|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Member
|
|
farokh Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916 |
guys  this is my training video sa-4 ! i make it with camatsia program of course i did it around 1 year ago ! but i upload this at rapidshare now  https://rapidshare.com/files/339575081/capture-6.avienjoy 
Last edited by milang; 05/30/12 10:57 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
Out-dated. Does not take golden eagles into consideration.
--
44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
Just upload it to Youtube, and I will share it in the SAMSIM website. Nice shot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
By the way, does anyone knows what is the output power of 30N6's transmitter? Looks like this data is still classified, I was unable to find it. Only for S-300V's 9S32 radar data is available, but from highly unreliable source. It states an average power of only 13 kilowatts and peak - of just 150. With that, it won't be able to track stealthy targets at distances beyond 25-30 km at best, so I highly doubt it.
IMHO: As the main question was concerning Stealth vs modern SAMs (S-300P/Patriot)... In the '70s during the development of these fundamentally-new, digitally controlled phase-arrayed, multi channel SAM systems were aimed to counter Jamming, ARM's, and Weasels. The AN/MPQ-53 and 30N6 (Flap Lid of SA-10) designs answered these challenges, by significantly reducing transmitted power (negating side/back-lobe HARM shots), and narrowed down monopulse pencil-beams (disabling track breaking efforts). When the Stealth appeared, during the '80s, both system (Patriot/S-300P) fire control radars needed a major redesign, to counter these new threat effectively. The Patriot PAC-3 system received the AN/MPQ-65 set, while the S-300PM received the (Tomb Stone SA-20) fire control radar. My educated guess is that... Patriot PAC-1 and PAC-2 S-300PT (SA-10A) and S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B) ... has limited capability against Stealth, as they were designed against (TBM's, ECM, ARM's,and Weasels). While on the other side... Patriot GEM/PAC-3 S-300PM/PMU1 (SA-20A) and S-300PMU2 (SA-20B) and S-400 (SA-21) ... is ready to meet the Stealth challenge. (as they are designed to counter it)  ps: just like a speed bump... 
Last edited by Hpasp; 05/30/12 03:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,044 |
Out-dated. Does not take golden eagles into consideration. If you have something more recent, Welcome... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
There's nothing out on the internet.
--
44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
As the main question was concerning Stealth vs modern SAMs (S-300P/Patriot)... In the '70s during the development of these fundamentally-new, digitally controlled phase-arrayed, multi channel SAM systems were aimed to counter Jamming, ARM's, and Weasels. The AN/MPQ-53 and 30N6 (Flap Lid of SA-10) designs answered these challenges, by significantly reducing transmitted power (negating side/back-lobe HARM shots), and narrowed down monopulse pencil-beams (disabling track breaking efforts). When the Stealth appeared, during the '80s, both system (Patriot/S-300P) fire control radars needed a major redesign, to counter these new threat effectively. The Patriot PAC-3 system received the AN/MPQ-65 set, while the S-300PM received the (Tomb Stone SA-20) fire control radar. My educated guess is that... Patriot PAC-1 and PAC-2 S-300PT (SA-10A) and S-300PS/PMU (SA-10B) ... has limited capability against Stealth, as they were designed against (TBM's, ECM, ARM's,and Weasels). While on the other side... Patriot GEM/PAC-3 S-300PM/PMU1 (SA-20A) and S-300PMU2 (SA-20B) and S-400 (SA-21) ... is ready to meet the Stealth challenge. (as they are designed to counter it) ps: just like a speed bump... Hpasp, this is very interesting, and certainly very plausible assumption! Thank you for this information! Meanwhile I also made some (very amateurish) research. There is a lot more info about aircraft radars, even the newest ones, than about SAM radars, so I decided to make some comparison and interpolation of data. The Zaslon radar, of MiG-31 fighter (which is the same period technology as the S-300's 30N6), is stated to have average power output of 2,5 kW, and detect MiG-21 class target at 130 km distance, which means that a target with RCS of 0.0034 square meters (as I mentioned earlier, this figure was given as an average for F-22 Raptor by one man who supposedly have an access to restricted information in Russia) will be detected at about 20-25 km range, if my calculations are correct. The latest Irbis radar, intended for Su-35BM aircraft, has an average power output of 5 kW and peak power of 40 kW, and is claimed to be able to detect a target with RCS of 3 square meters (MiG-21 class) at whopping 350-400 km. This means that F-22 will be detected at the distance of some 70-80 km. The Irbis is also lighter and more compact radar, than the Zaslon, which can only be installed on massive MiG-31. The Irbis is the same-generation system, as the S-400, so I might guess that performance leap from S-300PS to S-400 can be comparable to that from Zaslon to Irbis.
Last edited by Lonewolf357; 05/30/12 05:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
^^^^
But it probably has some issues when it comes to useage. In any case, I believe those figures are all for look-up cases in clear weather. This is significant because a look-down situation can drop the detection range by 1/3rd.
