Originally posted by Shotgun:
The RWR is smarter than that. It has audio cues to inform the pilot
what stage the SAM is in. Different SAMs, different radars,
different sounds as well. There is no single tone that says it all.
Its ALMOST idiot proof, that if a SAM was launched AT you or is
tracking someone, you WILL know and recognise the different audio
cue.
I never say its single toned, and actually I used the phrase
Modern RWR to highlight todays RWR can be very complicated which
is even with microprocessor to handle signals.
What i meant is, an SA-6 search radar, may not be what the
weasel wants to kill or suppress. Search radars on the RWR or HTS
may be spoofs or hoaxes used to draw away the 2 precious HARMs
carried on the F-16s. Whereas, a fire control radar, or a radar
that is locked is the real deal and truly deserves a shot.
We are not going into details of tactics for both of us are not
military pilots who are trained to do this. What the point is the
ARM is effective to suppress your old generation radar which
usually is powerless except shot down.
So now, im not longer arguing whether a Harm can home in on a
jammer. I think you made enough sense that theoretically it can do
so. .
Not only theoretically but also in practice.:
http://www.missilethreat.com/missiledefensesystems/id.20/system_detail.asp
In a report to Congress on May 28,
2004, the U.S. Department of Defense highlighted the major
improvements that China has made to its air and missile defense
systems over the past few years, including "[the] development of an
antiradiation SAM [surface-to-air missile], most likely intended to
target AWACS [Airborne Warning and Control System] aircraft and
standoff jamming platforms."U.S. Department of Defense, "FY04
Report to Congress on PRC Military Power Pursuant to the FY2000
National Defense Authorization Act," May 2004.
The report was referring specifically to the FT-2000, a
Chinese anti-radiation surface-to-air missile system designed to
counter electronic jamming aircraft, AWACS aircraft, and
other air radiation wave targets. .. the FT-2000 is also believed
to be capable of destroying tactical ballistic missiles, similar to
the U.S. Patriot and the Russian S-300P systems on The FT-2000 is
the direct result of a concerted effort by China to eliminate an
inherent vulnerability in medium- and long-range surface-to-air
missiles: jamming. For decades, air and missile defense systems
like the Patriot and the S-300P have been susceptible to advanced
techniques designed to confuse or immobile their interceptor
missiles and keep them from reaching their targets. One of the most
common jamming devices is S- and C-band airborne noise. If used
properly, this and other deception mechanisms lead to what is known
as the "suppression of enemy air defenses" and allows attacking
aircraft and missiles to proceed to their targets without
challenge.SinoDefense.com.
The FT-2000 was designed to neutralize and counter these airborne
jamming devices. It contains a passive radar target seeker
programmed to detect the specific electromagnetic signals emanating
from its target. Essentially, the FT-2000 uses its target's own
jamming frequencies against it. In addition, the FT-2000 has a
passive homing system that does not transmit electromagnetic waves,
thus minimizing the chances that its enemies will detect it in
time
The system is equipped with modified HQ-9 interceptor
missiles, each of which is 6.8 meters long, 0.47 meters in
diameter, and has a launch weight of 1,300 kilograms. The HQ-9
missiles give the FT-2000 a range of 12 to 100 kilometers and an
operating altitude of 3 to 20 kilometers. The mobile system is
transported and launched on an 8 X 8 cross-country launcher with
four canisters that resemble those used by the S-300P.
Remember your unfinished mutli-radar multi-location scenario?
Yes, the FT2000 utilizes 4 phase arrayed passive radar in 4
different location to geo-locate the jamming source the FT-2000 ARM
is essentially a S-300 SAM by airframe & flight profile. If the
FT-2000 was fired alongside with other normal SAMs like S-300 and
HQ-9, how can the SEAD mission to differentiate which one is ARM
and which one is SAM? Keep jamming, the slow moving EC-130 jammer
will be the preyby FT-2000, but stop jamming, other fighters may be
the prey of S-300/HQ-9. now you see, how a ARM Home on the
jammer
The Serbian SAMs inflicted what we call, "virtual attrition" upon
NATO aircraft. They forced NATO to fly more sorties, use more fuel,
carry less strike munitions and more jamming gear.
So even if you "Suppress" my SAMs, forcing me to take only shots
that am confident of hitting, I am still dealing you virtual damage
with the fact that my batteries are STILL operational. Just
quiet.
Your SAMs are still there but for what usage when your
supposed-to-protect asserts like airport/C3 centers etc all being
destructed by air raids.
Restrictions not referring to just political restrictions. But
also to environmental. Again, lessons learnt from Allied Force, the
SIGINT and ELINT aircraft had difficulties looking into mountainous
and hilly terrains. The terrain itself masked the presence of such
equipment.
Off topic, Singapore doesnt have mountainous and hilly terrains
to exploit but only Malaysia has which means its not a good news
for RSAFs EW platforms
Yes, fully agreed. Even in Allied Force, the Russians commented
that if the Serbs had just a SINGLE battalion of SA-10s, the NATO
campaign would have been gravely complicated.
Thats all my point a 3G SAM upgrading is the only way to go.
Same as the E-2C being replaced by the radar more advanced G550
CAEW. .
