Unfiled network capabilities of Su-30СМ and Su-35С. Is there a chance to catch up with a bunch of F-35A and IBCS?

The reason for the next high-profile and pathos PR campaign of Lockheed Martin Corporation in the West European and American media spaces was the uninteresting details of the US Air Force’s Orange Flag Evaluation 19-2 exercises held in June at 2019 training grounds near Palmdale (California) and El- Paso (Texas, at Fort Bliss Military Base). According to defensenews.com and competent sources at Lockheed Martin headquarters, the highlight and key element of these exercises is the multi-functional X-NUMX F-5A Lightning II fighter, which demonstrated the ability to transmit tactical airborne information the situation at the ground command post of the IBCS (Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System) integrated control system for anti-aircraft missile systems.




The concept of using tactical fighters as a "mini AWACS" will provide greater flexibility and survivability of air defense systems in modern theater of operations


In this case, we are talking about using F-35A as an inconspicuous aerial platform for radar and optoelectronic reconnaissance, as well as target designation, which scans missile-hazardous low-altitude airspace areas (inaccessible for "monitoring" by AN / TPS-75 and AN / MPQ- radars 53 / 65) for the appearance of tactical missiles, small UAVs and other means of air attack, using its own anti-interference radar AN / APG-81 and the optical-electronic sighting system EOTS. Information packets with the coordinates of the detected targets are immediately transmitted via the secure Link-16 or MADL radio channels to the operator terminals of the IBCS CP system, where further target distribution between the Patriot PAC-3 anti-aircraft missile batteries takes place.

Undoubtedly, this concept of using the F-35A fighter as the “mini AWACS”, which provides for the early interception of low-altitude cruise missiles of the enemy beyond the radio horizon, can significantly increase the combat stability of the Patriot PAC-3 air defense system during massive missile attacks by the enemy, as well as minimize damage caused to concealed strategic targets. At the same time, the Patriot’s battery participating in the cover will not need to use the E-3C / G “Sentry”, which is less operational and more vulnerable to enemy air defense systems, which in a certain tactical situation will save the lives of pilots and operators of heavy and clumsy AWACS.

Despite the fact that Scott Arnold, deputy president of Lockheed for integrated air defense and missile defense, and Dan Verville, general manager of Northrop Grumman, described this concept as “a new word in the functioning of the network-centric defensive systems of the US Armed Forces”, significant developments in this area were tested by specialists from the military-industrial corporations Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, as well as representatives of the US Navy back in September 2016. We are talking about the successful training interception of a Beechcraft MQM-107 aerial target located outside the radio horizon using an ultra-long-range anti-aircraft guided missile RIM-174 ERAM (SM-6) launched from the LLS-1 USS Desert Ship specialized ground-based launch system (stationary ground version) launcher Mk 41). Target designation for this missile was not issued by the ground-based illumination radar, but by the airborne radar AN / APG-81 of the F-35A fighter.


Launch of the SM-6 anti-aircraft missile from the LLS-1 USS Desert Ship specialized ground-based launch system


The following question arises: do tactical aviation and the Russian Aerospace Forces anti-aircraft missile troops using hardware and software that ensure the use of the Su-30SM / 1, Su-35S and Su-57 multi-functional fighters as full-fledged AWACS and airborne platforms, capable of providing comprehensive air defense calculations to air defense systems without involving A- 50U?

The final answer to this question can not be given by any expert community, not to mention the ordinary military-analytical publications of Runet. Nevertheless, one thing is certain - there is a reserve, and it is very significant.

The potential is hidden in the on-board communication terminals K-DlAE and airfield complexes NKVS-27


So, for example, the Su-27СМ / СМ3, Su-30М2, Su-30СМ and Su-35С multipurpose fighters, representing the most numerous “backbone” of the VKS tactical fleet, have K-DLAE, K- terminals for coded voice communications and exchange of tactical information DLUE and K-DLI operating in the frequency range from 0,96 to 1,215 GHz. At the same time, radio channels are used, protected by both the Reed-Solomon code and frequency tuning, which puts these communications equipment almost on a par with the terminals of the American Link-16 network. And most importantly, in all this stories the fact that NKVS-27 aerodrome complexes developed by the Polet scientific-production enterprise and which are simplified domestic analogues of the American IBCS system are used as ground communication stations with these terminals. This is where the whole snag lies.



