Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21100
    Points : 21648
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:20 am

    And 3/4 of Luftwaffe was on Russian front...

    The History Channel and the Discovery Channel and most in the US military seem to believe that it was strategic bombing of europe by the west and then D day that defeated nazi germany in wwii.

    My comment was meant to show that the USAF lie or at the very least can be wrong and therefore when they say the F-22 is perfect and can defeat anything you don't have to take them at their word.

    They are hardly going to say a $350 million dollar and airframe aircraft is slightly better than an F-15C.

    so bad then USAF pilots would have refused to fly with it as it would risk their own lives.

    So Serb pilots defending their country getting into Mig-29s that had not be serviced and had radars that didn't work are braver than USAF pilots?

    Actually they probably were, but refusing to fly an aircraft is not something pilots do very often... they don't tend to remain pilots for long and in war time they can be shot for that sort of thing.

    FEEDING FALSE STORIES AND THEN MAKING SOLDIERS BEG DOOR TO DOOR FOR FOOD IN CHECHNYA IS BEYOND SHAMELESSNESS.

    And British tank crew dying because they have cheap old ineffective body armour is a crying shame too but no armed force is perfect and problems occur.

    Considering your sources regarding the F-22 are you sure of your sources regarding the Russian military in general?

    Raptor was discontinued due to economy related reasons. Also in a new strategy couple of F22s will be helping out two whole squadrons of F15/F16s and act as a force multiplier. Borrowing few capabilities of F22s makes legacy jets even more effective. New strategy does not call for two whole squadrons on F22s on the onset unless opposing force is Russia or China......Chances of that are very slim like less than 5%.

    That isn't going to work and is completely ridiculous... if they are talking about not opposing a capable force then WTF do they need the F-22s for in the first place. They could have spent the 350 million and about a dozen F-16s.

    But in reality they were expecting the F-35 to be in service now so they are saving money by not upgrading the legacy fighters like the F-15 and F-16 so these aircraft will be going to the bone yard and the US will be replacing relatively cheap but capable aircraft with capable aircraft that are ridiculously expensive.

    Their main problem is production gap the F-15 and F-16 are 1970s aircraft and putting them back into full production would not be cheap or easy for that matter.

    For the Russians their aircraft are newer and can still be put in production in their latest model forms that are competitive.

    Duties like policing airspace or even just engaging enemy UAVs and cruise missiles don't require 350 million dollar aircraft... nor does dropping a satellite guided bomb.

    The gold plated USAF will be very expensive to maintain yet in real terms it still cannot take on a nuclear power with no chance of retaliation.

    Once Pakfa comes out and USAF checks it then they might or might not go for additional F22s.......this is my guess atleast.

    The F-22 is dead. More F-22s would kill the 3,000 odd F-35s they want to make.

    Personally, I would cancel the F-35 VSTOL version and redesign the other two to be more efficient... because they went for a unified design the conventional models design is largely dictated by the needs of the VSTOL version which makes them less efficient and more expensive.

    I would also be rather less arrogant than the US and actually collaborate on the design of the avionics so the export models can have fully international avionics and if you want the domestic model can have different equipment you want to keep secret... but at the end of the day they think it is a US aircraft that they will let their allies pay for and use but they are always US aircraft....

    Soon Raptor will be detecting Legacy jets from 400kms........deal with that! What if USAF modifies its AMRAAMs to go over 200 Kms, that would be something tough to deal with.

    Are you not listening?

    You are talking about individual planes... you watch too many American movies perhaps?

    A ground based passive sensor array like Orion detects an F-22 fly overhead... it doesn't emit anything so the F-22 has no idea it is there and no idea it has been detected. The information goes by fibre optic cable to HQ and passed to the entire network.

    That legacy fighter 450km from the F-22 that the F-22 can't detect yet already knows the F-22 is there.

    When the Legacy fighter is 350km the F-22 still doesn't know they are there till he scans for him using his radar... the legacy fighter suddenly detects a blip of energy over a broad band of radar frequencies at once... and 30 years ago would have ignored it as noise, but after the last upgrade the new ESM suite will take the datalinked info dated a few minutes ago showing an F-22 in the area that blip came from and puts two and two together and calculates the angle and approximate range based on signal strength to the target and transmits back to the network the new information. Other aircraft in his group do the same and with each piece of information together with a time stamp it is not rocket science to triangulate the rough area the F-22 is operating in.

    A long wave anti stealth radar in the area to a quick scan while another few also in the area remain radar silent but listen for reflections of long wave radar energy and the resulting data can be processed like it is one giant bi static radar and a very accurate location for the threat will be achieved... accurate enough for a few IIR long range missiles to be fired into the general area.

    Actually the current lock range of IRST operating on Su-35s are 80km

    And that would be against normal targets... a supercruising target will be detectible from greater distances.

    For instance the SR-71 could be detected by the IRST of the Mig-25 at 120 miles... which is further than it could detect it with its radar.

    US doctrine gives most importance to the safety and well being of its men and women in uniform or even in civilian aspects.

    By sending them to third world sht holes to ensure the price of oil stays low to fight and die in countries that are no threat to the US at all?

    In the BVR, your missiles are only as good as your radar is. If Raptor radar is way advanced then there is the main advantage right there.

