Russia EW
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
Does Russia have superior EW capabilities than the West?
http://yournewswire.com/russian-jamming-system-kills-all-nato-electronic-systems-in-syria/
http://osnetdaily.com/2015/10/russian-jamming-system-blocks-all-nato-electronics-inside-bubble-600-km-in-diameter-over-syria/
>>29765300
No.
>>29765300
Look up DFRM jamming on wikipedia and take a wild guess at whether or not a helicopter-mounted DFRM system is capable of "blocking all NATO electronics"
>>29765318
*DRFM
>>29765327
*DMFR
>>29765300
Broad spectrum jamming of digital communication across a wide area requires a tremendous amount of energy. A six hundred kilometer sphere would require more energy then Russia's electrical grid can produce.
>>29765300
>>29765366
..but jamming GPS and cell phones is easy and useful in a modern asymmetrical warfare environment.
>>29765300
>sources refer to the Donald Cook incident
Well, I'm not even reading that shit. And you shouldn't read that shit either.
![33338961[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/muOTF9h.jpg "33338961[1].jpg")
>>29765300
>Does Russia have superior EW capabilities than the West?
Unknown. They faced with NATO systems mixed with Soviet systems in 080808 war and made some conclusions from that. They bought a lot of modern EW means since that time. Not only Su-34 and ground vehicles, but also EW helicopters. they can be very dangerous. They can carry much bigger antennas than planes and be in air for much longer period. .
>>29765379
In very local proximity.
>>29765300
>Russia
>superior in anything besides vodka and krokodil consumption
Ukraine have some working EW systems, but russian one is shit.
>>29765379
Not gonna get the desired effect with a limited radius. It's like the Koreans dumping mines out of aircraft willy nilly. That backfired
>>29765560
OP here
I personally don't believe Russian EW is anywhere close to Western EW, and most of these claims are loads of horseshit
But can you explain and debunk the Donald Cook incident?
>>29766390
Pretty much everyone nowadays can jam radio comms, radars and GPS signals. The difference here is that Russia, in contrast to the US, has the entire EW branch in armed forces, supplements regular brigades with dedicated units, and invests is these capabilities more than anyone else.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/21/russia-winning-the-electronic-war/
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/ausa-global-force/2016/03/07/russian-aggression-ramp-up-us-army-focus-electronic-warfare-needs/81249312/
>>29766515
Which makes sense. US(thus NATO) loves&relies a lot on their electronic gadgets, ergo that's a good attack vector for russians, especially considering the asymmetry between forces.
>>29766515
>Dedicated EW units are a Russia only thing
No. Russia has some interesting systems but nothing comparable to US electronic warfare systems. Honestly they don't have an match for a Prowler, much less modern aircraft. There's no Russian equivalent to the old crows.
>Pretty much everyone nowadays can jam radio comms, radars and GPS signals.
GPS is low energy signals with a known protocol, Jamming them isn't very hard.
Radar gets complicated. Modern PESA radar are hard but not impossible to jam because they can shift frequency constantly. AESA get around this by broadcasting across a bunch of frequency at once, lowering the energy on any given frequency to the point it's hard to tell the radar is operating at all and making jamming very, very difficult.
Modern digital radio is exceptionally challenging to jam if it's not operating at a known power, frequency and protocol.
>>29765300
Not even close and if you believe Russian propaganda you are a moron.
>>29766535
Yeah, and it would be an awesome attack vector if Oscars could safely operate in blue water where they could launch close to targets rather then from tied up at the dock.
Doesn't mean that will ever happen.
>>29765300
Very unlikely, but we play EW capabilities very close to the vest in america. Very few people know, and probably fewer even understand the more technical aspects of "how", and even fewer are willing to talk
>>29765938
>They can carry much bigger antennas than planes and be in air for much longer period. .
You are now aware that the radar dish alone on an AWACS is bigger than your Mi-8's main fuselage cargo area.
