Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

PeeD wrote:A possible counter-VHF effect due to size/feature size for the B-2 would also explain why the Americans went for the B-21.

I'm aware that OTH radars can detect B-2 size shaping stealth, at least HF wavelength has no potential feature size effect in the same way VHF has no problems with smaller feature sizes of F-22/-35/-117.

However the problem with OTH radars is that they are static. A massive saturation attack by Tomahawks up to nuclear ballistic missile attacks could take these vital systems off. This is the nature of any static, large system, it's survivability is limited and in a serious conflict you just try to keep it alive as long as possible. We all know how potent the Russian IADS is, but here the determination of the opponent counts, if it is ready to spend 300-600-1000 Tomahawks for a single vital object, there isn't much that can be done. Furthermore there are limitations in scan rate and 360° coverage with OTH radars.

IR spectrum is another way but with the assumed cooling and sub-sonic speed, the ranges should be limited to 100km for cost effective TI sensors.

Maybe I overestimate the feature-size wavelength problem of the B-2 and e.g the gaps between the control surfaced are sufficient for VHF-band scattering. But maybe it has a stealth operation regime that makes it effective against VHF-band and hence the decision for the B-21.

The Nebo-m can detect the B2.

It needs to be several times bigger to be invisible.

There is only one reason to try to take down Russias OTH radar network so any attempt to launch anything at them would likely result in TOPOLS and SATANs and YARs etc stretching their legs... hardly the best way to start a first strike...

The new photonic radars they are working on could change everything...

I've been wondering about something for a while now and I think this is a nice place to ask. My last encounter with electromagnetic wave physics was back in my university days, decades back and I do not have the will to look them up again, so sorry in advance if what I ask is stupid.

OK, I have an X-band radar with a very narrow beam. Instead of simply sending pulses with it, I preform a typical amplitude modulation on them with a frequency of UHF or even VHF wavelengths. No matter what happens to the x-band carrier (due to stealth shape), wouldn't I get back the low frequency harmonic, provided I have an appropriate receiver listening? If my beam is narrow enough, maybe it is possible to get enough data for detection or even tracking, just by using its position when I get the harmonic back.

Do you think something like that could work?

Erlindur wrote:I've been wondering about something for a while now and I think this is a nice place to ask. My last encounter with electromagnetic wave physics was back in my university days, decades back and I do not have the will to look them up again, so sorry in advance if what I ask is stupid.

OK, I have an X-band radar with a very narrow beam. Instead of simply sending pulses with it, I preform a typical amplitude modulation on them with a frequency of UHF or even VHF wavelengths. No matter what happens to the x-band carrier (due to stealth shape), wouldn't I get back the low frequency harmonic, provided I have an appropriate receiver listening? If my beam is narrow enough, maybe it is possible to get enough data for detection or even tracking, just by using its position when I get the harmonic back.

Do you think something like that could work?

Nothing prevent from you to do that ,but it won't make any benefit.


First, the transmitter will be very expensive.
Second, the low frequency signal won't match the resonant frequency of the phased array, means that in good case it will have no directional amplification .Bad case it will burn out the transmitter.


And the returning signal won't have any amplification as well.


The antennas works only with very close frequencies, say a 100 mhz antenna will works well with +/- 10 mhz
A very high frequency antenna , like a 10000 mhz one will works well with +/-100 mhz frequency.

It can works with wide band as well, but the amplification will be smaller at the edge.

The data rate proportional to the frequency, say a 10 MHz means 10 megabyte .

So, if you want to deliver a 100 mhz signal with a 10 GHz transmitter then it has to have 10 Gbyte bandwidth, and the 100 mhz will be so out from the resonant frequency it won't receive any signal at all practically.

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/solutions/Enterprise/Borderless_Networks/Unified_Access/CMX/CMX_RFOpFreqDataRates.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_(signal_processing)

Yeah you are right but I was thinking a slightly different scenario. First not a phased array radar. I guess the math would be way too complicated. Maybe use one typical older generation conventional system.

Second, I wouldn't dream of trying to get the reflection with the same hardware, that is why I said "provided I have an appropriate receiver listening". I was thinking about a separate receiver antenna (of the appropriate length) for the returning harmonic. One with its own circuit to amplify and analyze it and send the results back to the main radar's cpu. I only want it to work as a trigger confirming that we got a return.

Why most of sources claims the bands that S-300 ,S-400 using will be defeated by F-22 ,F-35 . ok it may works well against X-band but Russia already using multible bands in the new AD systems .

For sure, tactical fighter-sized stealth aircraft must be optimized to defeat higher-frequency bands such the C, X and Ku bands — that’s just a simple matter of physics. There is a “step change” in an L.O. aircraft’s signature once the frequency wavelength exceeds a certain threshold and causes a resonant effect.

https://warisboring.com/could-russia-shoot-down-an-f-22-stealth-fighter-over-syria/

As usual... don't listen to what they say... pay attention to what they do... and what they are doing is NOT flying F-22 or F-35 anywhere in Syrian airspace when they can help it... when Russian Su-35s and Su-30s arrive they leave, though they are very brave when there is only an Su-25 there for example...

