Myths about radar.
Features of radar detection of targets.
I want to debunk a whole array of myths and misconceptions inspired by modern games and cinema.
Myth one. Target captured! Grows from technologies 30-50 years ago, when almost any system was built from two radars, one survey, and the second guidance. They worked at different frequencies and modes, and the task of the guidance radar was mainly to illuminate the target, so that the homing head of the missile saw it. For its time, the technology is correct, but with the improvement of technical solutions, the need for it has long disappeared. Such a decision has a great unmasking effect, practically warns the enemy about starting, in the case of starting from the aircraft, forces to withstand the course so that the illumination does not go beyond the limiting angles of rotation of the antenna. Most modern solutions are based on the principle of shot and forgot. This has its disadvantages, but the pluses are more. Thus, from the "target captured", only the switching of the scanning mode of the review radar remained, which can be interpreted as "taken on the fly."
Myth two. Target's on radar, we're about to slam him! Yes and no. The main difference is the distance and wavelength of the radar. The shorter the wave, the smaller the object can be seen, but the higher the absorption in the atmosphere. For example, all near-range naval air defense radars operate in a very short range and are able to see a single bullet, but the detection distance is limited to about 5 kilometers. However, as part of our game, atmospheric absorption should be of little concern to us. More importantly, the minimum beam width and minimum aperture. At distances of tens or hundreds of kilometers, a radar target is a signal coming from a zone of tens, hundreds or even thousands of meters. What does that mean? We know there's something there, but it's extremely difficult to get into it with a weapon without homing. Imagine an area with a side a mile away, and you know there's a car out there. Even with perfect shooting, you’ll have to plow over half until you hit the target with a 50% chance. And if EW systems are connected to the case, then you lose, for example, distance data. So if you see a conventionally average signal strength spot, you can assume that it is either something big and far away, or something small and close. Plus all the intermediate options. Where and how to shoot even a homing weapon is up to the gun operator to decide.
Myth three. It's MIGI! It's a movie again. These can be birds, balls, rain, mountain top, sprayed dipoles, a dummy induced electronic warfare or Tu154. Determining what the goal is is is a completely separate and very difficult task. In a combat situation, the work of the self-identifier/foreigner is an unmasking factor. If there's no mess, all you know at first is that it's not yours or your allies. If the target emits, it is turned on radar, then the frequency and scheme of operation can identify the type of radar, and then assume the type of aircraft or ship on which it was installed. If there are several radars, the search circle usually narrows. But there is a great opportunity for deception. By incorporating only a portion of your equipment that fits a different type of ship, you can be mistakenly identified, and therefore surprise, in the form of a completely different battle platform with different, unexpected characteristics. 100% identification is carried out only by visual means, which implies rapprochement with another combat platform.
Myth four. We get irradiated, we all die!
Even if your technique detected the fact of irradiation with the enemy's radar - it is far from the fact that he will see you. The reflected signal needs to travel all the way back, rapidly losing strength along the way due to scattering, and remain strong enough that the receiver could highlight it against the background noise and its own. Moreover, it is necessary that the receiver still receives a signal from this direction. And if in the case of distances of 100-200 kilometers, this almost does not play a role, then when trying to radar at a distance of 300,000 kilometers, the signal will return only after 2 seconds, which in turn means a great importance of the settings of the scanning radar. If the operator does not expect to see the target beyond 150,000, then the beam will turn to the next position and the signal will appear to be a short-term interference. If the operator configured the radar for a long wait for signals, the overall scanning speed suffers significantly. For example, scanning for 10 seconds and presumably a beam with an angular size of 1 degree, you will need 3600 seconds to scan the full circle around you with a scan height of only 1 degree! To scan the entire sphere, you will need 180 * 3600. 180 hours. 178. During this time, at our speeds, it is quite possible to skip. With a 10 second delay, you will scan the space over a distance of 1,500,000 kilometers, or 0.01 AU. The distance from the Earth to the Sun is 1AU. This leads to a very interesting architecture for the construction of long-range detection systems. For it is doubtful whether 648,000 radars could be built to cover every strategically significant point. Even 60,000 with a guaranteed detection rate in 10 minutes.
And finally, myth five. Radar is a grid. What a drawer. Well, yes, but for it to work, you need to bring tens, hundreds, and sometimes thousands of kilowatts of energy. And cool it all down. According to some data, the F35 radar can operate in maximum mode for only 10 minutes. Then the coolant runs out. Even if it's 20. It is not surprising, but quite likely. Place on the aircraft cooling system of cooling liquid It's weight and place. So it just drops overboard until the tank runs out. And there's a tank of 100 liters somewhere. So in our game everything will be real. Powerful radars will require powerful power supplies and generate heat that is much harder to get rid of in a vacuum than in the atmosphere. You say the vacuum is cold? Think of a vacuum flask in a thermos.