AWACS/Command post aircrafts of RuAF

Viktor wrote:Nice   

Russian Air Force received the third improved "flying radar" A-50U

I want to see bigger and clearer image.

you know i'd like to see if the A-50U's radar will adopt similar arrangement as A-50EI.. triangular AESA Radar.   

Model Revels A-100 Configuration ( Air International )

Austin wrote:Model Revels A-100 Configuration ( Air International )

Hmm.

I'm still wonder why Russians doesn't opt for Phalcon style three faced phased array design. It may have somewhat more complex module design due to need to provide electronic beam steering in both azimuth and elevation, but the benefit of having even faster update rate are very attractive. To me at least.

Stealthflanker wrote:

Austin wrote:Model Revels A-100 Configuration ( Air International )

Hmm.

I'm still wonder why Russians doesn't opt for Phalcon style three faced phased array design. It may have somewhat more complex module design due to need to provide electronic beam steering in both azimuth and elevation, but the benefit of having even faster update rate are very attractive. To me at least.

It is a model, so there could very well be differences on what will actually come out.

one revolution every five seconds, if true, is a very good update rate. e-3 does one revolution every 10 seconds.

Also, having two arrays instead of three means arrays can be placed closer to the centre of the dish and thus can be made bigger. roughly 20-ish percent bigger, area wise, i'd say.

two arrays need less power than three arrays, though i guess that may be offset by the fact there's additional power needed to rotate the dish.

both designs are good, i'd say. there are minor benefits and drawbacks to each.

Beriev A-50U

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia---Air/Beriev-A-50U/2426438/L/&sid=16f1e3c57a8f676365f61122080ff4ab

Russian air force will receive A-100, a kind of super Awacs.
http://www.redstar.gr/Foto_red/Eng/Aircraft/A_100.html

I don't know much about this awacs. Does this aircraft have AESA radar ? VHF, X-BAND radar ? As US are well aware that their stealth aircraft are vulnerable to modern russian radar, in fact they will ask their fighters, and bombers to fly at low altitude, below the classical radar coverture.
Will this super awacs be able to detect the B2 A lancer ?

Thx.

B2 will never fly at low altitude regardless of what they believe about their enemies radar capabilities. In case of VHF low altitude like high altitude will not be a big difference since VHF band is reflected by ionosphere and by the earth itself and everything in between could theoratically be "spotted", of course there is much more to it, but that is about the sheme of VHF band.

Werewolf wrote:B2 will never fly at low altitude regardless of what they believe about their enemies radar capabilities.

Werewolf you should had worked for Pentagon , Northrop and CIA in the '90 years, because you would had spared them the several billions dollars and years necessary to deeply modify this already hyper-costly strategic bomber and to change its main flying profile to low altitude....... only in order to provide it with a chance to penetrate a part of URSS's IAD of the time   



From the CIA formerly classified "Soviet Forces and Capabilities for Strategic Nuclear Conflict Through the Year 2000"  pag. 367 - Strategic Defensive Forces -

"In the coming decade ,however, Soviet Strategic air defense will be much more capable to engagé low altitude vehicles. As a result penetration by currently deployed US bombers will become much more difficult in particular in the heavily defended western URSS.
If the B2 bomber and advanced cruise missiles achieve the desired level of reduced observability, using tactics appropriate to stealth vehicles they probably would be capable to penetrate most of the Soviet Union at low altitude. The capabilities of Soviet air defenses will place some limitations on operations of the B2 , however. "

I repeat one more time, the real order of magnitude of the tactically relevant RCS of similar "stealth" aircraft and the laughable metropolitan legends circulating on them .....in particular on the net in the last decade , for the very high density of fanatical ignorants..... is entire worlds apart.

