It should be able to. It has all the components necessary. So long as its software can calculate the necessary deflection to put the round where it needs to be for it or its shrapnel to hit the missile, you're good. It already fires a larger shell than the naval CIWS does (30 vs 20 mm).
How much EMP is this hot little radar⚡📡〰️ emitting?
"The radar technology is impressive, particularly because Echodyne has compressed so much capability into such a small package. The gun is impressive. The proximity-fused ammunition is clever. ✅
Radars are "bright shiny objects" ⚠️ in the battlespace ~ sea, land or air. Won't Ivan try to decoy / spoof this hot little ♨️🛻 truck mounted technical and pop it with a beam rider? 🎛️🔊🎯💥
Turning on a radar signal is a plus / minus advertising adventure in the kill web....🕸️💀
Good question, Robert. This is one of the tradeoffs with putting an active radar on a gun truck. Maybe Echodyne will chime in here because I presume they will read this.
Small terminology correction first: EchoGuard isn’t generating an EMP. It’s transmitting RF energy in K-band, and it’s actually a surprisingly low-power radar. Echodyne emphasizes low size, weight, and power, with transmitter outputs ranging from fractions of a watt for the close-range version to a few watts for the standard model, with antenna gain producing much higher effective radiated power. I don’t know which exact configuration EOS is using on the latest Slinger, so I wouldn’t assign the truck a specific radiated-power number. You're right, though. Once you transmit, somebody with the right equipment will be able to detect and eventually geolocate you.
Thanks Wes, love this article. In the part where you were describing how things worked on your old E-3 setup, I began to wonder whether this “bird’s eye view” of things in the sky might not make for a perfect setup for a different kind of anti-drone system. Ukraine already has those 2 big eye in the sky planes from the Swedes. What if those were paired up with a plane carrying dozens of “diving” drone killer drones? You could spot dozens of Shaheds (jet or otherwise) below and then drop drone killers at them from above, rather than trying to hunt them from below or from the same altitude as they do now. These “bird of prey” style drone-killers could pick up a ton of extra speed on the way down to their target thanks to good old gravity, too. Does that make any sense (complete amateur talking here!) and if so, are you aware of anyone working on this type of drone killer platform?
Thanks Max! Yes, that makes sense, and you’re thinking along lines militaries are already exploring.
Ukraine’s Swedish ASC 890s could provide the wide-area air picture, while a separate “mothership” aircraft or large drone carried a magazine of small interceptors. I believe Ukraine is launching some interceptors from the sky now I just can’t think of the aircraft name at the moment.
The main thing is that I wouldn’t want the expensive AEW aircraft itself carrying the interceptors. Keep the radar platform well back and let it cue a cheaper carrier closer to the threat. DARPA’s Gremlins program proved that large aircraft can launch groups of small drones in flight so it’s plausible.
The frequency of the radar is another factor that should be discussed regarding target acquisition and targeting accuracy. The higher the frequency the more precise the radar return, compared to the lower frequencies that tend to return a smear. The comparison of an air search radar (e.g AN/SPS-49) and a surface search (e.g AN/SSPS-55) returns clearly shows the difference. Fire control radars that operate at even higher frequencies provide more precise returns that even look like the old target recognition silhouettes.
The poms had a radar (Stillwater, Clearwater or something like that) that could provide target recognition capabilities. Or so I was informed.
I am thinking of my experience with the old analog displays rather than the fancy digital ones that are available these days, but it is still a signal that requires processing.
It would be interesting to know what frequency these units operate at. It would be informative regarding actual capabilities.
More Aussie ingenuity. If only it could kill missiles.
It should be able to. It has all the components necessary. So long as its software can calculate the necessary deflection to put the round where it needs to be for it or its shrapnel to hit the missile, you're good. It already fires a larger shell than the naval CIWS does (30 vs 20 mm).
How much EMP is this hot little radar⚡📡〰️ emitting?
"The radar technology is impressive, particularly because Echodyne has compressed so much capability into such a small package. The gun is impressive. The proximity-fused ammunition is clever. ✅
Radars are "bright shiny objects" ⚠️ in the battlespace ~ sea, land or air. Won't Ivan try to decoy / spoof this hot little ♨️🛻 truck mounted technical and pop it with a beam rider? 🎛️🔊🎯💥
Turning on a radar signal is a plus / minus advertising adventure in the kill web....🕸️💀
(passive vs active x counter-counter measures)
Good question, Robert. This is one of the tradeoffs with putting an active radar on a gun truck. Maybe Echodyne will chime in here because I presume they will read this.
Small terminology correction first: EchoGuard isn’t generating an EMP. It’s transmitting RF energy in K-band, and it’s actually a surprisingly low-power radar. Echodyne emphasizes low size, weight, and power, with transmitter outputs ranging from fractions of a watt for the close-range version to a few watts for the standard model, with antenna gain producing much higher effective radiated power. I don’t know which exact configuration EOS is using on the latest Slinger, so I wouldn’t assign the truck a specific radiated-power number. You're right, though. Once you transmit, somebody with the right equipment will be able to detect and eventually geolocate you.
Thank you for this response Wes. 🇦🇺🇺🇲🎚️📯
For every measure, there is a counter-measure.
So turning on that radar might be equated with using only ONE headlight at night, 🧐🙈 on a battlefield?
Thanks Wes, love this article. In the part where you were describing how things worked on your old E-3 setup, I began to wonder whether this “bird’s eye view” of things in the sky might not make for a perfect setup for a different kind of anti-drone system. Ukraine already has those 2 big eye in the sky planes from the Swedes. What if those were paired up with a plane carrying dozens of “diving” drone killer drones? You could spot dozens of Shaheds (jet or otherwise) below and then drop drone killers at them from above, rather than trying to hunt them from below or from the same altitude as they do now. These “bird of prey” style drone-killers could pick up a ton of extra speed on the way down to their target thanks to good old gravity, too. Does that make any sense (complete amateur talking here!) and if so, are you aware of anyone working on this type of drone killer platform?
Thanks Max! Yes, that makes sense, and you’re thinking along lines militaries are already exploring.
Ukraine’s Swedish ASC 890s could provide the wide-area air picture, while a separate “mothership” aircraft or large drone carried a magazine of small interceptors. I believe Ukraine is launching some interceptors from the sky now I just can’t think of the aircraft name at the moment.
The main thing is that I wouldn’t want the expensive AEW aircraft itself carrying the interceptors. Keep the radar platform well back and let it cue a cheaper carrier closer to the threat. DARPA’s Gremlins program proved that large aircraft can launch groups of small drones in flight so it’s plausible.
An 26 mr O'Donnell!
The frequency of the radar is another factor that should be discussed regarding target acquisition and targeting accuracy. The higher the frequency the more precise the radar return, compared to the lower frequencies that tend to return a smear. The comparison of an air search radar (e.g AN/SPS-49) and a surface search (e.g AN/SSPS-55) returns clearly shows the difference. Fire control radars that operate at even higher frequencies provide more precise returns that even look like the old target recognition silhouettes.
The poms had a radar (Stillwater, Clearwater or something like that) that could provide target recognition capabilities. Or so I was informed.
I am thinking of my experience with the old analog displays rather than the fancy digital ones that are available these days, but it is still a signal that requires processing.
It would be interesting to know what frequency these units operate at. It would be informative regarding actual capabilities.
Awesome article (I'm not biased at all); I laughed.
Definitely just scratching the surface here in the extents of the doppler dimension beyond just bulk velocity!
You may also be sad to hear that the FIFTH dimension is time ;)
I stand corrected 😆