Stealth is a myth

Through reading about stealth, i have come to 1 conclusion its fake.
I have seen F-18's detect F-22's as well as typhoons when they met.

why would the government spend billions of dollars and years to research and develop stealth if it a fake, dont forgot all the secrecy that was involved

The secrecy is to cover the fact that it doesnt work and they thought that it would so they invested billions into it, why do you think they are retiring the expensive F-117 Nighthawks

Originally posted by ShadowKeeper
Through reading about stealth, i have come to 1 conclusion its fake.
I have seen F-18's detect F-22's as well as typhoons when they met.

What do you mean by "detect", simply shown up on air to air radar?

The F-22 has stealth elements, it is not a stealth aircraft like the B-2, or F-117, sure an F-18 can detect it put it behind a Mig-29 and see what happens. They are retiring a lot of the F-117 because they really are an obsolete craft. It is not a fighter, the B-2 can bomb at a higher altitude and fly longer distances. What purpose does it serve? The B-2 on the other hand is still very valuable.

If it dont work I bet they are gonna have a long talk wit them aliens lol However it would be helpful if you provided some evidence to your claim.

At what distance though?

Sure, another aircraft can pick up an F-22, but is that before the F-22 see's it? That's the key.

Besides, it's been proven 1 RAF Eurofighter can be ambushed by 2 F-15's and still come out on top. That's good enough for me, seeing as the F-15 has the best combat record of any aircraft.

Originally posted by stumason
At what distance though?

"Sure, another aircraft can pick up an F-22, but is that before the F-22 see's it? That's the key."


Distance does not matter, missile range is important

Distance is not as important as missile range

The key element to the F-22 is stealth, its the main driver. By detect i mean display the aircraft at +-100 miles away on the MFD's

The F-22 has to turn on it's Radar to detect aircraft by doing so it highlights its signature.

I was watching a special that was on the History channel and they were talking about the F117. They interviewed one F117 pilot who bluntly stated the stealth technology doesn't make the plane invisble to radar, it just shrinks its signature. To that effect I think it's still an advantage to have, but it doesn't make you invincible.

Stealth might work for the aircraft, but what about the pilots?
There may be no plane visible on the enemy radar-operators screen, but how would you explain the on-screen image of two guys in a sitting position at 40,000 feet????

I recommend not spamming the boards with 1 or 2 line opening posts to start with.

Answering all your points.

1 Stealth is not ''fake''
Approaching enemies undetected is ''stealth''
Silently(eg.sneaking up behind a guard)
Unseen(eg.camouflage)
Rapidly(eg.dropping from above)
are all recognised stealth techniques

2Stealth is not a waste of money if it saves lives

3,Of course Bush did it for the oil(plus other reasons). Yes he has gone too far.

4.Werewolves do not exist beyond Hammer house of horror movies

Hope this helps

[edit on 18-11-2006 by AGENT_T]

Trust me dont believe everthing you see on tv, why would you pay +- 230 million dollars for a thing that isnt invisible

Originally posted by AGENT_T

1 Stealth is not ''fake''
Approaching enemies undetected is ''stealth''
Silently(eg.sneaking up behind a guard)
Unseen(eg.camouflage)
Rapidly(eg.dropping from above)
are all recognised stealth techniques

For 1: Stealth is fake
Reason: B-2 was detected by the RAF on approach to Farnborough 2004 but still in unfriendly airspace
and a F-117 was shot down.
F-18E superbug detected a F-22 in a one on one engagement BVR
Silently: that thing makes a hell of a noise you can hear it even in the air
Unseen: This is not the army there are no bushes in the air
rapidly the Service ceilling is low for a fighter with that powerplant
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fixed quote


[edit on 18/11/06 by masqua]

Originally posted by ShadowKeeper
Trust me dont believe everthing you see on tv, why would you pay +- 230 million dollars for a thing that isnt invisible

I don't believe everything I see on TV, nor do I believe everything I read on ATS.

Your standpoint seems a bit extreme. Its like asking why the Army would buy camoflage uniforms if they dont make the soldiers completely invisible. Let's save some money and put them in all white unforms, that's just as good right.

I,d suggest you spend some time thinking up relevant titles for your ''researched'' threads

Obviously you want to discuss one particular aspect of stealth. ie regarding flight/plane design. Your thread title should reflect the point you wish to discuss.

Try to include some links also to support your point.

I think you have a big misunderstanding as to what stealth is. It isn`t supposed to make the aircraft invisible. It just makes it harder to detect the further away it is. Missile range is useless if you can`t detect the aircraft. Chances are the stealth aircraft will detect the non-stealth aircraft first, thus it will shoot first. I'll leave the detailed explanation to the people who really know there stuff though.

And they are retirring the F-117 because it is old.

Originally posted by ShadowKeeper
Distance is not as important as missile range

Thats irelevant. Seeing as both are USAF, the missile range would be the same.

What I meant was, the F-22 will see the F-18 before the F-18 see's it. The F-18 could, for arguments sake, have unlimited range missiles, but these would be useless if the F-22 wasn't seen and got a shot off first.

The B-2 you mention was in fact an F-117 and was targetted by an RAF Rapier missile system, which is optical/IR guided. Stealth technology reduces the radar sig so it doesn't stand out. You can, of course, still track a stealth aircraft with longer wave radars, but it wouldn't be useful in targetting them, as it would just tell you that "there is a plane somewhere in this 500m vacinity".

CELLDAR is better at doing this than standard Radar, but you still have to translate that info into a targetting solution, which is harder. You can also use TV signals as a detection medium, but the nack is being able to utilise this in a way that allows you to get a shot off.

The F-117 that was shot down in Serbia was as a result of a sequence of events. firstly, they flew the same route, night after night, so the Serbs just had to put a battery in whe way. Secondly, it had a malfunction which prevented a weapons bay door shutting properly, this had the effect of making it stand out like a sore thumb on radar.

All the Serbs had to do was point, paint and shoot.