Obviously the real technical requirements of weapon development programs of this kind and, even more, theirs CONOPS , as in the instance of the B2 "Spirit" strategic bomber, are always dictated by the former and never by the latter  

Mindstorm wrote:

From the CIA formerly classified "Soviet Forces and Capabilities for Strategic Nuclear Conflict Through the Year 2000"  pag. 367 - Strategic Defensive Forces -

"In the coming decade ,however, Soviet Strategic air defense will be much more capable to engagé low altitude vehicles. As a result penetration by currently deployed US bombers will become much more difficult in particular in the heavily defended western URSS.
If the B2 bomber and advanced cruise missiles achieve the desired level of reduced observability, using tactics appropriate to stealth vehicles they probably would be capable to penetrate most of the Soviet Union at low altitude. The capabilities of Soviet air defenses will place some limitations on operations of the B2 , however. "

I repeat one more time, the real order of magnitude of the tactically relevant RCS of similar "stealth" aircraft and the laughable metropolitan legends circulating on them .....in particular on the net in the last decade , for the very high density of fanatical ignorants..... is entire worlds apart.

Obviously the real technical requirements of weapon development programs of this kind and, even more, theirs CONOPS , as in the instance of the B2 "Spirit" strategic bomber, are always dictated by the former and never by the latter  

Thx for your responses and articles. In fact Mindstorm you have the same conclusions as Pierre Sprey. He said Stealth technology never worked. Even during Desert Storm, in spite of the hype, as confidential US defence reports old iraqis radars spotted several times the F-1117.
Moreover, if we add the fact that beside at least  2 F-117 were downed in Serbia, another B2 Spirit was also downed and crashed in Croatia. Leaving the myth of the B2 intact. A myth worked only for ignorants like I was, before Internet came, and evidently the congressmans, and taxpayers.

Another question.



If Vhf radars are enough to track the stealth, why do we need X-band, and L-Band ? If a vhf radar is enough to track F-22, and B-2, and could be used as CGI, and could guide SU-35, and Mig-35, why Russia will spend money for the cumbersome, and very expensive SU-Pak T-50 ? Is it worth to spend it ? Why this amount of money won't be spend to equip russian air force by Mig-35, and SU-35 ?

PS: photo taken from Carlo Kopp's owner of Auspower.net.

VHF band radars operate in very long wave lengths meaning they can achieve a much higher resonance of LO objects but are not very precise, not precise enough on hundreds of km to locate the exact location of the object. They are mainly used as Early warning radars which are also called OHT Over the Horizont Radars, because the waves are reflected by ionized sphere and ground. On shorter distances like in Serbia they are accurate enough to determine the exact location to be used for weapon guidance.

OHT/VHF band radars are spotters and X/L band radars are then used to directly "illuminate" at the direction where the VHF band radars have spotted something, a focused direction of L/X band radars uses lot of energy and has very good performance to locate in its narrowed and therefore more powerful operation to detect even LO/VLO objects.

They need to work together on higher distances.

Thx Werewolf.

Just a few words about this filthy bastard of Voltaire. He is the reference of ultra-liberalism.  I know that many among you recalled only this famous Voltaire' quote

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Well, quote full of duplicity, the life of this crook is full examples like "do what I say, but don't do what I do", and used very ugly methods, because he was a true uggly.
In this wonderfull video made in french speaking,  Henri Guillemin did a very relevant study about the life of Voltaire.


The most notable quote of this crook is -I don't know if you are aware about this very famous quote, but not teached in our frencheese university, you guess why-:

Un pays bien organisé est celui où le petit nombre fait travailler le grand nombre, est nourri par lui et le gouverne.

"a country well governed is where the little number work the great number, and this little number is fed by this great number, but the little number governs the great number".
This is exactly the doctrin of ultra-lberalism, Voltaire is one the father of human rights, women rights, uglly behaviour, colonialism, rascism, hypocrisy, and wars in order to be rich. This doctrin is the baseline of most of the western leaders. The only think that I regreat is when I was younger, Voltaire was presented us as nearly a half-god, pacifism, and in fact he was the complete contrary. No wonder why french republique invaded several countries, looted them. They looted this poor countries, not for the average frencheeses, but mostly for a small group of oligarchs, meanwhile most of the frencheese people lived in the poverty untill 1940. They began to live better only after the 50's not because of french revolution, but mostly because of the Soviet Union. Once Soviet Union collapsed, conditions of life started to decline everywhere in western countries.


There are many great frencheese true and honnest thinkers, writters, and philosophs. For example Victor Hugo, Lamartine, Emile Zola, Robespierre, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Louis Ferdinand Celine, Jean Jaures, Jules Vales. Voltaire is not our friend, must not among our baseline, he was a simple ugly crook, not more, not less.

