Ballistic missiles have a static trajectory. Therefore, there is no need to scan at a wide angle (elevation angle). This also supports the smaller antenna height. By eye, the aspect ratio of TPU-2 is about 1: 3. With an effective area of 6 m2, we get sides of about 1.4 * 4.3. The solid angle is about 1 square degree at a wavelength of 0.03. Based on my experience, I know that the scanning sector of such radars in standby mode is 90 * 15. Scanning with such a beam will take 27 seconds. Which is quite acceptable for such radars.anti ballistic missile look through narrow elevation? In what way?. Most aircraft cruise below 60.000 ft (18 km), at 350 km the elevation is about 3 degree, at 250 km, the elevation is 4.5 degrees, at 100 km, the elevation is still only barely 10 degrees. On the other hand, ballistic missiles can climb to 2000 km, which mean at 1000 km the elevation is already 63 degrees. Also, anti ballistic missile doesn't look through narrow sector, it is quite the contrary
I'm tired. I showed you that two radars with the same scanning and energy properties, but different in wavelength (1.1 m and 0.03 m) will have different losses. This difference is 31 dB.Once again.
Do you agree with that?
We walk in circles.And you were given figures and official source, you basically just quibbling
1. Chinese experts are not an official source, just like Ukrainian experts. The point is simple. You like the Chinese number, but not the Ukrainian one.
2. LM presentation, does not contain figures. The air defense loss graph cannot be compared with the RCS numbers.
3. The words of the LM representative do not contain figures, but only abstractions that can be interpreted as you like.
4. The article of the Air Force Major, has figures. But they were taken from a certain writer. Where did the writer get these figures- I don't know.
In addition, these figures do not agree with other sources for a small RCS. They claim that the RCS B-2 is less than the F-117.
I will not argue about this. Although Anich in his book talks about the P-15. It is the P-15 that is attached to the S-125 divisions. The P-18 is assigned to the S-200 divisions.Nope, it was P-18. I have the presentation given by Zoltan Dani himself
But again, I agree with you so as not to give you a reason to cling to words.
Understand, if the person was not sure, then he would have picked up a more general word. But he indicates exactly the value (figure).And your so called "fact" is based on a guy speculating with his naked eye when he was attacked by a missile at night
At the same time, non-standard direction angles, such as 45, 90, etc. And clearly 50.
Let it be a poorly photoshopped picture. Like this one.I thought you only believe official sources, all the journalist and non government sources are garbage?. Now you resort to use a badly photoshopped image from Instagram? The name of the Instagram account is literally still on your photo