>The latest Khibiniy EW complex will effectively “blind” enemy radars and satellites to the presence of a VKS air grouping, potentially crippling the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) air defenses in any kinetic contact between Russia and the Alliance. Normally, these Khibiniy complexes are mounted on the wingtips of advanced Sukhoi platforms: Su-35S fighters, Su-34 bombers and Su-30SM fighters. On one wing-tip, the Khibiniy system acts as a receiver to determine enemy radio and communications frequencies, while the second generates the jamming element. The system is automated and analyzes enemy signals before determining the best means of jamming. The latest Khibiniy variant, the Khibiniy-U, is mounted under the fuselage of the Su-30SM to provide broad coverage for an air grouping and boost the EW capability against high-technology adversaries. In the upgraded Khibiniy-U, the entire capability is magnified to provide cover for an air grouping against enemy radars and space-based assets. According to the Russian daily Izvestia, with the introduction of the Khibiniy-U as part of a VKS air grouping, NATO air defenses are rendered exposed and ineffective; the newest Khibiniy EW complex offers a near-stealth capability for Russian VKS operations in any theater (Izvestia, June 9). jamestown.org/program/russias-electronic-warfare-advances-offers-stealth-capability-for-fighter-aircraft/
>According to the Russian daily Izvestia, with the introduction of the Khibiniy-U as part of a VKS air grouping, NATO air defenses are rendered exposed and ineffective; the newest Khibiniy EW complex offers a near-stealth capability for Russian VKS operations in any theater (Izvestia, June 9). >evidence has emerged of a technological breakthrough for Russian EW capability that, when applied to airpower, offers a de facto stealth capability for some of its most modern fighter platforms (Pravda-tv.ru, June 9; see EDM, December 12, 2017). >What do?
Remember the old Soviet joke: There is no truth in news, and no news in truth
while i have no doubt its capabilitys are being massively overstated, the fact that theyve taken this aproach to stealth does explain why none of their aircraft are all that stealthy in themselves. not to mention russians like stuff that works under shit conditions, all the prep and the constant maintainence that goes with the western (US lets be honest) stealth aircraft probably doesnt apeal all that much to vlad and pals
Joshua Cox
>the fact that theyve taken this aproach to stealth does explain why none of their aircraft are all that stealthy in themselves. either that or theyre using this to cover their asses.
Bentley Lee
Yes, because being completely reliant on active electronic warfare systems is so much more reliable and consistent than actual stealth shaping and design.
This doesn't even address the fact that NATO planes have extensive EW capabilities as well, and in the F-22 and F-35's case, EW AND native stealth.
Josiah Stewart
ahahaha what a fucking joke "one wingtip is the receiver, the other is the jammer" You do know the TX/RX then JAM time from one place on the aircraft to another is MUCH longer than a radar pulse? By the time you figure all that out the enemy is on the next frequency.
t. engineer
Nolan Powell
If you have this incredible advantage, why the fuck would you broadcast it to the world? Same with the chinks.
Ethan Mitchell
Lt. General Ben Hodges, Commander of US Army Europe (USAREUR) describes Russian ECM capabilities used in Ukraine as “eye-watering,” suggesting some US and NATO officers are more than slightly disturbed by what they see. Ronald Pontius, deputy to Army Cyber Command’s chief, Lt. Gen. Edward Cardon, told a conference in October that, “You can’t but come to the conclusion that we’re not making progress at the pace the threat demands.” In short, Pentagon planners have been caught flat-footed for all the trillions of wasted US taxpayer dollars in recent years thrown at the military industry.
Justin Campbell
>We can't do stealth, but we have magic radars that'll do it for us!...
This is just getting pathetic, and even if this system hypothetically worked I really doubt the ruskies could afford to effectively deploy such a powerful and complex system on a wide-scale. Also, I wouldn't advise Russia to start messing with the NRO and Airforce's satellites, history suggests they probably have death lasers aimed at Moscow or something.
Jacob Sullivan
India said "fuck PAK FA" some days ago. This speaks for itself.
Carson Wood
>Let's be completely reliant on jammers when home on jam technology is a thing.
William Reed
Doppler effect?
I am ignorant of wavelengths and electro frequencies. Please educate me.
Wyatt Carter
oh for fucks sake, this is getting sad. and its so close to being good too, it just needs some design tweaking and better engines and youd have a decent plane.
why cant sukhoi admit they fucked up and fix the damn thing?
Matthew Brooks
>Give us more funding please
Caleb Russell
I heard from RT a single MiG-27 armed with this system can take down the entire USAF. Why would they lie?? I believe them
Joshua Cruz
FUGG WRONG THREAD`
Robert Butler
RT also said that Russians are not HIV positive and the entire country is immune to AIDs.
