I remember in the 90's when "stealth" became a slang term for a while, like "cool". It was such a buzz word for a while. They even named a sports car "Stealth"

@carlosandleon

2 жыл бұрын

which brand sports car?

@genericname3600

2 жыл бұрын

Dogecoin stealth

@alexhollings52

2 жыл бұрын

@@carlosandleon The Dodge Stealth! Basically, just a rebranded 3000 GT, pretty heavy, but there was an AWD twin-turbo version that was pretty cool.

@blurglide

2 жыл бұрын

@@alexhollings52 Yeah- very high-tech car, even by today's standards

@IvorMektin1701

2 жыл бұрын

I was praying for a Plymouth "Brazen" but alas.

I have a few notes on that last point: • every plane runs out of ammo whether stealth or not. In stealth mode, stealth assets can carry less ammo than non stealth assets but without prior warning, non stealth assets will not be able to maneuver in time to avoid the enemy assets, so each missile becomes more potent. In beast mode, it sacrifices its stealth, but can carry more weapons than traditional non stealth assets. • stealth delays detection until the last minute so it will make it a lot harder for the enemy to coordinate a counterattack or even know they are under attack until it’s too late. • stealth gives a clear advantage over in BVR engagements which by and large make up most aerial engagements in modern times. • stealth leads you to shoot down more of your enemy than your enemy can shoot of yours. • by the time the aerial engagement comes into close range should they desire to, for an engagement that started off with equal numbers will find the non stealth side at a severe numerical disadvantage and an engagement with significantly more stealth assets will be evened out by the time that close engagements occur. This can be advantageous to the stealth fighters within visual range or to friendly non stealth assets making up the rear fully stocked on ultra long range missiles queued up by stealth assets significantly closer to the enemy. • advanced networking takes the burden off of the stealth assets to have to carry all the missiles and bombs if it could call other assets with more suited or plentiful weapons to attack the enemy. This increases the amount of attack that can be coordinated by the F-35. • a stealth asset can choose to not engage an enemy at close range. Since they are stealthy, they can maneuver in such a way as to avoid being intercepted or spotted or maneuver to ambush the enemy from a more advantageous position. • all fighter jets designed with stealth are more maneuverable than traditional non stealth planes despite what you have heard. A loaded F-35 was able to maneuver with clean F-16s. F-22 are super maneuverable. On the off chance an F-35 finds itself in a dogfight, it will be perfectly able to outmaneuver traditional non stealth assets.

@Gunni1972

2 жыл бұрын

The moment, a Missile activates its own radar guidance, the "target" gets a missile warning. Unrelated to shape, size and speed of the missile. Or that of it's launching platform. Not so, with Infrared guided missiles. The Sidewinder is the most successful air to air missile. because it is fired from relatively close distance, and tracks heat. It is not suited for long ranges,because other heat sources, like flares, the sun, or heat sources from the ground can distract it. But for a "stealth kill" like that, you have to be dangerously close. Another option is Anti radiation missiles, which work, as long the target's Radar is on. it will home in on that signal, be it aerial or from the ground. And last but not least, there is opto electronic inertia guided. Means: The pilot acquires a picture of the target, sends it to the missile, and the Missile tracks anything similar to that picture and calculates the point of impact by inertia and Gyrostabilizer data. The last option does not care if your engine or Radar is on. It is perfect for anti-stealth missiles. Why? because there are not many airplanes that make use of stealth, And the known planes that do, have their Pictures taken from every single angle. That is, how they get the funding, or sales pitch.

@Relayer6a

2 жыл бұрын

@@Gunni1972 I'm not an expert, but isn't there also satellite guidance? And couldn't another platform, say like an AWACS, guide weapons from a safer distance? Thanks.

