F-22, stuff you should know

**Rusky** · 20 Jan 06, 01:46

Originally Posted by Defcon 6

I believe it when I see it

I have posted two other links for both radars a bit earlier.

**Defcon 6** · 20 Jan 06, 01:57

Yes, but the Russian anti-stealth broad wave radar helps, a lot, as US has admitted.

Post a link where the US makes such a statement. An official site.

I repeat the 50s thing is what western press says, Russia admitts that they were testing new stuff.

And sadly they only nabbed one F117? Stealth aircraft are not invulnerable, but yet are quite hard to kill.

The article i started this thread with was posted on the site's forum by an individual user, not on the actual site. Plus all the info about the radars is still correct whatever way you look at it.

No wonder! That individual user didn't know what the hell he was talking about. No wonder it seemed fabricated, it was! Also, a B-2 is not going to show up the size of a boeing 737. No frickin way. All stealth aircraft show up on radar. Usually about the size of a bird at short ranges, or..perhaps a bumble bee at longer ranges. However unfortunately such a small signature makes it nearly impossible to get and hold a lock-on. So detecting an aircraft is one thing, but getting a lock-on is quite different.

Actually you should check it out, the site has loads of videos and pics on both Russian and US aircraft, tanks, ships, guns, everything.

Perhaps I will. I would offer that you should visit www.globalsecurity.org in return.

**Rusky** · 20 Jan 06, 02:42

Originally Posted by Defcon 6

Post a link where the US makes such a statement. An official site.

What would you recognize as an official site?

And sadly they only nabbed one F117? Stealth aircraft are not invulnerable, but yet are quite hard to kill.

They also only had one radar of that type, and it was where for testing.

No wonder! That individual user didn't know what the hell he was talking about. No wonder it seemed fabricated, it was! Also, a B-2 is not going to show up the size of a boeing 737. No frickin way. All stealth aircraft show up on radar. Usually about the size of a bird at short ranges, or..perhaps a bumble bee at longer ranges. However unfortunately such a small signature makes it nearly impossible to get and hold a lock-on. So detecting an aircraft is one thing, but getting a lock-on is quite different.

The thing is yes that guy did exxagurate but i highly doubt that all that he wrote up all that detailed info on those two radars all by himself, i am pretty sure he took it from somethere, plus from what i have seen a lot of the stuff he said about whose radar checks out (the stuff there he explains the functions and workings not the ranting).

Perhaps I will. I would offer that you should visit www.globalsecurity.org in return.

Yes i know about it, its a good site.

**lurker** · 20 Jan 06, 02:49

Originally Posted by Rusky

Yes i know about it, its a good site.

good site for "deza"

**Rusky** · 20 Jan 06, 02:54

Originally Posted by lurker

good site for "deza"

Shto takoie deza? Izvini ya originalino is Pitera no ninche Moskvich tak chto ya tebia ne ponimati kak skazal bi tovarish chukcha.

**Defcon 6** · 20 Jan 06, 03:01

Интересно, было ли это русским

**lurker** · 20 Jan 06, 03:03

Originally Posted by Rusky

Shto takoie deza? Izvini ya originalino is Pitera no ninche Moskvich tak chto ya tebia ne ponimati kak skazal bi tovarish chukcha.

Деза = дезинформация.

**Defcon 6** · 20 Jan 06, 04:07

Alright I visited warfare.ru

take a look
http://warfare.ru/?lang=&catid=268&linkid=1739

then look-
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ussia/1144.htm

remarkably similar. Oh an by the way Lurker, the Kirov is a battle cruiser! lol! Even warfare.ru says so! Sorry, I just couldn't resist. lol

**~~Captain Drunk~~** · 20 Jan 06, 14:19

Originally Posted by Rusky

"The avionics for the F-22 were obsolete before the plane even went into production", a Pentagon analyst tells CounterPunch. That's because the computer systems that act as the plane's brain are powered by five-volt silicon chips. These went out of date in 1992 when Intel introduced the 3.3 volt Pentium chip. Now most computers run on the even faster Pentium III, a 1-volt microchip. "Imagine if this plane ever joins the fleet and is running on computer systems that are already 10 years out of date and will be 30 years out of date in the future," a senate staffer said. "It will be like trying to run a spreadsheet with an abacus."

