Stealth: Expensive waste

[Enzo Ferrari]

A lot has been said and written about the capabilities of F-22. History proves that Americans have a reputation of overstating or rather exaggerating the facts. Only time will prove how good F-22 is, since it has not even been inducted into service yet.
F-22 might never even face a real test of stealth and avionics in the battlefield, because US is very unlikely to go to war against any country(in the current world order) with a well equipped Air and ground force.
There are hardly handful of countries which are capable of taking F-22 for a test in the battlefield, and US enjoys good relations with most of them. The countries against which US may go to war with are already ill-equipped, and might not even match the F-16s, forget about the F-22s.
And real time tracking through satellites in not possible. How do u get a spy satellite to follow, if the aircraft changes course?? Don't tell me thrusters!!

In terms of a reputation of overstating or rather exaggerating the facts, nobody as good as the Russian(weapon sales brochures), just take look of the recent wars outcome...

[Dima]

In terms of a reputation of overstating or rather exaggerating the facts, nobody as good as the Russian(weapon sales brochures), just take look of the recent wars outcome...

that is not necessarily the case, it's all about the training, which the Americans outdid all their opponents in, when it was even(if it ever was) they were pretty close

for example, Iraqi's burying their T-72's into the ground, leaving only the turret, STUPID,the whole point of a T-72, which is not an MBT, but more like a MPT(Mass produced tank) was to be a fast tank with a high-caliber gun, by burying them in the sand, they had no chance to escape the Abrams tank, they're such idiots, what's with them and burying things in the sand?

[avon1944]

RE: Stealth: Expensive waste

> Maximus
> F-22 might never even face a real test of stealth and avionics in the
> battlefield
I doubt that, the USAF might not get a chance to soon but, allies like Israel will most likely get the first chance to use it in combat, just like it did with the F-15A and F-16A.

> There are hardly handful of countries which are capable of taking F-22
> for a test in the battlefield, and US enjoys good relations with most
> of them.
I don't feel that their will not be at "least" one major regional war between now and 2015! The PRC Versus the ROC, Israel Versus one of its neighbors, Pakistan Versus India, ROK Versus somebody, etc.!

> US may go to war with are already ill-equipped, and might not even
> match the F-16s, forget about the F-22s.
The USA does not want air superiority -they want air dominance! In practice air combat, the F-22 has kicked everything around and only seen when its using its guns. The F-22 has even killed Hearrier with their guns!!


>> Enzo Ferrari
>> In terms of a reputation of overstating or rather exaggerating the facts,
>> nobody as good as the Russian(weapon sales brochures), just take look of
>> the recent wars outcome...


> Dima
> that is not necessarily the case, it's all about the training, which the
> Americans outdid all their opponents in, when it was even(if it ever was)
> they were pretty close
The Soviets then Russians have not put any priority in air combat training. Before you buy USA weapon systems one of the requirements is the establishment of a good training program.

> Iraqi's burying their T-72's into the ground, leaving only the turret,
> STUPID,the whole point of a T-72, which is not an MBT
I didn't know the T-72 was NOT an MTB. Thank you for the information!

Adrian

[hello]

Who are design guys kidding? Stealth is nothing more than fad to aquire funds; a trend more fickle than anything from Milan. The cost of any sort of sensing equipment will be an order of magnitude below that of developing an airframe/naval architecture that can attempt to evade or baffle exigent systems. Watching T.V. earlier I saw some deluded individual expousing the virtues of a stealth tank. I ask you! The idea that 50+ tons of armour has some kind of covert role! What's it 'sposed to do after sneaking up? Only myopia trades armour/aerodynamics etc. for an attempt to become obsolete within a dacade.

What balderdash. I don't care about stealth tanks but stealth isn't just a waste; it works. How come none of the f117s in OpDesertStorm got downed by SAMs?
How come f22s won 80-1 against f15/f16s?

[hello]

Come to India dude. We'll give you the same satellite at 1/4th of the cost. :)

uhh-huh.

[The Chap]

What balderdash. I don't care about stealth tanks but stealth isn't just a waste; it works. How come none of the f117s in OpDesertStorm got downed by SAMs?
How come f22s won 80-1 against f15/f16s?

How come one was downed over Bosnia. DS relied on complete air superiority. Lookdown/shootdown is not what the little triangle is meant to deflect. Nighthawks don't work any longer. And don't forget that my initial premise was that in a cost/benefit juggle the cash is better spent elsewhere. :)

[Bill]

Wow, you need to go to my site and tell the F-117 pilot that posts there that his ride 'don't work anymore'.

I'm sure he'd be really interested in any data you have that he lacks...because he seems to feel that the F-117 is still quite capable for it's intended role.

