Low-flying aircraft undetectable?
- Thread starter kilo
- Start date
It doesn't matter how low aircraft have to fly, there are always radar systems able to pick them up, depending on position and purpose. Also, quick-reaction low-level SAM systems can always engage aircraft however low they fly.
It is not a matter of flying low, but a matter of planning, finding gaps in radar and missile coverage and situational awareness. low-flying is only one of the techniques to penetrate a defended airspace. Intel, situational awareness and ECM/ESM are much more important.
It is not a matter of flying low, but a matter of planning, finding gaps in radar and missile coverage and situational awareness. low-flying is only one of the techniques to penetrate a defended airspace. Intel, situational awareness and ECM/ESM are much more important.
While I am far from an expert on the subject, a lot of the answer depends on how many ships and the capability of the attacking aircraft. Flying low against a carrier task force would be nearly impossible because of the vast number of radar systems active in the carrier task force for air defence. Against a loan ship that would be easier. If the attacking aircraft had a capable ECM system or the attacking force had ECM aircraft that would probably help the chances of a successful attack. It also depends on the armament, because a lot of the modern ASM's can be launched beyond the horizon. If a missile was launched at ultra low level beyond the horizon, I would think that would make an attack even better.
Scenes from movies the Sum of All Fears aren't realistic and give people the notion of capabilities many airforces and navies don't have.
I hope one of the forums Defense Professionals can give you a better answer.
Scenes from movies the Sum of All Fears aren't realistic and give people the notion of capabilities many airforces and navies don't have.
I hope one of the forums Defense Professionals can give you a better answer.
LancerMC, you are specifically speaking of naval actions, where there are no mountains to weave through ;-) But essentially the same applies over land. As I wrote before, if you know the locations of SAM radars it is OK, but if one pops up in your flightpath even a 10 foot height will not save you...
Intel, good ECM and ESM and situational awareness are the key, flying low is just an aid then
Intel, good ECM and ESM and situational awareness are the key, flying low is just an aid then
Over a flat surface like sea? Depends on how high up above the sea surface the radar is located.
http://www.furuno.com/Furuno/Doc/0/7RQ000VI5STKJCHIH7H1UN8U2B/Radar+Horizon.pdfhttp://www.furuno.com/Furuno/Doc/0/7RQ000VI5STKJCHIH7H1UN8U2B/Radar+Horizon.pdf
http://radarproblems.com/chapters/ch04.dir/ch04pr.dir/c04p3.dir/c04p3.htm
"radar horizon"
From Department of Defense
Definition: (DOD, NATO) The locus of points at which the rays from a radar antenna become tangential to the Earth's surface. On the open sea this locus is horizontal but on land it varies according to the topographical features of the terrain.
Over a non flat surface e.g. mountain area, there are valleys to hide in, with mountains shielding the a/c from radar detection.
SAM's can be fired against low flying targets. Russian Sa-5 and manpads can engage down to 30 m, SA-19 down to 15m.
A radar mounted at 5 meters above ground can detect a target flying at 15m at a range of about 25km, or about 3500m further out than one could see.
jackehammond
New Member
Dear Members,
Not always with low flying aircraft. In a letter by a US Navy commander of a warship off of the Lebanon coast in 1983 he told of his look outs spotting a small aircraft approaching them and he kept warning the commander of the naval unit off of Lebanon (based on an Aegis cruiser) and the commander kept coming back stating there was no aircraft and at last the reporting commander prepared to go to general quarters when the aircraft flew away from his ship (ie it was discovered it was a Lebanese AF trainer). That is why a number of navies have not only radar units but IR units to pick up aircraft. And why the old fashion triple-A cannon is still important.
Jack E. Hammond
Not always with low flying aircraft. In a letter by a US Navy commander of a warship off of the Lebanon coast in 1983 he told of his look outs spotting a small aircraft approaching them and he kept warning the commander of the naval unit off of Lebanon (based on an Aegis cruiser) and the commander kept coming back stating there was no aircraft and at last the reporting commander prepared to go to general quarters when the aircraft flew away from his ship (ie it was discovered it was a Lebanese AF trainer). That is why a number of navies have not only radar units but IR units to pick up aircraft. And why the old fashion triple-A cannon is still important.
Jack E. Hammond
As a longserving member of Luftmeldekorpset:
1. Depending on distanceto target, growth of trees, gullies and jamming there is a hight below which radar does not detect targets - or detects them very badly and insecurely.
