New Stealth Coating Said To Work On "All Relevant Frequencies"

A German inventor living in the United Arab Emirates claims to have invented a stealth paint that is useful on "all relevant frequencies". The Chinese have already approached him desiring the paint but he has so far ignored them, hoping that his own country of Germany would be interested.

Article here: German Invents Radar Camouflaging Paint; SPIEGEL ONLINE 2008

Originally posted by intelgurl
The Chinese have already approached him desiring the paint but he has so far ignored them, hoping that his own country of Germany would be interested.

Ignored the Chinese? Commendable!

Rather 'quaint' find intelgurl, good one. I wonder what 'all relevant military frequencies' means though ..

Originally posted by Daedalus3
I wonder what 'all relevant military frequencies' means though ..

Yes, I wonder if that includes low freq radar? I've heard there are new passive solutions for stealth with low freq radar - one has to wonder...

Good read, hope he does well.

Saying RAM is less relevant now than before in military is complete bollocks though.

"small" inventors often have trouble being taken seriously by their countries, seems Germany is no exception. Think of the commercial advantage German tank and warship manufactures would have if they could achieve good stealth results without compromising the shape of the vehicle?? - barrels on guns being a very obvious example. On missiles is another.

Also, if he could make it light enough for aircraft, think cheapo-F22 lol. Eurofighter with near-F22 stealth and Meteor BVR missiles would sell to Japan, Australia and Greece I bet.

[edit on 11-5-2008 by planeman]

A quick check reveals Helmut Essen is real, and does work in the field of radiowave propagation/reflection/absorbsion.

However, I am extremely doubtful that such a material was "invented" in a back yard, and even more pessimistic that experts equipped with a state of the art lab cannot determine how it works.

reply to post by planeman


This is one aspect I think that gets no discussion. The Navy is moving towards reductions of RCS of most of its ships. the Arleigh Burkes have some reduction from my understanding. But you hear nothing about ground forces.

With aircraft like JSTARS and the potential of the space based ground tracking radars, there is no doubt some need for it. Hiding major troop/armor moves from airborn and spaceborn radar would be adventageous.

I posted this topic on the 9th..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

BP

i would sure like to see the patent. I didn't find mention of the number in the article.

don't doubt for a second that it can be done in someone's back yard, especially if they reference the correct information for "inspriation" in their methodology and design.

One design for this type of thing i have seen myself is so simple you would smack yourself in the head for not thinking of it yourself.

Originally posted by BlackProjects
I posted this topic on the 9th..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

BP

Quite so - (I rarely venture out of the Aviation forum)
However, there are certainly questions about this that are applicable to this forum.
For instance is this paint truly functional for "all rellevant military frequencies"?
Low frequency comes to mind here.
Thoughts?

getting it light enough and durable for aircraft use is probably a bigger issue (can't say either way, but clearly not all paints are suitable), and it still wouldn't change fundamental design issues that affect stealth like engine-blades reflections.

All frequencies? H,mmm.... I guess an army would like to have it work on the frequencies in JSTARS (or enemy equiv) and the Longbow's radar (or equiv).


Stealth in a defensive battle, as I see it*, is a force multiplier. We've only seen stealth applied in offensive warfare and only by USA. It'd be interesting to see it employed by a military that thinks and is structured differently, in a defensive operation. The problem stealth aircraft and/or vehicles has for an offensive force is that you have to commit resource to finding these stealth threats, and guarding against them.

If the stealth threat is in the air, then the attacker's offensive combat air patrols would have to be far tighter, and maybe resort to close escort of strike packages. Air crew in general would be far more jumpy over enemy territory. In this way pilots would end up chasing shadows and it'd be a CCC nightmare even if the threat itself is quite modest in footprint. It's like the sniper in the mountain pass effect - a tiny force tying down whole battalions.

