Here's Why No One Can Attacks AWACS Aircraft
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 июл 2024
- AWACS aircraft are indispensable components of modern military operations, providing essential surveillance, command, and control capabilities. Their advanced technology, strategic operational tactics, robust protective measures, and the deterrent effect of potential escalations contribute to their relative safety in conflicts. Consequently, despite their significant importance, AWACS aircraft remain largely unscathed, highlighting their strategic and tactical invulnerability in modern warfare.
Support us:
RUclips : @USDefenseNews
Facebook : / usdn.official
Instagram : / us_defensenews
If you have any problems viewing this Video, please report it here: usdn.official@gmail.com 
Наука
In the Ukraine War, Australian Wedgetail E7's have been flying over Poland but can see across the battlefield. Russian cannot shoot them down because they cannot do it without starting a war with Poland and Australia. Similarly the US has been flying early warning aircraft in International space over the Black Sea. Russia is very limited in what it can do if any attempt at downing the aircraft means launching a much larger war with enemies far more capable than Ukraine.
Sometimes it is just politics and fear that keeps the aircraft safe.
You think differently that’s good!
Well he didn’t hold back and used chemical weapons to murder people in the uk so I wouldn’t ascribe to your “he can’t shot them down’ theory’ too much.
Dear USAF. I worked on both the USAF E3 and the Australian Wedgetail. You are going to love the E7.
Totally agree. Personally I think it's ridiculous it's took us this long to get the wedgetail. I was on the e8 jstars for a few years before I even learned about the Aussies having the wedgetail and when I read up on it I was like you've gotta be kidding me theyve got a better system than us???? 😆
"There's a reason no AWACS has ever been lost in combat."
The United States (and the world) is fortunate that there has been no direct combat with near-peer states since WW2. Russia has lost two of their AWACS in recent months in its war against Ukraine (one on the ground and one in the air). It's likely that China wants/intends to destroy or disable USAF AWACS and tankers (and other combat aircraft) while they are still on the ground using waves of relatively cheap drones. The lack of sufficient aircraft shelters at most USAF bases around the world makes this a real risk, and the USAF (and Navy and Army) need to prepare with haste for this event.
ONLY RUSSIAN AWACS LOST MORE
@@user-ht8dd8kc3x It was flying very close to the Action near crimea
The adversaries that Russia have been facing are not exactly top tier peer adversaries too. They got pretty screwed up in the first conflict in Chechnya.
The US's most recent serious fight was the first Gulf War. Saddam Hussein did boast the 5th largest army in the world. Saddam did have some significant air power and ground based radar infrastructure and the home game advantage, but Saddam did get utterly spanked.
Combat casualty ratio was something like 70:1 which is hugely different than the 5:1 bragged about in Russia vs. Ukraine.
If American gear isn't all it's cracked up to be because America doesn't get into peer fights, I think it can still be asserted that America coordinates it's usage of military resources far better than anyone else who significantly fights.
Military performance does not merely come from superiority of equipment. Much of it comes with applying your resources intelligently.
American gear is quite good enough for it to deploy it exceptionally well.
Agreed. More cheap suicide drones, less B2's, Darkstars and Aicraft Carriers.
Too much money is spent in one place.
AND VICE VERSA.
Google Translate fail on that title.
Conceptually your statement is correct. However, the reality is AWACS flies a lot without fighter support due to weather restrictions for fighters. I experienced Soviet Aircraft that broke our safety perimeter. Another event occurred with a foreign fighter got within 20 miles of us; that was an interesting ride!
Who wrote the title of your video? Is that Engrish you're using?
There's nothing wrongs with their English, lol...
@@tomlee7956 The Englishs are gooder than a some, but room there for improvement is.
@@meatpopsicle1567 Perhaps is, perhaps is...
@@meatpopsicle1567understood. Master Yoda.
I was about to say the same thing! Apparently, no one spell checks things anymore. Many errors (like using a plural insteead of a singular). I'm not nit-picking here but ..... LOL
Is it so hard to proofread and spell check your video titles?
What Do You Means?
Evidently.
@@elmorteNF 😆
Broken English seems to be the new trend
@@StormsRadiosCats That's okay, broken English merely reflects that English is broken.
based on history Not current technology or threats
58 seconds into the video and I'm already being bombarded with advertisements
I use an extension called "ublock origin" on my Firefox web browser. It blocks all ads. I don't get any on you tube. I do get messages from you tube to turn off my ad blocker but I ignore them. The ad blocker does block some websites until you give it permission and may stop features on websites from working but that a small price for no ads. You can also turn on or off "ublock" extension for each individual website.
