US stealth aircraft generally fly with luneberg reflectors to enhance their RCS, *to prevent the actual RCS from being analyzed. *edit

@matthewhuszarik4173

Жыл бұрын

The same with US submarines rarely run making as little noise as possible. In fact in my entire time on a US submarine we never ran as silently as we could.

@matchesburn

Жыл бұрын

"and prevent the actual RCS from being analyzed" ...Yeah, no. The real answer is it's for operational safety reasons. Same reason it's done during peacetime as well. As for "RCS not being analyzed," I hate to break it to you, but the structural and angling design of stealth aircraft is known - for what I hope are obvious reasons. We know the physics and math behind the designing and reflection of electromagnetic radiation away. We've known about it for over 50 years now - since Pyotr Ufimtsev in the Soviet Union first came up with the equations to do it, wrote about it publicly and was ignored until the Department of Defense got a hold of translations of his work in the early 1970s and they collectively had a heart attack and wondered why the Soviets were ignoring him and passed it onto Lockheed and Northrop engineers. This is math and physics. Good luck classifying that. Now that said, you might be going for the argument of, "Well, yeah, but the RAM..." - that's also an issue. The RAM is always present and thus can be accounted for. Because there's plenty of non-classified (for obvious reasons) civilian ATC radar data on these things flying around and have been for decades. Take the radar values you get from civilian radar, which you know the capabilities of, match them up with range and bearing and the values for the RCS from the physical body returns minus what the radar reflectors (which are visible and have been photographed and videoed before and thus you know its dimensions) would reflect in that band and according to the civilian radar... and you have a very good idea of what the real RCS of the aircraft is. Given the actual value of the flying examples in civilian airspace with radar reflectors taken out of the equation, if you subtract the physical design specifications from that as well you can even get a very good estimate of how much EM radiation that the RAM is absorbing or deflecting as well. Realistically, a college student filing a few FOIA requests and taking a field-trip or two with a camera can figure this out... And they don't have to, because people have already done it. The defense wonk/OSINT community figured these things out decades ago. There's only so much you can hide in an open non-authoritative country where these aircraft are operating in. In China and Russia, it'd be a different story about collecting information and reverse engineering it out. But even then, if you look around, you'll see defense wonk and OSINT working on it. The language barrier is sometimes an issue, but they're no less determined or intelligent than their western counterparts. And I guarantee you that if the OSINT community and Janes know very accurate and close numbers to the RCS values... Any other country with an actual intelligence community knows far, far more. The only way to keep these values secure and unknowable is to not let anyone know that it's flying or exists in the first place. Easier said than done in an free country where there's oversight and curious people with cameras.

@jonathanpfeffer3716

Жыл бұрын

@@matchesburnthe RCS isn’t the secret part, it’s the specific radar signature, and its optimization against diff freq, that info can be used to fine tune radar to better acquire and classify the aircraft. it also cannot be obtained easily.

@mattfleming86

Жыл бұрын

@@jonathanpfeffer3716 And lets not forget that the outside skin is only a partial contributor to the overall RCS.

@TamagoHead

Жыл бұрын

@@matthewhuszarik4173 Great point! Thx for your service.

Radar tech: Sir, we have a radar contact the size of a small bird. Commander: and? who cares? Radar Tech: this bird is traveling at mach 2.

@JimCOsd55

Жыл бұрын

Which is why there are filters within the radar to ignore any return smaller then .5 m2. Otherwise your screen would be lit up with thousands of flying objects with the operator trying to figure out which one is the real danger. We had a a switch called MTI, moving target indicator, to filter out anything not moving at high speed.

@Think.com21

Ай бұрын

😂😂

@user-ij6mf2hp3r

Ай бұрын

Slow moving targets are also filtered out. How slow? Not me.

One other thing to talk about is the fact that the F-35 has rarely been flown outside the US without radar reflectors to make them visible to civil air traffic control radars so they can prevent incidents. I'm guessing the same was true for the 'fleet' of F-22s over the south china sea.

@MrKveite1

4 ай бұрын

Well other countries have F 35's too so you dont know anything about that...

@vinny7114

3 ай бұрын

​@@MrKveite1 Of course we do in order of being allowed to buy any fighter jets specially the F-35 the nation buying it must agree to a set of rules and guides otherwise they can't have it and if they violate it they will lose support, updates and or be completely locked out or even loose the aircraft itself. They can't buy a F-35 and do whatever they want with it. That's not how it works which is why we choose very diligent the country that can buy it

@MrKveite1

3 ай бұрын

Well the F-35 has 1 million bugs in the computer systems so atm it's a pile of JUNK, and by the time all the bugs get fixed it's probably obsolete....@@vinny7114

From Dan Flatley who was a F/A-18 pilot. He recalls the first time he fought against a stealth aircraft: "I remember indelibly the moment in which the AWAC (airborne early warning and control plane) called out to me that there was a Raptor [an F-22 stealth fighter] in front of me at very close range that made me uncomfortable," Flatley told Business Insider in a phone interview. "I had no way of targeting him, no way of defending myself." Years later he had the opportunity to fly the F-35: "What the public doesn't realize is how dominant the difference in information is," said Flatley. While the F-35 performs similarly to legacy jets in some areas like speed, turning, and range, there's a huge, ever-growing information gap between what the F-35 pilot sees and what an F-18 pilot sees. While the F-35 sees everything, it's seen by almost no one. Legacy jets, with the help of AWACs "may have a general idea that there’s an F-35 out there, but they don’t know exactly where we are," said Flatley. "Everything they see becomes the F-35 out there," said Flatley. "Every radar hit, every communication is about the stealth jet. They want to illuminate or eliminate a threat they can't handle." Even extremely capable operators fall prey to the F-35's psychological advantage. "It has nothing to do with their skill or technology. They're at such a technological disadvantage," said Flatley. "I’ve seen guys in F-18s turn directly in front of me and show me their tails cause they have no idea I'm there."

@teddy.d174

Жыл бұрын

It’s amazing how many times you hear the same description which you provided, however they still love to hate the F-35.

@spacecadet35

Жыл бұрын

What is fun is that that information/display system was actually "borrowed" from a much better aircraft. The F35 airframe is garbage. It is designed to be the most expensive product that Lockheed Martin can possibly. That leaves the information system, which is good. Why mot just put the good information on a good airframe?

@fredmdbud

Жыл бұрын

@@darrel7589 There's a difference between detecting an aircraft, and successfully targeting one - it's called resolution. Radars use different frequency bands, the higher frequencies returning range and position accuracy required for a missile to be able to hit a target close enough to cause damage. Make sense now?

@fredmdbud

Жыл бұрын

@@darrel7589 "The Marines have had to pull old F-18s out of storage because of F-35 delays." BS - there are no legacy F/A-18's in the active fleet - they were replaced with newer Super Hornets. And the ones in the reserves are on their way out, being scrapped or being sold to foreign countries, for spare parts if not as working airframes.

@williamzk9083

Жыл бұрын

It's likely the Su 57 is integrating data from several radars, not only microwave radar in its nose but the UHF radar in its wing leading edge the radars of other Su 57, ground radar and the AWACS to give a comprehensive view. The Russians were already doing this across the MiG 31. The same could be done with legacy western legacy interceptors including the F-18E/F.

The factors that you are missing is that normally , stealth aircraft fly with reflectors to protect their stealth during non combat operations In combat, radars don't simply operate freely , They are normally targeted for destruction Their ability to operate depends on various factors. Their range and the range of the weapons used against it

@lgnfve

Жыл бұрын

this video gave me a headache

@orlock20

Жыл бұрын

Radars also have filters so large flocks of bids and swarms of insects don't show up on radar.

@verdebusterAP

Жыл бұрын

@@lgnfve Its like they never have heard of SEAD and EW

@badlaamaurukehu

Жыл бұрын

Like a lightswitch.

@badlaamaurukehu

Жыл бұрын

Custom signature.

Interesting and enlightening information. I certainly appreciate time which you invested in the research and the confirmation of the data presented in this particular video. Thank you again for another outstanding video, my friend. May you and your family enjoy a wonderful weekend. 🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸

Great video and plain and simple explanation of stealth. Great work... Subscribed! Comment section full of experts, of course 😊

@martecastillo5870

Жыл бұрын

viva US protect us of greedy of chinese beho , i d work from US Embassy Mnla, and most of my brother in law are work to navy, marine etc, i lovre America

Fun fact: there’s a difference between a low frequency ghost and an actual firing solution. F22’s an Iranian ghost story for a reason.

