Read the forum code of contact
By: - 25th August 2005 at 13:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, modern stealth aircraft are still detectable by visual and I/R means. Certain types of long wavelength radar and Bi-statis radar can also detect modern stealth aircraft. The term 'stealth' really means reduced visibility to certain systems, not invisibility.
By: - 25th August 2005 at 15:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
IIRC, there is no stealth aircraft that cannot be detected by radar: it's more a matter of at what distance and whether its radar return is distinguishable from that of, say, a bird. Or is this completely of the board.
By: - 25th August 2005 at 16:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I once had a funny conversation with someone in the radar buisness, I was saying how great the F/A22 was becouse it was so stealthy. He told me that to track it you just needed a powerfull sensitive radar. So I said that it apparently has the equivilant radar signature of a bird, he replied by asking
"how many birds do you know that cruise at 50,000 feet at Mach 1.5."
Although thats a sweeping generalisation I could see where he was coming from.
By: - 25th August 2005 at 17:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think the idea behind stealth is that you reduce the detectability of an aircraft to the point where an enemy doesn't have a realistic window to respond.
By: - 25th August 2005 at 18:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
stealth works by greatly reducing the effective range of radars, but it can still be detected if the radar is close enough. as such, it is most effective against fixed radiation emmiters.
By: - 25th August 2005 at 21:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
the fixed or moving nature of the radar doesn't matter as much as the facing of that radar.
By: - 25th August 2005 at 21:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
this one just detected all US toys while the kosovo war... and behond
"The Nostradamus radar system is a set of 288 bi-cone antenna elements distributed over the arms of a three-branch star, with a buried infrastructure to shelter the transmission and reception electronics.
Nostradamus detects any aircraft flying 700 to 2000 kilometers away. Indeed, this new radar concept is based on very-low-frequency waves (6 to 30 MHz) that bounce off the ionosphere, which allows it to detect targets beyond the horizon.
Whereas transhorizon radars usely require huge linear antenna networks to beam the signals, the special surface distribution of Nostradamus makes it possible to control the electronic beams both in azimuth (360°) and elevation.
Apart from being the cheapest air surveillance mean at the moment, Nostradamus might be useful to:
carry out research on the ionosphere
map sea weather and currents (of interest to companies involved in off-shore oil drilling)
detect and track boats in distress "
By: - 25th August 2005 at 22:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
this one just detected all US toys while the kosovo war... and behond
"The Nostradamus radar system is a set of 288 bi-cone antenna elements distributed over the arms of a three-branch star, with a buried infrastructure to shelter the transmission and reception electronics.
Nostradamus detects any aircraft flying 700 to 2000 kilometers away. Indeed, this new radar concept is based on very-low-frequency waves (6 to 30 MHz) that bounce off the ionosphere, which allows it to detect targets beyond the horizon.
Whereas transhorizon radars usely require huge linear antenna networks to beam the signals, the special surface distribution of Nostradamus makes it possible to control the electronic beams both in azimuth (360°) and elevation.
Apart from being the cheapest air surveillance mean at the moment, Nostradamus might be useful to:
carry out research on the ionosphere
map sea weather and currents (of interest to companies involved in off-shore oil drilling)
detect and track boats in distress "
Great little system but how does this help me when I drive around in my mobile SAM or SPAAG system
By: - 26th August 2005 at 07:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: stealth detectable?
> PILOTGHT
> this one just detected all US toys while the kosovo war... and behond
There is all sorts of talk about detecting stealth aircraft. There has been even talk about tracking stealth aircraft as far back as the PGW#1! Yet, the only stealth aircraft shot down was the F-117 that flew almost directly over a mobile radar site.
All the talk about tracking the B-2 bomber, yet a $500M aircraft slow moving and big, could not be shot down!
You can add all the talk about detecting stealth by radar with detecting submarines by satellites! There is some degree of truth to the statement but the technology is a ways off. If detection of stealth was close at hand, Russia would not be trying to include as much stealth as they can in their fifth generation aircraft.
Adrian
By: - 26th August 2005 at 08:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
> PILOTGHT
> All the talk about tracking the B-2 bomber, yet a $500M aircraft slow moving and big, could not be shot down!
First, it is $896mil, w/o R&D costs.
Second, they never really had to guts to send over the B-2As when SAMs were still functional. As long as Yugo defences were still active, the B-2As only dared to fire off standoffs from over the Baltic, so such *invulnerability* does not really count, IMHO. Ironically, the B-2A is too valuable and too expensive to be used in the role for which it had been designed.
By: - 26th August 2005 at 09:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There is all sorts of talk about detecting stealth aircraft. There has been even talk about tracking stealth aircraft as far back as the PGW#1! Yet, the only stealth aircraft shot down was the F-117 that flew almost directly over a mobile radar site.
All the talk about tracking the B-2 bomber, yet a $500M aircraft slow moving and big, could not be shot down!
RUmors saod that the Nostradamus was able to track the b2 during bombing mission (so in "full stealth") but I can hardly remember when France tried to shot down it.
