American Physical Society, Report of the APS Study Group on Boost-Phase Intercept Systems for National Missile Defense, Vol. 2, July 2003, p. 177.
Specifically, this study says an effective aperture of 6 m2 and a physical aperture of 9.2 m2
See the message above.
Honestly, I don't understand what kind of monster it is. And what is its purpose. They say that this is generally a radar for the HAARP project.
It is also known that not all modules are installed, so it is difficult for me to determine the exact dimensions of the antenna.
Of course, I took with the same beam width and gain. How else?
Listen to yourself ...
You make an x-band radar so that its energetic characteristics coincide with the long-wave radar, you increase the gain by increasing the area. Thereby reducing the beam width.
Yes, you have created an x-band radar that has the same size, range, but very long scan times.
And now you say that this radar is better than the long-wave one. Than? The size is the same, the scan time of the standard 60 * 60 sector is 10 minutes instead of 10 seconds.
Don't you find it funny yourself? 
You nobly forgive me for my English.
91Н6Е in static anti-missile defense mode scans the sector 25 * 20 (500 square degrees) or 60 * 30 (1800 square degrees). For TPY, I took an average of 1350 square degrees.
Do you really believe that RCS values are obtained in close contact between two aircraft?
There is foreign policy intelligence for this.
Dismiss me from looking for a black cat in a black room. I'm not going to look for hidden meanings where there are none.
There will be numbers - there will be a conversation.
I'm not very interested in your distortion of Zelko's words.
Show me in any of the simulations you have given before, is the air intake plugged?
Here's the fun part, but later.
Until then, answer the question.
Do you trust this article?