>>29766515
>The difference here is that Russia, in contrast to the US, has the entire EW branch in armed forces, supplements regular brigades with dedicated units, and invests is these capabilities more than anyone else.
Someone has never heard of Wild weasels, Prowlers, Growlers, (retired) Ravens or the plethora of C-130 variants.
>>29766390
Well nothing makes any sense in the description of what supposedly happened. First of all, jamming systems don't magically shut electronics down, you just drown relevant signals in your own. Even if this somehow caused a glitch, thanks to Russia it's now been spotted and fixed. In fact, this leads to another point : had it happened, it would basically be Russia giving free information to the US on their jamming system.
Also there's the fact that someone would gather all of that information and leak it, yet the US crew wouldn't know that the Russian jet was unarmed. Also, does it seem reasonable to you that they would all send resignation letters over that ?
Really, it sounds like total garbage fantasy a vatnik would make up after having too much vodka.
>>29766738
Yeah, this is what I'm talking about. Russia has modern mobile systems blinding enemy aircrafts, deflecting incoming missiles and messing with proximity fuses. The American comprehension of EWAR ends with Nam war era spy planes and jamming Taliban's walkie-talkies.
>>29766738
E-3 Sentry is a net-centric warning and control station designed to share data.
Rychag on Mi-8 is an offensive equipment designed to jam radar, sonar and raido-electronic guided weapons. AN/ALQ-99 would be the closest US equivalent.
Shouting louder then the other guy is easy peasy.
Being silent is another old art.
Pic relevant.
>>29766888
Lmao
Thank you America
Vatniks are among the worst and most deluded scum
>>29766390
>But can you explain and debunk the Donald Cook incident?
All you need to know that it was bullshit was look at the claims that were made. A warship in peacetime does not have all its shit turned on, EW cannot 'turn off' anything unless it's SUTER and more importantly, a DDG does not have a crew of 20 some people who can 'immediately go to port and resign', especially when it's port visit schedule is very clearly known and it made all its visits on schedule.
>>29765300
>Does Russia have superior EW capabilities than the West?
>does russia have EW?
No
>>29766605
>Honestly they don't have an match for a Prowler, much less modern aircraft. There's no Russian equivalent to the old crows.
>>29766738
>Someone has never heard of Wild weasels, Prowlers, Growlers, (retired) Ravens or the plethora of C-130 variants.
a dedicated wild weasel jet? they don't have one yes, but the closest thing they have is the Su-34 with integral Khibiny.
>>29766605
>Honestly they don't have an match for a Prowler
you mean a-6 with alq-99e pod on board. mount khibiny on su-34 and you have dedicated support jammer outclassing anything in u.s. arsenal
meanwhile, where's the u.s. equivalent to mercury-bm?
>>29767653
You mean like the old 'Jabberwocky' round that the US developed and used in the Gulf War?
Artillery deployed jammers aren't new but it's nice to see the Russians finally joining the party.
>>29767653
>where's the u.s. equivalent to mercury-bm?
M270
nukes your shitty mutated grad launcher away
>>29767837
no, i'm talking about closest american analog to a tiny mt-lb simultaneously defusing up to 100 artillery shells in mid-air over the area of 400 meters
>>29765300
I've read that Russian jamming is quite potent, and caused a lot of trouble for the Ukrainians.
If the Americans ever want to fight the Russians, they have to be prepared to operate in an environment of multi-spectral communications denial and without GPS-assisted technology, which is something they have never encountered.
>>29767653
Looking for equivalent items isn't effective, because two nations wage war differently.
>>29767459
>>does russia have EW?
>No
Underestimating the enemy has long traditions in the West to the point of making it into an art.
Russians have very good mathematicians who can design things well and it would be very unwise to dismiss this aspect. Where the Russians have problems is in parts of electronics and in production reliability. Their philosophy then is to use the simplest thing that works since it has the fewest parts that can go wrong. Mir, the space station, shows how this works out.
