That is key, if you cannot explain something simply you likely do not know it well enough. Really shows his knowledge when not only does he have have original content, but also presents it in a digestible way.
of course by then he's going to have to tell us about electrogravitics and time travel and aeronautics will be passe...but well be here for that as well. cant wait.
Came across this channel today itself, and seriously I'm stunned with the topics you cover and explain really well which can't be found on any corner of internet. Already subscribed and binge watching all your videos & cant stop. Keep up the good work. Ty
You did it again, as I watched this, each time I had a question, you brought up an answering topic, you answered twin mounted ISRTs even as I thought it. Bravo. Although it can't be ruled out for a future interceptor, to be accurate binary ISRTs would need a "rigid" baseline , wingtips would not be ideal but with the right level sensor correction, it could be achieved. See why Nimrod AEW failed (I'd been taken aboard it's instrumentation test bed in the early 80's). There's got to be a perfect level of miniaturisation, sensor optics and coordination between all of the required components for an aircraft to give up lift for. I have Sunday chores but you make me want to go spec up a future interceptor on paper as I used to in my childhood ❤️
Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less). instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
Wow such a great presentation! I would further the discussion by adding "photogrammetry" to the list of techniques that could enable IRST systems to calculate the range to a target via passive means. It would be especially effective if the specific type of target aircraft was known, then the aircraft's known dimensions could be used to estimate range based on image size (given known parameters i.e. Lens magnification factor, pixel size/count/spacing of the detector's imaging array)...
Excellent video as always. Speaking about two IRST on the same aircraft on the wingtips: the base for triangulation would be fantastically short, but in astronomy, trigonometric parallax is performed on distant stars with even smaller useful angles, so I think that It could be feasible. Also, if the IRST can identify the type of enemy aircraft, distance could be extracted from his angular dimensions. In theory.
Actually that's not even needed. There's a thing called kinematic ranging, which is already used in some IRST systems. They do several target azimuth measurement in quick succession and by knowing how fast and in which direction the sensor is moving you can generate a pretty good estimate how far away a target is. Is it perfectly accurate? No, but it doesn't need to be. With modern missiles like the Meteor it doesn't matter if the estimation is a bit off, it will find it's target by itself during the final approach phase.
"Silent" radar can be achieved by having the battle arena illuminated by an aircraft hundreds of kilometers behind him. The attack aircraft can be totally passive. IR cannot replace radar, but will augment it.
I think the opposite ! When you see how technologies and electronics are evolving so fast, especially about miniaturization and highly capables camera and optics, I think there's a big chance the IRST and specially the FLIR, would be able to reach incredible distances in a close future. Maybe as far as radars or even superior distances and ranges ! Thales the French company working with Dassault on the Rafale, even said recently they wanna become the/a world leader in that kind of Optronics technologies. Clearly showing how important it will become in the future, and the fact they're working hard on it. Passive sensors can't be jammed or scrambled by countermeasures defense systems, and can't be detected, etc ... Very big advantages over the radars weaknesses. A former high rank senior of Dassault even said, the FLIR is like telescope, and when you know how far a telescope is able to see and with high resolutions quality, the day they successfully miniaturised it, it'd be capable to see and detect farer than radars !
Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less). instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode !
Ah Yes - Early Warning Stealth Radar! - Su57 AirShow Queen uses this with waveless Photon Fire Control Radar + Plasma Stealth Cloaking for a totally Silent Fighter Experience...
Detecting targets without pinpointing yourself to opponents is the "Mating Frog's Dilemma". The croak that says "Hey cutie, here's a big, sexy dude" in Frog says "Here's breakfast, come and get it" in Predator.
Yeah. That's the problem in a nutshell. The F-35 has individually controllable array elements, so as soon as it gets a return signal, it blacks out that position in space in the array. In a really dangerous situation it would be set to passive-only. It has exceptional IRST & passive RF detection capability in 365 degrees. This is arguably more useful than the very fancy Radar. A fancy trick is to have a forward F-35 on passive only, with an F-35 (or other plane) considerably to the rear. And the forward plane can seek radar bounce data from the further away plane. Thus keeping the active radar source further away from the dangerous elements. With networking, this can allow a number of stealth aircraft to play some pretty exotic cat & mouse in the sunshine of a distant friendly radar source. This also confounds enemy targets' ability to predict radar return angles (when designing a stealth aircraft).
@@parrotraiser6541 lol Well there's a couple other planes which can do similar. It's just that networking radar elements between aircraft is "more interesting" with stealth planes. And it's arguably less dangerous to have a rearward radar (which could create sporadic unfavorable angular reflections) than it is to be an active emitter.
@@kathrynck The problem with using a radar far back is that its radar waves will hit your own fighters from behind. If those are steahlt planes using shaped steahlt they will reflect the radar waves in many directions except back to the sending radar.
@@sorennilsson9742 Potentially yes. Even with jamming there is some risk of that. Although I tend to think having a jamming-rich environment does more to confuse the landscape in favor of stealth aircraft than it does to cause detection.
Given the F-101, F-102, F-106 and early F-4's (B, C and early D's) had passive IR systems, it'd be fascinating to know just why the USAF and USN ditched the tech by the 1970s with only the F-14 with an IR system as standard (although replaced by a long-range camera). Maintenance issues? I think these earlier systems had to have a coolant for them to work.
the passive IR systems on early fighters were more like very low-resolution FLIR than IRST. early radars weren't very automated and someone had to aim them at a target manually, the FLIR would give you a rough idea of where a target might be so that you could lock the radar on to them for an actually useful track. USAF fighters lost their FLIR once computers became good enough to handle basic radar functions automatically and quickly scan a larger area.
10:12 "A school boy exercise". Well clearly that puts me out of the race cause I barely scraped by High School Algebra. Fantastically informative, the info regarding Kinematic Ranging and the difficulties with Triangulation in regards to calculation with moving points on the triangle were new to me. Fantastic work.
Su27 IRST was the best thing to play with in DCS world multiplayer :) .... stealth kills with R27ET without triggering RWR on other planes. Great moments ...
They need to develop parachute-suspended smart flairs that alter their intensity and spectrum. Dump a load of them in the background and the IRST has so much signal processing that it's a nightmare to find the real guy.
@@craigkennedy432 No on microwave. The waves will dissipate before turning the humidity to heat. Microwaves are used on certain ordnance to guide them as it will pierce smoke.
@@the80386 Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less). instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
Your thesis is about IRST is pretty solid. I would give more weight to how IRST will be integrated into the Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) by the US and other countries. Also how they will put it to use it in a fully networked battlespace in combination with AWACS platforms. I would say it's just a matter of time, before IRST gets fully leveraged.
IRST certainly has come a long way, but Radars are also advancing significantly as well. I watched an interview with an F-35 pilot recently and he said that the pilots don't even call it a radar anymore, they call it a MFA, a Multi Functional Array. Their functionality has significantly changed over the last 20 years, past the point of just detection. Even in that role, significant advantages have been made. A modern AESA radar can perform an evolving series of actions nearly instantaneously, starting with producing a randomized search pattern using a range of different wavelengths and strengths causing it to be difficult to detect and nearly impossible to triangulate. Once it does detect something, it will hit that object with a series of different wavelengths and even create a synthetic image of the target, all of which will be compared to produce a high level of confidence in the target and make single frequency jamming far less effective (Jamming strength is divided by the number of frequencies you are outputting ie single frequency jamming is the strongest). This is all however besides the point. The concept of single sensor capabilities is outdated. You would never want one over the other but rather you want the Array and the IRST working together and this is how it currently functions. The Radar and the IRST work in conjunction, if the Radar gets a return, it cues the IRST to look at it and vice a versa. The exponential power of these systems working in tandem to create a more capable and more resilient sensor suite is far more significant than any single source sensor.
The F35 is a true pack hunter as well, it integrates together, with AI drones, and other battlefield assets to create a fully integrated picture. Nowhere for the enemy to hide. They only know their aircraft was targeted when it explodes.
there was an interview of a French pilot in "the fighter pilot podcast" he gave some official / publicly released numbers of the rafale's IRST abilities but never managed to find that moment in the archives. the big lines where that at a substantival range the plane could guide a IR missile close to pick up the target itself and voila you delivered an ir missile at long range and/or front aspect which mean a missile delivered with passive detection all the way, the interviewers described that idea as chill inducing.
Another fantastic video with excellent detail all the way through! I wonder if the newly announced Tempest, when operating in pairs (one being a drone), will be able to perform the kinematic ranging autonomously. Perhaps the piloted Tempest maintaining a constant heading and the drone Tempest performing the nauseating weave manoeuvre!
Don't know about it, but the rival of the tempest, the FCAS will be able to do it. They already showed in their official videos, the capacity of their drones in a MANNED-UNMANNED teaming and swarming formation, to perform kinematic. While two of the drones perform the kinetic, the other one is performing the jamming. Very smart and efficient idea I think. Link to the video I'm talking above : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
@@schrodingersgat4344 Sadly not a good idea. A radar and drone are already expensive things to send as decoys and to be destroyed ! I think his inspiration came from a European program called FCAS, which already displayed more than 1 year ago this kind of ideas for their future warfare system and 6th generation fighter jet NGF. Link to the video : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ It sounds more like the genius ideas of Dassault and Thales !
IRST also has a valuable peace time potential use of monitoring and tracking potential adversaries without approaching close or painting them with a tracking radar that could be perceived as an act of aggression.
No one is going to take being scanned by a radar as an act of aggression. Now do it with a missile guidance radar, the frequencies and characteristics of an opponent is sure to know about...
