pierson@cimnet.enet.dec.com (Desert Storm: Done Right, Done Now 04-Mar-1991 1954) (03/06/91)
From: "Desert Storm: Done Right, Done Now 04-Mar-1991 1954" <pierson@cimnet.enet.dec.com> Norman Yarvin: writes, in part, concerning airborne radar: >Second, the limit on a radar's range is due to a combination of antenna >geometry and output power. And altitude of the antenna. The curvature of the earth hides targets at a distance that the beam could otherwise reach. Being "up", the/an AWACS (ferinstance) can see further past the horizon. ======== _Jason Y. Li writes, quotes a newspaper article: > >>OTHR beats the Stealth!!!<< .... >Late in 1989, Australian scientists working on the project said it >could detect America's new $700-million Stealth bomber. A US Air >Force spokesman immediately described the claim as "hogwash". Said isn't did. Maybe they think it will (actually, the air vortex theory, the claim that OTH-B works by picking up the air vortices at wingtips makes some sense...) >But One independence source (Earth2000, Western Australian) has confirmed >that the Stealth technology - Relying on absorbant paint and sharp angles If that's all they know about stealth, i doubt they know enough to be useful... (the sources, not the crew at Jindalee...). >Another independent sources (Far Eastern Economic Review) did confirm >that experiments at a US OTHR station had detected both the Stealth >bomber and Cruise missile. "The Cruise Missile"? which one? Low observables are claimed for cruise missiles. How low is open to question. I attended an interesting IEEE meeting last fall (spring?). One of the B2 design team gave a presentation (public forum...). I recall his title as "chief scientist, electromagnetic design" or something close to that. A few apropros comments: When the first proto flew, it was always accompanied by chase planes. Could Jindalee tell the difference between chase planes and the B2? When the first proto flew, it had some added instrumentation for airspeed, trailing on a long wire (noticable on the video, to the point someone asked about it). This was to be removed, once normal sensors got calibrated. Could Jindalee see the wire, or the B2? F117 is KNOWN to use RCS enhancers. Presumably B2 did the same. >The OTHR system is intended to see over the horizon by bouncing a >signal off the ionosphere. The signal is then bounced back from an >aircraft to a radar receiver where it is read with the help of a >computer. A couple of years back, i got (another) IEEE tour of one of the US OTH-B sites in Maine. Its a room full of computers. >According the scientists involved in the project, there are still >some minor problems, such as Jindalee system could pinpoint the >position of an intruder down to only a box of 50 km or so square >of indefinite height. See speculation as to whether they were looking at the B2 or the chase/photo planes. ... Iain D. Sinclair writes, in part: >I recently read an article based on the writings of Lt. Col. (ret) Thomas >E. Bearden, on Soviet "scalar wave" EM weapons systems. "Time-Reversed" >waves are used in conjunction with radars to produce a directed-energy >weapon. The pulse also causes fission in some material. (apparently.) I have heard Col Bearden speak on a couple of occasions. He has been proposing this theory for some ten years. I lack sufficient physics background to ell if he is right or wrong, but it would require some substantial rewrites of physics if he was correct. Also, if he is correct, the USSR has had a "lock" on an advanced set of physics for 10-20 years. I do not understand why they should declare peace (as they have done (Yup, i see the border of sci.mil 8)>>). > - A nuclear accident in the Urals in 1957-8. > - The 1963 loss of the USS Thresher, the 1986 losses of an > Ariane rocket and the Challenger. (!) An old proverb, paraphrased: Never credit to enemy action, what can be credited to incompetence. > - Khrushchev's 1960 statement that "fantastic new weapons could > wipe out all life on earth if used unrestrainedly". Neutron bomb, CBW... ========== Philip Daniels writes, in part: > This comes straight off the top of my head, but I believe that the Soviet >Union has been developing Em weapons for many years. I once saw a documetary >which derscribed how the Soviet Union was bathing most of the world (ie >Western Europe, the Amercias and Asia) in EM radiation, in the form of >a long wavelength EM pulse. You can pick up this pulse on a standard >radio in the open air, inside buildings, even (I've heard) underground. Underground is unlikely. Inside a bulding would depend on the frequency. Its generally combined to "shortwave" (say 3-30MHz). I've heard it there. >It's called the 'Woodpecker' because of the sound it makes, and is >apparently the strongest EM pulse ever generated on earth. Someone else has recently provided the generally accepted version that the "woodpecker" is a Soviet OTH-B radar. Reportedly, amateurs have "chased" it off frequency by "pecking" back. Odd sort of a weapon, if true. "Strongest" is a fuzzy word. The peak power is fairly high, though not astonishing. The EMP from a Nuke is stronger (though one time.) One claimant to "strongest" EM source is the USN ELF transmitter in Maine. > If I remember rightly, the Soviets also bombarded the old American >embassy in Moscow with microwave radiation from a building across >the street. Generally accepted as true. =========== Mark Kinney writes, in part: ...... >On the same hand, is there any difference between OTH and OTH-B (Over The >Horizon-Backscatter)? Not that I know of... Backscatter is just the way that the pulse gets back to the radar.