GGTharos Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) Yep, there's STAP algorithms and there are papers written on the subject. Now ask him if it stopped any F-22's, and then take a few moments to think about what it is you're sorry about ;) There are a myriad of ideas that were mentioned for detecting stealth aircraft, and so far none of them have been useful for shooting them down. The STAP-equipped radars get a step closer, but you still have a fundamental problem: Low RCS targets still have low RCS, and that means weapons will have problems tracking them. Even the STAP algos can be foiled by specific ECM. It's really not quite as simple or easy as you want it to be. @GGTharos, Just had a nice conversation with my brother in law about the Smart L radar vs. stealth in this case the F22. He acknowledged to me that the F22 is indeed detectable at distances > then 65km. The key lies in the software! (in combination with the hardware). i'm not going to tell how it's done, because i lack the knowledge:), but you have to believe me that he does! This is first hand information! So yes the future is already there!, i'm sorry. Edited July 2, 2013 by GGTharos [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaktus29 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 basically people here including me don't understand what GG is saying, and that is that radar technology just cannot advance anymore, so F22 is forever and eva invisible to radar, or unable to be shot by radar guided missiles.. no matter the time frame, 10 yrs from now, 100 yrs from now, radar technology, software, algos, nothing can ever come close to what f22 shape is today and will be in 20 years still the same shape.. even as radars get more and more advanced with more and more advanced computers to analyze all kind of feedback, secondary, or passive or god knows what else the future holds for radar technology it just cannot come close to what f22 shape is today and was 20 yrs ago.. i must sadly agree i am stupid, f22 is and will be stealthy forever.. for you see GG told me you can't beat technology, once f22 was made all radar technology is void now, you just can't shoot f22 anymore.. and will not be able to do so even in 40 yrs time, because radar doesn't work that way.. end of story. move on. )) i am thankful for GG explaining the future of radar for me, to be able to see the future in 20,30 years in advance and still know radars will just never be advanced enough to catch a glimpse of f22... who says nostradamus didn't have the ability to know the future.. long story short, f22 rules the skies, in 20-40 years, and no development of radar technology will ever be able to detect him.. not even photon radars and x-rays and god knows what will be discovered in 10 years will never be able to do this, not even a technology we don't even know exists and has been researched will be able to detect him..this is how f22 stealthy this is.. end of story. move on)) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winz Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 While the radar technology may improve the underlaying physics are unchangeable. SW can only process what the antenne is able receive, and what the antenne is able to receive is based solely on the radar equation. The only thing you can do on your part is to increase the power output of the radar, but that would yield the same result - stealth plane detectable at lower ranges than a non-stealth plane. SW upgrade yields the same - stealth plane detectable at lower ranges than a non-stealth plane. It is physically impossible to have the much lower RCS plane detectable at similar ranges than a higher RCS plane. Russia and China investing into stealth just proves the technology validity. 3 The Valley A-10C Version Revanche for FC 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilky510 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 While the radar technology may improve the underlaying physics are unchangeable. SW can only process what the antenne is able receive, and what the antenne is able to receive is based solely on the radar equation. The only thing you can do on your part is to increase the power output of the radar, but that would yield the same result - stealth plane detectable at lower ranges than a non-stealth plane. SW upgrade yields the same - stealth plane detectable at lower ranges than a non-stealth plane. It is physically impossible to have the much lower RCS plane detectable at similar ranges than a higher RCS plane. Russia and China investing into stealth just proves the technology validity. +1 rep, well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron886 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 While the radar technology may improve the underlaying physics are unchangeable. SW can only process what the antenne is able receive, and what the antenne is able to receive is based solely on the radar equation. The only thing you can do on your part is to increase the power output of the radar, but that would yield the same result - stealth plane detectable at lower ranges than a non-stealth plane. SW upgrade yields the same - stealth plane detectable at lower ranges than a non-stealth plane. It is physically impossible to have the much lower RCS plane detectable at similar ranges than a higher RCS plane. Russia and China investing into stealth just proves the technology validity. Also repped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOLA Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 "There are many disbelievers in stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasserfall Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Yep, there's STAP algorithms and there are papers written on the subject. Now ask him if it stopped any F-22's, and then take a few moments to think about what it is you're sorry about ;) As i wrote, and already asked him. Yes Thales Smart L can detect the F22. Maybe i could have left out the "sorry" part, but what i meant is that Stealth isn't invisible on radar. You may not believe what i'm writing here, that's oke. But my brother in law is an authority on the subject! It was, and is never my intention to disagree with anyone, but this is something i wanted to share. Cheers! Intel