By: - 26th August 2005 at 09:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
LOL, yeah, I know, they then sent 2 rafale to shot them down with gun, but US never claimed it because of their shame... :D
By: - 26th August 2005 at 09:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://www.psaila.net/NOSTRADAMUS/FRENCH/HTML/synopsis.html
ha ha ha, well for the rookies, ok it's in french! and a bit old! anyway
they even talk to plugg it on air force planes MIDS, like a new AWACS
By: - 26th August 2005 at 16:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Stealth aircrafts are optimized for certain frequency ranges. Outside that frequency range these can be detected. Whilst the current stealth aircrafts can be detected by low frequency radars, their loaction cannot be estimated with sufficient precision to launch a SAM.
By: - 26th August 2005 at 17:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Stealth aircrafts are optimized for certain frequency ranges. Outside that frequency range these can be detected. Whilst the current stealth aircrafts can be detected by low frequency radars, their loaction cannot be estimated with sufficient precision to launch a SAM.
Bi-static radars can do that pretty well. And don't forget the emission energy paradigm: after "crude" detection by a LF radar, other HF or UHF beams can be focused on the possible target detection area and demask it by sheer combined emission power. Same system as in the basic Soviet ABM systems (RKO): Hen House, Pechora and the like detect the launch and the MIRV cone dispersal areas, Don 2NP (Pill Box) takes over for target discrimination and A-135 system targeting.
By: - 26th August 2005 at 18:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
the fixed or moving nature of the radar doesn't matter as much as the facing of that radar.
yes it does. every B2 mission is maticulously planned to avoid the 'danger zones' around hostile radars. moving radar systems makes it effectively impossible to be 100% sure that the B2's flight path will not take it into the effective detection range of a moblie radaition emmiter. as such, B2s are never used to try and infiltrate enemy territory when there are still mobile systems in operation because the planes are just far too expansive to risk no matter how small the chances of detection.
do remember that the B2 was not designed to be a 100% safe conventional bomber. it was designed to have the greatest chance of successfully penetrating soviet air defences and delivering nuclear payloads. in such conditions, not every plane needs to make it. it is sufficient that the 'enemy' is unable to have a decent chance of stopping all of the planes.
so, to sum up, the B2 was not designed to be able to go into extreme risk environments and servive 100% of the time. they were designed so that the best air defences in the world cannot shoot them down 100% of the time.
By: - 26th August 2005 at 20:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There are ways other then radar and IR to guide MANPADS, SAM's....
By: - 27th August 2005 at 02:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
First, it is $896mil, w/o R&D costs.Second, they never really had to guts to send over the B-2As when SAMs were still functional. As long as Yugo defences were still active, the B-2As only dared to fire off standoffs from over the Baltic, so such *invulnerability* does not really count, IMHO. Ironically, the B-2A is too valuable and too expensive to be used in the role for which it had been designed.
Flex297,
What are you on about? You do realise where the Baltic is? The B-2s employed JDAMs. From night one of Allied Force the B-2s were going deep inside Yugoslavia. They did not do stand-off. Where did you pick that one up from?
Details from Capt. Shower's interview on the events of 24th March:
'Capt. Mike Shower, flying an F-15C, was escorting the first of two strike packages - one package flew into southern Serbia while Shower's package went north over Belgrade. The strike packages were made up of 10 F-117s and two B-2 bombers with escort coming from a total of eight F-15Cs and F-16CJs. Approximately four minutes into the mission, Shower said they heard a "Splash one MiG-29" (a MiG-29 has been shot down) call from Airborne Warning and Control System from the south strike package. We got a little excited at that point since there was no doubt the Serbians were going to launch their aircraft. Six minutes into the mission, the Captain's radar picture was complicated by an unidentified aircraft taking off from Batajinica Airfield, a MiG-29 base in northern Belgrade.. The Captain said the final shot illuminated his aircraft from the rocket plume so the F-117 pilot could tell the two aircraft were approximately 2,000 feet from each other. The missile went right across the front of his aircraft down to the MiG-29 which blew up about 7,000 feet underneath the F-117. The MiG-29 crashed within 25 nautical miles of Batajinica Airfield.'
TJ
By: - 27th August 2005 at 13:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Bi-static radars can do that pretty well. And don't forget the emission energy paradigm: after "crude" detection by a LF radar, other HF or UHF beams can be focused on the possible target detection area and demask it by sheer combined emission power. Same system as in the basic Soviet ABM systems (RKO): Hen House, Pechora and the like detect the launch and the MIRV cone dispersal areas, Don 2NP (Pill Box) takes over for target discrimination and A-135 system targeting.
I am not familiar with above mentioned systems, and what you have written above could be correct. However, the general conclusion tends to be that; while detection is definitely possible using lower frequency radars, the ambiguity in the target location is extremely high. Further more LF/HF radars, being relaint on ionosphere, suffer from other problems as well, e.g. high probability of false alarms, availabilty highly effected by time of day etc.
Nonetheless, if you have any further knowledge on this issue, please do share with us.
Posts: 697
By: pilatus - 25th August 2005 at 12:23
iv thought about this now for a while and i was wondering if the stealth generation of a/c cannot be detected by radar would it be possible to detect them with infra red tracking systems? such as the KOLS29 carried by the the fulcrum?maybe this has been discussed before but its just some food for thought!?