Moreover, if we add the fact that beside at least 2 F-117 were downed in Serbia, another B2 Spirit was also downed and crashed in Croatia. Leaving the myth of the B2 intact. A myth worked only for ignorants like I was, before Internet came, and evidently the congressmans, and taxpayers.

Only one F117 was shot down.

The other F-117 and the B-2 kill are conspirasy theories.

If Vhf radars are enough to track the stealth, why do we need X-band, and L-Band ?

X band is high frequency and also high accuracy and is good for terminal guidance for missiles because the antennas needed are small but precise against non stealth targets.

L band is the frequency most digital datalinks operate in, so can be used for other purposes, but it is long enough to find smaller stealth aircraft like F-22, F-35, and more importantly stealthy cruise missiles and weapons.

VHF radar requires large radar antennas which makes putting them in planes difficult or impossible and it is only new VHF systems with digital electronics and AESA design that have enough accuracy for reliably chasing stealth aircraft.

why Russia will spend money for the cumbersome, and very expensive SU-Pak T-50 ? Is it worth to spend it ?

Using their air force for defence NATO wont be able to operate stealth detecting VHF radar over Russian territory so will have problems detecting and tracking the PAK FA.

Plus there is the obvious... the stealth of the PAK FA should render it safe from all current NATO Radar guided AAMs and SAMs... which is pretty useful.

Jamming and decoys work best concealing small targets.

GarryB wrote:Only one F117 was shot down.

The other F-117 and the B-2 kill are conspirasy theories.

Officially 1 F-117 shot down and 1 F-117 damaged (both by SAM-3), another damaged F-117 is uncomfirmed as only some sources talk about it. No B-2 shot down or damaged.

GarryB wrote:
Only one F117 was shot down.
The other F-117 and the B-2 kill are conspirasy theories.

We've already discussed this topic in this forum.
Firstly, I don't believe to any conspirasy, these are part of western hype in order to discredit any rational reasoning.
Secundly, If I diid not hear Pierre Sprey asserting that there are 2 F-117 -as you can see, I did not say there were 20 lost, but merely 2- downed in Sebia -moreover, Vladimir Iilyin asserted that there is another F-117 downed in Iraq. Must we despise every russian historian and should we absolutly believe every westerners ? - I never took credit. I don't think he is liar, neither incompetent. Moreover, the person that said he downed a B2 A was serbian commandant asserted that they downed this bomber. If Lt Colonel Đorđe Aničić  asserted why should I despise him ? He was the responsible of air defense. Should I believe of CNN, FOX, or other annex of DOD like NBC, ABC, CBS ? Didn't we implement many topics about the subjects of stealth technolgy, and how stealth bombers, or fighters were/are/and still will be vunerable to VHF radar, that dated since the 40's, if not the 30's.

medo wrote:
Officially 1 F-117 shot down and 1 F-117 damaged (both by SAM-3), another damaged F-117 is uncomfirmed as only some sources talk about it. No B-2 shot down or damaged.

I think there is no worth to tell you more about, if US acknowledged that this top of their hi-tech could be downed -and they were- so easily, what's happenned next ? Don't you think that the military complexe won't enrage ? And who do own US medias ? I think all these subjects you should be aware very well, maybe better than me.

When they shot down the first F-117 they showed wreckage.

they have not show wreckage of the other aircraft.

It is war... both sides will not be telling the whole truth.

The Serbian that said he shot down a B-2 might have shot down something but without B-2 wreckage it could easily have been one of the many dozens of UAVs they shot down.

GarryB wrote:When they shot down the first F-117 they showed wreckage.

they have not show wreckage of the other aircraft.

It is war... both sides will not be telling the whole truth.

The Serbian that said he shot down a B-2 might have shot down something but without B-2 wreckage it could easily have been one of the many dozens of UAVs they shot down.

I actually wrote a post about Serbia and NATO losses with pictures.

There were 7 Apaches downed 4 of them landed on Serbian soil rest managed to crash land in Albania those losses were denied till this day, while there was afterwards footage available of one completley burned apache almost not possible to identify only because of  tail rotor was intact and the others crash landed badly and were brought to a hospital.
Same goes for Jets, some managed to fly out of Serbian air space and enter some other country mostly Albania.