Very good video! :) Especially agree about the published ranges of IRST. It's a bit like the advertising on some flashlights, saying they are visible from X miles away... when really that kind of claim can be massively exaggerated depending on the conditions (like in that missile launch detection example). IRST is by far the most likely candidate to become the main method of BVR tracking in a stealth aircraft arena. But it's significantly more limited in capability than radar in terms of being weather agnostic, being reliable in varying conditions, or having great range. It leaves stealth very useful, but it does increase the range of detection to a stealth target well above eyesight. It is clearly the emerging next step in the cat & mouse game. Worth pointing out, even though you can detect the skin heat of an aircraft from the front pretty well, IRST has greater range viewing the rear of a jet aircraft, due to the significantly larger amount of heat visible from that aspect. So the range is going to vary a lot (up to double/half) even in the same conditions. The pilot must maintain a very flexible and open-minded concept of what areas are "clear" of threats. I also can't help wondering if 2 IRST's mounted at the wingtips might give enough triangulation to at least come up with "ballpark" ranging, which might be useful for a full track, or at least help inform the computers about how best to handle kinematic ranging. For example, twin wingtip IRST's might be "accurate enough" to tell the plane if the target has changed heading or speed while a kinematic triangulation is in progress. dual IRST's as a kinematic supplement. Just a thought. I dunno if it's viable. I think it could help the accuracy & time to calculate, and help prevent the system being fooled by a sharp turn in the target. But this is all theoretical. Exactly how far apart the tracks need to be, we don't know. At the very least, it could help provide an extremely thorough field of view, with 2 search arcs greater than 180 degrees overlapping fore & aft for some rough estimates of range in the weak areas. A microscopic degree of sensitivity to the angle of the sensor head would be the key tech for this I think. It might require very regular calibration as well. I think kinematic is 'somewhat' more useful than you suggest, although it really is blind to ranging fore & aft. Every plane flying not directly fore or aft could be calculated pretty quickly. At mach .95 it only takes 0.5 second for the IRST plane to travel 425 feet (130m) which should be plenty for triangulation. Your target is not likely to change heading or speed enough in under a half second to throw off a kinematic calculation (it "can", it's just not likely in that time frame). This assumes some blisteringly fast computation though. Several triangulation attempts in a row (rather than just 2), if looked at by a computer, could (as a bulk of data) help differentiate and accurately range a turning target I think. There's always satellites as well.
When you see how technologies and electronics are evolving so fast, especially about miniaturization and highly capables camera and optics, I think there's a big chance the IRST and specially the FLIR, would be able to reach incredible distances in a close future. Maybe as far as radars or even superior distances and ranges ! Thales the French company working with Dassault on the Rafale, even said recently they wanna become the/a world leader in that kind of Optronics technologies. Clearly showing how important it will become in the future, and the fact they're working hard on it. Passive sensors can't be jammed or scrambled by countermeasures defense systems, and can't be detected, etc ... Very big advantages over the radars weaknesses. A former high rank senior of Dassault even said, the FLIR is like telescope, and when you know how far a telescope is able to see and with high resolutions quality, the day they successfully miniaturised it, it'd be capable to see and detect farer than radars !
@@aviationaerospacechannel5987 I'd go with "all somewhat true, but don't get too optimistic". IRST is the best current (and for the near future) counter to stealth. But the range limitations aren't based on how good the glass is, or how many pixels it has, etc. It's based on the fact that the atmosphere blocks it over distance. And there's no technological improvements planned to alter the atmosphere to be more clear hehe. IR is a range of frequencies which are related to radiation created by heat, but it's all "relatively" near to visible light, and behaves fairly similarly for most purposes. Basically, IRST can get you similar results as a telescope. If you're looking straight up on a clear day, you can see up into the galaxy and beyond. If you're looking sideways at high altitude, you can see pretty far, probably up to 100 miles. If you're looking sideways at low altitude... maybe 30 miles. If you're looking at anything in cloud cover, or rain, or fog, or smog... you won't see very far at all. Go to a tall building, and point a telescope at the horizon. That haze which eats up the horizon? That's the problem. Detection range increases when you're looking at the tailpipe of a plane, but decreases when you're looking at the front (unless it's something like an SR-71, which glows very brightly in all directions). Stealth planes 'mostly' try to reduce their IR signature, so that they are less visible, although there's a limit to what can be done with a jet powered aircraft. IRST was for a while limited by the fact that when you telescopically look at long distances, your field of view is tiny. So it wasn't very feasible (for detection anyway) until computers could process large amounts of input very quickly, allowing what is essentially an IR telescope to rapidly scan across a large area. IR also needs to go to extra lengths to detect the range accurately. Are the IR sensors getting better? And the image processing improving? Yeah, they are. And that does increase the range & accuracy. Also, as missiles get "smarter" it becomes more possible to weapon-lock a target with less detailed information, and that helps IRST to be more effective. And that is the direction things are going for 5th gen cat & mouse. But it doesn't remove the atmosphere problem. Trading in a cheap pair of binoculars for a really good long range spotting scope is an upgrade, but neither are going to be impressive in less clear atmosphere conditions. No matter how good they are. IR will never have the range or all weather capability of a powerful radar. It just gets you about double the range of visual light through a magnifying optic, and has a favorable match-up vs. jet powered or hypersonic things. If you can see a plane with it's running lights on, with a good pair of binoculars. Then you can see most jet aircraft at about twice that distance with IRST. And that's actually pretty good on a clear night. Having a lower temperature exhaust, having extremely sensitive IR sensors with good glass, and the best possible image processing to bring out subtle details, and having IRST which has a complete 360 field of view, are all kind of the end-game "as good as it gets" for IRST. Which is why I think the F-35 is ahead of the curve. Also, IRST/FLIR/etc can be temporarily blinded or permanently damaged by an infrared laser, "IRCM" (it goes by several names in various countries). As a result, you can find a plane, but then that plane can say "OK, now you see me, now you don't". This tech also has some pretty devastating consequences for IR guided missiles. As well as some "other" uses I won't go into. I'd look for "IRCCM" to be the next big thing. It already exists in some forms, but that gets into 'not public' info real fast. As well as further tech improvements to long wave radars. Well, I can think of a few other things which may be the next big thing as well, but "shhh" ;-) Stealth was never about being "invisible". It's just going into combat in a ghillie suit, and trying to use the terrain, instead of going into combat in bright orange with a flashing light on your helmet.
@@kathrynck That's why in this video, isn't going enough far, and his informations are not well updated. I like this channel, but sometimes his videos are kinda weak ! Dassault FCAS program already showed their ideas about the 6th gen FCAS system and fighter NGF. The distance and range of IRST/FLIR or any type of Optronics, isn't anymore a problem if they're able to move and scan ahead the fighter jet. The official video : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ MANNED-UNMANNED teaming and swarming is the future.
@@kathrynck The remote carriers or what we commonly call drones or UAV/UCAV, this part of the FCAS program will be available in very early stages. As said in the other video, this teaming and swarming capability, is planned/scheduled for Rafale F4 and typhoon LTE. Other video : instagram.com/p/CH-fIVQgCfz/ Rafale F4 is supposed to arrive in 4 years, with some early upgrades and updates available in early 2 years. So the aircrafts and jets that gamble almost everything on stealth as the USAF one's, they really need to worry as their stealth will be close to useless, with these drones that are using IRST/FLIR (or other Optronics), jamming and kinetic/kinematic techs and systems. A moving flying IRST or Optronics is like the nightmare of the stealth aircrafts/jets, giving your position and allowing the enemy to shoot you down and long distances. These drones are even said, would be capable to carry weapons and missiles. Differents versions are already planned, and some already not far from a mass production and service/operations ready.
An example would be a soviet radar or ground station tracks/ detects an F22. Its location, direction, speed can be broadcast to an interceptor. If the interceptor lacks stealth, the safest thing is to try to come from the side, or possibly behind the F22 and use irst to do the identification/ targeting. This way the soviet fighter never turns on its radar . Totally depends on where the situation happens, type of engagement required, etc...
There's also the doppler effect, the longer distance, affects the frequency of the IR signal.. red-shift, etc. Modern sensors & ICs are fast enough to do it in a tiny package.
Actually that would only tell you the relative movement. Because of the red-shift the theory of the expanding universe was born. Because most cosmic object seem to move away from us. It can't tell you the distance. Also the relative speeds of fighter aircraft are to small to accurately determine their relative speed via the red-shift because for that you would need to know the exact wavelength of their IR-Emissions when stationary to the sensor. Radar actually does determine the targets movement in this way, by measuring the change in wavelength of the returned signal, but this only works so easely because you know exactly what wavelength the outgoing signal had. But what does work and is actually used with some IRST systems is "kinematic ranging".
VS stealth aircraft, it does replace radar for the most part. It's considerably less good than radar, and very weather sensitive, but it's the best bet for BVR detection of stealth planes.
@@kathrynck not only versus stealth but on stealth it gives them ability to detect and lock targets while being undetectable, shorter range is non issue when your plane can get closer and this would make missiles incredibly deadly because if the opponent doesnt know he is being targeted he cant evade properly.
As a single sensor yes. But modern fighters have a multitude of sensors and fusion. EW is by far the longest detection range for a proper listening platform. Here you have a very large spectra. Including longwave. Passive in the beginning. Radar comes next. But active. IR detection. Passive. Combining the information of all platforms give you great accuracy, great trustworthiness etc.
@@Asghaad true true it also begs for the introduction of a longer range FOX-2 missile, which approaches on inertial guidance, and locks on when closer (mad dog lock). Could be difficult (not impossible, but difficult) to know there's an engagement occurring until "...wait, aren't I supposed to have 2 wings?"
@@christianm1533 Especially if your radar can selectively black-hole areas in it's view, only pinging the target for a moment every so often for a position update?
Mounting a IRST in each wingtip should work. The Short distance between the two IRSTs should compensate for the inaccuracy in calculation the distance between two IRST on each aircraft. In mounting a IRST in each wingtip you know exactly right distance and it will be possible to make a quick and precis calculation. Good idea 👍
Or even better ! Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less). instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealthy mode toward the enemies !
