Modern Electronic Warfare In

Multi role Air crafts

Sriharsha Chamala Milan rai
Electronics and Communications Engineering,
RVR Institute of Engineering and Technology,
Sheriguda, Ibrahimpatanam, Andhra Pradesh
Sriharshachamala007@gmail.com milan.rai600@gmail.com
3

Abstract— this document aims to illustrate the
incomparable significance of modern day
electronic systems in military applications and
the extent to which they affect a nation’s security
and ongoing defence establishments or
procedures. In this regard, we shall use an
instance of“X-Band” radar as demonstrated in
the third generation fighter aircraft such as the
American F-22 raptor fighter jets or the Russian
Sukhoi Flankers and exemplify the concept of
posturing superior air defence and maintaining
air superiority in hostile terrain or environments
thanks to the technology mentioned above. In
addition to these we shall also deal with the
concept of “Beyond Visual Range” engagement
of targets and demonstrate how the
advancement of weapon systems enables a far
safer and more effectual termination of critical
missions.
I. INTRODUCTION
Radar guided air to air missiles currently
represent the best of what state of the art technology
can offer, both in terms of range, accuracy and
resistance to countermeasures. This reflects in the
fact, that these weapons are only used by the
world's frontline air forces, the maintenance of the
complex fire control systems required being beyond
the abilities of the average Third World country. In
comparison with the Western World, even the ranges beyond 20 nautical miles (37 km). This
Warpac air forces use few of these weapons, up to range has been achieved using dual pulse rocket
the mid seventies only the USSR using a number of
types on air defence aircraft
Radar guidance systems detect and home in on
their targets by sensing electromagnetic energy
reflected from the target's surface. The source of the
reflected radiation is a radar transmitter; in the
instance of weapons with active radar guidance, this
transmitter is situated within the missile; in the case
of semiactive guidance, it is carried by the launch
aircraft. In either case the transmitter must beam
electromagnetic radiation at the target, this radiation
must travel to the target, reflect, travel back to the
receiving antenna of the missile, be amplified,
demodulated and analysed to determine the
direction of the target, this information then enables
the guidance computer to steer the weapon toward
the target to achieve a kill. An effective weapon
must have the ability to discriminate between the
target's return and reflections from its background,
i.e. the surface of the Earth or ocean; it should also
be capable of resisting jamming or deception and be
able to penetrate through adverse weather
conditions...
II. BEYOND VISUAL RANGE
MISSILES AND TRACKING
TECHNOLOGY
A Beyond Visual Range missile usually refers to
an air-to-air missile that is capable of engaging at
motors or booster rocket motor and ramjet
sustainers motor.

In addition to the range capability, the missile
must also be capable of tracking its target at this
range or of acquiring the target in flight. Systems in
which a mid course correction is transmitted to the
missile have been used.
Early air-to-air missile used semi active radar
guidance that is the missile used the radiation
produced by the launching aircraft to guide it to the
target. The latest generation of BVR missiles use a
combination of semi-active and active radar.
The first such missiles were relatively simple
beam riding designs that were soon replaced by
Semi-active radar homing (SARH). This is where
the launching aircraft's radar is "locked" onto the
target in a Single Target Track (STT) mode,
directing radar energy at the target that the missile
seeker can "see" as it reflects off the target. The
radar antenna must "illuminate" the target until
impact. Missiles like the Raytheon AIM-7 Sparrow
and Vympel R-27 (NATO designation AA-10
'Alamo') home in on the reflected radiation; much
like a Laser-guided bomb homes in on the reflected
laser radiation. Some of the longest range missiles
in use today still use this technology.
detector of a radar signal – provided by an external
(“off board”) source — as it reflects off the target.
NATO brevity code for semi-active radar homing
missile launch is Fox One.
1) Concept: The basic concept of SARH is that
since almost all detection and tracking systems
consist of a radar system, duplicating this hardware
on the missile itself is redundant. In addition, the
resolution of radar is strongly related to the physical
size of the antenna, and in the small nose cone of a
missile there isn't enough room to provide the sort
of accuracy needed for guidance. Instead the larger
radar dish on the ground or launch aircraft will
provide the needed signal and tracking logic, and
the missile simply has to listen to the signal
reflected from the target and point itself in the right
direction. Additionally, the missile will listen
rearward to the launch platform's transmitted signal
as a reference, enabling it to avoid some kinds of
radar jamming distractions offered by the target.

