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.

 

why stealth?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2004 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Why would we invest so much money into stealth tech. if it can be seen on some radar? how come we just dont make airplanes that can fly faster than the rockets? if we did that then we wouldnt need any stealth. i dont know if it would work though?




posted on May, 20 2004 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Aircrafts cant fly faster then rockets because it is the rockets that we experiment with to go faster and then aircrafts.

Also stealth is really useful against Iraq and other countries like that.

In the 21st century people think there will be only minor war but if a major war comes then stealth against the more modern countries will not help much.

Hey but ever edge counts...

Out,
Russian



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 05:52 AM
link   
once they leave out the weakest link (the pilots) there will be flying aircraft that fly faster and higher the rockets can do chasing them !

but bear in mind if there is a war with low i.q. strategic military that low tech will come again to the battlefield !

it does'nt matter if in a A-10 tankbuster comes a riffle fired from a gun that was made in 1945 or 2001 !!
if the bullet hit in the right place the million dollar thunderbolt goes down !
and that makes a bloody difference on the scale !
one lousy bullet of 25 usa cents or a million dollar aircraft !

tip: how can the USA make the war cheaper ?
-----------------

load up all cargoplanes avaible with rocks found in afghanistan and around.
drop these stones from an altitude between 9000 / 10000 meters on any terrorist camp / weaponsfactory !
the results will be kinda hammering down anything the rocks meet without explosives.
oh yes and very stealthy too ! it hit before they even know it's coming down.

but...this is a very low cost and therfor uncle sam will be very happy and also the taxpayers



[Edited on 21-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Well, in a major war, F-22 CANT be seen on any rader. So before they could shoot, POP there gone out of the air.



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 08:10 PM
link   
i heard that durin either iraq or afganistan wars we were droppin big lumps of concrete on buildings instead of bombs , same job of destroying things just cheaper and less cassualtys from shrapnel.

this maybe just a rumour tho



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:47 AM
link   
as long as we have to follow the law of gravitation this can help very much the usefull way too !

can a genius please help to get the right figures proof here:

if a flying airplane at mach 3 launches a rocket that also is able to fly mach 3 will the actual rocket then reaches the speed of mach 6 ?

if it starts with the platform that already makes mach 3 i think this would add up.


now al you keen "figurators" help me out on this puzzle please



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE


if a flying airplane at mach 3 launches a rocket that also is able to fly mach 3 will the actual rocket then reaches the speed of mach 6 ?


I should think this is correct, as an aeroplane treavelling a mach 1 doesn't fly into its own cannon rounds if it flys while firing, because, the rounds are already travelling at mach one on the aircraft, so then if they are fired and travel at mach 1, they are actually travelling at mach 2.



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   
mm than ... a scramjetengine once it runs on topspeed would serve excellent the platform used to launch fast rockets but as a matter of fact their speed would be doubled or tripled...
curious what northrop,boeing or lockheed will think about this !



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 10:18 PM
link   
You are correct when a missile is travelling at the speed of the aircraft is released and this is called Inertia and is part of Newton's Law of Motion. However when a missile is released from the aircraft the air it is pushed backed by the air. This is called drag and in order for and object to double it speed it needs to spend 8 times as much power to push the missile thorugh the air.



posted on May, 23 2004 @ 06:12 AM
link   
ahum..if the fired rocket also is having a scramjetengine ??
since it is started from a platform also using a scramjet...
would make things easy ofcourse for the rocket to get enough velocity.





posted on May, 24 2004 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
ahum..if the fired rocket also is having a scramjetengine ??
since it is started from a platform also using a scramjet...
would make things easy ofcourse for the rocket to get enough velocity.




I'm not sure the profile of a missile is suitable for the intakes required for a scramjet engine. Really that's why most missiles use rocket propulsion a not jet propulsion.
Considered this example if you hold a car while riding a bike, your speed is the same as the car. If the car was going at 5-10 kmh it isn't too hard to keep up if you peddle hard enough. But if the car was going at 50-70 kmh no matter how hard you peddle you're going to deaccelerate.



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Russian got it right here. For the US, out stealth is probably only marginally effective verse a sophisticated enemy. If we are fighting a sophisticated enemy, then they probably have nukes, so the whole world is going to # anyway.

So stealth really is MOST usefull in taking out key targets in the first strike against weaker opponents. once defences are down, then the non stealthy planes can operate more safely.