    Wrong.

    In BVR the critical things are 1: is the target aware of the attack and when do they become aware of the attack, and 2: what options does the target aircraft have to defeat the incoming missile.

    A plane can be able to pull a million gs and have the best defence ESM suite available, but if they don't see it coming they are probably dead.

    If the target knows it is coming then there are plenty of things they can do and the kill probability plummets to very low figures.

    Powerful radars mean nothing... to fire a BVR missile all you need is the range to the target and its location and the flight speed and direction of the target. With that info you know where he is right now and where he will probably be by the time your missile gets there so you fire your missile at that latter location because that should be where he is when your missile gets there. When the missile gets to 10km from where it expects the target to be it will turn on its own radar and scan for the target... if it is not there then the missile has missed.

    The launch aircraft can do one of two things... fire the missile and forget about it and leave, or it can stay and keep tracking the target... if the target changes course or speed or both then the launch aircraft can calculate a new position for interception and send the new target area to the missile which will change its flight path to the new interception point.

    The thing is if you keep tracking the target the target will know it is probably under attack... especially when it detects the datalink signals with the course corrections sent to the missile.

    The simple fact is the greater the range the further the target can move the harder the interception likelyhood.

    400km range against legacy fighters will not help the F-22 against the PAK FA it is like wearing camouflage at night but using a brighter torch so you can see further to find people not wearing camouflage... they are going to see you too because of your big powerful torch...

    In the BVR, your missiles are only as good as your radar is. If Raptor radar is way advanced then there is the main advantage right there.

    First of all that video had nothing to do with IRSTs and everything to do with IIR array systems like thermal sights.
    Second Nakidka reduces the thermal and radar signature of a vehicle at a fraction of the cost, but still IR systems are not obsolete... just as radar jammers and radar decoys have not made radar obsolete.

    IRST going out of business soon it seems if we go by this video.

    Don't believe the marketing hype. Modern thermal sights have been around for some time and there are plenty of methods out there countering such systems... the move to 5th generation includes what is called sensor fusion and using QWIP based sensors that will combine long wave IR with medium and short wave IR arrays in addition to visible light arrays and laser arrays and even MMW and Cm wave radar sensors a computer processor will analyse the data and detect such systems as those depicted in the videos.

    The Russians are already working on Image Intensifiers that can detect artificial colours, so a camouflage uniform would glow despite being exactly the same colour and pattern and its background.

    Combining such technology to optically detect targets by their surface colour even at night with thermal and digital imaging devices and I don't think these systems will "defeat" IR sensors completely.

    Keep on counting on the nukes.........you have good going till 2015, when BMDs are all over Europe and US treating Russia like it treats Iran today. Hope Not but luck sides with the one who is well prepared.

    The US ABM system will cost them trillions of dollars and has zero chance against a mature nuclear power like Russia or even China for that matter. Even assuming they don't do anything to directly attack the ABM system it will never be able to handle the thousands of decoys that will be deployed by Russian missiles, and if they persist then Russia will simply make more missiles and more decoys and look to alternative ways to defeat it... the US is looking at nuclear powered UAVs, so nuclear powered cruise missiles could go on the table...

    They could make Granit sized missiles with a nuclear powered scramjet propulsion... they could fit them to OSCAR class subs... their unlimited range means you could launch them near Antarctica and have them fly up south america and enter US airspace from the south at mach 18 at high altitude and when they get to US airspace they could drop down to 100m or so at mach 7 or more... the shockwave would be lethal on its own.

    But most importantly let the US know you plan to make them and all it would take to cancel the idea would be for the US to cancel this ABM crap. They can have ABMs in the US if they want to waste their money but not on anyone elses territory and Russia will agree to the same limitation...
    coolieno99
    coolieno99

    Posts : 138
    Points : 161
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  coolieno99 on Sat Apr 07, 2012 7:45 am

    victor7 wrote:
    IRST going out of business soon it seems if we go by this video.

    http://www.gizmag.com/adaptiv-ir-invisibility-cloak/19748/
    This is an off-topic straw man argument. The subject is air-to-air engagement. As long as jet engines emit hot plumes, IRST will never go out of business. Newer IRST using QWIP detectors will greatly extend the detection range.

    Besides, it's much more cost effective to protect ground assets with IR-absorbing nettings.
    IR camouflage net
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3531
    Points : 3615
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  medo on Sat Apr 07, 2012 11:11 am

    Protecting technology as shown on BAE video is mostly meant for ground vehicles, which could easier carry additional weight and additional power generator and fuel, because they don't need to fly. There are also other means to reduce IR/thermal signature, but mostly used for ground equipment.

    Blinding laser equipment, I think you have in mind DIRCM and this is known thing and Russians also have it. Ka-52 is first serial helicopter standardly equipped with it. By your definition Ka-52 could be very dangerous helicopter to F-22 or F-35. It have modern RWR, LRW and MAWS together with DIRCM, chaffs and flares launcher, mmw radar and EO ball. With ECM pod Ka-52 could deny both AMRAAM and sidewinder from F-35 or F-22 and trying to engage Ka-52 with gun will be very hazardous because of unic maneuvering capabilities of Ka-52 (coaxial rotor), 30 mm gun and R-73 or Igla AAMs.

