The Air Force and the United States Marine Corps in pursuit of the radio potential of RTV Russia

19

The decimeter module RLM-D of the interspecific radar complex 55Ж6М "Sky-M"


The radio engineering troops of the Aerospace Forces of Russia are the key source of information about the tactical air situation for the anti-aircraft missile battalions, brigades and regiments of the VKS, as well as for the means of military air defense. The distribution of information obtained by radar detectors, separate radar of electronic reconnaissance and multi-element / multi-band complexes such as "Nebo-M", is carried out by means of automated control systems of anti-aircraft missile regiments "Polyana-D4М1" and "Baikal-1МE". The latter give the exact coordinates of the targets to the command and control points of the C-300PM1, C-300В / 4 and Buk-М1 / 2 / 3 systems in an already distributed configuration, which significantly reduces the response time of the air defense missiles to suddenly detected threats, and also eliminates the likelihood of simultaneous firing at one enemy object at once by several anti-aircraft divisions of several types.



The use of this technique is the main indicator of the fundamental level of network-centric linkage in the Russian army, especially in air and missile defense tasks. According to this criterion, our VKS do not lag behind the Ground Forces and the United States International Police, armed with the Patriot PAC-2 / 3 and SLAMRAAM air defense systems, which are connected into a single tactical network with the AN / TPS-59 / 75 surveillance radars, as well as by AWACS airplanes and airplanes through the radio link-16.

At the same time, there is such a criterion by which our airborne forces are significantly ahead of the units of radio intelligence and air defense of the SV, Air Force and the US Marine Corps. We are talking about the nomenclature of modern multifunctional radar stations for review, tracking and target designation related to the “interspecific” (RTR, air defense and civil and military air traffic control aviation) and intraspecific types. What do we observe among Americans?

At the arsenal of the US KMP in the middle 80-s Received a powerful high-altitude radar detector with active phased array decimeter D / L-band (frequency 1,215 — 1,4 GHz) AN / TPS-59 (known as GE-592 in KMP), which was later upgraded to AN / TPS-59 (V) xnumx. Modern computational facilities, as well as a large aperture area with a decent energy potential of this radar, allow 3 to start simultaneously tracing aerodynamic and ballistic means of an air attack at a distance of 500 km (instrumental range for large EPR targets). AN / TPS-740 (V) 59 is distinguished by a high target detection height in 3 km, with a solid time between failures in 152,4 hours. It is noteworthy that despite the low-frequency L-range of work, the resolution of the complex in range is 2000 meters. The list of the main disadvantages of the radar complex “GE-60” includes an extremely small scanning zone in the elevation plane, which is only 592 degrees. In the upper hemisphere of this radar, there is a huge funnel of the “dead zone” with the 20º sector, due to which air objects cannot be detected directly above the AN / TPS-140 (V) 59 position. Another negative factor for this radar is not the best way to work with ultra-small targets, the EPR of which is 3 — 0,01 м0,05. As you can see, this radar is not a unique product.

The second most common American surveillance radar can be considered a multipurpose decimeter AN / TPS-75 "Tipsy-75". Used today by the US Air Force "Tipsy-75" entered service with the American army in the distant 68 year. Even then, it was considered the most advanced radar due to the presence of a phased antenna array operating in the S-band (at frequencies from 2 to 4 GHz and with a wavelength of 15 — 7,5 cm). Compared to the outdated AN / TPS-43, the main trump card of this station was: big time between failures, high throughput (during digitization increased to 1000 simultaneously tracked targets), as well as higher accuracy. S-band work provides additional advantages in working on ultra-small targets. The instrumental range of the “Tipsi” reaches 450 km, and the target of the “fighter” type of the generation “4 ++” can be dialed at a distance 320 - 330 km and an altitude 30 km. Moreover, the AN / TPS-75 radar is the main ground-based targeting tool for the Patriot-PAC-2 / 3 anti-aircraft missile systems.