Such a pleasure, as always, to hear (and see) your no-bones-about-it, dispassionate, and authoritative summary of matters related to air power!

99.99% of the time American stealth fighters fly around with radar reflectors on them. Not all the time of course, but in most missions we do.

@Argosh

Жыл бұрын

I'd expect that number to be 100% outside of war or missions on what ammounts to a war footing.

@CrayonEater255

Жыл бұрын

@@Argosh Pretty much 100% in international airspace, it’s known some F35s fly without reflectors in friendly airspace like Poland

@haikaloronsentnel138

Жыл бұрын

0K C!A B0T!!!

@SportZFan4L1fe

Жыл бұрын

I find it hilarious that Over decades Stealth technology continues to improve while somehow radar technology has stood still. The Russians can track F-35's and F-22's from take off.

@Argosh

Жыл бұрын

@@SportZFan4L1fe as one can see in Ukraine Russian technology has indeed stood still. The F22 and F35 were built against a projected near peer adversary that just doesn't exist. Not only that, but you seem confused about what that stealth is there for. Its purpose is not to fool ground radar, that's never gonna work, it's purpose is to fool airborne radar systems in enemy fighters. It only has to prevent a lock. That's it. And it does that very reliably.

One thing that is being worked on is senor fusion and linking multiple lower frequency radar systems. When setup correctly and playing with the timing of pulses, it is possible to get very high resolution on stealth aircraft. It takes a lot of processing power to workout what is going on and very accurate clocks to tie the timing of the return signals. That is why you are seeing more overlapping integrated early warning systems with varying timed pulses. And these can be used to guide a missile to get within their radar lock.

I just started wondering if lower frequency radars could be joined together as a large interferometer radar. The idea is based on technology used in radio telescopes to extend the effective size of the telescope array to the earth diameter. A radar receiver array with effective size in kilometers could improve position accuracy enough for a weapon lock.

@dimavologdin5170

4 ай бұрын

You are right. One day I read an article describing Russian radars to form a network and I didn't understand why it is important. Also there was described a methodology when emmiter and reciever are located in different places.

In non combat operations, these aircraft fly with certain reflectors that enhance their RCS so they can be seen by civilian radars. However, while they can be detected, it is MUCH harder to track them for a firing solution!

@TheJackelantern

Жыл бұрын

Harder still when in a combat situation they go under the cover of electronic warfare.

The fact that early warning radars can tell that there are stealth fighters somewhere in the area, but they can't target them easily can be a benefit too. It makes the "enemy" think twice about doing anything (if they are not actively engaged in war) much like your video about limited disclosure of new military technology does for political leverage. The "enemy" knowing that something is out there and could very easily be a threat is probably more of a deterrent so the "enemy" does not initiate military action if that is your goal. Knowing there are F-35s and F-22s patrolling "somewhere" over NATO nations but knowing they can't target them is a great deterrent to starting a war. Not seeing anything patrolling might make them think there is nothing there threatening them.

@ldIezz

Жыл бұрын

yes espically when the f22 has a nuclear payload

@illusion9423

Жыл бұрын

Did you just repeat the same thing 4 times

@pigswhen102

Жыл бұрын

and even with the early warning radar that would be the first thing to be blown up by cruise missiles or hypersonic missiles doesn't matter if you can somewhat detect them because considering the range of new air to ground missiles the chances the stealth fighter in question has already shot off its payload are pretty damn high

@PointBlank65

Жыл бұрын

@@illusion9423 it's a bug with KZread and hitting the submit button

@Chris_at_Home

Жыл бұрын

@@pigswhen102 I used to ask the guys at these radar sites how they liked being the first target while I went around doing a project at them.

The fact that even though the nighthawk was shot down, it was still able to drop its munitions. Any other aircraft would have been targeted from much further away and possibly never had to chance to drop its munitions.

Excellent piece. Thank you. I learned a lot :)

huge difference between "track" and "target" and "weapons lock".

In a nutshell, the more stealthy an aircraft the closer it has to be to the radar source to detect. If a radar can detect targets out to 100 km the size of an F-16( on radar) then it might not detect an F-35 until 50km and an F-22 until 35km. It then has to track and provide a firing solution on the target. The tracking part isn't that hard once it can detect the aircraft, the firing solution is the problem. It might not get a firing solution until that aircraft is only 10km away and by time the aircraft reaches that distance it would have already been destroyed. Even when locked, stealth aircraft have advanced countermeasures to prevent a successful hit. So they are nearly impossible to shoot down even with modern defense systems.

@pawekobylinski4634

Жыл бұрын

It is very good to have stealth capabilities but it cant solve every problem. F22 or F35 can be shot down. You can't think about anty aircraft system as a single piece of radar and rocket launchers standing in one place. Typical battery of Ssystems has many different radars for different purposes standing in different locations.

@breadnewbie6326

Жыл бұрын

just remember how they shoot f117 using old soviet SAM: send the SAM close enough to f117, turn on the SAM's radar, then the SAM seek & destroy the f117. similar or better method probably can be used to target newer stealth using newer missile.

@pawekobylinski4634

Жыл бұрын

@@breadnewbie6326 If you can track the stealth plain with one radar from a far, even if not precise, you can use another radar to follow it precisely from closer distance and use a different radars to lit up plains for rockets to destroy it. You can use rockets with infra red tracking heads. They don't need radars to hit. There is a lot of technical options. Stealth is an advantage and is good to have it but this is not a wunderwafe. its obvious that against more primitive nations its different.

@bennylofgren3208

Жыл бұрын

What are you talking about? Once you are able to track a target, you *have* the firing solution. Once you know the altitude, position, speed and direction the target moves it is "only" a matter of calculating at what time and point in space the target and the missile or projectiles will intersect, and aim there.

@pawekobylinski4634

Жыл бұрын

@@bennylofgren3208 given target is not able to change any of this parameters.

The piece actually speaks to the benefit of stealth. The fact you can see a a stealth fighter and still not lock it up. The firer of the missile had to win the lottery of missile shots to take out an F-117 and this is out of how many sorties.

Great video! Explained it all exceptionally well.

They almost always fly with reflectors that improve their respective RCS, so that ATC can track them. They sometimes don't fly with said reflectors in combat or during training. The reflectors are called luneburg lens. It'd also be very suspicious if the planes were trying to sneak around in international airspace. During peacetime they always have reflectors on them.

@julianpetkov8320

Жыл бұрын

They are only "stealthy" at a very narrow band which is useful for terrorist missions over small countries.

@garysmcdermott

Жыл бұрын

@@julianpetkov8320 Stealth abilities of US planes have been demonstrated during early phase of warfare when they are used to knock out the strategic air command of the target nations (usually advanced Russian anti aircraft systems). This is not terrorism, it is just the first step in establishing domination of the air ways and preventing any shoot down in the next phase of operations which is usually to take out command and control and disable power supplies. The US can actually target accurately and regularly uses mini-munitions or even just concrete bombs to prevent collateral damage, unlike this sloppy Russian business in Ukraine where they "accidentally" wipe our civilian homes and facilities with grotesque regularity.

@bluemarlin8138

Жыл бұрын

@@julianpetkov8320 Wrong. They are more stealthy for all radar frequencies, as well as to infrared detection systems. They overmatch Russian air defense radars, as Israel has proven repeatedly over Syria. Taking out air defense systems prior to major offensives isn’t “terrorism.” It’s how any Air Force would do things if it had the capability.

@julianpetkov8320

Жыл бұрын

@@bluemarlin8138 "Wrong. They are more stealthy for all radar frequencies, as well as to infrared detection systems." Nuh, they light up like christmass trees and also leave a long trail of disturbance, both infrared and particulate. "They overmatch Russian air defense radars, as Israel has proven repeatedly over Syria." Oh you mean when Israeli F16s fire missiles from the safety of the other side of the border? You overestimate the "Stealth" of your MSMs propaganda bullsh|t. Let me give a you hint - no political considerations ever stopped the British Empire from attacking Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yugoslavia, etc. It is only what is waiting for them in Russia that is stopping them from defending their loot "Ukraine". "Taking out air defense systems prior to major offensives isn’t “terrorism.” It’s how any Air Force would do things if it had the capability." Using them to attack sovereign countries is an act of terrorism, regardless of the mission.

