Sometimes , the French DGA is just plain wrong .

Hamilcar , you are talking about "targeting the signal spectrum itself" , fine.

I understand the concept and various  jamming systems onboard aircraft are designed for the task .

Let 's take again Dijon as an exemple . Just imagine that it is a similar Chinese city with an important airbase ;-)

 

:Let's just say that since you do not understand electromagnetism at all, that you really don't understand what targeting the signal spectrum means. 

 

How the USAF and/or the USN could blind the various systems participating at the IADS around "Dijoniang" (lol) ?

 

I don't think I should describe to a defender HOW to defend.

 

Since you like the "peeled onion" metaphor (various superposed skins) , we 're gonna use it .

First , there is a OtH radar to deal with . It is probably well protected by other types of radars and various types of SAMs .

In itself , it is almost invulnerable to any conventional attack . Any B-2 armed with cruise missiles will be spotted and tracked at 1000km or more .

 

Any antenna is a signal exploit path. One as finicky as one that uses the ionisphere as a bounce mirror is so vulnerable to spoof that I find it a joke that you think it is immune. As for physically immune? Its got a GPS coordinate and it is a fixed sire. Its Tomahawk fodder. Besides as a blob detector, it is useless for anything but as a bearing hand-off to true acquisition radars and then its too late.  

What is left in unconventional attack , Nuclear , EMP , Laser , etc , take your pick ...

Let 's say that the country doesn 't have a ballistic missile shield and EMP is used . The OtH radar is out for days , ok ?

 

Lets try A HARM or just a GPS guided or inertial guided Tomahawk.  That will work. Out for GOOD. Even with a explosive driven flix capacity EMP warhead as its not just the aerial and transmitter that dies with that pulse but EVERYTHING connected to it,

 

Then , one can start a "proper" air campaign (or cruise missile attack first) against the other "skins" , like UHF , VHF emiters to try to open a breach where LO assets can "try" to survive . This is going to take a lot of jamming and bombing as the targets are probably numerous where you plan to hit . Then , the L and FM bands ("skins") must also be dealt with .

There , one have a big problem as it is a close to target defense ~area defense~ (you have to go in close) and the possible sheer number of targets to jam or to destroy is problematic . 

 

The trouble with your model is that the attacker has all the time he needs to peel you apart as he forces you to commit as he desires, and he poke holes where he wants. All he needs is a FEW  corridors in that chjange as he desires. You have to area defend everything in the zone. Once he forces you into local control, then you are helpless as he tears you to bits as he widens and exploits his entry points electro-magnetically and physically.  

 

If Dijoniang has 3 HA-100 passive radars using 14 FM relays inside a 300km diameter circle (over 70.000km square) , one would need multiple jamming aircraft at once . Then , a LO platform would only have to hide from the mormal military radars and could bomb with almost inpunity .

The problem is that the airbase has fighters , obviously , it 's an airbase .

 

That is not a problem: that is an opportunity. The attacker wants them to commit in the middle of the electronic warfare phase so he can KILL them as he BLINDS them, too. He probably wants the air base INTACT for his own use. No defense fighters left? Its paratrooper bait. 

 

Pfff ... What a task for the attacker . It can be done but it is not going to be a walk in the park .

 

Against the French?  Israel is a TOUGHER problem. FACT.

 

"Besides as a blob detector, it is useless for anything but as a bearing hand-off to true acquisition radars "

telling bw why he is wrong doesnt help, he will repost the same nonsense next week 

And let's not forget the fact that aforementioned "magic bullet" has a detection ceiling of 20 000 feet, assuming no one has cut off power to the commercial radio stations or jammed the low-energy FM spectrum. 

 

That's right 20 000 feet ! - According to their own PR literature.

 

 

 BW, there's never a magic bullet the way you imagine - that's what people are trying to say, all of these things may help but you can't simply take X piece of software and exaggerate its capabilities beyond the realms of reality whilst also ignoring the fact that of things to Jam/disrupt, commercial FM (or any FM-band) is a piece of cake.

 

 

It's helpful, fills a useful niche, but would end up doing very little to thwart an attack.

I also wonder why LM, the company behind both the F22 + F35 is so unconcerned about marketing Silent Sentry (which is like the french system except that it has the advantage of using the higher-energy TV/HDTV broadcasts if it in any way jeapordised it's stealth.

 

It's also noteworthy that multistatic arrays don't even make the DOD threat list when it comes to stealth countermeasures.

 

Why would Lockheed market a passive reciever (far before Thales did) if it made its two largest-ever projects largely obsolete.

 

Perhaps it's because such systems can be shut down easily by jamming/ creating power grid failure (how many hours of backup power do most FM radio stations have?)

 

Perhaps it's because it's (by nature) a 2d system.

 

Perhaps it's because it's much more effective at low-altitude than high altitude.

 

Perhaps because accuracy is only enough to turn on an ACTIVE radar system for acquisition and track.

 

Perhaps because the signals likely to be recieved from a stealth aircraft in the first place are likely to be noisy and weak, shaping DOES still apply, as does RAM. If you look closely at the matter you'll see that in almost every instance the aspect of the plane makes a huge huge difference to the signal return for a given channel (radio emitter) being inspected, magnify this for stealth and you're back to square one.

 

And perhaps because the purpose of such systems isn't really engagement, but early warning, it might tell you that shit is on the way, it might give you elliptical 10000m² track areas but it certainly doesn't give you much other than an extra layer of onion-skin.

 

It's really more useful as a way of surreptitiously spying on a neighbour's airspace, and that's what LM really intended to market it for.

 

Thank you, Hamilcar, Reactive, Jackjack, and GF, for giving me a breather.  I took one look at his most recent response--which starts with "I know that" yet ends with "I repeat," and whose first substantive sentence asks something about Serbs using TAMARA to shoot down an F-117 (as if it's true, and as if the Serbs had a TAMARA system, and as if [even if it were true] that would have anything to do with this subject), which he immediately follows with the command, "Don't take me for an ignorant fool!"--and I just started seeing red.

 

===============================================

 

I understand that feeling.

 

H.

Perhaps it's because it's (by nature) a 2d system.

Perhaps because accuracy is only enough to turn on an ACTIVE radar system for acquisition and track.

Perhaps because the signals likely to be recieved from a stealth aircraft in the first place are likely to be noisy and weak, shaping DOES still apply, as does RAM. If you look closely at the matter you'll see that in almost every instance the aspect of the plane makes a huge huge difference to the signal return for a given channel (radio emitter) being inspected, magnify this for stealth and you're back to square one.

And perhaps because the purpose of such systems isn't really engagement, but early warning, it might tell you that shit is on the way, it might give you elliptical 10000m² track areas but it certainly doesn't give you much other than an extra layer of onion-skin. 

It's really more useful as a way of surreptitiously spying on a neighbour's airspace, and that's what LM really intended to market it for. 

thats true, but what you said is wrong, keep reading and you will work it out

Discrimination

 

I do enjoy the fact that more or less all the usual culprits are helping (not) each other against the annoying French , lol !

***************

Reactive , do you realize that that I am talking about two friends and two friends only ?

 

One is indeed a pilot here in Dijon and the other is indeed working for Sagem , also here in Dijon .

In their fields , they know hundred time more than I do and it is why I often ask them for advice .

Anyway , it is not your business .

 

Regarding the HA-100 passive radar I understand that nobody here understand the technology or you (everybody) wouldn 'say such stupid things . I wander if it 's a good thing to enlight you ... (rolling eyes)

Let 's try ...

Reactive , you said :