J.O.R.N (Jindalee Operational Radar Network) of Australia

[Soldier]

Even though this article claims the coverage of 3000 Kms., most of other articles mention it as officially 2000 Kms but unofficially upto 3000 Kms, with not so much accuracy specially due to atmosphere behaviour. But still a radar to recon with. Wonder if there is anything else in the world right now which can outperform this radar?

Introduction

Australia is using a sophisticated new radar network that can detect stealth bombers, curb illegal immigration and spy on neighbouring nations from at least 3000 kilometres away. The $A1.8 billion Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) has taken more than 30 years to complete but is now undergoing final trials.

JORN is designed to monitor air and sea movements across 37,000km of largely unprotected coastline and 9 million square kilometres of ocean. It is being used to cast a security shield across Australia's remote northern approaches without the high cost of maintaining constant maritime and air patrols.

Operational Use

Jindalee over-the-horizon radar was used to track military aircraft landing and taking off from Dili Airport, in East Timor, on 20 September 1999, when Australia-led Interfet forces began securing the former Indonesian province from militia violence. Australian Hercules C130 transports were detected from 1500 kilometres away by a 6 kilometres-long radar array at Longreach (Queensland), and at a similar site at Alice Springs (Northern Territory).

Aircraft images were displayed on radar consoles in Adelaide and Melbourne, 2600 kilometres from the action. Royal Australian Air Force commanders said the radar was accurate enough to show aircraft turning on their landing approach to Dili Airport.

The new radar has also been used to track illegal immigrants approaching Australia by boat through the region's largely unguarded northern waters. Although designed primarily for air detection, JORN was reconfigured last year at Australian Government request to scan for marine intruders. More than 500 illegal immigrants have been arrested and detained in recent weeks, largely as a result of JORN intelligence passed to civilian customs authorities. JORN can also measure wave height and wind direction for meteorological reports.

Jindalee radar at Longreach, Alice Springs and Laverton (Western Australia) enables Australian military commanders to observe all air and sea activity north of Australia to distances of at least 3000 kilometers. This takes in all of Java, Irian Jaya, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, and halfway across the Indian Ocean.

JORN underpins Australian long-term military defence planning based on repelling an invader that attacks southwards through the Indonesian Islands, as did Japan in World War 2.

RAAF Group Captain Greg Hockings, who heads the new Jindalee Operational Radar Network, describes Jindalee as a "tripwire" in Australia's northern surveillance system.

JORN project manager Gordon McElroy, who previously directed Lockheed Martin's US battlefield defence programs, says of JORN: "There is none like it anywhere on the planet."

The JORN System

Lockheed Martin is the major partner in an Australian joint venture company, RLM Systems, which took over the project from the Australian Government's partly privatised telecommunications company, Telstra, in 1997. RLM performed a rescue operation after Telstra reported a $609 million loss on the project and could not guarantee a delivery date.

JORN uses two high frequency radio transmitters located 2300 kilometres apart, at Longreach and Laverton. The transmitter arrays are about one kilometre long and can generate a 20 kilowatt signal, which is stronger than most radio station signals.

The signal is said to be strong enough to blow up nearby re-fuelling depots, which are equipped with metal "faraday" shields to stop accidental sparks.

Signals are aimed at the ionosphere, where the beam is reflected over the horizon to targets up to 3000km away. A weak return signal from over the horizon is captured by a highly sensitive receiver that uses advanced software to separate background "clutter" from selected targets.

The receivers consist of two "arms", each 3.4 kilometers long, and each site consists of 960 individual antenna masts that must not be more than 10mm out of line along the whole length.

Transmitter and receiver sites near Longreach and Laverton are located about 100km apart to prevent electronic interference. The system is linked to 17 beacon stations across northern Australia, which are used to measure ionospheric conditions and calibrate transmissions from Longreach and Laverton.

The RAAF admits the system can operate well beyond its "unclassified" range of 3000 kilometres when radar signals become trapped inside the ionosphere and bounce twice before emerging over the horizon. However, unofficial reports that JORN can see as far as Singapore Harbour, Hong Kong and the Russian border are described by the RAAF as "highly optimistic".

More than a million lines of software code were written to integrate the constantly changing electronic data in what is described by RLM Systems as the biggest software development project in the southern hemisphere. The whole network is linked to a test command centre in Melbourne and, via a duplicate link, to the RAAF's high frequency surveillance command headquarters at Edinburg base, near Adelaide.