@mobiuszero2424

Жыл бұрын

@@bluemarlin8138 lol they are not, if they trying to diminish ALL frequencies they need extremely THICK anti radar paint, which is impossible to do, and no it cant absorb IR and no, its not that effective, you can check how russian S-200 used by syria hit israeli F-35 during israeli F-35 maiden operational mission, israeli said one of their F-35 is badly damaged by bird strike after syria claim they shot one of those F-35 now imagine if F-35 trying to pull that shit to russia or china? they cant stealth planes is useful to cut down radar detection range but thats it, its not totally invisible

Cool. 👍 Always enjoy your vids bro.

The Chinese and Russians can easily track F-22 and F-35 fighters even at long range at present...because the US and allied nations deliberately place Luneburg lenses/radar reflectors on those aircraft. They are designed to greatly magnify the radar returns of the aircraft for safety. In a peaceful environment, or one where you do not wish to surprise someone, this makes perfect sense...as well as not giving away the true radar signature of the stealth aircraft. Another advantage of low radar cross section is that it greatly reduces the power requirement for jamming and other signature reduction techniques: a low radar cross section lets you do many things in terms of other defensive measures, which acts as a multiplier of the plane's capabilities.

@no5tre557

9 ай бұрын

If you belive it is impossible to track it you will be surprised. But regardless of Being able to track it its Still possible to do it on far shorter distance than su57, f15, su27 etc etc. Iz Still has Huge advetange(hundreds of Miles) in comparison with 4th generation

@rodman7224

20 сағат бұрын

Sounds good but Russian and Chinese engineers will or already have a way to target stealth.

Such a great channel. Well done sir

Really liked that you broke down how stealth is a goal achieved by a myriad of systems & tactics, rather than just a few bits of tech that make the aircraft untraceable. Never considered that so👍.

Here's an interesting article about the F35 during a practice evading SAM threats at an air force base in Mountain Home Idaho. "During a recent exercise at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, F-35 squadrons wanted to practice evading surface-to-air threats. There was just one problem: No one on the ground could track the plane." The F35's had to turn in their transponders so the ground crew could see them. In the Red Flag games a British pilot said that he could visually see an F22 but his fire control radar couldn't lock on. They can "see" an F35 by using the wild feed from AM and FM radio stations but they're going to need alot of luck guiding a missile to a stealth aircraft using an AM/FM radio stations.

@PalleRasmussen

Жыл бұрын

Unless the US starts fighting itself (no longer an impossibility) that is irrelevant. What is relevant is what the Russians and Chinese can do.

@tusharrawat8232

Жыл бұрын

Lol the fact that a 4th gen Rafael shot down F-22 in 2009, imagine Rafael F4 vs F-22 now, F-22 is a joke never tested in a real war when Rafael evaded S-400 and bombed cities, and bro S-500 is R E A D Y. F-22 will fall like a leaf from sky u should start testing good escape systems for F-22 lol

@ni9274

Жыл бұрын

​@@tusharrawat8232 That was a dogfight, F22 won't engage in a dog-fight just shoot Fox3 and kill the rafale before he has even a chance to see the F22. S500 is just a variation of S400.

@dabo5078

Жыл бұрын

This could only prove that American AA crews are incompetent. Which we could see too in their students in the middle east which constantly gets evaded by Iranian drones.

@lafosh7234

Жыл бұрын

@@tusharrawat8232 please understand that at that time initially rolling out F-22’s there capabilities where and still is for security concerns severely limited…to shit on the F-22 from one dogfighting instances where one jet which was purposely built to be superior in where to the F-22 is not is a very poor take on your behalf…even said that for what the f-22 is and with its limiters off it can definitely hand most of the fighter jet field there asses

I love the B2 Spirit. It is a masterpiece of ingenuity.

Great stuff!!

Nonetheless they achieve incredibly high kill ratios against 4th Gen opponents at Red Flag and other exercises. Even though they can be detected, they really can’t be “tracked”. No one who’s flown the F-35 wants to go back to 4th Gen. It’s not just the stealth, it’s the overall situational awareness that puts the -35 at such an advantage. I’d suggest reading some of Billie Flynn’s posts. He has an incredible breadth of experience, both militarily and test/research for a contemporary fast jet pilot.

@little_error295

Жыл бұрын

No one said 5th gen is worst than 4th still doesn’t change the fact you can be tracked in stealth

@deadbird9

Жыл бұрын

@@little_error295 big difference between tracking an F-35 and just knowing it's out there somewhere, it's like saying taste and smell are the same thing

@little_error295

Жыл бұрын

@@deadbird9 lol horrible example smell makes up majority of your taste it makes up around 75-95% of taste 😂 you didn’t really help your point with that one

@little_error295

Жыл бұрын

@@deadbird9 also you forget China and Russia both have and are making stealth craft if they know where there even if they don’t have a lock and we don’t makes a huge difference

@deadbird9

Жыл бұрын

@@little_error295 point still stands whether or not it's a good example tracking and detecting are completely different

They can track the F-35....at 1/10th the distance of regular fighter jets. That's what stealth means, not making you invisible but rather hard to detect.

I designed radar systems and I found this, great. Really enjoyed it. Thanks V much for all your effort and putting it together in a fun and entertaining way. I hope it gets kids more interested in science and engineering. Really good. 👏👏

Great video on stealth fighter technology. Much thanks. .

This is why i keep a ka band radar detector in my 1978 transam.

@TamagoHead

Жыл бұрын

Cobra Kai reference?

@re-nz3sk

Жыл бұрын

Ja. and the CB is better than a cell phone for the people i hang with

Nice summary. You presented a very well informed discussion of the subject. I really appreciated your analysis of the F-117 shoot down. Complacency is a deadly trap to fall in to.

@WynnofThule

Жыл бұрын

Then again it's also still crazy to think how it took that much complacency plus a Serbian commander deciding "I'm gonna shoot down an F-117 if it's the last thing I do" just to take one down.

Thank you for the information

Am satisfied with ur elucidation Sir Alex. Too much ❤ love. Gonna follow u on Twitter too 👍

1: True stealth aircraft are not "easy to track" on radar. They aren't easy to detect on radar, either. The F-22 and F-35 are much more advanced than the F-117's earlier technology. 2: SU-57s seem to most likely have an RCS similar to the F/A-18 Super Hornet. Trapezoidal wings don't automatically equal a stealth plane. It doesn't really belong in the stealth platform category. 3: Luneburg lenses are a thing. They're used deliberately when aircraft are flying around which feature low observability ('stealth') technology as part of their design. Even those patrolling around Ukraine. This is to help avoid potential navigation accidents. If on a combat mission, those are removed. A German team claimed to have detected and tracked an F-35 at an air show, but either forgot it had Lunebergs attached or conveniently left that incredibly important detail out on purpose. 4: F-22s have gone deep into Syrian territory, flying around Russian-operated SAM sites at fairly close range, vacuuming up valuable emissions data at their leisure. At no point did those systems every change alert status, which they would have done if detecting them that close. The F-35 is designed with even more advanced technology than those. 5: F-35 pilots have been interviewed and say that, during Red Flag, they actually tell OPFOR anti-air operators where they'll be at which times, just to give themselves a challenge - and still aren't ever really threatened by them. Look up interviews with pilots of fourth generation platforms and they constantly point out that F-22s and F-35s are NOT detected on radar when going up against them. It's enormously frustrating for them, because they are often simulated as dead before being aware the opponent is even anywhere near them.

@teddy.d174

Жыл бұрын

Excellent points made, especially regarding 🟥 flag and the Raptors in Syria.

Thumbs up. Good homework there. Grant's Radar Game is a must read for anyone interested in the stealth game. It's richly illustrated and, for or someone a little familiar with these things, it provides a comprehensible breakdown of the concepts. On a general note, it should also be mentioned that modern stealth aircraft employ electronic warfare measures to aid passive stealth. They go hand in hand. Certain aircraft also integrates auto pilot and navigation systems to optimize flight routes and even maneuvering aspects to minimize the radar cross section towards the opponents radar systems, whether in the air or on the ground. And of course there are 'stealth tactics' and mission planning which is a whole chapter by itself.

