F-35 & F-22 as seen by thermal cameras

Thermal stealth is rather different than radar/microwave stealth.

a reply to: anzha

Yep and the last video I watched on the Sukhoi (s) said they have a thermal camera for ground and air targets.. Range of the passive thermal detection is of course classified...
3.55 in the following video youtu.be...

Unless there's measurements of other aircraft (with identical equipment, under similar conditions) I don't think these videos show much of any IR stealth either aircraft employ - there's nothing to compare it do. It does show both aircraft have a very hot exhaust.

My understanding is the F-22 and F-35 mostly ignore IR stealth, because IRST tends to be much more limited than radar.

originally posted by: C0bzz
Unless there's measurements of other aircraft (with identical equipment, under similar conditions) I don't think these videos show much of any IR stealth either aircraft employ - there's nothing to compare it do. It does show both aircraft have a very hot exhaust. My understanding is the F-22 and F-35 mostly ignore IR stealth, because IRST tends to be much more limited than radar.

I agree but knowing the few Russians that have crossed my path, "We have unknown at (insert range) so we fired all of our IR missiles which are Russian therefore very accurate. We shot many because we know how sneaky americanski aircraft can be".

It really would be something if after all the billions spent on stealth equipment to evade current radars the Russians come up with a long range super sensitive IR detection device that does not weigh a ton and can be mounted on actual fighter aircraft.

I personally would not underestimate advances in the infrared spectrum.
youtu.be...


Should make the defense industry boys rub their sticky little fingers together as they anticipate the billions more they can skim sorting out this new threat to their already cost more than than its' weight in gold aircraft systems.

a reply to: 727Sky

The F-22 and F-35 aren't invisible to radar though. They are measurably more difficult to detect, and older radars simply can't see them beyond certain ranges (they have to be very close and that distance depends on the model of radar in question) so they are invisible to those but newer radars are more than capable of knowing they are there. They are much more difficult to maintain a consistent lock on though, which has been a problem for air warfare since the development of the radar-guided missile. Even modern AMRAAMs, fired against a MiG-23 for example will miss the target on occasion because the radar guidance system decided to crap out for seemingly no reason.

Stealth meaning total radar invisibility is a myth really. I suppose "Radar detection resistant" might be a more accurate term, but "stealth" is much easier to say, and far more marketable.

a reply to: Ohanka

Agree

How badass was the music up until 22 seconds in.... Then it becomes totally [email protected].

Around 0:50, I was a bit let down because they cut the video. I guess it has valid reasons to not show the full turn but it would have been interesting to see.

Make a hybrid IR/Radar/Sound seeker and stealth will be fairly useless. Couple a laser targeter in there too and I think its over. You could certainly make a AA missile that would be nearly impossible to evade.

a reply to: Xeven

Don´t you think if it´s that easy that it would have been done? Just saying.

a reply to: 727Sky

IRST generally has a range out to about 60 miles or so. IR reduction will obviously reduce that.

a reply to: Xeven

I don't think it's reasonable to have a IR/Radar/Sound/Laser missile. Sound/Laser are pointless.

A dual IR/Radar seeker would be useful against stealth aircraft, but wouldn't make stealth "fairly useless" just like IRST didn't make radar stealth "fairly useless".

I know David's Sling Surface to Air missile does this:

Guidance system

AESA Millimeter 3D Radar + Dual Electro-Optical / (FPA) / Imaging Infrared (CCD/IIR) Seeker + [3-way datalink]

en.wikipedia.org...

I'm wondering what the future AMRAAM replacement will be? Some possibilities:
- Dual pulse rocket motor
- oxygen deficient solid rocket fuel ramjet
- dual band or dual mode seeker
- kinetic kill vehicle (no explosives)
- end-game steering via small rocket motors like SM-3
- dual A2A and A2G use

It would be very useful for the F-35 and F-22, if they could be smaller than the AMRAAM too so more could be fitted.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: 727Sky

IRST generally has a range out to about 60 miles or so. IR reduction will obviously reduce that.

Thanks I did not know where our current/claimed unclassified technological IRST range of acquisition stood.. Still sixty nautical miles ain't nothing to sneeze at. Lucky America has air to air with ranges far greater than that.

originally posted by: 727Sky
Should make the defense industry boys rub their sticky little fingers together as they anticipate the billions more they can skim sorting out this new threat to their already cost more than than its' weight in gold aircraft systems.

IIRC the MIC launched in 2005, 30 times improvement over the Spitzer, all look-down, better than stereoscopic.

Remember the big deal the Chinese made out of shooting a satellite?

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: 727Sky
Should make the defense industry boys rub their sticky little fingers together as they anticipate the billions more they can skim sorting out this new threat to their already cost more than than its' weight in gold aircraft systems.