Stealth Aircraft not Immune

Edinburg is also linked to a third Jindalee transmitter and receiver at Alice Springs, which has operated as a JORN test site since 1993. McElroy says the Jindalee radar is very difficult to jam because of the way the signal is propagated over the ionosphere. "It can also detect stealth bombers, which are not designed to defeat the characteristics of Jindalee's high frequency radar," he said.

Stealth aircraft, such as the US Nighthawk F117A, are designed with sharp leading edges and a flat belly to minimise reflections back towards conventional ground-based radars. However, Jindalee radar bounces down from the ionosphere onto upper surfaces that include radar-reflecting protrusions for a cockpit, engine housings and other equipment.

Group Captain Hockings says stealth aircraft are coated with special radar absorbing material to avoid detection by conventional microwave radar. But the Jindalee radar uses high frequency radio waves, which have a much longer frequency than microwave radar. "Unless designed to be stealthy to both microwave and HF radars, (stealth) aircraft would not evade detection by JORN," he said.

Defence contractors are due to hand JORN over to the RAAF at the end of next year.

Some Pictures of the System:
http://defence-data.com/storypic/sunset2.jpg
http://defence-data.com/storypic/poles.jpg
Coverage:
http://defence-data.com/storypic/scanrange.jpg

[Aussie Digger]

Yep there have been "confirmed" reports of JORN detecting F-117A aircraft and have detected other aircraft at ranges of 3500klms. Not a bad watch on Australia's northern borders eh? It's also very useful for maritime surveillance as well as aerial surveillance.

[Soldier]

Yep there have been "confirmed" reports of JORN detecting F-117A aircraft and have detected other aircraft at ranges of 3500klms. Not a bad watch on Australia's northern borders eh? It's also very useful for maritime surveillance as well as aerial surveillance.

I certainly agree about it being able to detect at 3500 Kms but when the target is in air..but no way on the sea. Also the range of 3500 is bit optimistic and at that range it is difficult for it to identify the target clearly.

[srirangan]

How easily and accurately can this detect incoming N.Korean or Chinese missiles?

Well this system looks great to me, certainly a leap forward in this sphere.

[gf0012-aust]

How easily and accurately can this detect incoming N.Korean or Chinese missiles?

Well this system looks great to me, certainly a leap forward in this sphere.

The US has just signed an agreement to have access to the technology so that they can integrate it into their ABM system.

[Aussie Digger]

I suggest perhaps you do a bit of research on the JORN Soldier, it IS as capable in Air surveillance as it is in maritime surveillance, however it is not exactly specific as to the exact location of an object. JORN is uesd for wide area surveillance. It will detect anything within the 3500klm range I mentioned, but other systems (such as Australia's Wedgetail AWACS) will be needed to identify the object, pin-point it's location and determine it's intent. The systems are complementary and overlap to a degree. JORN doesn't do everything, but it is the longest ranging operational radar system in the world...

[gf0012-aust]

I certainly agree about it being able to detect at 3500 Kms but when the target is in air..but no way on the sea. Also the range of 3500 is bit optimistic and at that range it is difficult for it to identify the target clearly.

The system has regularly intercepted beyond 3500k's. The declared figures on radar systems are always conservative.

To give you an idea of how capable it is, approx 7 years ago there was a test where the system was able to track a truck driving through the desert in western australia. The system regularly is used for maritime interrogation, and in fact australia has developed a smaller variant of it using surface wave radar to help detect intrusions north of queensland. that system is smaller and is able to pick up vessels beyond 400k's

edit: australia also has just approved the installation of a wide area grid network as well. it means that literally every part of the country is now trackable. that means that there are 4-5 systems interconnected:

JORN
WAGN
Ground Based Radar Network
DIGO satellites.
SWRS

It makes it virtually impossible for any aircraft to enter australian airspace without detection - even if they are at sea level.

[srirangan]

The US has just signed an agreement to have access to the technology so that they can integrate it into their ABM system.

So basically the Aussie Jorn + the US GPS work together to tmake the Missile Shield more accurate in that region. This would be great news if this works out perfectly, and I see no reason why it wouldn't.