The losses are till this day denied while some times footage exists, the "scraping" of some jets out of service right after the Serbian war crime. That is the US policy to deny whatever they can, they denied for the first two weeks that Iran managed to "shoot down" their Sentinel RQ-170 Stealth drone, after the Iranians showed it on TV they started making threats to Sanction Iran because they "STOLE" their precious drone.

This Policy of concealing and denying losses comes to such an absurdity that you can see it in Iraq with their Arbams tanks, the definition of a loss on the battlefield of fieldequipment warmachinery included is when it is rendered useless due enemy engagement, regardless if this is a tank completley destructed into pieces or a tank destroyed and is not anymore a  threat to enemy forces and b cant move/fire or be anykind of use for the own forces. But what does the USA do, while no other country has ever made such a Propaganda war about it? They start to use A-10s and F-16s to destroy their own destructed tanks so it can not fall into hands of IRAQ, the same IRAQ that made the Asad Babils made of steel that was designed for civil purposes, which had ZERO protection. The USA made this blatant propaganda that Iraqis could actually refurbish the destroyed Abrams tanks on the Battlefield with a non existent MIC.
But this Propaganda war didn't stop there, those F-16/A-10 airstrike finished Abrams were not counted as a loss to the enemy, while by all definitions except the American one, it is a loss to the enemy when the enemy manages to render some warmachinery for you useless. No, the US takes 2-3 Abrams tanks, which are destroyed by definishen(pun intended), with holes in hull, deformed hulls from mines/IEDs and takes only those parts from it which are intact (Canibalism) and to repair one single Abrams and calls this (ALL damaged tanks could be repaired).
That is an insanity of definition. The US policy is only about holding the Morality of own soldiers high and morality of other countries armies low and that is why they always have and always will use such Propaganda.

To believe that every denying statement of USA represents the truth is like believing the EU ABM shields are for Iran.

GarryB wrote:When they shot down the first F-117 they showed wreckage.

they have not show wreckage of the other aircraft.

It is war... both sides will not be telling the whole truth.

The Serbian that said he shot down a B-2 might have shot down something but without B-2 wreckage it could easily have been one of the many dozens of UAVs they shot down.

One thing many people don't realize is that, as a matter of policy, the Serbs and others don't display or make claims regarding downed aircraft, excepts in situations that can be defined as ""aberrations"". The reason for that is complicated; I can't explain it here; it will become clear in due course.

A limited selection of some anecdotes:

US lost over 9000 aircraft in Vietnam. Not that it matters, but as far as I know, they have mostly admitted to that. How many pictures have you seen of all of those losses?

US lost over 3000 aircraft in Korea, mostly shot down by the Russians (same as above). How many pictures of those have you seen? Did they ever admit how they were lost? They made a lot of denials regarding that also.

One independent reason that indicates the US aircraft losses in Serbia were huge is the extremely limited nature of US airforce's involvement in the follow-on "conflicts". Also they started to try to use B-1Bs in Iraq as often as they could (with the ensuing losses, of course). The significance of this is that you wouldn't use B-1B flying coffins if you had any other options.

I can go on and on; you can do that too.

I think I have already said more that enough.

The US lies.

I get it.

When Foreign allied troops were found to be responsible for a US soldiers death in Iraq the investigation was halted and evidence was covered up.

The reason given was they did not want to embarrass their allies (the Polish forces).

If they will lie and hide such things that are important to their own people of course the will have no problem hiding things with rather more strategic impact like the shooting down of F-117s or B-2s.

If we had a real media in the west instead of the corporate stooges we have today then their might be some real independent investigations, but we have no such things.

Don't be upset that I believe only one F-117 was shot down... I have been wrong before about a lot of things, and I am not believing the US because I respect them... rather because I don't believe they would be able to successfully cover something like that up... someone would squeal... I hope.

There can't be any B2s down. It would be easily proven true and it would be HUGE PR blow. But have no doubt, THERE ARE NO FUNDAMENTALS, that can make the interception of a B2 so much more difficult than a F117 or anything else. Latest doesn't mean invincible but Serbs and Afghans and Iraqis in 2003 where much less competitive that there are the Russian insurgents now and even them can't shoot down an old and humble MiG-29....


