Military Review

"To detect is not to shoot down": The US told whether the Russian air defense system will be able to neutralize the F-35 and F-22

135

Russia has deployed a Sky-M radar capable of seeing the fifth-generation F-22 and F-35 American stealth aircraft. However, "to see" does not mean "to bring down", Mark Episkopos, the author of an article for the American magazine The National Interest, is sure of this.


Russian radar stations "Sky-M" pose a threat to aircraft created using stealth technology, according to the Russian military, who deployed this type of radar in western Russia and Crimea, the author writes. They are capable of detecting aircraft and missiles at ranges of up to thousands of kilometers at high and medium altitudes. However, "detect" and "destroy" are different concepts.

In theory, Episkopos writes, the Russian Sky-M radars are capable of detecting incoming stealth aircraft F-22 and F-35, but this is only the first stage in destroying the target. After the stealth plane is found, it must be escorted, aimed a missile at it, and only then destroyed. Those. to neutralize an F-35 or F-22, the enemy must create a whole chain. It is worth knocking out one link from it and the chain will fall apart.

In addition, the author emphasizes, F-35 fighters do not fly alone and the Sky-M radar can become a "great target" for a high-precision missile. At the same time, the Russians have created a deeply echeloned air defense system that is quite difficult to overcome.

Thus, the statement by the Russians that the Sky-M radar and similar radars "see" American stealth aircraft is true, but this is only the first stage. Whether the Russian air defense will be able to neutralize the F-22 or F-35 squadron is a completely different question, which depends on many factors, sums up Episkopos.
135 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 25 May 2021 15: 44
    +30
    Mark Ekiskopos, Heaven M sees them, you admitted that. And now the news, the bomb: just now Putin VV: The tests of the C 500 complex are being successfully completed. Can you fly to Russia? good
    1. Anachoret
      Anachoret 25 May 2021 16: 13
      +21
      Even if they do, you can make a friendly bet) we bet on the spent rocket or two that we will shoot down the F35? ))
      throw the plane))
      1. Shurik70
        Shurik70 25 May 2021 16: 58
        -8
        Will the Russian air defense be able to neutralize the F-22 or F-35 squadron?

        In a conflict over a third-party territory (well, like, they noticed how Israeli F-35s invaded Lebanon in order to strike at Syria) - of course we won't. Because we will not shoot.
        But in a full-scale conflict, when there is a NATO-Russia war, having found a squadron, we just fucking with tactical nuclear weapons, and it doesn't matter there, a miss + (-) 100 meters is not critical
        1. Roman1970_1
          Roman1970_1 25 May 2021 17: 08
          +3
          well, like, we noticed how Israeli F-35s invaded Libya to strike Syria


          Yes, they fly to South Africa to bomb Syria, and sometimes to Antarctica.
          Learn geography. There they will teach where is Israel, where is Syria and where is Libya
          1. Shurik70
            Shurik70 25 May 2021 17: 12
            +5
            Quote: Roman1970_1
            Learn geography

            hi
            Pup.
            Fixed
        2. venik
          venik 25 May 2021 18: 02
          -1
          Quote: Shurik70
          well, like, we noticed how Israeli F-35s invaded Libya to strike Syria

          =======
          The question is: WHY is the Israeli F-35, like to strike at Syria, fly as much to Libya ??? belay
          Or is it "the cost of the exam" ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? what
          PS Well, everything else is correct! bully
          1. nov_tech.vrn
            nov_tech.vrn 27 May 2021 10: 59
            0
            Looks like a typo, they feel great in the Lebanese sky.
            1. venik
              venik 28 May 2021 20: 37
              0
              Quote: nov_tech.vrn
              Looks like a typo, they feel great in the Lebanese sky.

              =======
              "This" doesn't sound like a "typo"! "This" is more like "the costs of the exam" !!!
              PS My junior is a programmer (and very highly qualified). We took his upbringing very seriously! His wife (daughter-in-law) is also a woman very clever[b] [/ b] and "educated": (graduated from trade and economic) .... 5 years ago - they went on vacation: to Egypt. When the daughter-in-law heard that they were in Africa, she was shocked! "...This is the Middle East! What kind of Africa is this?... "....
              Here's another "victim of the exam" !!! request
        3. ck9999999
          ck9999999 25 May 2021 21: 31
          +2
          Why tactical? Even the old man-long-range air defense system S-200 was sharpened for the use of special ammunition in the event of a "star raid" of the enemy. Therefore, the B-52x armada is a thing of the past in Vietnam. That's it - the lafa is over, the bombers are only singles or, at most, in a couple.
          1. Al_lexx
            Al_lexx 26 May 2021 02: 33
            +2
            Quote: ck9999999
            Why tactical? Even the old man-long-range air defense system S-200 was sharpened for the use of special ammunition in the event of a "star raid" of the enemy. Therefore, the B-52x armada is a thing of the past in Vietnam.

