a reply to: Michet
There is precedent for lo level terrain flying to avoid missile engagement from enemy fighters in trail. Diving for the ground is one way of clogging
any seekers 'look down' tracking feature with signal return clutter from the ground. Chasing a fighter down to lo level to maintain the fight usually
results in both of them flying as close to the ground as possible.
This occurred a lot in WWII over germany, in Vietnam and the 6 day war in The middle East. There is footage.
The lesson learned from these engagements was having an ability to fly that low using terrain as cover levels the playing field, keeps pilots busy
avoiding terrain instead of engaging the enemy, making the use of weapons more difficult to bring a solution. The lead plane might even duck away from
radar and visual, if skilled or lucky.
So they set up a training exercise to familiarize pilots with it. Little room for error, Scary as f***.
The object of stealth is to exclude pilots from hiding from radar because they are invisible.
The opening salvo over Baghdad in the first gulf war bore that out. Still, the stealth 'fighters' role wasn't to engage the enemy fighters, there were
none. The role of the F117 was to drop bombs…
Dropping bombs at night from radar invisible bombers is covered now by the B2 spirit and lo level B1 (with terrain avoidance guidance computers). The
need to deploy stealth technology at night to invade other countries and bomb them like the First Gulf war isn't really necessary anymore. We have
cruise missiles, drones and other assets for that.
So we don't need a stealth fighter, a stealth bomber or a lo level fighter bomber… making the very expensive raptors into hangar queens somewhere,
waiting to be employed, or pushed into roles they aren't specifically designed for.
Thats the gist of it. Of course waiting for the ATS wrecking crew to ridicule that with a lot of necessary talk about improvements, ongoing
developments and new features.
edit on 27-4-2016 by intrptr because: spelling