Thus when they get it to work it works rather well. As for EW it should not be forgotten that it was the Russians that were the first to have radar systems capable of detecting submarines moving below the surface because they had found it how the surface changes due to a moving submarine.
>>29768138
As for EW it were the Russians who pioneered it in 1905. The more you know.
>>29768138
Lol typical russian shill. Crimea was lost because stupid ukies not weapons or tactics.
>>29768061
The problem here is that you're implying that an outdated military based on technology that Russia knows and uses is a good example for what would happen in the case of the US.
>>29768668
And US jamming technology is pretty modern and advanced, because everybody remembers how US demonstrated it recently in... oh, right.
>>29768740
In the most recent operations against an enemy with an actual IADs; Iraq.
>>29768747
>an actual IADs
you forgot quotes around word "actual"
>>29768777
Iraq's IADs was substantial, definately the largest engaged in recent memory.
>>29768740
So supposing you are right we can know :
1) Russian jamming technology is effective against a country with outdated Russian technology
2) US jamming technology hasn't been used
Therefore what ? There's no relevant conclusion you can make out of this.
>>29768640
>Lol typical russian shill.
Hardly. I have served my country in uniform and my country has a border with Russia. That means we cannot afford to be as naive as you are.
>Crimea was lost because stupid ukies not weapons or tactics.
Good to hear you have the total overview of everything that happened. Noone else has.
>>29768044
>defusing artillery
>where the fuse is mechanical
My fucking sides.
>>29768872
>Good to hear you have the total overview of everything that happened. Noone else has.
he says while having a total overview of everything that happened
I wouldn't be surprised if Russia did use jamming systems in Syria but it doesn't say anything about American electronic capabilities. A jamming signal will work as long as no one tries to destroy it (duh). Since USA is on an anti ISIS mission and NOT fighting Russia, there's nothing Americans can do to Russian jamming without appearing hostile.
>>29766738
>You are now aware that the radar dish alone on an AWACS is bigger than your Mi-8's main fuselage cargo area.
I'm talking about Su-24/34 family and other planes with EW containers.
>>29767653
>mercury-bm
Given that the mercury-bm is great against grads, does not mean it will be effective against use arty. The M732 proximity fuze, can be dialed for either airburst or PD. Hence even if the first few blow up, it is a simple matter to dial it to PD and then the mercury-bm is ineffective.
As a side note, almost all Russian equipment falls into this category: if the opponent does one thing in particular all the time, the Russian equipment is hideously effective. The problem with that is that the US and by extension NATO, loves to fuck around with how their equipment operates, and love to use wildly different weapons for the same task.
>>29768889
The idea is that if the mechanical fuze is set to detonate the shell when a specific signal is received, as all proximity fuzes do, then by stimulating that signal at a greater height renders the artillery round ineffective. However, once the arty is changed to use PD, or optical detection, or simply a timer, the jamming become ineffective. For example grad rockets which all have a built in proximity fuze, can all be defeated by the jamming because they cannot choose to use a different detonation scheme. Hilariously this is more important for NATO to realize, because it means that the primary Russian arty system can be easily defeated.
>>29766666
There is a the Association of Old Crows. The US isn't that closemouthed about it.
>>29766142
Ukraine got most of their stuff from russia , the only indeginous shit they make is modifications of russian gear , how can they be superior?
>>29768061
>If the Americans ever want to fight the Russians
The US has vastly more powerful radar deception and jamming equipment, signal processing and communication disruption systems.
>>29768138
Russians lack functional and reliable computers powerful enough to implement modern signal processing. This puts them about thirty years behind the US.
>>29767362
>sonar
>>29765300
I will say that they certainly put more effort in it than the US does.
>>29768810
1) It was outdated.
