Perun Posted May 14, 2022 Author Share Posted May 14, 2022 Those Soviet coefficients were only for wargaming. As I heard from some NATO officers their coefficients were similar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 (edited) Sorry, wrong thread. Edited May 15, 2022 by Stuart Galbraith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 14, 2022 Author Share Posted May 14, 2022 (edited) How the Navy Tried to Turn Bioluminescence Against the Soviets https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-the-navy-tried-to-turn-bioluminescence-against-the-soviets Edited May 15, 2022 by Perun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 15, 2022 Author Share Posted May 15, 2022 "After Walker's arrest, Caspar Weinberger, President Ronald Reagan's Secretary of Defense, concluded that the Soviet Union made significant gains in naval warfare attributable to Walker's spying. Weinberger stated that the information Walker gave Moscow allowed the Soviets "access to weapons and sensor data and naval tactics, terrorist threats, and surface, submarine, and airborne training, readiness and tactics." John Lehman, United States Secretary of the Navy during the Reagan administration, stated in an interview that Walker's activities enabled the Soviets to know where U.S. submarines were at all times. Lehman said the Walker espionage would have resulted in huge loss of American lives in the event of war." http://pub10.bravenet.com/forum/static/show.php?usernum=774301397&frmid=32&msgid=1361862&cmd=show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 15, 2022 Author Share Posted May 15, 2022 (edited) T-AGOS 1 Stalwart Ocean Surveillance Ship Ocean surveillance ships have a single mission to gather underwater acoustical data. The T-AGOS ships operate to support the anti-submarine warfare mission of the Commanders in chief of the Atlantic and Pacific Fleets. The ships are operated and maintained by civilian contractors. During the Cold War, ocean surveillance ships prowled the world's oceans searching for Soviet Navy submarines. ... The ship is designed to tow an array of underwater listening devices to collect acoustical data. The ship also carries electronic equipment to process and transmit that data via satellite to shore stations for evaluation. The ship, the listening devices and electronic equipment are all part of a system called the Surveillance Towed Array System, or SURTASS. SURTASS is a linear array of 8575 ft deployed on a 6000 ft tow cable and neutrally buoyant. The array can operate at depths between 500 and 1500 ft. Information from the array is relayed via WSC-6 (SHF) SATCOM link to shore. SURTASS patrols are of 60-90 days duration [which even with passive tank stabilisation is a long time to wallow around at 3 kts]. ... General Characteristics, Stalwart Class Builder: Tacoma Boatbuilding, Tacoma, WA. Propulsion: Diesel-electric; 4 Caterpillar D 3988 diesel generators, 3,200 hp, 2 motors, 1,600 hp; 2 shafts; bow thruster; 550 hp. Length: 224 feet (68 meters). Beam: 43 feet (13 meters). Displacement: 2,262 tons (2,298.3 metric tons) full load. Speed: 11 kts (12.65 mph). Crew: 20 Navy personnel and 18 civilians. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/tagos-1.htm Edited May 15, 2022 by Perun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 15, 2022 Author Share Posted May 15, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 15, 2022 Author Share Posted May 15, 2022 THE SOVIET ARCTIC https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp79t01018a000300010001-0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 The Hunt For A Soviet Submarine Desperately Trying To Sneak Through The Strait Of Gibraltar https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40286/the-hunt-for-a-soviet-submarine-desperately-trying-to-sneak-through-the-strait-of-gibraltar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 Distance for comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 1200 nautical miles from Keflavik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted May 16, 2022 Share Posted May 16, 2022 https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA422490/mode/2up?q=soviet+navy+mediterranean DTIC ADA422490: A Tale of Two Fleets: A Russian Perspective on the 1973 Naval Standoff in the Mediterranean   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 SOSUS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 The Kola Peninsula: The Strongest Soviet Naval Base (Kola-Halbinsel: Staerkste Flottenbasis der Sowjetunion ADA053509 https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA053509 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 A-10 Operations and the Battle for North Norway ADA193854 https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA193854 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 Swedish Security Policy ADA170392 https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA170392 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 Finland's Security and Defense Policy; Origins and Current Developments ADA166785 https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA166785 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 DTIC ADA041437: The Nordic Arc: A Vital Region https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA041437 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 ADA227428: The Impact of the Soviet Military Presence in the Arctic Region on Norwegian Security Policies https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA227428 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 ADA216232: Theater Campaign Planning: An Analysis of NATO's Northern Region https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA216232 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 Reinforcement of Tactical Air Forces in Central Europe https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/1975-03-01b.pdf It is for central europe but could be used for Arctic front Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 