Military Review

French "stealth frigate" are Russian radars

38
French frigate La Fayette could not hide from the Black Sea tracking station fleet, said a source in the power structures of the Crimea.


On Monday, the frigate La Fayette entered the Black Sea. It is built using stealth technology and is armed with anti-ship missiles.
As the agency’s interlocutor said, Russian radars see ships of this class hundreds of kilometers away.

French "stealth frigate" are Russian radars


The stealth technology stumbled when confronted with the Russian radio-electronic industry. The frigate La Fayette, while passing through the Bosphorus, "lit up" on the monitors of the radio engineering services of the Black Sea Fleet.
- stressed the source.

According to him, the radar escorted La Fayette. The observation ship is also attached to it.

The French frigate is heading for the eastern part of the Black Sea, presumably to the shores of Georgia.

In the Black Sea, La Fayette will not hide from us anywhere. We will see it accurate to the quay wall.
- added the agency interlocutor, transmits RIA News
Photos used:
https://twitter.com/YorukIsik
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Andrey160479
    Andrey160479 20 November 2017 12: 09 New
    19
    It will become invisible when it goes to the bottom.
    1. Logall
      Logall 20 November 2017 12: 13 New
      10
      For every tricky butt there is something With a screw! The invisibility cloak did not help! Better conjure ...
    2. Stas157
      Stas157 20 November 2017 12: 14 New
      +6
      We will see it to the quay wall

      Well, the Turkish spotters first saw him, and then messages from the Crimea already appeared. And why watch it, the Su-24 must be sent faster with the Khibins!
      1. St Petrov
        St Petrov 20 November 2017 12: 18 New
        +1
        There is no Khibin at 24, the Su-24MP will flood the air with interference without Khibin.

        Who knows what was on that Dry.
        1. Stas157
          Stas157 20 November 2017 12: 23 New
          +5
          Quote: c-Petrov
          There is no Khibin at 24, the Su-24MP will flood the air with interference without Khibin.

          Who knows what on that Dryer was

          Yes, it was a joke!)) In that story with Cook, the Su-24 was paired with the Bastion. While the Su-24 simulated an attack on a shaver, the American Bastions shone with rays.
          1. x.andvlad
            x.andvlad 20 November 2017 12: 31 New
            +6
            Well, then the eloquent journalists added color. Maybe they scared the Americans, when they "went wrong", but how fatal it was for them is a question.
            The fact is that in fact the KHIBINA SYSTEM ON THE SU-24 HAS NEVER BEEN INSTALLED. This is stated on the website of the developer and manufacturer of this system, "KRET".
            By the way, Khibiny is currently installed on the Su-30, Su-34 and Su-35, so the famous attack of the Su-24 bomber in April in the Black Sea on the destroyer Donald, who allegedly used the Khibiny, is nothing more than ...
            Even if the Khibiny were installed on the Su-24 or it would not be a Su-24, but a Su-35 with Khibina, almost nothing of what the media describe is unlikely to happen.

            The Khibiny complex is designed for radio direction finding of the probing signal of an irradiation source with subsequent distortion of the reflected signal parameters, namely for:
            delays in detecting the KREP carrier aircraft as an object of attack for the enemy;
            disguises the true object against the backdrop of false
            difficulties in measuring the distance to the object, its speed and angular position
            deterioration of the characteristics of the tracking mode "in the passage" when scanning the beam of the radar antenna
            increase in time and difficulty in capturing an object when switching to continuous radio direction finding
            i.e., to complicate the detection, target designation and tracking of targets by reconnaissance and air defense systems of the enemy.

            But that's not all.
            Against Donald Cook Khibiny is absolutely powerless. Any person who is even a little versed in radio engineering knows that in order to create noise for another transmitter, let alone completely suppress it, a transmitter of at least comparable power is needed. According to the technical characteristics of Khibiny, its power consumption is 3.6 kilowatts. Suppose Khibiny's efficiency is 100%, that is, all power consumption is equal to the radiation power. From the point of view of the laws of physics, this is not real, but for simplicity we will make this assumption. Thus, the power of the Khibiny transmitter is 3.6 kilowatts. Now let's see what Donald Cook has (USS Donald Cook).
            Firstly, it is the AN / SPY-1 radar, whose peak power can reach 6 megawatts. It is more than FIVE THOUSAND TIMES more powerful than Khibiny. Can Khibiny dazzle this radar?
            There is another smaller radar, AN / SPS-67, whose power is 280 kilowatts, which exceeds the power of the Khibiny by almost 80 times. This radar is designed to detect and track low-flying targets.
            There are other radars, but the most important thing is that Donald Cook has his own electronic warfare system, called AN / SLQ-32
            It was possible to provide such capacities because the destroyer has four General Electric LM2500 gas turbines with a total capacity of 75 megawatts. It is impossible to establish anything like this on any aircraft for obvious reasons. Therefore, from the point of view of electronic warfare, any aircraft, be it Su-24 or Su-35 against Donald Cook, is like a fly against an elephant. Donald Cook can easily make any plane deaf and blind, but Khibina has no chance to even create significant interference, so it’s argued that using Khibina you can turn off on-board computers and even engines
            - This, to put it mildly, is not true.
            1. Alex_Z10
              Alex_Z10 20 November 2017 13: 35 New
              +8
              Who ever writes this?
              Any person who is even a little versed in radio engineering knows that in order to create noise for another transmitter, let alone completely suppress it, a transmitter of at least comparable power is needed.
              Fuck noises for the transmitter. Need to dazzle receiver The power of the reflected signal is many times less According to the technical characteristics of Khibiny, its power consumption is 3.6 kilowatts.
              Any person who knows at least a little radio technology laughing
              Read about radar
            2. zulusuluz
              zulusuluz 20 November 2017 19: 42 New
              +2
              The funny thing is that the transmitter sent a signal to space, and the electronic warfare systems transmitted several thousand UFOs with different coordinates in response. And to cope with such a volume of goals, the performance of the “powerful radar” did not have enough ... Yes, and seeing several thousand flying airplanes in response to the screen, the soldier will at least feel uneasy.
          2. Scoun
            Scoun 20 November 2017 12: 46 New
            +5
            Quote: Stas157
            Quote: c-Petrov
            There is no Khibin at 24, the Su-24MP will flood the air with interference without Khibin.