Stealth is all about making it hard for other fighters to track you **accurately** at a distance, to interfere with standoff and beyond-visual-range combat so you are more defensible. It makes you more survivable if someone launches in your direction, and the strength of that protection grows the further you are from a sensor. Its also about being able to make *accurate* and *confident* decisions with information, and stealth denies your opponent to know how many of something is out there, and how far away it is, or what direction it is moving in.

@jameshughes6078

Жыл бұрын

Yup. Doesn't matter if they know of your existence if they can't actually get a hit or even target lock on you

@rydz656

7 ай бұрын

Yeah right, they can be tracked with heat signatures and air displacement easily.

@tuoffy7635

7 ай бұрын

@@rydz656 flares

@tiagodagostini

5 ай бұрын

The direction is not hard with any minimal triangulation. What you have a hard time is to get accurate speed and position with accurace of a couple of meters (needed to fire something at it)

@dboysify

5 ай бұрын

yeah but he compared the current stealth jet with the old low freq radar used by a no longer exist yugoslavia...he didnt dive into how far and sophisticated radar has become...its like comparing a medieval shield with a gun...

"Sir, I've detected a bogey!" "That radar contact looks tiny and weak. It can't have much radar cross-section. It's just a bird, Corporal." "Sir, how many birds have you seen flying Mach 2 at 30,000 feet?"

Glad you covered the use of stealth and why it's used.....seems like stealth is misunderstood by many people. I think many people think 'stealth' equates to "can't be seen on any ground radar"....but, they miss part of the point of radar lock on weapons. try being in a jet, trying to intercept a stealth F22 raptor, and see if you can get a lock onto it. Good luck! 👍 I mean, I can see when my local PD chopper is overhead....try hiding from the FLIR camera

@sean70729

Жыл бұрын

I saw an article where a pilot participating in DACT exercises against the f-22 said he could see it visually but his weapons systems simply couldn't

@knoahbody69

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, but this is all over FB and the trolls say "Russian and Chinese RADAR can detect F35 and shoot it down". It sounds like the guy was extremely lucky and a lot of errors were made by the USAF that led to the downing, mistakes that probably won't happen again.

You need to develop shape-changing aircraft that confuse targeting tech, by actually transforming the physical shape. An aircraft that has a static shape is easy to lock on to. This dovetails with the idea that vertical tails make better aerodynamic performance, but the angled tails deflect radar better. If the tails themselves change from vertical to angled, they can be adjusted as the situation requires. Even the shape of the wing or the body can alter to confuse the locking mechanism. So yeah. You need to build the X-wing.

@sethadkins546

Жыл бұрын

Maintenance costs go 📈📈📈

F-35's engagement range is longer than radar systems, so much of their stealth comes from their ability to strike from outside of radar range.

@magadadaskolin4667

Жыл бұрын

@@PetraNieBro Era of dogfighting is long gone. Also even if they spot it, they cannot lock on to it. That`s what they are used for. aka you see me? i dont care, my rockets have longer range than your lock on range

@spencerstevens2175

Жыл бұрын

@@PetraNieBro No its not. The radar signature of low observable aircraft is so small it cant be targeted by missile lock etc until its well within the f35s weapons range. Ive heard as close as 20 miles. The F35 is never going to get that close to a target on purpose. That doesnt even take into account if electronic warfare pods are active etvc. Thats just cross section.

@liwenhu5864

Жыл бұрын

If outside of radar range is being counted on, this is a big misleading for F35 pilots. Because F35's power source limited their radar range also. If enemy's radar range is not functioning well, so is F35's if not even inferior, so don't count on it!

@spencerstevens2175

Жыл бұрын

@@liwenhu5864 that's why we have awac and digital integration

Meter wave radar(VHF radar) can detect any stealth fighter, but its resolution is not enough to guide weapons, so it needs to be combined with other fire control radars. Therefore, only a country with a complete system can deal with stealth fighters.

Wow! That radar operator was lucky and we (USA) was sloppy. During Red Flag exercises, F-15 pilots claim that the F-22 can kill them before they even know there's a threat.

@vasilije94

Жыл бұрын

That radar operator was skilled and educated, not lucky. He knew exactly what to do and where to search with limited resources and firepower he had. He judged the situation perfectly and every decision he made was thought out and was the right one to do. Btw he also has Serbian inteligence to thank. They were watching F-117s basically lift off in Italy. So not luck. Just a great work and risk taken which payed off in the end.

@kameronjones7139

Жыл бұрын

@@vasilije94 no he was still lucky that it didn't change course at any point otherwise it wouldn't have worked

@vasilije94

Жыл бұрын

@@kameronjones7139 just because the enemy is incomptentent doesnt mean you applying every right move to get him is "lucky". He got the info from inteligence when planes got up, he went to the specific area where probability of catching specifically F-117 was the highest, he used the right scans, he knew weather would have him probably go alone and decided to risk his life and do another scan which was against the rules. The SAM was old as fuck and he used it to its maximum capability to get the most modern plane ever at the time. That is not "lucky" to make all those decisions right.

@kameronjones7139

Жыл бұрын

@@vasilije94 yes it does again he got lucky in that zero things changed otherwise he wouldn't have been able to do anything. You are making a false argument in saying I think it is all luck which I never said but to sit there and say luck didn't play a huge part in it is false

@probusthrax

Жыл бұрын

@@vasilije94 and he was lucky. Everything had to align just right for him to get that shot. That's what I meant and yes, he was extremely skilled. Hats off to him and his crew.

Most radars can detect stealth aircraft if the aircraft is flying close enough. The stealth aspects delays the detection so that the aircraft can detect the radar before the radar detects it. It means the US stealth can potentially accomplish its mission without being detected as opposed to what you are saying. US stealth fighters not only relies on angular shaping, it uses RAM and electronics to stealth itself from radar. The f35 has the option to jam and attack the enemy radar before it gets detected. The B21 is said to rely on distance by flying at high altitude in addition to stealth to avoid complete detection by radar.

@rickbase833

Жыл бұрын

Amen to this and many similar comments. Not only does the shape and coating help delay detection.....those things also make delay the ability for anti aircraft weapon systems to create weapons quality tracks that guided missiles can use to lock onto at longer ranges...until the SAM goes terminal at closer range.

@spacecadet35

Жыл бұрын

The trouble with RAM is that it only stop short wavelength radar. And if you are using electronics for 'stealth', those electronics are themselves detectable. To the best of my knowledge there are at least three mature technologies that can detect, track and missile lock onto an F35. That is battlefield technologies and does not include at least two satellite technologies. And there are at least two 'tricks' that everyone in the field knows for detecting any stealth aircraft in flight. "Stealth" as sold by Lockheed Martin, was a selling strategy, not a real world, useful, technology. As has been pointed out, anything that is good on an F35 can be put on a better airframe (and in some cases actually did come from a better airframe), and everything left over should be thrown on a scrapheap.

@cc23001

Жыл бұрын

You watched the video, congrats

@MrStylz1996

Жыл бұрын

Good comment, basically outlines the article. Bottom line is this. Even if an adversary or our allies learn how to track stealth better, stealth still offers an advantage over 4th generation aircraft. 4th gen will still be tracked before a 5th generation will be. So the benefit to stealth may shrink but stealth will always be at an advantage over non stealthy platflforms. Especially in BVR combat. I know China speaks of Quantum radar using paired photons. Shooting one down range and keeping one to study or observe. Good in theory but not ready to use in the field. I don't know enough about Quantum Radar but it shows some promis.

@Appletank8

Жыл бұрын

That's exactly what the video talks about. Stealth is mainly targeted at delaying missile guidance radar. While early warning radar might notice a stealth fighter coming, they can't get a target lock for SAM launchers.

Awesome job. U opened my eyes. Thanks

there was one phrase in this that caught my ear it was ... 'can feasibly allow' ... so we can say when reality prevails it is difficult to track a stealth aircraft and more so in a combat scenario when the disparate systems are not always functioning as a cohesive unit.

Let's see: The Israeli AF F-35 “Adir” penetrated Iran's airspace, circled high above Tehran, Karajrak, Isfahan, etc... Undetected, and only broken to the public by a Kuwaiti newspaper 🤣 😂 Additionally: The Israeli Air Force has upgraded its F-35 fighter jets to be able to reach Iran without mid-air refueling, according to the Jerusalem Post as of Wednesday, Jun 8, 2022

@hopper131

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, they added low observable external drop tanks. Oooooh!