The modernization of the element base of the NKVS-27 airdrome systems, consisting in the introduction of specialized data exchange buses, is fully capable of ensuring synchronization of Su family fighters with the automated control systems of the Baikal-1M and Polyana anti-aircraft missile brigades already in service -X4M1. " They will relay the target designation from the Su-30СМ and Su-35С airborne sensors to the workplaces of the S-300В4 and S-350 Vityaz and S-400 Triumph air defense systems. It remains only to find out whether work is underway to interface the NKVS-27 airfield stations with Baikals and Polyany.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Fayter2017 8 August 2019 15: 13 New
    • 6
    • 9
    -3
    It remains only to find out whether work is underway to pair the airfield stations NKVS-27 with Baikals and Polyany.

    It is not necessary, who needs it knows, and so:
    - Chatterbox - a find for the spy!)
    1. meGrail 8 August 2019 16: 49 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      How tired of such comrades, in every sentence about "secrecy", "whoever needs it knows that" !!
      With such success, we will soon degenerate into news like:
      "In part A, located in city B, Private C honorably completed elements of combat training on the new secret weapons E"
      Do not know what to say - be silent. And all the secret things will never fall into the open debate.
      1. vik669 8 August 2019 17: 02 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        So let's hope that all the secret things will never be in the public domain for readers of Murzilka for adults but ... boys!
      2. VO3A 11 August 2019 00: 01 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        The author is well done, the article is gorgeous, that's just too much optimism, he wants to believe ... But there is nothing ....
    2. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 24 New
      • 0
      • 4
      -4
      You don’t even understand what is at stake ... The author of the article gives out the wish for the possible real ... We do not have such opportunities, and are not expected ... You can portray something, but for a separate task ... We do not have system possibilities, we don’t even have the concept of network-centric systems at all ... We won’t pull them, they are vulnerable to electronic warfare systems and therefore we don’t need them ... Here is our advanced concept ...
      1. Gogia 13 August 2019 21: 28 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Read about the Mig-31 and its radar - this is the first aircraft in the world that was connected by a special channel to air defense systems, and also had communication with other aircraft in the field of view of the system. I think this topic continues ...
    3. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 51 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      There is no chance and do not dream ....
      1. Vlad.by 13 August 2019 09: 37 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Well, yes, there was no Barrier on the Mig-31, the command center was not issued ...
        But isn’t this the task discussed in the article?
        And what's the difference, on the ground or in the air is a receiver of information.
        Again, does the A-50 exist?
        Or from it the secondary does not get to Baikal?
        Unlike the American concept of network-centrism, where everyone passes information to everyone, we have the concept of centralized management.
        And far from the fact that it is worse.
        In any case, more realizable and reliable.
        1. VO3A 13 August 2019 11: 26 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          Well, you are clearly fantasizing ...
          Unlike the American concept of network-centrism, where everyone passes information to everyone, we have the concept of centralized management.

          They have one and the other together, it’s obvious ... But we do not have anything similar except in air defense ... And sort out the network-centric approach, at least read the Wiki .... And you’re talking about such nonsense!
  2. _Ugene_ 8 August 2019 15: 20 New
    • 7
    • 4
    +3
    the article is actually about what we don’t have, but it could be, in general, a dream
    1. Wolverine 9 August 2019 18: 47 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: _Ugene_
      the article is actually about what we don’t have, but it could be, in general, a dream