If the Americans have these complexes as the basis of the tactical ground-based electronic components of the SV, Air Force and ILC, then our Radio Engineering Troops of the VKS of Russia have several times a larger range of radar complexes, among which you can find products operating in all known wavelength ranges (from meter to centimeter), as well as intended both for high-altitude airspace scanning in a circular view mode, and for sectoral work in strictly fixed zones azimuth and elevation planes. These include a dedicated low-altitude / medium-altitude SART S-band 48YA6-K1 "reaching is-K1" multifunctional centimeter-looking radar and targeting 64L6 "Gamma S1" of L-the ranging radar, AWACS "enemy-D" (analogue of the AN / TPS -79), solid-state radar-APAA "Gamma-DE" all-altitude detector centimeter 96L6E C-band (for target designation radar SAM-C family 300PM1 / 400), and finally interspecific tri-band mobile radar system 55ZH6M "sky-M."

All of the above complexes, together, surpass the 2 main radar of the American army. Working in the C / X-band, the majority of domestic stations are ahead of American samples in accuracy of target tracking, as well as in the ability to detect "stealth" objects with ultra-low reflective surface. Moreover, radars such as BBO 96L6E or Gamma-С1, after appropriate hardware and software updates, are capable of direct targeting for missiles with active radar seeker systems. The modernization of these radars is enough for another two or three decades of service in the VKS.

The Americans do not have a full-fledged conceptual analogue of the interspecific Sky-M RLC, even at the level of a prototype. Of course, in contrast to this, you can put multifunction radar with AFAR AN / TPY-2 (tactical anti-missile warning system and control of anti-missile batteries "THAAD"), but due to the use of only X-band, the range of this station hardly reaches 900 — 1000 km Our 55Ж6М, built on a modular architecture, has an 3 high-potential radar module based on solid-state AFAR: RLM-M (meter range), RLM-D (decimeter range) and RLM-CE (centimeter range). The hardware of all modules is connected with the information field of the control booth of the KU RLK complex. In turn, KU RLK, using radio relay and cable lines, as well as a synchronization unit with third-party consumers "Gran-BVS" or a digital joint С1-FL-BI, can be integrated into the information network of the automated control system "Baikal-1МЭ", which transmits the coordinates of targets anti-aircraft missile units.

The conclusion about the uniqueness of the complex “Nebo-M” absolutely does not require a long analysis and comparison with foreign analogues. You can see it, for example, by instrumental detection range in the sector view mode, which is 1800 km for large aerospace targets called “BRSD”, a small-sized target with 0,1 2 EPR will be detected approximately at 260 - 280 km, which is 1,7 times better than AN / TPS-59. Hypersonic targets moving in the stratosphere at a speed of 17M (5 km / s) can be detected at an angle of up to 80 degrees relative to the complex, which the operators Tipsi-75 or AN / TPS-59 have not dreamed of; and the maximum height of the target to be detected at the time of the maximum elevation of the rays can reach 1200 km, which is 8 times higher than that of TPS-59! "Sky-M" easily copes with the tasks of detecting and tracking a wide range of ballistic targets, and therefore is considered a full-fledged mobile radar anti-ship missile systems, designed to work in a regional missile defense system. Developed by the Nizhny Novgorod Scientific-Research Institute of Radio Engineering (NIIRT), the 55ХХNNXММ “Nebo-M” complex began to actively enter the RTV system in 6. On the acquisition of the next set of "Sky-M" by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the Radio Engineering Forces of Russia, as part of the state defense order, 2015 of this year became known.

Judging by what is happening, the US Air Force and the International Maritime Commission are absolutely not satisfied with this, which is reflected in the active development of the 3DELRR (Three-Dimebsional Expeditionary Long Range Radar), 3-range "Expeditionary" radar projects and AN / TPS-80 G / ATOR (Ground / Air Task Oriented Radar, a radar designed to detect ground and air targets). The first project, owned by Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, is being carried out as part of the 52,7 $ 1 million contract of the United States Air Force to replace the aging Tipsy-75 surveillance radars. Initially, the conceptual work on the product was started at the beginning of the first decade of the 21st century in the design departments of Lockheed Martin. Competing with Raytheon and Northrop, this company offered its best practices on the radar of the future, and a full-size 3DELRR was developed as soon as possible.