@artnull13

Жыл бұрын

To be fair they also said: Khamenei, who received this information, now suspects a cooperation between Russia and Israel, and that the Russians gave Israel the secret code of the Russian radar in Iran - according to the Kuwaiti newspaper.

@FarmerDrew

Жыл бұрын

@@artnull13 if that's true, it could be a Russian defector tired of the anti-Semitism coming from high places in Russia; for example, Maria Zakharova blamed Jews for the downing of MH-17, when it was actually Russian separation terrorists. Maybe they have a mole giving Israel intel on Iran, to sap Russia and Iran at the same time.

@artnull13

Жыл бұрын

@@FarmerDrew I’m just saying that’s what’s the Kuwaiti newspaper said, it could be Iran trying to save face and blaming the Russians rather than saying an F-35 can fly over Tehran. Politics there aren’t exactly straightforward anyway even though Iran and Russia have close ties regarding Assad and the nuclear issue.

@anguswaterhouse9255

Жыл бұрын

As the video explains, they knew it was there, they just couldn’t target it

Russia and China: We detect F35 Also Russia and China: Develop their own Stealth Fighter

@sutapasbhattacharya9471

Жыл бұрын

LOL - India pulled out of joint Indo-Russian development of the Russian Sukhoi PAK57 'stealth' fighter as it was poorly engineered, powered by old and unreliable engines and too expensive. It did not meet the specifications that India wanted. It is basically a failed project. The Russian air force has been hiding over Ukraine as it is scared of both the old S300 system that Ukraine has and the Western-supplied Stinger and other man-launched anti-aircraft missiles. Unlike the USA, Russia cannot establish aerial dominance as it is not technologically capable of doing so. Similarly the Chinese [who steal tech from both the USA and Russia] pseudo-stealth J-20 can be detected with conventional radar and the Chinese are incapable of building high-powered jet engines for them. On the other hand, India is being offered collaboration from Rolls Royce, French and US engine makers who know how to make decent jet engine for its 5th generation AMCA.

@BrianBourgeois-

Жыл бұрын

“Stealth”

This is shaping up to be a contest like armor vs weaponry. The targeting will adapt to Stealth, Stealth will adapt to targeting, and on it will go until something else replaces the whole concept. Just like the super dreadnoughts, something will render it obsolete. Obviously, these things will still be around, just less relevent.

Russia and China are perfectly capable of seeing F22s/F35s from ground radar. They can watch them sneak up on their fighter jets and shoot them down😂

@Elendrian

3 ай бұрын

Seeing, maybe. Targeting, no.

The RCS of the F-22 is about the size of a Bee. Also as has been mentioned on here they fly with Luneberg reflectors during peace time operations. So even if China and Russia can detect the RCS of a Bee. It won't help them, and here's why. The exceptionally low RCS makes a stealth aircraft difficult to detect and more importantly significantly decreases The distance of detection from the aggressor force. The Air Force refers to this as breaking the "kill chain." In other words they don't have to completely defeat the radar from the aggressor, instead they decrease its effectiveness to such a state as to be rendered useless. The way I heard one Air Force General describe it was, We don't have to defeat everything in the hostel actors command and control chain We just have to defeat enough of their command and control to render it useless. So, yes it's probably true at some point when stealth aircraft get close enough you will see them on radar just as you would an F-22 on radar. But, by time you detect the aircraft it's too late.

@knoahbody69

Жыл бұрын

If I understand low frequency, this means the waves are big. If the waves are big, they go far. If the waves go far, they can be detected at long distance and the Pilots can adjust their tactics accordingly.

@fredd3.14

Жыл бұрын

supersonic bees sure be common huh

@knoahbody69

Жыл бұрын

@@fredd3.14 To be is to do. -Socrates To do is to be. -Plato Do-be-do-be-do. -Sinatra They Don’t Think It Be Like It Is, But It Do - Oscar Gamble.

@fredd3.14

Жыл бұрын

@@knoahbody69 it b how it bee

@knoahbody69

Жыл бұрын

@@fredd3.14 Let it b...kzread.info/dash/bejne/iaGKxpt_Ycm9YJM.html

Pretty good coverage of F-117 shooting down... Still, new methods are being developed. One is heat signature. It is also decreased, but still present and visible. So, if you incorporate a heat-seeking missile to come close to a stealth fighter via radio guidance and then engage its seeker head (Turkish Hissar SAM uses this method), he can be in trouble (especially since this is fully passive and he has no idea there is a missile in the air). Also, there are ground stations that are set to find anomalies (like active jamming) and home in on that. The wildest theory is by several heat sensors working together and triangulating... And let us not forget that once detected, fighter interceptors can be sent to that area and annoy him, potentially making him abort his mission... Also, there are often several receive antennas per one radar, in different locations, since radar deflection goes in different directions and not all angles are covered in the same way. For now, stealth is in the advantage, but the eternal race between a tool and a counter tool is on... U2 had safe flights until S-75 (SA-2) smashed him... F-117, you mentioned... And loss of one stealth is disastrous since it costs more than regular planes, by a large margin... So, why invest in stealth planes so much when several regular planes and drones can get the job done as well, for a lower price? Maybe that is why F-22 is discontinued and is no longer in production... Finally, they are expensive not only to make, but also to operate. There were reports that the US airforce is finding they are wasting a lot of money in Alaska on interception of Russian Tu-95. They are prop driven and use less fuel and are much cheaper to operate. So, for every F-22 intercept, USA burns way more money than Russia does and the attrition starts to show. That is why they are bringing back the F-15.

We still have military generals still just one month ago saying we got a team that is invisible to enemies. Relying too heavily on stealth is just overconfident.

really great content, thumbs up to you.

Some things never change. When B-52s went to Hanoi state side planners had them repeat routes & altitude until local general inThailand gave up his career to stop this

@pogo1140

Жыл бұрын

Robin Olds used that same USAF planning stupidity to bait the NVAF into the air so his F-4's could kill them.

Just as US submarines aren’t completely silent US war plane aren’t completely invisible to radar. What they do, do is allow our war planes and submarines to see their submarines and war planes before they see us. He who sees first and shoots first wins 90% of the time. Also remember surprise is still a major factor because to see US submarines and war planes you have to be focused on looking for them. This is something that can be maintained constantly.

@ALegitimateYoutuber

Жыл бұрын

well difference is submarines can't be 100% by design, because being to stealth (silent) gives them away. no that's a thing, they have to make noise. because they found out being to silent was detectable, since why would there be a void in the ocean. It's actaully funny and crazy at the number of ways we have to detect things. Often why we always use numerous things.

@eleventy-seven

Жыл бұрын

F-35 has a stealth cone 60 degrees forward. This is radar does not include IR. Latest IR detection is out past 100-150 km. A Saab Gripen has superior power to weight handles and far more weapons. The trade offs for such limited stealth make the F-35 almost useless. I wish we still put out great planes but not anymore.

@bwtv147

Жыл бұрын

Very early stealth experiments were with a submarine. Navy radarmen knew that their surface search radars showed them where the ground is but had little or no reflection from asphalt roads and runways. The navy tried coating a submarine with asphalt and sailing it on the surface. Putting enough asphalt on the sub to hide it from radar made it too heavy to use.

@williamzk9083

Жыл бұрын

Some of the latter SAM's have active radar terminal homing or infrared imaging terminal homing. If you can use a VLF radar to place a missile within 1000m of a stealth target you can probably acquire it and hit it. If you can fuse the data from two or more radars you improve the accuracy. Not just bearing and range from a single radar but triangulation from 2 or more. The radars are bigger, bulkier and more expensive but I think it can be done. You might have multiple infrared search and track in many areas that are cued by the radars to get an exact fix.

