10 ms·

There are two types of radar for virtually everything air defense. The first type searches the entire skies and is for finding aircraft. Networked versions of t

by SEJeff 7y ago

There are two types of radar for virtually everything air defense. The first type searches the entire skies and is for finding aircraft. Networked versions of this are much harder for stealth aircraft to hide from entirely however they have the radar signature of small birds. The S400 and upcoming S500 from Russia is an excellent version of this, but is itself vulnerable to electronic warfare countermeasures. Turning the sensitivity down low enough to detect small birds makes it impossible to use the radars from a practical sense. The second type of radar has an extremely narrow beam and is for targeting. This is the radar that locks onto a plane to direct missiles at it to shoot it down. This is the one that stealth aircraft pretty much entirely defeat. So in short, they can see the planes on occasion, and try to lock, but can't get a target lock. When they try, the stealth airplanes will often release rf tracking missiles and blow them up. I was a UAV (civilian term: "drone") pilot of the Shadow 200 TUAV in the US Army circa 2001-2005 and Iraq 2003-2004. The Shadow 200 TUAV was what was deemed "effective stealth" in that it had composite material with low radar signature and radar absorbing paint. The exhaust was dampened and came out about 1" from the propeller on the top so unless you were flying above, the thermal footprint was miniscule. We did some drills with our own Patriot air defense units and they said they had to set their radars so low they were picking up big birds. They also told us that simply wasn't possible to do in wartime.

mjevans 7y ago
Using an AI as a 4th dimensional filter to look for things like "birds flying at highly un-natural speeds" or to at least filter out the ones plausibly flying at natural speeds seems likely to be a current topic of current or already completed defense technology. It seems obvious enough that I feel like every competent military has already considered it.
Terr_ 7y ago
As a side-note, Towed Decoys are pretty cool too: > An aircraft-mounted control unit sends the specific signals to the decoy over a fiber-optic line. Once at the decoy, those signals are translated into radio frequency emissions. [...] For instance, the decoy can first try to generally jam a radar that is in search mode, then it can try to attack it directly to break its lock once it locks on. Then, if a missile locks on in flight, the decoy can instantly turn into a juicy target, or even targets, misdirecting the missile away from the aircraft. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/27185/f-35s-most-sinister-capability-are-towed-decoys-that-unreel-from-inside-its-stealthy-skin https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/27185/f-35s-most-sinis...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
AgentME 7y ago
>We did some drills with our own Patriot air defense units and they said they had to set their radars so low they were picking up big birds. I wonder if anyone has ever accidentally radar-locked a missile onto a bird and shot it down.
MaupitiBlue 7y ago
How bad was the Iranian RQ170 downing?
cgb223 7y ago
What’s a day in the life like for a military UAV Operator? Is it pretty low key compared to an 0311? How high quality are the controls/cameras? Is it high def or kinda grainy? Like walk us through a typical day, I’m sure many of us would find it fascinating
- agoodquestion 7y ago
  That's a good question. Perhaps the best one here. You should check out the book "Drone Warrior," by Brett Velicovich, https://www.amazon.com/Drone-Warrior-Soldiers-Americas-Dangerous/dp/0062693913 https://www.amazon.com/Drone-Warrior-Soldiers-Americas-Dange... Which is a great book, by a drone operator/warrior.
- SEJeff 7y ago
  It depends on your branch as all things do. By 0311, I'm going to assume the Marine Corps riflemen, the equivalent of the Army's 11B. Part of an 0311's job is kicking in doors and detaining bad guys. When there are bad guys sniping at them on the roof, they have a bad day. The UAV above them tells them "sniper on the SSW (south south west) quandrant of building 3, hit them" and then does instant BDA (battle damage assessment) to let them know the threat is neutralized or not. Those infantryman came back to the FOB that night and thanked us profusely. We helped them all come back alive. The most boring part of the job is probably road searches. On the way out to every mission and the way back (as you're flying to the mission coordinates handed down to you by the mission commander) you just look at the main roads. For every 10 hours of looking at roads, you'll see 1 guy digging a hole and emplacing an IED or burying wire under the road. Those "side quest" missions save a lot of soldiers. Additionally, we tend to fly ahead of most convoys if the timing lines up and give them