3 ms·
> A modern anti-drone system should not rely on traditional reflection-detecting radars but try detecting electric motors, radio signals from 3g/4g modems etc.
by jandrewrogers 1y ago
> A modern anti-drone system should not rely on traditional reflection-detecting radars but try detecting electric motors, radio signals from 3g/4g modems etc.
Standard kit on US military aircraft detect this and 5th gen platforms like the F-35 are designed to attack such systems.
One of the biggest misconceptions about the F-35 is that it is a combat aircraft, 1970s style but with better tech. In many regards, it is designed primarily as a state-of-the-art EW and AWACS-like system that can operate as part of a mesh. Yeah, it is still pretty good at the basic combat mission but the whole mesh EW/AWACS bit is its killer feature.
In the 20th century, you kill the AWACS/EW platforms, they are gone. A lot of effort went into both killing and protecting them. In the 21st century the AWACS/EW platform is a fluid organism comprising many stealthy cells because it is embedded into many platforms, and is much harder to kill because it isn’t a discrete target.
- at0mic22 1y agoI don't mean those anti-drone systems should target regular aircrafts. Really cool F35 can target them and at the same time it’s highly unlikely F35 would have ever reached those distant airfields.
- jandrewrogers 1y agoFor sure, I think those airfields are a bit beyond the combat radius of an F-35. It is partly why they are where they are.
- at0mic22 1y agoEven in the traditional scenario it’s still unclear how would F35 compete in range with enormous antennas on both specific aircrafts like Е-3 or land-based defense systems. Or is it more about fail safety rather than distance?
- randomcarbloke 1y agothe F35 can track targets at more than double the distance of the E3. It is the the most advanced flying weapons platform ever created, and the most misunderstood.
- dragonwriter 1y ago> Really cool F35 can target them and at the same time it’s highly unlikely F35 would have ever reached those distant airfields. If you wanted to take out bombers regularly attacking you with F-35s, you don't have to reach the airfields, you just have to reach them somewhere between the airfields and where they release their weapons.
- at0mic22 1y agoModern missiles have been developed to a point where those bombers would not necessarily have to leave russian airspace to release them. It concerns me a lot if those supersonic bombers are still valid today, but taking the fact Russia has 4 new tu-160 in production, I shoulda be wrong
- greedo 1y ago"new tu-160" is a stretch. These airframes were started during the time of the Soviet Union and are very very slowly being assembled. Russia has no ability to produce any of the TU-95/TU-23m/TU-160 past the few unassembled airframes it inherited from the USSR.
- at0mic22 1y agoAs far as I understood the biggest problem was not in the frame production itself, but in digitizing the Soviet era documentation for modern machinery. They reported it done in 2018 and 2 new aircrafts are promised to be brand new. I doubt anyone would be able to reliably prove they coming with old frame or not.