            Including the S-200. We just had a mixed regiment, the so-called "special purpose", the Leningrad separate air defense army of the country (they covered the Pskov airborne troops, naval aviation and something else, little things). It consists of three C-75 and two C-200 divisions. All had missiles with special warheads. The S-200 is a bit more powerful, since they worked at high altitudes.
        4. Al_lexx
          Al_lexx 26 May 2021 02: 29
          +2
          Quote: Shurik70
          But in a full-scale conflict, when there is a NATO-Russia war, having found a squadron, we just fucking with tactical nuclear weapons, and it doesn't matter there, a miss + (-) 100 meters is not critical

          Something like that. Even when I was on duty (S-75), our division had six missiles with special warheads. Rough opportunity. Something like 0.5kT or so (I don't remember now). Undermining not lower than 5 km (set at a constructive level), so as not to hurt your troops and, in general, not to soil the ground. It was supposed to be used for priority group targets (bombers with nuclear weapons). Based on the parameter of the minimum height, the radius of 100% damage is slightly less than 5 km. Moreover, this is without taking into account the EM pulse (there is more), which all modern electronics, with its microchips, will burn out once and for all.
        5. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 26 May 2021 15: 57
          0
          Quote: Shurik70
          just fuck with tactical nuclear weapons, and it doesn't matter there, miss + (-) 100 meters is not critical

          Why is that? Why waste resources? We do not have so many TNW to throw it on nonsense. The exhaust from the engines remained hot, brutally unmasking exhaust) You just need to aim the rocket so that its guidance head reliably captures this very exhaust. Since the modern radar station sees the plane, it is possible to aim with such accuracy that even throwing traps will not give the plane anything. And F 35 will not be able to maneuver. Brick is brick)
          1. Shurik70
            Shurik70 26 May 2021 18: 37
            0
            Quote: Mikhail3
            We do not have so many TNW to throw it on nonsense.

            Just a few F-35s are worthy targets.
            First, they are expensive.
            Secondly, they can carry nuclear weapons.
            Saving several cities from a nuclear attack is a good enough reason to use special ammunition.
            1. Mikhail3
              Mikhail3 27 May 2021 09: 37
              0
              However, if they can be knocked down with a shovel, you must use a shovel) This is not a game, in reality TNW costs millions of working hours that cannot be restored.
      2. Intruder
        Intruder 25 May 2021 17: 57
        0
        Even if they do, you can make a friendly bet) we bet on the spent rocket or two that we will shoot down the F35? ))
        Eh, young man ... do you still think that adult uncles across the Ocean will leave their pilots in the F-35 cockpits, without RTR and with electronic warfare systems turned off ... well, only if in nightmares ...
        1. Roman_vh
          Roman_vh 25 May 2021 18: 29
          +8
          Eh old man, do you really think that the Strategic Missile Forces will watch the work of RTR, electronic warfare and the aggressor's aviation flights?
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 25 May 2021 19: 36
            -2
            Eh old man, do you really think that the Strategic Missile Forces will watch the work of RTR, electronic warfare and the aggressor's aviation flights?
            Is it that strategists are engaged in such a "small fry", and even more so without the sanction of the Supreme and even as an air defense ??? And RTR and EW always work, and even more so where there are, those very formidable Strategic Missile Forces, as small and annoying little brothers! wink
      3. Iline
        Iline 25 May 2021 19: 15
        +10
        At first they thought the plane was invisible. It turned out that this statement is not entirely true.
        Now they pray to God that he is invulnerable. laughing
        1. Shopping Mall
          Shopping Mall 26 May 2021 15: 37
          0
          Quote: Iline
          At first they thought the plane was invisible. It turned out that this statement is not entirely true.
          Now they pray to God that he is invulnerable. laughing


          Invisibility was usually talked about by incompetent journalists, politicians and filmmakers. It has always been known that, for example, VHF radars are perfectly visible to Stealths. But their accuracy is not enough for aiming missiles.

          But the radar dm, cm, mm of the range is seen worse, at a shorter range. They will see even worse against the background of electronic warfare.

          But for V-V missiles and missiles with ARLGSN, when working against subtle targets of covered electronic warfare, everything will be even worse - the radar is weaker than that of the carrier and the air defense system, the target capture range of the seeker and the probability of hitting the target are greatly reduced.

          Conventionally, against a conventional aircraft, the probability of defeat will be 0,9. Against him, but covered with electronic warfare - 0,5. Against Stealth + EW - 0,25. I repeat, the numbers are conditional.
          1. Iline
            Iline 26 May 2021 16: 56
            +1
            In fact, while serving in the army, I myself was a specialist in electronic equipment (communications, navigation, location, electronic warfare) and I understand all your calculations very well.
            That's just the Americans began to rush with the development of air defense radars and aircraft. At the stage of technology development, stealth was easier - almost everything worked in the 3-centimeter range. From here the radar-absorbing coating and the airframe geometry were calculated. Now everything is much more complicated. Indeed, many locators for detection and guidance now do not work at the same frequency, but change it over time. Therefore, the FB-117 disappeared very quickly. Again, it is not realistic to carry out adequate radio absorption and reflection in dm, cm and mm ranges at the same time. Therefore, they do not risk direct contact with our air defense systems. Did the hysteria with Turkey and the refusal to supply them with the F-35 just happen?
            Electronic warfare is effective if you know the structure of the signal, and now there are no fools working at the same carrier frequency and constant form of this very signal. So it's not that simple.
            I agree that stealth technologies bring troubles at work, but not everything is so simple
            1. poquello
              poquello 26 May 2021 17: 40
              0
              Quote: Iline
              I understand all your calculations very well

              ) meter will detect and give direction, but dm on a narrow corner doesn't work better?
    2. Thrifty
      Thrifty 25 May 2021 16: 18
      +15
      Let's check it in real mode - you run f35, we guarantee its combat defeat! Going? ??
      1. Egoza
        Egoza 25 May 2021 16: 35
        +2
        Quote: Thrifty
        Let's check it in real mode - you run f35, we guarantee its combat defeat! Going? ??

        no need to bring people to a heart attack! We just "hit hard, precisely and silently"
        1. dorz
          dorz 25 May 2021 16: 57
          +3
          Americans are beginning to threaten in all planes and environments:



          Experimental American orbital drones Boeing X-37 are capable of carrying nuclear weapons, said Yan Novikov, general director of the Almaz-Antey VKO concern. “In 2010, the first such device was launched, today there are already six of two types - some smaller, others larger.