WARSAW PACT NONNUCLEAR THREAT TO NATO AIRBASES IN CENTRAL EUROPE https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp87t00126r000700800007-8 Same as above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 (edited) So how good is the AN/AWG-9 on the F-14 compared to something like F-15 or F-18 Radars? There was a big push in the 1960s and 70s to make long range airborne radars with 'automatic' acquisition and tracking processes to lighten the workload on the pilot. Many new technologies were needed to accomplish this, including high throughput processors, coherent transmitters and amplifiers, increased computer memory and new tracking algorithms. Doppler processing would be required to reduce/filter clutter and enable automatic acquisition and tracking. A new waveform, high pulse repetition frequency (HPRF), would be needed to facilitate this processing technique. This HPRF waveform would prove far superior to Low PRF waveforms used in 'pulse radars' of the past. These older 'pulse radars' required a human to monitor the radar scope and manually pick out targets hidden within the radar clutter. In the 1960s, the AN/AWG-9 was at the forefront of cutting edge radar design. With the new HPRF transmission/reception and automatic tracking being incorporated into its design. However, unlike other radars of this new generation, the AWG-9 retained its 'man in the loop' design of past 'pulse radars'. The RIO would still be able to manually pick up faint targets (or targets masked by clutter) that the automatic system wouldn't. Even today, automatic trackers need the target to be ~12dB (16 times) stronger than the noise in order to track. A skilled operator could do the same with a target only 3dB stronger than the background noise. https://i.imgur.com/2zf64Tc.png?1 Thus, where these new processes failed, a human could step in and in many cases out perform the automatic processes of the receiver. Additionally, the AWG-9 would also retain old school 'pulse radar' processes (LPRF waveform) adding further versatility to the sensor. (the LPRF was retained for 'all aspect' detection and ACM modes, but proved inferior to MPRF waveforms used by later radars) As if it wasn't enough, the AN/AWG-9 had an extremely powerful transmitter and very large antenna, giving it a narrow beamwidth. This combination made it the most powerful fighter radar (raw effective radiated power) up until the APG-77. However, the radar was designed primarily with 1960's equipment and sported an analog receiver. Leading to poor look down performance amid terrain, especially in automatic modes. All that being said, she represents the best analog airborne radar ever made, but her performance is highly predicated on the skill of her operator. One of the devs mentioned a detection range of about 110nm (in PD search; 90nm in RWS) against a fighter sized target. Giving it greater range than the F-15 and F-18. However, the AWG-9 lacks Medium PRF, giving it a distinct disadvantage against low Doppler (flanking) targets. EDIT: wrong dB to base 10 formula. ... One of the devs mentioned a detection range of about 110nm against a fighter sized target The PDS has a nominal max detection range of 115NM against 5m2 targets at best aspect, but it's a "fairly useless" mode since it only gives range-rate and no range at all, so doesn't leave you with a real picture, other than "something somewhere along this azimuth is closing/opening at rate X". RWS and TWS have nominal max detection rate range of 90NM for 5m2, and they give (inaccurate, something like 5NM resolution) range information (using FM ranging), so you can get a picture at least. RWS allows scan patterns up to +-65deg 8bar (takes 13 seconds), which scans a massive volume of sky, TWS modes are limited to patterns that repeat within 2 seconds (+-40deg 2bar or +-20deg 4bar). edit: 90NM range, not rate ... Does the AWG-9 RWS mode extrapolate range rate over time and present a velocity vector on the TID? Or is RWS data only range and azimuth? No tracking of targets in RWS, so just displays range and azimuth on each radar return, with no velocity vector. They're cleared after the frame time too. The big advantage over TWS is that you can use much bigger scan patterns. ... Great write-up. Do you have a paper going over the details as to why the SNR needs to be 12x stronger for automatic processors vs how humans are able to pick out targets with signature amplitudes of only 2x SNR? I always am so curious about how these rule of thumb numbers are derived. My source for the 12dB is the "Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Handbook" published by NAVAIR. https://i.imgur.com/2zf64Tc.png?1 I dont currently have additional data on this, but as I have worked with analog and digital receivers I believe it has to do with the differences in pattern recognition between human sight/perception and automated detectors. To prevent false alarms (false detection from clutter) in automatic detectors, a high threshold must be used. Humans naturally perceive sensor input differently and can instinctively spot patterns that are consistent (however weak) just above the noise floor. I wont pretend to understand how our brains accomplish this. Some techniques have come about that have lowered the threshold limit required of automatic receivers while still preventing false detections. These include Automatic gain control (AGC), Pulse integration (greatly increases SNR), constant false alarm rate (CFAR), and Track before Detect (TBD). TBD being one of the newer techniques. https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/9mamul/comment/e7dem5q/  Edited May 16, 2022 by Perun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 Confessions Of An E-2C Hawkeye Radar Operator https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25572/confessions-of-an-e-2c-hawkeye-radar-operator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 16, 2022 Author Share Posted May 16, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now