    Flankers don't use only R-73 IR AAM, but also R-27T with 70 km range and R-27ET with 120 km range.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 838
    Points : 1005
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat Apr 07, 2012 11:46 am

    IRST missile canceller

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkkWya-oun0&feature=related

    IRST going out of business soon it seems if we go by this video.

    http://www.gizmag.com/adaptiv-ir-invisibility-cloak/19748/


    Victor7 if you want to begin to talk seriously of similar subjects you must learn to control your "creative" vein.

    Those type of solutions -Russia use since several years "Nakidka" camouflage system which significantly reduce not only IR footprint of the vehicle protected but also enormously reduce its reflection in high radar bands- are obviously NOT applicable to aircraft( in fact is not for chance that also in the video you posted no aircraft was shown as the possible vehicle on which was possible to mount the system Wink )

    I image that you can easily realize why : primary IR emission's sources in an aircraft

    1) Engine nozzle and exhaust. (on which similar solutions applicable to ground vehicles and big helicopters become totally useless)
    2) Boundary of aerodynamics surfaces for effect of the huge air friction produced in the manoeuvring flight (also here similar solutions would be inapplicable for incompatibility with the aerodynamic layout)
    3) The main radar and some other systems such as tactical jamming pods (also here no possibilities to use similar systems).

    Victor7, as you can see, the best behavior for you would be to attempt to resist with all your strenght to your "creative" urge ; the alternative is to free totally it in a place where a similar mindset become even a quality widely appreciated by the horde of fanatical ignorants, [at example at F-16 . net].



    This logic is no different from Drunk Yeltsin's policies in 1990s that starved the defense research and hollowed the Russian defense structures. Keep on counting on the nukes.........you have good going till 2015, when BMDs are all over Europe and US treating Russia like it treats Iran today. Hope Not but luck sides with the one who is well prepared.

    Maybe you have not perfectly clear how stand really the situation: in the last twenty years the technological gap between Russian and USA nuclear delivery systems has grown wider and wider (and with the new generation of Russian nuclear delivery systems to be completed in the decade the situation will become even more black for USA) up to a situation where by Americans experts was stimed that is almost impossible to catch up even in the mid/long period.

    In particular the situation became unsustainable for USA with the introduction of Topol-M class ICBM, those ICBMs rendered suddenly outdated the whole US national ABM system because practically immune to any ABM solution (except in the boost/near boost phase) and thanks to its outstanding speed and precision was capable to attack in a "unacceptably"...for NATO... brief time window both ground and sea based NATO nuclear delivery systems opening to the scenario of a Russian first strike option with a very,very limited response by part of NATO.

    For effect of this situation was USA at be forced to react abandoning UNILATERALLY ABM treaty ,not Russia.





    avatar
    victor7

    Posts : 203
    Points : 214
    Join date : 2012-02-28

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  victor7 on Sat Apr 07, 2012 8:54 pm

    Protecting technology as shown on BAE video is mostly meant for ground vehicles, which could easier carry additional weight and additional power generator and fuel, because they don't need to fly. There are also other means to reduce IR/thermal signature, but mostly used for ground equipment.

    The point was that IRST cancelling techs are intensely being worked on and it is only a matter of time before IRST also becomes like stealth on airplanes. F22s are already near to being invisible to human eye or something like that.
    avatar
    victor7

    Posts : 203
    Points : 214
    Join date : 2012-02-28

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  victor7 on Sat Apr 07, 2012 9:01 pm

    A long wave anti stealth radar in the area to a quick scan while another few also in the area remain radar silent but listen for reflections of long wave radar energy and the resulting data can be processed like it is one giant bi static radar and a very accurate location for the threat will be achieved... accurate enough for a few IIR long range missiles to be fired into the general area.

    So this means that putting radars both active and silent in an arc or half a circle should help in catching the reflected waves. This might work although might need quite a few radars.

    Send up 50 UCAVs that are armed with IIR missiles... the goal is not some super UCAV that costs hundreds of millions of dollars... just a simple basic transonic UCAV with maybe 4 IIR missiles

    Can the signal to these UCAVs be jammed by F18-Growler types or other ECM measures.

    Why has Russia fallen so behind on UCAV or even simple drones technology.


    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/raptor-combat-finally/#more-76838

    The F-22 entered service seven years ago with its air-to-air weapons mostly in place, but with only rudimentary bombing systems. Likewise, the roughly $200-million F-35 will possess only a fraction of its expected capabilities when it finally enters service sometime after 2018. That could force the Air Force to hold onto older fighters far longer than it ever expected, in order to buy time for the new jet’s spiral upgrades.
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5559
    Points : 5571
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  TR1 on Sat Apr 07, 2012 10:42 pm

    victor7 wrote:
    Protecting technology as shown on BAE video is mostly meant for ground vehicles, which could easier carry additional weight and additional power generator and fuel, because they don't need to fly. There are also other means to reduce IR/thermal signature, but mostly used for ground equipment.

    The point was that IRST cancelling techs are intensely being worked on and it is only a matter of time before IRST also becomes like stealth on airplanes. F22s are already near to being invisible to human eye or something like that.

