New russian stealth fighter

[Falcon161 3]

As I was doing some passtime research on on the S-47 on wikipedia I found this Wikipedia article(<- click). Its quite interesting because it looks like a certain US fighter!

Edited May 26, 2007 by Falcon161

[eraser_tr 29]

What happened to China? Back in the day they were well ahead of western civilization in technology and originally invented things like gunpowder and rockets long before the west. Now it seems all they can do is rip-off others work. All of those chinese stealth fighter designs look like they were cobbled together from existing planes.

[Falcon161 3]

Yeah I've noticed that. But what really strikes me about the wikipedia article is that it is supposed to counter the F-22 and that it looks like an F-22 with bigger wings!

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Yeah I've noticed that. But what really strikes me about the wikipedia article is that it is supposed to counter the F-22 and that it looks like an F-22 with bigger wings!

 

You think that looks like the F-22, this was a proposal for the PAK-FA from a few years ago...

 

Also you'll notice, it's got external stores and wingtip rails, prolly one of the reasons it may not have been chosen...

[MigBuster 2,875]

You think that looks like the F-22, this was a proposal for the PAK-FA from a few years ago...

 

Also you'll notice, it's got external stores and wingtip rails, prolly one of the reasons it may not have been chosen...

 

 

 

Well im still waiting for tangible evidence of their finished stealth projects tbh.

 

The first Wikipedia article also mentions the use of plasma stealth which seems to be just a unworkable theory still from what ive read.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Well, in theory... it works. Only problem is that if it does, the fighter's radar won't as the ionised plasma that prevents incoming radar pulses from bouncing back also prevents any radar pulses from being emitted, or screws them up heavily. No one's sure on how this relates to AESA. Given the ammounts of money being thrown into the project, I'd want it working like the Romulan cloaking device...

[eraser_tr 29]

What's AESA? I haven't heard that acronym before.

 

The russians claim the plasma stealth is real and they have a working version.

 

If that really was the case, and it became widespread, we'd be going back to the days of old. The MK1 eyeball being the only manner of detection, and good old dogfights with guns and maybe shortrange IR missiles.

[+saint aj 0]

Active Electronically Scanned Array, it means Phased Array Radar.

 

Anyway I have a feeling the Russians are probably not fully developing stealth because they're concentrating on methods of defeating stealth technology---a lot more cost effective in the long run than developing multi-billion dollar stealth fighters. Also, with regard to the wide variety of F-22 clones, it may not have much to do with a lack of originality on the designers' parts. If you think about it, stealth aircraft require a LOT of effort to find the ideal configuration to make aerodynamics meet radar avoidance. Why waste your effort on researching a new platform when your enemies have already done the work for you? Chances are if the Pak-FA or J-XX programs go anywhere, the airplanes will be completely different on the inside than the F-22.

[+saint aj 0]

no idea about it being done with a Fencer, but there was a report from just last year about some Tu-160 Blackjacks entering Canadian airspace completely undetected during a Russian exercise...

[Gr.Viper 131]

It's not difficult to "defeat stealth technology" AFAIK, old Soviet radars that use larger wavelength than modern systems are able to spot stealth planes easily. To make something invisible for them you'll have to put about a meter-thick coat of absorbing material on the plane - and try to fly it.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Not to mention, nothing beats stealth like flying a dark coloured fighter during the daytime...

[ironroad 218]

Not to mention, nothing beats stealth like flying a dark coloured fighter during the daytime...

 

Or IR

[+saint aj 0]

a friend of mine and I had an idea for busting stealth a while back. the idea was to set up a linked array of radars connected by powerful computers, with some radars being set to extremely high return sensitivity (high enough that background noise would be a problem) and others being set to a much lower level of sensitivity. The radars would also be set to different frequencies and pulse rates. The computer cluster would then examine the data from the various radars as they swept a given area, and attempt to distinguish through comparitive analysis those radar returns which didn't behave like background noise--by moving at 500 knots, for example. The idea being that a stealth aircraft might have a very small radar signature, it can't actually be invisible, and it is still going to behave the way an aircraft behaves in terms of speed, altitude and direction. Such a radar configuration should be able to pick out even extremely small radar signatures and display them to the operator if they match the operating characteristics of an aircraft. Not to mention the multiple perspectives would allow for a form of Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar (ISAR), which can generate 3-dimensional images of the contact.