Jacob Cox
>only homos get aids >Russia has no homos
Flawless logic. Also police doesn't count as homo.
John Davis
>scary on-board jammers are literally 80s tech, you should do trailing EW pods instead if you've got a fighter-sized jammer since you can't match the power output of a dedicated jammer platform. This thing is literally nothing new and decades behind on everyone else, including the chinese.
Kevin Ortiz
It’s the equivalent of saying a Growler is a stealth aircraft, hilariously dishonest marketing.
Will you please stop reinventing electronic warfare as a sudden new threat every year?
Jacob Morgan
So is this also going to shut down electronics on Navy destroyers while making their massive crew of 14 people shit their pants and desert en masse?
Hudson Green
There isn't a chance current stealth tech will not be rendered obsolete in few decades.
The amount of anti-stealth solutions in the battlefield - not just radars, but radars too - will simply overwhelm the whole concept of hiding a hot 40-ton jet in the sky.
The only question is, what will become obsolete sooner - stealth, or manned jet fighters as a class.
US would absolutely love that. Signals intelligence would lap it up like a dog.
Asher Hall
thats assuming that stealth tech wont evolve with radar tech. one cant make a leap without the other catching up.
Connor Hall
I guess this is what they’ve been working on with all the poking at our ADIZ over the years.
Charles Lee
>There isn't a chance current stealth tech will not be rendered obsolete in few decades.
Aircraft with larger RCS would still be at an even worse disadvantage.
Grayson Hall
Stealth become "obsolete" is one of the dumbest memes.
A stealth aircraft is inherently more survivable than a non-stealth plane because a radar that can detect a stealth target can detect a non-stealth one better by orders of magnitude. Better to fly a jet where you only get detected at 100km rather than 1000km.
Jack Bell
Stealth tech requires designing new aircrafts around it.
Detection tech most of the time requires some clever math with existing electronic components with a bit of battlefield networking.
Yes, until the point when it does not offer a meaningful (or cost-effective) edge over non-stealth aircraft anymore. And the funniest thing about this point is that you never know if you've reached it already at any given time in the future, or if it is still some time ahead.
What actually effective detection tech exists? VHF radar? Bistatic radar? loads of infrared detectors?
Luis James
>Detection tech most of the time requires some clever math with existing electronic components with a bit of battlefield networking. fucking what? are you implying the only advance detection tech needs is just some change in frequency and thats it? you would have to design entirely new radars to detect newer forms of stealth. some ww2 radar cant detect a fucking F-22 with nothing but a change in its programming.
William Hall
AESA, SDR, MIMO, LIDARs, infrared, passive radio landscape analyzers, a niglet with two eyes and a cellphone, and as many combinations of the above as bored underpaid young math major can think of.
Ian Rogers
>what is software-defined radio >what is software-defined radar hello
Hudson Kelly
Okay so you actually know nothing but you can spout off some buzzwords.
Jeremiah Diaz
If you'd feel safe about your ego, you could google each buzzword. But you're not.
Christian Flores
That's oversimplifying it greatly, you're pretty much talking about legacy jammers. Advanced DRFM jammers have many channels to work with, so they aren't just replying back with a single frequency and they're also sending out all the frequencies gathered over the course of operation, not just the single frequency it just received. AESA radars are better at countering it because of much higher frequency agility but they can still be defeated. I've personally seen AESA radars not burn through jamming until well within a WEZ during tests. Jamming vs electronic protection will always be a cat and mouse game.
Christian Cox
you are an absolute muppet and you clearly didnt read my post. even if you did change frequency with those that wouldnt be enough to detect new forms of stealth. the tech leap would be too great. if what you said was true no one would ever have to make new radars ever again.
Brayden Wright
>AESA, software defined radio, multiple input multiple output Been around for decades. Basically 3 acronyms for the same thing >LIDARs, infrared, passive radio landscape analyzers Actually somewhat effective for detection but how are you going to engage something with anything but infrared? Then you're WVR
Benjamin Morris
I was actually specifically referring to DRFMs, you're pretty much limited to reaction deception if your transmitter is 14 meters away
Blake Morris
>Comrades, what is more useful to the purposes of revolution: newspaper or television? >Newspaper. Is hard to wipe your ass with television
Caleb Turner
>tech leap would be too great. too great for who? for what? is it written somewhere that tech leaps must only be a particular size? >no one would ever have to make new radars ever again. what makes you think we aren't going to that exact place?
Oliver Flores
>carefully skirting SDR and MIMO ach, kommando...