Without saying too much, I’m an F35 crew chief and my brother in law is aircrew on the AWACS: he admits that my job is more important bc the airframe I maintain makes the airframe he crews basically useless lol
"No One Can Attacks" English much?
😂
`The ongoing background "noise" was never needed. If the narrator and video were regarded as insufficient, then some distracting background "noise" might be necessary.
No one can attacks huh?
Actually, while none have been shot down in a war zone, by the USAF's own admission during a ‘Red Flag’ exercise some years ago, an RAF Tornado was able to breach an AWACS fighter screen and got close enough that the AWACS was considered to be within the missile kill range of the Tornado. And the AWACS was then "taken out of the exercise". I tried to find the link to the original article on here but I can’t find it.
Like the German and I think a swedish submarine manages to virtually sink an us aircraft carrier sneaking through the whole carrier battle group
Go Air Force
Go Navy!
@@rayraynod lol. I was actually in the Army but my dad made it to Chief Master in the AF. Cousin was an officer on a Sub.
ANG is not the air force.
@@facsimile-io3dd the Air National Guard does indeed fall under the branch of the Dept of Air Force. Let’s not be obtuse.
Has anybody even tried to?
a 250 miles radius is INSANEEEEE!!
Not really.
Pretty much normal for any warship. From any country. For over 60 years.
This explains why AWACS Thunderhead and AWACS Bandog never got attacked.
Theyre not defenseless. We know awacs and other airborne systems will be the primary targets in any air engagement with near peer countries. Theyre loaded with ecm's, chaff etc, when i was a systems op on the jstars we even tested tow decoys and other deployable countermeasures
Clownstrike: Hold my beer
Doesn’t the body of the plane interfere with the radar? Obviously this is a problem they have solved. I just wonder how they did it.
It'll be years before the E-7 is fielded, the USAF bought the, already in service, airplanes, as training prototypes but pretty much want to rip everything out and build it from scratch, so with typical glacial (and lucrative) development schedules, it'll be the mid 2030's before we see the first operational jet.
Seriously just how many lights do you need....
and to think they are all individually wired
Why can't we develop a B-2 Spirit AWACS? It is stealthy and has a long range.
I understand the manned operation part of it, but it is a great concept. I'm thinking outside the box.
Cause they're sending out thousands of watts of radar energy. It's a beacon no point for stealth
@@RyanFranny-xb4uq omg, I totally brain farted that one 😆 🤣....
The typo in the video title doesn't inspire much confidence.
a typo even in the title. amerika has the best HUBRIS
only going up against the sandals and AK brigade for decades helps a bit also. It's been a while since the US faced a peer enemy. Not sure this sense of superiority is well based.
just because a russian one was brought down by Ukrainians?!
Actually more than '250 mile' radius when connected to satellites.
No!!!! Its a jet with flying saucer technology. So unless you want a death beam in your face then leavit alone.
Never say never
Might want to go airbus next time considering Boeing's recent problems with quality control...lol
PL17: LMAO
Can AWACS outrun R-37 missile, which has range up to 400 km ?
new missile technology fired in a swarm will get past any defense. Our carriers are extremely vulnerable too
@@wellshutchins6885 You are absolutely right! All this misplaced hubris may lead to losing three carriers in a single week against the Chinese! Also their manufacturing capabilities are through the roof. All they have to do is overwhelm us with cheaper lesser stuff all day long until we run out of ammo and then we are just sitting ducks on the other side of the Globe Alone! Many supposed allies will Not get involve and come to the rescue when the shit hit the fans and their alliances will quickly shift! It is Not a secret the USA today is a long illed falling Empire!
Theory != practice - ask the Houthies.
Except it's never been done before. Sounds cool! Maybe some space wizards, laser beams that shoot out of the eyes, and a magic orb too!
Hellos. Cans no ones be attacks AWACS?
Amazing they use a first gen Boeing jet for these instead of, well, any of the 3rd 4th or 5th gen craft Boeing has built in the last 60 years.
Yep. The E-3 AWACS fuselage and engines are the Boeing 707-320B. Did not even upgrade to the CFM 56 as was done with the KC-135's.
Japan uses a Boeing 757 based AWACS
Your scenario is defence not offense
What’s a can attack?
why don't AWACS carry long range air to air missile?
