Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Newbie Joined: Jun 26, 2008 Posts: 13 Status: Offline

I have read up on claimed 'anti-stealth' technologies, and I just want your opinions. Is it really feasible that other nations can develop this technology so easily and cheaply w/o ever having produced a stealth aircraft themselves, or is it propaganda. I read on wikipedia about these techniques, and most of them seem unconventional or impractical, but its Wikipedia, so you never know. Just wondering... Question

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Veteran Joined: Dec 14, 2006 Posts: 421 Location: USA Ohio

As usual I think there is some truth but it is largely exaggerated as propaganda and for sales promotion.

Stealth merely reduces the ability to detect. Still the aircraft can still be detected, however they often go undetected or are not detected until it is too late. Even if you can detect an aircraft, you can’t necessarily track it well enough to get a lock and shoot it down.

I remember before operation Iraqi freedom, that there were claims that the Iraqis had obtained stealth radar technology and that none of our aircraft or missiles would be able to enter Iraq without early detection and being intercepted. Though the claims were laughable but somewhat alarming, in the end the claims seem to be lies, otherwise the technology was an utter failure.

I think anyone that claims to know the total effectiveness of stealth, countermeasures and detection of all countries is full of malarkey. It’s really hard to tell where the truth and propaganda starts and ends, because often technology and other factors are often unknown until they are tested in combat, even then it is often largely unknown.

Low band radars have a better chance of detecting, but a worse chance of tracking a VLO target.

If you go by the wild claims and suppositions of some posters on this board, stealth was obsolete and irrelevant like, last century...

Elite Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 914 Status: Offline

Obamanite wrote:

If you go by the wild claims and suppositions of some posters on this board, stealth was obsolete and irrelevant like, last century...

You need to get up to date. Didn't you know an S-400 can shoot down a mosquito from 200 miles? Wink

Elite Joined: Aug 02, 2006 Posts: 909 Status: Offline

SpudmanWP wrote:

Low band radars have a better chance of detecting, but a worse chance of tracking a VLO target.

You'll have to go really, really LO. And if you do then your resolution and precision goes to hell... If each dot on the radar screen is more like a box 40km by 40 km wide and objects you find can be tens of km off, you are not shooting anything down. You can at best tell your other assets that there may be something somewhere in a general area and have them go check it out. These assets, be it SAM radars, fighters, AWACs or whatever will still face the same problems traditional platforms face when they try to find and engage VLO targets. They can't really find the target until they themselves get shot at first or the target bugs out.

Radars like that used on the S400 batteries for instance are not really "low band". Like anything operating in the L-band, C-band, S-band, X-band or Ku bands, they suck big time with detecting VLO threats. OTH radars like the HF anf VHF units are a different story, but these have the problem described above.

Newbie Joined: Jun 26, 2008 Posts: 13 Status: Offline

sferrin wrote:

Obamanite wrote:

If you go by the wild claims and suppositions of some posters on this board, stealth was obsolete and irrelevant like, last century...

You need to get up to date. Didn't you know an S-400 can shoot down a mosquito from 200 miles? Wink

I thought it can tell if a mosquito has west nile from 200 miles? Laughing

By definition, any program that is being produced, marketed and deployed to counter a hypothetical VLO aircraft, will be designated 'Anti-stealth'.

It's more designation, than anything. And of course, one has to compete with all the VLO hysteria today accordingly. Hence, such terms are a natural reaction.

Elite Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 914 Status: Offline

geogen wrote:

By definition, any program that is being produced, marketed and deployed to counter a hypothetical VLO aircraft, will be designated 'Anti-stealth'.

It's more designation, than anything. And of course, one has to compete with all the VLO hysteria today accordingly. Hence, such terms are a natural reaction.

Except that VLO is proven.

In 1978, when Have Blue was being tested, I got the chance to play with an early word processor. It had crude editing functions and was the size of a piano.

Nobody out there is saying that the F-22 or F-35 have better signatures than Have Blue. More robust, yes; better performance in other ways, yes; but no huge differences in dB.

So, given what's happened in technology, and that radar/other detection engineers have had 30 years to think things over, only a complete idiot would assume that the detection gap has not been closed somewhat since then.

Elite Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 914 Status: Offline

LowObservable wrote:

In 1978, when Have Blue was being tested, I got the chance to play with an early word processor. It had crude editing functions and was the size of a piano.

Nobody out there is saying that the F-22 or F-35 have better signatures than Have Blue. More robust, yes; better performance in other ways, yes; but no huge differences in dB.

So, given what's happened in technology, and that radar/other detection engineers have had 30 years to think things over, only a complete idiot would assume that the detection gap has not been closed somewhat since then.

I don't think anybody is claiming it hasn't, just that stealth isn't ancient history / worthless as some would have you believe. To hear some tell it the F-22 and F-35 should be cancelled and the B-2 immediately scraped because stealth is now obsolete.

sferrin wrote:

Obamanite wrote:

If you go by the wild claims and suppositions of some posters on this board, stealth was obsolete and irrelevant like, last century...

You need to get up to date. Didn't you know an S-400 can shoot down a mosquito from 200 miles? Wink

Even better it can tell male from female. Guiness

I don't think that LO technology has been defeated or negated completely. Is it as good as it was in 1980? No. Where are the weaknesses? Not sure, but I think the best counter-stealth approach would involve networking and low frequencies, and that (in that case) the F-22 and F-35 would be more vulnerable than an all-wing aircraft.
Interestingly, though, while signatures have changed relatively little since 1980 - the work has gone into making stealth aircraft perform better and to reduce maintenance - classic EW has improved a lot, in terms of both performance and reliability.

asiatrails wrote:

sferrin wrote:

Obamanite wrote:

If you go by the wild claims and suppositions of some posters on this board, stealth was obsolete and irrelevant like, last century...

You need to get up to date. Didn't you know an S-400 can shoot down a mosquito from 200 miles? Wink

Even better it can tell male from female. Guiness

Next time I'm on Bourbon St. in New Orleans, I'm bringing one of those... Shocked

Elite Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 914 Status: Offline

LowObservable wrote:

I don't think that LO technology has been defeated or negated completely. Is it as good as it was in 1980? No. Where are the weaknesses? Not sure, but I think the best counter-stealth approach would involve networking and low frequencies, and that (in that case) the F-22 and F-35 would be more vulnerable than an all-wing aircraft.

And for a strike aircraft I'd totally agree. But an all-wing design isn't likely to do too well in an air-to-air scenario so you still need the more traditional types of airframes around I'd think. An X-47B / F-35 combination (or better yet an X-47B / F-22 comb.) gives you the best of both worlds. You might not want to try to tackle the newer S-300/400 series with an F-35 but you could probably do it with something like an X-47B and use the F-35 for air defense (where longwave detectability is less of an issue) and the 2nd day of the war after those longwave radars have been taken out. Or use VLO standoff weapons on the F-35. Not talking JASSM class (you don't need a stealth aircraft to deliver those) but more like a stealthy SDB or ARM.

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Anti-Stealth? Propaganda or Threat