2) It was manned by fucking arabs: http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars
3) Desert Storm required extremely extensive logistical preparation and massive preemptive deployment of forces into combat zone. Iraq could not do anything about it. If the West tries anything similar against Russian there is 100% guarantee Russia will notice the preparations well in advance and do everything in its power to disrupt it - including possible preemptive nuclear strikes if the Russians start to feel war is inevitable and they have nothing to lose.
>>29765300
No
/thread
>>29773851
>/threading your own post
>>29769743
>Given that the mercury-bm is great against grads, does not mean it will be effective against use arty. The M732 proximity fuze, can be dialed for either airburst or PD. Hence even if the first few blow up, it is a simple matter to dial it to PD and then the mercury-bm is ineffective.
Then they did their job, and did it well. The first few rounds are statistically the only ones that really kill, anything else after and the enemy has hunkered down and just being suppressed, which won't last long either since the counter battery fire now has a coord waiting to be serviced...
>As a side note, almost all Russian equipment falls into this category: if the opponent does one thing in particular all the time, the Russian equipment is hideously effective.
Not really. They just don't publicize shit that much so it seems that way.
> The problem with that is that the US and by extension NATO, loves to fuck around with how their equipment operates, and love to use wildly different weapons for the same task.
You mean like how showing their shiniest kits in conflicts that are really just sideshows?
>>29769795
>For example grad rockets which all have a built in proximity fuze, can all be defeated by the jamming because they cannot choose to use a different detonation scheme.
a)Most grad rockets don't have proximity fuze.
b)Those taht do you simply unscrew the item and replace it with a timer and PD one.
>>29773915
>not knowing this has been a thing since 2001
>>29770808
>Russians lack functional and reliable computers powerful enough to implement modern signal processing. This puts them about thirty years behind the US.
Are you fucking kidding me? They just buy those from the West (actually Chinks, Nips and Gooks make em anyway).
>>29769795
That's actuallly still pretty interesting. A capability like that would hamper many air burst rounds/rockets.
It's not a catch all, but you start pairing it with a gun/missile C-RAM system like Pantsir alongside medium to long/er range ABM/SAM's and you have a good defense
>>29774095
Hardened computer systems suitable for field EW work are non-export systems and are produced in the United States and England.
Granted, they'd be better off using off the shelf commercial workstation equipment then Russian built electronics, even if that's been shown to be a massive security hole in the past. Russian microelectronics are trash.
Jamming these days is all dependent on DSP and digital circuitry.
Considering most of these companies are either American, or American allies (Altera just bought by Intel).
Russians and Chings are mad fucked.
Have fun pinging at me with your binned processors vatniks
>>29774229
uh, no. Orientals are at the forefront of every microelectronics -related development, including military chips.
>>29774229
>England
name on bong chip.
>that's been shown to be a massive security hole in the pas
provided you got high and connected them to the outside world.
>>29774327
uh, no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_manufacturing_sites
65 nm was the forefront in 1995
>>29774327
>Name on bong chip
Are you high? BAE UK and US are major providers of EW equipment to the US and UK military, and everyone else allowed to buy from them.
>>29770660
Have you ever gone to an Old Crow meetup, and had them tell you all about current and near-current EW capabilities? Ever been to an Old Crow website, and read all their posts about current capabilities?
>>29774327
>uh, no. Orientals are at the forefront of every microelectronics -related development, including military chips.
AMD, Intel, Boeing, BAE and Texas Instruments, fine Asian companies.
>>29774327
>uh, no. Orientals are at the forefront of every microelectronics -related development, including military chips.
Fascinating. Please tell us two or three recent microelectronics developments, spearheaded by the "Orientals".
>>29774360
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabrication_plants
Samsung and TSMC are there up there too.
>>29774431
>AMD, Intel, Boeing, BAE and Texas Instruments, fine Asian companies.
Samsung, LG, Toshiba, Huawei, Lenovo, TSMC,...
>>29774411
>Are you high? BAE UK and US are major providers of EW equipment to the US and UK military, and everyone else allowed to buy from them.