[Soldier]

I suggest perhaps you do a bit of research on the JORN Soldier, it IS as capable in Air surveillance as it is in maritime surveillance, however it is not exactly specific as to the exact location of an object. JORN is uesd for wide area surveillance. It will detect anything within the 3500klm range I mentioned, but other systems (such as Australia's Wedgetail AWACS) will be needed to identify the object, pin-point it's location and determine it's intent. The systems are complementary and overlap to a degree. JORN doesn't do everything, but it is the longest ranging operational radar system in the world...

AussieDigger, I did not start this thread without studying about it. Infact I had been reading on various websites for almost 5 hours. I agree with you about it being specific to the exact location. I still stand by what I said. I will also like to add, that I studied about the engineering aspect and wavelengths, RF frequencies used. There is always a limit to it.

I sure will like some comments from GF, as I may recall him saying once on the forum that Australia was able to detect planes taking off from South of India. Reading the various articles online, that was no where near the truth. Perhaps it may have been said by someone else and if not GF, then I apologize in advance.

[Aussie Digger]

Yep, the JORN is perfect for tracking long range missile firings...

[gf0012-aust]

I sure will like some comments from GF, as I may recall him saying once on the forum that Australia was able to detect planes taking off from South of India. Reading the various articles online, that was no where near the truth. Perhaps it may have been said by someone else and if not GF, then I apologize in advance.

Nope, that wasn't me, and if I did say it then I was clearly over tired and delusional. ;)

The system unofficially was able to track stealth aircraft over bagdhad, although this seems far fetched, the nature and vagaries of the ionosphere sometimes give you an unusal window of surveillance. The Russians also experienced similar aberrations, although their system never had the absolute depth of field that we've managed to achieve to date.

[gf0012-aust]

I will also like to add, that I studied about the engineering aspect and wavelengths, RF frequencies used. There is always a limit to it.

The issue is that the Ionosphere introduces vagaries and opportunities which some scientists still don't fully comprehend, and which to date, we think we have a better grasp than other countires undertaking similar development.

Back scattering off the ionosphere can be influenced by weather conditions and a host of other variables. It's a bit like a hi tech version of a heliograph, except that the return is bounced off the ionosphere and not off of a device acting as a redirector. ie, if you don't have the system tuned properly, then you won't see the return etc... it's not like a normal RF interrogation process.

the other analogy is think of the hubble telescope acting like the ionosphere, if you don't get it right, then the reading will be hundreds of miles off

[Soldier]

I sure will like some comments from GF, as I may recall him saying once on the forum that Australia was able to detect planes taking off from South of India. Reading the various articles online, that was no where near the truth. Perhaps it may have been said by someone else and if not GF, then I apologize in advance.

Nope, that wasn't me, and if I did say it then I was clearly over tired and delusional. ;)

The system unofficially was able to track stealth aircraft over bagdhad, although this seems far fetched, the nature and vagaries of the ionosphere sometimes give you an unusal window of surveillance. The Russians also experienced similar aberrations, although their system never had the absolute depth of field that we've managed to achieve to date.

More then technology what impressed me most was the IDEA and INNOVATION... It really is a work of some cool thinking brainheads. Now since it is already implemented, there have to be people involved already working on enhancing the range further...

[Aussie Digger]

I too read that JORN picked up Stealth aircraft over Baghdad, but that seemed unlikely to me too. Maritime surveillance is one of the primary roles of JORN soldier, whatever those articles might say. Cheers.

[Soldier]

I too read that JORN picked up Stealth aircraft over Baghdad, but that seemed unlikely to me too. Maritime surveillance is one of the primary roles of JORN soldier, whatever those articles might say. Cheers.

Oh yes AussieDigger, I do not deny it. If I am not wrong it was made for maritime vigilence only but later modified for air & sea both.

[Soldier]

The Russians also experienced similar aberrations, although their system never had the absolute depth of field that we've managed to achieve to date.

Does that mean Russians also has the same type of Radar but with less capabilities? Any other countries you may be knowing of, who are trying to come up with this same type of technology?

[gf0012-aust]

Does that mean Russians also has the same type of Radar but with less capabilities? Any other countries you may be knowing of, who are trying to come up with this same type of technology?

The Russians have a system using similar concepts, but it's range is not as great. It was mainly designed to pick up the launch of battlefield rockets, SRBM's or aircraft surges.

[Todjaeger]

Are there current plans to link the data gathered by JORN and SECAR? Also, aside from range, does anyone know what the difference between the two systems are? JORN seems to be very long range, with a top down RF, from the ionosphere, while SECAR is HF and I believe is from sea-level to the ionosphere, but with a range of 200 n miles. Is this correct? From what I have read, the two systems seem pretty much the same otherwise.