    Uh....what?

    How exactly is F-22 anything invisible to the human eye?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21100
    Points : 21648
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 08, 2012 2:17 am

    [This is an off-topic straw man argument. The subject is air-to-air engagement. As long as jet engines emit hot plumes, IRST will never go out of business. Newer IRST using QWIP detectors will greatly extend the detection range.

    If we look at the real world track record... anti aircraft guns and missiles and radar have not led to the obsolescence of aircraft. Anti tank missiles and guns have not led to the obsolescence of tanks and armour. ABM systems have existed for decades and BMs exist in enormous numbers too.

    The torpedo and submarine have not rendered surface shipping obsolete, the sonar and depth charge have not rendered the sub obsolete.

    The point was that IRST cancelling techs are intensely being worked on and it is only a matter of time before IRST also becomes like stealth on airplanes. F22s are already near to being invisible to human eye or something like that.

    Please Victor... has the world stopped building helicopters and CAS because of the existence of Igla and Stinger and Mistral? The British have come up with a technology for attempting to hide ground vehicles and they talk about its potential for aircraft and ships but have no prototypes of either.

    THere are three bands of IR energy that the atmosphere does not block... they care called long wave IR, medium wave IR and short wave IR. Each has its different characteristics and faults and capabilities. Newly designed QWIP sensors offer the chance to create a sensor chip like the CCD chip in a digital video camera or a digital still camera.

    Most of these CCD chips are actually sensitive to IR light... if you don't believe me then take a digital camera and point it at your TV remote control and push a button on the remote. Looking through the viewer on the camera you will see a flashing light from the remote that is not visible to your eyes normally.

    That doesn't mean your camera is a thermal imager thermal imagers operate at different frequencies of IR light. The frequencies thermal imagers operate at all things emit energy. To get an object to emit energy in the visible light range you have to apply heat energy... heat a rifle barrel to a few hundred degrees C and it will start to emit orange glow of visible light... not very practical, but through a thermal sight the barrel will glow even at room temperature.

    Most thermal sights are optimised for a specific range of temperatures so 25-35 degrees C is set to white and anything colder than that is different shades of gray... in an open field in total darkness a human will appear white because of the body heat they emit... at night the ground will be colder than this so the human target will stand out... the point is that without any new fangled super anti IR technology you can go and stand under a tree with lots of leaves. Alternatively you can set fire to the grass in lots of places and then put on some heavy well insulated clothes to block your heat signature and protect you from the fires and it suddenly changes from finding the one white dot on the black background... which is very easy, to finding the gray dot amongst all the white burning bits and black background...

    QWIP technology will allow optical sensors to detect energy in long, medium, short wave IR... AND visible light... including low light, and also in ultraviolet as well. With a bit of computer processing to optimise the image and even the best camouflage will have problems.

    Equally those metal panels they use to heat up and cool down to give a false IR image will likely reflect radar really well, so a MMW radar sensor will defeat them too.

    Your attitude that this technology will make IRSTs useless so forget about developing them is short sighted. Not everything will be fitted with this Anti IRST technology. And with work there might be fairly simple ways to defeat this new anti IRST technology. Remember that there are many stealth aircraft that are already overweight and couldn't afford to have this technology added. Equally I rather suspect that in places like Russia and the US they are working on very similar technology with much much smaller elements where the goal is not to change the heat signature of the vehicle... this system would be useless against the taleban because the taleban have no thermal sights or thermal guided weapons, but a system with smaller elements that changed colour.... would be much more useful.

    So this means that putting radars both active and silent in an arc or half a circle should help in catching the reflected waves. This might work although might need quite a few radars.

    Any active radar can receive radar signals... that is how it works... it first transmits some radar waves and then uses the same radar to listen for their return. The scenario I suggested would simply require one radar in one battery near the suspected location of the F-22 to scan that entire area. Other SAM sites will have the same radar vehicle and will have data about the suspected location of the F-22 and can simply point their radar antennas at the suspected location area of the F-22. Radar waves don't occur naturally, so any beams reflected in their direction can only have come from an object in the sky.

    Using the adjusted network time, the time the radar signal was transmitted and the time the signals were received by all the different radars you can easily triangulate the position of the F-22. Each radar emission can be coded as it scans so moving left to right is could have 1,000 different little frequency variations... the specifics of which can be used to determine what part of the search box the target is in.

    That is the whole point of an Integrated Air Defence system... much better resource management.

    Can the signal to these UCAVs be jammed by F18-Growler types or other ECM measures.

    What signal? They are UCAVs, not remote control planes. Before takeoff they are fed the location of the target area and given the IR signature of the F-22. It will take off and fly to the area and look for F-22 shaped targets. You might have the drones transmit a video data feed to ground stations and after they have taken off you might want to redirect them to a different target area, but your datalinks will be encrypted so even if the enemy monitors them they wont know what you know and they wont be able to command the drones themselves. The energy required to jam them would mean flying in Russian airspace which would be a death sentence for a Growler... you could simply command 5 of the UCAVs to detect jammers and engage them...

    Why has Russia fallen so behind on UCAV or even simple drones technology.

    Why has the US fallen behind in ICBM technology? How many truck mounted ICBMs does the US have?

