Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Pat1 wrote:

Hi LordOfBunnies,I’m not sure what you know, but RCS must be measured at some standard condition (fixed distance, orientation, and radar settings [power, frequency, sensitivity, etc...]) and is only useful to qualitatively asses two airplanes.

Hmmm....can't agree with you on this one. Without breaking tradecraft, absolute RCS numbers can be and routinely are produced for anything so long as you specify the frequency range (i.e. "x-band") and an aspect angle(i.e. +/- x deg right/left and +/- Y deg above/below the nose). And of course the statistical confidence you want (scintillation and other effects cause variablity in the returns).

These numbers are not relative to other systems but are measured and reported against known standards (like the standard 1 meter diameter sphere)

F-16.net Sponsor

Another big variable in the stealthness of a plane is its pilot. Meaning by the way that he flies the jet.

All agree?

Shev

ACSheva wrote:

Another big variable in the stealthness of a plane is its pilot. Meaning by the way that he flies the jet.

All agree?

Shev

Stealthiness in terms of signature is independant of the pilot. Survivability on the other hand...

ACSheva wrote:

I've been talking to many guys at work about this quistion for quite some time. It's all very complicated. But most of them know how avionics, radars work. Im only a novice at avionics. And many of them think that in the next 5-10 years the Stealth of the F-22 will not be a "huge" factor. Sounds pretty crazy.Their bassicly saying that the F-22 can be, and will be tracked. If there is a chance than the technology can be built to great lenghts to counter that stealth jet. Again its only their, and my professional work related opinion. And by having a small understanding of how radars work, I would certainly agree. But, someone knows quite a bit more.

I have to say I'm confused by your comments. So, let me get this straight: you're consulting people who have no connection to the jet, and are not privy to its technical applications, or how they work. You will agree with what their personal, uninformed beliefs are, but you will disregard the facts stated by professionals with connections to the jet, and you'll still believe that there are ways this jet can be defeated in so many different ways? Did I interpret your statements correctly?

Something that bothers me on threads similar to this one is the growing number of members of this site who seemingly only want to know the ways to defeat (i.e., BRING DOWN a Raptor). In this day and age, these questions are very dangerous. Even though in my professional opinion, I know there is nothing for the Raptor driver to worry about, it still bothers me that people, especially in an international forum are asking questions about stealth-defeating capabilities.

If anyone else has something to add, please back up your statements with credible evidence, not some "opinion you heard from some guy". Also, some of these threads about stealth-defeating capabilities border on violating OPSEC. To the non-vets on this site, I'd ask to respect classified information, and do not attempt to ask a veteran on this site to divulge any of this information. For the record, that would violate INFOSEC, and most likely COMSEC.

My Two Cents

Beers and MiGs were made to be pounded!

Quote:

You will agree with what their personal, uninformed beliefs are, but you will disregard the facts stated by professionals with connections to the jet, and you'll still believe that there are ways this jet can be defeated in so many different ways? Did I interpret your statements correctly?

Wow, wow TC.

I meant no harm at all. Wink

Just to mention some of the people that I work with have a very big history with secret type work, and there opinion is valued. They know more than us, you can believe me.

Every time someone asks a quistion about the F 22 regarding its stealth(RCS) , someone comes on and says that " well I cant say exactly the numbers, but its reallly low" sound familiar. Its either that person is lying, or it is really low. I can see how people can become suspicious, no one has posted any concrete facts about the 22. Its just all " well I know, but I just cant say it".

Quote:

you will disregard the facts stated by professionals

TC, no ONE on this site has given any concrete facts about the Raptors stealth. Not a single one. If there was a fact I would gladly take it, and believe it. My point is that if youre going to say stuff, say the facts. Not just " well I dont have the clearance to" I think you know what I mean.

Shev Laughing

ACSheva, no one can state concrete facts because the concrete facts are the classified things. It is possible to say it is stealthier than *x*. As long as no RCS numbers are quoted it's all good. I've been reading a lot of these forums and seen you and TC state the same thing about a dozen times. This debate never ever ends well and everyone ends up getting pissed off. ACSheva, nobody can say anything absolutely positive in these debates because it's illegal to state positive facts. All that ever gets argued in this is a fuzzy area of speculation. Ok, I'm done ranting on that.

Now what I was going to ask, is there some equation as to detection range and RCS? Basically, at 100 nm what is the minimum RCS to be detected by Radar X. Just curious to see if there's anything like that out there.

So what you've implied there is that you're dissatisfied with the fact that our newest technology is classified and you want one of us with a security clearance to divulge classified information. Just how stupid do you think the veterans and contractors on this site are?

To knowingly share anything classified is not only a severe violation of one's integrity, it'll also land your @$$ in Ft. Leavenworth for about 25 to Life. Read up on Aldrich Ames and John Walker, then get back to us.

We say that we can't talk about certain things for a reason. The government wants to keep Russians, terrorists, and everyone else that has no need to know this information away from it.

Your posts and general demeanor on this site suggest to me that you aren't who you say you are. I don't believe you work in the aviation industry, especially for a company that has government contracts. I wouldn't be surprised at all if you were some 15 or 16 year old. If I were you, I'd watch the things I say or ask, before you get an involuntary visit from AFOSI or the FBI.

You want a concrete fact, well here's a concrete fact for you: It will be a cold day in Hell before you ever get any classified information out of me. Move on kid.

