Jump to content

All Things Stealth


Mr King
 Share

Recommended Posts

The outer surface of the rudder looks quite bizarre, it looks like someone has slapped some flat panels onto what is supposed to be a curved surface. Very odd. 

I suppose one could speculate that it's either an improved absorptive coating, or one that offers better maintainability, or both. (or a "control" as suggested by sunday.) We know they've authorised dropping $lots on an upgrade, one would imagine that revisions to this aspect would be in order given that the world is 20 years newer than it was when it entered into service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The finish is nearly mirror quality in places; it seems to be some kind of optical test. Though as the article states, it doesn't make much sense to do that to a low RCS aircraft unless you absolutely needed some of its performance characteristics as part of the test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an interesting bit

Quote

There is a tremendous amount of testing currently ongoing on infrared search and track systems (IRSTs) that are in the early processes of being widely fielded by the Air Force and the Navy, as well as developmental work on emerging aerial laser systems. Of unique note is ongoing testing of multiple General Atomics Avenger unmanned combat air vehicles sporting Legion IRST pods that has been occurring over the Mojave Desert. These tests have been in conjunction with the Skyborg aerial artificial intelligence initiative and larger highly advanced testing scenarios. The testing of various laser systems is also becoming extremely aggressive, as well as part of a larger push to move directed-energy concepts into an operational state. This includes laser systems intended to be fielded aboard fighter aircraft.

Anti-laser protection?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems about as likely as not. I can't see what other goal they would have with a coating that is *more* reflective. Although why they felt the need to take an F-22 out of service to test it...the article theorizes that the testing might have involved high altitude or high cruise speed that couldn't be replicated on another surrogate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laser fuzes are common. I wouldn't use the word "guidance" when describing them, though.

As they work by receiving reflections from the target, you might think that a reflective target could ensure that a beam would be reflected away from directly returning, but that would not be correct - a laser fuze wouldn't be emitting a single narrow beam but a wide swath that would find a normal surface somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the article notes, The war zone reported Son of Ares wearing a similar scheme last year, with a possible explanation.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/34225/stealthy-son-of-ares-jet-seen-covered-in-mirrors-during-mysterious-flight-tests

The first would be to support laser testing. The Pentagon has a slew of directed energy efforts ongoing, including those in the air-to-air realm. Considering where the treatment is situated on the aircraft, the latter would seem like the most likely application. The pod hung under Proteus for the tests appears to have two large dark lenses and one smaller one that could be indicative of cameras needed to record a laser test. They are fixed and facing directly to the side of the aircraft, so recording another aircraft would make sense here especially considering that the Model 401 jets and Proteus have been flying at around the same altitude, but offset laterally to varying distances. 

Regardless of what aircraft could have been toting the laser, getting an idea of how much laser energy is reflected by different aircraft coatings under real-world conditions could be very beneficial. Said laser doesn't have to be some very high-power system capable of damaging the target it is being fired at, either, and that would be counterproductive, anyway.

 

My SWAG is they are working on a LIDAR system, perhaps in connection with the IRST technology they are talking about, and want to try it out on a stealth aircraft without causing it any damage.

 

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you too can now smell like a 5th generation fighter. Checkmate, pour Homme, pour Avion...

https://news.yahoo.com/russian-defence-firm-founded-putin-204703698.html

A Russian defence giant founded by President Vladimir Putin has launched a men’s aftershave that evokes the cockpit of a fighter jet.

The release of the ‘Checkmate’ scent - named after a stealth jet unveiled by the Russian leader earlier this year - comes ahead of Christmas and amid increasing military tensions between Moscow and the West.

"The notes of the fragrance combine the scents of glass, natural leather and metals used in the construction of the fuselage, engines and cockpit of the aircraft," a spokesman for the state-backed defence group Rostec said.

The aftershave, which comes in a bottle topped with a knight chess piece, was developed in partnership with the Perfumers' Guild of Russia.

The Checkmate plane is a Sukhoi jet that is able to reach twice the speed of sound and can be converted to an unpiloted version, according to its designers, who aim to see it take to the skies by 2023.

It is part of a growing arsenal that Mr Putin has described as “invincible”, and analysts say is fuelling a new arms race. The US and Kyiv have warned Moscow could be planning an imminent invasion of Ukraine as troops mass near the country’s border.

