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.
Is this great bird at the end
Originally posted by Senior Citizen
I was just reading some interesting articles I found on the web about the F-117. After the shootdown of a F-117 over Bosnia, where does it stand today?
Is this great bird at the end or was there something that they didn't tell us.
Any comments appreciated.
Regards,
SC
Originally posted by GeoPetroEngGuy
So much info about it is still classified. Like the airframe materials, the stange shape (and we all know Stealth technology is mostly based on shape deflecting radar, blah blah blah) and, curiously, the flight ceiling (max altitude).
Now, humor me here, why is it that the ceiling is classified? I had a notion that the flat undersurface, retractable tail section, and no external anything, would make it an excellent space craft. The flat bottom, and the lack of external thingy's to burn off on re-entry. Not to mention the black color. Why? you don't need to be black to be stealth. A black plane in a blue sky sticks out like a sore thumb. Black is a terrible stealth color. And building a plane to ONLY fight at night in the 21st century? Come on. I think its black to prevent sun reflection while in orbit, so Joe Backyard Astronemer doesn't see it.
And the engine houseings? I believe the Air force spec was to house twin GE 404's, but I can't see how they would fit in there due to the extreme fuselage taper down to the diffusers and the postions of the internal weapons bays. I'm no aircraft engineer though, so I'm sure I may be corrected.
Originally posted by ch1466
Senior Citizen,
>>
I was just reading some interesting articles I found on the web about the F-117. After the shootdown of a F-117 over Bosnia, where does it stand today?
>>
With winged weapons like the SDB or a Longshot equipped standard JDAM, the F-117 would still be viable even now.
It's the difference between asking a ninja to haul a mortar tube into range to attack a commander's tent past the outer patrol belt and sentries but not 'within the stockade' of his army.
Vs. requiring the same task via a dagger 'twixt the teeth' walk right into the enemy camp.
>>
It is still a viable platform?
>>
It wasn't a viable platform from the very start sir. It was an overly large testbed fleet produced as a black program without any real accountability to the user command most likely to need it in a real war.
The weather in Europe /sucks/. There is running scud beween 3-7K all year round with frequent afternoon and late evening rain showers. In winter, the overcast can be solid for /days/ at a time.
WHY would you then design a medium level attack aircraft with only optical targeting systems?
Furthermore, the >
Would the US risk sending them out again?
>>
Against putz countries like AfG and Serbia? Yeah. Against first line threats?
Depends.
The F-22 without really capable Spiral-1 SAR/InSAR modes in it's APG-77 is not going to be able to designate targets for it's JDAMs as anything but a prebriefed coordinate bomber. Since they foolishly decided not to integrate a DAMASK type seeker into the JDAM itself (toss the weapon into a GPS funnel or 'basket' which is sufficiently narrow to let the seeker capture a sub-feature aimpoint or offset within the target itself), that is going to limit it's utility.
IMO, the F-117 also likely has a significantly lower -all round- RCS than the Raptor does. One Senator was quoted as saying the F-22's sideon RCS 'looking at the tails' was something closer to the Hindenburg than a Bird.
Again, stealth is a relative 'no see'em too good' system whereby you can hide in a lot paler shadows. But you still need to synergize the total system with standoff munitions, IMO.
>>
I know it happened a few years ago now, but have the US actually used them again in anger after that?
>>
Yes, they were among the jets employed in the initial penetrating munition attacks which failed, utterly, to destroy Saddam's bunker complexes.
Since the HDBT (Hard/Deeply Buried Target) set is one of the key 'hit the nerve, avoid wasting effort on the body' elements of stealth attack, conserving attrition as a function of repeated sorties, the inability of any jet other than the Batarang to carry truly deep penetrating munitions like the GBU-28/37 internally must be offset against the continuing need /and ability/ (with high grain radar looking through weather and small munitions able to target multiple aimpoints per mission) to hit fielded forces which shift constantly, bury themselves among decoys, and form a continuing stalling tactic as much as menace by dint of simply standing on the contested ground and daring the U.S. to commit to another Iraq.
>>
I find all these Black Aircraft projects very, very interesting and it was the black jet legacy that made me dig deeper into these very interesting and amazing flying machines.
>>
The Cockroach is a technologic oddity whose solutions to the RF signature modeling process largely derives from the period it was developed in (limited computational ability to determine aspect factors on returns other than as straight panels).
Now that massively parallel computation and widespread use of complex layered composites is better understood, I think history will have less to say about it as a warfighter than as a 'missing link' type developmental dead end.
What it says about stealth in general may not be nearly so kind.
>>
I was in awe when I first saw the F-117 in pictures and was privilaged to see one in 1995 at Mildenhall Airshow.
I was shocked to hear that one was brought down by enemy fire.
Is this great bird at the end or was there something that they didn't tell us.
Any comments appreciated.
>>
Pierre Sprey, when asked about the F-117 and 'the dark miracle of stealth' said that the reason the F-14/15/16 _ALL_ had limited loss factoring was that the comparitive percentage totals of radar guided heavy weapons able to reach above 10,000ft to those which were optical and/or small caliber limited to much lower, shorter, slants were 'typical' for any Soviet model air defense system which is to say less than a 20% ratio.
Fly above 10K and the trashfire didn't get you. Have deep enough pockets to absolutely /soak/ the 'residual 20%' of the radar threat with jamming and long range ARM and it goes away _using conventional SEAD tactics_ before significant attrition can occur.
Today, the threats reach higher and so the median altitude is probably 15-20,000ft. Even as networking systems and adaptations of BVR AAM as much as 'super weapons' like the S-300, greatly expand the threat bubble around any given target.
But the fact remains that the F-117 is not a system designed to fight a war in spite of a radar IADS but to merely expedite the process by which said system is taken down from the inside of the onion outwards.
Unfortunately, their are other, superior, options for doing this (always have been to be honest) while the blackjets ability to participate equally in the the medium-hi level interdiction game (as part of a package system) is limited by it's low installed thrust and LO compromised control layout.
i.e. You can either build an escort/SOJAM force around penetrating 10-12 black jets to some (likely empty if they know a damn thing about our tactics) IOC/SOC. Or you can use that same force to create salients in an enemy IADS into which conventional jets can gradually 'widen the bulge' using standoff munitions that they carry in far greater densities.
That being the kicker about attrition and the reasoning behind 'short wars' toast. Stealth which eats up supporting missions and yet doesn't nominally create anything more than a point target engagement capability (both bombs today I tell'ya!) actually prolongs a conflict based on a biologic model of attack that increasingly doesn't match the distributed warfighter models we are facing. Low tech or High.
KPl.