      That's just about anything, not a great strategist, but I can hardly imagine that some kind of fu-35 will impressively be in our air layers and pass the info right and left, the detection station will work for 300 km and its diapers are already full, I think 3 seconds he will think.
      1. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 56 New
        • 0
        • 5
        -5
        Yes, imagine, and we are in the full task, looking for an asymmetric answer ...
    2. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 53 New
      • 0
      • 5
      -5
      We do not have this, and cannot be, we cannot do this and therefore we do not need it ...
  3. parusnik 8 August 2019 16: 01 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    It remains only to find out whether work is underway to pair the airfield stations NKVS-27 with Baikals and Polyany.
    ... Do you sell "Slavic cabinet?"
    1. Joker62 9 August 2019 04: 04 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Alas, an ordinary cabinet with skeletons is for sale! wassat
  4. Bongo 8 August 2019 16: 18 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Unfortunately, Eugene once again undertakes to write about what he absolutely does not understand. negative In general, another "Damantsevschina" wassat
  5. Aleksandr12 8 August 2019 16: 19 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    In my opinion this is a simple show off Lockheed, to beat the price of the plane and yourself. Type: "That's what we are geniuses, what a wonderful airplane we made ... Praise us and carry on your hands."
    On the MiG-31 there is such a function as a mini AWACS. I suppose that on Su the same was provided for such a function as target attack with the help of ground defense. Apparently we have such a mandatory function as radio communication with the earth, everyone knows about it, but no one talks about it.
    1. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 30 New
      • 0
      • 5
      -5
      Show off in your head, 5th generation airplanes do only for such opportunities ... That's why they don’t consider our Su-57 a 5th generation airplane - it is not used as part of network-centric systems, we simply don’t have them .. .There are developments with air defense but it is a narrowly focused system ...
      1. Photon 11 August 2019 22: 20 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Stop twirling
        What do you know about network systems? It seems less than nothing
        1. VO3A 11 August 2019 22: 54 New
          • 0
          • 3
          -3
          More than you, that's for sure! And I know that we do not have them, and there is not even a concept for their creation ...
          Stop twirling

          Don’t stink!
      2. Vlad.by 13 August 2019 13: 37 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        American network-centrism completely nullifies the "benefits" of stealth technology. You will not argue that the noise-like link16 is not detected by radio intelligence stations.
        Since there is radiation, and it is both from the source and from the receiver (protocols, with the exchange of information, there's nothing to be done) - what a stealth ...
        Well, a complex "network-centric" network is good when no one interferes with it.
        They already do not know how to work with cards, let's see what happens when the connected channels are cut off to them.
        In Syria, they have already raised a howl, and there it is all - they tested some electronic warfare equipment.
        Believe further in the infallible Amer network centrism
        1. VO3A 13 August 2019 14: 29 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          I don’t believe in him, in this American network-centrism. Moreover, I think that they have chosen not quite the right direction, there are others .... And where is the STELS technology? And all your conclusions are like empty slogans in the style of "Hurray" and no more ...
  6. Zaurbek 8 August 2019 16: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    C400 seems to be unable to receive info from fighter jets yet.
    1. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 32 New
      • 0
      • 5
      -5
      Better be silent ... This is not yours and not for you ...
    2. Gogia 14 August 2019 10: 43 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      On modern aircraft, starting with MIG-31, there is a special digital secure communication channel for transmitting / receiving target designation data. This concept was not developed now, but at the end of the 70s. And they will not remove it from planes - that's for sure. The type of channel / bandwidth / method of data encryption, etc. is changing. Standard exchange protocol. These data are transmitted / received from control centers of aviation connections / airdromes or air defense systems, they can also be received / sent by automated reconnaissance systems or drones. What more do you need. There’s just a bunch of iron there, here and here. It overshoots and sees each other. It is possible to tie it all in one knot. This is the work of people who are engaged in tactics, strategy and programming. Everything will be fine, otherwise why would the new RSL be done with high-speed data exchange between aircraft and ground and terrain mapping? It's just that Americans always do advertising loudly and to the whole world - they are in force. It’s stupid for us to shout about it. we are, anyway, on the defensive .. And disclosing all the data and capabilities of our systems is silly and childish.
      1. Zaurbek 14 August 2019 10: 55 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Americans and connect successfully.
  7. Operator 8 August 2019 16: 36 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    "Subtle airborne radar reconnaissance platform" - fried ice? laughing

    The Reed-Solomon code allows you to only catch errors in data transmission, it will not protect against EW interference from the word at all. The only way to protect it is with a pointed communication channel using radar AFARs.
    1. Gogia 14 August 2019 17: 54 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      A directional channel through a satellite or a signal reflected from the ionosphere. Moreover, the transmission can be carried out by short but capacious data packets with interruptions and at different frequencies.
  8. meGrail 8 August 2019 16: 45 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    protected by Reed-Solomon code,