[ugunnadiepiggy]

Oh yes AussieDigger, I do not deny it. If I am not wrong it was made for maritime vigilence only but later modified for air & sea both.
i believe we recieved the idea from the states and improved the technology on basis provided by our think tanks, they do have a similar operation used by there defence forces to detect surface and submarine launch missles. I beleive this has now being extended with our technology and incorparated into ABM shield. the main dis-advantage is much like any radar except to a greater degree, in that it suffers from a form of clutter. i will not go into detail. it can detect a f117 because it is only stealthy in a headon, sideon profile, the radar waves are coming from an angle. although detecting a plane in bahgdad is beyond scope of the project it is not impossible to say it may have.

[Smythstar]

Yeah I think we bought the original antenna second hand from the Brits who had given up on their OHR program.
The Russians have or had the woodpecker http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/soviet/steel_yard.htm
and the Yanks are playing with their HAARP which depending on who you belive may be somthing similar to JORN.

[AUSTEO]

it can detect a f117 because it is only stealthy in a headon, sideon profile, the radar waves are coming from an angle.

Not quite.

OTHR uses long wavelengths in the HF (High Frequency) band, with wavelengths of the same order of magnitude as an aircraft. As such, stealth
shaping does nothing in terms of reducing radar reflection at these
frequencies, whereas microwave radar is effectively scattered by that shaping.

The price for this capability is in precision - you can say an aircraft is within a certain box that's ____ hundred metres wide, but that's obviously not good enough for missile guidance.

[StingrayOZ]

As I understand it JORN can be pretty confident to detect most things within 3,000 km. In favourable conditions it can reach out greater than 5,000 km. However that coverage is irradic and imprecise.

But it does give you information where to look with other resources. Many of which can see everything, but don't know where to look. I would imagine with a combination of systems, you could provide target information. While not specific for a missile, scrambled aircraft would know where to engage, object speed and heading atleast approximately.

I don't belive anyone has such a all emcompassing system like JORN. The americans have a more powerful but less effective system. But upgrades are taking place. I would imagine they will eventually form some sort of global network.

[gf0012-aust]

As I understand it JORN can be pretty confident to detect most things within 3,000 km. In favourable conditions it can reach out greater than 5,000 km. However that coverage is irradic and imprecise.

But it does give you information where to look with other resources. Many of which can see everything, but don't know where to look. I would imagine with a combination of systems, you could provide target information. While not specific for a missile, scrambled aircraft would know where to engage, object speed and heading atleast approximately.

I don't belive anyone has such a all emcompassing system like JORN. The americans have a more powerful but less effective system. But upgrades are taking place. I would imagine they will eventually form some sort of global network.

The issue is the distinction between detection and targetting. The US interest is to make JORN a companion system to existing detection and targetting capabilities. JORN by definition is not a targetting system.

I wouldn't argue that the US doesn't have similar capability (and by distinction I'm referring to task not capability). JORN us unique due to our requirements. OTHR capability exists with the US, France and Russia.

[Wooki]

i believe we recieved the idea from the states and improved the technology on basis provided by our think tanks...

I would dispute that. There may have been research in other countries during the 50's and 60's, but the JORN program is the result of a truly indigenous effort. I was vaguely surprised that Telstra couldn't keep it together, but I guess they lost some of the talent.

One of the first concepts to look closely at "JORN" like tech, was a proof of concept over the horizon Microwave link between NSW and Qld that had about a 400km range. Yes microwave, not HF. If you can use the ionosphere to manage microwaves, then it is relatively easy to adjust it for HF. In fact, as "easy as pie".

That is to say, there is a lot more depth behind JORN then people are aware of and a whole "swag" of very interesting spinoffs have cropped up as a result.

The USA has existing assets that could be modified to provide it with a global early warning detection system, far exceeding what JORN can do to date, but I am not sure as to whether the powers that be realize what they have or whether it is natural market forces that are preventing its implementation.

I suspect it is largely due to the latter.

Cheers

w

[StingrayOZ]

I would imagine the americans know what they are doing. They are only half as stupid as they make themselves out to be.

While they may be trying to apply part of the technology to targeting I would imagine its augmented by other targeting specific techniques.

Who knows what massive global plan the americans are working on. Given how far Australia was able to bring their own OTHR, the americans adopting Australian advances and throwing huge money and resources could do even more.