Also, there seems to be some sort of difference between detection and tracking that is not well explained, and tracking distances are shorter :/
In addition, IIRC, the IRBIS detects warships at 400km, but not fighters. Just IIRC. I need to find out why I remember something like that, but I'm pretty sure I saw a brochure of it that dispelled the 'detection of aircraft at 400km' deal. But ... memory can fail, so I could be wrong.
Last edited by GrayGhost; 05/30/12 05:45 PM.
--
44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
Last edited by Hpasp; 05/30/12 06:18 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 120
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 120 |
add some servo motors and ultrasonic rangefinder via microcontroler - fully operational search radar
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Member
|
|
farokh Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916 |
guys... i have amazing video gift for u  did u try to hit tomahawk with sa-3 in asuluk target until now??? this was my first time for hiting tomahawk with sa-3 ! i hope enjoy this video no idas used ... only manual tracking of course with hard stress !https://rapidshare.com/files/3770071971/capture-1.mp4
Last edited by milang; 05/31/12 08:01 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
^^^^
But it probably has some issues when it comes to useage. In any case, I believe those figures are all for look-up cases in clear weather. This is significant because a look-down situation can drop the detection range by 1/3rd.
Also, there seems to be some sort of difference between detection and tracking that is not well explained, and tracking distances are shorter :/
In addition, IIRC, the IRBIS detects warships at 400km, but not fighters. Just IIRC. I need to find out why I remember something like that, but I'm pretty sure I saw a brochure of it that dispelled the 'detection of aircraft at 400km' deal. But ... memory can fail, so I could be wrong. Of course, these ranges are for "ideal" cases, look-up, head-on, clear weather, no jamming. And yes, Irbis can actually detect a target with RCS of 3 square meters at 350-400 km range. This is clearly stated at manufacturer's web page (sorry, they don't have English version): http://www.niip.ru/index.php?option=com_...26&Itemid=8 It can detect warships, bombers and fighters at the same range, because for this radar, 400 km is also the maximum instrumental range. And I mentioned these numbers primarily for relative comparison of 1970es and 2010's technology. If the S-400's radar uses the same technologies as Irbis, and old S-300 used the same technologies as Zaslon, it means it might have effective range about 3 times greater, than old S-300PS, against a particular type of target, as well as very substantial counter-Stealth capability.
Last edited by Lonewolf357; 05/31/12 09:12 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
In addition to all mentioned above, quick and dirty estimation, by power output only: If Zaslon, with its average power of 2,5 kW, can detect F-22 at 20-25 km, the 30N6, with its 5 kW of average power, could, theoretically, detect it at some 40-50 km. However, the larger antenna and supposedly more sensitive receiver could give it even greater range. Of course, this is only a guess...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
In addition to all mentioned above, quick and dirty estimation, by power output only: If Zaslon, with its average power of 2,5 kW, can detect F-22 at 20-25 km, the 30N6, with its 5 kW of average power, could, theoretically, detect it at some 40-50 km. However, the larger antenna and supposedly more sensitive receiver could give it even greater range. Of course, this is only a guess...  For 2x detection range, you need 16x of power.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
Yep, thanks for the link. I must have been confusing it with something else. I've seen a lot of radar/missile/whatever figures and often they are ... mis-stated. Of course, these ranges are for "ideal" cases, look-up, head-on, clear weather, no jamming. And yes, Irbis can actually detect a target with RCS of 3 square meters at 350-400 km range. This is clearly stated at manufacturer's web page (sorry, they don't have English version): http://www.niip.ru/index.php?option=com_...26&Itemid=8 Actually this is not the case. The IRBIS-E is an /insanely/ powerful radar to mount on an airframe. The cooling requirements must be ... interesting. In any case, as Hpasp said ... the power relationship to RCS is to the fourth power of the distance, meaning doubling the range you need 16x the power. Just doubling the power gives you a lot less range increase than you think. This leaves stealth aircraft as very dangerous still - they'll still get that AMRAAM or SDB off the rails before or as you are about to detect them in the worst case for them, and best case for you. It can detect warships, bombers and fighters at the same range, because for this radar, 400 km is also the maximum instrumental range. And I mentioned these numbers primarily for relative comparison of 1970es and 2010's technology. If the S-400's radar uses the same technologies as Irbis, and old S-300 used the same technologies as Zaslon, it means it might have effective range about 3 times greater, than old S-300PS, against a particular type of target, as well as very substantial counter-Stealth capability.
--
44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
For 2x detection range, you need 16x of power.
Yep... An error in the formula I put into the spreadsheet and therefore faulty calculation...  EDIT: The real figure will be around 25-30 km for 30N6 - not very impressive...
Last edited by Lonewolf357; 05/31/12 06:19 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,154
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,154 |
We need a jump to 3D..... today DCS present combined operations and see them....   Rudimentary and no properly simulated.... but open to make 3rd Party addons..... �DCS: 3rd Party SamSimulator?
More News to the Front
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HOA's
by Terl9999 - 09/18/26 04:12 AM
|
Football
by Terl9999 - 09/18/26 02:42 AM
|
Flags
by Terl9999 - 09/15/26 10:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