    A curtain.
    1. meGrail 8 August 2019 16: 55 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      If someone is not in the know - the Reed-Solomon code does not protect anything, it allows you to correct errors in binary code. And in general, encoding is not equal to encryption.
      Here the bourgeoisie https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/DataLinkProcessingAndManagement/Documents/Understanding_Voice+Data_Link_Networking.pdf - please read how it works, nobody breaks the rubbish about "secrecy" and "who knows who needs it"
      1. Chaldon48 8 August 2019 17: 09 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        Secrecy, it is only necessary when the information did not manage to one way or another poke open access. It is customary for us to sometimes secret from our own.
        1. meGrail 8 August 2019 17: 14 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          There is such a concept as Security Through Obscurity - this is how NOT to be done.
          Ideally, for security, all algorithms should be known, and only the password should be secret - then this will be a safe solution
          1. region58 8 August 2019 21: 46 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: meGrail
            Ideally

            Denied encryption. wink
      2. region58 8 August 2019 21: 42 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: meGrail
        Reed-Solomon code does not protect anything, it allows you to correct errors in binary code. And in general, encoding is not equal to encryption.

        Uh-huh. yes And that is precisely why it is still widely used in error-correcting coding. On the microwave links (FEC) and satellite communications as well. In fiber too. In short, there is redundant information everywhere for error correction.
  9. Compare, for example, a piece of meat and a piece of watermelon ....
    1) "In this case, we are talking about using the F-35A as an inconspicuous aerial platform for radar and optoelectronic reconnaissance, as well as target designation, which scans rocket-hazardous low-altitude sections of airspace (inaccessible for" monitoring "by AN / TPS-75 and AN radars / MPQ-53/65) for the appearance of tactical missiles, small UAVs and other means of air attack, using their own anti-jamming radar AN / APG-81 and the optical-electronic sighting system EOTS. "
    2) The K-DlAE / UE airborne communications complex and the NKVS-27 airborne communications complex, this is the COMMUNICATION on-board complex for exported (!) Front-line aircraft and the COMMUNICATION ground complex. Nothing else!. Designed for near and distant telephone and telecode radio communications of aircraft with each other and with military aviation control posts.
    There are no “radar and optical-electronic reconnaissance, as well as target designation," which scans missile-hazardous low-altitude airspace sections (inaccessible for “monitoring” by air defense radars) for the appearance of tactical missiles, small UAVs and other means of air attack, using their own noise-resistant radar and the optical-electronic sighting system "" of the Su-27SM / SM3, Su-30M2, Su-30SM and Su-35S multipurpose fighters, could not be laid down and was not laid down in the K-DlAE / UE and NKVS-27, because it just radio communication equipment with the purpose of forming speech and other information channels (channelization radio equipment).
    According to these channels, one can speak, sing songs, and transmit other information, the source of which can be various on-board and off-board (when relaying radio signals) sources.
    That is, in 1) we are talking about the intelligence capabilities of aircraft equipment in the interests of reconnaissance, air defense and other interested services outside the aircraft, and in 2) radio equipment.
    3) ACS of the type Universal-1E, Polyana-D4M1, Baikal-1ME will be able to interfacing with the aircraft on-board systems through these channels formed by K-DlAE / UE and NKVS-27 in case of them (Su-27SM / SM3, Su-30M2, Su-30SM and Su-35S ") equipment as platforms for" radar and optical-electronic reconnaissance, as well as target designation, "but for this you need to know if all these aircraft and (or) which of them are equipped relevant (general or private) equipment for radar and optoelectronic reconnaissance, as well as target designation.
    It is likely that now production aircraft have limited capabilities in this direction.
    These ACSs have communication channels with different launchers and airborne objects, and the issue of software interface and interfaces between channels, channel and terminal equipment is not so complicated.
    In particular, automatic control systems of the type Universal-1E, Polyana-D4M1, Baikal-1ME can be interfaced with on-board systems A-50 and many other ACS and PD systems.
    4) It remains to find out:
    - Are all of these aircraft and (or) which of them are equipped with the appropriate (general or private) equipment for radar and optoelectronic reconnaissance, as well as target designation? because the
    - work on interfacing airfield stations NKVS-27 and other means of communication with Baikals and Polyans is not complicated and secondary.
    1. alstr 9 August 2019 07: 32 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I will add that the unification of exchange protocols is part of the TOR for all air defense systems and aircraft since the adoption of the S-300.
      1. Gogia 14 August 2019 17: 55 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        In-in and I about the same ... It seems then we were ahead of the rest ...
    2. Chaldon48 9 August 2019 09: 08 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      Compare a piece of meat and watermelon or assume that there will be, "Baikal" try to place on the bottom of Lake Baikal.
    3. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 38 New
      • 0
      • 5
      -5
      Bravo, very professional ... But it's all primitive and narrow and does not have a hundredth of the capabilities of network-centric systems ... These are narrow, inconsistent, disconnected, inconsistent systems, each of which is individual and not universal ... In short, yesterday. ...
  10. rocket757 8 August 2019 21: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It is obvious that the aircraft created for the conditions of network interaction will remain a lame penguin without creating this same network infrastructure!
    1. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 42 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Pi_dos has long had it ... And they are increasing opportunities ... And the software is not bad, but just new, and they want more and more, but not everything turns out right away and the costs are huge ... And the fact that the penguin flies badly they are not the main thing, it’s only the seniors who we rave about with close air combat ..
      1. rocket757 11 August 2019 07: 05 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: VO3A
        Pi_ ndosov have it for a long time

