Iraq has passive radar?

BBC ^

[ASA Vet]

The location of the transmitter (AWACS, etc.)

Since that platform is a transmitter, it could also be located by a passive receiver tuned to it's radar frequency.
That receiver site would need to be able to adjust frequencies quickly,
and be able to send it's results in realtime.

[AdA$tra]

The location of the transmitter (AWACS, etc) could be determined by a active radar,

Passive is going to pick up the location of any radar source. We just keep the AWAC's back out of harm's way. I am sure a sophisticated Russian radar would have no trouble with a moving radio source. To me it would seem like you could get more info rather than less with several radar sources moving back and forth parallel to the line of resistance. The airwaves would be flush with signals in a conflict area anyway. I am sure the Russians capitalize on every twist we can think of here.

[AdA$tra]

That receiver site would need to be able to adjust frequencies quickly, and be able to send it's results in realtime.

Like a police scanner attached to a P200. that ought to be plenty fast. Multiple scanning receivers might work too. It would not take much computing power to compost all the data.

[fire_eye]

A stealth aircraft may absorb radar directed towards it, but it will cast a "shadow" if it flies between a TV tower and a passive radar station

which will suffice to inform Abdul that he'd better duck, fast... but not in sufficient time to allow him to do so, much less *track* the object that just blew him to Allah...

[Darksheare]

It would be an interesting full scale test to see if they all go back to the stone age or not...

..'cause any unshielded electronics within a few hundred miles (or so) would also fry. And the power grid would be cooking itself to death as unchecked pulses race around it like uncaged hamsters on speed.

And riding those nice wave guides.......
Makes for a nice Sunday evening image to sit back and drink ice tea to.

[steveegg]

The problem with using AWACS/J-STARS in this system is that the wedge of space the "shadow" would have to pass through to be detected is constantly moving. In order to utilize this, first the location of the airborne radar would have to be determined (either through the enemies' active radar or through TMA), then the shadow would have to have the same analasys at the same time. In short, while AWACS could be used to say that a target's at a certain bearing, it's not going to be enough for even tracking.

Each move causes a counter-move. Given the state of computer processing, it won't be long before this is also defeated.