You never heard of Meteor for AEW&C? And the Rafale with its active cancellation in the earth clutter due to the mountain will not be detected by an AEW&C.
And AEW&C control Chinese fighters, You would be hard pressed to get near the AEW&C. The Same as French AEW&C and fighters
Who should we believe, a high-ranking military officer who has tested the system and measured his performance or a fan boy in denial with no proof?
Are you saying that the Rafale could fly in the valley, evade ground radar, and then jam AWACS radars with electronic warfare capabilities?
Let's assume it works in theory, but remember, the KJ500 is the fourth generation of Chinese AWACS with AESA radar, and jamming it won't be easy
Besides, putting an HQ17 in the valley would solve all our problems
Last edited:
Active cancellation is not jamming, it's a technique to make the echo of the aircraft disappear on the radar scope. The energy needed to do that is much lower than the energy needed to jam. The main difficulty is to process it very quickly. Here is a link to an article written by the Chinese on this subject:
Active cancellation analysis based on the radar detection probability
Otherwise, it's easy for the Rafale to destroy HQ17.
Last edited:
Welcome to the frog fantasy. No one else claims what the frogs fanboys make up. modern radars aren't single frequency carrier wave analogue
Last edited:
The AN/APR-50 utilises an ECM technique known as ’active cancellation’ - this stealth technique employs an array of antennas to transmit a signal which is out of phase within coming radar emissions, thus effectively reducing the intensity of the reflected returns through interference. If the emitted interference signal, travelling in the same direction, is exactly matched in terms of amplitude, period and phase, to the reflected radar signal, then the threat radar would not be able to detect any return signal, thus failing to ’see’ the aircraft. This is called destructive interference. In terms of applying such ECM techniques to an airborne platform, incoming signals will have many different characteristics of amplitude, period and phase, which, combined with the many different directions of reflection, resulting in phase/amplitude shift, will make true ’cancellation’ extremely difficult to achieve in the real world. It is more likely that the characteristics of the strongest incident signal would be selected by the system processor for destructive interference.
Operational status
The Northrop Grumman Company designation of the system is ZSR-63. In January 1993, Northrop Grumman was awarded a US$117 million contract to continue development of the AN/APR-50. Northrop Grumman was also awarded US$53.9 million to carry on with ESM development, including extension of the frequency range. It is believed that this was originally for Band 2 and the extension was to cover Band 4 from 500 MHz to 1 GHz. While it is believed that baseline versions of the system failed to meet operational expectations, software changes completed during the second quarter of 1998 were incorporated to address these problems. AN/APR-50 systems installed in Block 30 aircraft are described as ’fully capable in Bands 1 to 4’. Additional software upgrades were implemented during 2001-2002.
Attachments
And the UK is working hard to catch up with the Rafale with the concept of "digital stealth".
EUROFIGHTER TYPHOON: DIGITAL STEALTH
To be honest, my college major is mechanical engineering, and I know little about Electromagnetism. I understand that the active stealth technology is to use electromagnetic cancellation technology to make the aircraft equivalent to a non reflector, which is also an electronic interference system in itself. For example, the ZSR-63 electronic warfare equipment on B2 uses this principle
But in China, where AESA radar is widely used, are you sure it can keep up with the speed of radar frequency and waveform transformation? Moreover, there is far more than one radiation source scanning towards you on the battlefield, with LPI mode equipped radar, and gust fighter planes can even be difficult to determine if they are locked in
Last edited:
That is a Chinese paper link. They mean DRFM. Active cancelation is an obsolete subset of DRFM. As you say, with modern frequency hopping and LPI, The game changed a long time ago.
Radar jamming and deception - Wikipedia
The B-2 info using the term Active cancelation, isn't from an official source and is the reason he didn't use a link. Again they mean DRFM
Bill Sweetman invented the term for the Rafale in 1997. Chaltirl didn't answer him, so in his mind that gave him enough to make a story saying it had active cancelation. He didn't deny it. He just looked at him as if he was an idiot. The rest is fanboy history.
"1997 interview that Spectra uses "stealthy jamming modes that not only have a saturating effect, but make the aircraft invisible... There are some very specific techniques to obtain the signature of a real LO [low-observable] aircraft." When asked if he was talking about active cancellation, Chaltiel declined to answer."
"1997 interview that Spectra uses "stealthy jamming modes that not only have a saturating effect, but make the aircraft invisible... There are some very specific techniques to obtain the signature of a real LO [low-observable] aircraft." When asked if he was talking about active cancellation, Chaltiel declined to answer."
