Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Stealth Technology

    Share

    ricky123
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 223
    Points : 327
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    Re: Russian Stealth Technology

    Post  ricky123 on Thu Oct 25, 2012 1:04 am

    SOC wrote:
    ricky123 wrote:what i really meant was if usa dint get that tech .most prob usa wouldnt have been the only super power it wouldnt have the kind of influence it has now ....

    And my point is that yes, it would still have turned out this way. Stealth is a fun toy to play with and very useful in the right environment, but I've never heard of a military operation being cancelled because they couldn't use stealth, or more to the point we haven't done anything that has been so reliant on stealth that its absence would equate to failure. In fact, the 1986 Libya bombing originally considered the F-117, but they decided to use the F-111Fs and carrier-based jets for security. Take stealth out of the 1991 Iraq war, and you'd have seen more TLAM firings the first night. Take it out of Yugoslavia, and all that you have is one less shootdown. Take it out of Afghanistan or Iraq II, and all you end up with is greater reliance on B-52s and B-1Bs initially as long-range bomb trucks.
    but it gives them propoganda .they live on that kind of stuff

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Stealth Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:33 am

    They love the idea of a super high tech weapon...

    Of course ask Nazi Germany how uber weapons won WWII for them.

    In many ways their uber weapons were their downfall, at the start of the war they were far more successful but ended up relying on smaller numbers of uber weapons when the tide was against them and they failed completely.

    It is not like Hollywood hasn't shown them their weaknesses...Super high tech aliens killed by country song in Mars Attacks!, bacteria kills super high tech alien invaders also from Mars... in fact many of Hollywoods best movies eliminate technology and firearms and pit the hero against the enemy like in Alien (the first movie) or Predator.

    At the end of the day the US Strong! team will talk about mach 6 secret spy planes called Auroura and secret based on the moon and all sorts of rubbish because they read it on the internet or some guy from school told them.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian Stealth Technology

    Post  medo on Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:25 pm

    On the other hand stealth planes could become quite a big problem for USAF. F-22, F-35 and other older stealth planes were build in different times than they are today and will be in future. A decade or two ago US was full of money and could buy large numbers of expensive toys, but stealth planes are even more expensive than other planes like 1 billion $ for 1 B-2A and also expensive are spare parts and maintenance of them.

    After a decade and more of constant wars, majority of classical planes are worn out and will soon have to be retired. Because of financial and debt crisis, US and European militaries will face huge cuts if states will want to survive. With retire of cheaper classical planes only smaller number of expensive stealth planes will remain and with additional financial cuts their number will be also reduced and less capable to fly because of high maintenance costs.

    US will be still capable to defend itself, because they have two big oceans in defending lines, but Europe in few years will not be able to defend itself. Majority of European militaries are professional and with budget cuts those militaries will be significantly reduced without reserves and surplus equipment sold.

    Pugnax
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 110
    Points : 105
    Join date : 2011-03-15
    Age : 52
    Location : Canada

    Russian stealth

    Post  Pugnax on Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:01 am

    Excellent point Medo!,Thee classic model of ever diminishing returns of a collapsing empire.The Roman legion soldier analogy- he was never out fought as much as overwhelmed,expensive to maintain,never maintained in the numbers required to hold,a slippery slope indeed.

    SOC
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 595
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 38
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: Russian Stealth Technology

    Post  SOC on Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:32 pm

    medo wrote:stealth planes are even more expensive than other planes like 1 billion $ for 1 B-2A

    In fairness to the B-2, the only reason it's a billion dollar aircraft is because we only ended up buying 21 airframes. The entire development and testing cost was therefore spread over a very small number of airframes, ridiculously inflating the per-unit cost. It's like the F-22. Lockheed was building airframes at a cost of about $95 million at the end of production due to a host of gradual production process improvements, but as everything else was factored in you ended up with a much bigger sticker price.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Stealth Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:49 am

    Try to argue on the absolutely central role played by the first four “open scientific literature” publications of Professor P.Y. Ufimtsev PTD on the main course and general development of American modern stealth sector is totally pointless; from a strict scientific point of view it represented a real game-changing, revolutionary element for the US field.


    I think that the words ,on the subject, of the same Dr. Kenneth Mitzner of Northrop (the theoretical architect behind B-2 Spirit's design) on this subject will be more clear than other 10000 by anyone else :


    "We began to refer to Ufimtsev's theory as the 'industrial strength' theory, the one that could be applied to a broad range of problems and give us real numbers to put into our calculations."

    "I cannot imagine the B-2 having been designed without the influence of his work," Dr. Mitzner added. "Let me put it this way: Without Ufimtsev, today's stealth aircraft would probably have looked the way the speculative artists portrayed them, before their real shapes were publicly disclosed."



    This, instead is from the foreword wrote by Dr . K. Mitzner to the publication of "Fundamentals of Theory of Diffraction" :



    The first form of PTD developed by Professor Ufimtsev, the vector form applicable to electromagnetic scattering from three-dimensional bodies , has played a key role in development of modern low-radar-reflectivity weapons systems such as the Lockheed F-117 Stealth Fighter and the Northrop B2 Stealth Bomber, functioning both as a design tool and as a conceptual framework.
    These systems in turn have revolutionized the conduct of large-scale government-versus-government warfare and thus have helped to shape history.
    Ben Rich, who oversaw the F-117 project as head of Lockheed's fabled Skunk Works, refers to Professor Ufimtsev's work as "the Rosetta Stone breakthrough for stealth technology."

    At Northrop, where i worked on the B-2 project, we were so enthusiastic about PTD that a co-worker and I sometimes broke into choruses of " Go, Ufimtsev" on the tune of "On, Wisconsin". At both Lockheed and Northrop we referred to PTD as "industrial-strength" diffraction theory to distinguish it from the approach to diffraction then being favored in the universities, which was not well enough developed to handle stealth design"



    What would represent an infinitely much interesting question is why in plain Cold War ,with the very powerful Soviet intelligence security services rendering totally unavailable (cancelling often even the trace of theirs same existence ,up to ours days !) mountains of less important and critical scientific works ,seen as without any potential for an applicative derivations for URSS , for the mere risk that the Great Enemy could find a way capitalize theirs achievements, allowed quietly and just to the Ufimtsev’s works, to be publicized in open scientific journals ,while covering with the higher degree of secrecy the achievements and solutions to the same problem produced by others big names of the field working at the same Lab.... Wink



    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Stealth Technology

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:02 pm


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 5:02 pm