A way a fighter can self triangulate utilizing a radar is pointing the radar at the roughy bearing to the target, sending a high frequency pulse, and calculating the range, such as in the MiG-23
One of the newest challenges in naval warfare is how to counter hypersonic anti-ship weapons. These objects move too fast for interception by CIWS guns and missiles that require doppler radar to track incoming threats.Travelling at a few meters above sea level, they are in the densest atmosphere on the planet and when travelling at supersonic speeds, they will be extremely hot objects. They'll need something like the ablative coatings used on spacecraft for re-entry and that will make them the hottest objects in the sky after the sun. Radars lose time bouncing waves back and forth, each time requiring computer processing time to build an image. There just isn't enough time for computers to resolve it but infrared detection doesn't require radiation to be bounced back and forth. It happens at the speed of light. It could even be operated by an analog computer that doesn't "waste" processor time trying to figure out what is coming. The only intelligence that would be needed is to discern super hot missile from the sun. The contrast must be immense between them. (A corollary: Always make your hypersonic missile attack coming out of the sun.)
I genuinely *love* your videos. This is precisely WHY i even bother using RUclips. Thank you, easy to understand, well presented, and you're clearly very intelligent and informed. ☀️😎☀️🇺🇸
I guess the question is which sensor is more useful? My inclination is that in a world of stealth and shortened engagement ranges, IRST might be the preferable sensor, as it is much harder to hide from. Another advantage is IRST is that there is no such thing as an IR warning reciever because it is a passive sensor, which means it is 100% stealthy which active sensors such as radar never are. There is the not completely trivial problem of making the nose of a fighter stealthy while having a huge thermal camera in it, but I would argue that if possible, for dedicated air superiority, IRST might actually be the better primary sensor with a miniaturized radar system as a secondary.
While having two or more AC to triangulate is preferable it can be done with a single AC at lower precision and longer updates. By flying a perpendicular flight profile one AC can create the baseline separation for the triangulation measurement, but, since it will take some some to get that separation and all points are moving the precision will suffer. Kinematic ranging.
In my opinion it is a very good method for locating stealth planes or launching missiles. With the Pirate Sensor from the Eurofigher, ranges and other capabilities were targeted similar to that of a radar. In addition, these sensors are passive and cannot be jammed. However, the weather has a major effect on the performance of these systems.
@@christianm1533 not really you need to know where the enemy plane is, use a laser against him give away your position that’s dum If you have the enemy’s location, you shoot
Looking from tactical angle, and the fact that modern multilayered radars produce a2ad zones efficiently, airplanes are loosing their importance in such conflicts. Its really not a problem of blindness of airplanes that needs fixing. Its more of defeating/blinding that a2ad zone. And that by the nature of operations, isnt a job of airplanes to do. Its something that drones and cruise missiles will have to take on.
Great video! I have a question... what are the greenish marks under the f35 cockpit in minute 14:50 ? I´ve never saw something like this. Thanks in advance!
Those are unpainted areas, if you look at pictures of F-35 been assembled in factories you can see the same green color. Not exactly sure why this particular area is not painted but it's not first time I see this on F-35 pictures/videos. My theory is this have something to do with the complexity of maintenance of the stealth coating around certain panels.
I strongly suspect that we are underestimating the technological achievements of thermal sensors. I have seen generals saying that investing in thermal stealth is a fool's errand since just the heat generated by the air flowing around the aircraft will soon be sufficient to eliminate stealth. This may also have been one of the reasons why the f-35 specifically does not have super Cruise. Perhaps it's an attempt at avoiding some of this thermal stealth problem. Israel also believes that within 10 years stealth will not be decisive. And the only technology that I'm aware of which could create that change would be thermals.
I have this system in my car. There it's used for automatic high beam controll. It's even better than the fighter jet version, cause it can track front better than rear aspect. 😄
Yes... the IR system will be used to guide the long range missles the last mile or so... radar will get the missle close and the ir will get it up their tailpipe...
For triangulation in reliable way one would need to have 2 sensors or at least 2 lenses in tips of the wings, using single sensor and series of mirrors and actuators determine distance, it's possible, but not sure if on flying shaking platform
They already use "kinematic ranging" in some systems since decades. Modern fighter planes know very exactly where they are and how they move around in the air. Actually often much better than any pilot. So what you do then is to measure the relative angular movement for a few moments. The longer you do this the more accurate it gets and normally after a few seconds you have a good enough range estimate to fire a missile like an AIM-120 or Meteor. Ranging in this way isn't perfect, but it doesn't need to be. The missile will eventually use it's own seeker head for final target aquisition. It doesn't matter if the measurement is a few nautical miles off.
Since radar can also show your location, its probably that IRST will gonna replace radars, and stealth technology will also replaced with quantum stealth aka "Harry Potter Cloaking Device"
Well, yes but that's only true up to a certain hight. Above 30'000 theres hardly any weather any more so an IRST can give you a huge advantage in such conditions.
It seems like they’d be great for use with modern SAM systems, but I’ve never seen or heard anything along these lines. Am I missing something?You’d think it would be a no brainer! Imagine having an IRST slaved to something like a NASAAM launcher armed with AMRAAM or ESSM active radar missiles with lock on after launch capability. The SAM operator could Passively see airborne target (SEAD becomes les useful), launch missile towards target, let the missile’s own radar pick up the target, all while the launcher remains largely undetected.
One possibility might be to estimate the effects of atmospheric scattering on infrared emissions in terms of relative decrease in frequency. This might be easily countered though.
There's a more simple solution, and this is to make fly the Optronics and others IRST/FLIR. Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less). instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
Perhaps these infrared detectors could be used on the ground to search the skies for drones in the local airspace (perhaps even passively without the need to shine an infrared flashlight into the area) without needing to use radar that could cause the detector to be picked up by enemy aircraft on SEAD missions, or targeted by radar-homing missiles?
I have a free lunch for You, infrared is not inherently unsharp, it just need to be adjusted a small bit relative to the visible spectrum, however, producents of infrared cameras seem to have missed thát until recently. On old camera lenses with a focus indicator scale, there is actually a marking indicating this, usually a few millimetres from zero (< depending on type of lense, tele/wideangle).
Range it's possible to get from an AWAKS or a long range ground radar , Or from an spy satelite , it's not a problem to get range to target from an another place .
I suppose you'd also have to have a way to perform IFF interrogation as well if you were to abandon the radar. Interesting concept although the conventional wisdom was always to integrate IR/EO/Radar sensors. Now that AESA radars have become so popular (read: capable) one may ask the question from the other point of view: do you need IRST, especially pod-based, if you have an advanced, multi-mode radar? Great presentation.
I would say IRST is more importent than ever. Let's say an Aircraft carries an ECM-pod. You may detect it anyway on your radar from afar but your radar is probably unable to identify it. And IFF can only tell you at best, that it's not one of your own aircraft. So you have a blip on your radar that is something...could be an enemy fighter, could be a civil aircraft you don't know jet. IRST gives you in such a case the capability to identify the radar blip from still some distance away regardless of ECM. Also the use of Radar always comes with the risk of giving away your own position.
Infrared detection can be detected. It can be seen by night vision cameras. I have a set of night vision and I can see light pulses from the a TV remote. Heck, I can even use my Samsung phone's camera to detect an IR signal from a TV remote. I am sure a plane like an F35 could see that with its numerous cameras mounted around the plane. Infrared is a type of light that is invisible to the human eye.
That's not the same. What you describe is what's called active IR. In the old days, and that means just after WWII active IR was the hot shit, because it gave night fighting capabilities, especially for mechanized ground units. Active IR was based on IR-Illuminators basically a big searchlight which only emited in the none visible IR-frequency. With the right equipment it was indeed easy to detect. Today though you use passive IR sensors, which are much closer related to a Thermographic camera or the IR receiver on your TV, which is completly passive.
Wouldn’t it be possible to have a database on which the IR sensor could feed for information to identify and MOREOVER to estimate the distance of an aircraft. Anyone can find the size of any aircraft on the internet so the size of an IR image recorded by the sensor could be translated into distances. A bit like the technic astronomers use to find distances of stars, they use a specific type of star that emits the same light so for any level of light there is an associated distance.
Hi. Another good vidéo. As Rafale lover, I doubt of it's capacity to triangulate ils foe's position because I dont know, and I dont think, it is suited for communication with patrol follower. I know DGA asked for implement thé function. It was one or the F4 upgrade. Thanks vert much for your work. It five me a lot of fun.
Put two or three irst sensors on the same plane for triangulation. If the distance between sensors is greater than the wavelenth of radiation being used fairly accurate measurements should be possible.
Love your content and I learn a lot. However, I don’t get the “f-35 fan boi” stuff. If someone has an opinion that the F-35 is a far superior aircraft than others, that doesn’t mean their opinion isn’t based on the same facts or knowledge as yours. I mean, there is a good reason that tge F-35 wins the fighter competition over the Grippen (which you love)…and it isn’t b/c the Swiss, poles, Danes, Singapore(Ians?), etc are all fan bois. I think your channel and the qualities of your show are too professional to have that kind of commentary. You know more than anyone that most of the capabilities of the F-35 are classified so neither you nor I are able to doubt or confirm how good or overrated it is. Just constructive criticism b/c I do love your vids. Point out the flaws or why it isn’t as good as many think without labeling those who disagree “fan boys”? I mean, I feel like you are a “grippen fan boi” which -admittedly- is merely a perception and one you would disagree with. Is not your labeling of those who laud the F-35 as “fanbois” not just a perception? I just think your stuff is too good, to professional and - generally - without bias, to dilute that by intentionally injecting your bias or perception which cannot be based in fact (because too much is classified) but it’s your channel Your channel and just my opinion
A "Fan Boy" is someone who says that X must be better than Y without giving a reason or at least an educated guess, just because of an emotional stake. There are many that, whatever you may say, comment "The F-35 is better". But they are not the only ones, there are other fan tribes. The videos about the Su-57 attracted a lot of them who can't admit that the Russian can do anything worthwhile. It is a way of approaching a subject that I don't share, but everyone is welcome here as long as the conversation remains civilized.