@matthewhuszarik4173

Жыл бұрын

@@eleventy-seven Total weapons load out for the F-35 is 8,200Kg 25mm cannon 180 rounds for the Gripen it is 6,500Kg 27mm cannon 120 rounds

During WWII, my dad was a rear turret gunner in TBMs. Without radar, on night patrol missions the way they spotted enemy ships was to look down for their wakes, which were often slightly illuminated by bioluminescent ocean organisms that had been stimulated to glow by the wake turbulence. The glowing wake of a ship formed a “V” below, so the TBMs would dive and make their torpedo runs targeting the vertex where the sides of the “V” converged. Kaboom. Any aircraft flying through the air leaves a V-shaped wake that can be detected by doppler radar, and the same targeting technique can be used to target the aircraft. Your local TV weather girl with the right kind of doppler weather radar could track and target a “stealth” aircraft. By the way, my dad liked night missions far better than day missions because at night enemy fighter aircraft were not on his tail on those low, slow torpedo runs…during the day, he was staring back at the face of a Zero pilot with guns ablaze and a hailstorm of slugs all around him.

@curtisthomas2670

Жыл бұрын

Might be mistaken but didn't a guy in the movie Under Siege use a similar technique to detect a stealth plane??

@mrp8488

11 ай бұрын

​@@curtisthomas2670- That's where he got the idea.

@kwkfortythree39

9 ай бұрын

So USA wasted billions of dollars in stealth, like all other nations right now?

@1Ministras

4 ай бұрын

That's the most nonsensical thing I have ever heard. Air is not water, it has very little mass and momentum. Given how strong winds are in the atmosphere your V-shaped wake made by F-35 will dissipate faster than you can actually detect it. Not to mention finding a shift in the air with a radar? That is very very doubtful to me. Using your method on air is like using the same method on water, but there is a hurricane and 50 ships are sailing at the same time.

Being able to *track* a stealth fighter is *very* different from being able to target one well enough to intercept it or shoot it down.

@louischau7982

4 ай бұрын

Well if you can see where is the plane you can shoot it down … is that common sense ?

@leezhieng

4 ай бұрын

China already posses hypersonic missile capability for some time now... so yes they can actually hit F-35 with their missiles

@Elendrian

3 ай бұрын

@@louischau7982No it's not. You don't know what you're talking about.

@Elendrian

3 ай бұрын

@@leezhiengHypersonics are useless if they don’t have an accurate targeting solution in the first place.

very good detailed analysis👌👍

Great episode

I wouldn't be surprised if on the continental US we have a combined radar system made up of a lot of passive radar receivers to give us a very good air space picture. we have so much active radar between FM/AM stations ATC radars and weather radars that you could passively receive the reflections on those signals to get a good picture. the most difficult piece would be getting all the data to a single center for processing

@BlackCeII

Жыл бұрын

Am/FM is not radar....

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

@@BlackCeII True, but ambient non-military RF signals in an area can potentially be used to look for ELINT reflections. It's certainly not an accurate way of detecting or tracking something, but it's not without potential value.

@orlock20

Жыл бұрын

My tinfoil hat belief is the U.S. military was scared that the Soviets were working on stealth programs so it created the idea of UFOs as alien objects to get more people looking up over the skies and reporting odd aircraft. Eyes in the sky was the only backup if military radars were obsolete. The military had to give a reason to do this while keeping its stealth program secret.

@dongately2817

Жыл бұрын

You just described the raison de’tat for NORAD

@DUKE_of_RAMBLE

Жыл бұрын

@@BlackCeII You're not thinking about it in the right way. If you have all these signals that are well known, transmitting 24/7 at a constant power, you can set up an antenna to receive it. You record that for a long period of time and compare it to more advanced systems that give you known results (ie RADAR) in order to work out when there is nothing in the immediate airspace... or in other words, to establish a "Baseline". When something comes near, now the received signal will (or can, theoretically) change as a result. By how much, is slightly irrelevant as long as it's outside of margin of error, it's the fact it does change is the important part. From there you work towards determining how much it changes for what objects are passing by. Then, all that antenna (and receiver) has to do is sit there and report signal values. Now, place more, and more, and more of those antennas, and you begin to have a much higher fidelity. (see: "Very Large Array" of satellite astronomy, for an analog) If it can reflect a radio wave, you can then track it (albeit with some effort), and passively.

It is a stretch to call the Su-57 either a 5th generation or stealth aircraft. J-20 certainly, but SU57, just no. Even if they had built more than a handful of them, they would have nowhere near the capabilities of F-22's or F-35's. Even a casual observer can look at them, see all the rivets, see all the panel gaps, and know that they won't have a significant reduction in RCS compared to - say - an SU-35. Unlike the F-22 and F-35 which were built from the ground up as low RCS fighters, the SU-57 tried to add the capability in after the fact, and that just doesn't work.

@johnpaul3099

Жыл бұрын

Ok

@davidmbikumbix5871

Жыл бұрын

U seem to know too much, yet too little. Do some research

@ulrichkristensen4087

Жыл бұрын

The J20 has a cross section of a F18 superhornet without tanks

A stealthy plane armed with a stealthy payload is a really dangerous combo, both for hypersonic and subsonic jets & payloads!

Great video

This is also how the Soviets were able to shoot down the U-2 of Gary Powers, they routed his mission along a path that just been used and the air defenses had been greatly increased in the area in the hopes of another U-2 overflight.

@zacharyberry5019

Жыл бұрын

Not to mention Russian SAM’s had been improved moving their flight ceiling past the point of the U2’s making them obsolete. That’s why they turned to speed with the SR71

@Klaatu-gl7jg

Жыл бұрын

Popovs just increased a missile's range

@dougcoombes8497

Жыл бұрын

@@Klaatu-gl7jg It could still barely reach the U-2s 70,0000 foot altitude. Powers needed to fly very close to the SAM launch site to be close enough for them to successfully launch on his plane. There's also some question about whether the missiles shot at him were homing in on the ECM emitter in his tail.

@Klaatu-gl7jg

Жыл бұрын

@@dougcoombes8497 The U2 aircraft that would be withdrawn from service around 2025 is now flying high above a country's airspace, shooting it down would be a declaration of war. Add the X15 and the battery of military satellites, identifying the favorite TP of putin and the patriarch Kyrill, both products of the KGB, would be child's play especially adding itching powder.

Stealth isn't invisible. But no, you can't "track" a full stealth design on a mission. You can get some idea of a target, but you'll also eat a ARM pretty quick too.

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

Really it's a bit harder than that. In order to get a periodic "maybe something over there, I think, possibly, now i lost it" style of radar return, the plane has to be ignoring your radar, and sloppily showing you 'less than ideal' angles on the aircraft. Which won't happen in combat.

Awesome explanation!!!

I doubt the J-20 or Su-57 have low frequency radar on board , so going head to head in a BVR fight by the time you spot a raptor on your radar you can probably visually spot the AMRAM that’s about to hit you.

Both the F-22 and the F-35 have non-stealth modes when flying under ATC.

This explains why some of the renderings of the NGAD have vertical stabilizers that retract flush into the body. Most engagements happen at BVR and most countries don’t allow their pilots to wander into the MAR where they’re likely going to get killed anyways. Stealth fighters can do it but why put your super expensive stealth fighter at risk when he can stand off and have the advantage? The thing most people don’t understand about air combat is that a lot of things have to go wrong for two aircraft to enter into the merge and have an actual dogfight. With modern FOX 2 missiles like the Israeli Python and the AIM-9x Sidewinder just to name a few, it’s likely no one is going home when a dogfight occurs. The Israeli missile is so ridiculously sticky that it makes any 4th Gen fighter at least even with an F-22 because a lock is almost a guaranteed kill with those things. Did I say they are ridiculous? Anyways, having the vertical stabilizer retract is a great compromise since maneuverability is likely only important when you’re trying to engage in a dogfight and when you’re maybe trying to go defensive against an enemies missile launch. Sometimes you might have to do some hard turning when evading a missile. Typically that’s not the case but as you get closer you have less time to evade and then you likely need to turn a bit harder to get into the notch

@pogo1140

Жыл бұрын

What happens when the Stealth fighter meets another stealth fighter? Neither will see each other at BVR ranges.

@7gmeister

Жыл бұрын

@@pogo1140 let me put it to you another way.. If you know you could survive by maintaining a 12 mile gap between you and the other fighter but if you cross that gap your most likely going to die what would you do? That’s the situation every fighter pilot is facing in the modern world and it’s only going to get worse as technology gets better. The Israeli’s have developed a heat seeking missile that’s a high off bore missile but it can also make radical 180 degree turns over and over again and whenever a Sidewinder would not track and miss this thing will reacquire the target and go in the opposite direction and score a kill. It’s the ultimate fire and forget missile because if a lock is attained and you fire it it’s probably going to get you a kill That’s how good the tech is getting. Fighters and pilots that enter into the merge die. When there’s mutually assured destruction you avoid going there altogether. That’s just how it is and that’s why it rarely ever happens

The early warning radars which usually are meter wave radars can detect stealth fighters from long range, usually 300-500 km away. But meter wave radars do not provide the accuracy needed to guide missiles. So surfuce defense systems have the issues that they can't lock and shoot stealth fighters at their designed range. The best way to defend stealth fighters are stealth fighters.

