4 ms·

That's one reason why search and targeting radars are not the same thing. Missiles are fired (and aircraft are sent) in the general area of the detected aircraf

by dmpk2k 6y ago

That's one reason why search and targeting radars are not the same thing. Missiles are fired (and aircraft are sent) in the general area of the detected aircraft, where they'll pick up the enemy aircraft on X-band more easily. And don't forget the networking. It won't just be the one targeting radar; networked missile groups have existed for decades. This idea that Russia and China can't "lock on" assumes that the Russians and Chinese are idiots. They've been busy trying to improve the odds of a stealth kill ever since the F-117A went public, and probably before. LO helps, but it's not magic.

varjag 6y ago
Yes, there are no Russian and Chinese systems that can maintain weapons lock on a stealth fighter. Not airborne and not ground based. Russia scrambles to gain this capability with its latest s-300 upgrade (s-500), but so far it's not operational. This is why everyone in the world is queued to order F-35s: it's the world's only operational multirole stealth fighter you can buy, and it has no peer adversaries yet. Goes against the popular Internet wisdom of how crap F-35 are, but they sell like hot cakes.
- dmpk2k 6y ago
  The S-500 is meant more for ICBMs and cruise missiles. The S-400 variant is claimed to be effective against LO aircraft, but since only Russia, China and Turkey operate the things, we cannot say either way. We definitely cannot claim it's ineffective against LO aircraft.
  - varjag 6y ago
    ABM capability is touted since the original 1980s S-300, it's nothing new. The struggles with S-500 are well documented, much discussed on Russian arms nerds forums and absolutely have all to do with the challenges posed by F-35.
    - dmpk2k 6y ago
      No doubt, but that is tangential to what the S-400 is claimed to do, and if you don't mind me being blunt: neither us, nor any Russian forum goers, know if the S-400 is actually reasonably effective against LO aircraft. Maybe not even the Russians and American militaries do. Where the original claim comes from -- that Russia and China cannot shoot down an F-35 -- is beyond me. It is as daft as claiming that S-400 makes stealth useless. I take issue with such confident grand claims.

by dmpk2k 6y ago

varjag 6y ago

Yes, there are no Russian and Chinese systems that can maintain weapons lock on a stealth fighter. Not airborne and not ground based. Russia scrambles to gain this capability with its latest s-300 upgrade (s-500), but so far it's not operational. This is why everyone in the world is queued to order F-35s: it's the world's only operational multirole stealth fighter you can buy, and it has no peer adversaries yet. Goes against the popular Internet wisdom of how crap F-35 are, but they sell like hot cakes.

dmpk2k 6y ago
The S-500 is meant more for ICBMs and cruise missiles. The S-400 variant is claimed to be effective against LO aircraft, but since only Russia, China and Turkey operate the things, we cannot say either way. We definitely cannot claim it's ineffective against LO aircraft.
- varjag 6y ago
  ABM capability is touted since the original 1980s S-300, it's nothing new. The struggles with S-500 are well documented, much discussed on Russian arms nerds forums and absolutely have all to do with the challenges posed by F-35.
  - dmpk2k 6y ago
    No doubt, but that is tangential to what the S-400 is claimed to do, and if you don't mind me being blunt: neither us, nor any Russian forum goers, know if the S-400 is actually reasonably effective against LO aircraft. Maybe not even the Russians and American militaries do. Where the original claim comes from -- that Russia and China cannot shoot down an F-35 -- is beyond me. It is as daft as claiming that S-400 makes stealth useless. I take issue with such confident grand claims.