a heads up of upcoming situations. From ~7500ft above sea level, we could roughly read a license plate a mile away. We gave them situational awareness on neighborhoods to go out of their way and just avoid. Things like that. For every 100 hours of relatively mundane stuff, you get a few really special missions. One of those special missions was when a Kiowa scout helicopter took an RPG to the tail rotor and crashed in Tal'Afar. Most missions I was the AVO (Aerial Vehicle Operator aka pilot), but this was one of the few where I was the MPO (Mission Payload Operator aka camera dude). We saw this as a literal clone of the most infamous Operation Gothic Serpent (Blackhawk down) and all said, "Not on our watch!". And in the end, they made our video a lot less clear and put some parts of it in a Military Channel Special: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0845577/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0845577/ TL;DNR: UAV Operator is nothing at all like an 0311, but they love us because we do a dang good job of saving their lives. In return, they watch our backs.
kilo_bravo_3 7y ago
Also, the S400 and practically all ground-based long range radar systems have electronic footprints that make them stand out on sensor platforms designed to detect radars like high powered flashlights in a dark room allowing them to be easily mapped (for avoidance) and targeted (for destruction, if necessary) from over the horizon and far beyond the range of the systems themselves. Systems like the Sx00 are very useful if there are multiple rings of them surrounding a static high-value target and you want to defeat a fleet of B-52s (or certain types of ballistic missiles) that are approaching. They are borderline useless against any adversary that has low observability aircraft and a modern suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) capability. Israel has demonstrated this repeatedly, but Russian marketing is very good and (mainly Middle Eastern) countries are still pumping wasted dollars into buying air defense systems. In years of conflict Israel has launched thousands (2,000 in 2018 alone) of missiles at Syrian targets, and a grand total of one (1) F-16I has been shot down, and that was because the pilots were cocky (both survived) and they were loitering at high altitude doing battle damage assessments. In response to the shoot-down, the launchers that fired the missile were destroyed the same day. Not only do the Russian missiles keep missing, but Israel keeps using their anti-missile missiles to shoot down the Russian missiles before they can fall on populated areas after missing their targets.
- mrtksn 7y ago
  I don’t recall s300-s400 being deployed and fail though. It always was some very old system and the downed plane was hit by s200.
  - ohaideredevs 7y ago
    I don't agree with all the bashing of the S-400 here, but Russian performance has been "disappointing" in terms of demonstrating combat capability. "The obvious question that remains unanswered is whether Russia chose not to engage S-400s, or was simply unable to, whether because of American nonkinetic capabilities impacting those system or some other reason. Given the pre-attack notice given by the Pentagon to Russian forces through a deconfliction line, as well as the fact that no strikes were targeted at the air defenses themselves, analysts lean toward the former." https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2018/04/20/who-learned-more-from-the-strikes-in-syria-america-or-russia/ https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2018/04/20/who-learned-... In short, Russia has S400s in Syria. Russian government officials claimed Russia would shoot down the Tomawhawks. Russians knew the strikes were coming. Yet, they did not use the S400. To me, there are no two ways about it - Russia did not have the capability to engage even the legacy Tomawhawk missiles.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jessriedel 7y ago
Thanks for the insight! This is probably not really in your area of expertise, but do you know why they can't design a system to pick up everything larger than a sparrow and going faster than 50 mph? What about wartime makes this harder? Thanks much.
- nradov 7y ago
  Sure it can be designed, but to achieve that at a useful range takes a large, sensitive antenna panel with a very high power output. So it's going to be expensive and difficult to transport. Filtering based on speed is challenging because different techniques are needed depending on the target's relative course. Plus with the sensitively dialed up so high they're going to get a lot of random false positives. It's impossible to automatically filter out some random returns.
outworlder 7y ago
That's for UAVs though, right? Not sure about the one you used, but won't faster moving aircraft show like a sore thumb on doppler radars?
gravelordnito 7y ago
> I was a UAV (civilian term: "drone") pilot Civilian term: "murderer"

