What is "stealth"?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
Can someone explain to me exactly what a "stealth" aircraft can/cannot do?
I vaguely assumed it meant that it could not be detected by radar. However I now understand that ot just means it has a reduced radar return and IS visible to radar. In fact it is only a reduced signature against certain radars and from certain angles (ie head-on). Also even that advantage is lost if external weapons or fuel tanks are carried. Is this true?
Also, if stealth reduces a plane's radar return to that of a flock of birds, wouldn't enemy radar operators get suspicious about a flock of birds travelling at like 1000 mph? Could radars just be set to show everything travelling above a certain speed - say 100mph and detect aircraft that way?
>>28345460
They reduce the range at which radars can track them and reduce the rcs a radar system may detect. It's that simple.
>>28345460
I don't know that much about it, but here's my general understanding of it:
Radar sends out a signal which bounces off a surface and returns back to the origin. This works really well when planes have round, cylindrical bodies, because there's always at least a small portion where the aircraft body is exactly perpendicular to the origin of the signal.
When you make a super angular, blocky "stealth" plane, you're basically making a bunch of flat walls. It's like shooting your signal at the bumper on a pool table-- it's going to reflect your signal at an angle off into nothingness, rather than return it back to the radar operator.
And that's saying nothing about special paint or material schemes.
>>28345487
Is it the same RCS from the side as from the front? It doesn't answer my question - even if the RCS is small it's still travelling too fast to be anything but a plane.
>>28345460
shitposting slav detected
>>28345567
The problem is that radar generally doesn't see a continuous image, it's a series of scans. If an aircraft is sufficiently stealthy enough, it will look almost exactly the same as birds, bugs, or paint chips on the radar. It doesn't matter how fast it's moving if there are a million other dots of random noise out there to make it impossible to discern.
>>28345460
>Also, if stealth reduces a plane's radar return to that of a flock of birds, wouldn't enemy radar operators get suspicious about a flock of birds travelling at like 1000 mph?
No, because electromagnetic waves with frequencies different from light don't work like light.
It's a really silly mistake to make, please read a wikipedia article on how radios do and stay go.
>>28345460
It's actually remarkably simple.
Stealth means that the RCS is reduced. The smaller the RCS, the harder it is for a radar to get a solid return back. Think of it less as 'invisible' and more 'harder to detect'. Essentially a LO airframe reduces the effective range at which a radar can get a solid return at all.
> In fact it is only a reduced signature against certain radars and from certain angles (ie head-on).
Depends entirely upon the airframe. Most are LO all around but have the lowest RCS along the frontal arc where they're most likely to be detected.
>Also even that advantage is lost if external weapons or fuel tanks are carried. Is this true?
No. 'Stealth' is not an on/off variable. External stores increase overall RCS, they don't nullify it. Even on 4th gen airframes with no LO characteristics, the major radar reflector is not anything attached to the plane but the plane itself, most notably the intake, fan blades and body.
>>28345885
>em waves with frequencies different from light don't work like light
all electromagnetic waves are light
>>28346171
I haven't laughed this hard in a long time
Low af RCS.literally this.
>>28346206
>>28346206
quick guide
Radio waves - light
microwaves - light
infrared rays - light
visible light - light
ultraviolet light - light
x-rays - light
gamma rays - light
>>28346248
Must be why I can't close my curtains if I want the radio on :^)
>>28346265
It's light, it just isn't visible light.
>>28346307
He just keeps going
>>28346315
He is right though. It's all light, but the different frequencies and wavelengths mean they interact differently.
>>28346206
Do you... Do you actually think that light only refers to the visible spectrum? I can't tell if Poe's Law is in effect here.
>>28346265
The lower frequency means that there's less interference through walls and such, so there's little to no effect of shutting doors. If you look to higher frequencies like the ones used by your WIFI router, walls and doors block the signal.
U r dum
>>28346463
if you can't tell if Poe's Law is in effect, then it's in effect
>>28346365
No man. Light=radiation we see.
Radio waves are also electromagnetic waves, but not light.
>>28345460
>get suspicious about a flock of birds travelling at like 1000 mph?
No plane is undetectable to radar precisely because of that.
But with low enough RCS, you reduce the range of detection.
For example, S-400 radar might be able to detect F-35 at height at around 30-40km.
When you consider that the range of S-400 missiles is 400km max, you see how low RCS, or stealth, reduces the effectiveness of anti-air defenses.
>>28346561
Actually light=photons. Photons= electromagnetic radiation
>>28346549
Rused :^)
>>28346625
So, by modus poens, light=electromagnetic radiation, QED
Light is electromagnetic radiation. It has certain value from the range of the electromagnetic spectrum. Why is /k/ so shitty these days. I miss when shit posting was concentrated on lynching and racism threads.
>>28345567
Well, the thing is that even if there's nothing in the sky, you will still get some returns. That's just how it works. The stealth's goal is to hide in that ambient noise for as long as possible.
>>28346561
>When you consider that the range of S-400 missiles is 400km max,
against objects like airliners maybe
i doubt that S-400 is efficient against aircraft like F-15 beyond 80km
I love how not a single anon in this thread has pointed out the other aspects that make up a stealth/VLO aircraft, like IR signature reduction, LPI sensors and comms, etc.
>>28348413
The IR reduction is not necessarily a feature of radar stealth, and the others are not necessarily characteristics of stealth aircraft.
>>28348433
It's all literally integral to the concept of VLO aircraft, anon.
Jesus. This is stealth 101, and you idiots are holding forth as if you're experts? Just sad.
>>28348542
Quite simply, it isn't. Modern stealth aircraft use them because they assist the stealth, but they are not integral to the idea of radar stealth.
Look at the F-117, like what's in the OP. We're doing base level only. I'm sorry you're too autistic to realize.
>>28348787
>Look at the F-117
You mean the aircraft which had IR signature reduction and LPI comms? That F-117?
Scale of 1-10, just how ignorant are you?
ultimately, stealth's goal will be to reduce the range at which an enemy can engage you. there are interviews with pilots who went up against Raptors WVR, and they said that it was extremely frustrating to get a solid targeting solution because of the stealthy features.
People shouldn't think along the lines of invisibility, because that isn't possible at all. It's about taking the longest possible engagement range from 180 nmi down to say 40 nmi. That's huge.
>>28348814
I'll need a source on the LPI comms. But yeah, the IR reduction on the F-117 is hardly significant. There's a tiny exhaust plume. The only other IR reducing measure was the lack of an afterburner.
