Miscellaneous discussion of the VKS and its capability

[Gary]

There used to be a Russ vs XYZ thread that has magically disappeared. So let's not derail the Ukraine war thread @blackjack


>>>>>>>>>

OK give me a source than for the APG-66v(2) since its not just forecast international that gives it a 50km tracking range https://cmano-db.com/pdf/sensor/2083/ https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.airborne/karte015.en.html#:~:text=AN/APG-66(V)2A is an AN,signal processor line replaceable units. Also give me a source that says its a block 40 since the only sources I am getting is a block 20.

I think you have a comprehension problem here, I clearly said that donated F-16s are MLU which is closer to Block 40 than the original Block 20s, not an actual Block 40s. An MLU bird is either a block 5,10,15 or 20 upgraded to be very similar to Block 40, 50/52, or 50/52+.

In some regards the F-16 MLU donated to Ukraine is even superior to Block 40s.

Although you are quoting the capture range than the tracking range. a mig-31BM with a less powerful radar than the Su-35 hit a fighter sized target from 300kms away.
View attachment 60340

Russian measurements of RCS are a whole lot different than the West. In Russia's terms, fighter-sized" targets are an object with an RCS of around 20m^2. The Zaslon A is reportedly capable of detecting objects with 19m^2 RCS from around 200km away, while the modernized Zaslon M at around 300km for 20m^2 RCS. So when you boast that the MiG-31 is capable of shooting down aircraft at more than 300km, you're boasting its capability at airline-sized targets, not F-16 with an RCS of 2m^2.

The Western norms when they describe "fighter-sized targets" hovers around 5m^2. That's more realistic than Russia's interpretation.

Russia's best, like the IRBIS-E, are not particularly spectacular either, yes true it can detect 20m^2 objects from 400km away, but that is in pencil mode beam and at peak power concentrated at a very narrow FoV. Using that on volume search with average operating power, the detection range drops to 200km, and drops again to 170km in lookdown mode.

I only see alot of google sources say AIM-260km is to be 200kms. I dont know if you have noticed but the RVV-MD2 is operational and set in production before the AIM-9X block 3 with similar specs. I dont know about these 200km missiles project the U.S. boasts about but I think they have to be operational and in production, supplied it the U.S. before suppying it to Ukraine.

That's because you're not a good reader in the first place. The AIM-260 real range is classified, the USAF only mentions "in excess' of 200km or 200km+, that 200km+ could be 250km, 300km, 500km, etc, we will never know.

The thing is the JATM is designed to counter the advanced Chinese PL-21 series missile with a reported range of more than 300km (125 mi), it's only natural for the USAF to field something that flies even further than 300km. The JATM is designed with high standards in mind, against very advanced and very long-range Chinese missiles, not Russian.

I mean they can send AWACs but i dont think it would be a great idea to get hit 200-300kms from a Su-35 or mig-31BM according to the target they hit 300kms away in the 1990s. Maybe the R-37M can set a new record of hitting an AWACs 400kms away.

AWACS has around 400-700km of detection range depending on the model, Russian jets could detect airline-sized objects at around 200-300km,

Erieye ER could detect fighter-sized (5m^2) objects at around 403 miles or 648 km, larger jets like the MiG-31 could theoretically be detected even further.

yes they do, have you heard of the Su-27SM2 and the mig-29s use BARS radars. its always back and forth about radar breakthroughs. mig-31 was this 1st aircraft in the world with PESA, US or Japan with AESA and supposedly Russia with ROFAR. That aside I only have sources that suggest those F-16s use pulse radars unless you have sources that those F-16s are higher tier blocks I am all eyes here.

Not all BARS are PESA, some are Doppler, the PESA BARS are NO11M, SU-27SM2 uses N011 BARS which is Doppler. There's only one unit in the Russian air force that uses the MiG-29 (Izd 9-13) that is situated in faraway Armenia, the MiG-35 has phased array radar but their numbers are minimal.

The Ukrainians have received several hundred Storm Shadows and Scalps, but instances their combat use are only a literally handful so far. Not even NATO could comprehensively destroy all the combat aircraft of Yugoslavia or Iraq despite enjoying true air dominance, so I’m not sure why certain people are reading so much into the fact the AFU can still launch the occasional sortie from their deep interior.

If the AFU are doing so well with their existing fighter fleet, why all the clamour to get F16s?

Unless any NATO member is moronic enough to allow the AFU to base and operate F16s from their territory, no amount of F16s supplied will make any meaningful impact because of the airport support situation.

Singapore, Pakistan, and Taiwan regularly train to fly and operate their F-16 from highways, no big deal. Ig they can Ukraine can.

