NATO to send 4,000 troops to border with Russia - report

A F*cking F-16 can take out a S-400 with ease.

What is the max range of the S-400? 400 km? A US Strike with Air-to-ground missiles such as the new JAASM ER can fly 1000 km over an air defense formation and drop hundreds of cluster munitions to make it impossible to intercept by weapons like the Pantsir. Or fire hundreds of decoys the MALD-J(which has a range over 460 km) from a C-130 or F-15E and make the S-400 waste it's munitions.

US military "experts" have been fear mongering always. I remember back in '91 "military experts" said US weapons were no match for Saddam's!

 

The commander of NATO forces in Europe said that the capabilities of Russian Radio/Radar Electronic Warfare (REW) divisions are limitless.

“RIA Novosti" published translation of an article by military analytical portal “Defence News”, which reports on the capabilities of Russian troops of radio-electronic warfare. Military analysts report that Russian REW system is several times more superior than the US and can cause enormous damage to the US Army, as Americans do not have experience in dealing with it .

The commander of NATO forces in Europe, Ben Hodges added: "The US troops have never encountered Russian artillery and did not deal with serious REW system, jamming or information-gathering systems." According to him, Russian electronic warfare units have "exorbitant" capabilities.

The former head of the US Army REW Lori Bakhut on this occasion said: "Our main problem is that we have not fought in conditions of jammed communications for several decades, so we have no idea how to act in such a situation. We have no strategy and algorithm of actions, we are absolutely not prepared to conduct combat operations in the absence of communication. US does not have such extensive capabilities or REW what Russia has. We have a very good radio intelligence, and we can conduct wiretapping round the clock, but when it comes to shutting down enemy hardware – our abilities are not even one tenth of what Russian army can do"

According to the portal “Defence News”, the Pentagon decided to rectify the situation and launched a program that will make a difference, but the first results are expected only by 2023.

 

The old Russian....."WE BUILT IT FIRST!!".....ideology still exist!

LOL!!

AA

 

Once again US Army...who isn't funded with EW.

RIA Novosti is a Russian troll site owned by the Russian government.

NATO commander said NATO troops have never dealt with Russian EW, but Russians haven't dealt with US EW either....so I don't see the point.

- - - Updated - - -

These Russian trolls are literally high on drugs.

 

That is how you get a shiny new weapons system!!!

AA

 

It can track and hit targets moving 12,000kmh.

Anything that gets within 400km will be blown out if the sky. Missile. Jet. Plane. F35

 

I remember when in 2004 the USAF was so desperate for more F-22s, they pitted F-15s outnumbered against Indian SU-30MKI, with radars turned off F-15s, and said they "lost" in order to get more funding for the F-22.

 

It cannot track an F-35.

Historically American Military Aircraft made after 1976 are notoriously difficult to shoot down.

AA

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah....I think I remember that.

Every time they want more money they make up a threat.

AA

 

And? The MALD-J decoys look exactly like a missile, the S-400 wastes it's missiles.

The S-400 won't engage the JAASM-ER at those 400 km, it flies too low.

 

First, better, more of 'em, and prettier too.

Unfortunately....none of them actually work and the bright green paint is peeling off.

 

The S-400 uses the 91N6E to track it's targets.

The F-35 has an official radar cross section of 0.0015m2. But ever since 2014, it has been improved to be better than F-22(0.0001m2) The 91N6E has a range against a 4m2 target at 390 km.(which is typical fighter RCS), so it will likely track the F-35 well under 50 km.

Meanwhile an F-35 armed with JAASM-ER and JSOW-ER can engage anything in Russia over 500 km.

 

And the The former head of the US Army REW ?

I see you have nothing now so you resort to ad hominem

What happening in considering sources from weapons manufacturer or military as credible?

Yet again your bias shows.

 

Yeah...in a US Army barely even knowing EW, I won't be surprised.

They are credible. Because the US Army isn't well funded with EW weapons. But you have to realize the Joint cooperation with other forces.

 

The F-35 has such a small radar return that it is near impossible to get a missile lock.

Plus the F-35's missile jamming system is more than capable of preventing a missile lock.

AA

- - - Updated - - -

That is all about having control over Electronic Warfare Capability.

The U.S. Army works in an integrated services way and is well protected.

But some in the Army want their own systems.

AA

 

Keep in mind Russian Low frequency radars like VHF and UHF can spot stealth targets by making their radar signature larger. (however it will no way see it as good as a non-stealthy plane)

However these anti-stealth radars like the Nebo SVU and Nebo M and Vostek E cannot lock on to targets. That is why the S-400 needs seperate fire control radars which are normal frequency(X-band) which will easily be defeated by stealth unless at close ranges. (Remember in Kosovo, F117 lacked any time of radar or radar warning receivers to detect the threats. It flew within 10 miles of the Serbian radar). Now imagine an F-35 firing it's PGMs at hundreds of km, the S-400 has little chance.

But even without stealth, times have changed. Missiles can travel way farther than ground SAMs.

 

The thing is the combination of Stealth and Highly Advanced Jamming makes such U.S. Aircraft near impossible to shoot down.

