It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the F-22's 'radar signature" being exposed by it's use in Syria?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2014 @ 11:46 PM
link   
This is a shot in the dark, cough, cough.

Of course, I have no idea what I'm talking about. BUT, if I understand correctly, the Raptor has a device that hides/distorts it's signature when participating in international training events? Yes?

If so, then flying from the UAE to Syria/Iraq exposes the F-22 to prying eyes as far as it's actual radar signature or lack thereof. Different Radar bands, etc?

One would assume factions in most of the fly-over nations aren't necessarily friends of the U.S.?

Some quid pro quo with Russia/China?

Any risk of this or am I worrying too much?




posted on Oct, 25 2014 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Give it a sec.. Zaphod58 is busy reviewing one of the funniest WTH! post I've ever seen here on ATS.
I'm most curious of the answer too..

edit on 25-10-2014 by Bigburgh because: word drunken was pushing it.



ETA: yep Googled F-22 radar signature being exposed.. and the latest answer was a video ( dating last year )of a guy doing the fifth estate claiming Russia picked up on this.. claiming stealth is a joke. And radars from WWII are effective. So Russia made that tech smaller and mobile...
I smell BS...
Best let an expert answer your question.. I got nothing.


edit on 26-10-2014 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Zaph must have laughed himself into a coma...maybe....
But ill take a shot.....there is no reason whatsoever that exactly what you imagine isnt actually happening.
The tech wise countries would be only overjoyed for the opportunity to track (or try to track this plane)
They are not totally invisible to radars....but their stealthy attributes reduces their radar profile to that of an eagle or whatever you imagine....Perhaps multiband , or other special radars have been rushed to the countries in question by their erstwhile allies in order to gain intel....even infra red detectors could sense the exhaust somehow perhaps their range is insufficient to allow aaa fire or missile deployment.....idk
Think of it ike finding a needle in a haystack compared to on a table top
You can bet someone is feverishly working on better detection gear over there....



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

You can't expose what they can't see



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Typically for our stealth airframe...nd I'm dating here, we placed RCBs (radar cross section blocks) on the airframe so standard radar can detect during training missions...maybe different now.

Also, during missions, the craft will be transmitting its Mode 4 code.


EtA: I see you are speaking operational....no initially the Syrians won't be able to, but as another poster pointed out, other players will be analysing data to determine signature
edit on 26-10-2014 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:30 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker
The Syrians would not be able to narrow down the F-22's radar signature but the Ruskies might be able to as they have an Intel base in Tartus ... they moved some very sensitive equipment there in the last few years after our buildup in Iraq, one of the reasons was to get information on the Osprey and 22 if they were to see action.

I have no doubt they are busy correlating visual data with signals intelligence to do this in addition to hullteching the F-22 radar frequencies (this is narrowing the known frequency range in which onboard radars operate at in order to identify the platform when it is picked up from collection platforms). I know for a fact that is exactly what we would be doing and more.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Just a guess, because I'm not there, but I'd bet there is so much snow on the screens anytime that coalition forces are in the air that Syrian Air Defense systems rarely get more than a trace track on even the non-stealthy aircraft there. For all we know they're still sporting their Luneberg's.
edit on 26-10-2014 by _Del_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

OK. Based on the responses. it likely is happening. The question is how effective their efforts are.

It is therefore safe to assume it would have occurred sooner or later...if it hasn't already?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: _Del_

This reminds me of old days trying to identify minimal describable signal. You search the grass finding anything that is out of the ordinary, capture it, analyze it, and apply it to known data. I am positive that is what nearly every nation is doing with the F-22 in the skies. It was the same with the F-117s and the B-2s.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

As soon as the air-frame enters a combat zone, its capabilities are sought. Since this engagement is widely reported, I am fairly confident that any major power in the area is combing over data to determine some point in which they can accurately predict the presence of the F-22.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: ownbestenemy

Cool. Would they be using a passive system? Active radar? Possibly optics or any and all?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
I have no doubt they are busy correlating visual data with signals intelligence to do this in addition to hullteching the F-22 radar frequencies (this is narrowing the known frequency range in which onboard radars operate at in order to identify the platform when it is picked up from collection platforms). I know for a fact that is exactly what we would be doing and more.


It's 150-200 miles from Tartus to Raqqah, right? Have there been strikes closer to Tartus than that?
You have to figure the Raptors are coming and going from Al Dafhra to Syria via Iraq and not from somewhere over the Med or Turkey. Seems unlikely you'd get usable data from that distance -- especially in the face of a concerted EW effort. I'm not sure if you were on the ground you'd even get a look at a Raptor. They're probably being used at high-speed and high-altitude to take advantage of the extended range that gives the SDBs. Even if you could coordinate a visual sighting from 150 miles away and try to pick out a return to match, we don't even know if they are still wearing Lunebergs or otherwise degrading their signature. The Israelis have penetrated Syrian systems on their way to and from the reactor site with using VLO aircraft at a time when Syrian presence was much stronger, so I'm not sure it's a given that we're exploiting all our advantages in a conflict against an opponent without a coordinated air defense.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: ownbestenemy
a reply to: _Del_

This reminds me of old days trying to identify minimal describable signal. You search the grass finding anything that is out of the ordinary, capture it, analyze it, and apply it to known data. I am positive that is what nearly every nation is doing with the F-22 in the skies. It was the same with the F-117s and the B-2s.


Oh, certainly. And the more bands you have data for, the better. You'd also be looking for anything you could glean from ELINT. But in the face of heavy EW efforts, I don't know how many traces you're going to be able to pick out at all. Particularly when it comes to distinguishing the VLO signature from the ghosts. You can try to burn through jamming with higher-power to squelch the ghosts and detect a normal return. But if you do that with VLO, you're squelching all the things you're looking for along with the noise.

Nothing is undetectable. Everyone is trying to glean anything they can, and even the French were taking advantage of a Paris Air Show trip by F-117's, which led us to cancel further appearances of stealthy aircraft. I'm not saying noone is clever enough to build a book on them. I just don't think they've been given a sufficient opportunity to this point, and I don't think their use in Syria is a serious risk in that regard, or we wouldn't be using them (we don't need VLO against a foe without any coordinated air defense, and Syria is smarter than to engage coalition forces, no matter how they'd like to).



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 02:58 AM
link   
a reply to: _Del_

There's a cool You Tube video of a night refueling of an F-22 somewhere over the Arabian peninsula. You can see lights on the ground as the Raptor refuels from the tanker.

Could one not track the tanker and key to any returns connecting to it?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 03:24 AM
link   
They're not going in stealthy. The first raids went in with externals hanging, and I have no reason to doubt that later missions didn't have them either.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Wasn't the F-22 in an intercept of Iranian F4 to protect a US drone? Should have a lot of radars in the area, especially Iranian because they were vectoring the F4s to the US Drone. I guess the Iranians or anyone else interested must have been checking their radar data.

theaviationist.com...



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Any new military platform needs to have its day in court. In other words the F22 needs to find out its real strengths and weaknesses during actual war settings. With regards to its radar signature; I would think Lockheed along with their military counter parts are actually conducting analysis on how the F22 is performing and the radar signature being one of them. From this analysis they'll learn and make adjustments/corrections if possible.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: bucsarg

Stealth gets updated every few years anyway. They replace the skin every few years and update the RAM.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

OK, I will stop asking dumb assed questions.

Seems to me that the USAF and Co. have had plenty of time to test every possible band and the distances for each long before now. Not too many scenarios that couldn't be checked in house....



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

While you can get less visible to some frequencies there's always going to be something that can see you. It's a huge cat and mouse game that's fun to watch.



new topics




 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join