[Gr.Viper 131]

So, it's basically like microphone arrays used to track subs?

 

The best stealth system is a slow, prop-driven, wood-fabric plane.. No good IR signature, no radar blip, not even a sound unless you are really close. Make it unmanned, arm it with a nuke, blast everything

http://www.hans-egebo.dk/Polikarpof.htm

[i90807065 0]

I wonder if someone is making a SF,WoV, or WoE version....

[MigBuster 2,875]

i Read somethink about Straig flush radar detect the Stealth Aircrafts,and one French radar ,this french radar find the rcs on atmosphere,and calculate the dexactly point whre is the Stealth Aircraft(it maybe work with F-117,i dont kwon if it work with new Stealth fighters like raptor and Lightning II)

 

 

Apparently any radar can detect a Stealth plane - its the range that the plane is actually detected - thats the issue.

[JediMaster 451]

Well, there's 2 kinds of stealth...there's "strategic" stealth (for lack of a better term) where the plane isn't detected, and the only indication it's there is the destruction of the target. Then there's "tactical" stealth (again, I'm just coining these on the fly) where the target can be detected on EWRs or other "detection only" radars, but is unable to be tracked by tracking radars and therefore no RH missiles, AAMs or SAMs, can hit it.

 

Unless you're on a mission with deniability, generally speaking it doesn't matter if they can see you if they can't hit you. Of course, the old adage is if you can see it, you can hit it, but that was in the days before guided weapons.

[Gr.Viper 131]

What about laser guidance?

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Well, there's 2 kinds of stealth...there's "strategic" stealth (for lack of a better term) where the plane isn't detected, and the only indication it's there is the destruction of the target. Then there's "tactical" stealth (again, I'm just coining these on the fly) where the target can be detected on EWRs or other "detection only" radars, but is unable to be tracked by tracking radars and therefore no RH missiles, AAMs or SAMs, can hit it.

 

Unless you're on a mission with deniability, generally speaking it doesn't matter if they can see you if they can't hit you. Of course, the old adage is if you can see it, you can hit it, but that was in the days before guided weapons.

 

I reckon you're onto something. You look at something like F-22 or F-23, planes built from the ground up to be as stealthy and as advanced as possible so much so that they create new standards of comparison. There's the F-35 that is designed as a cheap(kinda ) , yet advanced multipurpose platform that finds a balance between advanced technology and stealth. Then you have aircraft like Rafaele, Saab Gripen, Super Hornet and even the F-16 to a degree which are conventional designs but contain design features, good ones too, that significantly lower radar returns when compared with previous generation aircraft like the F-14 and F-15. This line of thinking is why I think Flanker vs Raptor comparisons bug me as in terms of stealth, it would fit into the same catagory as these last two aircraft.

[JediMaster 451]

The Typhoon for instance was designed to be stealthy from the front, when heading towards a radar. They didn't concern themselves with the tail aspect, when flying away. I guess they figured the enemies would be destroyed by then?

All aspect stealth like the F-117, B-2, and F-22 is far more costly to design.

[Gr.Viper 131]

And "Comanche" is expensive too! Oh, how brightly they burn in EECH... F-16 also burn fine but they are a rare catch for my Alligator

Actually I don't quite understand what's the point in stealth helo as it's main cover still lies in keeping low profile.

[allentime 0]

roll out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6R2lm2QzCp8

[Redddevil911 0]

Russian stealth fighter, three words which just seem to be out of place! Making way for the new order of things, gone are the days when it was quantity over quality!

[JediMaster 451]

Russia can't afford quantity anymore either. That's why they've been modernizing their 20+ year old planes instead of building new ones for the last decade.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Russia can't afford quantity anymore either. That's why they've been modernizing their 20+ year old planes instead of building new ones for the last decade.

 

I think they've realised that the doctrine of quantity over quality is very wasteful and one of the keys to the USSR's downfall. They've been trying to get away from that for a while simply beause it was holding back future developments and modernisation. Once they shed Ground Control Interception, the VVS will be much more adaptable and stronger because of it. Force multiplication is a powerful element in the military environment these days and if you don't adapt... well you end up with an antique AF like the North Koreans, or Bolivia and their T-33 interceptors.