by SEJeff 7y ago

mjevans 7y ago

Using an AI as a 4th dimensional filter to look for things like "birds flying at highly un-natural speeds" or to at least filter out the ones plausibly flying at natural speeds seems likely to be a current topic of current or already completed defense technology. It seems obvious enough that I feel like every competent military has already considered it.

Terr_ 7y ago

As a side-note, Towed Decoys are pretty cool too: > An aircraft-mounted control unit sends the specific signals to the decoy over a fiber-optic line. Once at the decoy, those signals are translated into radio frequency emissions. [...] For instance, the decoy can first try to generally jam a radar that is in search mode, then it can try to attack it directly to break its lock once it locks on. Then, if a missile locks on in flight, the decoy can instantly turn into a juicy target, or even targets, misdirecting the missile away from the aircraft. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/27185/f-35s-most-sinister-capability-are-towed-decoys-that-unreel-from-inside-its-stealthy-skin https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/27185/f-35s-most-sinis...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

AgentME 7y ago

>We did some drills with our own Patriot air defense units and they said they had to set their radars so low they were picking up big birds. I wonder if anyone has ever accidentally radar-locked a missile onto a bird and shot it down.

MaupitiBlue 7y ago

How bad was the Iranian RQ170 downing?

cgb223 7y ago

What’s a day in the life like for a military UAV Operator? Is it pretty low key compared to an 0311? How high quality are the controls/cameras? Is it high def or kinda grainy? Like walk us through a typical day, I’m sure many of us would find it fascinating

agoodquestion 7y ago
That's a good question. Perhaps the best one here. You should check out the book "Drone Warrior," by Brett Velicovich, https://www.amazon.com/Drone-Warrior-Soldiers-Americas-Dangerous/dp/0062693913 https://www.amazon.com/Drone-Warrior-Soldiers-Americas-Dange... Which is a great book, by a drone operator/warrior.
SEJeff 7y ago
It depends on your branch as all things do. By 0311, I'm going to assume the Marine Corps riflemen, the equivalent of the Army's 11B. Part of an 0311's job is kicking in doors and detaining bad guys. When there are bad guys sniping at them on the roof, they have a bad day. The UAV above them tells them "sniper on the SSW (south south west) quandrant of building 3, hit them" and then does instant BDA (battle damage assessment) to let them know the threat is neutralized or not. Those infantryman came back to the FOB that night and thanked us profusely. We helped them all come back alive. The most boring part of the job is probably road searches. On the way out to every mission and the way back (as you're flying to the mission coordinates handed down to you by the mission commander) you just look at the main roads. For every 10 hours of looking at roads, you'll see 1 guy digging a hole and emplacing an IED or burying wire under the road. Those "side quest" missions save a lot of soldiers. Additionally, we tend to fly ahead of most convoys if the timing lines up and give them a heads up of upcoming situations. From ~7500ft above sea level, we could roughly read a license plate a mile away. We gave them situational awareness on neighborhoods to go out of their way and just avoid. Things like that. For every 100 hours of relatively mundane stuff, you get a few really special missions. One of those special missions was when a Kiowa scout helicopter took an RPG to the tail rotor and crashed in Tal'Afar. Most missions I was the AVO (Aerial Vehicle Operator aka pilot), but this was one of the few where I was the MPO (Mission Payload Operator aka camera dude). We saw this as a literal clone of the most infamous Operation Gothic Serpent (Blackhawk down) and all said, "Not on our watch!". And in the end, they made our video a lot less clear and put some parts of it in a Military Channel Special: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0845577/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0845577/ TL;DNR: UAV Operator is nothing at all like an 0311, but they love us because we do a dang good job of saving their lives. In return, they watch our backs.

kilo_bravo_3 7y ago

Also, the S400 and practically all ground-based long range radar systems have electronic footprints that make them stand out on sensor platforms designed to detect radars like high powered flashlights in a dark room allowing them to be easily mapped (for avoidance) and targeted (for destruction, if necessary) from over the horizon and far beyond the range of the systems themselves. Systems like the Sx00 are very useful if there are multiple rings of them surrounding a static high-value target and you want to defeat a fleet of B-52s (or certain types of ballistic missiles) that are approaching. They are borderline useless against any adversary that has low observability aircraft and a modern suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) capability. Israel has demonstrated this repeatedly, but Russian marketing is very good and (mainly Middle Eastern) countries are still pumping wasted dollars into buying air defense systems. In years of conflict Israel has launched thousands (2,000 in 2018 alone) of missiles at Syrian targets, and a grand total of one (1) F-16I has been shot down, and that was because the pilots were cocky (both survived) and they were loitering at high altitude doing battle damage assessments. In response to the shoot-down, the launchers that fired the missile were destroyed the same day. Not only do the Russian missiles keep missing, but Israel keeps using their anti-missile missiles to shoot down the Russian missiles before they can fall on populated areas after missing their targets.

mrtksn 7y ago
I don’t recall s300-s400 being deployed and fail though. It always was some very old system and the downed plane was hit by s200.
- ohaideredevs 7y ago
  I don't agree with all the bashing of the S-400 here, but Russian performance has been "disappointing" in terms of demonstrating combat capability. "The obvious question that remains unanswered is whether Russia chose not to engage S-400s, or was simply unable to, whether because of American nonkinetic capabilities impacting those system or some other reason. Given the pre-attack notice given by the Pentagon to Russian forces through a deconfliction line, as well as the fact that no strikes were targeted at the air defenses themselves, analysts lean toward the former." https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2018/04/20/who-learned-more-from-the-strikes-in-syria-america-or-russia/ https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2018/04/20/who-learned-... In short, Russia has S400s in Syria. Russian government officials claimed Russia would shoot down the Tomawhawks. Russians knew the strikes were coming. Yet, they did not use the S400. To me, there are no two ways about it - Russia did not have the capability to engage even the legacy Tomawhawk missiles.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jessriedel 7y ago

Thanks for the insight! This is probably not really in your area of expertise, but do you know why they can't design a system to pick up everything larger than a sparrow and going faster than 50 mph? What about wartime makes this harder? Thanks much.

nradov 7y ago
Sure it can be designed, but to achieve that at a useful range takes a large, sensitive antenna panel with a very high power output. So it's going to be expensive and difficult to transport. Filtering based on speed is challenging because different techniques are needed depending on the target's relative course. Plus with the sensitively dialed up so high they're going to get a lot of random false positives. It's impossible to automatically filter out some random returns.

outworlder 7y ago

That's for UAVs though, right? Not sure about the one you used, but won't faster moving aircraft show like a sore thumb on doppler radars?

gravelordnito 7y ago

> I was a UAV (civilian term: "drone") pilot Civilian term: "murderer"