 

[blackjack]

I think you have a comprehension problem here, I clearly said that donated F-16s are MLU which is closer to Block 40 than the original Block 20s, not an actual Block 40s. An MLU bird is either a block 5,10,15 or 20 upgraded to be very similar to Block 40, 50/52, or 50/52+.

In some regards the F-16 MLU donated to Ukraine is even superior to Block 40s.

translation of this post: closer to block 40, not an actual block 40, somehow greater than a block 40. If this was the case they would just call it a block 40+ than referring it to a block 20 correct? From the looks of it they want to throw them away than other countries that are keeping theirs undergoing upgrades like Israel or Turkey. In other words, I have doubts unless you have a simple article that tells me that these countries upgraded their F-16s avionics?

Russian measurements of RCS are a whole lot different than the West. In Russia's terms, fighter-sized" targets are an object with an RCS of around 20m^2. The Zaslon A is reportedly capable of detecting objects with 19m^2 RCS from around 200km away, while the modernized Zaslon M at around 300km for 20m^2 RCS. So when you boast that the MiG-31 is capable of shooting down aircraft at more than 300km, you're boasting its capability at airline-sized targets, not F-16 with an RCS of 2m^2.

The Western norms when they describe "fighter-sized targets" hovers around 5m^2. That's more realistic than Russia's interpretation.

How did you manage to screw up stating 300km for 19-20m2 when the screenshot your showing me says 400kms for 19-20m2? https://www.reddit.com/r/Dragon029/comments/443z1u so lets say what size target it can be at 300kms. 400km is the distance for a 19-20 meter target but since I am generous for your sake i will say 20. so square root of 20 is 2.11. square of 3 is 1.31 so 400 / (2.11/1.31) = a 3m2 at 248kms or using a 19m2 target 251kms. But since Russia in the past like to use 5m2 as a reference point regarding targets will 282-286.5kms but I have a hunch that if the target reference was another mig-31 than that aircraft might have been bigger if the F-15 is stated at 25m2.

Lets not try to complicate this further adding EW suppression or the F-16 and Su-35 getting stealth coatings. More than likely the K-37M would have better tracking capabilities than the R-33 that hit its target.

Russia's best, like the IRBIS-E, are not particularly spectacular either, yes true it can detect 20m^2 objects from 400km away, but that is in pencil mode beam and at peak power concentrated at a very narrow FoV. Using that on volume search with average operating power, the detection range drops to 200km, and drops again to 170km in lookdown mode.

Come on atleast criticize the F-22 fanboys for throwing 1m2 claims at 400kms than them doing the normal beam search of 1m2 at 200-240kms lol. RWRs on aircrafts can cue narrow radar beams on where to look and I am pretty sure the Zaslon-M was using a narrow beam search for the 400km claim in order to hit its aerial target from 300kms away.

That's because you're not a good reader in the first place. The AIM-260 real range is classified, the USAF only mentions "in excess' of 200km or 200km+, that 200km+ could be 250km, 300km, 500km, etc, we will never know.

depending where you look it can be claimed to 200km or above 200kms https://gagadget.com/en/weapons/200...tanks-f-22-raptor-will-undergo-major-upgrade/ Based on the troubles of the AIM-9X blocks in comparison to the RVV-MD2 I would not raise my hopes too much on what the range it will be or when it even enters production. Since I am still waiting on your evidence in regard to what blocks those F-16s are or what avionics they received the next thing in question is what air to air missiles Ukraine will actually receive.

The thing is the JATM is designed to counter the advanced Chinese PL-21 series missile with a reported range of more than 300km (125 mi), it's only natural for the USAF to field something that flies even further than 300km. The JATM is designed with high standards in mind, against very advanced and very long-range Chinese missiles, not Russian.

they "believe" its 300kms nor does the paragraph your quoting states that is what the AIM-260 is to beat. I think news article journalists seem rather confuse which missiles they quote because Wikipedia is telling me this missiles intent is to beat the PL-15 missile which is claimed at 200kms or comparable to Meteor.

The export of the PL-15 offers 145kms with its current length of 4 meters which will make me highly assume that the domestic version size with length and diameter could be as big as the K-37M with 400km claims. Just like liveleak videos anything made in China can be highly sketchy. Assuming they did not bump the size for domestic PL-15 than Russia and China are waiting on the US to put a missile into service of equal size and range. The length of the PL-21 wouldnt even allow an internal placement for any Chinese stealth fighter and only unstealthy external placement in which the U.S. with stealth + EW wouldnt even need a 300-400km missile to still hit the aircraft with just a 200km missile.