AA

 

THE DAILY BEAST

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter—the jet that the Pentagon is counting on to be the stealthy future of its tactical aircraft—is having all sorts of shortcomings. But the most serious may be that the JSF is not, in fact, stealthy in the eyes of a growing number of Russian and Chinese radars. Nor is it particularly good at jamming enemy radar. Which means the Defense Department is committing hundreds of billions of dollars to a fighter that will need the help of specialized jamming aircraft that protect non-stealthy—“radar-shiny,” as some insiders call them—aircraft today.
These problems are not secret at all. The F-35 is susceptible to detection by radars operating in the VHF bands of the spectrum. The fighter’s jamming is mostly confined to the X-band, in the sector covered by its APG-81 radar. These are not criticisms of the program but the result of choices by the customer, the Pentagon.
To suggest that the F-35 is VHF-stealthy is like arguing that the sky is not blue—literally, because both involve the same phenomenon. The late-Victorian physicist Lord Rayleigh gave his name to the way that electromagnetic radiation is scattered by objects that are smaller than its wavelength. This applies to the particles in the air that scatter sunlight, and aircraft stabilizers and wingtips that are about the same meter-class size as VHF waves.
The counter-stealth attributes of VHF have been public knowledge for decades. They were known at the dawn of stealth, in 1983, when the MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory ordered a 150-foot-wide radar to emulate Russia’s P-14 Oborona VHF early-warning system. Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth division—makers of the F-35—should know about that radar: they built it.
Making a plane VHF-stealthy starts with removing the target’s tails, as on the B-2 bombers. But we did not know how to do that on a supersonic, agile airplane (like the F-35 is supposed to be) when the JSF specifications were written.
Neither did the technology to add broadband-active jamming to a stealth aircraft exist in 1995. Not only did stealth advocates expect jamming to fade away, but there was an obvious and (at the time) insoluble problem: To use jamming you have to be certain that the radar has detected you. Otherwise, jamming is going to reveal your presence and identify you as a stealth aircraft, since the adversary can see a signal but not a reflection.
We can be sure that onboard jamming has not been added to the F-35 since. Had the JSF requirements been tightened by one iota since the program started, its advocates would be blaming that for the delays and overruns.
What the JSF does have is a jamming function—also known as “electronic attack,” or EA, in militaryese—in the radar. It also has an expendable radar decoy—BAE Systems’ ALE-70. Both are last-ditch measures to disrupt a missile engagement, not to prevent tracking.
JSF’s planners, in the mid-1990s, were close to correct when they calculated that low-band stealth and limited EA, combined with passive electronic surveillance for situational awareness, would be adequate at service entry. But they expected that the F-35 would reach squadrons in 2010, and China’s military modernization was barely imaginable.
The threats of the late 2010s will be qualitatively different. Old VHF radars could be dealt with by breaking the kill chain between detection and tracking: they did not provide good enough cueing to put analog, mechanically scanned tracking radars on to the target. Active electronically scanned array (AESA), high-power VHF radars and decimeter- and centimeter-wave trackers are more tenacious foes.
Last August, at an air show near Moscow, I talked to designers of a new, highly mobile counterstealth radar system, now being delivered to the Russian armed forces. Its centerpiece was a 100-foot-wide all-digital VHF AESA, but it also incorporated powerful higher-frequency radars that can track small targets once the VHF radar has detected them. More recently, however, it has emerged that the U.S. Navy is worried because new Chinese warships carry the Type 517M VHF search radar, which its maker says is an AESA.

 

Not to mention Low Frequency, long wavelength radars are easier to jam.

Russian anti-stealth radars can see the F-35, but can shoot it down because S-400 doesn't use low frequency radars to track targets, they use X-band bandwith frequency.

 

More baseless claims I see. You have no evidence that US has the capabilities that you claim

 

FAIL FAIL FAIL. Media is so stupid.

VHF radars are for Early Warning purposes.

They cannot shoot down stealth aircraft. The S-400 uses an X-band fire control radar.

Jamming reveals position? How stupid are these "military experts"? That is why you use MALD-J or standoff jammers. Or simply not use jammers on every airplane but ones that stay out of missile range.

 

But cannot not shoot it down you mean.

AA

- - - Updated - - -

Are you kidding me!!???

This information is not secret and available on the internet.

AA

 

Plus U.S. Military Doctrine unlike Russian Doctrine is for ALL U.S. SERVICE BRANCHES to attack in a specific methodology designed to destroy enemy air and ground defenses along with destroying enemy command and control and communications.

Russian military doctrine has changed little since WWII.

AA

- - - Updated - - -

What good is it if it cannot get a radar lock and even if it does it's guidance is burned out or jammed by U.S. Military Aircraft?

AA

 

Show it then. Show me a credible source that say that our EW capabilities surpass Russia's?


You won't do that. I have respected members of military as well as various defense analysis supporting my claims. You have nothing but wild theories and assumptions.

- - - Updated - - -

More baseless bias

"We can be sure that onboard jamming has not been added to the F-35 since. Had the JSF requirements been tightened by one iota since the program started, its advocates would be blaming that for the delays and overruns."

 

Keep in mind:

-US fighter jets have AESA radars(which can jam)
-Russia doesn't have AESA yet(until the PAK FA and MiG-35 come in service, while AESA is already of F-15s). They are still struggling to develop these chips.
-US is getting AESA dedicated jammers by 2020s, France and Sweden is already making GaN processing jammers, Russia is behind
-The Russians don't have sensor fusion on the fighters yet(until the PAK FA in service, meanwhile European Eurofighter Typhoons and Rafales have much more advanced tech)


Although exact stuff is classified, it's quite obvious Russia lacks the funding to support as powerful electronic infrastructure for the military.


There S-400 uses 92N6(or 2)E to lock on to targets, all the other radars are for support purposes(acquiring, warning, detection ) this includes all the fancy VHF ones, Nebo SVU, P-18, P-15, Vostek E, Nebo-M or whatever