Also, if AWACS and JSTARS can't see the stealth threats, then the fighter pilots and ground commanders start to doubt these still valuable assets. I am sure that western military doctrine has come to rely too heavily on these assets. Reverting to the 1960s war-picture where enemy movements are largely unknown and threats materialise at 10km would probably take a lot of people out of their comfort zone - as has the insurgency threat in Iraq.

In this way, stealth in the hands of a defending force is a form of asymmetrical warfare, and it's not one I think any country is particularly well suited to facing.


*Warning: Armchair General

I should think the Navy would be clamoring for this if it truly works as well as advertised. Radar absorbent paint isn't exactly new (in fact it was first used in WWII) and has been used in several projects since then. My basic questions would be what changed to make it more effective -- and what did it do to the weight of the paint?

another factor would be what colours can it be made in, and what the IR signiture impact is. But these are all questions I'm sure the inventer has thought about.

reply to post by planeman


I'd suspect by its very nature (unless he is doing something completely novel) you would find it affects the IR signature negatively. By how much under what conditions, who knows?

This was discussed in another thread.
Radar absorbent coatings are nothing new, going back to "iron ball" paint from the 40's.
I am highly suspect of the claim that it works on all relevant frequencies.

It could be tailored to a particular frequency, but each frequency would require a distinct geometry of its structure to acheive optimal refraction of the waves.

Originally posted by intelgurl
For instance is this paint truly functional for "all rellevant military frequencies"?
Low frequency comes to mind here.
Thoughts?

Looking at it basically, there are 3 ways of dealing with radar waves.

1. Reflection in set directions
2. Diversion around the body
3. Absorbsion


The first is dependent on the surface geometry, so can be discounted as irrelevant to the paint.


The 2nd was demonstrated recently, but only on microwaves and with limited success. While it is possible this paint works in a similar manner, I'm dubious.

news.bbc.co.uk...


The 3rd... well, 2 ways within this. 1 is expend the radiowave energy as heat (iron ball), the 2nd is destructive interference of the wavelengths.

But, it is very much dependent on wavelengths - and usually the depth of the surface. Unless you can change the direction of the wavelength to run within the surface until it is eventually cancelled or absorbed your snookered for longer wavelengths.



I still find it hard to believe someone can come up with this, and the refine it in a back yard. The odds on consistently refining something like this without having a means of verification are astronomical - yet der speigel would seem to suggest this is the case.



edit: typo

[edit on 12/5/08 by kilcoo316]

reply to post by intelgurl


Heh no problem.. That all relevent comment is interesting..We know the Serbs used a low freq radar to detect and shoot down an F117.. Experts say they still had to know where to look.

From Defense tech >>The F-117 first flew in combat during the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989 that led to the capture of dictator Manuel Noriega. F-117s were also flown in the air campaign over Serbia in 1999, and were among the first aircraft to strike targets in the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and in the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

One F-117 was shot down by Serbian anti-aircraft fire on 27 March 1999. Serbian forces launched Soviet-provided "Neva-M" missiles (NATO designation SA-3 Goa) to down the F-117A serial number 82-806. The pilot ejected after the aircraft was struck and was subsequently rescued by Allied forces.

According to then-NATO commander General Wesley Clark and other NATO officials, Serbian air defenses found that they could detect F-117s with their radars operating on unusually long wavelengths. This made the aircraft visible by radars for short times

While low frequency radars might indeed spot Stealth aircraft... aquiring an actual targeting solution is another matter entirely. I suspect that the advances in radar and the antiquity of the F-117 caused it to have a cross section that was large enough to be locked on to.

Oh... here is the appropriate link I found about the low frequency radars:

Low Frequency Radars

I was intending to put these links into the invisibility cloak thread... but the search engine isn't coming up with the goods, and I'm too lazy to keep searching...


Anyway, pukka invisibility cloak (across all the wavelengths) Mark II:


www.sciencedaily.com...

www.newkerala.com...


Science fiction is starting to become science fact folks.