The YF-22 advanced tactical fighter actually flew on 30 Sep 1990, much before the Pentium 1 existed, so although its a mid-to-late decade 1980s fighter, much of its avionics, etc., belongs to the late 80s while more worrisome are the emerging anti-stealth radars and heat-sensitive Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems which many European and Russian firms are producing very cheaply but are very effective. Stealth aircraft have special systems that cool exhaust gases and mask hot parts of the plane. Nonetheless, the plane's surface will always be hotter than background levels, and exhaust gases cannot be entirely cooled. Both of these factors produce heat signatures detectable by infrared systems.

Now if later Flankers / Berkuts turn up with powerful IRST and anti-stealth defences that detect F-22 easily, Pentagon's multi Billion Dollar Bomb will really be felt, considering that F-16Cs - which cost only $25 million each, just a fraction of percent, the cost of an F-22 -- can deliver up to 8,000 pounds of bombs in a typical combat situation, imagine for the cost of a single F-22 which may only hopefully be stealth really, hundreds of F-16s could take to the skies. A big 'stealth' gamble don't you think ?

**lurker** · 20 Jan 06, 20:36

Originally Posted by Defcon 6

Alright I visited warfare.ru

remarkably similar. Oh an by the way Lurker, the Kirov is a battle cruiser! lol! Even warfare.ru says so! Sorry, I just couldn't resist. lol

Haven't seen any "battlecruisers" in the official register.

p.s. If you call spoon a fork, it does not necessary becomes a fork, it just means that you are special.

**The_Burning_Kid** · 20 Jan 06, 21:40

Originally Posted by Rusky

As i said i get that, but the thing is the radar of a Mig or whatever will be able to detect the F-18, it doesn't need to know that F-18 is engaging it to do that.

There is a difference between detecting and engaging. The difference is that the AESA will be able to detect and lock on the enemy aircraft farther away than traditional radars. Known fact.

It is designing them? Where did it say it is designing them? Russia is designing them. A radr of this type detected the F-117 flying over Yugoslavia, you know the one that was shot down. Also a radar does need to be in the air to have its capabilities tested. I am going to try to find you another source.

Uh, the US pretty much knows that Russia is developing someway to counter their stealth. For one thing, the US would be concerned about it and would be doing something, but they aren't which pretty much tells me that they probably know the capabilities of the radar of the Russians (its not really that hard to figure out) and isn't posing a threat to the Raptor. You take the top officials in USAF for idiots, when they are probably smarter than anyone on this board.

As for your radars, it weird that they didn't mention that it has been actually tested or any of the results. They are all assumptions and based on past records, I would take it with a load of salt. I'll believe you when they show some hard proof that "here we detected a stealth aircraft and here's some flight data or a video or something on that line".

**Rusky** · 20 Jan 06, 21:45

Originally Posted by The_Burning_Kid

There is a difference between detecting and engaging. The difference is that the AESA will be able to detect and lock on the enemy aircraft farther away than traditional radars. Known fact.

Right, and i already pointed out why it doesn't matter. Also PAK-FA will also have an AESA radar.

Uh, the US pretty much knows that Russia is developing someway to counter their stealth. For one thing, the US would be concerned about it and would be doing something, but they aren't which pretty much tells me that they probably know the capabilities of the radar of the Russians (its not really that hard to figure out) and isn't posing a threat to the Raptor. You take the top officials in USAF for idiots, when they are probably smarter than anyone on this board.

How would you know? Maybe they are concerned, infact if you read the news article about the F-117 i posted it quotes some US official saying that infact they are concerned. Also F-117 shot down is a proof that Russian anti-stealth works. Also the F-22 stealth (atleast according to the article Defcon posted) is not using anything that will make it immune to broad length radar waves.

As for your radars, it weird that they didn't mention that it has been actually tested or any of the results. They are all assumptions and based on past records, I would take it with a load of salt. I'll believe you when they show some hard proof that "here we detected a stealth aircraft and here's some flight data or a video or something on that line".

Eh....we know that it works, because we have tested it. Also as i have already said an F-117 getting shot down was because of a test of the Russian radar. You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but this is reality, laws of physics don't go away because an aircraft has a "made in USA" label.

**highsea** · 20 Jan 06, 22:18

Originally Posted by Rusky

Right, and i already pointed out why it doesn't matter. Also PAK-FA will also have an AESA radar.

Lol, we don't even know if there will ever be a Pak-fa. And the head of NIIP stated last year that APAR was out of reach. Go through the old threads. Phazo was pulled off the Pak-fa project.