The F-35/ballistic missile test was more to examine whether an F-35 can be used to provide over the horizon detection and guidance for a sea-launched SM-3.
Can you make a serie of videos around How fighters performs during Red Flag ? The Gripen performance you mentionned was very interesting so I wonder How the other jets perfoms (Rafale, Typhoon, F-16-15-18, SU-30MKI...)
I would die for some extensive infos, but they are a very closely guarded secret. You just have pieces of interviews here and there, not enough to paint a coherent picture.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech I totally understand since we are in the same point. I actually struggle so hard to get any intels about it but nothing serious, only rumors. By the way do you have intels about why the french are no longer participating in Red Flag ? Maybe their heavy intervention in Sub-Saharian Africain coutries, Irak and Syria is a start.
You brought me a few question. Optics when scaled up can collect more photon and hence will gain more and more ability to detect far away object. If a irst were to become the main sensor, it would make sense to take all the space normally reserved for the radar and hence to be scaled up a fair bit which may enhance it's detection range. Would it be true in that case? The other question is if a target is triangulated and the distance is known then couldn't the computer can infer the size of the target. From that point wouldn't the irst/computer know the range of the target from a single sensor as long as it doesn't loose the target?
It would probably be more effective to install multiple small sensors than one big one. Astronomical observatories already use this idea to form one huge telescope out of multiple small ones. It uses a lot of computing power but it's very effective.
I found it very interesting and I think I wrote to you about that, also I'm intrigued by having 3 IRST on 1 plane, 2 on the wing tips, one in place of the radar... what's your view on a land bases IRST, something big, would that make stealth redundant? Thank you
Land based system make sense because performance/sensor size of irst hit the point of diminishing return much quicker than typical radar. It would be very ideal as a network of disperse observation station for both offensive and defensive operations that cannot be easily taken out by enemy sead. If anything, those disperse station themself can be a great anti seed unit. But ultimately you still want radar as it is not easily effected by the environmental element and provide a much more accurate picture of the battlefield. But using irst as a general guidance mechanics, and let the weapon onboard sensor pick up the rest seems to be what we will be heading in the future.
I mean if modern planes use AWACs to supplement their radar detection, why not use such planes to help triangulation? a bigger plane could house more IRST sensors and fly at a distance where triangulation would be possible. Also, why use the wing tips when you can use a longer distance, like the planes length? mount one sensor up near the nose, and mount the other on the vertical fin or towards the rear of the aircraft. If theres a height difference between them, they could possible be at a distance longer than the wing tips and might help with triangulating. It's not too outlandish, most predators, humans included, have two forward facing eyes to help perceive depth, so having two IRST 'eyes' seems ironically natural
The Rafale for example, the OSF is the old version. The new version is named OSF-IT. Range detection has been increased over 100km with this new Optronics, IRST and FLIR. Even the TV/IR has been improved on the F3 standard of the Rafale. The previous range was already superior to 40km, it was 50km. It's now superior to 50km but informations about the range hasn't been disclosed to public. Other point, the Rafale is now using more Optronics since the new TALIOS POD has been deployed on the F3R standard. It gives a wider ranges, distances and angles to cover the Rafale and detect further air to ground and air-to-air targets/enemies. The TALIOS optronic pod will incorporate artificial intelligence to analyse tactical data almost instantaneously in flight and extract and identify targets. This video, isn't going enough far, and his informations are not well updated. I like this channel, but sometimes his videos are kinda weak ! Dassault FCAS program already showed their ideas about the 6th gen FCAS system and fighter NGF. The distance and range of IRST/FLIR or any type of Optronics, isn't anymore a problem if they're able to move and scan ahead the fighter jet. The official video : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ A system of systems. MANNED-UNMANNED teaming and swarming capabilities, between many differents proven platforms using artificial intelligence and complex analytics to find and detect the enemies first and well ahead. A very highly advanced combat collaborative platform and systems between any types of military machines.
Ok so sure a tiny IRST won't outrange radar. What about an IRST the size of the nose of the plane though? And one that's optimized design and frequency wise for quickly achieving firing solutions.
*can anyone answer my query?* What's the difference between (MAW) Missile Approach Warning system's IR sensor & IRST? Bcz unlike IRST, The MAWS is able to calculate the "Range" of approaching missile, which in turn finds "impact duration" of the missile?
Exactly ! Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less). instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/ With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
Distance cannot be extracted from infrared image? From one image: no, from multiple at different wavelength: yes. Because different wavelengths are absorbed differently by the atmosphere one could theoretically use the difference of image with wavelength a and image of wavelength b to estimate the distance... Probably not practical though.
Couldn't it be possible to roughly estimate the distance by knowing the size of an object and the camera characteristics? So a characteristic infrared signal could be compared to the data list, the airplane or missile size is then known, you get a rough estimate for long distance. In the other stance you can identify the the airplane and have the exact size. The math is very simple, so you wouldn't have a delay. I guess even when you have to consider the angle of the the other plane you are looking at.
@@michaelkeller5008 Excuse me - in the "that's what happened" part of your claim, what part of the SAM system involved was a fighter and what part used IR?
@@michaelkeller5008 I see. And what part of "use IR to shoot down the jet" do you understand was used by a Yugoslavian SA-3? You know - the kind that tracks based on ground control radar?
@@michaelkeller5008 One report says an SA-6, I hadn't seen that. www.456fis.org/F-117_SHOT_DOWN.htm www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20051121.aspx en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-125_Neva/Pechora en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K12_Kub Either way, unless something else was involved that I don't know about, it was radar.
@@michaelkeller5008 there is no lesson to learn. The F-117s in serbia had flown hundreds of sortees through the exact same route, and you somehow consider shooting down one a success, and proof of its ineffectiveness. Let alone the fact that the “Old School” radar is a detection radar that couldn’t provide a firing solution for the missile. The radar that actually could guide the missile only achieved a lock when the F-117 opened its bomb bay, and even then only from under 20 kilometers away. That’s completely unimpressive.
@@michaelkeller5008 It was more of a case of "locating a stealth aircraft when you already knew the route it was going to take due to poor tactical planning at the USAF HQ and knowing when the stealth aircraft took off due to human intelligence outside the airbase and then catching it on your radar which was pre-pointed to where you therefore expected the stealth aircraft would be when it opened its weapons bay ruining its stealthiness. Then, launching your missile in that direction and getting lucky in the missile getting close enough to acquire the stealth aircraft. It took A LOT of savvy on the part of the battery commander, but it wasn't a failing of stealth. Baghdad had way better air defense and they were completely helpless to F-117s used with tactical intelligence. The USAF was much more to blame for the shoot-down than Lockheed.
I think one day you'll make your regular followers aeronautical engineers. Highly informative in simple language...
That is key, if you cannot explain something simply you likely do not know it well enough.
Really shows his knowledge when not only does he have have original content, but also presents it in a digestible way.
of course by then he's going to have to tell us about electrogravitics and time travel and aeronautics will be passe...but well be here for that as well. cant wait.
When I get some real money I swear I'm ponying up, these are invaluable summaries of facts man, thanks!.
Came across this channel today itself, and seriously I'm stunned with the topics you cover and explain really well which can't be found on any corner of internet. Already subscribed and binge watching all your videos & cant stop. Keep up the good work. Ty
This channel and Curious Droid are both a lot of fun to watch. If you like this one, you'll probably like that one as well.
You did it again, as I watched this, each time I had a question, you brought up an answering topic, you answered twin mounted ISRTs even as I thought it. Bravo. Although it can't be ruled out for a future interceptor, to be accurate binary ISRTs would need a "rigid" baseline , wingtips would not be ideal but with the right level sensor correction, it could be achieved. See why Nimrod AEW failed (I'd been taken aboard it's instrumentation test bed in the early 80's). There's got to be a perfect level of miniaturisation, sensor optics and coordination between all of the required components for an aircraft to give up lift for. I have Sunday chores but you make me want to go spec up a future interceptor on paper as I used to in my childhood ❤️
Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less).
instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
Wow such a great presentation! I would further the discussion by adding "photogrammetry" to the list of techniques that could enable IRST systems to calculate the range to a target via passive means. It would be especially effective if the specific type of target aircraft was known, then the aircraft's known dimensions could be used to estimate range based on image size (given known parameters i.e. Lens magnification factor, pixel size/count/spacing of the detector's imaging array)...
Excellent video as always. Speaking about two IRST on the same aircraft on the wingtips: the base for triangulation would be fantastically short, but in astronomy, trigonometric parallax is performed on distant stars with even smaller useful angles, so I think that It could be feasible. Also, if the IRST can identify the type of enemy aircraft, distance could be extracted from his angular dimensions. In theory.
Actually that's not even needed. There's a thing called kinematic ranging, which is already used in some IRST systems. They do several target azimuth measurement in quick succession and by knowing how fast and in which direction the sensor is moving you can generate a pretty good estimate how far away a target is. Is it perfectly accurate? No, but it doesn't need to be. With modern missiles like the Meteor it doesn't matter if the estimation is a bit off, it will find it's target by itself during the final approach phase.
"Silent" radar can be achieved by having the battle arena illuminated by an aircraft hundreds of kilometers behind him. The attack aircraft can be totally passive.
IR cannot replace radar, but will augment it.
