Originally posted by 187onu
..."low frequency" radars which operate under 2Ghz and can detect everything ...
but it can only pinpoint the aircraft within 30-50m (or feet)...
Then there is "Tamara" which can detect a stealth plane's "e-missions" ...
The UK has a radar system that can detect a stealth plane...
Intergurl where you at?
You are basically correct in your assumptions.
Low freq radar can detect
the presense of LO aircraft but accuracy is very much an issue.
The Tamara tracks "e-missions" but once again as you stated LO/VLO aircraft tactics and even design keep these emissions in check.
As for the UK having a system that can detect a stealth plane, there is no question about the ability to detect a LO aircraft, although it is not as
easy as everyone tries to make it.
I think that input from "PeanutButterJellyTime" and "Pyros" has been very good in this thread.
Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime
A big part of the success of stealth is the flightpath the aircraft take. They do their best to skirt around the air defences. At close range the
stealth aircraft are detectable and they fly their missions to stay out of that range.
This is very true, the secret to a stealthy ingress into enemy territory is not just
electronic countermeasures, Radar Absorbent Structure
(RAS) and Radar Absorbent Materials (RAM), it is also tactics. You don't fly a stealth aircraft directly over an enemy air defense radar system, you
go around the affected airspace, as the range at which a LO aircraft is detectable is greatly reduced from that of a conventional aircraft.
It may be beneficial to provide a little information on LO and CLO systems to hopefully bring some clarity to this discussion.
Theoretical Counter Low Observable radar:
CLO radar units include over-the-horizon backscatter radars (Australian Jindalee system), carrierless radar, bistatic and multistatic radars.
Stealth techniques include the use of active cancellation, radar absorbent structure or shaping (RAS) and radar absorbent materials (RAM) to reduce
the RCS of an object.
Theoretically, multistatic radar systems have advantages against targets employing at 2 of these forms of RCS reduction.
Active cancellation transmits an out of phase radar signal that cancels out its own radar echo. However, the location of passive bistatic receivers
can not be discerned by electronic sensors, so the active cancellation transmitter has no direction to transmit.
RAS deflects the radar energy in directions away from the signal source - however, a bistatic receiver can monitor the reflections since the antennas
are in remote locations from the signal source.
The Downside of CLO systems:
Target detection, even at very low Signal to Clutter Ratios (down to –100 dB) is currently possible, however target tracking using these low
frequency systems is in theory possible but technically improbable due to among other things a lack of processing power.
In the future theoretical tracking of LO targets could be accomplished by 3-dimensional positioning and using either triangulation or hyperbolic (or
both) target location strategies.
A variety of Radar, ELINT/SIGINT systems tout that they are "anti-stealth":
Low Frequency Radar:
One example of a low frequency anti-stealth radar is the Russian 55Zh6.1, which is a ground-based, 1-meter wave, circular scanner. This low-freq radar
can detect early generation stealth technology aircraft with "detect" being the key word.
With long wave / low freq radar there are 2 major points that should be brought up:
1. Detecting the presence of a stealthy air vehicle and accurately tracking it for a fire control computer are 2 very different things, as tracking
and lock-up only occur using higher freq radar.
2. There is a lot of noise in these lower frequencies and it is very difficult to detect beyond a few miles.
Passive Radar & PCL (Passive Coherent Location) Systems:
The Ukranian Topaz "Kolchuga", the Czech "Kopac", "Ramona" and "Tamara MCS-93" systems as well as the Russian "VERA-E" and "BORAP" systems
are all examples of "passive radar" which isn't really a radar at all but a listening device.
These systems listen for electronic signals generated by passing aircraft. It is important to also note that the Russian military considers the
"Kolchuga", "Kopac", "Ramona" and "Tamara" out of date systems, the VERA system is something you will want to pay attention to in the
Systems such as the UK's Celldar and Lockheed's Silent Sentry are good examples of PCL technology. Celldar as the name implies uses cell phone
frequencies to detect aircraft and Silent Sentry uses broadcast television and FM radio frequencies. China and Russia have both been working on
The frequencies monitored in these systems are relatively low (long wavelengths) and can theoretically detect stealthy air vehicles but again there
are issues with actually tracking the target for a fire control unit.
These systems have one transmitter and 2 or more receivers located in different locations, this can defeat stealth based on structural design (shape).
The premise behind RAS (Radar absorbent structure) is that the radar signals are deflected in directions other than back to the source. The
multi-static radar systems have recievers placed in carefully calculated locations in order to pick up the signals that are reflected away from the
It bears mentioning that the more effective Passive and PCL systems are bistatic or multistatic systems, in that they have multiple listening
If you walk away from this thread and learn only one thing, please let it be that there is a big difference between detecting a stealthy LO aircraft
and directing fire-control computers to a specific point in the airspace in question.
[edit on 26-4-2005 by intelgurl]