          Now one is in orbit for a year, two - the fourth and the fifth - flew off for two years, ”Novikov said. According to him, Boeing X-37 was officially created for scientific and reconnaissance purposes, but Russia understands that the large payload of these vehicles allows small drones to carry up to three nuclear warheads, and large ones - up to six.

          Washington is set to deploy eight aircraft similar to the classified Boeing X-2025 military shuttle by 37.
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 25 May 2021 18: 00
            +1
            Washington is set to deploy eight aircraft similar to the classified Boeing X-2025 military shuttle by 37.
            Well, what else can they do, just from orbit and bomb .., after all, these terrible Rushens in earflaps, set up everywhere, all sorts of their own: S-350/400, now here is the S-500 stuck under every Christmas tree !? lol
          2. poquello
            poquello 25 May 2021 23: 03
            +1
            Quote: dorz
            Russia understands that the large payload of these vehicles allows small drones to carry up to three nuclear warheads, and large ones - up to six.

            and there in the same (sort of) interview that this problem has already been closed
          3. D16
            D16 27 May 2021 12: 15
            0
            Boeing X-37 capable of carrying nuclear weapons

            A long time ago, the R-36ORB (orbital) was on alert. A missile with a monoblock warhead of a megaton class, capable of making either one or several turns before landing. They did not stand for long, since the accuracy was disgusting. No one in a sound memory and a sober mind will develop space bombers. ICBMs are much better and more convenient.
        2. venik
          venik 25 May 2021 18: 12
          +3
          Quote: Egoza
          no need to bring people to a heart attack! We just "hit hard, precisely and silently"

          ======
          Is it like that ?:

          wink
      2. Machito
        Machito 25 May 2021 16: 47
        +1
        Quote: Thrifty
        Let's check it in real mode - you run f35, we guarantee its combat defeat! Going? ??

        I support. The S-500 will quickly send the Penguin to the bottom. And then Izh flew away. Penguins are supposed to swim.
    3. Fantazer911
      Fantazer911 25 May 2021 21: 22
      0
      And why dakazat zapadnyj zhurnalyugam, let him buy F35 and launch in the direction of Russia, I think, and will cope with 300, no options! hi
  2. Dym71
    Dym71 25 May 2021 15: 44
    +7
    Thus, the statement by the Russians that the Sky-M radar and similar radars "see" American stealth aircraft is true, but this is only the first stage. Whether the Russian air defense will be able to neutralize the F-22 or F-35 squadron is a completely different question, which depends on many factors, sums up Episkopos.

    Why shoot them down? In general, we are in favor of world peace. At the second stage, an expert would not hurt to ponder over the question of the price of a flying penguin! yes
  3. PROXOR
    PROXOR 25 May 2021 15: 48
    +5
    They calm themselves down. We will not persuade them. Practice will show who was right.
    1. Gori
      Gori 25 May 2021 16: 17
      -15%
      Quote: PROXOR
      They calm themselves down. We will not persuade them.

      You calculate and present your result. It will be interesting. And so - these are bare words.
  4. lucul
    lucul 25 May 2021 15: 51
    +4
    And let me speak the language of this "expert"? )))
    He claims that:
    Radar "Sky-M" can be a "great target" for a high-precision missile

    So I say that the F-22 and F-35 will become
    "excellent target" for a high-precision missile

    After they are detected by the Sky-M radar.
    Not ? Didn't I catch the "expert" thinking? )))
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 25 May 2021 16: 53
      +2
      And where do you have the line "you do not understand, this is different"? No, no, no ... it doesn't work without it! laughing Besides, you absolutely ... how is a porn expert going to look at logic from our side? Disorder burn ...
  5. knn54
    knn54 25 May 2021 15: 52
    +3
    - which depends on many factors, sums up Episkopos.
    "Announce the entire list, please" ...
    1. Crimean partisan 1974
      Crimean partisan 1974 25 May 2021 16: 09
      +1
      "Announce the entire list, please" ...
      .... will not announce ... his organization to the Soviet sobering-up station like cancer to the moon ...... distillery ...........
  6. CYM
    CYM 25 May 2021 15: 52
    +8
    I've already heard it somewhere. lol
  7. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 25 May 2021 15: 54
    +4
    Let them try. And the fact that they know a lot about our air defense. They think so. What if not all? laughing
    1. prior
      prior 25 May 2021 16: 44
      +2
      I remember in Yugoslavia one such all and himself, invisible, bought a simple microwave oven. laughing
  8. Russobel
    Russobel 25 May 2021 15: 55
    +8
    Seeing this is already 90% of success.
    The main thing is to know where to look.
    And then the planes will catch up.
  9. HAM
    HAM 25 May 2021 15: 55
    +6
    As I understand it, "junior researcher" and "graduate student"
    Mark Episkopos, has only a purely theoretical relation to the army ... a natural nerd, and there ...
    1. hosekonceko
      hosekonceko 25 May 2021 16: 06
      -1
      How to aim a missile if its gsn does not see the target. In the meter range, the carcass is visible, the gsn of the rocket in the mm range - shooting into the sky
      1. lucul
        lucul 25 May 2021 16: 11
        +1
        How to aim a missile if its gsn does not see the target. In the meter range, the carcass is visible, the gsn of the rocket in the mm range - shooting into the sky

        Dear, I'll tell you a terrible secret - all the "stealth" of the F-35 is in the form - a view of the plane only from a frontal projection, roughly speaking only in the forehead. The side view and rear view of the aircraft are not stealthy. And the rocket does not care where to fly to the plane - from behind or from the side)))
        1. hosekonceko
          hosekonceko 25 May 2021 16: 14
          +5
          Target signal response in mm range at noise level
          1. lucul
            lucul 25 May 2021 16: 17
            -1
            Target signal response in mm range at noise level