@stallspeed1381

2 жыл бұрын

@@Relayer6a not really, another fighter can designate for a different aircraft, that’s the primary use for the f35 in air to air combat

@diecastworld7962

2 жыл бұрын

No it doesn't because now F 35 can carry 4 air to air missile internally in internal weapon bay and it's stupid how this channel promotes fake information F 22 has a RCS of 0.0001 and officially no radar on earth has ever claimed to have such a low RCS detection capabilities F 22 is kinda invisible because without afterburner it can fight with internal weapon bay carrying 4 air to air missile and without afterburner it still can achieve a max speed of mach 1.8 so detection is kinda like making it invisible

@kiabtoomlauj6249

2 жыл бұрын

@@diecastworld7962 You need to be more specific: 0.0001 square miles is vastly different from 0.0001 square meters or feet (with a meter equaling around 3 feet). Anyway, RADAR, next to the tiny visual range, on the Electromagnetic Spectrum, ranges (in waves) from around the size of a football to the size of the planet. Theoretically, you could do primitive triangulation and compute the size of a flying object, when you have enough... let's use unscientific terms here, pings and echoes (the return signals). GPS and many other processes and algorithms work on such & similar principles. We would NEVER freeze things, through current processing techniques, to absolute zero, for example.... but that doesn't mean we would never know where absolute lies... We will NEVER get into the core of the Earth and the Sun, yet we know to extremely high degrees of what exist there and what's going on there... It's just scientific triangulation, using modern and refined scientific tools... IN SHORT, yes, it is NOT entirely unsound to say the F-22 has a RCS of around 0.0001 square meters.... when all experts (from the US and Russia and China) have all established that the B-52 has a roughly 100 sq.m RCS, an F-15 having a 25 sq.m RCS, a more modern fabricated Rafale and Superhornet and a human having a 1 sq.m. RCS.... a Tomahawk having a 0.5 sq.me RCS, and an F-35 having a 0.05 sq.m RCS, etc., etc. BTW, it is NOT true --- obviously --- that back in the 1990s (with 1980s top line super computers, not much faster than today's top line cell phone computation power) we could design a jet like the F-22 that is PURPORTED to have 0.0001 sq.m. RCS but in 2021, we no longer have that capability.... and that's why the F-35 has a generally accepted RCS of 0.005 sq.m. Compromises had to be made; these things don't drop from the sky, free. You CAN build B-2, F-22, and F-23 aircraft... but the cost per unit to build and to maintain their stealth is just not within any nation's budget, if you intend to buy many hundreds to many thousands of such things. The US operates only about 145 fully functional, "war ready" F-22 (real number is likely around 100. The rest, about 3 dozen, are mostly for training, educational, or public display purposes); but each F-22 is costing between $300M - $400M... whereas it intends to buy up to 2,500 units of the F-35 (all models combined). The US Air Force alone, for example, plans to buy and operate around 1,800 F-35A... each costing roughly $100M...

"Stealth doesn't work against bullets." That's like saying camo doesn't work against bullets; well of course it doesn't, the intended victim is the sensor. If you have an aircraft with sufficient RF and IR stealth+ECM advantage to defeat radar and IRST-based gun track, you've already made the gun much less deadly by degrading accuracy. If you can manage optical camo (so-called invisibility cloak, if that ever finds its way onto aircraft) or straight up lasers to degrade the Mk0 Eyeball, then stealth would 'work' against bullets. It's a technological hurdle/overmatch in capabilities, not a limitation of what it means to be stealthy. And honestly one of the major point of stealth is to put you in a position of decision superiority so you aren't forced to accept merges short on missiles and wingmen. Stealth doesn't work against bad decisions.

@iamscoutstfu

2 жыл бұрын

Lasers are countermeasures, not stealth. You're saying stealth can work if the OPFOR has already had their targeting capabilities diminished to ineffectiveness by active countermeasures.

@keirfarnum6811

2 жыл бұрын

I read a statement by a pilot that they couldn’t even lock up an F22 when it’s right in front of them. So yeah, it helps.

@LRRPFco52

2 жыл бұрын

@@keirfarnum6811 That was from a Royal Australian Air Force exchange pilot flying in a US F-15C Aggressor Squadron on exchange. He said there's nothing he could do in BVR and in WVR, he couldn't get Helmet-Cued IR missiles to lock onto the Raptor. He said it was the most frustrating aircraft to fight against.

@EternalNico1

2 жыл бұрын

congrats u watched the video

Nice work on your channel, I find your analyses and presentations very accurate, original and trustworthy. Thank you for your efforts, very much appreciated.