However, there was an incident with the hacking of the company's servers in 2009, which, according to Western experts, led to the emergence of the promising Chinese UHF JY-26 “Skywatch-U” radar system. It is quite possible, because the antenna array of the Chinese radar is represented by similar convex receiving-transmitting modules with the final part based on a flat truncated cone (can be seen from the photos of the Zhuhai-2014 anniversary airspace). We saw similar PPMs on the 3DELRR layout from Lockheed Martin in 2013. Later, in the course of competitive "games", the project passed to Raytheon. Were applied: updated digital element base, a new form of MRP, as well as the “book” configuration of the aerial opening.

Currently, the 3 pre-production model of the new radar is undergoing assembly in the shops of Andover, Massachusetts; their operational readiness is expected to reach around the end of 2020. For such a solid period of time, Almaz-Antey and NIIRT can develop another promising radar, or significantly improve the algorithms of the software of existing BBO 96L6Е or Sky-M. Thus, the gap may become even more serious. Meanwhile, there is absolutely no reason to relax, because the 3DELRR is the 3-band radar of a fundamentally new generation. In particular, its receiving-transmitting modules will be made on the basis of an advanced semiconductor material - gallium nitride (GaN), which has increased heat resistance and resistance to mechanical loads. First of all, this indicates a significantly higher time between failures in comparison with PPM based on gallium arsenide (MRLS will be very reliable). Secondly, high temperature resistance will make it possible to increase the energy potential of the radar, which automatically expands its effective range from standard 350 - 400 km (on a fighter type target) to 500 - 600 km, of course, with a corresponding altitude of the latter.


Technical sketch of the promising 3DDELRR radar developed by Raytheon


It is known from open sources that a promising RLC will be represented by a single light antenna post based on several thousand anti-personnel missiles (more than 5 — 8 thousand), which will be transported by a six-axle truck with a specialized compact platform. It will also be placed 4-knnozhnaya platform in folded form for the operational installation of the antenna post. On the trailer to the truck, the generator of power supply of the radar complex and hardware controls / interfaces with various consumers will be transported via cable interfaces and the radio link Link-16. Considering the presence of only one “forwarding” 3DELRR radar module, it can be assumed that APMs will be divided into 3 subgroups operating in different decimeter and centimeter wavelengths (similar 2-band construction is embodied in the Chinese ship Type-346 MRLS). At present, it is known only about the centimeter C-band of the promising 3DELRR complex, designed to accompany the CC and precise targeting at a distance of up to 300 — 350 km; super-long-range detection modes will require the introduction of S- / L-bands. These ranges will allow the prospective concept from Ratheon to achieve the functionality of “Neb-M” in the list of operations performed on air objects. At the same time, the use of a single medium-sized antenna array is unlikely to provide an opportunity to work on targets at distances in 800 and more than kilometers. The 3DELRR, which is arranged “in the book”, will have excellent air transportability (surpassing the three massive antenna modules of the 55-X6М complex). This will be the main advantage of the American radar.

An equally interesting product is a mobile multifunction decimeter radar complex for the Marine Corps AN / TPS-80 G / ATOR. The first successful test of the radar, designed by Northrop Grumman, took place in March of 2013, and by the 2017 of the year, the station had reached operational alert. At the heart of the G / ATOR antenna web are all the same gallium nitride based PPM operating in the decimeter S-band (2-4 GHz). This range is not chosen by the manufacturer by accident. The 15-7,5 cm wavelength is ideal for use in the following modes: DRLO due to good atmospheric propagation, civilian and combat aviation (ATC) air traffic control, detection and targeting on small targets with 0,1 ESR and less square meters, as well as targeting interceptor missiles (missile and anti-missile missiles with active RGSN).


AN / TPS-80 G / ATOR


Small targets are also mentioned not by chance, because AN / TPS-80 is designed to replace five types of old, narrowly specialized radars — radar detectors for short and long range AN / TPS-62 / 63, radar for ATC AN / TPS-73 and counter-battery radar reconnaissance radars. AN / TPQ-36 / 37 Firefibder. G / ATOR successfully detects and accompanies artillery shells, mines and rockets of various calibers with a minimum radar signature. The wide range of operating modes and energy characteristics of this radar complex are comparable to the Israeli EL / M-2084 radar, which controls the Iron Dome anti-missile system.