    Very simply the Soviets and Russians invested money and time and effort into ICBMs. The US has invested time and money and effort into UAVs.

    Both have results. The Russians are safe from US first strike, and the US has the ability to kill people with impunity all over the place with its UCAVs.

    It is like anything after you spend billions of development and deployment and get experience operating them which leads to changes and modifications to make them better eventually you get a mature system that does what you want it to do. The US did that during the 1990s and the Russians are starting to do it now.

    The point was that IRST cancelling techs are intensely being worked on and it is only a matter of time before IRST also becomes like stealth on airplanes. F22s are already near to being invisible to human eye or something like that.

    As I mentioned above I am sure there are lots of people working on a version of this british system that works with visible light with the intention of making their aircraft appear invisible.

    Also as I mentioned above the Russians have found that in their development of image intensifiers that the light from natural objects is different from the light from artificially coloured things. This means if you wear white camouflage and go out and stand in the snow and to the naked eye you are incredibly hard to see if not impossible to see from any distance, this new Image Intensifier technology will make you glow clearly as being distinctly different from the background. It doesn't involve heat signature, but the fact that light is effected differently from snow as from white fabric. This technology could be applied to the light captured by a QWIP sensor sensitive to visible light and processed by computer for low light level conditions for night vision use.

    The QWIP sensors will initially expensive but soon after become very cheap... eventually they will be able to stamp them out like CDs in their millions.


    Last edited by GarryB on Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:18 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    gloriousfatherland

    Posts : 96
    Points : 119
    Join date : 2011-10-01
    Age : 27
    Location : Zapad and Boctok strong

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  gloriousfatherland on Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:00 am

    [quote="victor7"]

    The point was that IRST cancelling techs are intensely being worked on and it is only a matter of time before IRST also becomes like stealth on airplanes. F22s are already near to being invisible to human eye or something like that.

    Moi drug, nye soglasna:
    1. Stealth doesn't equal invisibility
    2. I'm sure WVR you would see a F-22, a black plane against a blue back drop Shocked
    3.How welll would IRST cancelling tech work? The engine whether supercrusing or not gives of infrared radiation that heats the airframe. In the thermal shot of the F-22 the infrared given off by the turbines were clearly mapped out on the F-22 fusealge. The exhaust was lso very brigth. So until they develop engines using magnetism IRST would always work. The boeing company in their prototype for the US 5th generation program, used heat absorbant tiles which wehere more advanced than those used on the space shuttle over the area in which the engines were housed.The aslo added some at the ehaust.The F-22 skin used RAM in order to attain its RCS. Thus it could not and will not use these tiles at the creases between the tiles would compromise its stealthyness. Also the electrical components in the F-22 such as Jammers, Radars etc use a high power houtput and thus some of this power would go into electrical heating adding to hotter spots whereeve these are housed. In addition frictional airflow which creates drag along the body of the aircraft adds to heating. Take a drive with your car on the highway after a good hour or so of driving feel its body, in theory not only would it be hot but alo statically charged. When an F-22 is up at 60000 feet , these factors increase its ability to be found on IRST, and thus as mentioned, untill new level of propulsion comes to the aviation industry this would perpetually be an issue
    4. Invisibily from my understanding you make me believe that an F-22 is invisible. So lets have a little discussion on invisiblity. Their are 2 perceptions of invisibility, physical and then electromagnetic. Now the reason we are able to see each other is becuase our body refelcts colour whilst abosrbing some of the in the visible light specrum of EM radiation.In order to be invisible by sight, the F-22 will have to use a body that abosrbs white light and doest reflect/ emitt any. This mateial doesn't exist. If such material did exist it would still have a particulate nature and thus still be tracked by radar since they operate in the other longer wavelength bands.Another method to achieve invisibilty is to travel faster than light as seen in star wars as the "hyperdrive" using a "hyperdrive speed generator" . You would now be travelling at a speed greater than 3*10^8 m/s which is impossible at the moment. You would not be seen but again still be tracked as you would still have a particulate nature thus still not entirely possible to be truly invisible. Last case I can think of is not being matter. If you are not matter you would not occupy space an thus cant be seen. But if you dont occcupy space you would not exist, thus making it impratical. You cant say you would transfor into "enerygy" because most energy exist as a mass or a wave.So this carries us back to the wave theories mentioned above. So "invisibility" is form a physics point of view really impossible theoretically as it violates laws of physics.
    avatar
    victor7

    Posts : 203
    Points : 214
    Join date : 2012-02-28

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  victor7 on Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:47 am

    Agree or not does not matter, the point is to have a good discussion on various possibilities and hybrid techs. If possibilities, even if naive or out of spectrum, are not raised then legit counter points will not have chance to show up.

    Btw, is there a way to track a plane by its 'unique turbulence' signature or on the easier mode just track a plane by the turbulence that it creates. I think both US and Russians used to track each others submarines by their unique sonar or something like that. I am sure turbulence of F22 should be different from that of F15.
    avatar
    gloriousfatherland

    Posts : 96
    Points : 119
    Join date : 2011-10-01
    Age : 27
    Location : Zapad and Boctok strong

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  gloriousfatherland on Sun Apr 08, 2012 4:04 am

    victor7 wrote:Agree or not does not matter, the point is to have a good discussion on various possibilities and hybrid techs. If possibilities, even if naive or out of spectrum, are not raised then legit counter points will not have chance to show up.
    Btw, is there a way to track a plane by its 'unique turbulence' signature or on the easier mode just track a plane by the turbulence that it creates. I think both US and Russians used to track each others submarines by their unique sonar or something like that. I am sure turbulence of F22 should be different from that of F15.
    respekt thumbsup
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21100
    Points : 21648
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 08, 2012 5:45 am

    I am sure turbulence of F22 should be different from that of F15.

    I would think that the fact that the F-15 turbulence path has an F-15 in front of it might be the give away... Surprised

    I have read of many different things the Russians have looked at and currently they deploy the widest range of seekers available... SARH, ARH, passive radar homing, and IR guided. They also have deployed these types on both long and short range missiles.

    I have read they were working on a homing system that detects burnt fuel from a jet engine... very much like sensors used during WWII to try to detect Submarines by sniffing for diesel fumes.
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3531
    Points : 3615
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  medo on Sun Apr 08, 2012 12:52 pm

    victor7 wrote:Agree or not does not matter, the point is to have a good discussion on various possibilities and hybrid techs. If possibilities, even if naive or out of spectrum, are not raised then legit counter points will not have chance to show up.

    Btw, is there a way to track a plane by its 'unique turbulence' signature or on the easier mode just track a plane by the turbulence that it creates. I think both US and Russians used to track each others submarines by their unique sonar or something like that. I am sure turbulence of F22 should be different from that of F15.

    They track submarines with MAD (magnetic anomaly detector) and this is decades old tech. Turbulence signature could be followed with weather radar and actually all radars could see weather picture, when they work with crude radar picture without filters.

    With visual invisibility like cameleon, it is difficult for plane, because background is not the same from different angles and is changing too quickly to follow. Also this kind of coat means additional weight for planes and adding additional power generator, computers and fuel for that and you will quickly see that this kind of technology is for ground equipment, where weight is not such problem and background is not changing that quickly. Also IR and EO sensors work in different specters, so placing RAM coat and invisible coats for different light specters and plane will be soon so heavy it will hardly take off to fly. And placing this coat over RAM mean plane is no more stealth for radar and placing RAM over this coat make this coat useless.
    avatar
    SACvet

    Posts : 3
    Points : 5
    Join date : 2012-04-07
    Location : United States

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  SACvet on Sun Apr 08, 2012 6:59 pm

    Gentlemen,

    This discussion is academic if not moot. Under the present political leadership (President Obama) there is no interest in further projection of power. After all the U.S. is planning a pull out from Afghanistan. The past incursion in Libya and the present incursion in Africa are political ploys to give Obama a place in the coming global government under the U.N. By the way Obama deployed these forces via Executive Order without notifying the Congress which is an impeachable offense (however not one representative has yet to start the impeachment process.) Obama is anti Israel so Iran and the middle east would have nothing to fear from the U.S. Obama is favoring the Russian leadership by "promising" non intervention with respect to Russian missile defense. At home the Democratic party has been wanting to ratify treaties with the U.N. which will basically eliminate U.S. sovereignty. The U.S. military 2013 budget is being cut to the point $0 will be spent on the KC-46 program (KC-10 airframe time to be extended), various weapon systems and defense R&D programs are being killed (i.e. C-130 laser program), training and pilot currency hours reduced, manpower reductions etc.
    Also, since Obama killed the F-22 program and DoD planners may see the end of the F-35 (lower funding increasing cost) USAF and USN will be forced to keep F-15s, FA-18s and F-16s longer. finally, the U.S. economy may end up defaulting if the Congress can't agree on how to manage the fiscal dilemma soon.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21100
    Points : 21648
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 08, 2012 11:40 pm

    They track submarines with MAD (magnetic anomaly detector) and this is decades old tech. Turbulence signature could be followed with weather radar and actually all radars could see weather picture, when they work with crude radar picture without filters.

    MAD only works at very short ranges... you basically need to know the area the enemy sub is in before MAD becomes useful.

    I think what he is talking about in regard to subs is the fact that a sub operating underwater churns up water as it passes so even if it is operating a few hundred metres below the surface with a thermal camera you can see the wake of mixed temperature water where a sub has passed for hours.

    Under the present political leadership (President Obama) there is no interest in further projection of power.

    Obama has pretty much continued the work of Bush of trying to get into bed with Georgia and the Ukraine, and wanting to build ABM systems that surround Russia that exclude Russia from the operation of said ABM systems.

    After all the U.S. is planning a pull out from Afghanistan.

    The planned pull out dates for Iraq and Afghanistan were not set by Obama... he is just enforcing them.

    Obama is anti Israel so Iran and the middle east would have nothing to fear from the U.S.

    Obama is not anti Israel. He is just not Blind Pro Israel no matter what.

    Obama is favoring the Russian leadership by "promising" non intervention with respect to Russian missile defense.

    Sorry... what does this mean? You make it sound like the ABM system in europe is being suggested by Russia and the only thing stopping it is US objections, when in reality it is a US system and to listen to the US government comments nothing will stop it.

