China PLA flagship radar system: YLC-8E anti-stealth radar. Claimed world the best

[xizhimen]

China PLA flagship radar system: YLC-8E anti-stealth radar. Claimed world the best​

 

[Gessler]

I have a good laugh whenever China claims it has defeated stealth, but then builds stealth aircraft.

Claims to has defeated carriers with ASBMs, but then builds carriers.

 

[Gary]

frankly speaking, all VLO fighter could be detected.

the question is :

1. at what range ?
2. at what particular resolution. VHF radar could see a VLO aircraft, but lack the ability to lock on to it, due to using longer wavelength and lower frequency.

 

[xizhimen]

I have a good laugh whenever China claims it has defeated stealth, but then builds stealth aircraft.

Claims to has defeated carriers with ASBMs, but then builds carriers.

And China is not the only country which claims to have anti stealth radar and still builds stealth jets. those who can't build anything can only laugh, of course.

 

[xizhimen]

I have a good laugh whenever China claims it has defeated stealth, but then builds stealth aircraft.

Claims to has defeated carriers with ASBMs, but then builds carriers.

And China is not the only country which claims to have anti stealth radar and still builds stealth jets. those who can't build anything can only laugh, of course

 

[xizhimen]

I have a good laugh whenever China claims it has defeated stealth, but then builds stealth aircraft.

Claims to has defeated carriers with ASBMs, but then builds carriers.

Tell you something very laughable, lndia claims they can detect stealth jets.

 

[Gessler]

And China is not the only country which claims to have anti stealth radar and still builds stealth jets. those who can't build anything can only laugh, of course.

Tell you something very laughable, lndia claims they can detect stealth jets.

Anybody can detect stealth jets. The Chain Home radar system used in WW2 can detect stealth jets. Yugoslav systems could detect F-117.

Detecting stealth aircraft is not the point. Any long-wavelength, low-frequency system can manage that. India has several radars of that sort.

The current crop of stealth fighters (not counting flying-wings like B2) are only capable of defeating X-band 'fire control radars' of other fighters, and the short-wavelength, high-frequency sensors on AAMs.

The so-called "Anti-Stealth" statement is a gimmick, nothing more. Traditional methods of bi-static & multi-static detection existed since a long time for the high-accuracy detection & localization of non-cooperative targets. Airliners for example, are cooperative targets i.e. they WANT to be seen.

 

[xizhimen]

Anybody can detect stealth jets. The Chain Home radar system used in WW2 can detect stealth jets. Yugoslav systems could detect F-117.

Then what made you laugh? just because China builts her own stealth fighters and you don't? you can just say we Indians can do it too.

 

[Gessler]

Then what made you laugh? just say we Indians can do it too.

The "Anti-Stealth" part.

Radars are not pro-stealth or anti-stealth. The particular frequency & wavelength of a radar depends on distance/range that its required to scan. If you wish for a long-range radar, you will automatically have to go with a low-frequency, long-wavelength as high-frequency is not conducive for long ranges. And if you go with long-range, you automatically attain the ability to detect objects which are physically smaller than the length of the waveform**. There's nothing particularly "anti-stealth" about it.

That's like saying a submarine is a "anti-floatation" ship and having a headline saying China has created Anti-Floatation ship technology.

** There's a reason why the wingforms of B2 are so long.

The true revolution in radar technology will be when one can begin to operationally implement principles of quantum entanglement to tell when the energy emitted by the radar has hit something or not. That would be technology that's impossible to hide from - but that's for distant future.

 

[Combat-Master]

That is a massive radar!

 

[xizhimen]

The "Anti-Stealth" part.

Radars are not pro-stealth or anti-stealth. The particular frequency & wavelength of a radar depends on distance/range that its required to scan. If you wish for a long-range radar, you will automatically have to go with a low-frequency, long-wavelength as high-frequency is not conducive for long ranges. And if you go with long-range, you automatically attain the ability to detect objects which are physically smaller than the length of the waveform**. There's nothing particularly "anti-stealth" about it.

That's like saying a submarine is a "anti-floatation" ship and having a headline saying China has created Anti-Floatation ship technology.

** There's a reason why the wingforms of B2 are so long.

The true revolution in radar technology will be when one can begin to operationally implement principles of quantum entanglement to tell when the energy emitted by the radar has hit something or not. That would be technology that's impossible to hide from - but that's for distant future.

Several countries claimed this technology, not only China. I remember Russians are the first, you seem to have many countries to laugh at.

 

[DANTE]

I have a good laugh whenever China claims it has defeated stealth, but then builds stealth aircraft.

Claims to has defeated carriers with ASBMs, but then builds carriers.

there is nothing strange here , in order to defeat stealth you have to know how it works and the best way to obtain this knowledge is by producing stealthy machines be it aircrafts , bombers , surface ships or submarines ......... "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. " i think that this fits just well regarding this topic .

 

[Gary]

This claim of "anti stealth" are usually for public consumption purpose.

If anti stealth are that potent, and with the potential to turn any VLO aircraft flying out there redundant, chances are the military will try anything it can to cover up those capabilities and prevent the enemy to find away to circumvent those advantage.

 

[Gessler]

there is nothing strange here , in order to defeat stealth you have to know how it works and the best way to obtain this knowledge is by producing stealthy machines be it aircrafts , bombers , surface ships or submarines ......... "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. " i think that this fits just well regarding this topic .

Not really - all you need to understand the characteristics of stealth aircraft is a good RCS test facility, both of an indoor variety where you can place both sub-scale as well as full-scale aircraft model inside an anechoic chamber to study the return from all angles & measuring how well the RAM is working:

...and an outdoor facility where a full-scale model can be hoisted at a height, and radar is fired at it:

Adversary countries routinely conduct RCS testing of enemy aircraft in this way. I saw pictures of a Russian facility a while ago which had sub-scale models of several US aircraft that were studying. I'll see if I can find it again.