Because it is not her job.
Because it's fighter jet accompaniment is far more effective at carrying weapons. They are faster, more maneuverable, and are built to handle the stresses of weapons deployment.
In addition, the extra weight of the weapons system onboard the early warning aircraft, plus the added reinforcement of wings etc to handle the stress of weapons deployment, means less weight of fuel can be carried, so less range and time in the air, and possibly the onboard radar systems might also have to reduce weight, and the smaller and less powerful radar system will thereby be less effective.
You can see in fighter jets, that while they carry plenty of very effective weapons, their range is much smaller than an an early warning aircraft. Part of that is due to the more powerful engines in relation to body size for both speed and carrying the weapons load in an airframe that is built extra strong (therefore relatively heavy) to handle the stresses put on it. This includes weight of systems for carrying the weapons, and launching systems, aiming and tracking/radar systems, for the weapons, and withstanding reactive forces from rocket launches and firing cannons, etc.
Putting weapons onboard an early warning aircraft is therefore is incredibly counter-productive, and would probably make the aircraft more vulnerable and much less useful.
"can attacks"... Was this video made by a kitten?
InB4"I has to's"😼
This information come to you from the US Department of Redundancy Department
Isn’t such radar equally detectable to enemy
A distant enemy would only receive a RWR warning of being scanned by long range radar. It's own onboard systems would have to be quite close in order to determine it's position and range however to launch offensive weapons at it.
Yes, radar emissions can be detected. This is how antiradiation missiles work.
Without a lot of information it's difficult to get much data from those transmissions. This is because the radars also have electronic warfare capabilities.
The E7's AESA will likely support low probability of intercept which blends transmissions into the background noise.
@@kwonekstrom2138to add to your excellent post, the aesa radars are also capable of much narrower bands, simultaneous band emission, and rapid channel hopping which further confound attempts to isolate and neutralize the emission source.
Also, long range fires require a missile to be at the intercept point, not where the source was at launch. It’s practically impossible to calculate this based on the moving aircraft’s emissions at very long ranges because assumptions have to be made by the firing computer about how much Doppler shift is actually occurring and WHY it’s occurring. With aesa, the amplification can rapidly be varied on the given frequency; which will be understood to be Doppler shift caused by direction of travel changes by the fire control computer. This, in theory, will cause the computer to assume the plane is going in a completely different direction. The fidelity of the emission is simply too low to hit fast moving objects reliably (ie from a strategic doctrine perspective)
The fact that an awacs is trackable by ultra low frequency radars from hundreds of miles away makes this video moot. Granted those radars can't guide missiles into it, but it can certainly guide aircraft towards it. And 2024, a lot of countries have assets that will be able to destroy awacs and/or its escorts. The powerful radar an awacs has is an ideal target for any anti radiation seeker head. They only have to lob them into the general direction of an awacs, and either the awacs is destroyed or it has to turn off its radars. No need to turn on powerfull radar to track it. And these are only a few of the dozens of realistic ways to kill awacs.
This is a typical video to placate the masses, and giving the ordinary man a sense of safety.
so m
Did you mean to write in your title Here's Why No One Can Attack AWACS Aircraft? Seems like that would be more coherent English. Not watching because I can't comprehend why channels put out gibberish in their titles and then expect people to click on their 'content' anyway. Why don't you edit your output?
"No one can attacks AWACS aircraft"? Well! But can they haz cheeseburger? Seriously, who writes this shit, some AI that didn't graduate 2nd grade?
The J20 is not a Stealth fighter aircraft. Not like the F-22 and F-35. The AWACS can detect them.
Title is just more click - bate .😊😊
Attack, not attacks.
I see someone is having some issues with English.
The air force should equip its AWACS aircraft with chaff dispensers & radar jammers that can be easily & quickly switched off & on,if it hasn’t done so,just in case.
The AWACS is one single massive electronic warfare machine.
I presume they are packed with the stuff.
Yeah if you can’t take the time to proof read your material, I can’t take the time to watch it.
The Russians have lost 2 of their similar aircraft so I don't think its a fool proof theory that they can't be shot down.
So what, I can drive right through Iraq and no one can ATTACKS me either ffs.
More curious why nobody speaks english
Tell that to the Russians. Ukraine got one
Because America hasn't faced a near peer enemy since WWII
There are no near peer adversaries.
I think Russia has lost three of their TEMU version AWACS aircraft.
Almost all due to Friendly Fire.