    At home the Democratic party has been wanting to ratify treaties with the U.N. which will basically eliminate U.S. sovereignty.

    Perhaps if the US backed off from some of its activities regarding its sovereignty in other countries then it would get a lot more respect and a lot more support and cooperation. Right now the US's sovereign right to put ABM systems in Europe and to surround Russia and its sovereign rights to tell Iran it can't have a nuclear weapons program even though it claims not to have one and the US has no proof yet is still trying to cripple it with economic if applied to the US the US would call an act of war, makes the US look like a colonial bully, and a country that is difficult to deal with on any terms but theirs.

    the U.S. economy may end up defaulting if the Congress can't agree on how to manage the fiscal dilemma soon.

    Economics 101... live within your means... spend less than you earn... save for a rainy day etc... etc...
    avatar
    victor7

    Posts : 203
    Points : 214
    Join date : 2012-02-28

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  victor7 on Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:22 am

    Obama is favoring the Russian leadership by "promising" non intervention with respect to Russian missile defense.

    Russia has been played up by sweet talks and about-turn promises in the last 20 years. Enough is enough is the tone from Kremlin now. I would not be surprised if Russia backs out of the START and goes on to pile Topol-Ms type missiles in thousands.

    avatar
    gloriousfatherland

    Posts : 96
    Points : 119
    Join date : 2011-10-01
    Age : 27
    Location : Zapad and Boctok strong

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  gloriousfatherland on Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:23 am

    [quote="victor7"]

    Russia has been played up by sweet talks and about-turn promises in the last 20 years. Enough is enough is the tone from Kremlin now. I would not be surprised if Russia backs out of the START and goes on to pile Topol-Ms type missiles in thousands.


    When the West assisted in the dissolving of the USSR, they agreed to not expanding Nato further east. 20 years later, it seems it is only Russia left. The hipocracy is daming. The only agreement which the west upheld was the deal not to invade Cuba it seems. Yeltsin was probably drunk when he and the three others decided to go Independent in believing in the western fantacies fed to them in the non-expansionist nature of Nato. If there is to be a world government its not going to be under the UN its either NATO or US
    avatar
    victor7

    Posts : 203
    Points : 214
    Join date : 2012-02-28

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  victor7 on Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:25 pm

    The US seems to overlook two points while making its 'expensive' foreign policies vis-a-vis Russia.

    a) Russia is not going back to communism of any sort. Russia aims for social democracy on the lines of France or Scandinavian countries where there is free health care and some social support nest for really vulnerable sections of the society like handicapped or ill and out of job or temporarily out of work etc. US has the same types of programs in place now.

    b) Russia does not look to destroy or the destruction of the US in any shape.......unless ofcouse US attacks Russia and jumps into the suicidal campaign of stupidity. Russians have general appreciation and even admiration for the US and are basically friendly and warm hearted folks.

    US is wasting its resources for nothing and in turn hurting its own best interests i.e. its economy and hence the daily of lives of its people.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21100
    Points : 21648
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:05 am

    Very good post with very good points Victor... the Russians can be a friend or an enemy... and if the US keeps going down the path it is going it will become tired of putting up with American BS and will become an enemy.

    The US is blowing a real opportunity because as bad an enemy as they could be they could be a very powerful and useful ally following a different path and it is not like they have to sell their morals and deal with a communist country to do it either. In fact they already did that with the Chinese so they clearly have no problem.

    I guess it is like Sunni muslims and Shia muslims treating each other worse than they would treat a non believer.
    TheArmenian
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1812
    Points : 1963
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  TheArmenian on Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:16 am

    GarryB wrote:I guess it is like Sunni muslims and Shia muslims treating each other worse than they would treat a non believer.

    Garry, that is the truth.
    Foreign powers are currently maximizing their exploitation of that fact
    avatar
    gloriousfatherland

    Posts : 96
    Points : 119
    Join date : 2011-10-01
    Age : 27
    Location : Zapad and Boctok strong

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  gloriousfatherland on Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:27 am

    TheArmenian wrote:
    GarryB wrote:I guess it is like Sunni muslims and Shia muslims treating each other worse than they would treat a non believer.

    Garry, that is the truth.
    Foreign powers are currently maximizing their exploitation of that fact

    They call it managed chaos Smile....The US did the same to Iran and Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war....What a shame...Thats the reason why the middle east will be always "colonised" by foreigners thousands of miles away.The people like it that way...
    Sujoy
    Sujoy

    Posts : 886
    Points : 1044
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:16 pm

    The F22 was designed from the onset to defeat enemy fighters in a BVR contest . However, here is the thing .BVR and WVR combat are much alike, insofar as during the engagement endgame the fighter under attack is within tracking range of the weapon fire control system and where possible the weapon or fire control element should be defeated kinematically. This is exactly where the PAK FA has a huge advantage over the F22 .

    A number of countries that Do Not and Will Not have access to the PAK FA have begun to realize that they have no fighter aircrafts in their inventory that can match the PAK FA. At this point, the PAK FA outdoes its western counterpart/s in terms of speed, maneuverability, sight range, lifting capacity, and even radar evasion.