A. Semi Active Radar Homing

Fig 2: Fly - By - Wire

Contrast this with beam riding systems, in which

the radar is pointed at the target and the missile
keeps itself centred in the beam by listening to the
Fig 1: Semi Active Radar Homing signal at the rear of the missile body. In the SARH
system the missile listens for the reflected signal at
Semi-active radar homing, or SARH, is a the nose, and is still responsible for providing some
common type of missile guidance system, perhaps sort of “lead” guidance. The disadvantages are
the most common type for longer range air-to-air twofold: One is that a radar signal is “fan shaped”,
and surface-to-air missile systems. The name refers growing larger, and therefore less accurate, with
to the fact that the missile itself is only a passive distance. This means that the beam riding system is
not accurate at long ranges, while SARH is largely
independent of range and grows more accurate as it
approaches the target, or the source of the reflected
signal it listens for. Another requirement is that a
beam riding system must accurately track the target
at high speeds, typically requiring one radar for
tracking and another “tighter” beam for guidance.
The SARH system needs only one radar set to a
wider pattern.
2) CONTINUOUS WAVE RADAR:
Modern SARH systems use continuous-wave (CW)
radar for guidance. Even though most modern
fighter radars are pulse Doppler sets, most have a
CW function to guide radar missiles. A few Soviet
aircraft, such as some versions of the MiG-23 and
MiG-27, used an
Fig 3: A Simple Radar Warning System
AUXILIARY GUIDANCE POD OR AERIAL TO PROVIDE A CW
SIGNAL. THE VYMPEL R-33 AA MISSILE FOR MIG-31
INTERCEPTOR USES SARH AS THE MAIN TYPE OF GUIDANCE
(WITH SUPPLEMENT OF INERTIAL GUIDANCE ON INITIAL
STAGE).
SARH missiles require tracking radar to acquire
the target, and a more narrowly focused illuminator
radar to "light up" the target in order for the missile
to lock on to the Radar return reflected off target.[1]
The target must remain illuminated for the entire
duration of the missile's flight. This could leave the
launch aircraft vulnerable to counter attack, as well
as giving the target's electronic warning systems
time to detect the attack and engage
countermeasures. Because most SARH missiles
require guidance during their entire flight, older
radars are limited to one target per radar emitter at a
time.
3) Electronic Counter Counter missiles:
Recent-generation SARH weapons have superior
electronic counter-countermeasure (ECCM)
capability, but the system still has fundamental
limitations. Some newer missiles, such as the SM-2,
incorporate terminal semi-active radar homing
(TSARH). TSARH missiles use inertial guidance
for most of their flight, only activating their SARH
system for the final attack. This can keep the target
from realising it is under attack until shortly before
the missile strikes. Since the missile only requires
guidance during the terminal phase, each radar
emitter can be used to engage more targets. Some
of these weapons, like the SM-2, allow the firing
platform to update the missile with mid-course
updates via data link.
Fig 4: A Radar Homing and Warning System
(RHAW)
 III. High Power Aperture X-Band
Fighter Radars
A). Pulse Doppler Radar Performance vs. B). Tactical Implications of High Power
BVR Combat: Aperture Product Fighter Radars:
Fig5: PDS vs BVR combat
Pulse Doppler radars remain the primary long
range sensors used by fighter aircraft for BVR
combat. This is for several good reasons. Infrared
sensors cannot penetrate cloud or other atmospheric
propagation impairments as well as X-band
microwaves can. Radar, conversely, can penetrate
most weather conditions and impairments from the
stratosphere down to the lowest layers of the
troposphere. Effective range is another
consideration, as radar performance is limited by
the pulsed power-aperture product of the design,
which in the current state of the art permits X-band
fighter radars to acquire larger targets at distances
in excess of 200 nautical miles (~400 km). Radars
are also capable of rapidly divining the velocity,
direction, altitude and often identity of targets,
which can be problematic for passive sensors
operating in the optical bands. Radars typically also
double up as X-band data link transmitters for long
range missiles, an important factor in achieving
high kill probabilities in BVR combat, where thtime
of flight of the missile would otherwise create
opportunities for a target to move outside of the No
Escape Zone (NEZ) of a BVR missile seeker. For
the foreseeable future radars will remain the