Excellent! Packs a lot in a short time.

I love the quotes you mention, you can speak stuff all you want, but having proof mentioned? Gives you the credit you deserve

Very interesting video, thanks for making!

Nice video in clearly explained of stealth phenomenon in aviation mobilizes thanks for sharing

Great upload very informative 👏

Our Cessna 150J (N51305) had a grey radar absorbent paint. When the guys would jump in their planes and go dog fighting, 1 of us would go with 1 of the others. The reason, is our plane was also hard to spot below the horizon unless you knew what you were looking for.

Thanks for this. Didnt need a single bit of this info, but its refreshing to watch something different than the usual MegaProjects videos to get my fill on aviation for the day.

Old Jezza is the master of linguistic capability so top job mate for quoting him.

5th Generation aircraft also use advanced EW and sensor fusion to give pilots exceptional situational awareness of how to avoid threat radars. This is some of the most classified stuff on an F-35.

@grndzro777

2 жыл бұрын

That doesn't really work against L band though. What are our F35's going to do? Avoid radar ranges 500 miles in diameter. A couple L band installations can triangulate. Russia has had L band radar since 1993. It's everywhere over there. Nebo M mobile radar can detect them also. If russia turns on it's L band net we cannot approach their border undetected.

@MachonyLeeoun

2 жыл бұрын

@@grndzro777 if you know that, they already know that

@johnsilver9338

2 жыл бұрын

@@grndzro777 u can destroy them first with anti-radiation missiles

@grndzro777

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnsilver9338 That would have to be within 50 miles, and get through Pantsir missile defense, and Krashkua-4 which is powerful enough to disrupt satellites in LEO. R37 has 4x that range. L band would have detected F35 enough to triangulate and fire. It's why the US is fast tracking the new AARGM-ER. Because cracking a full S400 site isn't an easy task.

@johnsilver9338

2 жыл бұрын

@@grndzro777 the L-band can detect but it cant provide a lock on. nor its its fire control radars. plus with jamming lesser chance of being detected. stealth and jamming go hand in hand. and just like with any other SAM, u use SEAD tactics. u wont be using anti radiation missiles alone.

"and on that bombshell" haha. Nice touch. 😃

I had no idea that Mach 1.6 was barely supersonic.

why don't they do something opposite of stealth, send a single small drone that appears like a whole squadron of bombers on radar, to send the enemy into a panic.

@tatecarson8053

2 жыл бұрын

I think I remember seeing a video a few years ago where Russia did something similar to that. They had a guided missile(could've also been a drone) that had a radar cross section the size of a fighter. In theory they would use those to scramble enemy interceptors and come in from behind the unsuspecting aircraft or once the enemy aircraft was low on fuel.

@gavinpoley2314

2 жыл бұрын

There is a missle type thing that does something similar, sadly it's no longer used

@blurglide

2 жыл бұрын

They've been doing that since the 60's. Look up the "Quail" drone. Now days they typically do the much cheaper towed decoy, although I imagine they still have something around that does what you said

@hassanalbolkiah127

2 жыл бұрын

They are called decoy drones/missiles, it appears on the radar as an actual fighter. Or you might be referring to electronic warfare, that sends lots of loud noises to the radar to fill it up screen with lots of non-sense returns. There are tons of way to get past this tho, the signatures of different materials are different, so if you're experienced you can tell the difference between the radar return of a F22 compared to a F35 (they will show up on radar if you get too close)

@Kman31ca

2 жыл бұрын

They did that in Desert Storm. Sent in a bunch of drones to get the Iraqis to light up their radar then planes following the drones blew them to bits with HARM missiles.

I am glad you included that quote from Carroll because it goes to a point I made on the video you made about making the F-15 stealthy. I said that stealth is fine and all, but if the enemy AC has you in sight, then you could be smoked. The F-35 is nowhere near capable of taking on another plane in a dogfight. Not. One. Bit. That's why I thought making more of the F-15SA's was a better idea, because there will come a time when you're going to have to shoot and fight your way out of a jam.

@colinhobbs7265

Жыл бұрын

Not at all true though. The f35 can hold its own in a dogfight. The f22 can absolutely dominate.

Nice analysis

Amazing video

Looking forward to the future attempts at visual stealth like invisibilty cloaking or "Predator" camo.

In my first go round, was an RF guy. The F-117 always gelled in my head as the ultimate reflective surface, scattering radar energy every which way (lots of sawtooth), but back at the Search Radar, or the Targeting Radar once handed off. I honestly can't remember (or know) if the F-117 used a lot of RAM or not compared to the F-35, because the F-35 looks more like that smooth rock that energy flows around while absorbing energy around seams or edges. Completely different approach than the famous "hopeless diamond". Of course the F-35 wields way more Counter Measure smarts, and ECM than the F-117 so it would even be more survivable and less observable in the RF/IR realm. But, once eyeballs got on it . . . different story, than say an F-15 in an eyeball to eyeball fight.

@Gunni1972

2 жыл бұрын

You can't just put a super powerful engine on a plane, and expect it to be invisible in IR. However, if the F-35 is tracked by a close range IR missile, it will fare similar to every other jet. Because the enemy is already much too close. Mistakes were made.

@LRRPFco52

2 жыл бұрын

F-117A had zero ECM, RWR, or Radar. It relied entirely on RF and IR VLO signature to avoid detection or weapons-grade tracks. Only 1 had a missile proximity detonate near it enough to cause catastrophic damage in over 2000 combat sorties. The F-117A also underwent 3 generations of RAM during its service life. They were always working on improving features of the RAM, to include RCS reduction and durability. The IR signature reduction on the -117 is very cool.

@LRRPFco52

2 жыл бұрын

@@Gunni1972 Look up the LOAN nozzle and IR signature reduction on JSF. They employed decades of research from previous programs when they tackled the IR VLO on JSF. There are so many complimentary systems and layers working together, that it's an entire discipline deserving its own lengthy study from an engineering perspective. F-35s have the largest fighter engine with the most available thrust, but have a smaller IR signature than a T-38 or F-5. Short-range IR missiles are obsolete even in the 4th gen. We have moved to dual focal plane array IIR/UV seekers long ago. In the more advanced nations, the "short range" multimode FPA seeker missiles are BVR-capable as well. AIM-9X Block II+ and ASRAAM Block 6 have increased range outside of the traditional WVR weapons employment envelope. I've done a lengthy mathematical study of all the 4.5 Gen and Su-57 IRST detection and tracking ranges on various types of airborne targets, from supersonic bombers down to subsonic VLO fighters in the different weather and altitude bands. Short story is you will not have IRST detection of a subsonic VLO fighter until right on the edge of WVR, which is many minutes too late. You especially will not have PID. If they go supersonic, you will get a hit in the sensor envelope much earlier, but they've been tracking you from 300-400km out already. This is the baseline for any discussion about JSF stealth in the IR spectrum.

@brrrtnerd2450

2 жыл бұрын

@@LRRPFco52 HOLY Crow! That is even better! Thanks for this information. I know very little about the F-117, always wondered what it had, or didn't beyond the shape and saw tooth patterns. Thanks for this information, very much appreciated.

@brrrtnerd2450

2 жыл бұрын

@@LRRPFco52 Even more good information. I could (attempt) to glean an pick this apart for a long time. Vaguely familiar with some of the concepts you mention. Really appreciate this information. Just a bit more knowledgeable now, or at least realize how little I know.

Leading edges etc. Perhaps use a synthetic (plastic or ceramic, radar transparent or absorbing) front edge to provide the necessary aerodynamics. Within that use whatever metal is needed, but with anechoic shape analogous to sonic anechoic chamber walls. (Typically a set of steep wedges, in alternating rows. These could be coated in radar absorbing coating, but it would be protected from wear and damage. A complex structure like this could also include multi-spectral absorption materials and structures.

The amount of labor and even more importantly money that goes into maintaining the "stealth systems" on these aircraft is absolutely insane.

@bengreg2457

2 жыл бұрын

No not really they just tell you that . Stealth is fake they trick the systems there is no magical coating that deflects radar u fool . Americans mind games are advanced

@bighands69

2 жыл бұрын

There is no price to having the ability of keeping your country in existence. As people may point out something is very expensive and not worth it but it is better to be saying that than to have your country not exist at all. Right now I am sure Ukraine wished they had spent hundreds of billions on their defences.