I said chips, the thing that goes inside to do the "thing". Most likely its a Samsung one anyways- those bastards sell to everyone it seems.
>>29774431
Analog devices, Xilinx, 4DSP, Qualcomm, Nvidia, Google, Apple, Adobe, Cisco, HP, Dell, Microsoft, Oracle, National Semi, Microsoft, IBM
>>29774505
"being up there" and "at the forefront" are two different things.
Regardless both Samsung and TSMC are in American allied countries.
>>29769795
>The idea is that if the mechanical fuze is set to detonate the shell when a specific signal is received
>he doesn't understand how timed fuzing works
Fucking insane.
>>29774533
>Samsung
sells to everyone, even those damn dirty chinks. They actually provided the chips for some of the Rooskies advanced SAMs even.
>>29774533
>TSMC
Taiwan is so fucking inflitrated by commies in every facet of civilian and military power structure its not even funny.
>>29774591
The king of digital signal processing is still the intel processor supported by some FPGA chips.
Both technologies solidly in American hands.
>>29774505
Reminder that Intel, AMD, and nVidia are easily the most important semiconductor designers, and all American. ARM, which creates and licenses the designs used in nearly all mobile procs outside the Atom and Tegra lines, is British. Samsung's Exynos, Qualcomm's Snapdragon, and Apple's procs are all ARM licenses.
>>29774629
>Both technologies solidly in American hands.
that are strangely enough, yellow for the most part.
better be careful, Japan and Korea went through the same phase, exporting their best and brightest to learn and be masters of their own field, then come back with all that knowledge and experience.
>>29770757
Ukraine have its own military industry with western tech support. It is vastly superior then anything vatniks can manufacture.
>>29767653
There's an order of magnitude difference in the power output of Khibiny and ALQ-99.
A pair of ALQ-99's can output more power than an Irbis-E. Khibiny's power output has never been officially disclosed, but I would be surprised if it was over 1KW. Wingtip+no dedicated cooling means the amount of power it can deliver is very limited.
Without enough power, the hostile radar can burn through jamming very quickly.
>>29765300
Ivan please go to sleep, you have earned your daily rubles
>>29773835
Their IADs was about as old as the american equipment used to destroy them.
>B-but you can't win because we'll nuke you!
Kind of utterly irrelevant to the discussion and highly unlikely.
>>29773835
>Desert Storm required extremely extensive logistical preparation and massive preemptive deployment of forces into combat zone.
Doesn't matter, no matter the enemey, America will smother it with money.
>>29765300
>russian-jamming-system-blocks-all-nato-electronics-inside-bubble-600-km-in-diameter-over-syria
At this point I almost want WW3 to happen so I can lord it over Vatniks when all this shit gets frazzeld by MALDs and eats a Growler-load of HARMs
>>29774648
>Intel, AMD, and nVidia
No one of their civilian products can be used in military products. You can't use Core i7 in your missile or plane or anything.
>>29777033
lol. Meeeee toooo.
>>29776770
Russian strategic weapons have reached the point they'd lose an atomic exchange in any case.
>>29777072
Well you could, but it would be a generally poor idea, though system on a chip solutions for embedded equipment could be usable.
You couldn't use them for EW, though.
That said, they don't only make consumer products.
>>29774505
>TSMC
Uh.. Okay. That's a semiconductor foundry company. They make the waifers used as the raw materials for microchips.
That's really important, and a huge part of the world economy. It's also like saying an iron smelter in Canada is the same thing as Newport News Shipyard because they use steel.
TSMC dose not make microchips.
>>29776770
>Russian strategic weapons have reached the point they'd lose an atomic exchange in any case.
Just don't forget to duck and cover when they "lose" your cozy suburban house away.
>>29770808
>The US has vastly more powerful radar deception and jamming equipment, signal processing and communication disruption systems.
Which ones?