            Who knows what on that Dryer was

            Yes, it was a joke!)) In that story with Cook, the Su-24 was paired with the Bastion. While the Su-24 simulated an attack on a shaver, the American Bastions shone with rays.

            The bastions didn’t shine through anything, they could “highlight” the Bastions, in general, Krasukha-90 worked out with a 4% probability or its variation, by the way its performance characteristics were classified and if the Khibiny were on the Su-24, then only as an auxiliary system.
            In general, there was a “Cook”, the Cook systems were furious and idle, the “Khibiny” for Baika and Bike, put out Cook from the ground and the Su-24 recorded everything that it could.
            1. Stas157
              Stas157 20 November 2017 14: 46 New
              +4
              Quote: Scoun
              The Bastions didn’t shine through anything; it was the Bastions that could “highlight” the target

              Well, I myself didn’t come up with the fact that Cook radiated from the coast with radars. The Bastion may additionally include the Monolith-B self-propelled over-the-horizon radar for detecting air and surface targets. And in the Crimea they are.
              True, at an over-the-horizon station, the strength of the reflected signal will still be less.
          3. ZVO
            ZVO 20 November 2017 15: 46 New
            0
            Quote: Stas157
            Quote: c-Petrov
            There is no Khibin at 24, the Su-24MP will flood the air with interference without Khibin.

            Who knows what on that Dryer was

            Yes, it was a joke!)) In that story with Cook, the Su-24 was paired with the Bastion. While the Su-24 simulated an attack on a shaver, the American Bastions shone with rays.


            Death Rays, yeah ...
            Kindergarten ...
            1. Stas157
              Stas157 20 November 2017 16: 05 New
              +3
              Quote: ZVO
              Death Rays, yeah ...
              Kindergarten ...

              Well, if you put any radar on your eggs, then it won’t seem enough.))
              1. ZVO
                ZVO 20 November 2017 18: 13 New
                +1
                Quote: Stas157
                Quote: ZVO
                Death Rays, yeah ...
                Kindergarten ...

                Well, if you put any radar on your eggs, then it won’t seem enough.))

                Each of us at any given time is irradiated from 1 to hundreds of radars located at different distances.
                Do you know the number of base stations in the city and their radiation level?
                And now compare the Monolith in the kwxitv case and 170 nautical miles ...
                What will burn out there? cerebellum?
                1. Stas157
                  Stas157 21 November 2017 07: 38 New
                  +2
                  Quote: ZVO

                  Each of us at any given time is irradiated from 1 to hundreds of radars located at different distances.
                  Do you know the number of base stations in the city and their radiation level?

                  The transmitter power of the cell tower is not higher than 50 watts even in the village, and in the city less than 10 watts. Nevertheless, there is a severe restriction on TB so that a person cannot get into a radius closer than 25 m. Do you think this is accidental?
                  There are much more powerful antennas for broadcasting companies, but they are at high altitude and their power is evenly redistributed over the area.
                  The power of an air defense radar, tens of kilowatts, can be focused at one point. These are completely different things.
      2. Logall
        Logall 20 November 2017 12: 19 New
        +8
        Quote: Stas157
        Well, the first Turkish spotters saw him

        Of course, he passed through their strait ... He could be felt there!
      3. 79807420129
        79807420129 20 November 2017 12: 20 New
        +7
        Quote: Stas157
        What to watch, the Su-24 must be sent faster with the Khibiny!

