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.

 

What about Russia's Stealth?!?! What about the others?!?!

page: 6
1
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Well, only 20 B-2's were made weren't there? I'm sure someone so inclined could trace them from their serials, that would help. I don't go on Govt reports I tend to believe the BBC. They are world reknowned and frequently off the govts christmas card list because of their true reports. Their reports are so impartial that Fox called the unpatriotic in GW2.


You mean the news organisation, reporting from Iraq, that were assuring viewers that the Americans would never take Baghdad as Marines were driving up and down the street outside?
Perhaps a slight exaggeration but still...

I haven't seen a lot of impartial reporting of the Iraq war. The mass media seems convinced that America will lose the war and run away with their tails between their legs. Other reports, especially from the soldiers on the ground, seem to indicate that America is making astonishing progress in building civilisation in the wake of Saddam. Now the indications seem to be that the WMDs that people were looking for ended up in Syria.

On the subject of stealth, as a concept it's brilliant, in execution it's been rather silly. F117, a subsonic fighter without any offensive weapons anyone. While you might have difficulty getting a radar lock on it, shooting it with a gun seems pretty simple.

Maybe that's why the Russians don't seem to have made a lot of progress with it. They haven't seen any major use for it.




posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 06:39 AM
link   
I find the skepticism of stealth to be amusing. Of course the latest Russian radars, both by the "double diget" SAMS and newest airborne radars, can detect stealth. The thing is that the whole story is that the old one's can detect stealth as well. Heck, anything with a radar can detect the stealthiest aircraft or missile. The advantage of stealth is that it can get closer and detect the target before it is detected. If a F-22 flew right next to the SU-35 it would be detected. Fifty miles out though the F-22 lesurely launches a AIM-120-D at the SU and the SU would never know what hit it, unless the SU got within a couple miles at best. The S-400 will also detect the F-22, but not before the F-22 pilot launched it's SDB and turned around to head for the Officer's Club. Stealth isn't an absolute, just a tool to give a capable and deadly aircraft even more advantages and options. Combined with extensive training and tactic development, it gives a unbeatable advantage. If you really dont' believe stealth works,,,, well it makes more nice targets to shoot.



posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freman


You mean the news organisation, reporting from Iraq, that were assuring viewers that the Americans would never take Baghdad as Marines were driving up and down the street outside?
Perhaps a slight exaggeration but still...



A slight exaggeration? How about absolute cobblers?


I mean the news organisation that had a reporter (Ragi Omar) ON THE STREETS of Baghdad with the US forces, while the US networks were reporting on video feeds in their nice safe studios, and congratulating themselves on how great they were, didn't you see that?



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   
I say it is most likely that the Russians at least had a prototype. The only really secret thing about stealth is the RAM material as far as making a “flying diamond” every one knows that is a stealthy shape. Given the Russians aren’t retards have picked up on this and atleat attempted it.



posted on Dec, 24 2005 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Yup, but if the S-400 can detect and engage the missiles then where does that leave you?

I'd expect such SAM systems to be integrated more like a layered carrier defence that would be able to resist at least some missile attacks



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   
do u hav any proof that it can intercept any missiles and if it can it will defineltely run out of missiles plus heres prrof that an f 15 wit the right weapons can take out an s 400 SAM.www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...

and besides as laxpla stated an F/A 22 or B 2 bomber is capable of taking out the S 400 wit a JDAM



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:37 PM
link   
n by da waii dima a lotta sams can take out futut re threats almist every sam can www.lockheedmartin.com... and so can the patriot n da patriot misssile is gettin an upgrade still less range than an s 400 but close www.lockheedmartin.com...
: barf:



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   

You can make whatever theoretical argument you want. You have no proof that this test was in any way flawed. Other simulations not done by the military, or even Americans have given far more impressive results. The F-22 was given a 10:1 kill ratio against SU-35's. Even if you count in inaccuracies in their simulations, it's still impressive.


I call BS.

One source says that F-15 vs F-22 is 5:1 the next source says that Su-35 vs. F-15 is 2:1 and now someone else says F-22 vs Su-35 is 10:1.

If it takes 5 F-15s to kill one F-22... How can it take 2 F-15s to kill one Su-35 when it will take 10 Su-35s to kill a F-22?



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Actually (whether the argument is valid or not) those figures are not contradictory because however you break it doen 2 x 5 = 10.

So, if it takes 5 F-15s to kill an F-22 and 10 Su-35's to do the same it should take two F-15's to kill an Su 35.