Israeli F-35s are worse... it seems Russia has given them permission to strike Iranian and Syrian targets if they wish but they are not to strike Russian targets or places where Russians might be but even then Israeli aircraft wont enter Syrian air space or if they do they hide behind civilian airliners or come from US controlled Syrian airspace using US codes pretending to be US aircraft...

So do tell me... are these the actions of countries with aircraft invulnerable to enemy air defences?

Why waste time with long range stand off weapons when they have all those cheap simple weapons they can drop directly on target and ensure accuracy and that the target is still there...

This thread is... is Russia safe from F-22 and B-2, but ironically your question is... are third world countries broken by civil war safe from Americas super planes with Russian help... and the answer to that question also seems to be yes.

Russia is safe from any weapon the west can deploy, as long as they have the nukes.

Exactly, and while the reverse is also true it would also be fair to say that Russia is not interested in occupying or invading Europe or anywhere else either...

GarryB wrote:
This thread is... is Russia safe from F-22 and B-2, but ironically your question is... are third world countries broken by civil war safe from Americas super planes with Russian help... and the answer to that question also seems to be yes.

To be honest i don't like to judge Russian AD systems based only on the concept that Russia is safe by operating them.

Russia exports a lot of systems, discussing the effectiveness of these systems that will be operated by other (not broken) countries makes sense more than saying Russia is safe , Russia is safe because of multiple factors (including AD systems ).

Countries like Turkey ,Egypt,Greece, china...etc who are operating Russian AD systems could face threats from stealth enemy aircrafts , here is the discussion that will evaluate the Russian AD systems which my money on it

If you have only air defence system to defend yourself you will loose. No matter how good they are.

Isos wrote:If you have only air defence system to defend yourself you will lose. No matter how good they are.

Really? I would say that all the F-22s and B-2s will be blown out of the sky before they even reach Russia's border. Only
Washington exceptionalists think they will actually be able to use B-2s like regular bombers over Russian territory. Maybe
if they were going to use them like standoff platforms then they would have some argument. But dumb bomb runs over
Russia like WWII, get f*cking real.

kvs wrote:

Isos wrote:If you have only air defence system to defend yourself you will lose. No matter how good they are.

Really?  I would say that all the F-22s and B-2s will be blown out of the sky before they even reach Russia's border.   Only
Washington exceptionalists think they will actually be able to use B-2s like regular bombers over Russian territory.    Maybe
if they were going to use them like standoff platforms then they would have some argument.   But dumb bomb runs over
Russia like WWII, get f*cking real.

US have more f16/15 and b1 that can launch stand off missiles than f22 and b2.

That's right, they do. But one thing proven US jets can't do - take off and land from an unprepared runway.

Isos wrote:

kvs wrote:

Isos wrote:If you have only air defence system to defend yourself you will lose. No matter how good they are.

Really?  I would say that all the F-22s and B-2s will be blown out of the sky before they even reach Russia's border.   Only
Washington exceptionalists think they will actually be able to use B-2s like regular bombers over Russian territory.    Maybe
if they were going to use them like standoff platforms then they would have some argument.   But dumb bomb runs over
Russia like WWII, get f*cking real.

US have more f16/15 and b1 that can launch stand off missiles than f22 and b2.

B1 series is being retired. And are you serious with the F16 and F15 crap? Is America going to park some aircraft
carriers off Russia's Arctic coast and bomb Russia like Serbia in 1999. Must be some fine acid you are on.

The original statement is "air defence alone can't make you win a war". What's the point with carriers and runways destroyed or Russia VS USA, if it was true Russia wouldn't be operating so much fighter jets.

To be honest i don't like to judge Russian AD systems based only on the concept that Russia is safe by operating them.

Well I agree but this thread is specifically about whether Russia is safe from F-22 and B-2 and so we are talking about whether Russia has the AD systems to defend itself from those platforms so that is what I based my post upon.

Russia exports a lot of systems, discussing the effectiveness of these systems that will be operated by other (not broken) countries makes sense more than saying Russia is safe , Russia is safe because of multiple factors (including AD systems )

Again, I agree, but think on this thread the discussion is about whether they keep Russia safe from their primary enemy and its tools.

To discuss whether those same systems exported to other countries I would prefer to create a new thread or use a thread already dedicated either to those export countries or the systems themselves and their use in foreign countries.

Countries like Turkey ,Egypt,Greece, china...etc who are operating Russian AD systems could face threats from stealth enemy aircrafts , here is the discussion that will evaluate the Russian AD systems which my money on it

And the discussion in that case would also need to include the higher chances of an attack by the US on those countries and their lack of other systems and support equipment that Russia enjoy. They of course have other equipment and resources Russia does not enjoy and the different situations effect performance of those exported systems, but this is clearly not the thread to discuss it...