AWACS has around 400-700km of detection range depending on the model, Russian jets could detect airline-sized objects at around 200-300km,

Erieye ER could detect fighter-sized (5m^2) objects at around 403 miles or 648 km, larger jets like the MiG-31 could theoretically be detected even further.

If this is the case Su-57s or Su-35s would be suffiicient enough for AWACS using K-37Ms. Su-35s according to Rostecs 2014 got slapped with new GaN MMICs for its EW system along with some RAM coatings. Also stop misquoting what is actually said about detection ranges.

Not all BARS are PESA, some are Doppler, the PESA BARS are NO11M, SU-27SM2 uses N011 BARS which is Doppler. There's only one unit in the Russian air force that uses the MiG-29 (Izd 9-13) that is situated in faraway Armenia, the MiG-35 has phased array radar but their numbers are minimal.

 

[Gary]

translation of this post: closer to block 40, not an actual block 40, somehow greater than a block 40. If this was the case they would just call it a block 40+ than referring it to a block 20 correct? From the looks of it they want to throw them away than other countries that are keeping theirs undergoing upgrades like Israel or Turkey. In other words, I have doubts unless you have a simple article that tells me that these countries upgraded their F-16s avionics?

To correct it even further, no one is calling an MLU a Block 20 anymore after it has done MLU. People just call it F-16 MLU or sometime F-16 Block 5/10/15/20 MLU.

Yes, at some point MLU birds are even more advanced than Block 30/40 or in Indonesia's MLU'd F-16 case almost equal to Block 52+, not quite the same because the engine uses an older F100 PW 220E.

This birds could stand toe to toe with almost all Russian jets, with maybe the exception of Su-57 or the MiG-31 in very long range engagement, the only let down is their lack of force multiplier, hence they fight with clear inferiority.

How did you manage to screw up stating 300km for 19-20m2 when the screenshot your showing me says 400kms for 19-20m2?

Yes correct it is 400km for 20m^2, my typo...the numpad 3 and 4 are btw very close
Also another quick note, Russia's standard of fighter-sized target is not 20m^2 but 16m^2.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dragon029/comments/443z1u so lets say what size target it can be at 300kms. 400km is the distance for a 19-20 meter target but since I am generous for your sake i will say 20. so square root of 20 is 2.11. square of 3 is 1.31 so 400 / (2.11/1.31) = a 3m2 at 248kms or using a 19m2 target 251kms. But since Russia in the past like to use 5m2 as a reference point regarding targets will 282-286.5kms but I have a hunch that if the target reference was another mig-31 than that aircraft might have been bigger if the F-15 is stated at 25m2.

In this reference the RCS of F-16 is 5m^2, in here it's 1.2m^2. Not one actually cites where they got those numbers. And we might not know the real numbers, but F-16 is a very small plane, and it's natural for it to have a lot less RCS than let's say a Su-27 or even a MiG-31.

Come on atleast criticize the F-22 fanboys for throwing 1m2 claims at 400kms than them doing the normal beam search of 1m2 at 200-240kms lol. RWRs on aircrafts can cue narrow radar beams on where to look and I am pretty sure the Zaslon-M was using a narrow beam search for the 400km claim in order to hit its aerial target from 300kms away.

Correct, narrow beams are kinda useless in real-world situations, and oh btw after a more careful reading, the MiG-31 claimed 300km shot are against a single target at likely at 16-20m^2 RCS, which directed the whole energy to just one target, in real-life operation, you need to divide those energy beams especially when you're doing TWS against multiple targets which translated into even less range.

depending where you look it can be claimed to 200km or above 200kms https://gagadget.com/en/weapons/200...tanks-f-22-raptor-will-undergo-major-upgrade/ Based on the troubles of the AIM-9X blocks in comparison to the RVV-MD2 I would not raise my hopes too much on what the range it will be or when it even enters production.

It's funny you keep calling the AIM-9X as troubled when Russia's own R-77 has just been accepted into service only in the 2010s, decades after the AMRAAM. Even to this day, it's not rare to see Russian frontline fighters still fly equipped with SARH R-27s, likely because the R-77 isn't yet matured or are in production in very low number.

I have yet to see modern F-16/15/18 fly with AIM-7 Sparrows these days.

Since I am still waiting on your evidence in regard to what blocks those F-16s are or what avionics they received the next thing in question is what air to air missiles Ukraine will actually receive.

