Share this on Facebook
download .zip with all pictures
That’s simply not true. It’s not even close to true.
To see why, we turn to [the radar equation.](http://www.radartutorial.eu/01.basics/pic/formel14.png)
The terms in this equation are:
1)Power Emitted (P sub S)
2)Antenna Gain (G)
5)Minimum power received for detection (P sub E sub min)
6)Loss Factor (L sub ges)
The only things that could possibly be taken as functions of the target and not the radar are RCS and loss factor. So, let’s address those
-There are three things that affect radar cross section:
A) Number of radiators-How many surfaces are present that can reflect radiation? Essentially the number of surfaces and surface discontinuities.
B) Modes of radiators-How do the radiators reflect? The general rule here is that specular reflections are preferable to edge diffraction,
C) Array of radiators- How are the radiators arrayed? Do their reflection interfere destructively or constructively?
You might be able to see that none of these include size, and that’s because size is not a major factor in radar cross section for objects that kill running waves on surfaces. I could scale an F-22 up to three times its volume and it would have roughly the same RCS. In addition, wavelength is not a factor in RCS, so you’re “different wavelengths have different efficacy” statement simply fails there.
-Loss factor is composed of atmospheric loss, internal attenuation in the antenna, and fluctuation loss from tracking a moving object. While the target affects fluctuation loss, it’s the target’s speed and not its size that matters. Size affects none of these factors.
Size has no effect on how effective certain frequencies of radars are. Whoever told you that was simply wrong.