TR Sensors and Detector Programs

[TheInsider]

470km for 1 square meter target for wide area search. 600km if the beam is concentrated to an undisclosed x-degree arc.

 

[Afif]

470km for 1 square meter target for wide area search.

Can you please provide any source for that? That would be extraordinary if it is true.

 

[Radko]

470km for 1 square meter target for wide area search. 600km if the beam is concentrated to an undisclosed x-degree arc.

Could you drop some links or provide sources for "470km for 1 square meter"? Because if true then this is a really big achievement

 

[TheInsider]

Could you drop some links or provide sources for "470km for 1 square meter"? Because if true then this is a really big achievement

I can't because it is my personal source.

 

[TheInsider]

I can't because it is my personal source.

BTW I'm also somewhat skeptical but he insisted that there is more to EIRS than it is revealed. EIRS has better performance than the radar of S-400(they have on-field performance data of S-400 radar). That is why Aselsan CEO says we don't need S-400 anymore.

Some more info. Some capabilities of the radar are at the T/R module level and some capabilities are at the building block level. Aselsans architecture revolves around T/R modules coming together to form building blocks. I don't know if it is the same for other big AESA radar producers. Every T/R module can be controlled independently for some functions but can only be controlled at the building block level for others.

We don't have the building block specs but if it is similar to MURAD AESA building blocks (16 T/R modules per block) EIRS might have 250 building blocks (4000T/R modules) another alternative might be 256 building blocks for 4096 T/R modules (Well digital design works like 8-16-32-64-128-256-512-1024-2048-4096)

18 EIRS will be delivered by 2030 both in fixed and mobile versions.

 

[godel44]

470km for 1 square meter target for wide area search. 600km if the beam is concentrated to an undisclosed x-degree arc.

If I remember the radar formula correctly (and I might not be), the maximum range is linear in RCS^(1/4). So if 470 km for 1 m2 is correct, it would mean 264 km for 0.1 m2, 149 km for 0.01, and 84 km for 0.001. I don't know what the RCS of F-35 is in the S-band, but there seems to be a good chance of detecting at 100+ km.

 

[YeşilVatan]

If I remember the radar formula correctly (and I might not be), the maximum range is linear in RCS^(1/4). So if 470 km for 1 m2 is correct, it would mean 264 km for 0.1 m2, 149 km for 0.01, and 84 km for 0.001. I don't know what the RCS of F-35 is in the S-band, but there seems to be a good chance of detecting at 100+ km.

In theory, wouldn't that allow us to deny F-35's airpace? Considering the radar itself is protected against deep strikes etc.?

 

[TheInsider]

Network-Based Distributed Radar Applications
*Resource Optimization via Joint Management
*Plot and/or Data Fusion
*Hypersonic Target and Ballistic Missile Handover
*Time, Frequency, and Waveform Synchronization.

*Coverage Optimization
*High Performance
-Resistance to jamming
-Variety in the geometry of detection
*Endurance

Multistatik Radar ( Radar system which has transmitters and receivers in separate locations)
More resistant to Radar EW Systems ( Radar Jammers)
Geometry advantage against stealth technology

*Coverage area
*Scan time
-Transmitter can be omni (omni-directional)
-Multistatic MIMO (Multiple input multiple output)
*Communication
*Synchronization
-Time, frequency
-Phase, beam
*Noise elimination/filtering
*Separation (noise separation)

Göndermeç=Transmitter
Almaç=Receiver

 

[Afif]

In theory, wouldn't that allow us to deny F-35's airpace? Considering the radar itself is protected against deep strikes etc.?

Well, there are some catches.

1. FCR also has to be able to provide fire control solutions At 100+km against F35.

2. In the near future NGJ is going to be integrated with F35s

3. I believe in SEAD/DEAD mission USAF can simply overwhelm the adversary's interceptors.

 

[TheInsider]

If I remember the radar formula correctly (and I might not be), the maximum range is linear in RCS^(1/4). So if 470 km for 1 m2 is correct, it would mean 264 km for 0.1 m2, 149 km for 0.01, and 84 km for 0.001. I don't know what the RCS of F-35 is in the S-band, but there seems to be a good chance of detecting at 100+ km.

Yes one of the selling points of EIRS is the detection of targets with low RCS. 100+km is still the stand-off range for F-35.

As you guys can see Aselsans network-based radar application is not a basic lets hook-up all of the radars to the network and paint a big picture with what all of the radars can see.

 

[Afif]

If I remember the radar formula correctly (and I might not be), the maximum range is linear in RCS^(1/4). So if 470 km for 1 m2 is correct, it would mean 264 km for 0.1 m2, 149 km for 0.01, and 84 km for 0.001. I don't know what the RCS of F-35 is in the S-band, but there seems to be a good chance of detecting at 100+ km.

We should remember F-35s supposed 0.001 RCS only from the frontal angle.

Ground Radars looks up at somewhat different angle than the direct frontal angle.

 

[Huelague]

That is why Aselsan CEO says we don't need S-400 anymore.

@Nutuk , maybe you remember our discussion, if SIPER is ready to replace S-400.

 

[Heartbang]

If I remember the radar formula correctly (and I might not be), the maximum range is linear in RCS^(1/4). So if 470 km for 1 m2 is correct, it would mean 264 km for 0.1 m2, 149 km for 0.01, and 84 km for 0.001. I don't know what the RCS of F-35 is in the S-band, but there seems to be a good chance of detecting at 100+ km.

In theory, wouldn't that allow us to deny F-35's airpace? Considering the radar itself is protected against deep strikes etc.?

Well, there are some catches.

1. FCR also has to be able to provide fire control solutions At 100+km against F35.

2. In the near future NGJ is going to be integrated with F35s

3. I believe in SEAD/DEAD mission USAF can simply overwhelm the adversary's interceptors.

with the data at hand, its fair to say that EIRS is a good counter to F-35. Those DSI's do pop out

F-35A Radar scattering simulation

Introduction F-35 is the backbone of American stealth fighter fleet, it is intended to replace F-16, F-18C/D, Harrier and A-10. There are currently 3 versions of F-35 which are F-35A, F-35B and F-3…

basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

 

[godel44]

We should remember F-35s supposed 0.001 RCS only from the frontal angle.

Ground Radars looks up at somewhat different angle than the direct frontal angle.

0.0015 in X-band if I recall correctly. With concentration on an arc, it gives almost 120 km even with that RCS. But as you said, detecting it and directing a Siper missile to it are two different things. Hopefully the people who made EIRS put some thought in how to use the FCR better as well.

 

[Afif]

with the data at hand, its fair to say that EIRS is a good counter to F-35.

F-35A Radar scattering simulation

Introduction F-35 is the backbone of American stealth fighter fleet, it is intended to replace F-16, F-18C/D, Harrier and A-10. There are currently 3 versions of F-35 which are F-35A, F-35B and F-3…

basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

Bro, I actually read that article before. But the thing is, as he mnetioned clearly, this chart is without taking into account ultra-modern RAM coating ( Except for the inner surface of the inlet duct, even though it was only mnZn RAM ) that F-35 has on its fuselage.

I mean it is no secret US was working on RAM coating for 4 decade now and they are ahead of everybody by far in this regard.

And F-35s RAM coating is optimized against S and X Band.

He also said,
"keep in mind though the actual RAM used on stealth aircraft may have absorbing rating of-15 to -25 dB depend on the actual frequency"

And i am gonna say this is actually a conservative estimate given how far US advanced in the field of RAM development.

And if we take cutting age RAM into consideration. Let's say it reduced the F-35s frontal RCS by -20dB against S Band.

And this is f-35s frontal RCS against S Band without RAM.

• S-band result of clean F-35 in Case 2 (-20° to +20° horizontal arc, -20° to +20° vertical arc)

So, now on top of that with RAM reducing -20dB....well, you can do the math on your own.

There are saying of USAF generals were they claimed, F-35 is the most stealthiest jet in US inventory.


Note, please don't misunderstand the purpose of this post. I am not on a campaign to discredit ERIS's capability.
It is an excellent radar with cutting age GaN based dual axis AESA technology.

 

[Heartbang]

(-20° to +20° horizontal arc, -20° to +20° vertical arc)

We don't have high enough mountains to make the EIRS detect the F-35 from those arcs.
You do have a point, but one must also remember that these graphs do(suspiciously) top out at +/- 22 degree arcs. Further simulations are needed.

 

[Nutuk]

@Nutuk , maybe you remember our discussion, if SIPER is ready to replace S-400.

About S-400 I think it is too preliminary to say we don't need it.

In wartime a 380km range AD missile can come in very handy, for one it can create a no go zone for the enemy (unless they have drones like we do). We think too much that AD missiles are only used to down aircraft and tend to forget about the airspace denial aspect (closing of airspace) which is as important.

Even if the S-400 is not integrated into the Siper system, it will be an utmost handy tool to be used next to it in the mentioned airspace denial.

 

[Oublious]

Bro, I actually read that article before. But the thing is, as he mnetioned clearly, this chart is without taking into account ultra-modern RAM coating ( Except for the inner surface of the inlet duct, even though it was only mnZn RAM ) that F-35 has on its fuselage.

I mean it is no secret US was working on RAM coating for 4 decade now and they are ahead of everybody by far in this regard.

And F-35s RAM coating is optimized against S and X Band.

He also said,
"keep in mind though the actual RAM used on stealth aircraft may have absorbing rating of-15 to -25 dB depend on the actual frequency"

And i am gonna say this is actually a conservative estimate given how far US advanced in the field of RAM development.

And if we take cutting age RAM into consideration. Let's say it reduced the F-35s frontal RCS by -20dB against S Band.

And this is f-35s frontal RCS against S Band without RAM.
View attachment 55474

• S-band result of clean F-35 in Case 2 (-20° to +20° horizontal arc, -20° to +20° vertical arc)

So, now on top of that with RAM reducing -20dB....well, you can do the math on your own.

There are saying of USAF generals were they claimed, F-35 is the most stealthy jet in US inventory.


Note, please don't misunderstand the purpose of this post. I am not on a campaign to discredit ERIS's capability.
It is an excellent radar with cutting age GaN based dual axis AESA technology.

So you are blindly accepting what they are saying? Did you asked proof or source from them?

 

[Afif]

So you are blindly accepting what they are saying? Did you asked proof or source from them?

Nope, it is the article that @Heartbang Brought up.

We were disscusing in light of that.

He used it as reference in his post so naturally I did too.

Besides, there is nothing to accept blindly about these highly classified strategic technologies. All we can do is to make the best guesstimate we can based on data on hand.

 

[Joe mark]

So you are blindly accepting what they are saying? Did you asked proof or source from them?

He just don't want to hear that turkish products are high tech and quality