NCTR has nothing to do with radar type. MSA radars could do this since the 80s and 90s.
PD filtering is for filtering. You can’t filter what you can’t detect. RCS still plays a part, as does radar resolution, so no, it’s not that simple.
ARH that we have are MSA and are weaker than the aircraft radars due to size and battery constraints, so not really until much closer, that’s why you need to guide them with datalink from long range in the first place…
this makes no sense.
you realise that NCTR is possible because of the accuracy of the radar? You are just saying big words you know nothing about. Radar resolution in AESA radars is easily able to detect missiles against a sky. You realize that if a radar can detect an airplane from +100km away it is just as easily abled to detect a missile infront of it from 10 km away?
sure the radar of your plane might be able to
but the seeker of your missile probably wont
and after that a missile is probably not enough to set the proxy fuze
i think @kizvy posted a doc further up, saying that the amraam isnt able to lock onto targets with a rcs smaller than 1 square meter
and iam pretty confident that any A2A missile has an rcs lower than that, especially in front aspect
Spoken like someone who truly doesn’t know how NCTR works
Tell me, enlightened one, what is this “radar accuracy” that you speak of? And how would a radar run NCTR on a missile?
Might I say that the AIM-120A is 80s tech while the AIM-120D is extremely recent, I think that electric components in the last 30 to 40 years have improved quite a lot, so why would it not be able to have a sensitive yet effective proxy fuze why would it not have an effective yet power lenient radar?
I think you should yourself spend more time doing something other than posting on war thunder forums, you have more post on this single topic than most people have on this entire platform, and that does not make you any more credible to talk about things.
As for telling me I don’t know how NCTR works:
NCTR is combination of different techniques to Identify aircraft and other flying objects. One of these measures is to detect to objects velocity, acceleration, RCS, and such, which is really easy and you can do this with pretty much any radar. On the otherhand, modern radars can detect the movement of engine blades on aircraft, and can also provide a “2D-picture” of the scanned object, these can be matched to preprogrammed images of the aircraft they are detecting. AESA radars accuracy is far more than enough to basically draw a recognizable picture out of objects far away, It can very easily detect a missile flying towards the radar.
So tell me, what do you think NCTR is? It sounds like your knowledge comes mainly from War Thunder itself, or more specifically war thunder forum…
Oh boy let me teach you a little bit of physics.
Radars run NCTR by doing JEM, which requires visible turbines or compressor stages to match microdoppler signatures to pre-specified known returns uploaded to the aircraft computers.
Now tell me, as you are so masterfully knowledgeable
How many turbines and compressors does a missile have?
:)
You probably think that IFF interrogators also identify hostile aircraft 😂
How can you be so confidently incorrect XD
You realize what I just said covers that entire thing right? That is One of the measures to identify aircraft. How do you explain Ground tracking radars? You realize even old Mechanically scanned radars can detect non-moving ground targets just based on image recognition, same applies to air objects, EXCEPT its way easier to identify objects against a clear sky when they are moving towards you?
I think you should stop talking like you know anything about radars since you just proved that you barely even understand basic principles.
You don’t know the difference between detection, tracking, categorization, and identification.
I’m not going to bother discussing the finer points of synthetic aperture.
Go use JEM-based NCTR on a missile that uses a rocket motor.
Please get some education.
You are ignoring every point I am making and just spamming big words you think you know anything about. I am wondering that where you got all this “education” you speak of, myself I am a mechanical engineer and I am pretty familiar with sensor technology. I also notice you are mostly just getting mad at me and using strawman arguments to deflect every flaw I mentioned in your original argument. Maybe you should take a break from posting here (your posts are a big percentage of this whole thread), and seek some education yourself?
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Okay, I am not even going to bother responding to that. Your whole argument is countered in its entirety by that fact that Close in weapon system exist. You think that a system able detect artillery shell and give firing solutions to hit them mid air would prove a modern radar system could do the same thing? How about counter battery radars, do you think artillery shells are detected by their “turbines”. And yes I know these radars are different than those of an airplanes, but they are also old mechanically scanned radars.
You need to understand that detecting doppler shift isnt the only thing that you can identify things with a radar, stop ignoring my arguments and try to seek actual education about things you are talking about.
Is the brimstone with us in this room right now?
This is not the same principle used in AAMs or airborne radars my child.
It’s also millimetric radar. Which exchanges range for resolution.
Different applications, not interchangeable.
Thank you for spending your time, to provide this, clearly explains my point with pictures too.
What is a “millimetric radar”? And by the way they use the exact same principle, which is called “radar”.
clearly this is a MMW radar as well
and so is this
Congratulations you have discovered synthetic aperture radar
Which works differently from how the brimstone works
Yeah but surely it still cant detect a missile in the air /s
If you don’t know the difference between the pros and cons of different frequency bands, I’m not going to bother teaching.