What about the heat signature of the stealth aircraft from its engine to shoot down with a heat seeker, after detection with an L or S band radar?

Nicely done video. The lesson's learned from the SR-71A program which included early Stealth technologies that would become the backbone for Future "Stealth" applications and usage. The SR-71A's also had the ultimate complementary tech to stealth - Speed. Yes the BlackBirds could be seen on radars but bye the time that would take place they had already did what they were sent to do - gather intelligence ( Spy ). Having the most accurate and up to date intelligence is fundamental for the best possible success and outcome for your operations.

@spencerstevens2175

Жыл бұрын

They also usually flew totally outside hostile countries borders. They would fly so high they could see hundreds of miles around them

@augustoenriquebarretoreyes6735

Жыл бұрын

Do you remmember this name ¿Francis Gary Power or Powder???? its sr-71A came down and not for himself. Today every Mig-31 can tackle this task.

@johnpaulbacon8320

Жыл бұрын

@@augustoenriquebarretoreyes6735 Hello. Yes I know of Francis Gary Powers - He is the pilot of a Lockheed U2 spy plane that was shot down in Russia and what was responsible for the acceleration of the development of the spy plane that would replace the U2 ; the SR-71A BlackBird. The differences between the U2 and the SR-71 ia as different as day and night.

Yes, certain radars can track stealth aircraft. But now, try tracking a mix of stealth and non-stealth assets, all while your radars are being targeted one by one, you're being jammed/spoofed and with cruise missiles in the air. Yeah.

@bruh41232

Жыл бұрын

Plus add in the old-school methods the Israelis sometimes love, a good-old-fashioned badass special forces platoon with nothing to do that day but whack S-400's and S-500's and go back for beers.

@arthurhenare3016

Жыл бұрын

Fry and cant fly, any way, get em up into action the call.

Can a weapon system use both low frequency radar, to guide a missile toward the general direction of the fighter, and high frequency radar on the missle itself, for accurate targeting once the missle gets close? Or use a visual system (with AI image recognition) for final targeting?

@nyamutota

4 ай бұрын

Many modern missile systems come with their own radar. Useful for locking in on target and evading defence systems

Excellent show

The US, UK, and Dutch F35s can enter enemy airspace that are even looking for stealth aircraft attack and leave the enemy airpace undetected , depending if you define blowing something up as remaining undetected. Its a very well known fact that stealth aircraft can be tracked, and you came back to the old argument about bomb doors from the aircraft lost in serbia i think. What about the 2 stealth aircraft UNDETECTED in Austria that got photographed flying with a C130? The Austrains only knew those aircraft where there when the americans lodged a flight path for a c130 for the 3rd time in a week and it was unusual and they despatched 2 fighters to take a look. When they fighters intercepted them, they were shocked to see 2 stealth aircraft completely undetected flying with the c130 en route to iraq . They took pictures to prove it because the ground controlling radar didnt pick them up and the pilots didnt either so had to take pictures to prove it. Anyway yes stealth aircraft can be tracked the russians and chinese versions prove that, the f35 can be tracked but when the US airforce decide they dont want to be tracked they can turn on a full tech package along with the stealth shape and absorbing material and go undetected. They can overwhelm the enemy radar with signals and misdirects, they can jam and intercept signals and coms and prevent the communication between radar and weapons system. They can engage enemy targets from outside their airspace , there is a reason a multi million dollar upgrade to the f35 in underway to keep it at the forefront of 5th gen tech. there is a reason the US spent the most on this system and work began 25 years ago and as far back as the 80s . I am not arguing they can be detected however low the chance is but they can be invisible to enemy systems as well

@olddirtyb4st3rd

Жыл бұрын

Could you provide more information or sources concerning the incident in austrian airspace? It seems google is not my friend in this case.^^ Thank you! :)

@ewc58

Жыл бұрын

Sounds like you had a really great time at the Lockheed convention

@exelsuremovers8889

Жыл бұрын

lol.. Americans will say anything to feel good.

@spacecadet35

Жыл бұрын

Two things, C130s are not noted for their airborne intercept radars. They mainly use a weather radar. And secondly, Civilian "Radar" does not use primary radars anymore, they use transponders. A pair of B52s could easily have been following that Herky Bird and no one on the ground would have spotted them on radar. And if you are doing jamming and other such active measures, even a Cessna 172 could fly in and out totally undetected. The point of stealth is that you can hang around unsupported and undetected, and the F35 cannot do that. It is a slow , fat and fragile bird. Though looking at the reports coming out of Ukraine, it turns out that stealth is probably not needed at all.

@celestineoc1123

Жыл бұрын

Who told you that US, UK and Dutch F35 cannot be seen ? How many Russian and Chinese radar have you operated ? You are funny. Oh the Austrians and NATO thanks for the info.

🏆🏆🏆👍🇺🇲🙏 Thank you for sharing.

Excellent points in this documentary. So while low band radar can detect the F35 in an aproximate area the missles launched may not get a lock on the target at all.

Boxer: I detected my opponent in front of me. I was however unable to predict the magnitude and direction that the knock-out punch would come from. 😂

And then there's Donald Trump: on the F-35 "They're litterally invisble!!, You cant see it!!!"

Y’all, stealth aircraft aren’t invisible and never have been, even the mighty f-22 raptor will get picked up when it gets close enough to a radar. The idea is that by knowing the warzone, and your enemy, you can get WAY further into enemy radar without being detected or locked, which is why stealth matters so much. Against planes stealth aircraft usually can’t be seen until around 20ish miles on the LOWER end of stealth aircraft, and ground radars and awacs can see them around 50-60. The difference is they’d see other aircraft around 150 and so forth, but with stealth you can pull out a lot more range

@BlackCeII

Жыл бұрын

The Fee isnt a stealth aircraft...

@swaghauler8334

Жыл бұрын

And just because you can see the target on search radar, that doesn't guarantee a lock on. The older AIM 7s were easily spoofed by going low and disappearing against "ground clutter." This was a tried and true tactic for MIG pilots in Vietnam. The AMRAM was specifically designed to "look down, shoot down" because of this.

@aceofaces1506

Жыл бұрын

@@swaghauler8334 yeah you’re right that’s another thing, stealth complicates ALOT of things. Done right it makes a plane really hard to shoot down. But it’s not invisible though

Your documentaries are so well made and you’re so well spoken! Nice work 👍🏼

I’m glad I found the stealth fighter expert the pentagon has been looking for.

Interesting multi million dollar fighter but unfortunately Colonal Zoltan Dani didn't know it was supposed to be invisible.

The F-117 also did not have standoff jamming from EA-6Bs. The standoff jamming went back to 1991 from EF-111As. I have only heard a few people DoD or not, mention the lack of standoff jamming.

@deborahmcgauley6095

Жыл бұрын

F35 has its own jamming. That is the F35s biggest edge is it doesn't need support aircraft.

I’m surprised you didn’t mention the reflectors they fly with during peace time to increase radar signature.

Great explanation

Detecting an aircraft is different from tracking and targeting one. Several SA 300 and S a 400 missile sites in Syria have been destroyed by F 35s. The radar might be able to see you but the seeker heads cannot.

@downix

Жыл бұрын

Syria has never had an S-400, and their S-300 was only brought online in May. You may be thinking of their S-200 and S-125 systems.

@michaelernst3731

Жыл бұрын

@@downix MSNBC, CBS, ABC ALL the Alphabet News stated SA-300 3 of them. Thats 3 missile Batteries and 2 RADARs (Tracking & Targeting) Just across the border into Syria from Israel. I KNOW im talking about US News but EVERY News from Europe too. Defence Network News did State SA-300. Doubt the SA-400 but Putin was talking about sending one for the Main Russian Base.