If you have only air defence system to defend yourself you will loose. No matter how good they are.

Especially against a super power that has taken the decision to attack...

Really? I would say that all the F-22s and B-2s will be blown out of the sky before they even reach Russia's border. Only
Washington exceptionalists think they will actually be able to use B-2s like regular bombers over Russian territory. Maybe
if they were going to use them like standoff platforms then they would have some argument. But dumb bomb runs over
Russia like WWII, get f*cking real.

Russia has more than just an air defence system, they have the ability to attack in kind which is ironic because HATO can attack but really cannot defend...

US have more f16/15 and b1 that can launch stand off missiles than f22 and b2.

That need airbases to operate from and are no longer in production and cannot be replaced...

That's right, they do. But one thing proven US jets can't do - take off and land from an unprepared runway.

X2

B1 series is being retired. And are you serious with the F16 and F15 crap? Is America going to park some aircraft
carriers off Russia's Arctic coast and bomb Russia like Serbia in 1999. Must be some fine acid you are on.

The proliferation of the S-400 and Su-35 might result in the F-22 and B-2 not being much use anywhere...


To be clear this thread is about the defence of Russia against the US so comments about exported Russian systems don't make sense and should be directed to threads for specific countries or specific systems where their abilities can be discussed in context regarding the various situations they might find themselves in around the world.

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/mig-31bsm-foxhound-vs-f-22-raptor-which-heavyweight-jet-would-reign-supreme-in-air-to-air-combat

I guess no need to compare every Russian aircraft against F-22 which its production already stopped .

Now U.S has F-35 that full of defects

ahmedfire wrote:I guess no need to compare every Russian aircraft against F-22 which its production already stopped .

Now U.S has F-35 that full of defects  

Yes, but the article admits that the ancient Mig-31 is competitive with the allegedly best F-22. Something novel for western
sources.

Anyway, Russia can handle both the B-2 and the F-22. That is why the yanquis are going at it with the B-21 and attempts
to make hypersonic missile systems.

[quote="kvs"]

ahmedfire wrote: 
Anyway, Russia can handle both the B-2 and the F-22.   That is why the yanquis are going at it with the B-21 and attempts
to make hypersonic missile systems.

AFAI Understood, in spite of the hype, and propaganda, US are very far to obtain hypersonic's weapons. Until now, they failed to build fair supersonic cruise missiles. In fact, the entire West is lagging behind Russia. Do not believe their filthy fake news like these
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/10/21/all-us-navy-destroyers-will-get-hypersonic-missiles-trumps-national-security-advisor-says/
made just before the election in order to reassure US allies that are more and more worried. US cannot afford to have fair hypersonic weapons, in any foreseeable future, if US will stay alive, and won't implode before.
The F-22, as the B-2 were nearly given up because US high responsible understood quickly that the stealth technologies cannot be a viable option, and they understood for a while. As Russian leaders understood too.
For that reason, Russia focused to modernize the SU-30 SM, and SU-35, besides Mig-35. Russians are working to embed Radio Photonic radars, besides new powerful engines and hypersonic weapons.
SU-35 will have new powerful engines and new hypersonic ammunitions.

ahmedfire wrote:I guess no need to compare every Russian aircraft against F-22 which its production already stopped .

Now U.S has F-35 that full of defects  

Its worse than that. The F-22's serviceability rates are terrible. The question in the thread is theoretical. Based on the theory that the F-22 wasn't a total failure

The F-35 is such a disaster that they are going back to building F-15's. The F-15X is the new big thing now. The F-35 program is full speed ahead though. They are selling as many of them as they can, to their "allies"  They even opened up the desert to the F-35 now. The UAE peace deal with Israel was just to sell F-35's

F-15X is there to be a missile truck that is commanded by f-22/35.

F-22 is a huge program and the plane has its defaults but it is a great fighter when it's in the air.

F-35 is a failure and they will probably come with another program to replace it. LM already said they are working on a new plane.

Isos wrote:F-15X is there to be a missile truck that is commanded by f-22/35.

F-22 is a huge program and the plane has its defaults but it is a great fighter when it's in the air.

F-35 is a failure and they will probably come with another program to replace it. LM already said they are working on a new plane.

They are just now rolling the F-35 into service. Its just funny that at the same time, they are quietly reintroducing a 4th gen aircraft in the F-15x.

And the F-15 was introduced in 1976. Which makes it quite a bit older than the su 27, which was introduced in 1985. You can see it. The F-15 is more dated than the su 27

They start a new and updated f-15EX not the old one. Just like su-35 on your picture is an highly updated su-27.

F-35 is low on weapons to replace the f-15 anyway. The air force needs something more. F-22 is a dead project and too costly to start it back and adapt modern stuff for it. F-15 is easier to updated. F-35 is in the class of f-16.