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.
Originally posted by Seekerof
Originally posted by Daedalus3
As for the K-172, I doubt the AIM-120D even matches this proposed missile in range..
Key word in your mention there, Daedalus: "proposed."
seekerof
Originally posted by urmomma158
They russians and Americans are working on it so maybe in the future as an add on............ But pretty soon they will be devloping tech that can change the shape of the AC in flight. Who says the same airframes will be sued. they will be thrown away eventually and buy new upgraded ones. Sorta like how we dont use F 15's built in 1970. So plasma stealth and plane morphing seems the only logical yet sure technology.
Originally posted by urmomma158
No i mean an aircraft which can literlly change its shape in flight. Think of what could happen on the ground! i bet the Russians and the Area 51 folks have plasma stealth and acive cancellation so im not worried.
Originally posted by planeman
On a tangental point, do you think there is a correlation between people who are what you might call "F-22 nutriders" who see the Raptor as some sort of god of airpower rather than a system with strengths and weaknesses, and people who believe that the USAF also has plasma stealthm, hypersonic bombers, anti-matter, anti-gravity and the like?
If the US has anti-gravity then why the hell is it spending $$$$$$$$ trying to get things to fly that apply conventional physics????? If the F-22 didn't need wings it'd be hell of a lot easier to design, lol..
Originally posted by kilcoo316
-Definitely
Originally posted by WestPoint23
Not really, speculation is just that. But do you think there is a correlation between the people who think the Raptor is a hyped up obsolete machine and the ones who think the Russians have secret plasma stealth and technology? I wonder…
Originally posted by kilcoo316
Who thinks the F-22 is obsolete? (yet - give it about 10 years until DEWS are here - then it is obsolete along with every other fighter in the world).
Originally posted by kilcoo316
Its also alot more believeable from a technical point of view.
Originally posted by kilcoo316
While infact, no system is perfect, and I know there are compromises to the F-22 (just like every other aircraft in the world) and nothing is above criticism.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
Ah, let me guess, you also assume that radar technology will be so advanced that tracking VLO aircraft should be easy.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
DEWS? By US enemies? Ok sure, you can make assumptions, but the question still remains, how are you going to target something which you cannot detect? Ah, let me guess, you also assume that radar technology will be so advanced that tracking VLO aircraft should be easy. Sorry, but I’ll take my 150 mil Air Superiority fighter over assumptions any day.
Oh really, well that’s great. I suppose since hypersonic technology has been proven and since it is also very real and believable there should be a whole slew of hypersonic strike aircraft in service around the world, eh? Paper drawings don’t fly and they certainly aren’t the real thing.
The F-22 is not perfect, sure, I agree, but it is the best fighter currently in the world for Air Superiority. That is all I have asserted about it, you do not agree with that statement?
It's expensive and you don't want to reveal all of your technology.
Originally posted by planeman
On a tangental point, do you think there is a correlation between people who are what you might call "F-22 nutriders" who see the Raptor as some sort of god of airpower rather than a system with strengths and weaknesses, and people who believe that the USAF also has plasma stealthm, hypersonic bombers, anti-matter, anti-gravity and the like?
If the US has anti-gravity then why the hell is it spending $$$$$$$$ trying to get things to fly that apply conventional physics????? If the F-22 didn't need wings it'd be hell of a lot easier to design, lol..
Well even though they are advancing what does that prove its not just a weak return you know.
Originally posted by kilcoo316
- What arrogance - you think only the US is capable of making lasers? For the, I dunno, umpteenth time - the F-22's RCS values will remain relatively static now the design is fixed, while radar systems and computer processing are advancing at an extremely fast rate. You are the one making the assumptions that:
Well duh
1. No existing radar cannot detect the F-22 at useful ranges (that would also include American radars)
Its not as easy as you are putting it out to be.
2. No radar will be developed that can detect the F-22 at useful ranges.
Well don't you think they have though of that. Over 4,000 hours of radar testing.
3. An AESA slaved to a low freq radar might be able to focus on and search a smaller area with sufficient resolution to generate a firing solution at a useable range.
You are thinking of solid fuel rockets. Scramjets can do the same distances at high speed. You just need to scale it up. there have been reports of sonicbooms indicating hypersonic aircraft.
- Hypersonic technology has been proven, yes, with short ranged and small craft designed specifically for the purpose of going hypersonic. Now, where is evidence of scaling? Both for airframe and propulsion? Do you think NASA researched and tested the SCRAMjet just for the fun of it?
what????
Who mentioned paper drawings?
how do you know NASA doesn't make advnaced things like at AREA 51. Not all agencies share info.NASA is not some mil tech agency.
-Definitely
and
- Ahh, but, but, but, but...
See NASA etc, they waste all their money trying to replicate projects that were done 30 years ago in area 51.Sometimes common sense just isn't applied[edit on 4-5-2006 by kilcoo316]
Originally posted by urmomma158
It's expensive and you don't want to reveal all of your technology.
Originally posted by planeman
If the US has anti-gravity then why the hell is it spending $$$$$$$$ trying to get things to fly that apply conventional physics????? If the F-22 didn't need wings it'd be hell of a lot easier to design, lol..