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.

 

B-2 Spirit question.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   
We have discussed in weaponry forum (airships against minefields), if the B-2 is equipped with ground penentrating radar to locate underground structures (like bunkers, caves, nuclear silos). What do you think? Has anyone more info about it.




posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 04:27 PM
link   
I found all the info you could possibly want on the B-2 and it said something on Google about ground penetrating radar, but the document is massive so i'll leave it to you to read it!!!





posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 06:18 PM
link   
The only problem with it having and using a ground panatrating radar is that it would give its position away and would defeat its stealthy nature which is its prime asset



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
The only problem with it having and using a ground panatrating radar is that it would give its position away and would defeat its stealthy nature which is its prime asset


Couold it perhaps use a veriable frequency type radar like the one on the Raptor?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Here is some info i found from here:

www.airforce-technology.com...

"RADAR

The Raytheon AN/APQ-181 covert strike radar, operating at J-band (Ku-band), is a multi-purpose radar with terrain following and terrain avoidance modes. Testing at Edwards Air Force Base has demonstrated reliable terrain following at altitudes down to 200ft.

In November 2002, Raytheon was awarded a contract to develop a new Ku-band AESA (active electronically scanned array) antenna for the B-2 radar to avoid interference with commercial satellite systems after 2007. Installation of the new antenna on the B-2 fleet is to be completed by 2010."

I am curious to know why this Ku-Band AESA is needed on the B2? Its being developed to avoid interference with commercial satellites (I'm assuming military aswell although thats not stated here) so does that mean it can be tracked by satellite? If so doesnt that make it vunerable to enemy actions?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by wierze
I am curious to know why this Ku-Band AESA is needed on the B2? Its being developed to avoid interference with commercial satellites (I'm assuming military aswell although thats not stated here) so does that mean it can be tracked by satellite? If so doesnt that make it vunerable to enemy actions?


Quite simply, a lot of modern ground mapping commercial satellites use RADAR to get a good image, and a lot use synthetic apeture technology to get the best image possible. It just so happens that this radar is at the same frequency as a lot of military systems the US uses, and since the US isnt the only country putting satellites in orbit, it cant stipulate what types of radar are out of bounds for commercial uses. This means that if they didnt change the type of radar being used on the military aircraft, you can end up with spurious returns, ghosted images, and generally a great big mess if a commercial satellite happens to pass overhead when the B-2 is using its system.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
We have discussed in weaponry forum (airships against minefields), if the B-2 is equipped with ground penentrating radar to locate underground structures (like bunkers, caves, nuclear silos). What do you think? Has anyone more info about it.
.

It's officially called the AQN-181 radar system! I believe it has the ability to find underground tragets. Remember: it was design to locate hardened strategic targets in Russia and other Warsaw Pact Nations! Most of these targets were underground to try to protect them from attak! While I can't prove that my assumption is correct, it would make sense given the knowns.

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Man after reading that we should make satellites with radar that are capable of detecting planes.





West Point, Out.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Man after reading that we should make satellites with radar that are capable of detecting planes.
West Point, Out.



What makes you think there arent already sats in orbit with that capability?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Man after reading that we should make satellites with radar that are capable of detecting planes.
West Point, Out.



What makes you think there arent already sats in orbit with that capability?


we are borke and not high tech enough... i think



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   
The b-2 had no need for ground penetrating radar when it was first put in use. It's mission was to carry 16 bombs--big bombs--but I don't know if it's new mission requires the need for the radar. As someone mentioned earlier--Ground sweeping radar would give away its position.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow

we are borke and not high tech enough... i think



Uhm, what?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by ulshadow

we are borke and not high tech enough... i think



Uhm, what?


well, we are running out of money(money = oil = black gold
) and the human race is so primitive and broke...
oil

[edit on 14-4-2005 by ulshadow]

[edit on 14-4-2005 by ulshadow]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 05:17 PM
link   
ulshawo what are you talking about?
Please explain our posts.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
ulshawo what are you talking about?
Please explain our posts.


someone saids

"What makes you think there arent already sats in orbit with that capability?"

so i explain why...


stay cool



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 07:23 PM
link   
But if anyone has the money and the tech its the U.S.





West Point, Out.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
But if anyone has the money and the tech its the U.S.



yea, you are right, but we might need a united earth to have that much money and advances in tech will be far faster...


[edit on 15-4-2005 by ulshadow]



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow
yea, you are right, but we might need a united earth to have that much money and advances in tech will be far faster...


[edit on 15-4-2005 by ulshadow]


Very little has driven technological development more than war and conflict.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by ulshadow
yea, you are right, but we might need a united earth to have that much money and advances in tech will be far faster...


[edit on 15-4-2005 by ulshadow]


Very little has driven technological development more than war and conflict.


well, yea, you are right, we do advance a lot of tech in wars, like WWII, one of the big advances was the airplane i think...



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
WWII developed a lot of things such as computers, jets, rockets, just to name a few. Without WWI and WWII and the Cold War humanity would not have al of the current technologies it enjoys today.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join