bright

Your confused about what I’m saying. The ARRAY OF RADAR STATIONS is emitters. I’m saying THE ATTACKERS AGAINST the array of radar stations only need to be passive detectors.

That’s the topic of the thread your replying in. Quote:

you could theoretically make a moderately large distributed array sprinkled over a few square kilometers

Your information about passive radar detection is not up to date. There are tons of passive detection of radar systems that by design do zero emission. The radar array stations will need to emit in order to function, but the enemy can find those radar emitters without emitting any energy of their own

https://daronmont.com.au/products/passive-radar

I’m not understanding. Let’s say army A has a radar array of 500 relatively cheap radar stations. They clump them all into a 1 square km area. So now army Z drives some howitzers nearby (which aren’t detectable by ground based radar), waits till a radar station turns on, the passively locates the radar base station, and shoots a cheap shell at it which destroys it.

But if you say army A has the level of military equipment that can locate and destroy howitzers up to 30 km away in all directions, then what benefit does an array of concentrated radar stations provide?

Locating radar emissions is a passive process, it doesn’t reveal your own location. That’s why i said the radar array would have to have very strong defenses extending out 30 km in all 360 degree directions from each individual radar station. And if a group has that strong a level of military equipment already then i don’t see why they would need this huge redundant array of radar stations all concentrated in a small area.

Locating the radar base station? No that’s the easiest part. Radar is like turning on a Hollywood style searchlight pointing up into the sky. The instant you turn it on its extremely obvious where the radar searchlight is coming from

Unless I’m missing something in your plan i don’t think that would work well. If these radar stations aren’t surrounded by very serious defensive systems for hundreds of miles in every direction, then they’ll simply be blown up by dumb howitzer shells that only cost around 2000 dollars.

Howitzers are cheap, relatively long range, mobile, and accurate enough. If you don’t have strong enough defenses to prevent the howitzers from moving into range, then they’ll just blow up all your radar stations with cheap shells.

A petabyte is 1000 terabytes. There are commercial hard drives that are over 30 tb. So 33 of these drives hold 1 pb. Times ten makes 330 hard drives to hold 10 pb. All of those drives together would take up just one third of a single full height server rack like this.

https://www.quantumtechnologyequipment.net/products/s6llst3137

So not only wouldn’t it need a whole data center, in fact it wouldn’t even need a whole server room, and actually wouldn’t even need a whole server closet!

I calculated this all out only because I’m procrastinating😆