• Radar: APG-66v2 Range : 100km, 10 tracks , six-on-six AMRAAM capable
• IFF : Hazeltine APX-113, Range :185km
• An Electronic Warfare Management System (EWMS) developed by Terma Elektronik AS in Denmark provides centralized EW control for entire EW suite : management of threats (RWR), ANQ pods and advanced chaff/flare systems.
• Mission computer : Texas Instruments MMC
• HMD Capable
• Sniper pod capable

The side stick controller (manufactured by Lear Astronics Corporation) and throttle grip are block 50 unit models replacing the oldBlock-10/15 stick grips. Both throttle and stick will be equipped with various controls, for an increased variety of functions, including VHF and UHF communications, IFF interrogation, Improved Data Modem operation, secondary flight controls (speed brakes), night vision cockpit blackout selection (NVIS Switch) and boresighting as well as slaving of missiles (now only selectable via the cues of the Stores Control Panel, which requires hands-off-throttle, head-down operation).

MAGR, Miniaturized Airborne GPS Receiver built by Rockwell-Collins Avionics & Communications Division, operating via an E-Systems antenna. It provides accurate position, velocity and time to support navigation, steering and weapon delivery. This system is smaller and lighter than the Block 40/50 receiver (RCVR 3A), consumes less power but delivers the same performance.

The cockpit layout will be the one of the F-16C Block-40/50. However, unlike the Block-40/50 aircraft, the MLU F-16s will be equipped with color displays. The cockpit lighing will be compatible with Night Vision Imaging System (NVIS) and all visible surfaces will be painted black. The Night Vision goggles are deactivated in the HUD field-of-view to allow inhibited HUD viewing.

F-16.net - The ultimate F-16, F-35 and F-22 reference

www.f-16.net

they "believe" its 300kms nor does the paragraph your quoting states that is what the AIM-260 is to beat. I think news article journalists seem rather confuse which missiles they quote because Wikipedia is telling me this missiles intent is to beat the PL-15 missile which is claimed at 200kms or comparable to Meteor.
View attachment 60374

Read again ? It clearly said that JATM is created to contend with China's PL-15.

The AIM-260 is designed in mid specifically to counter the likes of PL-15, they want an even longer-range missile

Ps : 124miles=300km

Classified AIM-260 Air-To-Air Missiles To Arm Future Air Force Drones

Arming Collaborative Combat Aircraft with AIM-260s will give them and their crewed companions boosts in reach, survivability, and lethality.

www.thedrive.com

The export of the PL-15 offers 145kms with its current length of 4 meters which will make me highly assume that the domestic version size with length and diameter could be as big as the K-37M with 400km claims.

Missile casing size could be a cue on the range, but not always the case. The ESSM for example achieves the same range as the BUK/Shtil missile while being half as large. The truth is the US know-how on rocket propulsion is better than Russia's. Even China imo has already surpassed Russia in air-to-air missile propulsion as well.

ESSM= L: 3.6m, D: 0.2m, Range:50km
SHTIL 9M38 L: 5.5m. D: 0.4m, Range: 50km
SHTIL 9M317M : L: 5.1m, D:0.35m, Range: 32km

If this is the case Su-57s or Su-35s would be suffiicient enough for AWACS using K-37Ms. Su-35s according to Rostecs 2014 got slapped with new GaN MMICs for its EW system along with some RAM coatings. Also stop misquoting what is actually said about detection ranges.

To go after those AWACS, Russian fighter radar needs to light up radar full power, Russia's AESA LPI characteristics are up for debate, but the SU-35 PESA high-powered radar would be easily spotted by passive means longer than the AWACS own radar, let alone the K-37M onboard radar.

The AN/AYR-1 ESM onboard the E-3 Sentry could sniff up electronic emissions from 300miles away, they have all the time to direct escort fighters to protect them or simply go away.

Condor Systems’ AN/AYR-1 Electronic Support Measure (ESM) outfitting the Boeing E-3 Sentry series of AEW aircraft can detect threats transmitting in a two gigahertz/GHz to 18GHz waveband at ranges of circa 300 nautical miles/nm (556 kilometers/km):​

Best Supporting Actor - Armada International

AEW and tactical datalinks expert Athanasios Chouliaras shared his thoughts on how the electronic support mission, performed by AEW aircrafts, could evolve.

www.armadainternational.com

To be effective, those F-16 will need AWACS.

View attachment 60375

The PESA N011M Bars radar are known to be outfitted to India's MKI, Malaysia's MKM, Algeria's MKA. The weight necessitates the addition of canards. The SU-27SM2 doesn't have the canard to counteract those added weight.

For the Su-35, adopting the large diameter Irbis-E necessitates a bit larger radome to accommodate the 900mm radar , which is absent from the Su-27SM2 claimed here.