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.
Yes, but body armour can stop a bullet as well.
Name me one tank round that has been known to penetrate chobrahm armour?
Ah but that is not what we are on about is it?
Ah but was that the best SAM's in the world?
Also the skill of a pilot and or ground crew has to be taken into account.
Umm as it was shown in other threads that the iraq air defenses where not the best also in GW2 the defeses where set up by the chinese who arent the best at this are they?
Also in kosovo the exsperience and training of the crews has to be taken into account.
How can it be for a short time?
We nethier know the exact time nor distance.
Also we do not know the "special conditions" of what you speak of.
Actually every plane can be detected, so that I am afraid is debunked
That is so but the military doesnt always have the luxary of going with the simple option.
I believe that the US doesnt need the F22 but something along the lines of the eurofighter, but oh well.
Ah thats not strictly true.
Detecting something above you is effective if many are placed.
If there is only one anti stealth radar which exists that no one has how can it exist?
I would call a ship a fairly heavy concentration of SAM's , esspecially an anti air ship.
Now tell me again how are these cases not acceptable?
Hell two of them are dirrect attacks on ships by many planes.
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
What kind of bullets? I'm sure there are some that are far more powerful then the toughest body armor.
A DU round could penetrate it. Honestly, do you think the armor is invinsible?
It really is.
Yes. Syria and Iraq had the very best the Russians had. As for skill, that's completely subjective.
Iraq had pretty much the best of what the Russians had. The Chinese are often flaunted as being able to stop stealth on here. You've probably said it at some point yourself.
Yes, we do know. I've already given a source for this in a previous argument. Someone else did the same, as well.
And what do you mean how can it be for a short time? They only had its signal for a short period of time before it vanished again.
This is just stupid. It CAN be detected, but it would destroy its target long before it is.
You don't think the US needs the F-22 because you think its overkill...
And the military doesn't spend money on something that's obselete.
PCL is a theoretical form or radar, like sonar or something. It's not an actual device...
They are a handful of incidents that occured throughout time. If something doesn't work 70/100 times, it's fairly ineffective.
Originally posted by Asia Minor
These pro-americans don't know what their talking about. Trust me. The S-400 can shoot things as low as 50 feet and is anti-stealth. It is designed to shoot down Reconnaisance aircraft, AWACS, cruise ,ballistic missiles and Stealth aircraft. These guys are commenting out of total ignorance. A UAV is the easiest of targets. Saddam shot them down regularly with his SAMs. Read a book!
Originally posted by Laxpla
Yas, UAV's are easy to shoot down, but not new generation Stealth UAV's that are more advanced then the F-117.
Originally posted by Asia Minor
Dude your wrong. I been knowing about this super sam for years, you just read an article today. Your speaking out of patriotism. We are speaking out of knowledge The Raptor is no less stealthier than the F 117. The only difference is the fact that the Raptor gives off less electrical signals. It's just a pilot guided, rather than pre-programmed plane. It's not what your trying to hype it up to be. That's all. It's no match for the Triumf. Neither do you know how the Triumf function as you are talking about radar signals. The Triumf has about four ways of detecting enemy craft.
[edit on 12-2-2005 by Asia Minor]
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
The F-22 is not the same as the F-117. It has been designed to counter low frequency waves which first generation stealth was somewhat vulnerable to.
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
The F-22 isn't invinsible, but it sure closer than any other fighter the world has yet seen.
And really, you can see SAM's have failed time and time again. They're failing Iran right now. We've been overflying the nation with our drones for a while now. They've given the order to shoot down anything over their airspace. The S-300's they're supposed to have from Russia seem to be failing.
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
Iran has a lot of other SAM's, as well. They have the Rapier, which, according to some people on here, can shoot down a B-2...
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
Iran has a lot of other SAM's, as well. They have the Rapier, which, according to some people on here, can shoot down a B-2...
Originally posted by Starwars51
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
Iran has a lot of other SAM's, as well. They have the Rapier, which, according to some people on here, can shoot down a B-2...
All stealth airplanes can be tracked on most good radar systems. The problem is that you have to be close enough and from the right angle.
All of the accounts of a rapier tracking a B-2 happened when the B-2 was not worried about being tracked. If it was worried about being tracked it would be flying at high speed, very low altitude (lets say 100 ft) and using ECM when neccisary. That is an entirely different ball game.
Originally posted by SiberianTiger
The reason the U.S. IS OVERFLYING IRAN is so Iranian radar can track them so that the u.s. planes can backtrack were Iranian radar station are and be prepared for when U.S. really attacks, thats why Iran is not shooting down those U.S. PlANES.