            Have you read about the side view and the rear view? ))) Not? Passed by understanding? ))))))
            If the Sky-M radar sees an invisible aircraft, then any missile with an infrared seeker will reach it and shoot it down, just throw the rocket into the indicated square, and the thermal seeker guides the missile at the red-hot F-35 engines))))
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 25 May 2021 16: 38
              0
              "you just throw the rocket into the specified square," ///
              ---
              The square is too big. Even if you throw 10 missiles there
              without radar tracking from the ground, then the probability that the thermal
              The seeker will be close to the aircraft and will lock the target - almost zero.
              What do you suggest: shoot a flying sparrow from a machine gun -
              you look, one of the bullets will catch.
              Without aiming and tracking the rocket by ground radar, it is impossible to hit.
              1. lucul
                lucul 25 May 2021 16: 40
                -2
                The square is too big.

                How big is it if the Sky-M radar clearly sees the target? ))))
                You compare the trajectory of the flight and in the specified place the rocket and the plane will meet)))
                1. Avior
                  Avior 25 May 2021 16: 56
                  +2
                  The warrior is right - the accuracy of the meter range radar is not enough to guide missiles. This is a general detection radar. In addition, the RCS of the fighter in the meter range is only about three times higher than that of the decimeter range.
                  In order for the EPR to grow strongly, the wavelength of the debt significantly exceeds the dimensions of large structural elements of the aircraft - planes, fuselage.
                  That is, the decimeter range is really needed.
                  1. lucul
                    lucul 25 May 2021 17: 14
                    -4
                    Warrior is right - the accuracy of the meter range radar is not enough for missile guidance

                    Tell that to Francis Powers and his U-2.
                    1. Avior
                      Avior 25 May 2021 17: 31
                      +1
                      The meter-range radar in the missile guidance station of the S-75 complex, which shot down Powers, is not used and cannot be used to guide missiles
                  2. Gori
                    Gori 26 May 2021 09: 20
                    -2
                    Quote: Avior (Sergey
                    In addition, the EPR of the fighter in the meter range is only approximately three times higherthan decimeter.

                    Justify.
                    1. Gori
                      Gori 26 May 2021 10: 00
                      -1
                      Quote: Gori
                      In addition, the RCS of the fighter in the meter range is only about three times higher than that of the decimeter range.

                      Continuous mistakes? Wouldn't it be the other way around? And not 3 times?
                    2. Avior
                      Avior 26 May 2021 10: 07
                      +1
                      an increase in RCS in the meter and decimeter ranges occurs if the wavelength is greater than individual structural elements
                      for a cruise missile this rule is fulfilled by virtue of its size, there the increase can be hundreds of times, for a fighter by approximately 3 times, for a bomber by 2.
                      There is a table in this book.
                      https://znanium.com/catalog/document?id=205255
                      sorry, there is no free link at hand, but it can be found on the net, I downloaded
                      A significant increase in the EPR of aircraft is observed in the decameter range, at a wavelength of more than 10 m.
                      1. Avior
                        Avior 26 May 2021 10: 41
                        0
                        in meter and decimeter

                        typo, in meter and decameter
                      2. Gori
                        Gori 26 May 2021 10: 48
                        0
                        Quote: Avior
                        an increase in RCS in the meter and decimeter ranges occurs if the wavelength is greater than individual structural elements
                        for a cruise missile this rule is fulfilled by virtue of its size, there the increase can be hundreds of times, for a fighter by approximately 3 times, for a bomber by 2.

                        Avior, the book is good, but a lot of things that were eliminated in unobtrusive aircraft were dropped into it. For a significant reduction in resonance phenomena, the keels of the tail are spaced apart. The authors of this description introduced the attenuation of e-m (electromagnetic waves) from meteorological formations from the wavelength (they merged everything into one heap) - however, we are talking about the EPR, which strongly depends for purposes on the reflection power and this power decreases with the wavelength by an amount of 1 / lambda (no matching symbol). The RCS value decreases. So first I asked you to justify your expression. Even the simple Wikipedia for a convex surface has it. In this case, it was right for the authors of this description to introduce into their discussion not only the EPR, but the equation of the maximum range (where the wavelength is presented), which gives the radar radiation wavelength squared and the EPR separately. Otherwise, it is not entirely correct.
                      3. Avior
                        Avior 26 May 2021 11: 08
                        0
                        as far as I understand, this effect is associated with diffraction, which depends on the wavelength including
                2. The comment was deleted.
            2. Cheerock
              Cheerock 26 May 2021 09: 35
              0
              Tellingly, no one thought that a link of interceptors could be thrown into the square, for example ...
    2. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 25 May 2021 19: 39
      +3
      How happy is it in the mm range?
      The head of the R-27 rocket, for example, works in the cm range.
      The rocket head usually operates in the same range as the radar.
  • Prjanik
    Prjanik 25 May 2021 16: 13
    +7
    The expert probably is not aware that Sky-M has integrated radars of meter, decimeter and centimeter ranges, and the complex not only detects, but also directs missiles to the target. He also does not know about missiles from the S-400 system.
    1. Avior
      Avior 25 May 2021 16: 58
      +2
      What a meter radar sees, a decimeter and centimeter radar may not see
      1. Prjanik
        Prjanik 25 May 2021 17: 32
        +7
        What is the problem, even if the radar of the centimeter range of the penguin at a great distance does not see well, then in the meter and decimeter range it is easy, the computer will combine all the reflected signals into a single signature, which will be guided by the rocket until its active homing head captures the target
        1. Avior
          Avior 25 May 2021 17: 54
          -2
          The decimeter range sees as badly as the centimeter range
          The meter range has low resolution and does not work at low altitudes
          1. Prjanik
            Prjanik 25 May 2021 18: 14
            +2
            Well, well, of course he won't see a fly, but a penguin without problems) Something the Yankees are in no hurry to sell the F-35 to the Turks after they bought the S-400, they suspect something) Apparently, their own air defense stealth can be seen quite well
          2. Gori
            Gori 26 May 2021 09: 24
            0
            Quote: Avior
            The decimeter range sees as badly as the centimeter range
            The meter range has low resolution and does not work at low altitudes