If you can take down satellites - You can take down an AWACS ! 🤔
This is probably technically true, but not really an operational reality. Satellites generally fly in extremely predictable paths (intercept courses can be planned days in advance in most cases) and have no ew to disrupt targeting. They also dont benefit from atmospheric effects that can obfuscate targeting at long ranges or have a practical targeting horizon.
There are a lot of tactical advantages in favor of awacs compared to low earth satellites.
If you think this is all we have, considering this is on RUclips. You have not been paying attention!!!
Ask the russians about theirs!
yeah, i don't know if the AS-50 is so tech evol. and likely operators were drinking vodka and playing tetris
[Laughs In S-400]
... unless it is Ruzzian.
... and trashy.
Doubt it. Can't even spell right.
If a satellite can be shot down
Woth zUsa s overwhelming support yes.stealth interceptors etc..
But with less supoort awacs is still eady prey with modern mwans Datalinking BVR s saturating defensive means escorts etc.
This is copium. The AWACS is a big, bright emitter. Passive sensors would be sufficient to target a fast, long range missile to the immediate vicinity of the AWACS. A sufficiently advanced missile would arrive, go pitbull, and pick up the AWACS itself. The reason the US hasn't lost one yet is because the US has assiduously avoided near-peer combat since 1945.
ya think? Not gonna happen with an AWACS and it's 300KM+ detection range.
NATO AWACS also has ECM. Tougher nut than what you think.
AWACS will detect enemies before they can detect AWACS, so try harder
@@JLC_Subutai Stealth. Try harder yourself, skippy.
Stop the cap 🧢
"any sensor, any system"
I hate to break it to you, but you are one war late in your copy-pasted analysis...
New long-range hyper-fast missiles with stealth tech, and passive sensors are HERE!!! That means NO radar emiting aircraft is safe, when THEIR radar is in range to be effective. There is no safe distance anymore, and an escort is useless against the new anti-air weapons.
Unless the AWACs get serious defense systems with lasers or something like that, it's over. Even of you shoot down an incoming up close with another missile, at mach 5+ the debris will just keep going and become effective shrapnel.
I would NEVER become a crew member on a slow, large aircraft without ejection seats in the coming wars. It would be suicide.
Even transporting troops will become almost impossible once the live show starts.
Another expert
What is the name of this missile?
Plenty of missiles have been hypersonic for a long time, we just didn’t make a big deal about it.
@@charliematts1736 R-37m and YES its Russian, but it actually works. The US also just put 300Km range Standards on an F/A-18 Super Hornet.
@@mss3834 A 55 year old, ex Army who studied military science in University... So maybe not an engineer expert, but a weapons connaisseur.... So thanks for being petty and an arse...
Russia lost 2 of them
But... Russia doesn't really know how the modern air force should work
Poor A-50's.... 🤣🤣🤣
Unprofessional standards using childish cartoon sounds.. SSSSSSWWWWWWWIIIIIISSSSSSHHHH / ZZZZZAAAAAAAPPPP to the dislike button jr
Head cheer leader !!
Just hope AF leaders are NOT drinking all your Kool Ade
The reason no AWACS has bin lost yet is that they have not bin up against proper long range air to air missiles like the R-37M yet. It is specifically designed to take down AWACS and airborne tankers from up to 400km.
They claim 400km but it’s only been shown up to 300km, and that was obviously not against a real target with countermeasures and a military with extensive counter missile capabilities.
I don’t think the USAF is the least bit worried about the R-37m which is 1980s tech.
And the reason no AWACS has been lost is there’s yet to be an aerial engagement with a peer / near peer. North Vietnam and Iraq had air forces but their fighters were never allowed to get near any of the USAFs ISR / AWACS / C3 aircraft.
Russia can’t even shoot down Cessna drones, it’s hilarious to think they could pull off a mission against an AWACS.
Bin?...Bin?...I see Scrabble eludes you.
The probability of kill drops rapidly with range. Assuming they had the advertised range... I have serious doubts that their targetting systems can overcome EW effectively at those ranges.
People always seem to forget that defenders have countermeasures.
@@FrankTedesco oooh no, not the grammar police!
@@kwonekstrom2138 even under ideal testing scenarios against a drone the best they could muster was 300km which is likely at the extreme limit for the launching platform.
You're absolutely right that against an actual aircraft they'd be using EW, counter measures, and not to mention fighter escort to intercept any in bound missiles. Honestly I'd be surprised if they could even launch at 100km, and that's a big *IF* they could even get that close.