Wyatt Stewart
>too great for who? for what? for the old ass radar you want to use. you cant just change some programming and expect it to be like a new system >what makes you think we aren't going to that exact place? because its not fucking possible. someone can and will find a flaw in it and use it, making that "never obsolete" radar entirely useless.
Landon Richardson
From my limited knowledge on it, it makes sense that deception jamming might have issues against a frequency agile radar, but barrage noise jamming could still be an issue if the jammer is working against all known frequencies of the radar painting it. Just becomes a limit of how many frequencies does the radar operate on vs how many can the jammer operate on.
Brody Allen
do you even now how technology works? its not possible for something to be good enough to where you never need to update it. something will always need fixing or updating with the times.
Samuel Gonzalez
You keep repeating these things but I'm not entirely sure you understand the implications. Pretty much every radar is a digital system at this point made of FPGAs, Xeons, GPGPUs or some combination. I could come up with a new algorithm next week. Would it help me defeat stealth? No, probably not.
Neither would beamforming with different antennas unless those two antennas happened to be spaced 100 km away and the plane flew close enough so i could measure a differential of multipath reflection. Well within the Xband detection range anyway.
Gabriel Thomas
Yep it's a constant game of frequency range. Guess where all the major A/D, D/A manufacturers are located?
Alexander Cruz
>for the old ass radar you want to use what. who said anything about radars necessarily being old? we're talking about radars becoming numerous, omnipresent and flexible, because they are getting cheaper and smarter - while planes are hard-designed around countering previous generation of detection systems, with an ever-increasing cost of each unit.
There isn't even a glint of flexible, modular, scalable or funtional stealth in sight - UNLESS you hold RT propaganda in OPs post for truth.
Kevin Johnson
>offers a near-stealth capability near stealth is not stealth
Justin Phillips
Not sure what you mean by A/D or D/A, I'm only a pilot, and my degree is in aero engineering.
Nicholas Hughes
Analog to digital and digital to analog converters. Essential for going inbetween the digital and analog (RF, Radar) domains
Jordan Williams
Guessing Israel since their jamming tech is maybe only surpassed by the Chinese, but idk
Tyler Sanders
>do you even now how technology works? now you know too.
if you never update the hardware, it gets old. thats how the advance of progress works >numerous, omnipresent and flexible what? even if that was possible, youre assuming stealth tech wouldnt do the same thing, hell, its already beginning to do that. besides, are you seriously assuming that radar tech will get the point where it never needs to be updated, and that stealth tech or EW tech will never get to this same level as well, or even surpass it?
Charles Sanders
thats not how that fucking works. at all. as long as there is technology, it will need to improve to meet the standards of other technology. thats how that works. its not some fucking RPG skill that you level up in you fucking mong.
William Barnes
New software can help with signal processing, but you always run into limitations on the physical systems it's going to be running on.
Cooling, processing power, physical memory, power of transmission units, sensitivity of receiving units, ect can't be changed via software.
Nicholas Ward
You are holding "stealth tech" and "radar tech" as equivalent in development potential, as if they were two branches of research tree in a videogame, with points freely allocable to each according to player's will. This is false.
There is no signs of "stealth tech" departing from its current set of solutions that root in the geometry of the airframe and expensive materials used in coating of surfaces. This set of solutions is inflexible and expensive, i.e. its development potential is not equal to radars.
William Robinson
wew lad. like, just two classes on patents and innovation could fix you up, but, alas, you never had one.
Alexander Walker
>You are holding "stealth tech" and "radar tech" as equivalent in development potential what? you clearly dont know how technological evolution works, as long as one makes a leap, the other will catch up. and if the idea of stealth that we have currently runs out, then the idea will change. besides, stealth has infinitely more potential than radar, because stealth is a concept, not a technology. if radar will ever get to the point that you are describing (which it wont because having a radar that can detect anything and never needs to be changed ever is not possible) then the current idea of stealth will change to a more fitting model. radar on the other hand cannot do that because it is limited in the way it can be developed without changing concept entirely.
David Price
>blind >with jamming literally all you need are two radar-equipped adversaries to be pinpointed.
some common sense could fix you up too. so long as the environment for technology will change, so will the technology. technology doesnt get stagnant unless people stop developing and innovating. progress will always be constant
Cooper Powell
boy where to start with this one. I guess lockmo, raytheon, NG, Boeing are all wasting money on something that doesn't work.
Maybe take your little paint picture and show them?
Just to let you know whose side I'm on. The Russian EW industry is garbage because its tech sector is equally garbage
Jonathan Gutierrez
>I guess lockmo, raytheon, NG, Boeing are all wasting money on something that doesn't work. its not their own money and they're the ones getting the money when its gets spent..