I think the opposite ! When you see how technologies and electronics are evolving so fast, especially about miniaturization and highly capables camera and optics, I think there's a big chance the IRST and specially the FLIR, would be able to reach incredible distances in a close future. Maybe as far as radars or even superior distances and ranges !
Thales the French company working with Dassault on the Rafale, even said recently they wanna become the/a world leader in that kind of Optronics technologies. Clearly showing how important it will become in the future, and the fact they're working hard on it.
Passive sensors can't be jammed or scrambled by countermeasures defense systems, and can't be detected, etc ... Very big advantages over the radars weaknesses.
A former high rank senior of Dassault even said, the FLIR is like telescope, and when you know how far a telescope is able to see and with high resolutions quality, the day they successfully miniaturised it, it'd be capable to see and detect farer than radars !
Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less).
instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode !
Ah Yes - Early Warning Stealth Radar! - Su57 AirShow Queen uses this with waveless Photon Fire Control Radar + Plasma Stealth Cloaking for a totally Silent Fighter Experience...
How are targets high fidelity ID'd with IRST beyond 60km + how are IR weapons guided to targets beyond 40kms?
Bi Static radar? Has there ever been a working example of this?
A combination of different radar types would certainly discover an anomaly in the air especially if it is moving from one radar post to the other
Superb analysis, as usual. The finest military aerospace technology channel, on You Tube, by far.
Dual IRST can have accuracy of naval optical range finders, approximately 100 m from 100 km on base 10 m.
Detecting targets without pinpointing yourself to opponents is the "Mating Frog's Dilemma". The croak that says "Hey cutie, here's a big, sexy dude" in Frog says "Here's breakfast, come and get it" in Predator.
Yeah. That's the problem in a nutshell. The F-35 has individually controllable array elements, so as soon as it gets a return signal, it blacks out that position in space in the array. In a really dangerous situation it would be set to passive-only. It has exceptional IRST & passive RF detection capability in 365 degrees. This is arguably more useful than the very fancy Radar. A fancy trick is to have a forward F-35 on passive only, with an F-35 (or other plane) considerably to the rear. And the forward plane can seek radar bounce data from the further away plane. Thus keeping the active radar source further away from the dangerous elements. With networking, this can allow a number of stealth aircraft to play some pretty exotic cat & mouse in the sunshine of a distant friendly radar source. This also confounds enemy targets' ability to predict radar return angles (when designing a stealth aircraft).
@@kathrynck Thank you for the information. It sounds as though you know more about the topic than you can officially admit. :-)*
@@parrotraiser6541 lol
Well there's a couple other planes which can do similar. It's just that networking radar elements between aircraft is "more interesting" with stealth planes.
And it's arguably less dangerous to have a rearward radar (which could create sporadic unfavorable angular reflections) than it is to be an active emitter.
@@kathrynck The problem with using a radar far back is that its radar waves will hit your own fighters from behind. If those are steahlt planes using shaped steahlt they will reflect the radar waves in many directions except back to the sending radar.
@@sorennilsson9742 Potentially yes. Even with jamming there is some risk of that. Although I tend to think having a jamming-rich environment does more to confuse the landscape in favor of stealth aircraft than it does to cause detection.
Given the F-101, F-102, F-106 and early F-4's (B, C and early D's) had passive IR systems, it'd be fascinating to know just why the USAF and USN ditched the tech by the 1970s with only the F-14 with an IR system as standard (although replaced by a long-range camera). Maintenance issues? I think these earlier systems had to have a coolant for them to work.
the passive IR systems on early fighters were more like very low-resolution FLIR than IRST. early radars weren't very automated and someone had to aim them at a target manually, the FLIR would give you a rough idea of where a target might be so that you could lock the radar on to them for an actually useful track. USAF fighters lost their FLIR once computers became good enough to handle basic radar functions automatically and quickly scan a larger area.
They found the Sidewinder seeker head worked just as well as those early passive IR systems.
10:12 "A school boy exercise". Well clearly that puts me out of the race cause I barely scraped by High School Algebra.
Fantastically informative, the info regarding Kinematic Ranging and the difficulties with Triangulation in regards to calculation with moving points on the triangle were new to me. Fantastic work.
Su27 IRST was the best thing to play with in DCS world multiplayer :) .... stealth kills with R27ET without triggering RWR on other planes. Great moments ...
can go against f22 or f35 that way ?
They need to develop parachute-suspended smart flairs that alter their intensity and spectrum. Dump a load of them in the background and the IRST has so much signal processing that it's a nightmare to find the real guy.
IR jamming
IRST can do kinematic analysis to differentiate a fast flying plane and a slowly falling parachute.
@@Aaron-wq3jz Microwave offense / countermeasures? as in use a MW pod to overload / negate the effectiveness of ISRT
@@craigkennedy432 No on microwave. The waves will dissipate before turning the humidity to heat. Microwaves are used on certain ordnance to guide them as it will pierce smoke.
@@the80386 Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less).
instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
Your thesis is about IRST is pretty solid. I would give more weight to how IRST will be integrated into the Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) by the US and other countries. Also how they will put it to use it in a fully networked battlespace in combination with AWACS platforms. I would say it's just a matter of time, before IRST gets fully leveraged.
IRST certainly has come a long way, but Radars are also advancing significantly as well. I watched an interview with an F-35 pilot recently and he said that the pilots don't even call it a radar anymore, they call it a MFA, a Multi Functional Array. Their functionality has significantly changed over the last 20 years, past the point of just detection. Even in that role, significant advantages have been made. A modern AESA radar can perform an evolving series of actions nearly instantaneously, starting with producing a randomized search pattern using a range of different wavelengths and strengths causing it to be difficult to detect and nearly impossible to triangulate. Once it does detect something, it will hit that object with a series of different wavelengths and even create a synthetic image of the target, all of which will be compared to produce a high level of confidence in the target and make single frequency jamming far less effective (Jamming strength is divided by the number of frequencies you are outputting ie single frequency jamming is the strongest). This is all however besides the point. The concept of single sensor capabilities is outdated. You would never want one over the other but rather you want the Array and the IRST working together and this is how it currently functions. The Radar and the IRST work in conjunction, if the Radar gets a return, it cues the IRST to look at it and vice a versa. The exponential power of these systems working in tandem to create a more capable and more resilient sensor suite is far more significant than any single source sensor.
The F35 is a true pack hunter as well, it integrates together, with AI drones, and other battlefield assets to create a fully integrated picture. Nowhere for the enemy to hide. They only know their aircraft was targeted when it explodes.
there was an interview of a French pilot in "the fighter pilot podcast" he gave some official / publicly released numbers of the rafale's IRST abilities but never managed to find that moment in the archives. the big lines where that at a substantival range the plane could guide a IR missile close to pick up the target itself and voila you delivered an ir missile at long range and/or front aspect which mean a missile delivered with passive detection all the way, the interviewers described that idea as chill inducing.
It is true, it is in the French doctrine
Another fantastic video with excellent detail all the way through!
I wonder if the newly announced Tempest, when operating in pairs (one being a drone), will be able to perform the kinematic ranging autonomously. Perhaps the piloted Tempest maintaining a constant heading and the drone Tempest performing the nauseating weave manoeuvre!
Don't know about it, but the rival of the tempest, the FCAS will be able to do it. They already showed in their official videos, the capacity of their drones in a MANNED-UNMANNED teaming and swarming formation, to perform kinematic. While two of the drones perform the kinetic, the other one is performing the jamming.
Very smart and efficient idea I think.
Link to the video I'm talking above : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
I always love your content. It's like give 15 minutes and boom! Everything happening in the military tech is now known. Thanks! 🙏
The loyal wingman would be ideal to have IRST and be a decoy with the range finder ;-)
Put a radar on it ,just to draw attention.
@@schrodingersgat4344 Sadly not a good idea. A radar and drone are already expensive things to send as decoys and to be destroyed !
I think his inspiration came from a European program called FCAS, which already displayed more than 1 year ago this kind of ideas for their future warfare system and 6th generation fighter jet NGF. Link to the video : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
It sounds more like the genius ideas of Dassault and Thales !
IRST also has a valuable peace time potential use of monitoring and tracking potential adversaries without approaching close or painting them with a tracking radar that could be perceived as an act of aggression.
or Vice Versa unfortunately
No one is going to take being scanned by a radar as an act of aggression. Now do it with a missile guidance radar, the frequencies and characteristics of an opponent is sure to know about...
Very good video! :)
Especially agree about the published ranges of IRST. It's a bit like the advertising on some flashlights, saying they are visible from X miles away... when really that kind of claim can be massively exaggerated depending on the conditions (like in that missile launch detection example). IRST is by far the most likely candidate to become the main method of BVR tracking in a stealth aircraft arena. But it's significantly more limited in capability than radar in terms of being weather agnostic, being reliable in varying conditions, or having great range. It leaves stealth very useful, but it does increase the range of detection to a stealth target well above eyesight. It is clearly the emerging next step in the cat & mouse game. Worth pointing out, even though you can detect the skin heat of an aircraft from the front pretty well, IRST has greater range viewing the rear of a jet aircraft, due to the significantly larger amount of heat visible from that aspect. So the range is going to vary a lot (up to double/half) even in the same conditions. The pilot must maintain a very flexible and open-minded concept of what areas are "clear" of threats.
I also can't help wondering if 2 IRST's mounted at the wingtips might give enough triangulation to at least come up with "ballpark" ranging, which might be useful for a full track, or at least help inform the computers about how best to handle kinematic ranging. For example, twin wingtip IRST's might be "accurate enough" to tell the plane if the target has changed heading or speed while a kinematic triangulation is in progress. dual IRST's as a kinematic supplement. Just a thought. I dunno if it's viable. I think it could help the accuracy & time to calculate, and help prevent the system being fooled by a sharp turn in the target. But this is all theoretical. Exactly how far apart the tracks need to be, we don't know. At the very least, it could help provide an extremely thorough field of view, with 2 search arcs greater than 180 degrees overlapping fore & aft for some rough estimates of range in the weak areas. A microscopic degree of sensitivity to the angle of the sensor head would be the key tech for this I think. It might require very regular calibration as well.
