What's new

Chinas PLA electronic warfare aircraft and Type 55 destroyers were unable to track Nancy Pelosis aircraft due to US carrier group EW

mili

FULL MEMBER
Jan 9, 2022
338
0
364
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
Instead of simply opening their eyes & see that pelosi had to detour from SCS, TW straits, usa forces running away & not sending their carrier to the straits despite promise by white house to do so, kids choose unnamed sources & Minie Chan. lol

I always say nobody can turn usa into india like China can.
 

LeGenD

MODERATOR
Aug 28, 2006
13,690
121
17,276
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
It's a Hong Kong paper that has the reputation of making outrageous claims regarding the PLA
Americans are very strong in the EW regime. Do you have doubts?

Never underestimate your opponent, particularly USA.

Just look at what happened to Russia in Ukraine. Russians would have swallowed Ukraine whole but American support and supply of technologies made it possible for Ukrainians to thrash Russian forces. Russians will be embarrassed further in coming days.
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
15,038
362
14,717
Country
China
Location
Australia
Ah the typical retarded argument from you. ADS-B was switched on for her entire flight, that means even the average Joe could track her plane as it's publicly available information.


Yet your retarded as somehow believes that PLA could not locate her plane when her C40C position, altitude and speed were broadcasted. Like I said idiot, keep believing these stories. I'm sure the PLA is loving it.

As an intel officer in the army. I did some target tracking (or ISTAR in the field) myself.

First of all, "Locating" a target and "Tracking" a target is 2 different concepts.

I can locate a car in the parking lot. But to track that car, I will need to have unrestricted line of sight on said target, in the field, it was called "Putting a Tab" on it. Which mean whenever you lose sight of the target, you lost the tab, hence losing the track.

So which mean if the car I am tracking went inside a tunnel, or go under a bridge, or go inside an underground parking garage, you are not tracking said target.

To track an aircraft, you can track a target constantly by position reporting (Which is what Gambit said) or dead reckoning, it's IMPOSSIBLE to have visual contact unless you send in a fighter jet and tail the target and provide you with constant feedback, otherwise what you are looking at is a dot on the screen, how do you know that is the C40C? Your answer, because the blip have a tag which squawk Nancy Pelosi flight code. The problem is that is not constant feedback, it's once a minute if I remember correctly. So essentially, what you know is where Pelosi's plane was every minute when she reported her position. That is not the same as Tracking. Because of two issues.

1.) You only know the position 1 out of every 60 seconds.
2.) How do you actually know that was Pelosi Plane? Squawk code can be spoof,

I don't know if this report is true or not, I just want to talk about the concept of Locating a Target and Tracking a Target.
 

TNT

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 2, 2019
6,946
-17
12,319
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The chinese can track F22s from orbit, what is a passenger plane. But i guess some ppl in china using american tactics, to create excuses for more funding.
 

gambit

PROFESSIONAL
Apr 28, 2009
27,346
147
25,462
Country
United States
Location
United States
As an intel officer in the army. I did some target tracking (or ISTAR in the field) myself.

First of all, "Locating" a target and "Tracking" a target is 2 different concepts.

I can locate a car in the parking lot. But to track that car, I will need to have unrestricted line of sight on said target, in the field, it was called "Putting a Tab" on it. Which mean whenever you lose sight of the target, you lost the tab, hence losing the track.

So which mean if the car I am tracking went inside a tunnel, or go under a bridge, or go inside an underground parking garage, you are not tracking said target.

To track an aircraft, you can track a target constantly by position reporting (Which is what Gambit said) or dead reckoning, it's IMPOSSIBLE to have visual contact unless you send in a fighter jet and tail the target and provide you with constant feedback, otherwise what you are looking at is a dot on the screen, how do you know that is the C40C? Your answer, because the blip have a tag which squawk Nancy Pelosi flight code. The problem is that is not constant feedback, it's once a minute if I remember correctly. So essentially, what you know is where Pelosi's plane was every minute when she reported her position. That is not the same as Tracking. Because of two issues.

1.) You only know the position 1 out of every 60 seconds.
2.) How do you actually know that was Pelosi Plane? Squawk code can be spoof,

I don't know if this report is true or not, I just want to talk about the concept of Locating a Target and Tracking a Target.
The reason he repeat the same lines is because he know he been busted. He did not know the difference between radar which is non-cooperative and ADS-B is which cooperative. From what you said -- position reporting -- that must come from the target, the feedback. You and I cannot dumb down the explanation any more. The next level down is crayons and paper, or maybe whiteboard and dry erase markers because he is nominally an adult. More than once, I made it clear that this story have a big assumption to it, and that would have satisfied %99 of the people. But for the PDF Chinese here, even for a suspicious story, China must somehow come out on top. In the end, his stubbornness equals to looking stupid.
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
15,038
362
14,717
Country
China
Location
Australia
The reason he repeat the same lines is because he know he been busted. He did not know the difference between radar which is non-cooperative and ADS-B is which cooperative. From what you said -- position reporting -- that must come from the target, the feedback. You and I cannot dumb down the explanation any more. The next level down is crayons and paper, or maybe whiteboard and dry erase markers because he is nominally an adult. More than once, I made it clear that this story have a big assumption to it, and that would have satisfied %99 of the people. But for the PDF Chinese here, even for a suspicious story, China must somehow come out on top. In the end, his stubbornness equals to looking stupid.
lol, you are not aware because you are not an Intelligence man (Not that intelligence, I mean as in Military Intelligence) What they are doing is akin to Counter Intelligence, in a cheap way.