[AGRA]

Its called SBIRS... Space Based Infra Red System. It will provide both launch alert and tracking of ballistic missiles (the current DSP satellites only provide launch alert). However SBIRS will also provide 'other' battlefield intelligence... Which means tracking infra red signatures from planes, vehicles and ships.

[Wooki]

Its called SBIRS... Space Based Infra Red System. It will provide both launch alert and tracking of ballistic missiles (the current DSP satellites only provide launch alert). However SBIRS will also provide 'other' battlefield intelligence... Which means tracking infra red signatures from planes, vehicles and ships.
Yes :D That is one asset.

I would imagine the americans know what they are doing. They are only half as stupid as they make themselves out to be.

I find comments like the above offensive and they detract from the board as a whole. People (presumably yourself) who focus on one individual as a representative of the whole are small minded and lack imagination. I suspect that you would consider George Bush (with whom I am sure you are basing your laser like insight upon) the greatest man on Earth, if he chose to spend 5 minutes one on one with you.

w

[StingrayOZ]

I didn't mean to offend.

My comment was actually saying "Americans are very smart operators, despite many people claiming the opposite. They are so far ahead on this sort of stuff that they make everyone look like 1st graders playing with duplo."

My half as stupid was actually a play on the standard comment of "your only half as smart as you make yourself out to be". While many people may think that americans are deficent in smarts, all I have ever seen of the technical side, is that the US is extremely capable and have almost all the answers on stuff everyone else is just dreaming about.

Criticising the usa is like critising god. They are trying to do so much, any outcome that is not perfect is deemed terrible evil.

The things I say I say from a country which is a very, very staunch supporter of the USA.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22523510-953,00.html

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/27/poll-support-for-iraq-war-reaches-new-low/

Infact Australia supports the Iraq war more than American's do. 92% of Australians think Australia and the US should have a very close defence relationship even after the Iraq war rift (rift being ~40+% of Australians supporting it). I would also point out Australia's long term commitment to previous US action in Korea, Veitnam, GWI, etc etc etc...

While I may disagree with some decisions, I try and do so in a positive manner. Knowing we will all be working together next time.

[Wooki]

I didn't mean to offend.

My comment was actually saying "Americans are very smart operators, despite many people claiming the opposite. They are so far ahead on this sort of stuff that they make everyone look like 1st graders playing with duplo."

My half as stupid was actually a play on the standard comment of "your only half as smart as you make yourself out to be". While many people may think that americans are deficent in smarts, all I have ever seen of the technical side, is that the US is extremely capable and have almost all the answers on stuff everyone else is just dreaming about.

Criticising the usa is like critising god. They are trying to do so much, any outcome that is not perfect is deemed terrible evil.

The things I say I say from a country which is a very, very staunch supporter of the USA.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22523510-953,00.html

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/27/poll-support-for-iraq-war-reaches-new-low/

Infact Australia supports the Iraq war more than American's do. 92% of Australians think Australia and the US should have a very close defence relationship even after the Iraq war rift (rift being ~40+% of Australians supporting it). I would also point out Australia's long term commitment to previous US action in Korea, Veitnam, GWI, etc etc etc...

While I may disagree with some decisions, I try and do so in a positive manner. Knowing we will all be working together next time.

Oh, no problem. I guess I am a bit tired of the election schpeel already and misconstrued your writing. I apologize in turn for jumping the gun.

cheers

w

[barra]

JORN was an Australian initiative with original contract going to Telstra who built the original ground stations. The Americans only got interested in its capabilities when we asked to confirm aircraft movements around Guam to gauge JORN's accuracy with time and position.

Hooroo

[Awang se]

not really good for missile targeting maybe, but good enough to provide early warning and to significantly narrow down search envelope for more accurate sensors. to detect a strike 3000km away is already a significant achievement. it provide plenty of time for the defence preparation and to concentrate maximum firepower in a direction the attack will come.

i wonder, maybe the arrays can be mounted on a mobile platform. or is it too big?

[gf0012-aust]

not really good for missile targeting maybe

hence US interest in being able to merge the capability into their existing sensor capability


i wonder, maybe the arrays can be mounted on a mobile platform. or is it too big?

too big.....

[Tasman]

i wonder, maybe the arrays can be mounted on a mobile platform. or is it too big?