In a promotional video for the scent featuring the plane of the same name, a narrator intones: "While the majority are hesitating, there is a handful of those who change the world.

"While the majority are playing by the rules, a few rewrite the rules to suit themselves.”

Detractors were quick to point out online that glass has no discernable scent.

 

I hope it has more success than their poorly received Salisbury Scent.

 

 

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When asked in an interview the former F-14 pilot Keith Nance said that the cockpit of a fighter aircraft smells of 'balls and butt.' Different countries must find different smells agreeable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/12/2021 at 4:16 PM, bojan said:

Thats very interesting, but I believe they are reaching with this.

The destruction of a second F-117 fighter is one of several suspected Yugoslav hits against NATO aircraft using air defences from the 1960s or earlier with modernised electronic warfare systems, which when also considering the poor state of the country’s defences during a state of effective civil war reflects poorly on how NATO air units would have fared against a modern Soviet air defence force orders of magnitude larger and several decades ahead in terms of sophistication. With the F-117 being considered by far the most survivable Western fighter in the world, the implications of its loss to very meagre defences were serious.

 

It reminds me far more of what SAC were doing over Hanoi, using incredibly complacent flight paths. Its not disrespecting the Serbian Air Defence to suggest the USAF handed those F117's to them on a plate by using similar flight paths for days. There is no reason to believe they would have done that in any Third World War.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Thats very interesting, but I believe they are reaching with this.

They are also underestimating AD, but that is due the misunderstanding of the entire concept of the "integrated AD" that is incredibly common among western analysts.

Quote

It reminds me far more of what SAC were doing over Hanoi, using incredibly complacent flight paths.

They have used flight patches that they could, it was a real issue due the number of planes involved. Flight patch for F-117 was selected based on the known positions of AD in order to reduce chance of detection from "unfavorable angle" while turning. What they did not probably count on ability to set up quickly. From the Zelko interview, he initially did not believe that SA-3 battery can set up in 20-30 minutes - they were told that after leaving previous site and arriving on new one it takes at least 1.5 hours, or even more.

Ironically, this fits 1:1 with a unit diary "probable" hit. Now maybe in next 20 years we will know what was that "big radar target" they have also successfully engaged.

Edited by bojan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Thats very interesting, but I believe they are reaching with this.

The destruction of a second F-117 fighter is one of several suspected Yugoslav hits against NATO aircraft using air defences from the 1960s or earlier with modernised electronic warfare systems, which when also considering the poor state of the country’s defences during a state of effective civil war reflects poorly on how NATO air units would have fared against a modern Soviet air defence force orders of magnitude larger and several decades ahead in terms of sophistication. With the F-117 being considered by far the most survivable Western fighter in the world, the implications of its loss to very meagre defences were serious.

 

It reminds me far more of what SAC were doing over Hanoi, using incredibly complacent flight paths. Its not disrespecting the Serbian Air Defence to suggest the USAF handed those F117's to them on a plate by using similar flight paths for days. There is no reason to believe they would have done that in any Third World War.

I rather suspect they would be so complacent in a Third World War, at least in some way with some system.  I also think that like SAC over Hanoi, they'd adapt right quick once they realized what was happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, R011 said:

I rather suspect they would be so complacent in a Third World War...

I think that NATO really bought into whole "One week of bombing and Milosevic will fall" bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One might have thought Powell would have recalled the division in Korea, a place known for being somewhat hilly and not especially sandy.  Or the previous half century plus in the non-dunes of  Bavaria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2021 at 11:04 AM, bojan said:

They are also underestimating AD, but that is due the misunderstanding of the entire concept of the "integrated AD" that is incredibly common among western analysts.

They have used flight patches that they could, it was a real issue due the number of planes involved. Flight patch for F-117 was selected based on the known positions of AD in order to reduce chance of detection from "unfavorable angle" while turning. What they did not probably count on ability to set up quickly. From the Zelko interview, he initially did not believe that SA-3 battery can set up in 20-30 minutes - they were told that after leaving previous site and arriving on new one it takes at least 1.5 hours, or even more.

Ironically, this fits 1:1 with a unit diary "probable" hit. Now maybe in next 20 years we will know what was that "big radar target" they have also successfully engaged.

Would elaborate on the  "integrated AD" as is relates to the geographical area you are describing? My limited understanding on integrated AD is based on ships on the ocean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...