What is the significant of VERA-E to Malaysia???

cmf_tin

19# mfadilaa
hahaha... wa cuti baru buleh muncul.

venez

BTW blog Military of Malaysia pun tgh dimonitor oleh pihak keselamatan coz kadang2 info yang diberi adalah sulit dan terhad...

cmf_tin

20# lkick2113

selalunya perbincangan akan jadi mcm Q&A.
memula general tapi sedar2 oppsss... terlebey sudah
by the time menda tu disedari dan mau diedit, dah ramai yg baca.

lkick2113

ok Tin, sori kalo bahaya tajuk ni, tapi niat aku nak tau pendapat je... coz cite lebih2 pun x boleh..

belacan79

Urmm, actually civilian forms of such systems are widely used around the world; principally by air traffic controllers. And the availablilty of the algorithms means that you can copy and reproduce it.

Simply put, the location of aerial crafts are detected by a triangulation of receivers. It`s like this. Blindfold three men and put a 4th in the centre or somewhere close to the centre. Ask the 4th person to shout. Chances are that the 3 blindfold men could locate the 4th person shouting(his position) by triangulation. However, it might not be all that accurate which is why normal radars are used to confirm the position and type of the aircrafts. You do not see VERA-E systems operating alone any where.

There are some drawbacks.

As mentioned, one is that current systems would still need normal radar systems to work in concert with the VERA-E to confirm the presence of aerial crafts and presence of enemy crafts.

Secondly, you would need a lot of receivers and coordinated central sites to cover a large area and a large area effectively. The quoted 450 km range(to be used effectively) requires a lot of central sites and receivers all over the place and it is beyond the reach of most countries as it is expensive.  You would need a distance of approximately 15-30 km(the closer the better) between receivers so you can imagine how many you would need to cover an entire country. And they are generally  "line of sight" limited.  Hence, most systems cover small areas like the air-space around air-force bases and air-ports.

Thirdly, the central coordination site is vulnerable elint-wise and comint-wise and would be targetted and jammed anyway like normal radars in an event of any conflict. The whole system fails when the central site goes down or jammed and the system fails when an enemy starts popping the receiver towers with precision guided weapons because you lose triangulation.

Fourth and another reason why normal radars need to be used is that the VERA-E system can be compromised by false projections of esm signals throughout all bandwidths. How does a uav that sounds like a Boeing 747 sounds? And it can be overwhelmed by projecting hundreds and thousands of esm signals into the area. Further, it cannot read enemy signals and communications. It locates the source. You can integrate normal ELINT systems together but that is not wise because you can be tracked by normal means.

Fifth and contrary to some false media reports, it cannot detect steath crafts. Stealth crafts can emit zero esm signal emissions in battles(so how to detect) and very very low esm signal emissions when necessary beneath track levels. Stealth as you know it involves an entire spectrum of reduced visibility detection techniques; the shape of the aerial crafts, reduced detection via radar/electronic emissions, internal weapon bays, etc

It is a good complement to the conventional radars in peninsula malaysia if it is true malaysia purchased a system.

lkick2113

25# belacan79

good info...

this kind of discussion might be "confidential" as what some forumer said, for me i create this tread juz to discuss and to gain the knowledge, not more then that.

interesting to know this mechanism..

Secondly, you would need a lot of receivers and coordinated central sites to cover a large area and a large area effectively. The quoted 450 km range requires a lot of central sites and recievers all over the place and it is beyond the reach of most countries as it is expensive.  You would need a distance of approximately 30 km between receivers so you can imagine how many you would need to cover an entire country. And they are generally  "line of sight" limited.  Hence, most systems cover small areas like the air-space around air-force bases and air-ports.

Thirdly, the central coordination site is vulnerable elint-wise and comint-wise and would be targetted and jammed anyway like normal radars in an event of any conflict. The whole system fails when the central site goes down and the system fails when an enemy starts popping the receiver towers with precision guided weapons because you lose triangulation.

belacan79

26# lkick2113

It is a means to an end. Not an end in itself. Because it can be compromised like all electronic systems. It is supposed to work with conventional radar systems. Malaysia has just purchased a couple of mid to long range radars so VERA-E(if such a purchase is really true) will serve a complementary purpose and increase detection.

It is best placed near naval bases and air force bases because it could pick up something which conventional radars could not because they are subjected to heavy jamming. And then use conventional radars and target acquisition radars to shoot aerial targets using rapier missiles.

Edit: It is not confidential. it is open souce knowledge. MAF`s doctrines as per how and when and where to use it is confidential.

lkick2113

25# belacan79

good info...

this kind of discussion might be "confidential" as what some forumer said, for me i create this tread juz to discuss and to gain the knowledge, not more then that.

interesting to know this mechanism..

Secondly, you would need a lot of receivers and coordinated central sites to cover a large area and a large area effectively. The quoted 450 km range requires a lot of central sites and recievers all over the place and it is beyond the reach of most countries as it is expensive.  You would need a distance of approximately 30 km between receivers so you can imagine how many you would need to cover an entire country. And they are generally  "line of sight" limited.  Hence, most systems cover small areas like the air-space around air-force bases and air-ports.

Thirdly, the central coordination site is vulnerable elint-wise and comint-wise and would be targetted and jammed anyway like normal radars in an event of any conflict. The whole system fails when the central site goes down and the system fails when an enemy starts popping the receiver towers with precision guided weapons because you lose triangulation.

lkick2113

Edit: It is not confidential. it is open souce knowledge. MAF`s doctrines as per how and when and where to use it is confidential.

yup agree....

belacan79

29# lkick2113

By the way, ESM receivers and radar transmission detectors are`nt new. They have been around for a long time. Most modern countries have them for surveillance on ships, land and EW/intel planes.  And yes, there are suitable counters and counter-measures formed/built over the decades obviously. Ask the Israelis. VERA-E just uses the receivers to triangulate the location of aerial objects. It is not a new concept.