Also, Russia has no manufacturing capability to manufacture the MMIC's necessary to build AESA at production levels, and the test beds they have built had serious problems. You need the ability to build a couple million MMIC's to equip a fleet of AC. What are you going to do, buy them from the US?

Originally Posted by Rusky

How would you know? Maybe they are concerned, infact if you read the news article about the F-117 i posted it quotes some US official saying that infact they are concerned. Also F-117 shot down is a proof that Russian anti-stealth works. Also the F-22 stealth (atleast according to the article Defcon posted) is not using anything that will make it immune to broad length radar waves.

NO, the stinkbug shootdown only shows what happens with bad planning and treacherous allies.

You should stop commenting on radars until you have a better understanding of them. A meter band radar would never fit on a fighter AC, nor could it ever be used for targeting data even if it did get a return. Which it probably wouldn't, at least until the target was within visual range. What do you think ARTCC uses? A flight of 117's landed at the Prince Sultan AB during GW1, and the Saudi's never saw them. And this was one of the most alert air bases in the world at the time.

Originally Posted by Rusky

Eh....we know that it works, because we have tested it. Also as i have already said an F-117 getting shot down was because of a test of the Russian radar. You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but this is reality, laws of physics don't go away because an aircraft has a "made in USA" label.

sheesh, why don't you find somewhere else to post this nonsense.

**The_Burning_Kid** · 20 Jan 06, 22:34

Originally Posted by Rusky

Right, and i already pointed out why it doesn't matter. Also PAK-FA will also have an AESA radar.

We are not even talking about that PAK-FA and that isn't even getting an AESA radar.

How would you know? Maybe they are concerned, infact if you read the news article about the F-117 i posted it quotes some US official saying that infact they are concerned. Also F-117 shot down is a proof that Russian anti-stealth works. Also the F-22 stealth (atleast according to the article Defcon posted) is not using anything that will make it immune to broad length radar waves.

Notice it doesn't reveal there name it just says "anaylist." Go beyond the words and actually look at the context and don't be fooled on how they write these stories. The people that write this are trying to catch attention and make people believe things. And that F-117 shooting did little more than show that a wet stealth aircraft coupled with open bomb bays has a much larger RCS. Both problems have been fixed in the F-22. As for the radar, it had little effect as it was just there to pick up anything moving and since they got info that the US would conduct some bombing in the area, they knew that whatever they picked up was most likely a US aircraft so they just shot the missile at it.

Eh....we know that it works, because we have tested it. Also as i have already said an F-117 getting shot down was because of a test of the Russian radar. You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but this is reality, laws of physics don't go away because an aircraft has a "made in USA" label.

No they say they tested it but where's the proof?

**Rusky** · 20 Jan 06, 22:49

Originally Posted by highsea

Lol, we don't even know if there will ever be a Pak-fa. And the head of NIIP stated last year that APAR was out of reach. Go through the old threads. Phazo was pulled off the Pak-fa project.

Link? Also PAK-FA is coming out in 2007, its all on graphic, Mikhailov (minister of defense) and Sukhoi are both confirming this.

Also, Russia has no manufacturing capability to manufacture the MMIC's necessary to build AESA at production levels, and the test beds they have built had serious problems. You need the ability to build a couple million MMIC's to equip a fleet of AC. What are you going to do, buy them from the US?

Sure, if US is offering.

NO, the stinkbug shootdown only shows what happens with bad planning and treacherous allies.

You should stop commenting on radars until you have a better understanding of them. A meter band radar would never fit on a fighter AC, nor could it ever be used for targeting data even if it did get a return. Which it probably wouldn't, at least until the target was within visual range. What do you think ARTCC uses? A flight of 117's landed at the Prince Sultan AB during GW1, and the Saudi's never saw them. And this was one of the most alert air bases in the world at the time.

Eh...okay..i never claimed that those radar would fit on a plane. Also your visual range claim is incorrect, read the stats on the two russian meter band radars i have posted, and reposted with different links.

sheesh, why don't you find somewhere else to post this nonsense.

Russian Federation has confirmed this, its not nonsense just because you choose not to believe it.

Thread: F-22, stuff you should know

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

Stuff that'll make you laugh!

Your Thoughts on David Icke?

The Stuff of Life

Soviet guns in Afghanistan (interview)

Whatever This Guys Is "high" On, Its Good Stuff!

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions