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.

 

Stealth detection systems

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by 187onu
we have discussed this in my topic stealthspy, you know which one because you posted in it!

remeber the "RADAR" one, DON'T COPY MY TOPICS! btw mine was better, this one is full with nonesence!



I've been asking you for links to some topic that you claim is yours for about a week now.

WTF is your problem ?




posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   
here my friend:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



You'll find a detailed explanation about ANY radar system of today and tommorrow, the explanation this topic does NOT have!

and it is about stealth detection as well.

[edit on 8-6-2005 by 187onu]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Good thread indeed.

But are you playing any "Who started the best threat ?" competition

BTW : I assure that this thread is not derrived from that on purpose. I dont copy existing stuff inetntionally and this trait is a direct concequence of the fact that i am not chinese



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:32 AM
link   
of course it is a good thread, and no Im not playing competition who has better topics, allthough I'd win
.



BTW : I assure that this thread is not derrived from that on purpose. I dont copy existing stuff inetntionally and this trait is a direct concequence of the fact that i am not chinese


WTF does that mean???



lets get back on topic!


Im sure your informed about the Tamara and kolchuga systems?!
now, if they detect e-missions from a plane, it means it would and should also pick up enmissions from a planes radar system.
so it should definatly pick up the e-missions from a F-117, the F-22 has a new inproved system that makes sure it is undetectable.

So there you go, another system that can detect stealth planes.


and about that UK stuff, I think what happend is that at that airshow, there was a Rapior close enough to the F-117 in order to get reflected signals back.
OF COURSE IT WILL PICK UP SOMEHTING IF YOUR CLOSE ENOUGH TO IT.
thats why they fly far enough from it.
basicly, you can use ANY radar system and pick up signals if the stealth fighter fly over it!!! DUUHHHHHHHHH


I gues this is what happend!







[edit on 8-6-2005 by 187onu]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   
What someone should try is to take a radar system, put it in a soccer field and get someone to shoot a soccerball from one side the the other side of the field and see what kind of signals it will reflect!

and another test, a (these round things people play with at the beach, just happen to forget the name real quick) and throw it the same way as the soccer ball.

or even better a footbal (american footbal).


UFO's are basicly round (dont' play smartass), thats why it doens't send a signals or better to say REFLECT signals back to its source (radar system), looking at it logicly!








[edit on 8-6-2005 by 187onu]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 10:44 AM
link   
I forgot to mention something very important.

stealth only beats radar systems from the "FRONT" NOT the rear.
so that could have been another way for the UK to have detected the stealth plane because it flew over and reflected enough signals back for it to lock on as they claim!!!



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Now the AWACS's radar is waaaaaaaaaaay more powerful than the fighter's. The F-22 will appear on the radar screen of the AWACS when the fighters are out of its missile range just the way it would appear when it very close to the fighter with an unaided fighter.

How much is waaaay more powerful?

The power in radar returns goes as 1/R^4, therefore to double your range, you need 16 times as much power.

That may be a reasonable ratio of AWACS radar power versus a fighter plane's.

It may also be reasonable that a F-22 could get off a shot at the AWACS craft itself with a long range missile. This would have to be planned carefully.

My feeling about the stealth detection is that it is possible either by low frequency radar or diffuse passive ground scatter from other emitters.

The problem though will be real-time accurate localization. You may know that there is 'something' out there, but it will not be fast or accurate enough to direct weapons at it.

For an enemy it would be unclear what is going on: E.g. "is this a missile? a small UAV? A stealth plane? what?"

One more thought. What would be a great mission for a stealth UCAV?

One-way fly-in and missile launch against the other side's AWACS.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 03:51 PM
link   
An AWAC’s Radar has long rage but the Raptor would still be concealed
until it came in close due to its small RCS and stealth features, right?


[edit on 22-6-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
An AWAC’s Radar has long rage but the Raptor would still be canceled until it came in close due to its small RCS and stealth features, right?


Yes, pretty much.



posted on Dec, 24 2005 @ 10:33 AM
link   
The crash mentioned in this story that grounded the Raptors happened at Nellis in December of 2004. The F-22 went down shortly after take off on Dec. 20th. The pilot ejected safely.

An Air Force investigation concluded that a computer glitch caused the crash and because of that crash Air Force Raptors were grounded for three weeks across the United States.

OK stealth spy??
The F-22 is better
I dont know what you're talking about.
All aircraft development has gliches..
Ever heard of the F-117 Nighthawk??
that thing has a RCS of like ten times the size of the F-22 and we hit a Libyan ammo dump while their entire defensive missile system was aon high alert!! we can get anything with the F-22, whatever you want to think, the F-22 owns the Su-47 anyday. The berkut's foward swept wing increase RCS a whole lot.. THe F-22 wold see it from like 50 miles, and then shoot it with a AMRAAM from 45 miles and own it...



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Talking to one of the math modelers who worked on vera here in Pardubice(also the home of semtex) it works with the earths magnetic field instead of conventional radar and needs to also use the bi-static technique as well to be effective....also anyone who thinks that this tech just headed west is deluding themselves.....look at the history between US and Russia for every new plane US produces Russia try's to counter it funny that they haven't bothered with stealth, besides if your opponent thinks that he is invisible he is going to be very surprised and demoralized when he finds that he can be seen...




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join