I think kinematic is 'somewhat' more useful than you suggest, although it really is blind to ranging fore & aft. Every plane flying not directly fore or aft could be calculated pretty quickly. At mach .95 it only takes 0.5 second for the IRST plane to travel 425 feet (130m) which should be plenty for triangulation. Your target is not likely to change heading or speed enough in under a half second to throw off a kinematic calculation (it "can", it's just not likely in that time frame). This assumes some blisteringly fast computation though. Several triangulation attempts in a row (rather than just 2), if looked at by a computer, could (as a bulk of data) help differentiate and accurately range a turning target I think.
There's always satellites as well.
When you see how technologies and electronics are evolving so fast, especially about miniaturization and highly capables camera and optics, I think there's a big chance the IRST and specially the FLIR, would be able to reach incredible distances in a close future. Maybe as far as radars or even superior distances and ranges !
Thales the French company working with Dassault on the Rafale, even said recently they wanna become the/a world leader in that kind of Optronics technologies. Clearly showing how important it will become in the future, and the fact they're working hard on it.
Passive sensors can't be jammed or scrambled by countermeasures defense systems, and can't be detected, etc ... Very big advantages over the radars weaknesses.
A former high rank senior of Dassault even said, the FLIR is like telescope, and when you know how far a telescope is able to see and with high resolutions quality, the day they successfully miniaturised it, it'd be capable to see and detect farer than radars !
@@aviationaerospacechannel5987 I'd go with "all somewhat true, but don't get too optimistic".
IRST is the best current (and for the near future) counter to stealth. But the range limitations aren't based on how good the glass is, or how many pixels it has, etc. It's based on the fact that the atmosphere blocks it over distance. And there's no technological improvements planned to alter the atmosphere to be more clear hehe.
IR is a range of frequencies which are related to radiation created by heat, but it's all "relatively" near to visible light, and behaves fairly similarly for most purposes. Basically, IRST can get you similar results as a telescope. If you're looking straight up on a clear day, you can see up into the galaxy and beyond. If you're looking sideways at high altitude, you can see pretty far, probably up to 100 miles. If you're looking sideways at low altitude... maybe 30 miles. If you're looking at anything in cloud cover, or rain, or fog, or smog... you won't see very far at all. Go to a tall building, and point a telescope at the horizon. That haze which eats up the horizon? That's the problem.
Detection range increases when you're looking at the tailpipe of a plane, but decreases when you're looking at the front (unless it's something like an SR-71, which glows very brightly in all directions). Stealth planes 'mostly' try to reduce their IR signature, so that they are less visible, although there's a limit to what can be done with a jet powered aircraft.
IRST was for a while limited by the fact that when you telescopically look at long distances, your field of view is tiny. So it wasn't very feasible (for detection anyway) until computers could process large amounts of input very quickly, allowing what is essentially an IR telescope to rapidly scan across a large area.
IR also needs to go to extra lengths to detect the range accurately.
Are the IR sensors getting better? And the image processing improving? Yeah, they are. And that does increase the range & accuracy. Also, as missiles get "smarter" it becomes more possible to weapon-lock a target with less detailed information, and that helps IRST to be more effective. And that is the direction things are going for 5th gen cat & mouse.
But it doesn't remove the atmosphere problem. Trading in a cheap pair of binoculars for a really good long range spotting scope is an upgrade, but neither are going to be impressive in less clear atmosphere conditions. No matter how good they are. IR will never have the range or all weather capability of a powerful radar. It just gets you about double the range of visual light through a magnifying optic, and has a favorable match-up vs. jet powered or hypersonic things.
If you can see a plane with it's running lights on, with a good pair of binoculars. Then you can see most jet aircraft at about twice that distance with IRST. And that's actually pretty good on a clear night.
Having a lower temperature exhaust, having extremely sensitive IR sensors with good glass, and the best possible image processing to bring out subtle details, and having IRST which has a complete 360 field of view, are all kind of the end-game "as good as it gets" for IRST. Which is why I think the F-35 is ahead of the curve.
Also, IRST/FLIR/etc can be temporarily blinded or permanently damaged by an infrared laser, "IRCM" (it goes by several names in various countries). As a result, you can find a plane, but then that plane can say "OK, now you see me, now you don't". This tech also has some pretty devastating consequences for IR guided missiles. As well as some "other" uses I won't go into.
I'd look for "IRCCM" to be the next big thing. It already exists in some forms, but that gets into 'not public' info real fast. As well as further tech improvements to long wave radars. Well, I can think of a few other things which may be the next big thing as well, but "shhh" ;-)
Stealth was never about being "invisible". It's just going into combat in a ghillie suit, and trying to use the terrain, instead of going into combat in bright orange with a flashing light on your helmet.
@@kathrynck That's why in this video, isn't going enough far, and his informations are not well updated. I like this channel, but sometimes his videos are kinda weak !
Dassault FCAS program already showed their ideas about the 6th gen FCAS system and fighter NGF. The distance and range of IRST/FLIR or any type of Optronics, isn't anymore a problem if they're able to move and scan ahead the fighter jet.
The official video : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
MANNED-UNMANNED teaming and swarming is the future.
@@kathrynck The remote carriers or what we commonly call drones or UAV/UCAV, this part of the FCAS program will be available in very early stages. As said in the other video, this teaming and swarming capability, is planned/scheduled for Rafale F4 and typhoon LTE. Other video : instagram.com/p/CH-fIVQgCfz/
Rafale F4 is supposed to arrive in 4 years, with some early upgrades and updates available in early 2 years. So the aircrafts and jets that gamble almost everything on stealth as the USAF one's, they really need to worry as their stealth will be close to useless, with these drones that are using IRST/FLIR (or other Optronics), jamming and kinetic/kinematic techs and systems. A moving flying IRST or Optronics is like the nightmare of the stealth aircrafts/jets, giving your position and allowing the enemy to shoot you down and long distances.
These drones are even said, would be capable to carry weapons and missiles. Differents versions are already planned, and some already not far from a mass production and service/operations ready.
An example would be a soviet radar or ground station tracks/ detects an F22. Its location, direction, speed can be broadcast to an interceptor. If the interceptor lacks stealth, the safest thing is to try to come from the side, or possibly behind the F22 and use irst to do the identification/ targeting. This way the soviet fighter never turns on its radar . Totally depends on where the situation happens, type of engagement required, etc...
There's also the doppler effect, the longer distance, affects the frequency of the IR signal.. red-shift, etc. Modern sensors & ICs are fast enough to do it in a tiny package.
Actually that would only tell you the relative movement. Because of the red-shift the theory of the expanding universe was born. Because most cosmic object seem to move away from us. It can't tell you the distance. Also the relative speeds of fighter aircraft are to small to accurately determine their relative speed via the red-shift because for that you would need to know the exact wavelength of their IR-Emissions when stationary to the sensor. Radar actually does determine the targets movement in this way, by measuring the change in wavelength of the returned signal, but this only works so easely because you know exactly what wavelength the outgoing signal had.
But what does work and is actually used with some IRST systems is "kinematic ranging".
The detection range will most likely be too short for fighters jets (as a replacement). But it's a great addition to radar.
VS stealth aircraft, it does replace radar for the most part. It's considerably less good than radar, and very weather sensitive, but it's the best bet for BVR detection of stealth planes.
@@kathrynck not only versus stealth but on stealth it gives them ability to detect and lock targets while being undetectable, shorter range is non issue when your plane can get closer and this would make missiles incredibly deadly because if the opponent doesnt know he is being targeted he cant evade properly.
As a single sensor yes. But modern fighters have a multitude of sensors and fusion.
EW is by far the longest detection range for a proper listening platform.
Here you have a very large spectra. Including longwave. Passive in the beginning.
Radar comes next. But active.
IR detection. Passive.
Combining the information of all platforms give you great accuracy, great trustworthiness etc.
@@Asghaad true true
it also begs for the introduction of a longer range FOX-2 missile, which approaches on inertial guidance, and locks on when closer (mad dog lock). Could be difficult (not impossible, but difficult) to know there's an engagement occurring until "...wait, aren't I supposed to have 2 wings?"
@@christianm1533 Especially if your radar can selectively black-hole areas in it's view, only pinging the target for a moment every so often for a position update?
Mounting a IRST in each wingtip should work. The Short distance between the two IRSTs should compensate for the inaccuracy in calculation the distance between two IRST on each aircraft. In mounting a IRST in each wingtip you know exactly right distance and it will be possible to make a quick and precis calculation.
Good idea 👍
Or even better ! Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less).
instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealthy mode toward the enemies !
The wings move.
Hoping you can cover this in a future video: IRST's role in defeating stealth.
Very interesting subject and equally good explanation , I think first time on RUclips. Keep it up . Will watch it several times again and again.
A way a fighter can self triangulate utilizing a radar is pointing the radar at the roughy bearing to the target, sending a high frequency pulse, and calculating the range, such as in the MiG-23
I wonder if a second sensor could be towed. That would give a lot more distance than wingtips, and it might also act as a useful decoy.
That would be something for the eurofighter.
@@shanerooney7288 It's straightforward to add radar reflectors and/or flares to the towed pod as desired.
