If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Ian" wrote: (PS - I've recently seen a concept drawing of an F-22 with external stores, and not just fuel tanks. Won't that really harm the RCS etc, or have they developed stealthy weapons and pylons? Or was it just some bored aviation artist?) They have the option of an F-22 with external stores, for *after* air superiority is achieved. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Chad Irby" wrote in message ... In article , "Ian" wrote: (PS - I've recently seen a concept drawing of an F-22 with external stores, and not just fuel tanks. Won't that really harm the RCS etc, or have they developed stealthy weapons and pylons? Or was it just some bored aviation artist?) They have the option of an F-22 with external stores, for *after* air superiority is achieved. I'm reliably informed that with the radar in Eurofighter, and the partnership with AMRAAM / METEOR air to air superiority only becomes a problem against F-22. Hopefully we'll not end up fighting against the US? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Ian" wrote: I'm reliably informed that with the radar in Eurofighter, and the partnership with AMRAAM / METEOR air to air superiority only becomes a problem against F-22. Hopefully we'll not end up fighting against the US? Well, as long as the European manufacturers don't sell them to anyone nasty. Which isn't a good bet, thinking about the last twenty years or so. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:36:54 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:
In article , "Ian" wrote: While the signature of the Eurofighter isn't as low as that of the much fabled F-22 (do I add the /A as well?), it is considerably lower than any in service aircraft (and many of the planned ones as well). You *are* excluding the F-117 from that comment, right? The Eurofighter, while using some RCS reduction tech, is nothing like a true stealthy airframe, and isn't stealthy at all when carrying weapons from many angles. Basically, they took it from "barn door" to "manhole cover" in RCS. I would be willing to bet the farm that the B-2 has a lower RCS than the Eurofighter. And the B-2 is a very large aircraft. Al Minyard |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 12:25:30 -0000, "Ian" wrote:
"Chad Irby" wrote in message ... In article , "Ian" wrote: While the signature of the Eurofighter isn't as low as that of the much fabled F-22 (do I add the /A as well?), it is considerably lower than any in service aircraft (and many of the planned ones as well). You *are* excluding the F-117 from that comment, right? The Eurofighter, while using some RCS reduction tech, is nothing like a true stealthy airframe, and isn't stealthy at all when carrying weapons from many angles. Basically, they took it from "barn door" to "manhole cover" in RCS. Sorry - yeah I was excluding the F-117 and B-2. Eurofighter's original concept was to be stealthy, i'll agree to that. However, given the four (originally more) partner nations requirements, it was never going to work. Thats when they went for the "stealthier" option. The concept of operations would seem to be scoot to within range of the weapon and then bug out. The cruise missiles they'll carry (Storm Shadow and Taurus) have ranges that allow them to do this. AMRAAM (and hopefully Meteor when it is finsihed) will allow this in AA. I know its dangerous to say this, but when do we next envisage a war with Air to Air? GWII didn't have it, and had next to no 'real' SAM activity (if you discount the patriot attacks on the RAF and USN(F-18?)). GWI had a bit more, but that was more due to the missions the RAF undertook with JP233 and low level bombing (the standard tactic developed for 'cold war attacks using Tornado and predecessors). The last true air to air I can think of, would be the Falklands, when the AIM-9L (I think?) was given its operational debut (and what a debut) I don't doubt if the 4 partner countries had the money, they would develop an F-22 level stealth aircraft. I know they're working on some very interesting concepts for future aircraft that will be at that level if not better. (PS - I've recently seen a concept drawing of an F-22 with external stores, and not just fuel tanks. Won't that really harm the RCS etc, or have they developed stealthy weapons and pylons? Or was it just some bored aviation artist?) cirby at cfl.rr.com Yes, but they are not intended for use in a high threat area. They go on after enemy air and AA assets no longer exist (day two). Al Minyard |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Nebo-U" is
able to detect small-size and barely visible targets, including also those built using Stealth Technology. I dont know about this radar,but if its a backscatterer it wont be able to detect any stealth plane at meaningfull distances. (Serbian style "internetting" then maybe) |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
(B2431) wrote: From: Chad Irby Date: 1/11/2004 5:05 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: "We have invented a great new anti-stealth tracking system! Within ranges of a few miles, we can detect most stealth aircraft for about 50% of the diurnal cycle!" Binoculars? That has to be it. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:46:16 +0000 (UTC), Steven James Forsberg wrote:
: 20 year old technology at that time. The USAF didn't even bother to go back : to blow it up. : Russia still doesn't have a stealthy aircraft, neither does Europe or China. : Russia is just flying around in warmed over Sukhoi designs. When a Phoenix : missile takes out your Sukhoi at 200 miles out and you can't even see where : it came from, you'll be saying "I wish I had stealth" just as your parachute Highly unlikely. First of all, the Phoenix never had a range of 200 miles. Secondly, it has been (or is being rapidly) retired from service. Secondly, while 'stealth' is nice to have, note the US is not buying any more stealth aircraft. New fighters will have "stealth features" but do not meet the military's own definition of 'stealth'. The F-117 is hardly a fighter at any rate... regards, ----------------------------------------------------------- Where in the world did you get the idea that the F-22 and F-35 are not stealth aircraft?? Obviously, no aircraft is completely invisible to radar, but when you get down to the RCS of a bird, that is stealth. Al Minyard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RUSSIAN WAR PLANES IN ASIA | James | Military Aviation | 2 | October 1st 03 11:25 PM |
Vietnam era F-4s Q | Ed Rasimus | Military Aviation | 87 | September 27th 03 03:59 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
[AU] Light plane sparked terror alert | David Bromage | Military Aviation | 41 | September 11th 03 05:37 PM |
F15E Radar question. | Bill Silvey | Military Aviation | 5 | August 30th 03 06:17 PM |