Also, I'd like to point out how stealth works - it reduces the RCS. Thus, it basically shortens the range of radar to creat gaps between radar stations. It doesn't just make a plane invisable to radar, it makes the aircraft look so small that it can't be differentiated.



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 12:48 PM
link   
my reference was for the new generation drones !
if the blackbird was able to launch at high speed the D-1 drone than today it must be possible too for scramjettechnology don't you think ?



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Building aircraft that travel faster then the SAM's is not really feasible because you cannot drop bombs at such high mach speeds anyway. The aircraft has to slow down some in order to drop its ordanance. That is the whole need for stealth.
Also on the subject of nukes. In the state that the world is in now, there will never be a war that will destroy the world with Nukes. Too many people in the world now are tired of fighting wars over BS. It'll never happen. We need to be concerned about threats from outside the earth. Talk about your concretre bricks!!! HA



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ash73
Building aircraft that travel faster then the SAM's is not really feasible because you cannot drop bombs at such high mach speeds anyway. The aircraft has to slow down some in order to drop its ordanance. That is the whole need for stealth.


Really? then please explain why the US military is spending money on this, this, or just check out intelgurl's post here.


Originally posted by ash73
Also on the subject of nukes. In the state that the world is in now, there will never be a war that will destroy the world with Nukes. Too many people in the world now are tired of fighting wars over BS. It'll never happen. We need to be concerned about threats from outside the earth. Talk about your concretre bricks!!! HA

Really? You know why Saddam didn't use WMDs in either Gulf War? because we told him if he did, we would just pull our troops out and let the ICBMs fly. Also, tell that to North Korea - I'm sure Kim wouldn't use nukes



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 02:58 PM
link   
QUOTE:
you cannot drop bombs at such high mach speeds anyway

it is you only that talks about bombs dropping !
read the postings please !
there is a big difference between lauching and the dropping of bombs !

the filmclip of the M-21 blackbird launching a D-1 drone at high mach is on the internet !!
so don't tell it can't be done since that filmclip is now some decades old
and proof to you that the technique can be updated to our new modern stealth standards.

[Edited on 24-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I f one of you could possibly show me some proof of any aicraft "inside the atmosphere" opening its bay doors at mach 5 or more-and yes all stelath aircraft must have its weapons internal- I would apreciate it. Bomb or missle, the bay doors have to open to release its payload. And to clear things up, we spoke of destroying the world with Nukes. Korea had has less than a handful of very simple nuclear devices. Add up the numbers.



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ash73
I f one of you could possibly show me some proof of any aicraft "inside the atmosphere" opening its bay doors at mach 5 or more-and yes all stelath aircraft must have its weapons internal- I would apreciate it. Bomb or missle, the bay doors have to open to release its payload. And to clear things up, we spoke of destroying the world with Nukes. Korea had has less than a handful of very simple nuclear devices. Add up the numbers.


Well, the YF-12a was designed to be an intercept version of the SR-71 blackbird, which did Mach 3.2 officially, and probably pushed close to Mach 4 unofficially. It would have used AIM-47A missles to destroy Soviet bombers attacking the US before they could get to the mainland - this was 1960's/70's technology, so use your head and think what they can do 40 years later. Also, you forget that most of these bombers that are so high speed would indeed come closeto or completely exit the earths atmosphere.




This is a pic of the weapons bay doors open for research.

some info on the YF-12A



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
once they leave out the weakest link (the pilots) there will be flying aircraft that fly faster and higher the rockets can do chasing them !

]


In history of air war , pilot most important asset! How can be "weakest link"?



posted on May, 24 2004 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by psteel

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
once they leave out the weakest link (the pilots) there will be flying aircraft that fly faster and higher the rockets can do chasing them !

]


In history of air war , pilot most important asset! How can be "weakest link"?


Because the pilot is the one preventing aircraft from pulling EXTREME G's. In todays modern war, the computers, radar, ect are getting so precise and so complicated that much of an aircrafts use is in how the pilot is emersed in it. Take the F/A-22 for example. Everyone is all hung up on it's stealth, supercruise, TVC and whatnot. But what really makes it amazing is how this is all portayed to the pilot. Through color moniters, it shows all friends/enemys, the range of enemy radar, and when the F-22 will be detected.
So, you are right in a way, but because "dog fighting" is becoming more and more obsolete, you will find that more and more aircraft are going to be pilotless because you can perform more extreme manuevers and your pilots don't die when their planes get shot.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join