ACSheva wrote:

Just to mention some of the people that I work with have a very big history with secret type work, and there opinion is valued. They know more than us, you can believe me.

Some of the people I work with have a similar backround...and they don't boast about it...So basically I don't know their opinion...nor do I ask...

Enthusiast Joined: Oct 27, 2004 - 10:49 AM Posts: 70

LordOfBunnies wrote:

Now what I was going to ask, is there some equation as to detection range and RCS? Basically, at 100 nm what is the minimum RCS to be detected by Radar X. Just curious to see if there's anything like that out there.

The short course:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar#Radar_equation

A little deeper course with examples:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/es310/syllabus.htm
Read "radar fundamentals" (chapters 7-14).

I'll let you to find the correct values.

Quote:

Something that bothers me on threads similar to this one is the growing number of members of this site who seemingly only want to know the ways to defeat (i.e., BRING DOWN a Raptor).

TC, I disagree with you. Yes some people hate the Raptor program and would love to see it be a terrible failure. However, I think the majority of people out there, want to know if the Raptor CAN be defeated not for the purpose of exploiting its defeat, but they would like some reassurance that it cannot be defeated. With you for instance, you have this little RCS number we all'd die to hear. If that RCS number is small as any of us immagine then it reinforces our belief on the likely hood of anyone spotting a Raptor is impossible. However, you are under the security clearence because the US Govt trust that you know that releasing the RCS number will only increase the probability of it's defeat. With most people, I think they like to hear how a Raptor can be defeated because its much more solid and understood than hearing "well, trust me it cant be defeated but I cant tell you why." Hopefully thinking that way will help you cope with all the hordes of people out there TC. Cause I assure you none of them would like to see the Raptor defeated, they would just like to be reassured that it can't be.

Sorry my grammar is so terrible in this sentence, hope everyone understands it.

As for your "friends" ACSheva, if you trust their oppinion so much then what point is there coming on the internet and asking people you dont even know theirs? For all you know everyone on this site who is "in the know" could really just be 14yo kids with lots of time and sometimes a few physics text books to make them sounds smart. If you beleive these people are highly qualified in their oppinions than it is probably healthy for you to trust them. But if you feel you need to question their oppinions by bringing them here than you should probably reevaluate your degree of trust in their oppinions. Noone on this site can tell ya anymore than they do. Either because they are under security clearence like TC, or they just plain dont know, like me. Hopefully it stays that way.

-Aaron

I understand where you're coming from Tengu. However, from my point of view, any way that question can be asked could be very dangerous. Even though I'm no longer with LM, I still take talk like that very seriously, because I would never want to potentially put our troops in danger, especially when I hope to be back in uniform very soon.

Beers and MiGs were made to be pounded!

TC, its good to know that you know where at least one of the members is coming from. Very Happy

In no way am I trying to get the Raptor brought down. And if the Russians/Chinese do want info on the 22, trust me they got better ways of getting the info. There is no need to worry, because no one has said anything "classified". So youre safe. Its just everytime people ask for a fact, all they get is " well, you see I know the facts, but I cant say the facts, because..." And that is ussualy the answer from the people who boast most about the Raptor, or who worked with it. If you arent going to say some facts, than dont mention that you know them. That will stop all of the confusion.

So lets get back to the topic, and Aaron thanks for the kind words.

Shev

Quote:

Your posts and general demeanor on this site suggest to me that you aren't who you say you are. I don't believe you work in the aviation industry, especially for a company that has government contracts. I wouldn't be surprised at all if you were some 15 or 16 year old. If I were you, I'd watch the things I say or ask, before you get an involuntary visit from AFOSI or the FBI.

You want a concrete fact, well here's a concrete fact for you: It will be a cold day in Hell before you ever get any classified information out of me. Move on kid.

I dont even know how to respond to this TC. It sounds like youre trying to switch the topic here man, I dont know what anybody could of said to get you on so much. If you want some proof of my work I can post some pay stubs, etc. Dont worry its not classified. I dont get super agitated, why because I have nothing to worry about. I tell you what I really am. We all know what really is up here.

Shev
Shev

I am a big fan of the Raptor from a technical viewpoint. I personally have no need, nor desire, to know specific facts about it. Particularly it`s RCS.
I read with interest how the pilots of the jet love their new machine and are excited about it`s capabilities.

I think it is just curiousity from people who are "nuts" about airplanes who want to know the real facts. No-one is stupid enough to publish "real" figures. I personally want the Raptor to be every bit as good as it is advertised. I don`t feel that there is a real attempt here to wean classified information in this particular thread although I understand that may have happened in the past.

I understand and agree with your concerns TC. You are a patriot . That is admirable indeed. I am sure however, the mods would pull the plug if they thought we were sailing close to the wind so to speak.
It is good enough for me to hear the opinions of pilots who fly the Raptor. There is no huge conspiracy to "overhype" the airplane by the millitary. That hype is generated by the imagination of the public.

I am sure, in due time, we will hear about all the capabilities of the Raptor.
When it is deemed safe to do so. Probably when the USAF has something even better!!!!!!

Actually it will be 369% effective against any Su/MiG they can throw up in the air. Good question... why the *$#$ are you asking? ol' AC has a habit of asking the WRONG questions. The truth is that the public will never know.
.. thank God.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

How Stealthy?