Valid Points on Stealth?

[marcos]

[Cali]

Muah :doh:

[Exorcet]

Rather poorly thought out. Those small, cheap, radarless (aka blind) fighters will just get picked off by TWS multi AMRAAM salvos unless the enemy can field AWACS everywhere.

 

They don't have a passive advantage vs LPI radar and datalinking, and the whole point of the article, that numbers are better technology (let's only build Predators) forgets that only the US has US like numbers of planes. So there are more stealth planes, and they are better than the other planes.

[marcos]

I thought there were some good points and some exaggerated points.

 

The missile kill probability is definitely relevant although the figure seems exaggerated.

[Boberro]

Piece of crap.

[Exorcet]

I thought there were some good points and some exaggerated points.

 

The missile kill probability is definitely relevant although the figure seems exaggerated.

Well I could see it as something suggest small, cheap fighters to back up stealth. The A-10 is the best plane for Afghanistan, nothing in the 5th gen yet will beat it in that role.

 

But turning the entire ground attack force into A-10's would be suicide vs a modern IADS.

[aaron886]

Not backed up by fact at any point. I particularly like the bit about the Typhoon's RWR-based superiority. Awesome.

[wilky510]

Not backed up by fact at any point. I particularly like the bit about the Typhoon's RWR-based superiority. Awesome.

Didn't you hear? The Typhoon is a 6th generation fighter. Why would the great European fighter waste time on stealth technologys? It's useless. The Americans, Chinese and Russians have it all wrong with their worthless, flashy stealth prototypes/aircraft.

[marcos]

The important question is how well a clipped-fin AMRAAM will do from long range when it's not used against a target drone.

 

But most of the figures in there are BS.

Edited February 5, 2013 by marcos

[Exorcet]

Well with stealth, missile lethality should go up. An unaware fighter that's been launched on probably won't act very different from a drone. Also in the F-22's case, the missile should have a great deal of energy from the launch platform.

[Majinbot]

A question, my apologies if is stupid, but If the F-22 is so superior why US didn't use it in the recent wars?

[EtherealN]

I didn't read the whole thing in detail (working atm), but did he at some point discuss the impact of datalinked launches? The whole IRST etcetera passive attack and detection capability is all well and good, but let's not forget that both F-22's and EF's are able to launch on targets without themselves activating their radars. They just need their datalinks... But the important question there becomes: what if the AWACS/IADS/etc that's backing up the EF's can't see the "silent" F-22's while the F-22's backup can detect and track the silent but non-stealth EF's...

[EtherealN]

A question, my apologies if is stupid, but If the F-22 is so superior why US didn't use it in the recent wars?

 

What use is an F-22A against Afghanistan? There's no air force to fight.

Was not in service in 2003 against Iraq.

The Libyan intervention did not require it against the obsolete Libyan air force, thus the risk of a plane crashing due to technical mishaps is too great - don't want people selling "secret sauce" parts to China, Russia etcetera. (Remember, the americans consider this plane so secret they won't even sell it to NATO countries, nor Japan, Australia etcetera. Not even a downgraded export version.)

[Majinbot]

..... Not even a downgraded export version.)

 

Like F-35 :D

[marcos]

Well with stealth, missile lethality should go up. An unaware fighter that's been launched on probably won't act very different from a drone. Also in the F-22's case, the missile should have a great deal of energy from the launch platform.

Utter rubbish..... again.

 

Does a drone have RWR/MWS/ECM/Jamming/TRD/9+g manoevrability at supersonic speeds? The stealthiness of the aircraft has no affect on the stealthiness or performance of the missile itself.

 

The missile's energy is one issue. Its ability to turn is another, even assuming it's not distracted/blinded and is still actually attempting to hit the right target.

 

I didn't read the whole thing in detail (working atm), but did he at some point discuss the impact of datalinked launches? The whole IRST etcetera passive attack and detection capability is all well and good, but let's not forget that both F-22's and EF's are able to launch on targets without themselves activating their radars. They just need their datalinks... But the important question there becomes: what if the AWACS/IADS/etc that's backing up the EF's can't see the "silent" F-22's while the F-22's backup can detect and track the silent but non-stealth EF's...

Interesting point but data acquired oddly enough from a heavy stealth protagonist suggests that the AWACS targeting a Rafale/Typhoon/PAK-FA etc. would be well within Meteor/R-33/R-37 kill range.

 

Detection range by a modern AWACS and RCS of some fighters:

 

* F-15C & Su-27 (RCS = 10~15m2): 450 ~ 600 km

* Tornado (RCS = 8 m2): 420 ~ 500 km

* MIG-29 (RCS = 5 m2): 370 ~ 450 km

* F/A-18C (RCS = 3 m2): 330 ~ 395 km

* F-16C (RCS = 1.2 m2): 260 ~ 310 km

* JAS39 (RCS = 0.5 m2): 210 ~ 250 km

* Su-47 (RCS = 0.3 m2): 185 ~ 220 km

* Rafale (RCS = 0.1~0.2 m2): 140 ~ 200 km

* F-18E (RCS = 0.1 m2): 140 ~ 200 km

* MIG-42 (RCS = 0.1 m2): 140 ~ 200 km

* EF2K (RCS = 0.05~0.1 m2): 120 ~ 170 km

* F-35A (RCS = 0.0015 m2): 50 ~ 60 km

* F/A-22 (RCS < or = 0.0002~0.0005 m2): < or = 30 ~ 45 km

 

If you take a typical RCS for a 4.5th gen fighter (0.05-0.1m^2), there's some very real problems actually getting the seeker head of a BVRAAM to lock onto that from outside the ranges at which IRST is probably useful in conjunction with something like a MICA IR.