            Why does the meter range not work at low altitudes. The frequency f = 300 MHz is the VHF range, the wavelength is 1m. So why doesn't it work at low altitudes. Do you have a mistake?
            The United States often uses one centimeter-range radar on ships, and they do not complain that they see poorly at long range and do not see low-flying targets. Why is this so?
            1. Avior
              Avior 26 May 2021 09: 30
              -2
              ... 55Zh6M "Sky-M" is an interspecific mobile radar complex for detecting aerodynamic and ballistic objects at medium and high altitudes; it is part of the Sky radar family [2].
              1. D16
                D16 27 May 2021 13: 35
                0
                objects at medium and high altitudes

                This is because the earth is round. laughing The sky works for a long distance.
                1. Avior
                  Avior 27 May 2021 13: 52
                  0
                  and small too. but only at medium and high altitudes.
                  1. D16
                    D16 27 May 2021 14: 20
                    0
                    For small, it works like most others, but it is designed to interact with the S-400 and S-300V4. They have their own low-altitude detectors and the sky has no reason to perform these functions. Therefore, in the composition of the Sky there is no station similar to a "crocodile" for low-altitude detection.
                  2. D16
                    D16 27 May 2021 14: 28
                    0
                    Not. The sky works in conjunction with the S-300V4 or S-400. They have their own low-altitude detectors. Therefore, in the composition of the Sky there is no such thing as "Crocodile". As in any other surveillance radar of any manufacturer. So its "low altitude" does not differ from any other observation station and is determined by the curvature of the earth and the height of the antenna canvas.
                    1. Avior
                      Avior 27 May 2021 14: 36
                      -1
                      we are talking specifically about the meter radar
                      1. D16
                        D16 27 May 2021 14: 47
                        0
                        And what, meter waves propagate in some other way? The meter range is the longest and most independent of external factors. Therefore, it detects targets at a higher altitude. The flat-earth proponents do not elaborate a bit. They will win, and the Air Defense Forces will see everything.laughing
                      2. Avior
                        Avior 27 May 2021 15: 35
                        -1
                        ... Do meter waves propagate in any other way? The meter range is the longest

                        Can this be considered an answer to your question?
                      3. D16
                        D16 27 May 2021 15: 50
                        0
                        Of course not.
  • Usher
    Usher 26 May 2021 01: 04
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    What a meter radar sees, a decimeter and centimeter radar may not see

    So what? The rocket in the inertial system will fly to the point of confident capture and that's it. Don't be smart.
    1. Avior
      Avior 26 May 2021 01: 23
      -5
      Or will not reach
      Or will fly and find out that the target is false
      Or there won't be a sure grip
      Or it will simply not fly out of the launcher until the target is fired by the radar.
      Especially if the target is maneuvering
      1. Usher
        Usher 26 May 2021 21: 15
        -1
        Quote: Avior
        Or will not reach
        Or will fly and find out that the target is false
        Or there won't be a sure grip
        Or it will simply not fly out of the launcher until the target is fired by the radar.
        Especially if the target is maneuvering

        Are you an ant?
        1. Avior
          Avior 26 May 2021 21: 47
          -1
          I just do not climb to comment and talk about what I do not understand
          The idea of ​​launching a rocket using meter-range radar data is complete nonsense.
          First, for the reasons that I have listed
          And secondly, Sky M is a radar, not an air defense system, it does not have any missiles and, in principle, it cannot shoot non-existent missiles. Its task is to detect targets, not shoot at them.
          If you do not understand the difference, but take up the reasoning, then it is useless to explain it to you, reason further
          hi
          1. Usher
            Usher 26 May 2021 22: 27
            -1
            Quote: Avior
            I just do not climb to comment and talk about what I do not understand
            The idea of ​​launching a rocket using meter-range radar data is complete nonsense.
            First, for the reasons that I have listed
            And secondly, Sky M is a radar, not an air defense system, it does not have any missiles and, in principle, it cannot shoot non-existent missiles. Its task is to detect targets, not shoot at them.
            If you do not understand the difference, but take up the reasoning, then it is useless to explain it to you, reason further
            hi

            God, at least read the open information and make an analysis. Do you know what pairing is? And how many radars are in the complex?
            1. Avior
              Avior 26 May 2021 22: 34
              -1
              You keep on composing.
              Take open information and read the appointment of Heaven M. If after that you don't understand why you can't shoot according to its data, I can't help you.
              1. Usher
                Usher 26 May 2021 22: 36
                -1
                Quote: Avior
                You keep on composing.
                Take open information and read the appointment of Heaven M. If after that you don't understand why you can't shoot according to its data, I can't help you.

                Facepalm !!!!
                1. Avior
                  Avior 26 May 2021 22: 48
                  0
                  It is clear, in fact, you have nothing to write
                  I will not interfere
                  hi
          2. Arkon
            Arkon 27 May 2021 12: 57
            0
            Quote: Avior
            The idea of ​​launching a rocket using meter-range radar data is complete nonsense.


            You tell the engineers of the ZG radar "Sunflower", which, in spite of its "meter", fully carries out target designation.