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

Notice how F22s and F35s always all look brand new off the factory line....to keep all of its 100% Stealth capabilities, they must constantly repaint and change out panels even with a scratch on it.

I would guess that a fundamental part of stealth mission planning is to not allow the other guy to close to a range where your countermeasures are ineffective. If you get into a dogfight you have screwed up.

@bighands69

2 жыл бұрын

The key to good stealth is to be at the point of detection where it makes no difference meaning the enemy cannot do anything about it.

@Ripa-Moramee

9 ай бұрын

​@@bighands69The thing is, as the guy said in this video, there is a difference between being able to see and then get a lock, furthermore being able to maintain a solid lock is even more difficult as even during missile flight, either the missile or the radar may simply not be able to see the target, and as such does not track or does not properly track. This of course, specifically is regarding radar guided missiles, heat seekers are completely different but in the case of the F-22, it also has stealth in the area of thermal, by having good thermal dissipating materials and heat shielding for its engines and exhaust, also the ability to very meaningfully super cruise without the need of after burners makes it extremely effective at also combatting heat seekers.

Great content. Stealth doesn't work against bullets. Classic!

Great show as always mate, I love your channel. How about covering the differences between the Western stealth aircraft and those of Russia (ha ha) and China?? Or the much anticipated B-21 Raider??

Very nice

“Stealth doesn’t work against bullets” - I’d actually disagree with this one. Most modern fighter jets use radar to lock an opponent to provide gunsight targeting. If an aircraft is stealthy enough to avoid getting locked, it is a lot more difficult to use guns against them (still possible, just more difficult)

What I think of when I hear stealth being talked about is - A bird sized blip on the radar screen.. Hmmm, how many small birds fly at 50 000 feet doing a 1000 mph?

@gibbsm

2 жыл бұрын

try and lock onto that bird and shoot it down now.

@derekflegg2510

2 жыл бұрын

@@gibbsm If you can see it - it can be incepted and shot down like anything else.. And it won't be long before SAMs are programmed to kill those little birds lol

@0MoTheG

2 жыл бұрын

@@derekflegg2510 Have you heard of clouds ? The great deal with radar is that it works in a cloudy night.

@derekflegg2510

2 жыл бұрын

@@0MoTheG And that has what to do with what?

@0MoTheG

2 жыл бұрын

@@derekflegg2510 Clouds tend to be opaque.

I saw the title n it got me curious... but my instant response on the title was.. Because we have eye's

I spoke to an Air Force fighter pilot at a local airbase. He told me that if you are flying against a “Stealth” aircraft, and you get to be within visual range of it on equal footing. That “Stealth” pilot has done several things very wrong. You should not ever see him / her up close, until you are hanging in your parachute 🪂 and your aircraft is falling in several burning pieces. Even when the “Stealth” aircraft is out of missiles, it should maneuver to your rear blind spot and gun you in the back.

@bighands69

2 жыл бұрын

Chances are that if that pilot has not detected that stealth aircraft before observable space then that pilot is going to get hit.

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

The whole point is to never get into a dog fight. It's the dumbest way to fight and win an air war

But how do we KNOW they're not invisible. We wouldn't be able to see them 🤔🤔

@Gunni1972

2 жыл бұрын

@Wiegraf Truth is, what humans cannot change through empiric measures or Accidental. Truth has to be accepted, not challenged.

“Welcome to being shot down”: BFM does not usually take place at super sonic speeds. A guns “dogfight” is going to be at lower speeds where thrust to weight, turn rate and turn radius will be of higher importance than top speed. High super sonic speeds are more relevant in BVR engagements when the added energy of a high top speed increases the pK. of a long range AA missile shot, however low observability trumps this advantage because BVR missile employments can be performed at close ranges without the risk of being targeted. A 60 nm shot from 2.0mach in a 4th gen fighter may keep the fighter out of the WEZ of the opponent when a 30 nm shot at .9mach from a low observable fighter is still outside of the WEZ and has the same kind of pK. In reality, BFM fights are extremely rare making up none of the peer to peer engagements of the last three decades. Saying a stealth fighter is a worse platform than a non stealth fighter because of dogfighting is like saying a Tesla is worse than an bicycle because it doesn’t have playing cards stuck in its spokes.