The US practically treats these as national security assets, a lot of things would have to go very wrong for RU to take out an E2 or E3 - their best shot would be the opening salvo of a war against the US but even then then the US ant NATO would notice the escalations and ensure any AWACS / ISR / C3 aircraft had fighter escort.
Sorry, but this is utter BS. The Russians have the MiG31 with powerful radar and R37 long range missiles developed especially to hunt for AWACS. These have a decent chance at shooting one down, especially if they are willing to take heavy losses themselves.
Russia don't have shit😂😂
I mean, anything can happen, but an awacs can pump out probably 100 times the energy the mig 31 can produce, and long range fires are impossible without accurate mid course corrections. These corrections aren’t possible if you cant achieve local em superiority over the target.
Power is only one factor though, russia cannot produce modern aesa radars, which means they lack resolution and fidelity on small returns (like an awacs 200km away). Further, they cant channel hop like aesa’s can, making it very easy for automatic jamming software to emit a pulse 180 degrees out of phase with the attacker. Two em fields 180 degrees out of phase will cancel out and leave the attacking aircraft with absolutely no return to fire at.
It gets even harder though, because the us has been able to effectively spoof pulse doplar and pesa radars for at least 30 years now, which means they can match the frequency just enough out of phase that it returns targets (often times many targets) that aren’t actually there. It does this by artificially creating Doppler shifts in the emissions that convince the computer that there are objects moving at all different speeds and directions from a bunch of different starting points. This is actually why a lot of ufo reports come out near us military bases. This makes it a crap shoot even attempting to guess which of the 30 contacts that popped up on your screen are the real target. It becomes impossible when there is a cone 180 degrees out of phase directed around the center of the aircraft AND spoofed returns everywhere else. This leads to a scenario where the radar only sees false returns.
Aesa was the future 30 years ago, today pesa radars and pulse Dopplers are woefully inadequate against modern ew systems. Any aircraft operating these outdated systems will require a substantial amount of blind luck to be successful against radar system with radically more power and agility.
Did you know what happened at SC sea back in June? US carrier group EW aircrafts sent to interrupt China were completely blinded for full 12 hours. No one can attach US AWACS aircraft, think again.
Lol
RUBBISH!!
Russia has lost three AWACS planes in Russo-Ukraine war so its not exactly accurate !!!!
Along with all their high quality well staffed navy, tanks, the fearsome s300 and 400 which can’t shoot down a Cessna …comparing anything against Russian equipment is like comparing it to the Iraq army. Russia turned out to be a paper tiger filled with drunks and criminals.
Hes not talking about russian knockoffs of us awacs.
ahhh, talking about real tech here, not trash
No AWACs have been lost. But though not as powerful, the US has radars on its reaper drones. And they have been shot down over the black sea near Ukraine. China's PLA has designed multiple weapons systems specically designed to take out AWACS, Wedgetail, and tankers. The fighter escorts aren't much use against the PL15 and PL21 air to air missiles aimed at US radar planes and tankers. The AWACS is completely obsolete and not survivable against a near peer adversary. The range of an AWACS is limited by the curvature of the Earth. Satellites would do a better job. And likely we already have these in service and China has weapons to take those out as well.
Reaper now has what is referred to as a black hole counter signals sent back to enemy. We’ll found out soon
West is lost, military laging behind,weapons , ships , avio etc producation lagging, energy sector lagging .. west is fuvked ..
And Russia is leading the way. Right.
@@mss3834 china, and is using russia ...
Did not Ukraine just shoot down Russia version of this aircraft. So not impossible to shoot down, just another target in a global conflict
don't compare real tech equipment with trash. thanks.
well, no awacs had been lost! now Russia just lost one...
AWACS stands no chance getting close to S400 and S500 AD systems. Yanks have had to pull their drones out of the Black Sea area. If Russia went head to head with the US you can expect to see your AWACS pretending to be submarines.
Wow what carabao English no one can attacks! Byeden's style of Ingrish!
Our entire military is in trouble Until President Poopy Pants is gone with his entire idiot administration. God help all of us!
You must mean diaper don. The orange felon
Stole Elections Have Consequences.
yeah, that orange guy running for office should be behind bars by now...
Why do you hate America and shit on our military?
Because the makeup wearing, hair dying, draft evading fat man who says veterans who got captured or soldiers who get killed are chumps and wants to withdraw from NATO, is buddies with N Korea and Putin, is so great for the military?