>>29768810
Ask the Israeli Air Force what they thought of Soviet ADS in 1973.
>>29767086
>The American comprehension of EWAR ends with Nam war era spy planes and jamming Taliban's walkie-talkies.
Wewlad
>>29766212
It created one of the last untouched nature preserves in the world so I'd say the occasional deer exploding is well worth it.
>>29778551
Half of Israeli air force has been wiped out in Suez by S-125, so unfortunately they're not available for comment.
>>29778542
For airborne?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_EC-130H_Compass_Call
>inb4 MUH COLD WAR TECH
its already at block 35. THIRTY FIVE.
>>29778588
And how do we measure it as being "vastly more powerful"?
Do you know the wattage it outputs? What is the yard stick you are using to make such statements of one system being vastly superior?
>>29778601
The other russian systems are single facted pod based systems that are limited in scope compared to the compass call missions.
>>29778640
>are single facted pod based systems that are limited in scope
What does single facted mean?
What is the implication of a pod based system?
Why is a pod based system limited in scope compared to a Hercules with EW gear?
>>29778704
>What does single facted mean?
If you cant speak english get off the board.
>Why is a pod based system limited in scope compared to a Hercules with EW gear?
The equipment is contained in the pod, while with the herc the entire cargo capacity is dedicated to the mission.
>>29770808
>Russians lack functional and reliable computers powerful enough to implement modern signal processing.
I'd like to see you attempt to document this. Having done DSP programming for a living I would not be troubled of you used professional terms here.
DSPs and FPGAs can easily be sourced through the Asia. Getting fast ADCs with good bitwidth is actually harder.
>This puts them about thirty years behind the US.
Really.
>>29774229
>Hardened computer systems suitable for field EW work are non-export systems
Perhaps. However this is not hard to make since the technology is well known and much in use in laboratories where external noise must be excluded. EMP safe electronics has been a thing for more than 30 years now.
>>29774266
>DSP and digital circuitry
So? First off DSP blocks are commonplace in SoC and easily available. ARM with NEON and SIMD etc. can be bought off the shelf or you can buy IP blocks and get Taiwanese companies to make the ASIC or you can put it into FPGAs that are easily obtained.
DSP is not just about raw power and clock frequencies but also about mathematics and there Russians do well.
>>29774481
>spearheaded by the "Orientals".
TSMC has continuously improved production and succeeded in reducing linewidth and is now a preferred foundry for many fabless companies. This would not be possible if TSMC (as well as Samsung, LG and more) had not had these breakthroughs.
>>29777072
>No one of their civilian products can be used in military products.
Back in the day the Russians bought a load of Japanese games consoles in order to extract the microprocessors which they then used in military hardware. It worked then.
>>29777325
>Uh.. Okay. That's a semiconductor foundry company. They make the waifers used as the raw materials for microchips.
>TSMC dose not make microchips.
You have no idea. This is just painful.
>>29776770
>Their IADs was about as old as the american equipment used to destroy them.
Lol, no.
>>29778588
>Number built 14
How is this relevant again? The vast majority of both Russian and US airborne ECM assets are pod based. Now show me anything comparable to Krasukha-4.
>>29765300
So Russia has the transistor now? Vacuum tube-powered stuff, while quaint, is not superior.
>>29779492
How is it not relevant, and why does the US need to have comparible vehicles when their doctrine isn't the same at all?
>>29779492
Do you have an equivalent to the Predator/Reaper drones?
>>29780410
>>29780465
So we went from "The US has vastly more powerful radar deception and jamming equipment, signal processing and communication disruption systems" to "it's all about doctrine" fairly wast. Well, Americans might be not as ineducable as it usually seems.
>>29780574
going to interject here but this guy pointed out Compass Call here >>29778588 and your rebuttal was:
>lol only 14
Youre really no better.
>>29780465
Also they developed this thing in the late 80s, but it was in a more tactical range, yet with twice the speed of the Reaper and 1 tonne payload.