One of the newest challenges in naval warfare is how to counter hypersonic anti-ship weapons. These objects move too fast for interception by CIWS guns and missiles that require doppler radar to track incoming threats.Travelling at a few meters above sea level, they are in the densest atmosphere on the planet and when travelling at supersonic speeds, they will be extremely hot objects. They'll need something like the ablative coatings used on spacecraft for re-entry and that will make them the hottest objects in the sky after the sun. Radars lose time bouncing waves back and forth, each time requiring computer processing time to build an image. There just isn't enough time for computers to resolve it but infrared detection doesn't require radiation to be bounced back and forth. It happens at the speed of light. It could even be operated by an analog computer that doesn't "waste" processor time trying to figure out what is coming. The only intelligence that would be needed is to discern super hot missile from the sun. The contrast must be immense between them. (A corollary: Always make your hypersonic missile attack coming out of the sun.)
Why am I watching this?, can't get this anywhere else!. Good knowing how people try to out think each other.
I genuinely *love* your videos.
This is precisely WHY i even bother using RUclips.
Thank you, easy to understand, well presented, and you're clearly very intelligent and informed.
☀️😎☀️🇺🇸
Nice that you take up exhaust of F35.
I guess the question is which sensor is more useful? My inclination is that in a world of stealth and shortened engagement ranges, IRST might be the preferable sensor, as it is much harder to hide from. Another advantage is IRST is that there is no such thing as an IR warning reciever because it is a passive sensor, which means it is 100% stealthy which active sensors such as radar never are. There is the not completely trivial problem of making the nose of a fighter stealthy while having a
huge thermal camera in it, but I would argue that if possible, for dedicated air superiority, IRST might actually be the better primary sensor with a miniaturized radar system as a secondary.
While having two or more AC to triangulate is preferable it can be done with a single AC at lower precision and longer updates. By flying a perpendicular flight profile one AC can create the baseline separation for the triangulation measurement, but, since it will take some some to get that separation and all points are moving the precision will suffer. Kinematic ranging.
Triangulation .... Flatearths hate that word 👹 grrrrrr.
@user9823598246 that's why handrails are used everywhere in australia
In my opinion it is a very good method for locating stealth planes or launching missiles. With the Pirate Sensor from the Eurofigher, ranges and other capabilities were targeted similar to that of a radar. In addition, these sensors are passive and cannot be jammed. However, the weather has a major effect on the performance of these systems.
They can be jammed, however typically not at large distances.
Not in an air dominance situation where the fight will be way above the clouds
@@christianm1533 not really you need to know where the enemy plane is, use a laser against him give away your position that’s dum
If you have the enemy’s location, you shoot
I Really like your videos. It motivates me to do research by my own on the topics you are talking about.
Thank you a lot! :)
Looking from tactical angle, and the fact that modern multilayered radars produce a2ad zones efficiently, airplanes are loosing their importance in such conflicts. Its really not a problem of blindness of airplanes that needs fixing. Its more of defeating/blinding that a2ad zone. And that by the nature of operations, isnt a job of airplanes to do. Its something that drones and cruise missiles will have to take on.
Great video! I have a question... what are the greenish marks under the f35 cockpit in minute 14:50 ? I´ve never saw something like this. Thanks in advance!
Good question! I thought they were formation lights but it might also be on the filming side, some form of enhanced reality.
Those are unpainted areas, if you look at pictures of F-35 been assembled in factories you can see the same green color. Not exactly sure why this particular area is not painted but it's not first time I see this on F-35 pictures/videos. My theory is this have something to do with the complexity of maintenance of the stealth coating around certain panels.
excellent video. thank you
Thanks
As usually millenium, ur explanations are clear, thank u for this one more time awesome job! 👍🎯😘
IR only works in clear skies, and can be degraded by lasers, IR. jammers, fares. I would recommend a millimeter wave radar for WVR.
Good idea
13:11 ... you know you've watched too much mecha anime when your first thought on that segment is "why not give the plane some drones?" :p
How is there not radar in space looking down on earth. Makes so much sense to me being the best system
I strongly suspect that we are underestimating the technological achievements of thermal sensors. I have seen generals saying that investing in thermal stealth is a fool's errand since just the heat generated by the air flowing around the aircraft will soon be sufficient to eliminate stealth.
This may also have been one of the reasons why the f-35 specifically does not have super Cruise. Perhaps it's an attempt at avoiding some of this thermal stealth problem.
Israel also believes that within 10 years stealth will not be decisive. And the only technology that I'm aware of which could create that change would be thermals.
I have this system in my car.
There it's used for automatic high beam controll. It's even better than the fighter jet version, cause it can track front better than rear aspect. 😄
Yes... the IR system will be used to guide the long range missles the last mile or so... radar will get the missle close and the ir will get it up their tailpipe...
Compound sensors and compound engines are the future.
For triangulation in reliable way one would need to have 2 sensors or at least 2 lenses in tips of the wings, using single sensor and series of mirrors and actuators determine distance, it's possible, but not sure if on flying shaking platform
They already use "kinematic ranging" in some systems since decades. Modern fighter planes know very exactly where they are and how they move around in the air. Actually often much better than any pilot. So what you do then is to measure the relative angular movement for a few moments. The longer you do this the more accurate it gets and normally after a few seconds you have a good enough range estimate to fire a missile like an AIM-120 or Meteor. Ranging in this way isn't perfect, but it doesn't need to be. The missile will eventually use it's own seeker head for final target aquisition. It doesn't matter if the measurement is a few nautical miles off.
Bistatic radars allow a passive radar to detect emitter reflections.
Since radar can also show your location, its probably that IRST will gonna replace radars, and stealth technology will also replaced with quantum stealth aka "Harry Potter Cloaking Device"
Please make a series on Chengdu- J2O 5th gen aircraft
No because ir radiation is easily absorbed by water or water vapor so it becomes highly degraded in cloudy or rainy weather.
Well, yes but that's only true up to a certain hight. Above 30'000 theres hardly any weather any more so an IRST can give you a huge advantage in such conditions.
It seems like they’d be great for use with modern SAM systems, but I’ve never seen or heard anything along these lines. Am I missing something?You’d think it would be a no brainer! Imagine having an IRST slaved to something like a NASAAM launcher armed with AMRAAM or ESSM active radar missiles with lock on after launch capability. The SAM operator could Passively see airborne target (SEAD becomes les useful), launch missile towards target, let the missile’s own radar pick up the target, all while the launcher remains largely undetected.
Various Russian systems have them, but the range from the ground is severely limited.
I see one video and I'm hooked...
One possibility might be to estimate the effects of atmospheric scattering on infrared emissions in terms of relative decrease in frequency. This might be easily countered though.
There's a more simple solution, and this is to make fly the Optronics and others IRST/FLIR. Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less).
instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
Perhaps these infrared detectors could be used on the ground to search the skies for drones in the local airspace (perhaps even passively without the need to shine an infrared flashlight into the area) without needing to use radar that could cause the detector to be picked up by enemy aircraft on SEAD missions, or targeted by radar-homing missiles?
I have a free lunch for You, infrared is not inherently unsharp, it just need to be adjusted a small bit relative to the visible spectrum, however, producents of infrared cameras seem to have missed thát until recently.
On old camera lenses with a focus indicator scale, there is actually a marking indicating this, usually a few millimetres from zero (< depending on type of lense, tele/wideangle).
That is good explanations thanks.
Range it's possible to get from an AWAKS or a long range ground radar ,
Or from an spy satelite , it's not a problem to get range to target from an another place .
I suppose you'd also have to have a way to perform IFF interrogation as well if you were to abandon the radar. Interesting concept although the conventional wisdom was always to integrate IR/EO/Radar sensors. Now that AESA radars have become so popular (read: capable) one may ask the question from the other point of view: do you need IRST, especially pod-based, if you have an advanced, multi-mode radar? Great presentation.
I would say IRST is more importent than ever. Let's say an Aircraft carries an ECM-pod. You may detect it anyway on your radar from afar but your radar is probably unable to identify it. And IFF can only tell you at best, that it's not one of your own aircraft. So you have a blip on your radar that is something...could be an enemy fighter, could be a civil aircraft you don't know jet. IRST gives you in such a case the capability to identify the radar blip from still some distance away regardless of ECM.
Also the use of Radar always comes with the risk of giving away your own position.
Maybe use of aster 2 air launched.quantum radars and data linking probable
Yes, indeed! This channel is unique!
Just use a combination of both, the IRST system does not take up much space or require much power to run.
Infrared detection can be detected. It can be seen by night vision cameras. I have a set of night vision and I can see light pulses from the a TV remote. Heck, I can even use my Samsung phone's camera to detect an IR signal from a TV remote. I am sure a plane like an F35 could see that with its numerous cameras mounted around the plane. Infrared is a type of light that is invisible to the human eye.
That's not the same. What you describe is what's called active IR. In the old days, and that means just after WWII active IR was the hot shit, because it gave night fighting capabilities, especially for mechanized ground units. Active IR was based on IR-Illuminators basically a big searchlight which only emited in the none visible IR-frequency. With the right equipment it was indeed easy to detect. Today though you use passive IR sensors, which are much closer related to a Thermographic camera or the IR receiver on your TV, which is completly passive.
Just subscribed to your channel
I love your content
Perhaps do a series on surface to air missiles?
Of course it can , and stealth needs to consider other than radar when a system is trying to hide. 😎
the audio recording volume is so low
Very cool channel
Wouldn’t it be possible to have a database on which the IR sensor could feed for information to identify and MOREOVER to estimate the distance of an aircraft. Anyone can find the size of any aircraft on the internet so the size of an IR image recorded by the sensor could be translated into distances. A bit like the technic astronomers use to find distances of stars, they use a specific type of star that emits the same light so for any level of light there is an associated distance.
Hi. Another good vidéo.
As Rafale lover, I doubt of it's capacity to triangulate ils foe's position because I dont know, and I dont think, it is suited for communication with patrol follower.
I know DGA asked for implement thé function. It was one or the F4 upgrade.
Thanks vert much for your work. It five me a lot of fun.