Summing up our work, we can conclude that in terms of multifunctional radar systems for tactical airspace lighting for air defense / anti-missile systems of military air defense, as well as air defense VKS, the Russian radar from NRIITT and Almaz-Antey are significantly ahead of the US in most well-known indicators . Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and the U.S. Armed Forces are now in the role of overtaking. Nevertheless, the long delay on the previous design of the Neb-M and BBO 96L6 antenna arrays is very losing, and without the inclusion of GaN semiconductors or substrates based on low-temperature co-fired ceramics (LTCC) in the design, we can lose the “radar race” by the middle of 20's.

Information sources:
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-690.html
http://forum.militaryparitet.com/viewtopic.php?id=16957
https://vpk.name/news/87085_provedenyi_uspeshnyie_ispyitaniya_mnogocelevoi_rls_antps80_gator_v_kachestve_radara_pro.html
http://pentagonus.ru/publ/sostojanie_i_perspektivy_razvitija_amerikanskikh_nazemnykh_rls_dalnego_obnaruzhenija_vozdushnykh_celej_2016/18-1-0-2677
19 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    19 May 2017 05: 46
    long delay on the previous design of the antenna array "Sky-M"
    and BBO 96L6E is very losing, and without incorporating GaN-based semiconductors or substrates based on technology low temperature co-fired ceramics (LTCC) we can lose the "radar race" by the mid-20s
    . here the question is directly to Chubais ... where are you our "nanotechnologist", our LTCC and GaN semiconductors? and click the shutter ...
  2. +7
    19 May 2017 06: 10
    The radioengineering forces of the Russian Aerospace Forces are a key source of information about tactical air conditions ... The distribution of information received by radar detectors, individual radars of electronic reconnaissance and multi-element / multi-range complexes of the type "Sky-M" is carried out through automated control systems for anti-aircraft missile regiments Polyana-D4M1 and Baikal-1ME

    Eugene, and what does export option ACS "Baikal-1МЭ" in our radio engineering divisions? Also, I would like more detail about anti-aircraft missile brigades in the structure of the airborne forces. And this is at the very beginning of the article. fool By the abundance of "mistakes" your publications are just going through the roof. negative
    1. +3
      19 May 2017 07: 29
      Bongo-well, so correct his mistakes, please write your article-read with pleasure hi
      1. +3
        19 May 2017 09: 43
        Quote: Exorcist Liberoids
        Bongo-well, so correct his mistakes, please write your article-read with pleasure

        I would love to write, but I can’t, because I’m not able to compete with Eugene in the level of “patriotism”. lol Seriously, I don’t see the point of doing this, since I have written on these topics more than once. hi
      2. +4
        19 May 2017 12: 43
        Quote: Exorcist Liberoids
        fix his bloopers
        ]
        Blooper in article one, this statement that
        significantly ahead of the American in most known indicators. Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, and the US Armed Forces are now catching up.

        There are two types of people who underestimate a serious adversary ....
        “Urya” -patriot is certainly nice to read that we have small problems with the production technology of GaN and LTCC. Although, in fact, from the publication it is not clear why such dual-use technologies, which are in demand, including in civil ones, are not developed.
        But the main problem in radar is not this, but that already after Operation Desert Storm, most scientists agreed that another radar crisis had come. The enemy’s energy capabilities for jamming have exceeded by an order of magnitude the radar’s defense capabilities, not to mention anti-radar missiles.
        Therefore, now only one direction of development in radar technologies is possible - this is the creation of a hidden and low-potential radar field, the integration of active and passive reconnaissance systems with electronic warfare systems.
        Otherwise, the average combat time of modern radars will be no more than 10 minutes, i.e. the delivery time of the weapon, as every inclusion of powerful radiation is instant unmasking.
        Theoretical and even technical solutions for creating a hidden active radar field in Russia have been developed for a long time, even patented. But the modern defense industry is profitable to produce very expensive products. It needs a lot of investment in the development of GaN and LTCC technologies. Therefore, it is not profitable for industry and developers to develop radars in which there is no own transmitter (they can use any electromagnetic energy, including communication and navigation satellites), because they are a priori cheaper by at least 70%, and the trouble with new algorithms and software debugging is much more.
        1. +2
          19 May 2017 18: 00
          that another radar crisis has come. The enemy’s energy capabilities for jamming have exceeded by an order of magnitude the radar’s defense capabilities, not to mention anti-radar missiles.
          Therefore, now only one direction of development in radar technologies is possible - this is the creation of a hidden and low-potential radar field, the integration of active and passive reconnaissance systems with electronic warfare systems.