Not saying the logic is sound, as I don't think it is. Only that the figures work.

duh, *slaps forehead* I've got it the wrong way round havent I. Muppet that I am


[edit on 16-2-2006 by waynos]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158
do u hav any proof that it can intercept any missiles and if it can it will defineltely run out of missiles plus heres prrof that an f 15 wit the right weapons can take out an s 400 SAM.www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...


and besides as laxpla stated an F/A 22 or B 2 bomber is capable of taking out the S 400 wit a JDAM


Did you read it?

Decoys? Decoys with turbofan engine blades? Ever hear of radar recognition - once they see they are decoys they wont engage.


It also assumes there is no surrounding radar systems, as in they are in a "circle the wagons" arrangement.


Also, the Russians do have anti-missile systems - bit like an upgraded ZSU, but I cannot find the damn thing online.


Oh, and go search out the range vs altitude/speed for a JDAM.



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Russian

You can make whatever theoretical argument you want. You have no proof that this test was in any way flawed. Other simulations not done by the military, or even Americans have given far more impressive results. The F-22 was given a 10:1 kill ratio against SU-35's. Even if you count in inaccuracies in their simulations, it's still impressive.


I call BS.

One source says that F-15 vs F-22 is 5:1 the next source says that Su-35 vs. F-15 is 2:1 and now someone else says F-22 vs Su-35 is 10:1.

If it takes 5 F-15s to kill one F-22... How can it take 2 F-15s to kill one Su-35 when it will take 10 Su-35s to kill a F-22?


well actually russian it depends on what type of radar weapons etc the opposing plane its using and besides it wasnt done done with mockfights



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316

Originally posted by urmomma158
do u hav any proof that it can intercept any missiles and if it can it will defineltely run out of missiles plus heres prrof that an f 15 wit the right weapons can take out an s 400 SAM.www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...


and besides as laxpla stated an F/A 22 or B 2 bomber is capable of taking out the S 400 wit a JDAM


Did you read it?

Decoys? Decoys with turbofan engine blades? Ever hear of radar recognition - once they see they are decoys they wont engage.


It also assumes there is no surrounding radar systems, as in they are in a "circle the wagons" arrangement.


Also, the Russians do have anti-missile systems - bit like an upgraded ZSU, but I cannot find the damn thing online.


Oh, and go search out the range vs altitude/speed for a JDAM.
yes i did read it but JDAms can be used for SEAD dont u know that and you're forgetting the terrain masking the S 400 wouldnt see the F 15 and not all SAMS are going to be nearby it i mean cmon it has a 400 km range and also i suggest you llok up MALDS they are sophisticated decoys the S 400 dont know about the F 15's based on terrain masking and maneuvers to avoid doppler shifts read more carefully and SAMS dont intercept missilesw ith their own missiles they have to use gattling guns for that and they dont work on all missiles/bombs A n S 400 missile cant intercept A S 400 missile its not designed for that and i wuz pointing out how the S 400's missiles cant intercept missiles not other missile systems


[edit on 19-2-2006 by urmomma158]

[edit on 19-2-2006 by urmomma158]



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   
o yea everheard of diamond back JDAMS they increase the range by over 3 times over 45 miles



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:31 PM
link   
and it wuz my mistake i wasnt sure weather a prevoulsy stated source was using JDAMS against an S 40 only an assumption n heres the JDAM things u requested www.fas.org...

also were in da link duz it say JDAMS were used on the S 400 it was HARMS, cruise miissles,decoys, and a jsow



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
besides how many interceptor missiles are areound the S 400 wat if those are destroyed then wat?



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158
o yea everheard of diamond back JDAMS they increase the range by over 3 times over 45 miles


This is interesting, please link if you got one. I know the SDB has a range of over 60 NM which is quite impressive.

My question is if the JADAM kit can be fit onto a B-61, which would give that nuclear weapon some standoff capability, along with accuracy that would give it hard target hitting uses. *like missile silos.

[edit on 2-4-2006 by Sandman11]



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Does anyone know where I might find a 'Gimp to English' dictionary?



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Does anyone know where I might find a 'Gimp to English' dictionary?


I have been looking myself but i came up empty. They have no pratical solution for this level of corruption they said.


On topic again. I have posted sources elsewhere that strongly suggests that even the mid range incarnations of the S-300 ( by the early 90's ) could engage cruise missiles and the like with good hit percentages. Can't say i have much to indicate this was widely tested by western experts but anyways.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I posted some links to those claims there.

Stellar



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 07:37 AM
link   
I think the reason why other countries don´t develop the stealth technology is they don´t even think about it. ???

Smartest race on earth:

American (American came from Europe, and i thought among them, the smartest are Germany and Italian)

Russian

Jew

Chinese

others

Just kidding guys!

[edit on 04/23/2008 by Eastpolar Commander]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join