Core i5-9600K, Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO, 16GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro, Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 WINDFORCE 8G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Stealth was never invisible on radar. The whole point of stealth is that said aircraft will be detected at 1/10th the range of a non-stealth aircraft. That gives you some serious options about avoiding or attacking a radar station (or whatever is attached to it :) ). Radars are getting better at picking up low RCS targets, but low RCS targets still have the enormous advantage of having a low RCS. Ask your brother in law what the implications of this are, he will be able to explain this to you much better than I can, but long story short ... low RCS means later detection, greater initiative and potentially no useful detection at all in terms of weapons engagement, especially if ECM is used. If you want to ponder a scenario, you have your SMART-L picking up an F-22 at 65km ( ...+ ... :) ), but he's dropping munitions from 100km, where perhaps your radar can't see or track him yet. Your radar sees the munitions (or maybe they're decoys) and that area is now prioritized, but there's another stealth plane coming from a different direction that isn't receiving as much attention any longer. Stealth makes it much easier to use such tactics. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasserfall Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 (edited) Stealth was never invisible on radar. The whole point of stealth is that said aircraft will be detected at 1/10th the range of a non-stealth aircraft. That gives you some serious options about avoiding or attacking a radar station (or whatever is attached to it :) ). Radars are getting better at picking up low RCS targets, but low RCS targets still have the enormous advantage of having a low RCS. Ask your brother in law what the implications of this are, he will be able to explain this to you much better than I can, but long story short ... low RCS means later detection, greater initiative and potentially no useful detection at all in terms of weapons engagement, especially if ECM is used. If you want to ponder a scenario, you have your SMART-L picking up an F-22 at 65km ( ...+ ... :) ), but he's dropping munitions from 100km, where perhaps your radar can't see or track him yet. Your radar sees the munitions (or maybe they're decoys) and that area is now prioritized, but there's another stealth plane coming from a different direction that isn't receiving as much attention any longer. Stealth makes it much easier to use such tactics. i agree on this and that stealth has an advantage, that's clear to me:) Just pointed out that it can be detected. btw, their working on this, maybe interesting. BnrA4VfjgPI and radar. http://www.thalesgroup.com/pharos/ Cheers! Edited July 3, 2013 by wasserfall Intel Core i5-9600K, Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO, 16GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro, Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 WINDFORCE 8G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 All F-22s To Have Backup Oxygen Systems Within 12 Months Apr. 9, 2014 Full installation of automatic backup oxygen systems on the F-22 fleet is expected to be complete by this time next year, , a top US Air Force acquisition officer said April 8. Raptors in Alaska have already begun using the system. The Air Force awarded more than $30 million in multiple contracts to Lockheed Martin to install the systems following a grounding and multiple high-profile reports of pilots experiencing hypoxia-like symptoms while flying the F-22, including a fatal November 2010 crash of a jet based at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska. Most of the current backup oxygen systems in the F-22 fleet require activation by the pilot, which might not be possible in the case of extreme hypoxia-like symptoms, such as a pilot blacking out. Lt. Gen. Charles Davis, the military deputy in the office of assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee that it has been more than 24 months since the last hypoxia-like incident occurred. And since the F-22 returned to flight in September 2011, it has averaged about 26,000 flying hours a year. The Air Force in its fiscal 2015 budget request is asking for $330.6 million in research, development, test and evaluation for the F-22, and $331 million in procurement. This funding covers the Increment 3.1 software suite, which is scheduled to be complete in fiscal 2017. It includes new air-to-ground capabilities such as a new ground mapping radar, threat geolocation and the ability to carry the small diameter bomb. Future upgrades will include advanced electronic warfare protection, improved ground threat geolocation, and the ability to carry AIM-120D and AIM-9X advanced missiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realtrance Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 So that implies the F-35 is probably dead in the water at this point. Not that any of it matters, except as historical interest. ;) ROG Maximus X, Intel i7-3770 3.5GHz , Nvidia 680Ti, 16GB DDR3 2400MHz, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron886 Posted April 18, 2014 Share Posted April 18, 2014 So that implies the F-35 is probably dead in the water at this point. Not that any of it matters, except as historical interest. ;) Uh, it does? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitman Posted April 18, 2014 Share Posted April 18, 2014 So that implies the F-35 is probably dead in the water at this point. Not that any of it matters, except as historical interest. ;) Yes, because the most expensive procurement this world has ever seen will just wash down the toilet, right? Everyone who purchased the F-35 will now have access to the F-22? I find that funny, considering I watched them dismantle the assembly line for the Raptor back in 2012... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weta43 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Sure, people have bought / ordered F-35 - so they'll obviously be built, but it doesn't take much of a stretch to read : The Air Force in its fiscal 2015 budget request is asking for $330.6 million in research, development, test and evaluation for the F-22, and $331 million in procurement. This funding covers the Increment 3.1 software suite, which is scheduled to be complete in fiscal 2017. It includes new air-to-ground capabilities such as a new ground mapping radar, threat geolocation and the ability to carry the small diameter bomb. as a realisation that the F-35 is only going to be useful in operations against 2nd tier opponents and lower, or where air dominance is already established by F-22, so F-22 are being prepared for what was once touted as the F-35's forte... Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Seems like quite a stretch to me ... those capabilities were always in the plan for the F-22, and that simply makes it a capable platform within the war-machine. Threat geolocation means it can datalink any detected threats. I don't see where you got the conclusion that the F-35 will only be useful against 'second tier opponents'. The F-22 just does not have the sortie to take over, and in any case, the F-22/35 hi-lo mix was, again, always in the cards. Sure, people have bought / ordered F-35 - so they'll obviously be built, but it doesn't take much of a stretch to read : as a realisation that the F-35 is only going to be useful in operations against 2nd tier opponents and lower, or where air dominance is already established by F-22, so F-22 are being prepared for what was once touted as the F-35's forte... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ФрогФут Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 (edited) I'd suggest banning the troll and moving on, gentlemen.:) Edited April 19, 2014 by ФрогФут "Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин Ноет котик, ноет кротик, Ноет в небе самолетик, Ноют клумбы и кусты - Ноют все. Поной и ты. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realtrance Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Just one last, hopefully not irritating comment, personal opinion, not truth: wouldn't it have made more sense (hindsight's always 20/20) to have kept F-22 production going, and to have phased in the extremely ambitious multi-service, international capabilities of the F-35? They are, ultimately, complementary aircraft and should have been developed, produced and funded as such, with ongoing F-22 production buffering the risks of the F-35's next-gen ambitions. Armies of quadrotors will render it all obsolete soon enough, though. :) Think of it as distributed dogfighting, like networked distributed computing. The manned aerial battle PCs of today will be left behind by the robotic iPhones of tomorrow, so to speak. ROG Maximus X, Intel i7-3770 3.5GHz , Nvidia 680Ti, 16GB DDR3 2400MHz, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 It would have made more sense to develop the marine version as a separate aircraft. In hindsight. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFunk1606688187 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 There's probably a good essay to be written on the pitfalls of trying to engineer a wonder project that can do everything and cost less and put it all into a single airframe. Or, to be more of a tease, what if they'd gone ahead with a naval F-22? How would that have changed the design process of the JSF? Warning: Nothing I say is automatically correct, even if I think it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepec9124 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 There's probably a good essay to be written on the pitfalls of trying to engineer a wonder project that can do everything and cost less and put it all into a single airframe. Or, to be more of a tease, what if they'd gone ahead with a naval F-22? How would that have changed the design process of the JSF? I'm guessing it would be cheaper to resume F-22 and give strenghtened gears for naval version. Only issue would be STOVL version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outlawal2 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I'm guessing it would be cheaper to resume F-22 and give strenghtened gears for naval version. Only issue would be STOVL version. Sorry folks, you don't just put tougher wheels on it and it is good to go... The landing gear for naval use requires that the entire airframe be designed specifically to handle the added stresses... You don't just retrofit new gear and all is well... "Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence." RAMBO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepec9124 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Sorry folks, you don't just put tougher wheels on it and it is good to go... The landing gear for naval use requires that the entire airframe be designed specifically to handle the added stresses... You don't just retrofit new gear and all is well... Damn, you are talking like an engineer or something :megalol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realtrance Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Ok that made me laugh! That is certainly the case! The F-35 is an unimaginable (to us mortals) engineering miracle, for sure. Even if in some ways it doesn't quite achieve its ambitions (hybrid capability at low cost), it certainly provides a benchmark to think about. ROG Maximus X, Intel i7-3770 3.5GHz , Nvidia 680Ti, 16GB DDR3 2400MHz, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outlawal2 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Damn, you are talking like an engineer or something :megalol: Well I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night... :lol::megalol: "Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence." RAMBO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOnTheOP Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Sorry folks, you don't just put tougher wheels on it and it is good to go... The landing gear for naval use requires that the entire airframe be designed specifically to handle the added stresses... You don't just retrofit new gear and all is well... This is true, but given the F-22's low-speed handling, I have to wonder what the approach speeds could be brought down to, and how the impact stresses would compare to other naval fighters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts