Of DAS, EOTS etc..

[arian]

Again, it's a MWIR sensor; there is no visual sensing capability in it (although Advanced EOTS will add multispectral capability, which infers MWIR + SWIR + visual); the Vegas video is also at a slant range of a little over 90km.

I'm not 100% certain whether visual has a longer or shorter range than IR either; the atmosphere is more opaque to IR, but IR disperses less in the atmosphere.

OK. The Vegas video looked like it was in visual spectrum to me, that's why I asked.

[SpudmanWP]

IIR

[Dragon029]

Also the 90km / 49nmi one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2q65qOl1tM

[hornetfinn]

Again, it's a MWIR sensor; there is no visual sensing capability in it (although Advanced EOTS will add multispectral capability, which infers MWIR + SWIR + visual); the Vegas video is also at a slant range of a little over 90km.

I'm not 100% certain whether visual has a longer or shorter range than IR either; the atmosphere is more opaque to IR, but IR disperses less in the atmosphere.

OK. The Vegas video looked like it was in visual spectrum to me, that's why I asked.

It's definitely made by MWIR thermal imaging system. It looks like visual spectrum because it's made with high resolution and highly sensitive MWIR thermal imaging system (EOTS) using advanced image processing. MWIR system means there is high thermal contrast which means the images have high contrast and targets can be seen very clearly from background (sky, clouds, ground, water). Thermal imaging systems see everything based on temperature differences which can be extremely small with modern systems. Then they convert that to visible spectrum images to be usable to human eyes.

Whether visual spectrum, SWIR, MWIR or LWIR has the longest range, depends on situation, environment and weather. In very clear day against clear sky background a strikingly colored target can be seen very far away with visual spectrum optical systems like binoculars. Generally IR systems outperform visual spectrum systems in most other situations like less than perfect weather, night and against most backgrounds because there is much more contrast. In most situations a fighter aicraft is used, MWIR systems have the longest range. Especially against relatively hot targets like aircraft, missiles and vehicles, modern MWIR systems will see targets at much longer ranges than visual spectrum systems. LWIR systems are best against cool targets which are viewed against very cold sky (like ballistic missile warheads at very high altitude where they are seen against space).

[spazsinbad]

For the ballonskis on previous page post photo by 'popcorn': http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... es/132350/

[popcorn]

Informative, Spaz.

[arian]

Yeah satellites should have no problem with identifying these as fake balloons. But then again, an adversary can make decoys out of realistic materials as well. For considerably more logistical costs, the Russians have thousands of decaying tanks in storage they can roll out and use as decoys.

PS: Dragon29, the video you linked to says its at 49 miles, not nautical miles. That's about 79km. Still an amazing level of detail at that range. One could probably see individual weapons carried by soldiers at that range.

[Dragon029]

PS: Dragon29, the video you linked to says its at 49 miles, not nautical miles. That's about 79km. Still an amazing level of detail at that range. One could probably see individual weapons carried by soldiers at that range.

The reporter says 49 miles, the screen doesn't give units but says "SLR 49.1". I could be wrong, but because this is military aviation, that should be in nautical miles. I expect that the Lockheed rep likely didn't notice the lack of "nautical" in the reporter's statement, or thought it impolite / unnecessary to correct them during the recording.

[arian]

PS: Dragon29, the video you linked to says its at 49 miles, not nautical miles. That's about 79km. Still an amazing level of detail at that range. One could probably see individual weapons carried by soldiers at that range.

The reporter says 49 miles, the screen doesn't give units but says "SLR 49.1". I could be wrong, but because this is military aviation, that should be in nautical miles. I expect that the Lockheed rep likely didn't notice the lack of "nautical" in the reporter's statement, or thought it impolite / unnecessary to correct them during the recording.

I read 43.1, which is 49 miles.

(on second look, the video of it zooming on the houses is at 12nm, or 22km, so not as far as I had thought).

