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.

 

Russian Engineers Admit Using F-117 Wreckage for Tests

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2007 @ 03:12 AM
link   
This is really old (2001), and I was not on ATS back then so I don't know if such a thread has been posted on here befor. I just thought I'd share it with you guys.

www.newsmax.com...

From the second paragraph of the article:
"In addition, a small number of Russian tactical aircraft have been modified with low-observable stealth technology in order to conduct airborne tests against the new air defense systems"

So from what I understand this "low-observable" stealth tech is the result of the research they have done on the wreckage? Or do other countries have anything similar? I just picture a SU-30 coated in stealth tech and get shivers down my back
hehe.

Anyways, if all you guys knew about this - sorry to draw your attention to something you already knew. Reason I'm posting this is because I have never seen an article saying Russian acknowladged running tests on that wreckage. I knew it was the most likely scenario but never heard any acknowlegement of it.

Regards,
Maestro

PS: 2 moer parts to that article about the Russian space program and navy in 2001 if anyone is interested lol.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 05:45 AM
link   
The coatings are RAM, and that is available to most countries.

The interesting bit would be if they tested, LO drones against their pride: S-300/400..

And then again it may give some insight into the design of the PAK-FA..



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Think it's worth a shot to try and search for these tests that they ran? I mean it's been about a bit under 10 years that they have been running tests I'm guessing. And i'll bet you since Putin became president and started putting cash into improving the military he definately did not forget about this. Think it would be possible for Russia to have some version of stealth tech? Maybe worse then the f-117 but still good? The reason I'm thinking this way is Russia claims that the S-300/400 can shoot down stealth planes right, how can they make this claim without having their own stealth fighter to put it up against? The only thing I can think of is moving these AAs to an area where the US might be flying a stealth plane for recon or something (like a spy plane). Maybe that's why they're so eager to sell their latest development to other countries (there would be other reasons too ofcourse). Or would it be possible to take the radar out of an S-300/400 and ship it secretly to a country where the US might be flying stealths? I know this all sounds kind of ridiculous but i'm just trying to figure out how far they might have gotten with these tets by now.

Regards,
Maestro



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Understanding and testing a technology is one thing. The technical ability to manufacture is another thing.

Understanding what ram is and how to use angles to deflect radar isn't that hard. Building a vehicle which incorporates those features and is practical and economical is a whole other story.



posted on May, 29 2007 @ 09:06 PM
link   
The fact they admit this is stunning. However, they are doing all they can to fuel a new "cold war". They need to do something fast to save the economy. But good for them, we would do the same.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 09:20 AM
link   
OMG why?!?! do people think Russia is trying to fuel a new cold war. ask yourself this; how would Russia benifit from it?

Regards,
Maestro



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Ask them.
Two new nuclear-capable missiles in two years.
Using a missile-defense which has no capability to intercept Russian missiles, which is not defended, and which could be saturated with conventional attacks anyway as means to pull out of the Conventional Arms Treaty.
Etc.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Yeah and the rapid expansion of NATO, 2 large-scale wars started by the US in the last 5 years, the unclear and questionable objectives of the War on Terror, a political coup organized by NATO in Ukraine and Georgia, and constant criticism of Russia by the West has absolutely nothing to do with it right?

Face it- Russia has little ability to fuel another Cold War, no ability to sustain itself militarily in another Cold War, and absolutely no interest or potential for benefit from a Cold War. What Russia is doing is responding to US/NATO actions for the last decade. NATO has been really really active in East Europe lately, and it has nothing to do with terrorism or such nonesense. It is pure and simple expansion, and if you expect Russia (or China, or India, or Iran) to sit still and watch NATO and US run the world their way - you are deeply mistaken.

So if anyone is doing any fueling here, it's US. Cold War ended for Russia, and so did the build-up of its military in the 90's. US however never stopped building and modernizing its legions. Well guess what- Russia is up and running as a direct result.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 02:34 PM
link   
As much as I dislike Russia's current internal crackdown, it's the US & NATO's actions in Eastern Europe that are driving the current rise in tension, not the Russians.

If the Russians started setting up missile bases in Mexico, I think the US might be a little put out too...



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by maestro46
OMG why?!?! do people think Russia is trying to fuel a new cold war. ask yourself this; how would Russia benifit from it?

Regards,
Maestro


Right now Russia benefits from high oil prices due to fears of war. A new cold war would surely drive oil prices even higher. The other market they like seem to like is weapons.

Both markets are better in times of war or at least perceived war.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
As much as I dislike Russia's current internal crackdown, it's the US & NATO's actions in Eastern Europe that are driving the current rise in tension, not the Russians.

If the Russians started setting up missile bases in Mexico, I think the US might be a little put out too...


Our actions are that of a community welcoming new countries aboard to a membership they requested. The main reason they joined was to protect them from russia, which most likely had plans to retake these nations sooner or later.

We offered them a partnership with regards to the missile shield which is purely a defensive mechanism. We aren't exactly installing new nukes in those countries.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a new cold war means oil prices climb, nations have to pick sides, those sides need weapons...we sell weapons, Russia sells weapons, Russsia sells oil, siezes land for national securtiy or lol protection......on and on....Plus the people get a false since of pride..Russians start singing, we wave our little flags and pop chinese fireworks.......and AROUND AND AROUND we go again and again and again and again

money it ALL boils down to that...Russia needs it, and has the factories to supply all the killing us shaved little apes can handle

[edit on 30-5-2007 by TXMACHINEGUNDLR]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join