primary tool for the acquisition, tracking, and
engagement of targets in the BVR air combat game.
The conventional wisdom in BVR
combat is that the player with the longer ranging
radar wins the game as the radar provides the
opportunity to detect the opponent earlier, initiate
tracking and identification, and launch a missile
shot first. This is however predicated on several
assumptions:
*The player with the longer ranging radar has a
longer ranging missile to facilitate a first shot.
*The player with the shorter ranging radar does not
have the capability to effectively jam the radar.
*The victim does not turn tail early, spoiling the
missile engagement geometry and getting out of the
missile's kinematic No Escape Zone.
Missile kinematic performance is thus critical, and
a prerequisite if one seeks to gain an advantage by
deploying longer ranging radar than an opponent
has. Missile range will be determined in part by the
design of the missile; specifically how much energy
is stored in its rocket or ramjet propellant, and how
good the midcourse autopilot software is in
converting that energy into range, but the
kinematics of the launch aircraft also matter
immensely. The F-22A has proven repeatedly that
super cruising at 50,000 ft adds more than 30
percent to the range of the AIM-120C AMRAAM it
carries, compared to a subsonic launch from a
conventional teen series fighter.
 Needless to say radar and
communications are pivotal components in any
modern air defence system and it is in this area that
EW has found its most dramatic application.
Historically EW emerged as a discipline during the
Luftwaffe night blitz and credit for its development
as a discipline goes without any doubt to the
British. The British successfully degraded the
performance of the Luftwaffe's Knickebein and
Wotan radio navigation systems by jamming and
followed this with the successful application of
Fig 6: Impact of Missile Kinematics vs. Power
communications jamming, radar deception jamming
Aperture
and chaff (window) during the night bombing
offensive. Sadly Bomber Command was unable to
Electronic warfare between opponents remains a
match its success in the application of offensive
key consideration in long range missile combat.
EW with effective defensive countermeasures
While high power aperture radars provide good
which resulted in a horrendous sustained loss rate.
burnthrough performance, at extreme ranges well in
Ignorance of EW kills which history proves
excess of 50 nautical miles burnthrough is unlikely
repeatedly, yet decision makers blindly persist in
to be a practical proposition. This is because the
their rejection of the discipline, remaining oblivious
power ratings of conventional defensive jamming
to the vital issues.
systems will be sized to defeat surface based
The significant aspect of the early
engagement radars with power aperture
British EW effort was the emphasis on offensive
performance well in excess of any fighter radar. A
techniques rather than defensive systems, this past
technique for suppressing a jamming source that is
and current trend seems to stem from the greater
available to users of AESAs and hybrid ESAs is to
publicity associated with major offensives rather
put sharp nulls into the antenna mainlobe
dynamically.

IV. Conclusions
Electronic Warfare has become a military discipline
within itself with a pervasive influence upon the
strategy, tactics and technology of modern warfare.
No more is this evident than in the modern air battle
where Electronic Warfare (EW) drives penetration
strategy and tactics, while fundamentally
influencing airframe and weapon system design.
By definition EW is military action
involving the use of electromagnetic energy to
determine, exploit, reduce or prevent hostile use of
the electromagnetic spectrum and action which
retains friendly use of the electromagnetic
spectrum. More specifically it is the application of Fig: Radar plays a vital role in EW
technology, strategy and tactics to deny the than an appreciation of sustained loss rates.
opponent the partial or full use of those electronic
systems which rely upon the transmission of .
electromagnetic energy, primarily radar and
communications.
 Acknowledgement

I would like to acknowledge the “Aus Air Power”

think tank for provide immeasurable inspiration
towards the completion of this paper and Dr. Carlo
Kopp in particular, the publications of whom
formed the basis for most of this papers
interpretations of real world data.

References.
[1] Aus Air Power - Dr Carlo Kopp, SMAIAA,
MIEEE, PEng.

[2] WIkipedia.