It covers much to great an area to be developed as a mobile system. Also the transmitter site and its receiver site are separated by a large distance to prevent the transmitter from interfering with the receiver.

http://www.defence.gov.au/raaf/organisation/info_on/units/1_rsu/index.htm

Tas

[Awang se]

i mean an individual transmitter/receptor in the array. maybe we can rotate it's location in one general area. a few kilometres relocation won't affect greatly on such a system, i think.

I first heard about the system when i was still 16 years old, and that's 11 years ago.

[gf0012-aust]

i mean an individual transmitter/receptor in the array. maybe we can rotate it's location in one general area. a few kilometres relocation won't affect greatly on such a system, i think.

I first heard about the system when i was still 16 years old, and that's 11 years ago.

Unofficially there are claims that the system was able to detect scud launches in the ME and to actually see into the PACRIM as well.

If thats the case, then it already has demonstrated a degree of omnidirectional capability.

[Awang se]

what i meant is for the survivability. stationary target is a sitting duck. if we can rotate the individual antenna into several alternate location, it may improved the survivability.

anyway, if several antenna in the array are knock out, can JORN still be operational?

[gf0012-aust]

what i meant is for the survivability. stationary target is a sitting duck. if we can rotate the individual antenna into several alternate location, it may improved the survivability.

anyway, if several antenna in the array are knock out, can JORN still be operational?


In real terms, the only weapon that could make a catastrophic statement on JORN would be a ballistic response - and that would narrow it down to a few players.

Cruise missiles would have to be basically coming in under MRBM range definitions to reach out and touch the system - again that is a capability that in current terms is only available to the Russians. China certainly doesn't have that depth of response capability in cruise missile tech.

It would take quite a bit to stuff up the arrays - and then you'd also have to kill the control stations - and a few other bits and pieces which aren't in the brochures. ;)

All theoretical of course. ......

Let me reiterate the tried and true expression that you can go and kill anything if you have the technical means and political will and intent to do so - but to reach out and touch JORN narrows down the hostiles list somewhat considerably....

[StingrayOZ]

And JORN has redudancy. How big are the arrays? Kms? Long and narrow. In several locations. You can't fire a single missile and pull the plug on it.

It would be a huge long range strike even starting from costal Australia. Not to mention perhaps more critical US installations on the way there. Given the US is linking into it, they would take it very personally.

[VGNTMH]

I realize that the range of JORN can very with ionospheric conditions.

But one thing I have always wondered is, are there any times when JORN cannot operate at all due to unsuitable ionospheric conditions?

That is can it operate at all times, with the range varying from say 2000km to much longer, or can it only operate say 75% of the time and the other 25%of the time it is ineffective?

In any case it is a very respectable technological achievement by Australia (CSIRO?) and surely of great utility to the ADF and JOPC.

It gives you an omniscient feeling!

[Wooki]

In real terms, the only weapon that could make a catastrophic statement on JORN would be a ballistic response - and that would narrow it down to a few players.

Cruise missiles would have to be basically coming in under MRBM range definitions to reach out and touch the system - again that is a capability that in current terms is only available to the Russians. China certainly doesn't have that depth of response capability in cruise missile tech.

It would take quite a bit to stuff up the arrays - and then you'd also have to kill the control stations - and a few other bits and pieces which aren't in the brochures. ;)

All theoretical of course. ......

Let me reiterate the tried and true expression that you can go and kill anything if you have the technical means and political will and intent to do so - but to reach out and touch JORN narrows down the hostiles list somewhat considerably....

And JORN has redudancy. How big are the arrays? Kms? Long and narrow. In several locations. You can't fire a single missile and pull the plug on it.

It would be a huge long range strike even starting from costal Australia. Not to mention perhaps more critical US installations on the way there. Given the US is linking into it, they would take it very personally.

Ummm, I wouldn't be so sure about that. All existing (published) radar technologies rely upon electro-magnetic energy and a media converting electricity into that EM energy. So you only have to shut that process down to achieve a kill.

It is actually quite easy to disable that process in a static array. E.g. A Cessna 172 could do it.

cheers

w

[gf0012-aust]

Ummm, I wouldn't be so sure about that. All existing (published) radar technologies rely upon electro-magnetic energy and a media converting electricity into that EM energy. So you only have to shut that process down to achieve a kill.

It is actually quite easy to disable that process in a static array. E.g. A Cessna 172 could do it.

cheers

w

Ok, if you want to be pedantic. In a state on state conflict - you have to penetrate the transcontinental air space with an asset that will effect the kill.