IIRC the MIC launched in 2005, 30 times improvement over the Spitzer, all look-down, better than stereoscopic.

Remember the big deal the Chinese made out of shooting a satellite?

hahaha.... an I also remember all the brouhaha about all the space junk the shoot down caused. I do not believe in the present world and the tensions thereof that China and Russia are sitting back on their laurels especially with the manufacturing of war implements..

You and I have both seen when the gee whiz boys screw up how our soldiers and airmen die. I could spot an F4 when it was considered our state of the art fighter at great distance simply because of the dark smoke trail coming from its' twin engine gas gusselers.... Damn mig 17s and 21s were shooting down f105s and F4s due to our lousy air to air missiles that were more duds than not... The only reason I bring that up is the whole production equation. If a war started tomorrow without nukes would our less than 872, F22s be able to maintain a mission readiness against all the new Russian aircraft that have been made or upgraded (1400 was the count last year that I read) in the last 3 years ? Yes our air force has one heck of allot more than just F22s and the almost (but not quite yet) F35s.... A kill ratio of 5 to one or 10 to one seems to be the current thinking ?

Hopefully a real war with a real opponent on par with our technical advantages will not happen in our life times ... or the grand kids... but ... things keep ratcheting up if you listen to Putin or any of the spokes persons for the Chinese..

Most articles I have read about China says by 2020 or 2025 at the latest they will be ready to make a serious challenge to the NATO/USA ... Probably written by the military industrial complex but the sources I seem to remember were Chinese news articles...Propaganda.?

I certainly have no inside information and am far removed by choice and age from all the warrior talk and the latest technical stuff.... so take what I say as just thoughts and my personal opinion.. I hate to be number two in a two man death match..!

a reply to: 727Sky

One of the best new air to air missiles in development is Russian.

The Chinese ability to challenge the US is... complicated. Technologically they'll be much closer to us by 2025. Realistically, they'll still be years away from being able to challenge us anywhere but WESTPAC and Asia. Their logistical challenges are still quite substantial and will take awhile to overcome.

originally posted by: 727Sky
If a war started tomorrow without nukes would our less than 872, F22s be able to maintain a mission readiness against all the new Russian aircraft that have been made or upgraded (1400 was the count last year that I read) in the last 3 years ? Yes our air force has one heck of allot more than just F22s and the almost (but not quite yet) F35s.... A kill ratio of 5 to one or 10 to one seems to be the current thinking ?

The last time I was within earshot, I heard a confident voice state that no modern US jet could be taken down ... except by chance. IIRC, that same conversation mentioned the use of 'missile trucks' to minimize the exposure of US fighters to radar. That, and kill so much of an adversary's countermeasures as to make Desert Storm look like the training mission that it was. There was a real old acronym I might not be remembering correctly MFLP (massive, furious, lethal, precise).

Zaphod is in-thread and certainly has a more well formed opinion than mine. I know strategy and tactics rule over technology and sustainable numbers. Far less aware these days of the presiding opinions on air strategy. Even a general overview would be great to hear.

I'd imagine that the heat produced on that video is when its doing stuff that stealth isn't much use for like landing or you've been detected and are trying to avoid an incoming missile so need to punch it, i'd imagine under normal usage it would operate much cooler.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: 727Sky

One of the best new air to air missiles in development is Russian.

The Chinese ability to challenge the US is... complicated. Technologically they'll be much closer to us by 2025. Realistically, they'll still be years away from being able to challenge us anywhere but WESTPAC and Asia. Their logistical challenges are still quite substantial and will take awhile to overcome.

What about the "meteor"? Currently in pre-production, the first Meteor missiles are on-schedule for delivery during 2012. When the missile enters service with the air forces of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK in 2013-15, it will offer full integration on the Saab Gripen and Dassault Rafale jets, in addition to the Eurofighter, with the potential to also equip a number of other platforms, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

Notice the F-35 will be able to mount these as well(potentially) So looks like the US air force is opting for a british missile perhaps?

Oh and also they tested modified Tomohawk missiles recently . These can hit ships.

The current generation AIM-120D, has a two-way data link, GPS-enhanced IMU, an expanded no-escape envelope, improved High-Angle Off-Boresight capability, and a 50% increase in range

Still the meteor sounds like it be a good one for us to use if we can.

Zaphod. You talking about the K-77? That was in 2013 last i checked.

Oh found a intersting article
Russians unhappy with new US missile system

The above could be improved with the new SM-6

originally posted by: anzha

Thermal stealth is rather different than radar/microwave stealth.

Yes, not much stealth on vertical landing but it looks like all the heat signature is below the tail, so somehow the nose is being held up without much heat signature.