            According to the legend of the exercise, the crew of the RK "Dagestan", performing air defense watch tasks in the middle part of the Caspian Sea, was attacked by the aircraft of a simulated enemy. The pilots of the Su-24MR, simulating the aircraft of a simulated enemy, were tasked with designating a missile strike on the ship by flying at low altitudes in conditions that make it difficult to detect targets by the ship's radar stations.

            In turn, the duty crews of the Sunflower over-the-horizon radar station (ZG radar) had to detect low-flying targets at the maximum possible flight distance and transmit data with target designations to the Territorial Control Center of the Caspian Flotilla and the crew of the ship on duty.

            Duty crews of the radar station and the crew of the RK "Dagestan" successfully coped with the assigned tasks. Ship anti-aircraft gunners, when air targets approached the line of fire, conditionally destroyed enemy aircraft.
            1. Avior
              Avior 27 May 2021 13: 35
              -1
              read carefully. To detect and transmit target designation, which is the task of the surveillance radar, and not to shoot.
              when air targets approached the line of fire, conditionally destroyed

              Did the word conventionally bother you, for example?
              1. Arkon
                Arkon 27 May 2021 13: 45
                0
                Quote: Avior
                To detect and transmit target designation, which is the task of the surveillance radar, and not to shoot.


                And the radar also shoot? belay
                1. Avior
                  Avior 27 May 2021 13: 47
                  -2
                  read the beginning of a branch
                  the complex not only detects, but also directs missiles to the target.

                  if you think so too, then re-read your post again
                  hi
            2. Avior
              Avior 27 May 2021 13: 54
              -1
              launch a rocket based on meter-range radar data

              Ship anti-aircraft gunners, when air targets approached the line of fire, conditionally destroyed aviation
              1. Arkon
                Arkon 27 May 2021 14: 02
                0
                Well, yes, here it remains unclear - on whose coordinates the missile was launched: on the transmitted "Sunflower" or on the ship's air defense. However, if this is the second case, then what kind of joint application can we talk about?
                I think we are still talking about launching naval missiles at the coordinates of the ZG radar.
                1. Avior
                  Avior 27 May 2021 14: 13
                  -1
                  I think you are wrong. And, it seems, it is written in the above quote in such a way as to mislead.
                  Radar Sunflower is a surface wave radar, it is two-dimensional, and, by definition, cannot give out data for firing, of course.
                  This is a general detection radar, it issued information in advance about the appearance of a target, and they will still shoot the ship complex when the opportunity arises.
                  1. Arkon
                    Arkon 27 May 2021 14: 25
                    0
                    Let's wait for additional information. hi
  • Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 25 May 2021 16: 14
    -3
    Episkopos. laughingA-50.rls aircraft Well, the cherry on top is the A-100 aircraft with a new radar with AFAR, capable of detecting air targets at a distance of 600 km. The Russian latest anti-aircraft system S-500 "Prometheus" is completing tests. laughing
    1. hosekonceko
      hosekonceko 25 May 2021 16: 25
      -4
      We'll see and take down everyone RAFAR rules in 2050
  • Murmur 55
    Murmur 55 25 May 2021 16: 21
    +4
    Oh how !!! Previously, they finished off with their heels in the chest that Russia has nothing to DETECT their f, now it turns out that there is, reminds a story with a hyper sound, first hee-hee, ha-ha "Putin cartoons" and then add this weapon to the list of prohibited under START-3. And this phrase that the discovery is just the beginning of the chain reminded me of a cartoon - "While your horse has FOUR legs, one, two, three, four, a boy on TWO legs one, two, one, two."
    1. zenion
      zenion 25 May 2021 16: 45
      +3
      Don't scare their plane. He will not fly from fear at all and it will become impossible to shoot him down in the sky. Is that only to give tanks and shoot from a slingshot.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 25 May 2021 16: 33
    +1
    Whoever bellows, their vaunted Patriot is not even able to detect the object, I am silent about the rest. And we tested the S-500 Prometheus.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 25 May 2021 23: 09
      -1
      You're right. The Patriot is unable to detect the stealth plane.
      The Americans recognize this.
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 26 May 2021 13: 26
        +1
        So let them stick their tongue into the crack and not googling, you tell them. laughing
  • Prisoner
    Prisoner 25 May 2021 16: 36
    +9
    "To discover is not to bring down." Is that the motto of American air defense?
  • A.K.
    A.K. 25 May 2021 16: 37
    +1
    And this Episkos did not ask the question what the American air defense can do against our missiles and aircraft? Against the backdrop of events in Saudi Arabia, there are great doubts about their capabilities.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 25 May 2021 19: 52
      -3
      American air defense is just as ineffective against stealth aircraft as Russian.
      Physics works the same way in Russia and in the USA.
      And the Americans tested this in large exercises: an attack by the Air Force against the air defense.
      F-35s easily passed through the Patriot deployment area.
      The radars did not react to them at all. But the F-15 and F-16, too
      those who participated in the attack were accurately detected and conditionally shot down.
      1. A.K.
        A.K. 25 May 2021 23: 01
        +1
        They can't shoot down a missile from Emen. And what they are doing there and talking, as practice shows, turns out to be nothing more than a PR campaign of American weapons. They love to direct the shadow on the fence. They can’t do anything against us militarily, I’ll tell you more, they won’t even try. They will try to strangle us with someone else's hands.
      2. poquello
        poquello 25 May 2021 23: 38
        -1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        like the Russian

        ooh-ooh-ooh, why are you hiding behind the landscape? )))))))))))))))))))))))))
  • zenion
    zenion 25 May 2021 16: 40
    0
    To see is not to bring down. These planes can be covered by the firmament, easily, because the firmament will not see them and will easily let them through. Therefore, in addition to the planet Earth, they can fall on the moon satellite or the sun star. Yes, they can still fall into the okyan sea, but it is immeasurable and they will not be found invisible. The main thing is not to grease the wings with wax, so that it does not melt.
  • Crabong
    Crabong 25 May 2021 16: 44
    +3
    In vain they are there, in this "Nat. interest ”this Greek is paid a salary ...
  • Gunther
    Gunther 25 May 2021 16: 50
    +1
    Quote: Mark Episkopos
    However, "detect" and "destroy" are different concepts.