Of the 4 transcontinental - intercontinenal systems in service, which state player is a threat to australia?

[Wooki]

Ok, if you want to be pedantic. In a state on state conflict - you have to penetrate the transcontinental air space with an asset that will effect the kill.

Of the 4 transcontinental - intercontinenal systems in service, which state player is a threat to australia?

? No it doesn't have to be a state player, But me just mentioning it here should give anyone involved in the system enough nounce to deduce the threat and close the door on it.

So it is a non-issue, or should be a non-issue by weeks end.

cheers

w

[rabs]

Does the JORN system have the ability to link up with other forces, such as RAAF Hornerts or Even USAF Hornets and provide updated information such as location. It has been established that it cant provide targeting data but can it at least be data linked is what im trying to say?

[lobbie111]

By reading here I have worked out that JORN is not ideal as a targeting system, now my question is this. Discounting any AEWAC platforms or any other kind of non ground based radar system. What could you use as a ground based targeting radar as a complement for the system, would it have to be custom designed?

I dont think it matters that it could reach the full extent of the JORN's range maybe the range of the longest range fighter in use today, just a bit longer perhaps so you can be able to destroy aircraft or shipping before they launch a payload at Australia.

Sorry if this was off topic btw.

[gf0012-aust]

an agreement was signed last year with the americans to integrate JORN capability into their other sensor captive/targetting systems

[lobbie111]

an agreement was signed last year with the americans to integrate JORN capability into their other sensor captive/targetting systems

Sorry, I don't understand which country you are talking about.

Is the agreement to integrate American targeting systems onto the Australian systems.

OR

Is the agreement to integrate an Australian JORN type network onto the American targeting systems in America?

Sorry if that sounded like I was stupid or something

Oh and I read the initial deal with Telstra was actually a partnership of GEC Marconi and Telstra, Marconi Pulled out and then Telstra had no clue

[StingrayOZ]

I belive the agreement is to add american targeting systems onto the Australian system and intergrating it into the american sensor network. Atleast that is how I understand it.

Something to do with JORN being quite good at detecting missile launches. While JORN can lack detail, these locations would be known, the the trajectories could also be monitored by other means and combined with JORN data, but as a first inital warning JORN can do that.

I wouldn't be suprised if the technology gets used elsewhere.

[lobbie111]

Any word on what they are going to use or is it secret until they reveal it to the public?

[StingrayOZ]

I wouldn't expect a whole lot of technical information to come out about more than what is already in the public domain. Perhaps when everything is operational they might make an announcement regarding its performance.

[gf0012-aust]

I wouldn't expect a whole lot of technical information to come out about more than what is already in the public domain. Perhaps when everything is operational they might make an announcement regarding its performance.

The stuff in the public domain about JORN is so far off the mark that its next to useless.

I would expect the same if not even more vigorous sanitising of publicly available info on the next stage project.

[gf0012-aust]

Something to do with JORN being quite good at detecting missile launches. While JORN can lack detail, these locations would be known, the the trajectories could also be monitored by other means and combined with JORN data, but as a first inital warning JORN can do that.

That's Pine Gaps role de rigeur....


I wouldn't be suprised if the technology gets used elsewhere.

It can't. No doubt elements of the integration will be useful learning tools, but it's not as if they can migrate the process into (say) Sea Based X Band......

[StingrayOZ]

The stuff in the public domain about JORN is so far off the mark that its next to useless.

Well, would we have it any other way? FUD is essential.

No doubt elements of the integration will be useful learning tools, but it's not as if they can migrate the process into (say) Sea Based X Band......

Of course, but JORN being a bit of a wildcard may have an impact on future research and development depending how useful it can be used in this new enviroment and application. While I don't expect it to be cut and paste hardware jobs, theres a fair bit of money being thrown around at I belive the software level which may follow on to other projects.

That's Pine Gaps role de rigeur....
What the inital launch and boost phase detection? Or the more detailed information?

[gf0012-aust]

Well, would we have it any other way? FUD is essential.

Its interesting how much rubbish some of us have seen thats been touted as fact though.

Of course, but JORN being a bit of a wildcard may have an impact on future research and development depending how useful it can be used in this new enviroment and application. While I don't expect it to be cut and paste hardware jobs, theres a fair bit of money being thrown around at I belive the software level which may follow on to other projects.