          Fig knows how these hidden fields and passive location based on signals from other sources will work in a serious war. They probably can also be crushed by interference. And other sources of radio signals may suddenly not be. In addition, a lot of what is visible from satellites. In my amateurish opinion, it would not be bad to have a spaced location with many cheap radiating antennas and one reception in a disguised position. But there will be complexity with the connection between them.
          1. +2
            20 May 2017 15: 01
            Quote: Falcon5555
            knows how these hidden fields and passive location based on signals from other sources will work in a serious war. They probably can also be crushed by interference.

            This is their advantage, in conditions of interference, the general energy background rises, which means that the correlation-basic algorithms of active-passive radar methods will work even more efficiently, almost at the level of superresolution. The main thing that would be enough computer performance.
            1. 0
              20 May 2017 16: 59
              I doubt that the algorithms will work better.
  3. +3
    19 May 2017 07: 04
    The Air Force and the United States Marine Corps in pursuit of the radio potential of RTV Russia

    Strange name for the article. The author apparently does not know that there are practically no mobile radars in the US Air Force, and they are unnecessarily necessary to Marines operating under the cover of aviation and sea radars.
    1. +5
      19 May 2017 09: 50
      Quote: zyablik.olga
      Strange title for the article.

      The main thing here is that the headline should be catchy, and the fact that the content is sometimes below any criticism is not important. In fact, mobile KMP radars were needed when the United States was preparing for an armed confrontation with the USSR, and the marines were more likely to get hit by Soviet front-line aircraft. To protect against this, the ILC purchased surveillance radars and the Hawk air defense system. Since then, a lot of water has flowed, although the radar in scanty amounts remained, SAMs have long been decommissioned. In general, this does not make much sense, since ILC operations always carried out together with carrier-based aircraft and warships on which there are powerful radars and long-range air defense systems.
  4. +2
    19 May 2017 07: 27
    Eugene hi now one people will come to the site and you and they will also poison fairy tales, wondering that their fu35 cannot be found, it is so invisible that both pilots in the garages and technicians and refuellers do not immediately see it! lol Where are we, "lapotnikov unwashed" !!!! lol
  5. +2
    19 May 2017 13: 37
    I wonder how you can get ahead of the United States in air defense of the airborne forces, if they basically do not have the airborne forces?
    1. +2
      19 May 2017 13: 54
      Quote: Walanin
      I wonder how you can get ahead of the United States in air defense of the airborne forces, if they basically do not have the airborne forces?

      But there is air defense in the USA, although of course the NORAD system is now sharpened for completely different tasks than 25 years ago.
      1. +1
        19 May 2017 14: 03
        Well, for example, they would be compared with Aegis. Do they have the basis all over the sea, or not?
        1. +3
          19 May 2017 14: 43
          Quote: Walanin
          Well, for example, they would be compared with Aegis. Do they have the basis all over the sea, or not?

          Air defense of the North American continent is based on stationary radars and interceptor fighters.
          North America Air Defense System (clickable) hi
          1. +1
            19 May 2017 16: 07
            Thanks for the link. Judging by that article, they just do not consider land-based air defense systems as something important. In principle, it is understandable why.
            1. +1
              20 May 2017 21: 47
              Dear, for the sake of interest, read what the United States can take to the air, it’s not only Avax and Sentry, there are special squadrons for radar combat. layered blow
              1. 0
                20 May 2017 21: 49
                In this vein, I would like to read and make clear that opponents and our measures for defense and counter-struggle can really
              2. 0
                21 May 2017 01: 27
                I know all this very well. Will you be able to repel an eLeaned strike? No, such a term does not exist in nature. What did you want to say? No.