    The limited optical visibility, of the PAK FA is largely attributed to the use of metamaterials and so-called “e-camouflage” in the more recent versions of the PAK FA. The negative refraction index of metamaterials makes them an ideal means for camouflaging military targets, as they cannot be discovered by radio reconnaissance equipment within a certain range of frequencies. Using this technology, on-board cameras record everything surrounding the aircraft, in real time mode. Supercomputers and metamaterials allow the cameras to project the image on to the aircraft’s surface, making it invisible.

    Meanwhile the development of Kh-35UE (AS-20 Kayak), Kh-38ME, Kh-58UShKE (AS-11 Kilter), and RVV-MD (AA-11 Archer) class missiles for the PAK FA will be completed by the end of this year or early next year .

    Russia may therefore choose to equip a BVR missile with one of several different semi-active radar homing, active radar homing, infrared-homing or passive X-band anti-radiation homing seekers. The missile might be using one of several possible airframes or derivatives, with diverse kinematic performance
    avatar
    victor7

    Posts : 203
    Points : 214
    Join date : 2012-02-28

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  victor7 on Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:37 pm

    At this point, the PAK FA outdoes its western counterpart/s in terms of speed, maneuverability, sight range, lifting capacity, and even radar evasion.

    Yes on maneurverability, lifting capacity, better missiles, distance range
    No on radar evasion, radar sophistication, supercruise

    The invisibility logic that you mentioned is in progress but not heard of that on PakFa or even F22 yet.


    It seems with such techs around the corner, the jets will start employing missiles which are stealth, irst invisible, optical invisible. Making IRST and Optical invisible is already available for ground machines. Even if missiles turn out to be not round but square with flat panels that make it heavy and reduce the speed from Mach 4 and around to only Mach 2, if the opposing pilot does not see it coming on any of his onboard gadgets then this missile can only be defended by jammers or periodic or random bursts of direct energy and lasers.

    Russia and allies better bets are to be able to defeat stealth by radar or other sensors. Right now they are only able to play catch up of sorts.
    Sujoy
    Sujoy

    Posts : 886
    Points : 1044
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Apr 11, 2012 4:23 pm

    victor7 wrote:
    At this point, the PAK FA outdoes its western counterpart/s in terms of speed, maneuverability, sight range, lifting capacity, and even radar evasion.

    Yes on maneurverability, lifting capacity, better missiles, distance range
    No on radar evasion, radar sophistication, supercruise

    The invisibility logic that you mentioned is in progress but not heard of that on PakFa or even F22 yet.


    It seems with such techs around the corner, the jets will start employing missiles which are stealth, irst invisible, optical invisible. Making IRST and Optical invisible is already available for ground machines. Even if missiles turn out to be not round but square with flat panels that make it heavy and reduce the speed from Mach 4 and around to only Mach 2, if the opposing pilot does not see it coming on any of his onboard gadgets then this missile can only be defended by jammers or periodic or random bursts of direct energy and lasers.



    Russia and allies better bets are to be able to defeat stealth by radar or other sensors. Right now they are only able to play catch up of sorts.

    My friend , this logic has already been successfully implemented on India's Su 30 MKI , now re-christened as Super Sukhoi . Now bear in mind that unlike the PAK FA the SU 30 MKI was not conceived as a Stealth fighter . In spite of this the "invisibility logic" is working wonders .


    Sukhois carry between 10-12 Beyond Visual Range ( BVR) missiles so they can fire more than three or four round Beyond Visual Range missile salvo during the opening stages of an engagement. In this manner the aircraft being targeted will face a difficult problem as it must jam, decoy and/or outmanoeuvre three or four tightly spaced inbound missiles. The basic aerodynamic act of the SU 30 MKI and the PAK FA is without precedent. In military thrust setting the PAK FA could cover the whole afterburning performance envelope of the F-15 , Typhoon or Rafael .


    Ever heard of Pentagon's " Operation Chimichanga " . Long story short , the end result of this exercise was that F 22s were shot down over enemy territory every time they tried to carry out the dual role of emptying 250 lbs SDBs and thereafter trying to shoot enemy aircrafts with AMRAAM and Sidewinders . Therefore they had to call in F 16s to fire their own air to air missiles.
    avatar
    victor7

    Posts : 203
    Points : 214
    Join date : 2012-02-28

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  victor7 on Wed Apr 11, 2012 5:16 pm

    Here is an article on Op ChimiChanga

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/04/air-force-stealth-strike/

    Where does it say that F22s got shot down and F16s had to come to their rescue? Where?
    Bombing was mainly done by B1s. Why do you try to twist the facts? Just to deceive yourself and others and put lots of lives in danger.

    I do not really care about the aerodynamics of any plane as it will not be able to detect F22s unless very near. For now missiles do not tend to beat the IRST detection so that is some hope to kill off whatever is launched. Down the road be ready for stealth missiles which are invisible to both optics and infrared detection.

    Regarding 'invisible' Super Sukhoi, there is no such thing. All upgrades on Su-MKIs are regarding AESA radar and OLS system. Google mentions that Indians are working on 5th Generation stealth type plane in addition to Pakfa project with Russia.

    Why are you throwing lies and wrong facts? That does not help at all!!

    Sponsored content

    Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2? - Page 15 Empty Re: Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:20 pm