    Don't worry Markush - we'll get to DC if this bucket of bolts (f-35) accidentally survives.
  • stan200000
    stan200000 25 May 2021 16: 51
    0
    It seems that the phrase "To see is not to bring down" speaks about its own, about the painful ...
  • Butchcassidy
    Butchcassidy 25 May 2021 16: 59
    +1
    Can be a "great target" ... If grandma has eggs and a bike, it will not be grandma, but a biker.
  • Shahno
    Shahno 25 May 2021 17: 17
    +1
    Quote: lucul
    How to aim a missile if its gsn does not see the target. In the meter range, the carcass is visible, the gsn of the rocket in the mm range - shooting into the sky

    Dear, I'll tell you a terrible secret - all the "stealth" of the F-35 is in the form - a view of the plane only from a frontal projection, roughly speaking only in the forehead. The side view and rear view of the aircraft are not stealthy. And the rocket does not care where to fly to the plane - from behind or from the side)))

    In fact, this is not the case. But I can't reveal any more secrets ...
  • Shahno
    Shahno 25 May 2021 17: 21
    -2
    Quote: HAM
    As I understand it, "junior researcher" and "graduate student"
    Mark Episkopos, has only a purely theoretical relation to the army ... a natural nerd, and there ...

    Well, if he is under the Darpa program, then he has something to do with it ..
    I'm afraid you underestimate these nerds.
  • AVA77
    AVA77 25 May 2021 17: 28
    0
    It’s strange, like the F-35 is all so invisible to the impossibility, and this justified the price, the complexity of operation and other stealth nishtyaki. But it turns out he is visible wassat so what now?
    Put the F-35 on tracks and drive it strictly with thistles and windbreaks outside the radar detection zone crying It turns out that the F-15.F-16 is nothing worse than the F-35, because seeing does not mean shooting down.
  • Shahno
    Shahno 25 May 2021 17: 33
    -1
    Quote: AVA77
    It’s strange, like the F-35 is all so invisible to the impossibility, and this justified the price, the complexity of operation and other stealth nishtyaki. But it turns out he is visible wassat so what now?
    Put the F-35 on tracks and drive it strictly with thistles and windbreaks outside the radar detection zone crying It turns out that the F-15.F-16 is nothing worse than the F-35, because seeing does not mean shooting down.

    And what is strange to you ... How would the air defense breakthrough machines be planned.
    They will see they will not see them without a difference .. The main thing is to fulfill the assigned tasks as much as possible.
    Make it difficult to resist as much as possible, and cause maximum damage.
    1. AVA77
      AVA77 25 May 2021 19: 32
      +2
      As if air defense breakthrough machines were planned. laughing
      They will not see them without a difference, wassat they will not shoot down, they will break through the air defense, they will not break through, where are we flying, why are we flying, women will still give birth lol This is what I understand about setting those tasks for the development of the F-35.
    2. Gust
      Gust 26 May 2021 10: 03
      +3
      Physics is really the same for everyone, and all-aspect interference attenuation of the radar signal is nonsense, you know. In addition, if his radar does not emit anything, then he himself does not see anything (about the invisible LPI mode, it's generally obvious stupidity, who prevents to declare the same mode for the Sky-M radar, which will make it supposedly undetectable for the Kharms, etc.;) ). An open circular nozzle is visible in a large solid angle for thermal seeker. About the interference, by the way. Here all the time they laugh from the "witnesses of the Khibiny sect" how this electronic warfare suppressed the radar of the URO destroyer allegedly. But why doesn't the similar nonsense from stealth fans generate the same amount of fun? How the weak radar of the aircraft will "suppress" the powerful multi-band ground complex ???? Or "there is evidence of this, but they are classified?;))))"
  • Konstantin Shevchenko
    Konstantin Shevchenko 25 May 2021 17: 38
    +1
    Interestingly, the author of The National Interest Mark Episkopos thought about where the surviving F-35 and F-22 will land? Perhaps the parachute is not a salvation.
    1. CYM
      CYM 25 May 2021 18: 52
      +2
      IMHO It depends from where they land? If from the bombing of underdeveloped countries, then landing on departure airfields is usually not a problem. And if from the "air defense breakthrough" and the bombing of a decent nuclear power, then this is a 95% one-way flight (Doolittle Raid 2.0). Back in 1985-87 we were given (in a serious case) a simple task, to release our SU-17s with a special suspension at any cost and drive them farther from the airfield - to partisan. I don’t think that such tasks have changed much for us and our "partners" since then. sad
  • bk0010
    bk0010 25 May 2021 17: 40
    -2
    After the stealth plane is discovered, it must be escorted, aimed a missile at it, and only then destroyed.
    And we will aim not a rocket, but a fighter. And he will see everything up close and direct.
  • Taras mp
    Taras mp 25 May 2021 18: 09
    -2
    Not to be detected does not mean to shoot down anyway that not visible does not mean not visible
  • Safron
    Safron 25 May 2021 19: 05
    -1
    It is worth checking in reality. Pampers under yay .... and fly))).
  • Kapkan
    Kapkan 25 May 2021 19: 10
    +2
    An article in the spirit of a documentary from Discovery, where everyone is repeated 15 times.
    It's even scary to think how stupid their analysts are and how far from understanding how and what works.
  • Herman 4223
    Herman 4223 25 May 2021 20: 21
    0
    The main principle by which stealth is achieved is the reflection of the radio signal away from the radiation source. If the plane flies in the zone of a developed air defense system, then it will be irradiated by several radars from different sides, and maybe several dozen. The reflected signal will be picked up by other radars. The rocket will fly to the plane from the angle from which the radio wave is reflected.
    1. Shiden
      Shiden 25 May 2021 21: 22
      0
      It seems to me that this is not a complete article, but a banal pulled out quote. This is to let off steam for the commentators. And if, since it is sensible to wait for one plane to break through the air defense, Iraq and Yugoslavia will not be an example of this, all means of attack will be used.
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 25 May 2021 22: 06
        +1
        Yes, there are practically no normal articles. Those who translate here, apparently, are not fire either.
  • reminin
    reminin 25 May 2021 22: 22
    0
    Now one is in orbit for a year, two - the fourth and the fifth - flew off for two years, ”Novikov said. According to him, Boeing X-37 was officially created for scientific and reconnaissance purposes, but Russia understands that the large payload of these vehicles allows small drones to carry up to three nuclear warheads, and large ones - up to six.