        So the Colleague, he doesn’t go to our shores, but to Georgia, they will sing him "there", and we did not invite him, come into our territorial waters and he will be Suliko with Khibiny and Khor with Bastion. hi
      4. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 20 November 2017 15: 42 New
        0
        The French frigate La Fayette is first a warship
        at the entrance to the Black Sea, they copied it with a 3G radar
        and as befits a warship, it worked there radar radiation alarm
        - all hatches lifted automatically
        - increased pressure in all compartments
        so to speak ship ready to get tough
        I think after this shell shock we will not see him soon
      5. Krabik
        Krabik 20 November 2017 23: 59 New
        0
        IL-2 attack aircraft must be sent, here the French just run for the pampas ...
    3. Buffet
      Buffet 20 November 2017 16: 34 New
      0
      Well, yes ... Only now in Russia they build ships using this technology.
      1. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 20 November 2017 17: 32 New
        0
        our ships are armed with ZG radar and anti-ship missiles Onyx
        and our opponents constantly hear an alarm about the exposure of our radar
      2. Krabik
        Krabik 21 November 2017 00: 02 New
        +1
        Our more invisible than the French, especially Kuznetsov stealth-invisible%)

        Well, boats with stealth contours hiding behind the waves in the Black Sea;)
  2. x.andvlad
    x.andvlad 20 November 2017 12: 10 New
    +1
    Also, a surveillance ship is “fastened” to it.
    But this is correct. Let yourself feel like "away".
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 20 November 2017 12: 32 New
      0
      Quote: x.andvlad
      Also, a surveillance ship is “fastened” to it.
      But this is correct. Let It Feels Like Away

      but it’s very interesting ... who was “fastened ??" .... it should be a surface ship .... who?
  3. amr
    amr 20 November 2017 12: 11 New
    +1
    would have laughed at it with a blanket stuffed with a Crimean bull-calf!
  4. aszzz888
    aszzz888 20 November 2017 12: 12 New
    +1
    ... yeah, the praised invisibility ... WE SEEED such! laughing
  5. Observer2014
    Observer2014 20 November 2017 12: 13 New
    +3
    radars accompany La Fayette. Also, a surveillance ship is “fastened” to it.
    And under water "Krasnodar" does not sleep laughingThis is not even 2008! The code "Moscow" went out to the NATO team twice. Now, the "Bastion" with radar guidance to drive these friends across the Black Sea can be from the Crimea.
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 20 November 2017 12: 14 New
    +3
    Exploring these stealth ships is useful. It would be nice to "study" the F-35. In all forms ... wassat
    1. aszzz888
      aszzz888 20 November 2017 12: 21 New
      +3
      Mountain shooter Today, 12: 14
      Exploring these stealth ships is useful. It would be nice to "study" the F-35. In all kinds ... wassat

      hi ! ... I think it’s better shot down and on the ground ...
  7. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 20 November 2017 12: 15 New
    +1
    French "invisible frigate" are Russian radars

    The main thing is that he is invisible to the French. It's like in a children's game - he closed his eyes and thinks that no one sees him, which means he hid.
    1. novel66
      novel66 20 November 2017 12: 20 New
      +3
      it’s some disgusting thing - to violate children's ideas about the world. could keep silent
  8. Coconut
    Coconut 20 November 2017 12: 15 New
    +1
    La Fayette forgot to send a telegram to Crimea .. "I won’t find me in the house" laughing
  9. Non liberoid Russian
    Non liberoid Russian 20 November 2017 12: 19 New
    +1
    stealth ... we do not see it only for horses or Papuans from Africa-Asia-Oceania ... for this it was created, for weak opponents
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 20 November 2017 12: 34 New
      +1
      Quote: Not a liberoid Russian
      stealth ... we do not see it only for horses or Papuans from Africa-Asia-Oceania ... for this it was created, for weak opponents

      Well, yes, well, yes .... but our Gorshkovs and Grigorovichs are not visible to us? fool ... everyone sees everything - a matter of identification !!!!! ... fishermen? ... barge? .... yachts? ...
      or warship .... in this "invisibility"
  10. totoro21
    totoro21 20 November 2017 12: 54 New
    +2
    No one ever said that such ships would be invisible to radar (except for journalists). EPR decreases from hundreds of square meters. meters to tens, but still remains very significant. The advantages of stealth ships (as well as aircraft) are that they are detected at a shorter distance. Well, even harder to identify. That is, Lafayette can be confused with some sort of fishing tub.
  11. Enoch
    Enoch 20 November 2017 13: 32 New
    0
    No wonder with such a strong "blue" glow.
  12. ZVO
    ZVO 20 November 2017 15: 50 New
    +2
    Well, all the fools were noted ...
    The truth about any additional corner reflectors did not write ...
    Which on almost all stealth ships and planes are set deliberately and specially in peacetime ...
    And in large quantities.
    That even a low-power radar of a fishing seiner would see and not run into a board ...

    But our idiots do not need it.
    And the boobies from the defense of Crimea and some agency - all the more. They no longer need a brain.
    They are already in the Crimea - they want to rest ..
  13. Cananecat
    Cananecat 20 November 2017 15: 59 New
    0
    For not .... here you are not there)))
  14. datur
    datur 21 November 2017 01: 18 New
    0
    OUR HIM TYPE OIL FOR CRUISSAN IS NECESSARY !!!! wink