Stealth-detecting bistatic radar is back in the news

By John Keller
Posted by John Keller

I can remember back in the mid '80s when rumors first started circulating widely in print of a secret military aircraft under development that would be invisible to radar. During those Cold War days that meant that U.S. and allied aircraft might be able to have unlimited access to airspace over the Soviet Union.

Those rumors eventually morphed into the official announcement of the F-117 stealth fighter. Radar-evading technology developed for the F-117 was applied to the B-2 stealth bomber, but experts speculated that if we had this radar-evading technology, then our adversaries would have it, too.

With that realization came feverish discussion of how to defend against stealth technology. The discussion quickly included not only stealthy manned aircraft, but also low-flying cruise missiles that radar had a hard time picking up.

One of the counter-stealth technologies then was called hybrid bistatic radar, which eventually came to be known simply as bistatic radar -- a scheme where the radar transmitters and detectors were in separate locations.

Bill Sweetman wrote on the Aviation Week defense technology blog this month of a formerly secret project to defend Swedish airspace against stealthy cruise missiles with a bistatic radar approach called the Associative Aperture Synthesis Radar (AASR).

The AASR program, Sweetman wrote, was cancelled in 2000 because at the time experts no longer considered cruise missiles a threat. U.S. bistatic radar and other anti-cruise-missile programs have fallen by the wayside, as well, as research dollars have shifted to other priorities.

A similar casualty of post-Cold-War defense priorities was the so-called Over The Horizon-Backscatter radar system, or OTH-B. This experimental system was to bounce radar waves off the ionosphere -- just like shortwave radio signals do -- not only to extend radar defenses against cruise missile threats, but also to help radar pick up low-flying cruise missiles in ground clutter.

I always thought bistatic radar was a good and obvious idea, and not only for counter-stealth. Conventional radar is a double-edged sword; it can detect the enemy, but also gives away the location of the transmitter. It's like turning on a flashlight in dark woods. Everything in the vicinity knows you're there.

Not so with bistatic radar. If defense researchers could use it to make and deploy a practical system, then perhaps stealth fighters could use radar and still remain stealthy.

If bistatic radar research is going on, it's being done quietly. Depending on how military threats emerge in the future, I think we'll hear of this technology again.

Previous Blog Posts

The haunting bugle call Taps is 150 years old this summer

The Navy's solid-state laser weapon

High-performance embedded computing (HPEC) gaining market traction, but its definition remains elusive

Did I say $114 million mistake? I meant $351 million.

Continuing the conversation

Lockheed Martin experimental stealth surface vessel to be scrapped after yielding valuable technology

Air Force competes in National Collegiate Cyber Defense competition

Will Intel 3rd Generation Intel Core processor make a big splash in embedded computing applications?

The $114 million mistake

Iran under attack once again

High-performance computing for rugged mobile military applications is becoming a hot design issue

Is the U.S. getting ready for conflict?

Historic obsession about the Titanic sinking 100 years ago wipes Bread and Roses strike from popular memory

The future of UAV technology aims high

Conference combo

We can thank a self-absorbed Congress for hurting national defense if deep automatic defense cuts happen

Securing the military network

FAA's impending rule on small UAVs may usher in a new era of civil aerial warfare

Boeing and Airbus both claim victory in WTO Appeal? That can't be right...

The defense industry may be adjusting to a new age of financial austerity

What's up with all the anti-tamper technology?

Effects of 2013 DOD budget cuts already being felt with program cancellations

Top ten technologies the U.S. Army's Rapid Equipping Force is looking for

The Aerospace & Defense Bloggers

Ernesto Burden is the publisher of PennWell’s Aerospace & Defense Media Group, including Military & Aerospace Electronics, Avionics Intelligence and Avionics Europe.  He’s a father of four, a runner, and an avid digital media enthusiast with a deep background in the intersection of media publishing, digital technology, and social media. He can be reached at ernestob@pennwell.com and on Twitter @aero_ernesto.

John Keller is editor-in-chief of Military & Aerospace Electronics magazine, which provides extensive coverage and analysis of enabling electronic and optoelectronic technologies in military, space, and commercial aviation applications. A member of the Military & Aerospace Electronics staff since the magazine's founding in 1989, Mr. Keller took over as chief editor in 1995.

Skyler Frink is an Assistant Editor of Military & Aerospace Electronics and Avionics Intelligence. Skyler graduated Cum Laude from the University of New Hampshire with a BA in Journalism and a Minor in Information Technology in 2011. He has contributed to many different publications both online and in print throughout his career as a Journalist. Skyler can be reached skylerf@pennwell.com.

Courtney E. Howard, as executive editor, enjoys writing about all things electronics and avionics in PennWell’s burgeoning Aerospace and Defense Group, which encompasses Military & Aerospace Electronics, Avionics Intelligence, the Avionics Europe conference, and much more. She’s also a self-proclaimed social-media maven, mil-aero nerd, and avid avionics geek. Connect with Courtney at Courtney@Pennwell.com, @coho on Twitter, and on LinkedIn.

Mil & Aero Magazine

May 2012
Volume 23, Issue 5