>>29780465
Currently Russia does not have armed drones, some prototypes are reportedly in development.
>>29780574
Uh, no. Having greater EW capability doesn't mean you have to have an analog of a Krasuha-4.
The doctrine point was about where those EW capabilities come from.
Much like Russia relies on IADs for airspace denial and control; you wouldn't say the US is weak in the air because they don't have fifteen types of SPAAG. They just don't use SPAAGs.
>>29780653
He was talking about airborne ECM in general and brought up an extremely limited production aircraft. It's not a rebuttal, it's a notion that airborne ECM are in general pod based, regardless of country. You can say Compass Call is a more capable airborne ECM system, but you can not base your whole "The US has more powerful stuff" argument on just 14 specific planes.
>>29780755
Considering the range and application, 14 aircraft are more than enough.
>>29780720
Having greater EW capability requires, well, to have such a capability. And since Russian EW is pretty much unrivalled, I don't really get the point of your post.
>>29780776
You are missing the consideration of effectiveness.
>>29780794
...and it does have the capability.
Its just a defensive, road-based solution isn't what US doctrine dictates as needed. Feel free to try and bother reading the point about SPAAGs if your poor brain is straining too hard at that concept.
>>29780664
>prototype platform-launched "reusable" vehicle
Yeah, ok.
Not to say that Predators and Reapers are important components of US EW, mind you.
>>29768061
>>29780574
>>29778601
>>29780755
>make generalized assertions about the supposed inability of US military assets to overmatch and defeat Russian EW
>anons answer with specific example of highly capable US EW capabilities demonstrated in Kosovo, Libya, Iraq, Serbia, etc.
>vatniks move goalposts to discuss specific metrics of capability that they never cited in the first place, attempt to insinuate that doctrinal differences preclude evidence of technological superiority
Dezinformatsiya, everybody.
>>29780832
You still don't get that this is not about the platform, aren't ya? The US does not have any EW system even remotely as powerful as Krasukha-4. This is the rebuttal of "The US has more powerful stuff" post above.
>>29780869
I don't think he brought up UAVs as an example of EW.
>vatniks
Off to /pol with you, imbecile.
>>29780893
>The US does not have any EW system even remotely as powerful as Krasukha-4.
Yes it does. It's called Compass Call.
You know, for somebody who claims that this isn't "about the platform", you sure seem intent to make it about the platform.
>>29780918
>Off to /pol with you, imbecile.
If that's the extent of your refutation, I guess there's nothing more to say, vatnik.
It is becoming gruesomely obvious that most people here have little or no idea about WE other than the entirely superficial stuff that you might find in Wackypedia.
ECM is merely a tiny bit of EW. Perhaps it appears rather manly to some to pump out gigawatts of RF power, felling all birds in direct line of sight but that is the rather blunt approach.
Also branches have their own views on EW. So you won't see much radar jamming from the Army, HF DF from the Air Force etc. All the talk about "network centric warfare" is just that: talk. Inter branch rivalry will make sure this will not be reality for decades.
>>29780955
>Yes it does. It's called Compass Call.
Compass Call can jam satellites and AWACS? Has range greater than 300 km?
>M-muh vatnik
Poor clapburger trying to banter, how cute. Simply having 14 highly capable EW aircraft doesn't mean the US has "vastly more powerful" EW systems. It only means that it has 14 highly capable EW aircraft. But Russians have more and better EW systems.
>>29780999
>Compass Call can jam satellites and AWACS? Has range greater than 300 km?
I don't know anon, you're the one who seems incredibly sure that it can't.
What is its range?
>>29780999
>OP posts articles from two third-rate "news" rags, one of which appears to be the transcription of the other
>both cite the same article from Sputnik (with broken links), itself a Kremlin mouthpiece
>"Russia has country-scale helicopter-mounted jamming systems!!"
Sure.
