Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

F22 Analysis, News and Updates

Discussion in 'The Americas' started by Picard, Feb 25, 2012.

  1. DrSomnath999

    DrSomnath999 Major RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,664
    Likes Received:
    1,514
    Country Flag:
    France
  2. Star Wars

    Star Wars Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,027
    Likes Received:
    304
    and here enters gambit and ends the f-22 debate :bunny:
     
  3. gambit

    gambit FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    96
    This tells me you do not know why the 'bomber' class was developed in the first place. Further, the design of the aircraft call the 'bomber' is no longer limited to dropping bombs. The venerable B-52 is being explored as a stand-off ECM platform. In the opening stages of a war, this will enable US to confuse opposition air to deliver those critical first disabling strikes against ground targets to reduce the availability of opposition air, if not rid the sky of it altogether. And when you mix in high value targets that are deep inside enemy territory, the Bone and the B-2 can serve to both distract and destroy both air defenses and said targets.
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. gambit

    gambit FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    96
    Thanks for the invite/welcome but 'wisdom' is stretching it. :lol:
     
    2 people like this.
  5. DrSomnath999

    DrSomnath999 Major RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,664
    Likes Received:
    1,514
    Country Flag:
    France
  6. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Most of that spending goes to bureocracy and feeding pigs at military-industrial complex, only portion is actually spent on something useful.

    It is also true at subsonic speeds, although detection range will be smaller than with supersonic target.

    F16 was not designed as such, and is far less of a "jack-of-all-trades" than F35. Even then, its AtA performance suffered by its conversion to fighter-bomber

    F16 is: dogfighter, tactical bomber; ground-based only
    F15E: dogfighter (but worse than F16 and F15C), interceptor, tactical bomber; ground-based only
    F35: interceptor, tactical bomber, wannabe-CAS plane, reconaissance; ground- and carrier- -based, with STOVL, CTOL and CATOBAR versions, and all in VLO airframe - which, as it turned out, isn't VLO but LO. It is planned to replace F16, F18, A10, and AV-8.

    Wrong, as I have shown above. And F35 does so many things it can't even be 'good enough'.

    ...such as? Until you show me where, and how, your comment is, to put it lightly - irrelevant.

    They process sources of heat:
    - exhaust stream
    - exhaust
    - airframe

    Unfortunately, there are rules that cannot by changed or controlled by parties involved. Rules, which F22 and F35 ignore.

    Not really. Better sensors is all it takes.

    Making radar stealth, and extra cost paid for it, pointless.

    In one out of thirteen cases, yes.

    Except I have already adressed that several times, including essay - noone will use aircraft's active sensors or IFF, for precisely that reason.

    Wrong comparision. First, rules of air combat are different than those of ground combat. Second, I never said that F22 will be useless, but that it will be useless as air superiority fighter. AWACS hunting, scouting (if equipped with IRST), its fine. But securing air superiority? Forget it.

    Third, try to equip your infantry only with snipers and see what will happen - they'll get slaughtered by first tank or IFV they run into, not to mention what will happen if they are forced into close quarters.

    Wrong. Even modern BVR missiles usually miss, for reasons that have little to do with guidance systems. Pk of 7.7 % is "reliable" to you?

    (Naturally, that Pk is what would be achieved against comparable opponent, not against opponent that is completely oblivious to the fact it is being fired at).

    Wrong, I have explained why.

    Or orbital IRST. But AWACS is good when it can stay out of enemy's missile range. If it can't do it, it's dead.

    In short: it's good for fighting technologcally AND numerically inferior force. F22 and F35 will only make USAF numerically inferior in any conflict with China (over Taiwan, probably), even thought China spends dozen times less on its military than US.

    With or without it, irrelevant.

    My arguments about BVR missiles are based on their historical use, and 30-to-1 comment was in reference to Averageamerican claiming that F22 can win against force that outnumbers it 30 times.

    Even in LPI mode. Heard about spread-spectrum technology?

    It takes one second at least, and I was talking in reference to IRST, not radar.