If you compare DSTO's annual budget compared to DARPA, or even one SAIC project then you'd weep at embarassment - considering the paucity of funds, aust tech manages to hold its head up. Or if you look at whats spent on metalstorm by respective parties.... then the money being thrown around will be primarily from the cousins.....

[Dr. Renato]

Does anyone know what the time-bandwidth (BT) product of the Jindalee radar is?

[Pro'forma]

This wasn't the Canadian/Australian cooperation? Or regarding to similar
European, this did not use mimicry as other projelts alike. On a tech-case or not, joint rehearsals do all for us primary. Tender spot to, would describe
whether it is impossible as keep its technical front.

[gf0012-aust]

This wasn't the Canadian/Australian cooperation? Or regarding to similar European, this did not use mimicry as other projelts alike. On a tech-case or not, joint rehearsals do all for us primary. Tender spot to, would describe whether it is impossible as keep its technical front.

Would you mind restating your response? I'm not quite getting the gist of your message.

[Pro'forma]

Would you mind restating your response? I'm not quite getting the gist of your message.

Any giddy ?
This is no gilding, although you find it. As reply to; Jindalee
is a masterpiece, I agree.

[gf0012-aust]

Any giddy ?
This is no gilding, although you find it. As reply to; Jindalee
is a masterpiece, I agree.


Sorry, we're having a comms disconnect here. I don't actually understand what you're trying to tell the forum.

[gf0012-aust]

This wasn't the Canadian/Australian cooperation?


There is no canadian involvement with the development of JORN.

[Pro'forma]

There is no canadian involvement with the development of JORN.

I understand. To the matter of JORN. This replacement clearly JORN
has done, what was called the previous Radar, before the newest one.
Are you considering, the radar technology has taken the advantage,
as for the latest new products, with protection as measurable as it is?

[lobbie111]

I understand. To the matter of JORN. This replacement clearly JORN
has done, what was called the previous Radar, before the newest one.
Are you considering, the radar technology has taken the advantage,
as for the latest new products, with protection as measurable as it is?

I don't believe there was a previous radar, JORN was borne out of a requirment for a new system not a replacement for an existing one.

Well as I understand to an extent it does take advantage of new LO technologies because of the way it works by finding the top of the aircraft not the flat bottom. There isn't really a detection capability that matches JORN it is a pretty unique capability.

[gf0012-aust]

There isn't really a detection capability that matches JORN it is a pretty unique capability.

Not entirely correct. There are a couple of other systems with similar technology, however JORN is unique wrt depth of interrogation and a few other sensing/discrimination "bits"

[lobbie111]

what do you mean by "depth of interrogation" detail, or range?

[Pro'forma]

I don't believe there was a previous radar, JORN was borne out of a requirment for a new system not a replacement for an existing one.

Well as I understand to an extent it does take advantage of new LO technologies because of the way it works by finding the top of the aircraft not the flat bottom. There isn't really a detection capability that matches JORN it is a pretty unique capability.

Correct. I dont disagree your conclusion.
JORN Australia got the head-point on their International protection affairs.
Your main (first) suggest as required new system is true.
Second nx. main thing is range of detection, nor losing first main
x-opportunity and touch.
Any close you think you find your way ?

[lobbie111]

Second nx. main thing is range of detection, nor losing first main
x-opportunity and touch.
Any close you think you find your way ?

Sorry I'm not sure what you mean, do you mean an X band capability?

[Pro'forma]

Sorry I'm not sure what you mean, do you mean an X band capability?


Second nx. ? ( Second next )

Was writing x-opportunity to jump to the detection range. Band of detection.
When you are turning from 6,560, feet down , you get the first touch of
detection and revealed. Good protection I would say.

Band capability must have been called the "touch" in the area and you
receive the message confirming you are safely recognized without
unpleasant disorder.

Is this the band capability you are looking ?

[Awang se]

i think i heard somewhere about the Russian attempt to build OTH radar. it cause quite a ruckus back then. the system disturb the radios all over the globe. i don't recall the name of that system.

[gf0012-aust]

i think i heard somewhere about the Russian attempt to build OTH radar. it cause quite a ruckus back then. the system disturb the radios all over the globe. i don't recall the name of that system.

IIRC it was nicknamed "Woodpecker" but was NATO referenced as "Steel Yard"

The Russians also had Irida which was similar to the now dismantled Aust SWR in Far North Qld