>>29781033
If you don't know then why are you trying to defend some other anon's point about how "The US has more powerful stuff"?
>>29781145
I never referred to either OP or helicopter-mounted jamming systems. I am referring to a specific post that claims bullshit. If you want a better article, there's this one:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/08/02/us-army-ukraine-russia-electronic-warfare/30913397/
>>29781286
>If you don't know then why are you trying to defend some other anon's point about how "The US has more powerful stuff"?
If you dont know, why are you so sure russia is "unrivaled"?
The sword cuts both ways.
>>29777072
you'd be surprised
Germany's toy manufacturing industry gave them an edge in the first years of WW1 because the same wind up mechanism used in toys worked as the fuses in artillery shells
>>29781286
>I have bigger bottle of vodka than dimitri xaxaxa)))
But how do you know, Olev? How big is Dimitri's bottle?
>Does not of matter, I know mine biggest)))
>>29765300
I'm confused. Does the term "electronic system" cover only radars?
>>29778542
SEWIP Block 3, AN/ASQ-239, AN/ALQ-99.
Really the high energy stuff should scare Russians less then cheap and ubiquitous defensive ECM that is going to explode with software-defined equipment.
>>29778998
TSMC is the largest fabless wafer company in the world. Are you retarded?
>>29768138
I agree with this.
The West underestimates Russia and Putin all the time, it's funny because it makes me wonder how man more times we want to fall on our noses until we finally take them serious.
Asking about Russian capabilities on /k/ is a waste of time though since this board sucks nothing but American cock nowadays and disregards everything Russian, especially after Crimea. Add the obvious redditfags and you have one giant circlejerk of zero arguments and 100% memes.
>>29784371
Maybe its to do with a lot of those assumptions being proven right all the time, or at the very least never proven wrong.
>>29784371
When Russia has at least three aircraft carriers in service I will regard them as a legitimate threat. Okay, how about that.
>>29765938
>helicopters
>can stay in the air longer then planes
Ivan pls
>>29782968
Because of the burden of proof. Krasukha-4 basic characteristics are stated, while Compass Call is so far just said to be "capable" on wiki. Unless you have some certain information I am free to assume it's just a glorified An-12BK-PPS copycat.
>>29783592
Nice try, but in reality it went like this:
>I have of an bigger bottle of moonshine, Ivan!
>Yeah? Well here's my crate of vodka and every bottle in it is bigger than yours, Eugene. Now tell me exactly how big is your bottle.
>It's don't :^)
>>29784193
>The US has more powerful EW systems
>Which ones?
>Y-you shouldn't care about powerful EW systems, better take a look at all these pods!
Oh boy, here we go again.
>>29785964
The US operates / operated the EA-6B as one of its primary jamming aircraft. New AESAs like the F-22's and F-35's put out the same amount of power.
>>29784834
>When the US has at least one hypersonic AShM in service I will regard them as a legitimate threat. Okay, how about that.
>>29785964
>Posts picture of a plane that only according to russian propaganda networks shut down an Aegis system
>Vs proven, regularly updated EWO systems
>>29786157
In all honesty there's no need to shutdown something that never functioned in the first place.
>>29786029
Does anybody have a hypersonic AShM in service?
>>29786029
You fell for the hypersonic meme.
>>29786157
Nice strawman you got there, too bad the very producer of the said system denies the media bullshit you are trying to pull here.
>>29786427
Yes, Russia does. inb4 Mach 5 is not hypersonic because reasons.
>>29786560
In order to be hypersonic it has to exceed Mach 5.0.
The Kh-22 has a maximum speed of 4000 km/h, which is around 3.8 M.
http://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/as-4.htm
Wikipedia says 4.6 M which is closer but still not fast enough to be hypersonic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-22
>>29786621
You just googled it, right? Kh-22 has two flight profiles. One is low altitude supersonic, another is hight altitude hypersonic. In the latter flight profile Kh-22M has Mach 5 speed.
