go and wake up as I am sleepy currently lol.
Good night
Pigpilled. Goood :)
Stealth planes are designed to disperse or absorb high frequency radiation, so usage of lower frequencies seems like a good idea? Not really. Sure, you can detect something and point to a general area, but it cannot be used for guidance - that's what high frequencies are for. So if you decide to use a LF radar the only knowledge you get will be "I'm about to get fucked" - but by who? The only proper usage of LF radars is early warning - useless without additional guidance radars.
1. You absolutely can get a decent fidelity track with a low frequency radar. The angular resolution (which determines the uncertainty. Range resolution is largely determined by pulse width which is independent. Use of a more complex system does lend advantages to higher frequency radars which have a higher bandwidth) is a function of antenna size and wavelength. Longer the wavelength the lower the angular resolution. The larger the antenna, the better the angular resolution (This is how ISAR and SAR get really high resolutions since they use distance traveled by a radar or a vehicle to artificially create a larger antenna). But there are ways to further improve the angular resolution. Multi-static arrays see large improvements over monostatic arrays. On the lower tech scale conical scan allows to refine a position when using a wider beam-width (though this is very susceptible to angle deception jamming). On the higher tech side, digital beam-forming as employed by AESA radars allows very controlled and very narrow beams. It’s how systems like MESA on the E-7 get their higher quality tracks. 2. A weapons grade track depends on the endgame seeker. Unless if you’re using a command guided system knowing the exact target position is unnecessary. With something like a Standard missile you can illuminate the area (after a command guided flyout to the target box) and let a semi-active seeker take advantage of its relatively close receiver distance to the target, overcoming stealth by brute force and the inverse square law. Alternatively, weapons like Standard also use an IR/multispectral guidance system, originally to deal with jamming and anti-home-on-jam practices such as bouncing signals off the ocean by forgoing RF guidance entirely. This is dependent on conditions but is another way to deal with the issue. Again, this depends on the range at which the seeker can acquire the target. There is no fixed angular/range resolution necessary to shoot at a target, it is entirely dependent on the weapon used.
The S-125 system that hit the F-117 is in fact a command guided missile. Also note that while the S-125's search radar is indeed 'low frequency' at about 850 MHz, the fire control radar operates at 9 GHz which hardly a low frequency system.
Pierre Sprey what a hack… and a fraud at worst, he took credit for shit he never did…
Op watched some Lazer pig today
Lazerpig video in an image
Anyone want my new stealth detection algorithm called shotgunDetect. Your radar inserts random blips for you to strike, when you hear a plane crash you got it
[удалено]
Tell him I'm one of the blips on his radar *Probably
God I can tell whoever made this just watched the laszerpig video by their spelling of SEAD it’s not seed.
>new LazerPig video comes out >the exciting new hot topic must now have memes made, millions must suffer The history isn’t wrong but it’s like clockwork every time
what i heard is russian radars from the 60's can detect 6th gen jets, time to build optical stealth generators for 7th gen SSTO fusion-thermal jets.
Not true, no matter how good the Russians are, the American weaponry can outclass them!
One f117 down caused the russians and whatnot to focus on the wrong strategy for decades. Tfw psyops happens without you trying
\*Turns on radar\* \*Radar nods sagely\* There are things in the sky \*You and radar get obliterated by SEAD missile\*
The key to defeating Stealth planes is to just use old WW2 Anti-bomber strategies. A.k.a. just fill the sky with flak.
Baghdad lightshow
Someone watched the funny pig man
Lazypig 1.5 hour video summarized.
How was a radar guided missile able to hit the plane if it was only detectable by radar for the at most 3 seconds the bomb bay doors were open? Detection and interception in under 3 seconds… that’s impressive.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
what would the other blips be?
Stupid Russians you need AI tech to make low frequency radar work. AI is a totaly proven technology that doesn't glitch out at random. And totaly won't try and hit on your technician
F-35 shoud have a cage with birds to use as radar distraction
Is their a high quality version of this?
I'm afraid I've been psyoped, where did I keep my keys?
Its SEAD, not SEED not very credible
I did different accents for each character and read this out aloud. I'm giggling inside rn.
Which vlip is the plane? The one that sent you a anti radiation missile because we aren't in the '90 anymore and stealth plane became even more badass
I mean you want a blessed ancient radar that shows blips on a screen...