That's the Shizzznit! Thanks. Integration of conformal arrays will really be a big deal. An RF version of the DAS with longer range and even more deadly for obvious reasons.

-DA 

i'd also add that this report ignores some of the developments already made wrt to distributed arrays.

 

ie, we already have conformal array concepts successfully developed for aircraft and are already looking at platforms like submarines.

 

the advantage of a conformal array over a "point" distributed array should be self evident....

 

 on another point, the US already has mules using belly arrays which hive the test aircraft a horseshoe shaped view.  current materials science developments mean that they could in theory do an "EP-3" and stick a belly beam AESA in between engine points (eg Shornet, Eagle etc....)  so, design possible, but poss unnecessary.

It would make an interesting weasel...

In addition to Weasels. It also opens the door to some different communications architectures since AESA has long been considered useful for high BW LOS COMLINK.

-DA 

Ignoring physics as usual.

 

Herald

There's the obvious 360 degree all around coverage, which are readily mentioned.

 

What I did not see mentioned are potential for.

- Improvements in detecting stealth airplanes.

- Improvements in Jamming.

- Improvements in signal processing.

- Improvements in signal processing shared among planes in the same formation.

 

And what would sticking 360 degree radar on a missile do?

 

 

 

An air to air missile which will turn around just after you have evaded it or even making high speed yoyo's to engage.

Problem there is that AAMs expend all their fuel very shortly after launch. If they miss, they would lose so much energy turning around that they would simply "fall" out of the sky after the first attempt. They would need some kind of looooong burn sustained motor or a second stage that fires after the energy robbing turn.

-DA

 

 

Nil content my left foot!.

Herald

 

*Now* you've posted some content.  However, surely there must be ways of doing it, as there are aircraft with multiple antennas around the airframe, are there not?

 

When you have two separate systems putting out phase interference you have to work out beam geometry and clean up the sidelobes for starters. This is a classic bolo with own radars and own active jammer systems or same telemetry links, same platform, as you are all too aware, WP.

 

Often it comes down to simple point geometries and scan schemes. The antenna has to be moved or the radio beams pointed away from each other so that radio beams as they scan through the same volume of space don't cross each other.  Or you can develop an electronic phase canceler thbat acts as a noise gate.

 

Citation... 

 

Citation... 

 

Discussion... 

 

Its sounds so easy. It isn't, which is why the American aircraft AESA radars are so phenomenal and why the SPY 3 is taking so damn long to perfect.

 

Herald

.

 

Herald