Wait so F.3 guys were putting themselves in position to be engaged by Soviet Shorad systems?
No haha, this was testing for going to Bosnia, the same systems tested are what they would be going up against.
4 Likes
Right! Thought it was data obtained from the field ha ha
1960’s SAM’s, including OSA and Kub are not modern whatsoever. Israel first tested their Arrow-2 sam in 1996, which includes dual IR + Radar seeker and delivered the first complete system in 1998. This is an example of a much more robust system that could be in use by other countries today.
1998 was an important year as that is when the Eurofighter was supposed to enter service. In 1995 an F-16C was shot down in Bosnia by a 2K12 Kub surface to air system (SA-6). They had thought their EW systems, jammers, etc were more than sufficient to evade these types of systems already as well. In 1996 newspapers were questioning whether or not the Eurofighter was necessary.
In 1996 the European combat aircraft situation was rather poor. The Tornado couldn’t cut it, neither could the Mirage F1. The Mirage 2000 was fairly robust and performed well enough to compete against the F-16C and others. The Gripen had just entered service. Simple systems like the towed decoy could similarly improve any 4th generation fighter and did not warrant the production of an entirely new aircraft on its’ own.
Had the Eurofighter come around the same time as the Gripen it may have been legitimately worthwhile. No - the phrase that best describes it is “late to the party”.
SAM’s like Israel’s Arrow-2 are large, sure, but there are already many more multi-mode seekers that have shown promise on smaller designs. They’re even testing an air to air variant.
American’s were.
the hornet and viper have attachable ones but the F-35 has internal Decoy(s) as well
2 Likes
Interesting, a news article from back then was claiming that it was against R-27s XD
What are the limits on manoeuvring while towing the decoys? Do they remain attached no matter what or will they auto retract/jettison at some point?
full flight envelope
1 Like
Sounds like a nightmare to balance for War Thunder in that case lmao
like man these towed decoys gotta be so shit that the US conveniently chose to retrofit them to multiple jets while also choosing to implement them into the F-35.
Strange, huh
9 Likes
Not necessarily, would basically be 1-2 get out of jail free cards (when used right). after that, you are back to being just as vulnerable as before. No different to APS saving a tank from an ATGM at top tier GRB
1 Like
It probably would work against those as well. What GunJob posted is just discussing the testing that was conducted on one occasion in the US.
2 Likes
No one said that they were bad
One successful test against older SAM’s made in the 60s does not indicate it should have a 100% success rate.
You could do us all a favour by taking your gaslighting elsewhere, thanks.
7 Likes
Yeah
The laws of physics havent changed since the 60s
A modern PESA or AESA still uses a pulse dopplar waveform which can still easily be jammed.
Modern radars primarily use frequency hopping to defeat jamming, but a sufficiently advanced jammer will detect any changes to the signal and immediately counter the counter.
The main reason why towed radar decoys are becoming much more prevailing is because because of the home on jam from active missiles is the most dangerous threat. You don’t want your 100 million dollar fighter jet to be the primary target, so you drag a giant blinding bullseye some 100 meters behind you instead.
The only way to defeat the jam, is to completely overpower the incoming signal, by chirping, frequency modulation or just burute force.
4 Likes
I love coming to this thread for the daily dose of Mig_23 waffle, it’s great entertainment
7 Likes
AESA far harder to jam than PESA or M-scan but sure
rafale spectra is not effective against AESA radars too, same would apply for most DRFM jammers
That’s only due to the speed at which it can perform waveform modulation.
A sufficiently advanced jammer can still counter that.
A sufficiently powerful jammer will still overload an AESA antenna.
2 Likes
yeah but what jammer can do this? only one i can think of is ALQ-99 on EA-18G that can go toe to toe with AESA radars output wise
ALQ-99 is only dedicated jammer I know of that can counter AESA radars effectively by being advanced (F-35 and to a degree F-22 can do this)
edit: EPAWSS on F-15E and F-15EX can do this too, same with IVEWS on upgraded USAF F-16’s
So your argument TRDs being useless/bad is that the RAF in the 1990s tested them against 1960s SAMs, decided “eh good enough” and employed them and continue to employ them 30 years later on their most advanced fighter aircraft and you reckon that they never bothered to test them vs any SAM system made in the last 60-70 years?
9 Likes