@rafsanul-hasan

Жыл бұрын

@@downix S300 and S400 same thing

@downix

Жыл бұрын

@@rafsanul-hasan the single S-300 site is still in operation. "Several" have not been destroyed. I have found records of several S-125 and an S-200 site being hit.

@downix

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelernst3731 reading Defense Network News here and they show an S-200, not a 300, as well as several Bavar-373, Iran's copycat to the S-300. I also found reports of Israel hitting the Iranian systems at least twice, so perhaps that is what the media reported?

They can track in Harpoon missile coming at this ships how could they really tracking F 35

@kathrynck

Жыл бұрын

bingo. (I'm assuming you meant "can't track inbound Harpoon.."?)

Very informative

I’ve yet to hear a fighter pilot voice the opinion that having a low observability (stealth) aircraft is not useful. The ones you hear from are the keyboard commandos

The existing stealth jets can minimize their radar cross section in the 20 deg width horizontally mounted radars, i.e. ground and jet fighters. But from any radar high above them, the stealth is just as big as F-15. Satellites from space can "see" stealth clearly in the daylight and send 10 images in 1 second. Yes, stealth jet can be tracked and nailed from above easily. I will not be surprised to see surveillance drones in 120,000 ft altitude loafing around the globe with powerful radars.

Faraday's first law of electromagnetic induction states, “Whenever a conductor is placed in a varying magnetic field, an electromotive force is induced. Likewise, if the conductor circuit is closed, a current is induced, which is called induced current.” Aircraft is a conductor going throu magnetic of earth

The F117 is still the plane that is the hardest to weapons lock and they were never retired they are still ready to fly when needed

I always figured that giving a potential enemy any data about stealth returns is bad, as I believe that the use of AI, coupled with low frequency radar, could allow for reliable tracking in the future. However, defeating the low frequency detection ability would mean that such AI controlled systems would have to be coupled with acoustic and visual sensors to even know a stealth craft was present. I think AI will be incorporated into many systems at some point. All of these things present problems for sure, but they're solvable. I think the US mostly needs to give priority to preventing espionage within the military and contractors developing or working on advanced systems. Your most sensitive stuff should never have a direct connection to the web.

@1LSWilliam

Жыл бұрын

Obviously, and the fact that none of this is happening corroborates your asseetion that the US has been thoroughly infiltrated or compromised by enemies who are never named, except by Trump.

@thorwaldjohanson2526

Жыл бұрын

Classified data always has to be airgapped, and yes, espionage is a huge problem in the high tech sector, which includes military. And regarding the AI, there is certainly huge potential in that, but training any ai models, they need a LOT of data. So having the reflectors on most of the time makes it much harder for adversaries to collect that critical data.

@DIREWOLFx75

Жыл бұрын

"I think the US mostly needs to give priority to preventing espionage" You seriously need to realise that USA isn't automatically the most technologically advanced. There will always be espionage, but today, it is often more about HOW does a nation do this or that. Because the basics of these kind of techs are literally everywhere, and there's at least 2 dozen nations that have made their own variation on stealth. Probably twice that. Give them cash and Cuba could build a stealth aircraft. That's how far and wide spread the tech is today. And more importantly, there's at least that many that have created some form of "anti-stealth" capability. My own nation started working on counterstealth tech in at least the 80s that i KNOW of. And the Gripen NG will include enough of it that it should be perfectly capable of generating a "hard lock-on" against any current stealth-aircraft at considerable range. This is why China and Russia hasn't even bothered trying to reach the same minimalist RCS that USA tries for. Because they KNOW that they can still "burn through" that. Instead they've gone with greatly increased ECM ability to complement the stealth. This also drastically reduces production and maintenance costs. While USA spent decades actively AVOIDING to develop counterstealth on the arrogant assumption that "if we develop it, others might be able to steal it from us", other nations developed such technology completely on their own and pretty much everyone that tried to develop it managed to achieve success to some degree. How much of that is actually deployed in active service, i have no idea about sadly, but i did once get a chance to read a summary about the various counterstealth technologies known to be "functional" and it's a BIG bunch, some better some worse. But all of them at least potentially capable of being turned into a functional targeting system. However, one of them is to use networking systems to allow multiple of your own planes have their sensors act together, letting them fake being a much more powerful single sensor(this is one of the Gripen NG advantages, just 4 aircraft together to effectively double the effective radar power). And you know the problem is with this? This is a CIVILLIAN DEVELOPED TECH. It's especially used for astronomy, where dozens of smaller telescopes can be linked up to simulate a much larger one. And this is also one of the technologies that are both relatively easy to use, effective and incurs very little extra costs(you need a decent datalink and you need the programming, and most of the programming exists as open source). Meaning that this is something that today can be developed by literally ANY nation with even the most basic and "primitive" tech industry. You know what another really common way of overcoming stealth is? Using an Active phased array radar correctly(ie having the right computer code added to it). And what's the upcoming standard equipment for all future combat aircraft? Oh yeah, APARs(though it probably deserves mention that PPAR can do the same thing when used correctly, as some Soviet techie managed to figure out(apparently the same person also figured out how to use analog parts within a phased array radar to make it even better at counterstealth, somehow...))... Also, do remember that USSR was among the absolute first to make use of datalink technology, in the MiG-31s and in antiship missiles among other things. Both Russia and China has complete access to what is 4th or 5th generation of that tech. Which is probably why it's been stated that S-400 is "decent" at shooting down stealth aicraft, while the S-500 and -550 are supposedly "very good" at it. S-500 went into active service LAST YEAR. It's already out there. Short version? USA may or may not be leader in stealth tech today, but there's so many variations going around that it's quite frankly impossible to tell(i would say it is not, but there's no real way to determine). Mostly, the level of stealth today is based on what the nation building it is willing to pay for. However, in COUNTER-stealth? USA isn't even in the top 5 list. Probably not even top 10. Mostly due to the previously mentioned arrogant assumption of superiority leading to a 20 year behind starting point. But also because of its ridiculously inefficient military industry and to some degree also the lack of people with the right math and physics education or capability(this is the same for pretty much most nations adhering to the Bologna process of education, which sadly includes my own nation as well, although we have some deviations which helps a little bit). China does not have that issue AND it has over 4 times the US population to draw skilled people from(today, they are probably competing with Russia for top spot in both stealth and counterstealth). Russia DID change to the Bologna process, BUT is going to or have already switched back to the education system developed in the USSR due to it being quite frankly, completely superior in the hard sciences. Russia also inherited all the counterstealth techs in development by USSR. The document i saw mentioned FIVE different unique techs just from there. So no, prioritising preventing espionage isn't going to be worth much for USA. Stop people from blabbing about it far and wide on the internet and you cut down leaks by >70%. Be smarter about how it's discussed politicially and you remove the majority of the rest of the leaks. Because seriously, it's hilarious to what extents USA goes to "protect its secrets" aaaand then the next day you can read half of them because they're discussed in congress, senate or something. At least USA plugged the funny gap in its DoD website. Only took, what was it, 10 years? Literally ANYONE could LOG IN with a guest account and read internal memos, discussions and supposedly secret stuff. Plug the stupid leaks, then you don't really need any "espionage prevention". And the cost probably isn't worth it anyway.

@teddy.d174

Жыл бұрын

They didn’t create the term “loose lips, sink ships” for just any old reason.

@olivertaylor8788

Жыл бұрын

China is years ahead of most in technology. Belive lt,you're not about to tell them things they don't know long before Americans public.That cheep junk they show the world is a front, They don't show the good stuff.But they can hit a dime 5000 miles out if they wanted.might want to rethink war plans.

"Early warning" radars and large SAM systems (like the S-300) just happen to be great targets for cruise missiles though, thus they are not going to make a realistic difference in a peer conflict.

@GottHoldNicetomeet

Жыл бұрын

And cruise missiles can be intercepted by s300 spaa or other Sam means. The Sam site just needs to be overwhelmed

@ulrichkristensen4087

Жыл бұрын

@@GottHoldNicetomeet not if they are jammed, by super hornets

@GottHoldNicetomeet

Жыл бұрын

@@ulrichkristensen4087 then the missiles can turn into home on jam.

@ulrichkristensen4087

Жыл бұрын

@@GottHoldNicetomeet that is not how it Works

@GottHoldNicetomeet

Жыл бұрын

@@ulrichkristensen4087 for sources that are jamming why not?

Thanks well explained and accurate.