    Direction is enough to facilitate a merge.

    How? Bombers destroy ground targets, usually fixed (vehicles are left to CAS planes, like A10).

    Which is irrelevant considering that we are discussing stealth FIGHTERS. Stealth bombers are useful for destroying high-risk targets. Stealth fighters, only as escort for stealth bombers.

    Which means that trying to replace F15, F16 and F18 with F22 and F35 is idiotic at best.
     
    Last edited: Feb 29, 2012
    1 person likes this.
  7. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Not likely, considering his points so far are all wrong.
     
  8. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,379
    Country Flag:
    United States
    I think your beating a dead horse, B1 and F35 are stealth planes, they dont need escorts. Thats why they call them stealth. When you add stealth into the combat mix, any one comming against the USA is just committing suicide. Its going to be a Iraq all over agains as soon as an enemy pliot hears beep beep beep, they are going to bail out, if they dont after the 4th beep they are dead.
     
  9. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Wrong. YOU are beating a dead horse.

    First, B1 is not a stealth plane, B2 is. And yes, B2 does not need escort... for now... but if it is caught by fighters, it's dead. And F22&F35 are simply too costly to be produced in numbers large enough to fight a conventional war - what I wrote was only way for F22 to achieve its full potential.

    Second, your other points are all wrong. When pilot hears beep beep, he starts throwing decoys, flares, chaff (depending on nature of threat) and engages in evasive manouvers, and then goes to kill threat.

    Third, I explained why Iraq happened way it did.
     
  10. Star Wars

    Star Wars Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,027
    Likes Received:
    304
    Are you an Aerospace Engineer by any chance ?
     
  11. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Even if I were inclined to tell anyone anything more about myself than I already did, it is irrelevant. Argument must stand or fall on its own.

    Besides, on Internet, nicknames are used, so people can easily lie about themselves; and even photos of some documents can be falsified if someone is skillfull enough.
     
    Last edited: Feb 29, 2012
  12. gambit

    gambit FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    96
    Wrong only based upon your erroneous assumptions. So yes, according to you, I would be wrong. But changing your mind is not my intent. For every participant in any discussion, there are 100 silent observers whose minds are at different degrees of settling. By the time am done explaining to the interested lay readers on the foundation of radar detection and how 'stealth' come to be, it will be in their minds that your arguments will be shredded.
     
    Qwertyness and Firemaster like this.
  13. gambit

    gambit FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    96
    You mean like this...???

    [​IMG]

    Nope. Not very accurate and precise at all...:lol:
     
    Qwertyness and Skull and Bones like this.
  14. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    At which speed and altitude?

    Only if they don't know anything at all about kinematics, guided missiles, passive sensors, anti-stealth technology, stealth itself and IFF.
     
  15. gambit

    gambit FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    96
    The question is why is the X-band so popular in the first place. The first air defense radar system was WW II Britain's Chain Home system...

    Chain Home - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    So the idea of using meters length wavelength in radar detection is not new. As radar technology progresses, other wavelengths were explored and eventually the X-band proved itself to be the most versatile and reliable -- as in producing target resolutions, especially with dynamic targets, or moving and maneuvering targets.

    So why did the X-band became so popular over the years?

    First...A visual representation of 'wavelength'...

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The X-band belongs in what is called the 'centimetric' bands, meaning the physical measurements of a complete cycle equals to that of the 'centimeter' or 'millimeter' or 'meter' -- centimetric, millimetric, and metric -- the Chain Home system operated in the metric bands.

    Second...How do we keep track of a dynamic target?

    [​IMG]

    The above illustration contains the foundation of a pulsed radar transmission.

    In order to keep track of any moving body, we need to keep a continuous records of 'time slices' of the moving body, very much like a high speed camera that give us 'slo-mo' actions in sports.

    The medium of detection is electromagnetic (EM) radiation. The method of detection literally physically touches -- impinge -- upon the body, bounced off the body, and hopefully whatever that bounced off the body would return to the seeker.

    As illustrated, each pulse of detection medium (EM radiation) contains many cycles of said medium. The reason is because we want to ensure signal integrity throughout the process. The shortest pulse possible for any wavelength would contain just one cycle of said wavelength. That is not enough to maintain signal integrity considering the atmosphere will attenuate -- or absorb -- some of the signal's power. So the solution is to create pulses where each pulse contains many cycles.

    We can see that each pulse have 'timestamps' of an event, as in the pulse have a time index of when it was created and a time index of when its creation end. Or as we call it -- leading and trailing edges. When a pulse impact the body and bounces -- reflects -- off the body, we also have a record of an event -- leading and trailing edges of that reflected pulse.

    The longer the pulse, the more processing time it will require of those 'time slices' of an event. When we are dealing with a moving body that can reach speeds of four digits km/h or even higher, long wavelengths are not as 'fine grain' as shorter wavelengths in giving us those 'time slices' of an event. So to go back to that sports 'slo-mo' analogy, the replay would be 'jerky' and abrupt, but with a higher shutter speed camera, which captured 'time slices' of an event in the visual spectrum, the higher the shutter speed, the greater the amount of 'time slices' it can capture, the smoother the 'slo-mo' action.

    This is why the centimetric bands proved to be useful in providing us with these valuable target 'resolutions'...

    - Altitude
    - Speed
    - Heading
    - Aspect angle (to the seeker)
    - Location (spatial)

    The inevitable question would be: Why not use shorter wavelength (higher freq) as in millimetric?

    The answer is the problem of what happens when a millimetric pulse impinge upon a curvature -- or the '10-lambda' (10-λ) rule.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda
    Lambda is the symbol for wavelength.

    [​IMG]

    What happens in the '10-λ' rule is that when a signal meet a curvature, as in a sphere or cylinder, the curvature induces what is called the 'surface wave' behavior. The physical surface is called the 'electrical path' for this behavior. As the surface wave travels on this path, other wave behaviors occurs and that is called 'leaky waves' and 'creeping waves'.

    http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1406218
    So upon a curvature, sphere or cylinder, we have three types of signals:

    - Specular
    - Surface wave
    - Leaky wave

    - Creeping wave

    The reason why I post the creeping wave apart from the others is because this wave behaviors depends on the diameter of the sphere or cylinder. The specular reflection will occur no matter what because even though this is a curvature, there is always a tiny amount of surface area that is flat and perpendicular to the seeking radar, so specular reflection will always be there.

    So for the 10-λ rule:

    - If the diameter is less than 10-λ the creeping wave will occur.

    - If the diameter is greater than 10-λ the creeping wave will not occur.

    Using the millimetric wavelength will give us all sorts of 'hydrometeors' phenomena, fancy word for water related 'stuff' like rain or snow. It would clutter up our radar view, obscuring the intended target. This is why the millimetric wavelength is used mainly in research, specifically meteorology, or when the target is close enough that we do not care about atmospheric interference and want as high as target updates -- 'time slices' -- as possible.

    Just in case anyone thinks I made up this '10-λ' rule...

    [​IMG]

    Look at the 'Introduction' paragraph. Look at the authors' names.

    The '10-λ' rule is well known for decades in the radar community. It does not matter what wavelength employed, as long as there is that diameter and wavelength relationship, the '10-λ' comes into play.

    Now the interested readers know why the centimetric band is more popular for radar detection than the metric and millimetric bands.

    The argument that 'long wavelengths' are somehow 'stealth' defeating is plausible in theory but difficult in application. These radar systems are large and cumbersome. Since each pulse is essentially a packet of energy it mean to propagate a 'long wavelength' radar transmission, each pulse of this 'long wavelength' transmission will contain more energy than the shorter centimetric and millimetric pulses, thereby giving the transmitter location away to beamrider missiles.

    <Poof> goes the long wavelength ground radar station.

    Next post will contain how 'stealth' is achieved.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2012
    Qwertyness, MiG-23MLD, Vritra and 4 others like this.

Share This Page