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.

 

Bolt on stealth

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
RAB

posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 05:48 AM
link   
Talking to a mate of mine over the weekend, and she started talking about "bolt On" stealth, a range of ways to make a plane stealthly. Apprently the F35 will come in various stealth configerations e.g. more stealth for more trusted customers and less stealthly for less trusted customers.

Just pondering if this is some type of electro magetic stealthing, as apponsed to the hard stealth of the F117?

RAB




posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 05:51 AM
link   
There's really no way you could stealth up an F-35 very much. All the ordanance was designed to be carried externally, so you would have to redesign all the weapons carried by it to be stealthy. You could make it less visible, but not truly stealthy.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
There's really no way you could stealth up an F-35 very much. All the ordanance was designed to be carried externally, so you would have to redesign all the weapons carried by it to be stealthy. You could make it less visible, but not truly stealthy.

All the ordinance?
That is wrong.

The F-35 is capable of carrying up to 2,000lb bombs in each of it's 2 internal bays along with an air-to-air missile.

Below is a graphic detailing ordinance that can be carried in the F-35's internal stores.

(graphic and further information can be found @ Aerospaceweb.org).

The F-35 can carry much more on it's wings which would nullify it's stealthiness but it can be very lethal just by using it's internal stores.

In answer to the original question regarding EM type stealth, the F-35 like the other stealth craft in the US arsenal uses RAS (radar absorbent structure) and RAM to reduce RCS, any electronic RCS reduction would be through jamming and not some exotic plasma stealth feature.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   
good call bios. the F-35 is designed so that once the air or a hostile area is no longer a threat that the F-35 can go in carrying even more ordance becuase the stealth is a none factor/ or less of one at the point. By the way what do you guys think of the external gun idea that is probably going to be used on the 35?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 10:26 AM
link   
The F35 isnt that stealthy. I heared it is just as stealthy as the F117 and how old is that design?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
I guess the over-riding point is one of 'need'.

The comment about using the F35 in a high-stealth mode for as long as it is needed that way and then making use of its' great less or unstealthy load carrying ability later seems to make sense to me.

As for bolt-on stealth?
I don't know about that but I do know that when the RAF started using RAM on it's Tornados (about as non-stealthy a plane as there is in service these days!) there were more than a few shocked at just how effective it was.

[edit on 20-6-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by tomcat ha
The F35 isnt that stealthy. I heared it is just as stealthy as the F117 and how old is that design?

The F-117 has gone through some upgrades and is still very stealthy and probably a lot more stealthy than the F-35.
I have seen a graph somewhere online comparing the RCS's of the various stealth aircraft and it is very enlightening. I'll try to find it and post it.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   
The F117 is a design from the late 70's and early 80's and thats long ago.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by tomcat ha
The F117 is a design from the late 70's and early 80's and thats long ago.

doesn't matter, it is still a more stealthy airframe than the F-35.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Nice, stealth is clearly the next "thing" with the american planes...



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 06:14 PM
link   
First of all the F-117 can only carry a couple of internal guided munitions and its speed is sub sonic its maneuverability is poor its A2A capability is virtually non existent, not to mention its shape.
Now the F-35 is not going to be a stealthy as a B-2 but for the things that it does and the way it carries its weapons and performs to even be as stealthy as the F-117 is a huge thing.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Erm, my limited understanding of this matter is that there is no "bolt-on stealth" for either the F-35 JSF or F-22 Raptor.

"Bolt-on stealth" is a cliche of sorts among internet and technical aircraft industry people that is a reference for the famed and vaunted, but not yet seen or produced, Russian "bolt-on" plasma stealth equipment.





seekerof

[edit on 20-6-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 11:29 PM
link   
I would like to "second" what Bios and Seekerof have said.
The F-35 does not have "bolt-on" stealth...
The term "bolt-on stealth" generally indicates Russian plasma stealth, which was promised for export a few years ago but has not come to fruition. (yes we would know if it was available for export).
The F-35 is also not as stealthy as the F-117 which has had numerous upgrades and is still the stealthiest manned aircraft in the US inventory... (as far as the public knows, that is)



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 11:47 PM
link   
well i guess stealth is nothing but a waste of money and time.

check out this thread : stealth detection



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Stealth Spy that technology is not proven and until we see some confirmed facts about if it can tack stealth aircraft then we will believe you. Unit then just let it go.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 07:19 AM
link   

the F-117 which has had numerous upgrades and is still the stealthiest manned aircraft in the US inventory...


I thought the B-2 was the stealthiest plane in the U.S. known inventory?



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   
StealthSpy, you "guess" too much.
Stealth has been and will be for some time at the forefront of advancements in "stealth detection." No stealth, no "stealth detection" research and implementation, comprende'?

Stealth advancements are revolutionary and are now being incorporated into virtually all major air forces. It makes sense that "stealth detection" would increase incrementally.


Nothing but wishful thinking on your part and amounting to conjecture, cause last I checked, if stealth is a waste of time and money, care to explain why India [among other nations] is working on it?






seekerof



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Stealth Spy that technology is not proven and until we see some confirmed facts about if it can tack stealth aircraft then we will believe you. Unit then just let it go.


i dont mean any offence, but i feel it has worked in Yugoslavia.