Having said this, B2 is by far the best first strike (unexpected) strategic bomber there is. After the first hour my humble opinion is that B2 being out of production, extremely complicated, extremely expensive, low in numbers and subsonic is not such a factor and thus I am not so much about Russia and China following it's footsteps but better go for a more conventional bomber.

GarryB wrote:The US lies.

I get it.

When Foreign allied troops were found to be responsible for a US soldiers death in Iraq the investigation was halted and evidence was covered up.

The reason given was they did not want to embarrass their allies (the Polish forces).

If they will lie and hide such things that are important to their own people of course the will have no problem hiding things with rather more strategic impact like the shooting down of F-117s or B-2s.

If we had a real media in the west instead of the corporate stooges we have today then their might be some real independent investigations, but we have no such things.

Don't be upset that I believe only one F-117 was shot down... I have been wrong before about a lot of things, and I am not believing the US because I respect them... rather because I don't believe they would be able to successfully cover something like that up... someone would squeal... I hope.

I has no big impact when you speak about 1 or 2 or even 10 where destroyed this wouldn't change the reality at all, what happened, happened.

The only difference if it was 1 or 10 is a forum dick contest, but if we would speak reality the perception would change and a morality downer for western militaries and especially US, if we would reveal all casualties and losses of American soldiers and warmachinery, because today we have a such profound US military propaganda that they build almost or undestructable magical Depleted Uranium, Chobham and other magic words for naive fanboys, this would have a significant change also on political level.

The US MIC and Military have a tradition of Propaganda through Hollywood where USA is always the good guy and they will send 100 soldiers just to rescue one, that they only fight against unjustice and dictatorships, that Military hardware of the US is the highest technology the world has ever seen and every US grunt has all that stuff available at all time, that Tanks are the best, Jets are the best, Ships are the best and has no opponents with even similiar technology or effeciency. In every movie where anything that has action scenes or the Military in it, you see big screens almost Holographic, that every little meaningless soldier just can call in an airstrike for any kind of threat....etc.

You all seen this propaganda movies, you all know they portray their enemies as ville terrorists,nazis,communists and whatever.

This is all Propaganda that has been "educating" generations since the WW2 and how blatant it often is, it is still striking effective in manipulating peoples view of the "reality".

If we would reveal all those losses and counter all those profound infested propaganda in peoples heads, the will of everydays US citizen would drop to send people to war, other militaries would also have the opportunity to actually use same propaganda to demorilize those who are so eager for war which are mainly naive fools.

The point is the clearer the picture of war is the lower the will for war is. And Americans have never seen a real war on their soil, they are brainwashed since decades that USA has almost no losses and the other one is always the bad guy so lets kill him.
This is a result of a society that has been brainwashed and artificially addled by the political system, for empirial reasons.

Nice   

Russia to start testing new A-100 long-range radar detection aircraft in 2017

The testing of A-100 AWACS aircraft will be started in 2017
Russian Aviaton » Tuesday August 19, 2014 02:01 MSK

The state-testing of advanced A-100 Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft (AWACS) will be started in 2017, ITAR-TASS reports with reference to Deputy Director General of Vega Concern, Anatoly Kraylyuk (Vega is responsible for development of A-100 aircraft).

According to him, the production of aircraft equipment is underway; the state testing of these components will be started in 2016.

"According to the program schedule, the state testing of the aircraft will be started in 2017", - he said.

It was reported earlier that A-100 will be derived from Il-476 aircraft (Il-76MD-90A).

It seems that second Il-476 is meant for A-100

LINK

Il-76MD-90A “Ulyanovsk” to Be Transferred to Taganrog Aviation Scientific-Technical Complex

AEW Il-76MD-90A entitled “Ulyanovsk” is today transferred to Taganrog Aviation Scientific-Technical Complex named after Beriev to create on its basis a prototype of promising aircraft with warning and control system A-100 “Premier”.

It was reported by TASS referring to “Aviastar-SP” – a company-manufacturer of the liner.

The aircraft successfully completed a flight test program in mid-November. Last test flight was conducted with the participation of representatives of the State Flight Test Center, who arrived from Moscow. To check the operation of the ship in difficult conditions, the landing was carried out in the dark.


http://rostechnologiesblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/21/il-76md-90a-ulyanovsk-to-be-transferred-to-taganrog-aviation-scientific-technical-complex/