[hello]

How come one was downed over Bosnia. DS relied on complete air superiority. Lookdown/shootdown is not what the little triangle is meant to deflect. Nighthawks don't work any longer. And don't forget that my initial premise was that in a cost/benefit juggle the cash is better spent elsewhere. :)

That f117 was downed by a visual ground station. Sure, the things not that invisible but it wasn't shot down by a Mig29. And for air superiority the F/A-22 has a greater benefit than cost. And precisely what "elsewhere" are you talking about? The USN has already wasted enough on several programs and the Comanche was axed.

[The Chap]

[the Comanche was axed.[/QUOTE]

I pass you on to a post regarding the non-existent chopper. Thence go hound the BBC.

Probably not worth me re-itterating COST/BENEFIT again. leith

[Warrior_Medic]

Who are design guys kidding? Stealth is nothing more than fad to aquire funds; a trend more fickle than anything from Milan. The cost of any sort of sensing equipment will be an order of magnitude below that of developing an airframe/naval architecture that can attempt to evade or baffle exigent systems. Watching T.V. earlier I saw some deluded individual expousing the virtues of a stealth tank. I ask you! The idea that 50+ tons of armour has some kind of covert role! What's it 'sposed to do after sneaking up? Only myopia trades armour/aerodynamics etc. for an attempt to become obsolete within a dacade.

Is that why the U.S. sent F-117 first into Baghdad back in 1991 rather than B-52's?

You're an idiot.

[The Chap]

Is that why the U.S. sent F-117 first into Baghdad back in 1991 rather than B-52's?

You're an idiot.

That seems to be a touch strong. A buffoon perhaps, yet I suggest that you -as a "warrior-medic"- may perchance be displaying a fundamental ingnorance of some old greek idiot's oath.

I have no issue with being called an idiot, but, dear boy, I do wish the cretin flinging the **** examined the material in his hand first.

Heal thy self.

[Garry]

That f117 was downed by a visual ground station. Sure, the things not that invisible but it wasn't shot down by a Mig29. And for air superiority the F/A-22 has a greater benefit than cost. And precisely what "elsewhere" are you talking about? The USN has already wasted enough on several programs and the Comanche was axed.

NO VISUAL STATION COULD DETECT OR DOWN F-117 IN THE NIGHT (this NIGHT Hawk was downed around 22:30 night on March 26, 1999). IT WAS DOWNED BY RADAR GUIDED SAM MISSILE.

search for the news of that time.... the pilot was missing at night. The rescue op was in the night.... the aircraft was donwed 1 hour after sun set. THE LIE ABOUT VISUAL SYSTEM DOWNING IT IS SILLY UNCOMPETENT

[Garry]

Gentlemen, you may rest in lucky belief that angles + cover really make something invisilble for all band radars due to diverting reflection of radar waves and absorbing them.

The current stealth designs can not be singificantly improved as they rely on form of the object - sharp angles reducing RSS + less elecments that increase RSC. I really doubt that much could be contributed further in this direction..... RSC of F-22 would probably be many times beter than F-15, however it is hard to move futher by much.

However the history proven that sensitivity of radar systems was around doubling every 10-15 years as well as computing abilities to process received data. Today you can even calculate how many blades are in the aircraft engine though air intakes. F-117 and B-2 were invented and known for long time.... as well as their principle making them LESS VISIBLE FOR CERTAIN RADAR BANDS..... in the last 20 years Soviet engineers designed and fielded radar systems which completelly undermined their less visibility advantage..... it was tested from ships which observed with radars take offs and flights of F-117 and B-2 from different bases in Brittain, Ariano and etc..... these aircraft are no longer LESS VISIBLE.

So to the question does a designer should think of reducing RSC of a new aircraft/fighter/tank/helicopter/etc..... yes. Low RSC give great advantage against old systems. However this should not be made a sole most important principle of the weapon as it was with F-117 and B-2 when everything else was sacrificed to LESS RADAR VISIBILITY as this advantage is not sustainable.

[Bill]

There aint no "soviet engineers" no more boy.

I hate to point that out to you...

I will give you russians one thing. You can stare down the barrel of a gun being pointed at your face and still convince yourselves that you've got the situation under control...

[B.Smitty]

NO VISUAL STATION COULD DETECT OR DOWN F-117 IN THE NIGHT (this NIGHT Hawk was downed around 22:30 night on March 26, 1999). IT WAS DOWNED BY RADAR GUIDED SAM MISSILE.

search for the news of that time.... the pilot was missing at night. The rescue op was in the night.... the aircraft was donwed 1 hour after sun set. THE LIE ABOUT VISUAL SYSTEM DOWNING IT IS SILLY UNCOMPETENT

The radar guided SAM may've had an EO/IR backup mode. IR does work at night.