[hornetfinn]

More about how far away can you see with different systems. EODAS was able to easily detect and track SpaceX Falcon 9 space rocket from 1300 km/800 miles away. It also detected and tracked the second stage until the burn-out. All this with over 90 degree FoV which means very wide lens. Such a feat would not be possible with visual spectrum systems even in best conditions unless FoV was significantly reduced. There is just so much heat generated by rockets and missiles that it makes them far more visible in thermal wavelengths than in visual wavelengths. Of course the smoke trail can be seen far away in good conditions. Other military equipment is also generally far easier to see in IR and more difficult to counter with camouflage and paint. Of course there are situations and conditions where visual systems outperform IR systems (like looking through glass or seeing things in color).

[Dragon029]

I read 43.1, which is 49 miles.

(on second look, the video of it zooming on the houses is at 12nm, or 22km, so not as far as I had thought).

I think you're looking at the wrong point in time; here's an edited excerpt that shows the 49.1 figure:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCbrEWUZOfA

I can see how the 9 may look a bit like a 3, but at about the 8 second mark you can see a "3" in the elevation figure (the number right above the slant range) and how it differs to the 9 in their font.

[arian]

The decoys don't need a motor, they just need a compressed gas canister that triggers upon deployment.

BTW it turns out my initial guess was right. These things use a motor to stay inflated. So the motor would show up on thermal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZWPyy8Nfj4

[SpudmanWP]

Found some extra info and the first "picture" of the proposed Advanced EOTS.

Lockheed Martin Unveils Advanced EOTS Development

At this year’s Air Force Association Annual Air & Space Conference and Technology Expo, Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMCO) updated on the status of its Advanced Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) development for the F-35 Lightning II fighter aircraft.

The baseline/legacy EOTS is a low-drag, stealthy multi-function system integrated into the F-35’s fuselage that the company touts as an affordable, high-performance, lightweight system that provides precision air-to-air and air-to-surface targeting capability. Says Lockheed Martin: “As the first sensor to combine forward-looking infrared and infrared search and track functionality, EOTS enhances F-35 pilots’ situational awareness and allows aircrews to identify areas of interest, perform reconnaissance and precisely deliver laser and GPS-guided weapons. LMCO has delivered more than 170 EOTS units for the F-35 to date.

Lockheed Martin has now offering to the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) what is calls Advanced EOTS, an evolutionary upgrade of the EOTS (completed circa 2002) that the company believes can be available for the F-35’s Block 4 development, presently scheduled to roll out in the 2019-2020 timeframe.

Designed to replace EOTS, and in response to the evolving threat, Advanced EOTS has a larger aperture and incorporates a range of enhancements and upgrades, including short-wave infrared (SWIR), high-definition television, an infrared marker and significantly improved image detector resolution. These enhancements, which leverage off-the-shelf technology and DoD tech base investment including USAF investment in focal plane arrays, will increase F-35 pilots’ recognition and detection ranges, enabling greater overall targeting performance.

Due to its similarity in shape and size to EOTS, LMCO notes that AEOTS can be installed with minimal changes to the F-35’s interface. It will be housed behind the same low-drag window (see photo, right), maintaining the F-35’s stealthy profile. Advanced EOTS production – if the F-35 program elects to procure it -- will be completed on the current EOTS line.

Don Bolling, Lockheed Martin’s Fire Control BD Director told DSJ that the AEOTS system, funded over the past five years via internal LMCO and supplier investment, is now at a Technology Readiness Level of 4 (i.e., component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment), with a demonstration planned to move the AEOTS system from TRL 4 to TRL 6 (representative system flying on a surrogate aircraft) in early 2017.

LMCO sees AEOTS as being “cost neutral” – that is, costing no more than EOTS as presently provided. Bolling notes that Lockheed Martin is proposing that the F-35 program take up funding the system’s advanced development so that AEOTS is prospectively ready for inclusion into the early Block 4 F-35 in the 2019-20 timeframe, should EOTS be a systems identified for improvement within Block 4, a development that LMCO believes to be likely.

Bolling adds that the U.S. Government will decide whether/when the capability provided in AEOTS will be fully releasable to the eight F-35 partner nations.

http://www.dsjournal.com/aeots.html

[talkitron]

Does the internal, F-35 Advanced EOTS correspond to a particular announced version of the external Sniper targeting pod?

[SpudmanWP]

Not that I am aware of but it likely contains the sensors form the latest SniperXR pod build or maybe a new sensor for both of them.