    Russia already has the means to "spin" satellites with nuclear missiles from orbit. A couple of years ago, there was also a hysteria from the NATO leadership that some of Russia's satellites suddenly began to move to other orbits of their own accord. And after the launch of the space truck, NATO satellites can be massively removed from orbit and dumped in a landfill near the moon.
  • isv000
    isv000 25 May 2021 22: 35
    0
    The FSA can tell a lot, but they are afraid to remember how in Yugoslavia their stealth from the C-125 was filled up with the help of a microwave. soldier
  • Kelwin
    Kelwin 26 May 2021 04: 39
    0
    Yeah) Remind this uncle that F117 took off the C-125) It's like a tarpaulin across a striped snout) Let him figure out what a newer complex can do) It is possible that this f35th iPhone will wake up even when it is taken to accompany ... laughing
  • Fedor M
    Fedor M 26 May 2021 06: 27
    0
    Nothing prevents from sending a squadron of MiG 31 with R 33 missiles to intercept
  • Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 26 May 2021 06: 28
    -1
    Spotted, launched a tactical missile with YABB and blew it up. You can forget about invisibility ...
  • TatarinSSSR
    TatarinSSSR 26 May 2021 07: 24
    -1
    As it is not noticeable on both sides of the ocean, they began to talk so calmly and routinely about the war between the United States and Russia, about the destruction of each other. Hate propaganda works with a bang. The military-industrial complex of both countries clap their hands from billions of injections.
  • silver_roman
    silver_roman 26 May 2021 09: 25
    0
    The Greek is absolutely right. Does not mean. It simply means that the stealth low-signature performance has been minimized, for the sake of which the F-35 was made so fat-ass in terms of dynamic performance, thrust-to-weight ratio, etc. So they would find it at a range twice the distance at which it would be shot down. Everything is logical
  • Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 26 May 2021 09: 57
    0
    Another reasoning based on advertising characteristics of aircraft and unknown characteristics of the radar. With the same success, this "iksperd" can crush water in a mortar.
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 26 May 2021 15: 50
    0
    However, "to see" does not mean to "bring down"
    Nice to read. In fact, to detect is to bring down. Two serifs define position, altitude, course and speed, everything, you can shoot. Operation KGB (or GRU?) "Radar invisibility" cost the United States trillions of dollars and lost leadership in the aircraft industry. It is a pity that the fog has begun to dissipate. Very sorry. Let the resources continue to thump into this hat.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 26 May 2021 16: 12
    0
    there is no need to neutralize the f-22 or f-35 for the Russian air defense.
    before they run out of fuel, than they reach the important goal.
    these are fighters with a range of about 500-600 km. The actual combat radius is even smaller.
    But outside the borders of the Russian Federation, there is a completely different alignment - there is no air defense system, and individual points and installations are no longer so dangerous.
    As for the shooting capabilities, there are no problems at distances of 40 km or less, the only window where there may be difficulties is the distance of launching or activating an active warhead of 40-80 km. Under these conditions, there may be problems with accurate targeting and more than 1 missile may be required.
    I do not yet know how effective it is, there may be some failures in the accurate determination of flight parameters, which can lead to large errors when launching a rocket from a distance. But if there is a correction system, then the problem can be corrected.
    It is also unclear how well the guidance heads do in the frontal projection, where both the radio silhouette and IR radiation are minimally visible.
  • Wolf
    Wolf 26 May 2021 18: 09
    0
    NEVA S125 can shoot them down and it is proven, but what can we say about Buk S300, S400, S500, Pantsir, etc. ...
    It is important that the air defense system is older than 30 years, then it is mature so that it can be sold to non-release from Mars. laughing
    1. Wolf
      Wolf 26 May 2021 18: 10
      +1
      But nastayayushche have NEVI = TANUSHA !!!
  • Radio operator and engineer
    Radio operator and engineer 29 May 2021 15: 07
    0
    A full-scale conflict, nothing good does not bring our air defense either. Gaps and holes will gradually appear ... The point is in the number of attacking missiles. There are almost 1,5 rockets on the iron dome. Conventional, ballistic and that's it. What will happen to our dome if in several waves there is a strike by 2,3 thousand missiles at the same time? Moreover, they are highly accurate and "ranked" by classes of targets and methods of attack. And only then a massive attack of F22, 35. To finish off the remnants of the network centric of our air defense. The question is rhetorical.
    But locally, yes, I think no options for NATO members.