During the bombing of Kosovo, one F-117 was shot down by Yugoslav anti-aircraft with a Russian made missile of 1964 vintage.

A second F-117, though not downed, was severely damaged during the conflict.

web.mit.edu...



Pentagon officials confirmed that the aircraft was tracked by an unidentified radar and that two surface-to-air missile were fired at the F-117.


link


^^American F-117A stealth bomber shot down over Yugoslavia in March of 1999.



The cockpit canopy of the destroyed F-117A stealth bomber. March 27, 1999.

And the F-117 is supposed to be more stealthy than the F-35. And moreover it was detected by the Tamara anti-stealth radar. This very radar is now obselete compared to other anti-stealth radars that have been developed today and most are in vogue too.

Please take time to check out all my posts in the stealth detection thread >> www.abovetopsecret.com... u'll know

again, i reiterate i dont mean any offence from the pics posted and this is not any flame bait.... i hope u guys understand



[edit on 21-6-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

the F-117 which has had numerous upgrades and is still the stealthiest manned aircraft in the US inventory...


I thought the B-2 was the stealthiest plane in the U.S. known inventory?


It is! I did research on the B-2 for many years. The B-2 RCS is Highly classified, but it is Believed by most sources to be between 1/50'th to 1/100'th of the F-117's. The B-2 was built with a number of stealth technologies that did Not exist yet when the F-117 was build, such as LPI Radar, which can't be detected by enemy sensors. the B-2 was also the First Stealth Aircraft to be build almost completely from Radar Absorbing Composits. In contrast the F-117 is made of aluminum and then coated with RAM.

The B-2 is the Stealthiest modern aircraft by far!



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
care to explain why India [among other nations] is working on it?


well the only nation india may ever have a war with is pakistan, who dont have any anti-stealth tech and dont have the brains to think of asking someone for it.

India are developing the MCA, which is a development of the LCA and is tailless and RAM coated. A prototype is under construction at ADA.



The Medium Combat Aircraft [MCA] is projected as the replacement for the Jaguar and Mirage 2000 fleets in the IAF. It is under design at the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in Bangalore. The MCA will cost $2 billion to develop and will be a tailless delta design with two engines, combined with a thrust vectoring control capability.

It is hoped that the engines on the aircraft will develop a thrust-to-weight ratio of 7.8:1. Although it is unclear which company will be selected to supply the engines; SNECMA, Klimov and General Electric have offered to develop thrust vectoring engines for it .

The MCA will be in the 12 ton clean weight class, with a maximum take-off weight of about 18 ton. With the emphasis on stealth, the MCA will have two small, outward-canted fins. For stealth reasons, the engines will be without afterburners. They will have a slightly higher dry thrust than the LCA engine. These engines will also have thrust-vectoring nozzles for manoeuvring. A super cruise capability is not being sought for the MCA. The MCA will use the radar-absorbent material to reduce RCS.





INDIAN AIR FORCE PROCURES RUSSIAN STEALTH TECHNOLOGY FOR MIG-21's
The Indian Air Force (IAF) is now adding stealth modifications to an existing $340m programme to upgrade 125 of its MiG-21bis fighters to MiG-21-93 standard. Sources for Jane's Defence Weekly have revealed these secret events in a report published in today's edition of the magazine.

Extensive tests to demonstrate Russia's ability to upgrade Indian fighter aircraft with stealth capabilities took place in front of Indian defence ministry officials at the Sokol aircraft plant in Nizhniy Novgorod on 29th May 2000. The demonstration was highly successful and is understood to have resulted in the Russian government and RSK MIG urging the IAF to adopt the stealth modifications across its MiG-21-93 fleet.

The core of the demonstration saw two MiG-21bis--one upgraded with stealth technology and one without--being tracked by what is believed to be a Mig-31 in a controlled test of radar-absorbent materials (RAM) and coatings developed at the Moscow Institute of Applied and Theoretical

Electrodynamics. During its flight the radar signature of the upgraded Mig-21bis was shown to be between 10 and 15 times weaker than the regular MiG-21bis.


www.janes.com...

since the mca is only a replacement, making it stealthy is a great advantage for use on countries wihtout these new stuff, but it may not work against ones that do (with whom the prospect of war is nil)

But india are working on anti-stealth stuff too.




Scientists of the Bangalore-based Indian Institute of Science (IISc) are developing the next generation radars.

These high-precision radars would also be able to detect rain drops, hails or ice flakes at a large distance with high accuracy for meteorological studies, he said, adding "A single drop of rain having a diameter of one millimeter at a distance of 100 km can be traced by these radars."

The only bottleneck is that the radars require very high computing facility for practical use. "With our supercomputer, which is faster than US Cray supercomputer, it takes about nine hours to analyze the data," Balakrishnan disclosed.

A new mode of computing is therefore necessary to accelerate the practical use, he said. Probably quantum computing, which is still in the laboratory stage and is believed to be the future of computing, would be the right technique for such radars.

The team is also working on an advanced version of the radar which can make the so-called "invisible aircraft" visible. Normal radars fail to see the type of aircraft, regularly used by advanced countries for surveillance, as they are coated with a paint which makes them invisible to the radar.

But in their movement they produce waves which, at least theoretically, can be detected just as the movement of a ship can be traced by observing the waves it creates. "We are trying to develop computational algorithm for this purpose," Balakrishnan said.


link




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join