Total 'Active Cancellation' against modern AESA radars is literally impossible. That's why SPECTRA is optimized to cancel the most potent signal which produces biggest spike. That reduces Rafale's RCS considerably.
Like or not, French are ahead in this game of 'active stealth' vis-a-vis US/Russia/China/UK etc.
What is really funny, is his B-2 info on the now obsolete AN/APR-50 is 12 years behind. The new tech is on the B-2 and F-35
As to Rajput. It's hard enough reading his nonsense. Giving any belief in it, would be reflecting on you.
16 Feb 2012
"BAE Systems has won a contract from Northrop Grumman – Aerospace Systems to provide Electronic Support Measure (ESM) systems for use on all 20 B-2 Spirit bombers, marking BAE Systems’ presence on all three of the U.S. Air Force’s Low Observable platforms; the F-22, F-35 and B-2 aircraft.
Northrop Grumman selected BAE Systems in a competitive bid process over the incumbent and industry’s top Electronic Warfare providers, to replace the aircraft’s 30-year-old legacy AN/APR-50 ESM system. The system, in conjunction with the radar warning receiver, detects electronic threats encountered by the B-2 and provides situational awareness of detected threats to its air crew.
As to Rajput. It's hard enough reading his nonsense. Giving any belief in it, would be reflecting on you.
16 Feb 2012
"BAE Systems has won a contract from Northrop Grumman – Aerospace Systems to provide Electronic Support Measure (ESM) systems for use on all 20 B-2 Spirit bombers, marking BAE Systems’ presence on all three of the U.S. Air Force’s Low Observable platforms; the F-22, F-35 and B-2 aircraft.
Northrop Grumman selected BAE Systems in a competitive bid process over the incumbent and industry’s top Electronic Warfare providers, to replace the aircraft’s 30-year-old legacy AN/APR-50 ESM system. The system, in conjunction with the radar warning receiver, detects electronic threats encountered by the B-2 and provides situational awareness of detected threats to its air crew.
Last edited:
Americans failed at Active Cancellation(on B-2), yet the French succeeded(on Rafale)...that is quite telling. Isn't it my Aussie mate?
And I gave this example only to respond to @Optimist assertion that only the French claimed this kind of technique, an assertion which is therefore false with the American and even UK counter-examples.
MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions
2-3 days. Extremely hard to believe, Sir. I just mentioned IAF's doctrinal musings. Personally, I don't trust IAF to accomplish & maintain air-superiority over Pakistani airspace within 2-3 weeks, & that too not without getting half-of-IAF fighters destroyed themselves. IAF might have the...
MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions
@vstol Jockey @Ashwin @Nikhil is it possible for spectra to acheive active cancellations against an aesa radar? There was discussion on this started by @BMD here's the link... Why active cancellation vs stealth is a myth • US approach is pure stealth...why? . US stealth technology is...
MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions
@vstol Jockey @Ashwin @Nikhil is it possible for spectra to acheive active cancellations against an aesa radar? There was discussion on this started by @BMD here's the link... Why active cancellation vs stealth is a myth • US approach is pure stealth...why? . US stealth technology is...
MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions
@vstol Jockey @Ashwin @Nikhil is it possible for spectra to acheive active cancellations against an aesa radar? There was discussion on this started by @BMD here's the link... Why active cancellation vs stealth is a myth • US approach is pure stealth...why? . US stealth technology is...
MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions
@vstol Jockey @Ashwin @Nikhil is it possible for spectra to acheive active cancellations against an aesa radar? There was discussion on this started by @BMD here's the link... Why active cancellation vs stealth is a myth • US approach is pure stealth...why? . US stealth technology is...
He can think whatever he wants, but the fact of the matter is French have succeeded in implementing Active Cancellation on-board their fighter and now the entire world wants it. US tried it before on B-2 but they failed. But that did not mean that they have stopped working on it. In fact, Russians, Brits, Americans and wait a minute even Indians are now seriously working on Active Cancellation
But you French are the pioneers of this tech, no doubt!
When the Americans do it, it works and is a game-changer that is only capable thanks to American exceptionalism.
When non-Americans do it, it's a fantasy and is invalidated by the laws of physics and it will never work.
This is because the laws of physics are actually the laws of magic. The rule is simple: if an American tries something, it works. If a non-American tries the same thing, it fails. It's really easy to understand.
DARE! On our GaN ASPJ/HBJ pods.
Also, Tejas MK2 is supposed to have Rafale's SPECTRA like integrated EW suite mimicking most of its capabilities.