2. The cheapest and most effective way of detecting them is to place observers with binoculars.
Let me repeat once again: Air Defence is effective when the combination of Control and Warning assets, fighters, SAM's and AAA work together. If the defence hasn't gotten that act together the attacker will destroy at tolerable cost. If fighters alone were the answer, why do the USNavy send AA destroyers in the task force?
1. Depending on distanceto target, growth of trees, gullies and jamming there is a hight below which radar does not detect targets - or detects them very badly and insecurely.
2. The cheapest and most effective way of detecting them is to place observers with binoculars.
Let me repeat once again: Air Defence is effective when the combination of Control and Warning assets, fighters, SAM's and AAA work together. If the defence hasn't gotten that act together the attacker will destroy at tolerable cost. If fighters alone were the answer, why do the USNavy send AA destroyers in the task force?
Further to your detection range arguement....
It Depends....
On the material used to manufacture the incoming missile / aircraft,
On the speed of the incoming target,
On the sea state & condition of the waves,
On whether the antenna is stabilsed & has a blind (wooded) arc of transmission.
& finally on the radar itself, it's age, it's capability & how the signal itself is interpeted/extracted.
I have seen a I-Band navigation radar used to track aircraft, but only because of the track extractor used.
Let's just say it was a fallback option that was asked for by a customer....
Needless to say there's too many variables, but the newer the radar & system used to display the target data, the easier I think it would be.
Systems Adict
It Depends....
On the material used to manufacture the incoming missile / aircraft,
On the speed of the incoming target,
On the sea state & condition of the waves,
On whether the antenna is stabilsed & has a blind (wooded) arc of transmission.
& finally on the radar itself, it's age, it's capability & how the signal itself is interpeted/extracted.
I have seen a I-Band navigation radar used to track aircraft, but only because of the track extractor used.
Let's just say it was a fallback option that was asked for by a customer....
Needless to say there's too many variables, but the newer the radar & system used to display the target data, the easier I think it would be.
Systems Adict
The gibbon
New Member
what i would like to know is could an aircraft fly low over a country which is not in a time of war or crisis and not be detected?
Depends what that country had and where you were flying. Altitude is no longer a protection against airborne radar so any airforce with any serious air-to-air capability could pick you up without any real difficulty.
There are potential corridors or pockets of undetectability where military and civil ground stations might not pick you up but any sensible military knows exactly where these are and keeps an eye on them accordingly. It's definitel doable and smugglers (for example) do it on a fairly regular basis but they only acheive (and require to be fair) very limited penetration, drug smugglers from Mexico for example only need to get a few miles over the US border to drop their cargo. If you were attempting to penetrate US airspace for a military objective you'd probably be looking to go much deeper and the USAF would be taking a rather dimmer view of (and keeping a wider eye out for) your activities.
Speed can also be a factor in avoiding detection at low elevations. There is a huge quantity of spurious ground returns, and most radar systems rely on Doppler shift and/or MTI to reject them. Fly slow enough and you can get filtered out. If you do something like flying down a freeway at 50 feet and 80 mph (128 kph) the only radar that will spot you is the one the cop at the side of the road is using.
not really. OTHR and SWR can sort out ground clutter
the issue of traditional sweep radar is because it has a nominal elevation threashold minimum
someon_unknown
New Member
i am excited to hear that story from lebanon in 83. my father was stationed on the U.S.S. Wainwright in 83 off the coast of lebanon. i have always been searching for stories of events he went thru. i really don't know him as well as id like and hearing stories kinda lets me get ideas on what he went thru. Anytime i have tried to find anything on his service and its all too classified for me to know. as far as i know he was a seal attached to the carrier group the Wainwright was a part of. thank you for this. i sill continue my search for more info.
Northrop Grumman is developing & testing a seaborne version of the F-35's EODAS.
Silent Watch EO/DAS
This would be a Horizon to Horizon 360 24/7 detection system where other IR & radar assets would be queued for ID purposes.
Silent Watch EO/DAS
This would be a Horizon to Horizon 360 24/7 detection system where other IR & radar assets would be queued for ID purposes.
That's a very nice capability to have when fused with radar and other ship sensors. I wonder though how well it would fare though in adverse weather conditions?
I think the real question would be how it would fair versus the same system on another platform, like the F-35. If both are degraded equally then it doesn't pose an advantage probably does give an advantage either way.
If the aircraft is above the storm and the ship is traveling through it, I suspect the cooling effect of the rain on the ship would suppress its IR signature and give it an advantage relative to an aircraft.