        They create it!
        No one has a full-fledged network structure that can really provide what is needed. Work is underway and they will be ahead of everyone, most likely.
        "Lame Penguin" is a common expression, not specifically for the Yankees. It's just that they are the first, they create, experiment, they even have something !!! There is nothing to talk about the rest, especially about the statements of our representatives. All this still needs to be created and done in real life!
        1. Gogia 14 August 2019 17: 57 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          The most interesting thing is that this aircraft has a limited target detection radius and such a platform is suitable for tactical decisions in a small theater of war or against the Papuans.
          1. rocket757 14 August 2019 20: 52 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Gogia
            The most interesting thing is that this aircraft has a limited target detection radius and is suitable

            for this, the NETWORK is created !!! comprehensive, with elements of reconnaissance, guidance, and everything else! The effective area of ​​the aircraft is how far the NET gets!
  11. Bodipancher 8 August 2019 23: 25 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    From a technical point of view, this is not a problem. Air defense systems, AWACS aircraft integrate with each other, transmit targeting to each other and distribute targets. If there is a special tire, there is no problem receiving data from the fighter’s radar. In the same way, on the contrary: a fighter pilot can receive target designation from the same radars of S-400 systems and others.
    1. VO3A 10 August 2019 23: 46 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      And where to get this "special bus" if there is no unified concept, which means nothing fits ... Even UAVs cannot give direct target designation to combat systems ... Dream on ... We got stuck yesterday, in Syria, nothing, nothing we can do ...
      1. Bodipancher 11 August 2019 00: 00 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I’m not a military man, but my duty is related to the integration of various departmental information systems among themselves (and this is really a problem because each department makes an order for itself from different manufacturers). I think computer systems based on military equipment are built on similar principles, so I think that the problem is completely solvable, if there was a will and an appropriate technical task. The ability to integrate into new samples should be incorporated initially, in existing samples during modernization. Moreover, all manufacturers of military equipment are in one holding, which greatly simplifies organizational issues.
        1. VO3A 11 August 2019 00: 04 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          There is no will, not even understanding, we have such a stupid military leadership ... We can’t do anything in Syria, and they are introducing experience ... "To seize a bridgehead behind enemy lines to disrupt the deployment of his troops" - these stupid heads cannot be cured. ..We have all the teachings moronic in design and do not correspond to the modern war ...
  12. Vahe mardanyan 9 August 2019 11: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Could the AWACS aircraft be inconspicuous, does it radiate very powerfully?
    1. Nikolay Balashov 13 August 2019 19: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Here. Correctly. From the invisibility, the mini AWACS becomes "bright" and there is no need to use stealth.