 

Stealth is obviously an advantage but there are a lot of issues with the theory of the hypothetical 6-kill BVR Raptor/Lightning II.

Edited February 5, 2013 by marcos

[marcos]

Like F-35 :D

:megalol:

 

Fairplay. That was good.

[Exorcet]

Utter rubbish..... again.

 

Does a drone have RWR/MWS/ECM/Jamming/TRD/9+g manoevrability at supersonic speeds? The stealthiness of the aircraft has no affect on the stealthiness or performance of the missile itself.

What drone is prohibited from ECM and maneuvering? And what fighter on CAP is pulling 9 g for the duration of the flight?

 

If a fighter is able to launch undetected, you get a missile against a non maneuvering target. Jamming won't come into play until the missile goes active most likely.

 

The missile's energy is one issue. Its ability to turn is another, even assuming it's not distracted/blinded and is still actually attempting to hit the right target.

And energy is ability to turn, or part of it.

 

 

Interesting point but data acquired oddly enough from a heavy stealth protagonist suggests that the AWACS targeting a Rafale/Typhoon/PAK-FA etc. would be well within Meteor/R-33/R-37 kill range.

That's a good point.

 

 

If you take a typical RCS for a 4.5th gen fighter (0.05-0.1m^2), there's some very real problems actually getting the seeker head of a BVRAAM to lock onto that from outside the ranges at which IRST is probably useful in conjunction with something like a MICA IR.

 

The aircraft still has its own radar, and in the age of data linking, the radars of all its allies. Perhaps we'll see a return of SARH like tactics, except with handoffs from one fighter to another.

 

IRST is also going to be subject to weather, and first look is still probably going to be by radar which would allow the stealth fighter to take a course where the chance of detection is minimal (if possible).

[WildBillKelsoe]

Piece of crap.

 

I AGREE

[GGTharos]

Actually that aircraft is, in a number of ways, an upgrade over the F-22. Of course, they do two very different jobs, so apples and oranges.

 

Like F-35 :D

[GGTharos]

What's your problem exactly? The AIM-120 has intercept capability against a 9g target, just like most modern MRMs. Are you aware of any aircraft that can routinely exceed this? Not sure why missile maneuverability even comes into this. We're not talking 60's missiles.

 

Utter rubbish..... again.

 

Does a drone have RWR/MWS/ECM/Jamming/TRD/9+g manoevrability at supersonic speeds? The stealthiness of the aircraft has no affect on the stealthiness or performance of the missile itself.

 

The missile's energy is one issue. Its ability to turn is another, even assuming it's not distracted/blinded and is still actually attempting to hit the right target.

[GGTharos]

The article is dumb. I don't even see consideration being given to the air bases own defensive capabilities, or the potential fact that those 'small, cheap fighters' just might not have the range to get there.

It considers VHF, HF radar, IRST and RWR to be magical, stealth target-spotting hardware.

It makes a lot of assumptions that are invalid, like lack of data-link on the stealth aircraft's part.

WVR combat ignores the fact that some stealthed aircraft will get the shot first due to better initial position and possibly IR suppresstion.

It ignores the fact that the stealth fighters can much more easily set up drag-and-bags.

 

It also ignores the fact that the huge furball they're advocating is a complete crap-shoot and turn rates and other such fun things don't matter as much.

[Exorcet]

Also on the 4+ gen RCS figures, their all aspect stealth probably isn't as strong. This is maybe less of a problem for AWACS (but the AWAC's won't operate in a vacuum, escorts and ground radar) but for the missile, if the RCS jumps when you aren't looking very nearly at the front, that would be quite a big help.

[marcos]

What's your problem exactly? The AIM-120 has intercept capability against a 9g target, just like most modern MRMs. Are you aware of any aircraft that can routinely exceed this? Not sure why missile maneuverability even comes into this. We're not talking 60's missiles.

Sure it does theoretically but put it in a live operational environment against EW, ECM and TRDs and it may fail even at that but its success rate against a target manoeuvring at 9g even without that would be a lot less than 100%.

[GGTharos]

Okay, I still don't see your point. It's successs rate against such a target depends on the range at which the missile is launched, and the specific maneuver that the target is executing.

 

None of this really matters, because I doubt that's what you're really thinking about.

 

Sure it does theoretically but put it in a live operational environment against EW, ECM and TRDs and it may fail even at that but its success rate against a target manoeuvring at 9g even without that would be a lot less than 100%.

[Exorcet]

Sure it does theoretically but put it in a live operational environment against EW, ECM and TRDs and it may fail even at that but its success rate against a target manoeuvring at 9g even without that would be a lot less than 100%.

 

On a good day (for the attacker) the target has 10-15 seconds to pull 9 g maneuvers. Depending on fuel load, weapons load, and cruise speed (because you cruise at cruise speed, you don't cruise to avoid missiles*) 9g may not even be possible initially. The odds favor the missile.

 

*Some of the 4+ gens can supercruise, and any newer ones produced may as well, so like the F-22 it's possible that they may perform supersonic CAP or intercepts. I do wonder about their endurance though.