Forum: General F-35 Forum

discofishing wrote:

I've read these types of radars have been a little more successful in tracking LO/VLO aircraft. If that is true, I would imagine the OTH radar technology would improve to a point these things would be "mobile", especially if other nations are developing stealth aircraft of their own. I'm sure Moore's Law could be applied to radar technology. Even without being mobile, they have such massive range that I guess a stealth destroyer wouldn't necessarily need its own OTH sensors, it would rely on data networking.

It's not a computer processing issue that precludes such radars from being mounted on a ship, but rather antenna size.

Australia's JORN - Jindalee radar system features 3 main transmitter and receiver sites each with antennas hundreds of metres long. The nature of the system also requires the transmitter and receiver sites to be geographically dispersed to a large degree. Requirements obviously not suited to shipboard usage.

If you want over the horizon targeting from a ship, something like this will do the trick:

http://www.ainonline.com/sites/ainonlin ... ilance.jpg

A new podded system L-M is trying to flog off around the place. Can definitely see some sales prospects for such an idea from those who can't afford a real AEW&C system at sea.

Or perhaps something like this:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/PTDS/

It was an old fashioned way of gaining persistent aerial surveillance and is starting to come back into vogue again. Perhaps it may do so for ships too...

Or you can use Co-Operative Engagement Capability systems and network your force package together to increase radar coverage for the entire deployed fleet, or you get a real AWACS in support...

Plenty of ways to solve the issue...

F-16.net Sponsor

OTH radars, due to their very long wavelength, serve as a "tripwire" type of device. They do not offer enough resolution to target weapons and con only offer a "there is something in that general area" type of precision.

And from there the satellites can search.

Satellites cannot search and target fighters in flight... yet Smile

not till next week

I am wondering how well a modern destroyer could handle a saturation attack of the new SDB block IIs in the case of said stealth destroyer having too dense of defenses. I would imagine such a weapon could be useful when fighting an adversary like a Zumwalt.

discofishing wrote:

I've read these types of radars have been a little more successful in tracking LO/VLO aircraft. If that is true, I would imagine the OTH radar technology would improve to a point these things would be "mobile", especially if other nations are developing stealth aircraft of their own. I'm sure Moore's Law could be applied to radar technology. Even without being mobile, they have such massive range that I guess a stealth destroyer wouldn't necessarily need its own OTH sensors, it would rely on data networking.

There are some issues with physics that Moore's Law cannot overcome - but then again Einstein's postulate that nothing is faster than light has recently come into question.

tacf-x wrote:

I am wondering how well a modern destroyer could handle a saturation attack of the new SDB block IIs in the case of said stealth destroyer having too dense of defenses. I would imagine such a weapon could be useful when fighting an adversary like a Zumwalt.

The max range of the SDB is well within the EZ of ACS equipped escorts. The delivering aircraft would be very lucky to get close enough...

Most CIWS systems cannot fire straight up (within a 5-10 degree cone). Given this limitation, if the SDBs followed a plunging attack (from 20-30k feet) their chances are better for a successful engagement.

I think you guys should watch this. It's how things actually work. This is what all this "net-centric" and "network enabled" talk is all about. It's a complicated picture, not easily resolved with this-versus-that analysis.

Cooperative Engagement Capability: http://youtu.be/WumIk1MwVPM

stereospace wrote:

I think you guys should watch this. It's how things actually work. This is what all this "net-centric" and "network enabled" talk is all about. It's a complicated picture, not easily resolved with this-versus-that analysis.

Cooperative Engagement Capability: http://youtu.be/WumIk1MwVPM

They're going to need to update that video soon to incorporate F-35and F-22 aircraft acting as long-range pickets.

popcorn wrote:

stereospace wrote:

I think you guys should watch this. It's how things actually work. This is what all this "net-centric" and "network enabled" talk is all about. It's a complicated picture, not easily resolved with this-versus-that analysis.

Cooperative Engagement Capability: http://youtu.be/WumIk1MwVPM

They're going to need to update that video soon to incorporate F-35and F-22 aircraft acting as long-range pickets.

That would be a waste of fuel and airframe hours.

A system that extensive probably only applies to the US - other nations make do with lower capabilities. Again, the main thrust of my question is about F-35 stealth effectiveness vs modern air warfare ship sensors and in turn the effectiveness of modern ship stealth technologies against the F-35s sensors. There's been a lot of talk about radar horizons and the like but once the F-35 is in radar range, assuming it is not emitting itself, are the modern ship borne sensors powerful enough to defeat it's stealth measures?

If you're talking about the F-35 versus various Russian or Chinese radars, that information would be classified as secret, as it should be. And even if you're claiming to want to know at what range it would be visible to NATO radars, that would also be classified as secret, as it should be.

(Newbie shows up, wants to know at what range the emerging stealth fighter is visible to ship-borne radars. Interesting. Very suspicious too, if you ask me.)

destroid wrote:

A system that extensive probably only applies to the US - other nations make do with lower capabilities. Again, the main thrust of my question is about F-35 stealth effectiveness vs modern air warfare ship sensors and in turn the effectiveness of modern ship stealth technologies against the F-35s sensors. There's been a lot of talk about radar horizons and the like but once the F-35 is in radar range, assuming it is not emitting itself, are the modern ship borne sensors powerful enough to defeat it's stealth measures?

Simple answer, yes. If an F-35 gets close enough to a radar system it will be detected and tracked. How close that is depends on the capability and type of radar and the LO properties of the F-35. A smart pilot with good situational awareness however should be aware of potential threats in an F-35 well before they are able to engage him.

The point of stealth however or Low Observability as it is actually known (LO) is not to "defeat" enemy surveillance and targetting systems entirely. The point of LO is to enable an LO platform to get within range of it's own weapon systems whilst staying out of or minimising the "threat rings" that defending forces have around the assets they are attempting to defend.

F-35's level of stealth should ensure over a long period of time that it is able to employ it's weapons against a target before it can be engaged itself by ground/surface based weapon systems.

The F-35 will always have the ability to engage a target outside the maximum range of ground or surface based systems. Weapons like JSOW-ER, JASSM/JASSM-ER, Storm Shadow and the like ensure that. Unlike 4th Gen aircraft, the F-35 will also have the ability to penetrate these surface based defensive systems thanks to it's LO and employ much cheaper, Paveway, JDAM and Small Diameter Bomb type weapons at closer range, thus reducing the cost of war.

A Paveway II guidance weapon costs about $18k in today's dollars. A JASSM costs $600,000. Start engaging targets with SOW's and the cost escalates pretty quickly and with inventories being reduce to save money, how viable is such a plan? NATO just about ran out of munitions during the Libya campaign, without any high-end defensive systems to worry about...

Such costs have to be factored in to which aircraft type you are going to acquire in the next generation. An aircraft that MUST make extensive use of expensive standoff attack weapons against high end defensive systems and can be a bit cheaper to acquire initially or an aircraft than can do either and is likely to be cheaper in the long run?

Forum: General F-35 Forum

F-35 and stealth destroyers?