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.

 

Shooting down Stealth/F22 and winning the war

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Semicollegiate
 


The same thing can stop an F22 much easier because it is slower duh lol. It is going at a much slower speed and lower altitude than a hypersonic fighter lol.




posted on Apr, 5 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Semicollegiate
 


The same thing can stop an F22 much easier because it is slower duh lol. It is going at a much slower speed and lower altitude than a hypersonic fighter lol.


I agree, that's why I proposed dust/powder as an anti-air defence. The powder/dust would do more physical damage to a faster vehicle, but it would scuff up the stealth outer surface and turbine blades if not damage the stealth aircraft directly.

The problem with dust is the quantity required. Probably cubic miles with a density of one particle per inch( for sand) or something like a thick planar sheet, perpendicular (normal) to the direction of approach for a special powder.



posted on Apr, 6 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Oh right and what exactly are these high powered (I guess that's about as technical as you get) satellites. You really have no idea your just making up stuff. You post absolutely no links referencing any material related to these high powered satellites.

Although what you are saying seems remarkably similar to several Hollywoods movies such as Under Siege 2 LOL.

So do you have anything to back you up apart from Hollywood special effects ?



posted on Apr, 6 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   
ASAT, Jamming via space or ground, and RAM on top of aircraft to counter, US military knew about this for the past 15 years to defeat Space Based Radar.

Some food for though, the Bird of Prey was developed around the same time for a technology demonstrator.


CCS Block 20 and SM-3 anyone?

Good Day



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Laxpla
ASAT, Jamming via space or ground, and RAM on top of aircraft to counter, US military knew about this for the past 15 years to defeat Space Based Radar.

Some food for though, the Bird of Prey was developed around the same time for a technology demonstrator.


CCS Block 20 and SM-3 anyone?

Good Day


There are also space based laser satellites to stop all incoming missles. I heard the russians also made a secret deal with god as well. Therefore they win



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:09 AM
link   
I go on facts



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Laxpla
 


Even if you place RAM on top of a plane it will still reflect a fair amout of material. ASAT is also in possession of the Russians but if you shoot down a satellite wouldn't that lead to an all out war?

What about high powered optical satellites and LIDAR satellites. The US does not have technology to defeat such systems. Therefore stealth is rendered a figment of the imagination.
edit on 7-4-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   
"IF" in possesion of an adversary of the United States. Active camouflage on the Bird of Prey mimics the surrouning environment even with those little satellites trying to sneak a peek, Disguising shadows,changing color or luminosity to match the surroundings. And this was being developed over 20 years ago!

US HAS the technology to own space, ASAT and Jamming equipment would render satellites useless in trying to detect stealth. And have fun detecting Next generation stealth.

www.dtic.mil...

Your a big boy you can research this stuff I don't need to spoon feed you!


Good day.
edit on 7-4-2011 by Laxpla because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Laxpla
 


I was familiar with this technology, but its not in practice on the F22. The Russians also have laser and microwave weapons to fry the f22 before it even takes off. But it is not in practice just as the optical stealth is not in practice. Their are countermeasures to jamming with dedicated channels and AES-256 strength encryption. The optical stealth is not on the F22 dude, so its useless. The f22 stealth is useless because satellites can see the F22 from space.
edit on 7-4-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Laxpla
 


I was familiar with this technology, but its not in practice on the F22. The Russians also have laser and microwave weapons to fry the f22 before it even takes off. But it is not in practice just as the optical stealth is not in practice. Their are countermeasures to jamming with dedicated channels and AES-256 strength encryption. The optical stealth is not on the F22 dude, so its useless. The f22 stealth is useless because satellites can see the F22 from space.
edit on 7-4-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)


Ugh, I don't think you understand what I'm saying, maybe there is a little miscommunication going on.

Before the US sends planes in, more specifically you mention the F-22 . The US will OWN the satellites before we send the planes it. Its common sense?

I'm interested in those microwave weapons and lasers that you mention would fry the F-22 before they take off


EDIT: I will enjoy to discuss this with you further tommrow but for now I'm out
edit on 7-4-2011 by Laxpla because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Laxpla
 


What if they are russian owned satellites and the Russians are just giving their services to another country say Iran. Is the US really gonna try to shoot down a Russian satellite to start WW3?

Here is the F22 cooker:
www.ausairpower.net...



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Laxpla
 


Even if you place RAM on top of a plane it will still reflect a fair amout of material. ASAT is also in possession of the Russians but if you shoot down a satellite wouldn't that lead to an all out war?

What about high powered optical satellites and LIDAR satellites. The US does not have technology to defeat such systems. Therefore stealth is rendered a figment of the imagination.
edit on 7-4-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)


Sorry but optical satellites aren't that effective in tracking aircraft and LIDAR don't exist and would be very ineffective as well.

The more I read your statements the more I think you're basing your argument on Under Siege 2

For a person who claims a physics degree you seem to have little practical knowledge of its application. Most of the things you state especially about satellite technology is just plain made up fantasy.
edit on 7-4-2011 by mad scientist because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mad scientist
 


Haha, tell me how LIDAR wont be effective? Optical satellites already exist duh. How will LIDAR fail? It is already being used by the military to map terrain features. It can see through clouds. What aspect of LIDAR failed?



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by mad scientist
 


Haha, tell me how LIDAR wont be effective? Optical satellites already exist duh. How will LIDAR fail? It is already being used by the military to map terrain features. It can see through clouds. What aspect of LIDAR failed?


Can't you read, I never said optical satellites don't exist and I'm sure I'm far more familiar with them than you. You make the assertion that there are LIDAR satellites which is BS. As I said you get too much of your tech opinions from watching movies.
Come on post a reference to these LIDAR satellites you claim can track aircraft in real time.
edit on 7-4-2011 by mad scientist because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by mad scientist
 


Haha, tell me how LIDAR wont be effective? Optical satellites already exist duh. How will LIDAR fail? It is already being used by the military to map terrain features. It can see through clouds. What aspect of LIDAR failed?


BTW LIDAR CANNOT penetrate cloud cover. You do know lasers are just focused light right?



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   
"Frying before the F-22 Takes off"

Unless you place one of these babies right infront of a airfield where F-22's are taking off, I highly doubt they are going to touch them. I don't get where you get your information from.

"If we assume target hardness for typical COTS electronics, the lethal radius is between 3.8 and 7.0 nautical miles, if the target hardness is greater, the lethal footprint is reduced accordingly"

JASSM-ER would obliterate the few that are in Russian hands, yet I see no sources that they even have any in their inventory. All there is is an illustration.

The JASSM is designed to destroy high-value, well-defended, fixed and relocatable targets which the Russians seem to be developing. Such as the S-400 and this "Ranets-E"

You speculate, Im a realist.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by mad scientist
 


Dude LIDAR satellites exist. They have been using it for ground mapping. We did experiments with lasers when I was getting my physics degree. Yes I know what lasers are capable of.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Laxpla
 


The Pantisir and Tor is designed specifically with the express purpose of intercepting the JASSM-ER before it even reaches the s400. That is the purpose of said systems. The JASSM-ER will be cooked and the S400 commander will be smoking a cigar even before the f22 pilots get back home.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by mad scientist
 


Dude LIDAR satellites exist. They have been using it for ground mapping. We did experiments with lasers when I was getting my physics degree. Yes I know what lasers are capable of.


Obviously you don't because you stated LIDAR can see through clouds, it can't. Also taking a still image of a fixed point is no where even close to the capability of tracking a realtime target.

As for your physics degree, there is some debate as to whether you even have one, especially if you think LIDAR is an all weather sensor



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join