The goal is to mislead people, and for normal folks, who probably have never seen the inside of a Radar Station, that can be done relatively easily, you throw in some example, you throw in some term, viola, all you got to do is to make it believable. But to the people who trained to do the stuff they say, that's another story. The terminology were wrong ("Locating" vs "Tracking" for example) and the method were wrong. We can pick that up very easy, because that was what we did for a living.

On the other hand, they don't need to fool everybody to achieve their goal, they only need to be able to fool the general public, and since most of the general public don't really know shit on technical detail like that even if we know they are Bullshitting, there are still some following for those post, because it looks legit, and that tick boxes.
 

gambit

PROFESSIONAL
Apr 28, 2009
27,346
147
25,462
Country
United States
Location
United States
Americans are very strong in the EW regime. Do you have doubts?

Never underestimate your opponent, particularly USA.

Just look at what happened to Russia in Ukraine. Russians would have swallowed Ukraine whole but American support and supply of technologies made it possible for Ukrainians to thrash Russian forces. Russians will be embarrassed further in coming days.
ASSUME that this story is true. What we have is an ideal correlational experiment or study. A correlational experiment is one where the experimenter have no control over one or more variables.

The experimenter is China and the variables are:

- Radar return
- ADS-B info

China can control radar return by turning on/off the radar, varies its transmission characteristics, or move positions. But China have no control over ADS-B info which is under absolute control by the airplane. Then allegedly come radar interference by the US military, somehow somewhere. Assume that the interference is even just %50 effective, now China can use ADS-B info as a correlative factor. The ADS-B info is a constant: one burst per sec. But the radar return is erratic. The ADS-B info tells China that the plane have a spatial translation once per sec, but the radar return is saying once per several secs or even longer. Under actual combat conditions, there would be no cooperation from the target and the erratic radar return would not be enough to respond, but if China chose to respond with an intercept, it would require visual ID of the target which would mean greater risks for the interceptors.

As for the US military as also an experimenter, aside from the two above variables, they have a potential third: Chinese radar behaviors. If they monitored a change in transmissions of any kind such as freq hopping or sweep intensity from a narrower beam, they know their efforts were successful. Ultimately, they could have called the Pelosi's plane and said there was a danger so turn off your ADS-B transmission but, assuming this story is true, there is no need because as long as the plane continues to provide that correlative data, their experiment is successful.

Here is an excellent layman level open source on radar antenna designs and behaviors...


See section 'Radar Search/Scan Pattern'. When you switch antenna, people WILL know what you are looking for and WHY based solely on transmission characteristics that they received.

Do I, personally, care if this story is true? No. Because I seen enough 'dirty' tactics from the SIGINT guys when i was active duty. SIGINT flights are provocative, even if the flight is completely passive and all the flight does is scoop up EM data from anywhere. The Soviets never liked it then and neither does China now. From what SIGINT collected and analyzed came EW tactics disseminated. So people should not think that our EW guys just simply turn on/off their gear.
 

gambit

PROFESSIONAL
Apr 28, 2009
27,346
147
25,462
Country
United States
Location
United States
Why bother with stealth technology if you can "hide" your big fat arse aircraft.
EW is not hiding. Imagine you holding a shield. I can see the (EM) shield I just do not know who is behind that shield, you or your brother?

This is 'stealth'...

qXKe0E1.jpg
 

StraightEdge

FULL MEMBER
Jan 21, 2021
962
-2
948
Country
India
Location
India
EW is not hiding. Imagine you holding a shield. I can see the (EM) shield I just do not know who is behind that shield, you or your brother?

This is 'stealth'...

qXKe0E1.jpg

Whatever it is, if it's that good, just use it, why bother with stealth?
 

Farhan Bohra

FULL MEMBER
Jul 5, 2016
497
-1
517
Country
India
Location
India
The reason he repeat the same lines is because he know he been busted. He did not know the difference between radar which is non-cooperative and ADS-B is which cooperative. From what you said -- position reporting -- that must come from the target, the feedback. You and I cannot dumb down the explanation any more. The next level down is crayons and paper, or maybe whiteboard and dry erase markers because he is nominally an adult. More than once, I made it clear that this story have a big assumption to it, and that would have satisfied %99 of the people. But for the PDF Chinese here, even for a suspicious story, China must somehow come out on top. In the end, his stubbornness equals to looking stupid.
You expect answers from people who claim to be living in China while speaking/writing perfect English? And surprised that why they want China on top even on every topic, be it fake or real.

You barking at the wrong tree.
 

casual

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 8, 2011
2,971
1
2,145
Country
China
Location
United States
Americans are very strong in the EW regime. Do you have doubts?

Never underestimate your opponent, particularly USA.

Just look at what happened to Russia in Ukraine. Russians would have swallowed Ukraine whole but American support and supply of technologies made it possible for Ukrainians to thrash Russian forces. Russians will be embarrassed further in coming days.
just a friendly tip since you are a mod.

Don't believe anything by Minnie Chan. They are pure clickbait.
just look up her articles and you'll find out why
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom