Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: rmack@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Bistatic Radar
Message-ID: <1991Apr5.092400.8783@amd.com>
Date: 5 Apr 91 00:58:15 GMT
References: <1991Apr2.064909.14705@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: University Computing Services, Wright State University
Lines: 37
Approved: military@amd.com



From: rmack@desire.wright.edu

micquis!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (John Moore) writes:
> It is possible to use signals from an independent source to passively track
> aircraft.  There was an experiment done some years ago where aircraft in the 
> vicinity of LAX were tracked by a passive radar system. It used the signals 
> from a TV satellite as the emitter. It worked! That is a truly stealthy 
> bistatic radar.  

Having done quite a bit of research lately on the B-2 bomber and its probable
(or improbable) effectiveness, I can tell you that the US Air Force is well
aware of the threat of bi-static radar and of its possible uses.  In fact, the
current continental US defense radar (PAVE PAWS) system is essentially
bi-static, as the signal generator and the sensors are in different locations.
The PAVE PAWS system will eventually surround the US with OTH radar tracking
stations, half of which (east and west coasts) are currently active.

However, this is not necessarily the same as "passive" radar detecting, as the
source puts out a signal that is easily detectable.  The advantage is that you
might place the source of the signal in a hard-to-hit location, like earth
orbit, as in the above mentioned satellite example.  The US, the Soviets and
other nations are considering this possibility.  Radar technology is being
advanced in the US in particular but I still don't think we're quite ready to
build radar emitting satellites.  Other bi-static systems are currently being
used or tested with particular emphasis on aircraft carrying the transmitters
and flying behind the front lines while forward sensors pick up the
reflections.

BTW- The USAF dismisses bi-static radar as a serious threat to stealth
bomber/fighter capabilities and I am presently inclined to agree with them.
The biggest advances in radar will probably come in increased computer
processing abilities that may signifigantly increase radar stealthiness and the
ability to detect stealthy targets.

Bob Mack, Wright State Univerity