Owen Johnson
Which of those companies are claiming jamming efforts = stealth?
Carter Gomez
you're right. Sorry I'm caffeinated as shit
Gavin Moore
are you retarded? you sound completely stupid. that shit doesn't even work as a back-of-the-napkin experiment.
Bentley Carter
Can you tell me of other technology that has reached a point where it stops and never is replaced
Robert Green
6000km radars on X-band, radio optical radars, usage of GaN and higher powered modules,
Is there any breakthrough in material? Oldfags have to realize electronics outpace stealth. It was a great concept. But I am pretty sure the designers had no idea back than how fast electronics have evolved to this day.
Camden Martin
>The Russian EW industry is garbage because its tech sector is equally garbage
sigh.... Do you want me to show you like I showed other users on Jow Forums that they have had GaN UHF modules for EW systems by the time the EA-18 or F-35 have yet to be implemented passed 2020?
Does the US have atleast a single land based jammer with similar performance like the Murmansk-BN or Krasukha-4
Troll harder.
Cameron Howard
>UHF EW Oh nice you can block out some of the HAM bands i guess
We don't have land based because land based are of limited offensive value and relatively easy targets.
>lets build these really big trucks, make them sit in a spot and have them broadcast a massive signal on a battlefield
I really wonder what could go wrong with this.
>Do you want me to show you like I showed other users on Jow Forums that they have had GaN UHF modules for EW systems
Broofs :-DD
Christian Kelly
>Broofs This
Liam Gutierrez
stealth is near stealth user
Dylan Parker
>extensive EW capabilities >f22 and f35
and ok f35 have some modernized pieces on it the f22 that lm is still battling on court the dod for them not to upgrade the damn thing is at least laughable to say that their 80s tech is somewhat relevant today
>This doesn't even address the fact that NATO planes have extensive EW capabilities as well, and in the F-22 and F-35's case, EW AND native stealth. LOL'd hard at that claim. It's nothing more than fucking delusions. You have no fucking clue what EW is.
Brody Edwards
China never broadcast shit.
All we know about China are internet leaks made by insiders to feed the Chinese watcher community, and occasional US intelligence reports that confirm those leaks years later.
As for Russia, they broadcast more of their developments because arms trade is one of their biggest economic pillars.
Aaron Reed
Jamming is not used to "blind" the enemy, it is used to confuse and disorient them, making ranging and successful interception more difficult. The OP claims that vatniks can somehow hide their presence by jamming, when in reality you're broadcasting your position to anybody willing to listen.
Stealth > jamming. You only jam when the enemy knows where you are already. No, you are retarded. Jamming scrambles the return signal, but it does so by flooding you with radiation. It is the equivalent of using a flashlight to blind your enemy in a dark room. It still gives the enemy directional information. All you need to get a fix on the jamming target are two directional receivers whose positions are known. You can interpolate other information from that over time. These are things modern electronics can do in the blink of an eye.
You might spoof missiles but you ain't hiding shit.
Grayson Diaz
Russia broadcast shit they want to sell. There's shitload of news about BMPT they;re trying to sell to Iran, and literally 0 news about "Izdelie-30" engines they're building for themselves.
John Powell
>0 news about "Izdelie-30" engines any idea what their specs are gonna be?
Adam Robinson
>russia has up to date anything no they don't
Hudson Carter
Don't forget that stuff like the MALD-J and NGJ, and probably the F-35's active jam capability can also do stuff like create false returns so enemy fighters start trying to intercept radar ghosts.
Ryder Nelson
they have the quietest subs, best SAMs and have hypersonic ICBMs. US is lagging behind in all of these areas.
Dominic Davis
>Coin commemorating a tame, pointless flyby >EW system manufacturer called what vatniks claimed impossible for the system to do Yeah, sounds about right for Vatniks.
Ayden Sullivan
>quietest subs, Kek >best SAMs That's like saying you're the best reader in the remedial math class. >and have hypersonic ICBMs In CGI. And the US looked into it decades ago and it just wasn't worth it.
Joseph Kelly
everything I said is true. your butthurt doesn't help the situation.
Brandon Hill
Right on. Plus Compas Call.
Benjamin Russell
MFT (multiple false targets) is a pretty common DRFM technique. As discussed earlier with the other guy replying to me, might not be good enough for good frequency agility radars. Noise jamming can always work though
Gabriel Moore
ok vladmir, lets not forget that the russian economy collapsed at the end of the 80's, and that the russian military has been living on the breadline up till 2015
heck, the russian military budget of 2018 is nowhere near that of the USSR