No the system was already tried in 2013 but not accurate enough because only using l16
Look for tragedac
Put two or three irst sensors on the same plane for triangulation. If the distance between sensors is greater than the wavelenth of radiation being used fairly accurate measurements should be possible.
Could you perhaps do a series on the air to ground weapons like the HARM
Love your content and I learn a lot. However, I don’t get the “f-35 fan boi” stuff. If someone has an opinion that the F-35 is a far superior aircraft than others, that doesn’t mean their opinion isn’t based on the same facts or knowledge as yours. I mean, there is a good reason that tge F-35 wins the fighter competition over the Grippen (which you love)…and it isn’t b/c the Swiss, poles, Danes, Singapore(Ians?), etc are all fan bois.
I think your channel and the qualities of your show are too professional to have that kind of commentary. You know more than anyone that most of the capabilities of the F-35 are classified so neither you nor I are able to doubt or confirm how good or overrated it is. Just constructive criticism b/c I do love your vids.
Point out the flaws or why it isn’t as good as many think without labeling those who disagree “fan boys”? I mean, I feel like you are a “grippen fan boi” which -admittedly- is merely a perception and one you would disagree with. Is not your labeling of those who laud the F-35 as “fanbois” not just a perception?
I just think your stuff is too good, to professional and - generally - without bias, to dilute that by intentionally injecting your bias or perception which cannot be based in fact (because too much is classified) but it’s your channel
Your channel and just my opinion
A "Fan Boy" is someone who says that X must be better than Y without giving a reason or at least an educated guess, just because of an emotional stake.
There are many that, whatever you may say, comment "The F-35 is better".
But they are not the only ones, there are other fan tribes.
The videos about the Su-57 attracted a lot of them who can't admit that the Russian can do anything worthwhile.
It is a way of approaching a subject that I don't share, but everyone is welcome here as long as the conversation remains civilized.
The F-35/ballistic missile test was more to examine whether an F-35 can be used to provide over the horizon detection and guidance for a sea-launched SM-3.
well, it simply impossible with current tech fire control accuracy can not be provided.
Can you make a serie of videos around How fighters performs during Red Flag ?
The Gripen performance you mentionned was very interesting so I wonder How the other jets perfoms (Rafale, Typhoon, F-16-15-18, SU-30MKI...)
I would die for some extensive infos, but they are a very closely guarded secret. You just have pieces of interviews here and there, not enough to paint a coherent picture.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech I totally understand since we are in the same point. I actually struggle so hard to get any intels about it but nothing serious, only rumors.
By the way do you have intels about why the french are no longer participating in Red Flag ?
Maybe their heavy intervention in Sub-Saharian Africain coutries, Irak and Syria is a start.
You brought me a few question. Optics when scaled up can collect more photon and hence will gain more and more ability to detect far away object. If a irst were to become the main sensor, it would make sense to take all the space normally reserved for the radar and hence to be scaled up a fair bit which may enhance it's detection range. Would it be true in that case?
The other question is if a target is triangulated and the distance is known then couldn't the computer can infer the size of the target. From that point wouldn't the irst/computer know the range of the target from a single sensor as long as it doesn't loose the target?
It would probably be more effective to install multiple small sensors than one big one. Astronomical observatories already use this idea to form one huge telescope out of multiple small ones. It uses a lot of computing power but it's very effective.
I found it very interesting and I think I wrote to you about that, also I'm intrigued by having 3 IRST on 1 plane, 2 on the wing tips, one in place of the radar... what's your view on a land bases IRST, something big, would that make stealth redundant? Thank you
Land based system make sense because performance/sensor size of irst hit the point of diminishing return much quicker than typical radar.
It would be very ideal as a network of disperse observation station for both offensive and defensive operations that cannot be easily taken out by enemy sead. If anything, those disperse station themself can be a great anti seed unit.
But ultimately you still want radar as it is not easily effected by the environmental element and provide a much more accurate picture of the battlefield. But using irst as a general guidance mechanics, and let the weapon onboard sensor pick up the rest seems to be what we will be heading in the future.
Interesting, very......
Could two irst side by side use angular difference to find the range of a target?
No. Irst could only acted as augmentation to ghe radar
I mean if modern planes use AWACs to supplement their radar detection, why not use such planes to help triangulation? a bigger plane could house more IRST sensors and fly at a distance where triangulation would be possible.
Also, why use the wing tips when you can use a longer distance, like the planes length? mount one sensor up near the nose, and mount the other on the vertical fin or towards the rear of the aircraft. If theres a height difference between them, they could possible be at a distance longer than the wing tips and might help with triangulating.
It's not too outlandish, most predators, humans included, have two forward facing eyes to help perceive depth, so having two IRST 'eyes' seems ironically natural
The Rafale for example, the OSF is the old version. The new version is named OSF-IT. Range detection has been increased over 100km with this new Optronics, IRST and FLIR. Even the TV/IR has been improved on the F3 standard of the Rafale. The previous range was already superior to 40km, it was 50km. It's now superior to 50km but informations about the range hasn't been disclosed to public.
Other point, the Rafale is now using more Optronics since the new TALIOS POD has been deployed on the F3R standard. It gives a wider ranges, distances and angles to cover the Rafale and detect further air to ground and air-to-air targets/enemies.
The TALIOS optronic pod will incorporate artificial intelligence to analyse tactical data almost instantaneously in flight and extract and identify targets.
This video, isn't going enough far, and his informations are not well updated. I like this channel, but sometimes his videos are kinda weak !
Dassault FCAS program already showed their ideas about the 6th gen FCAS system and fighter NGF. The distance and range of IRST/FLIR or any type of Optronics, isn't anymore a problem if they're able to move and scan ahead the fighter jet.
The official video : instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
A system of systems. MANNED-UNMANNED teaming and swarming capabilities, between many differents proven platforms using artificial intelligence and complex analytics to find and detect the enemies first and well ahead. A very highly advanced combat collaborative platform and systems between any types of military machines.
Ok so sure a tiny IRST won't outrange radar. What about an IRST the size of the nose of the plane though? And one that's optimized design and frequency wise for quickly achieving firing solutions.
*firing solutions at long range*
would an optical ragefinder work too? like tank gunners use mils to calculate the distance of a target they already know the size of?
Nice job do compairson between rafale and JF block 3 or j10c
Excuse me can you tell me that the irbis radar can track a target like the f-35? Which range start to track it??
*can anyone answer my query?*
What's the difference between (MAW) Missile Approach Warning system's IR sensor & IRST?
Bcz unlike IRST, The MAWS is able to calculate the "Range" of approaching missile, which in turn finds "impact duration" of the missile?
Makes me think companion drones could be invaluable in the role of performing IRST.
Exactly ! Dassault already have imagined and prepared with its partners Thales and AirBus, a teaming and swarming capable system using drones or also called UAV/UCAV. It'd be available in a close future on Rafale F4 as a first part and step of the FCAS program (F4 is scheduled to arrive in 4 years or less).
instagram.com/p/CH2d2nMAYLZ/
With this solution, IR and other Optronics and advanced kinetic kinematic systems could be really superior than radars, since they're flying in a very passive and stealth mode toward the enemies !
the 2 irst Solution could be tried on somthing like a bomber with a large wingspan
Not enough distance between sensors, I suspect...
@@edcew8236 depends on the size of the Lenses used, if they are big enough it is possible
Can you make an episode of radar jammers, how they work im aerial combat?
Distance cannot be extracted from infrared image? From one image: no, from multiple at different wavelength: yes.
Because different wavelengths are absorbed differently by the atmosphere one could theoretically use the difference of image with wavelength a and image of wavelength b to estimate the distance... Probably not practical though.
Couldn't it be possible to roughly estimate the distance by knowing the size of an object and the camera characteristics? So a characteristic infrared signal could be compared to the data list, the airplane or missile size is then known, you get a rough estimate for long distance. In the other stance you can identify the the airplane and have the exact size. The math is very simple, so you wouldn't have a delay. I guess even when you have to consider the angle of the the other plane you are looking at.
Locate stealth aircrafts with old school radars then send fighter jets with IRST nearby to track and shoot them down with IR missiles.....
@@michaelkeller5008 Excuse me - in the "that's what happened" part of your claim, what part of the SAM system involved was a fighter and what part used IR?
@@michaelkeller5008 I see. And what part of "use IR to shoot down the jet" do you understand was used by a Yugoslavian SA-3? You know - the kind that tracks based on ground control radar?
@@michaelkeller5008 One report says an SA-6, I hadn't seen that.
www.456fis.org/F-117_SHOT_DOWN.htm
www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20051121.aspx
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-125_Neva/Pechora
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K12_Kub
Either way, unless something else was involved that I don't know about, it was radar.
@@michaelkeller5008 there is no lesson to learn. The F-117s in serbia had flown hundreds of sortees through the exact same route, and you somehow consider shooting down one a success, and proof of its ineffectiveness. Let alone the fact that the “Old School” radar is a detection radar that couldn’t provide a firing solution for the missile. The radar that actually could guide the missile only achieved a lock when the F-117 opened its bomb bay, and even then only from under 20 kilometers away. That’s completely unimpressive.
@@michaelkeller5008 It was more of a case of "locating a stealth aircraft when you already knew the route it was going to take due to poor tactical planning at the USAF HQ and knowing when the stealth aircraft took off due to human intelligence outside the airbase and then catching it on your radar which was pre-pointed to where you therefore expected the stealth aircraft would be when it opened its weapons bay ruining its stealthiness. Then, launching your missile in that direction and getting lucky in the missile getting close enough to acquire the stealth aircraft. It took A LOT of savvy on the part of the battery commander, but it wasn't a failing of stealth. Baghdad had way better air defense and they were completely helpless to F-117s used with tactical intelligence. The USAF was much more to blame for the shoot-down than Lockheed.
nice. i just added it to my phone.