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.
originally posted by: CiTrus90
a reply to: Zaphod58
Wait, i think i lost you here.
To simplify it, to simplify it really a lot, let's say there are "only" 2 ways to get stealthiness on an aircraft:
-first one, coating/RAM
-second one, its shape
originally posted by: _Del_
If the RCS of the F-117 was "3", to use your random number, the F-16 would come in around "1500" and not 45. The effect of the RAM on the two aircraft is not going to be proportionate because the shapes are not the same, and when flying an aircraft's RCS is very dynamic, not static.
[...]
You also can't simply coat an F-16 with an even layer of heavy RAM. The F-117, on the otherhand, was designed from the start for a liberal application of RAM across the majority of it's surface.
[...]
Assuming you created a one-off F-16 for RCS testing, you now have a F-16 that you will have to return to standard, or find another use for.
originally posted by: _Del_
The handful of F-117's, however, remain available for threat simulations or testing against new transmitters or systems out at Groom, as a yard stick for their performance.
[...]
I think the last is probably the most likely use of the aircraft at the moment, and not the testing of new RAM.
originally posted by: CiTrus90
If the effects of the RAM are not as proportionate as we pointed out in the previous posts, i'd be more willing on spending money on a program for making the F-16 (or any other active aircraft for that matter) stealthier than for making the F-117 so.
... if i were to test such a new system, i would do so against "contemporary" stealth platforms like the F-22 and the F-35, and not against something of 30 and more years ago, because the same principles work differently on differents aircrafts.
originally posted by: _Del_
And again, if they are testing RAM, much of it could have nothing to do with improving RCS reduction itself, but rather on material performance and degradation ("wear and tear") and how that over time reduces the effectiveness of the RAM.
originally posted by: _Del_
Why wouldn't they be doing both? We're far more likely to see a threat of the F-117's caliber than of the F-22's in the near term.
Because i can't believe that since the F-117 became operational till our days, the USAF didn't come up with a way to pick it on a radar or any other system. I would never, ever, put something in combat operations without being sure that i could counter it first. What if it fell in enemy hands for example, like it happened during Allied Force in '99, and the enemy got a hold of it and produced its own version?
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: CiTrus90
It has little to do with the flight envelope. Its about how the material stands up to many things. How easy it is to remove and work on, how it stands up to flight in general, how much signature is reduced, etc. A lot of factors that you don't test on just any platform.
[...]
You want to test using the most realistic way you can. That means applying it to a stealthy platform for testing. But with a limited number flying you don't want to lose any operational aircraft just for testing. This compromise works perfectly.
My guess is the F-117s are flying over new radar systems being built by china, russia, etc to test exactly how good they are and if they are able to get a radar lock on the aircraft. Cause if you cant lock onto them then it doesn't matter if you can see them or not. I think the testing of new RAM materials is a secondary.
originally posted by: CiTrus90
But if the point of all of this was to just test out a new RAM it would be much easier and cost effective to build something like McDonnell did with the X-36, a subscale prototype/testbed. You could just slap everything you wanted on it, test it as much as you want, replace everything you want as much as you want, and all of this without the fear of loosing an operational airframe.
And without the need to keep an outdated aircraft flightworthy.
Moreover, if they were testing a new RAM, this thing has got to be some sort of paint that can be applied to other aircrafts.
But once again, why testing an outdated platform against contemporary system? It's highly unlikely the F-117 will get back into service, so if i had to test possible adversary radars i would do so against contemporary fighters (i.e. F-22/35), which, as far as i understand, have a different (and more efficient) way to achieve stealth than the F-117.
originally posted by: CiTrus90
But still, if the F-22 and the F-35 are really "stealthier" than the F-117, i don't see a plausible reason for testing a new system against an obsolete platform.
Unless the F-117 has still some tricks up its sleeve that we're not aware about.