@alexlazar4738

2 жыл бұрын

" the f-117 nighthawk has the cross section only slightly bigger than a tenth of an inch" and yet it was detected by turning on P-20 (a soviet analog radar from 1949) for 10 seconds and then shot down over Yugoslavia in 1999. US stealth fighters are really only tested against men in sandals on bicycles sporting 40 year old carabines (Taliban) .

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

Welcome to the last dog fight the US was in was in 1999 lmao. And the stragedy nowadays is to avoid and not even get close to a dog fight. Which is why US focuses more on BVR and radar and Stealth. Look at Russia problems with Ukraine. Russia has supermanuverable jets but are being shot down super easy lol

There are several levels of stealth with the top level being craft that cannot be detected at all or seen. To do that they probably fly at night and try to carry out their missions at a distance from the target.

Holy moly I think this is the first time I’ve heard a KZread video use the word “literally” correctly.

"Barely exceed Mach 1" What? F-35's top speed is Mach 1.6. Non-stealth aircraft with weapons, fuel tanks, and sensor/ew pods on pylons often have sub-mach 1 limits as well as g limits with 9g being the clean standard, but a Eurofighter with a full fuel/air-to-ground load is capped at ~Mach 0.5. An F-35, with a full fuel load and full weapons bays is capable of 'supercruise' up to Mach 1.2 (i.e. no afterburning). Also, if you run out of missiles and your opponent has missiles, that's obviously a terrible situation regardless of whether your fighter has stealth or not.

@davidfoley1204

2 жыл бұрын

Can I see your source for the full load Eurofighter claim? Just seems very hard to believe.

@valenrn8657

2 жыл бұрын

F-35's top speed is Mach 1.6 with 1200 Mph.

@davidfoley1204

2 жыл бұрын

@@valenrn8657 I Know that, it's the fully loaded EF at mach .5 that I find hard to believe.

@valenrn8657

2 жыл бұрын

Note that higher speeds have higher IR signatures.

@moistman6930

2 жыл бұрын

@@valenrn8657 Higher Speeds don’t; higher engine RPMs and Afterburner needed does. Also, do you know what the EF claim is? I’ve seen videos of them exceeding the speed of sound in combat loads for QRA. It recently caused a sonic boom.

I’m calling BS on the 1/10,000th of and inch tolerance for the F-22 and the F-35 being orders of magnitude tighter. I worked at a supplier for Lockheed making many of the panels and doors for all 3 variants. The tolerances for the edges absolutely were NOT under 0.00001”. They were on the order of 0.01” to 0.001” on the edges. The tolerance of the thickness of the parts was controlled more than on comparable parts on other aircraft, and some extra production steps were done to maintain that thickness tolerance for composite parts, but again none of the features were held anywhere close to as tight as mentioned on the video. What Lockheed *did* require above and beyond was lots and lots of SPC (statistical process control) - they were going for consistency, but again the variances between parts were easily measurable.

The fact that radar absorbant paint isn't effective ad high speeds is not as much as an issue as you would think. This is because when traveling at such a high speed for a lengthy period of time will heat up the front of the aircraft such that it will easily be visible on even the oldest IRST system in service.

@bighands69

2 жыл бұрын

But do those exotic aircraft show up as easily?

@kden9772

2 жыл бұрын

@@bighands69 every Russian aircraft has an IRST system. The ones on the SU30/35 series are very good.

In the 50s, The British Victors and Vulcans while Huge had Tiny Radar Cross Sections, Imagine Modern Versions with Stealth Coatings

every dog fight is 100 miles out. your shot down before you ever see them now. That's stealth.

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly. The tactic now is to avoid a dog fight. Why would a pilot ever want to be in a dog fight.

one of the issues i see is the lack of a large payload. A 100m target is a big risk, and for what rewrad? A few aa rockets?

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

Military strategy is to never just send 1 type of jet up in the air. The F22s and F35s fly with F15s and F16s. F22s and F35s radar will send targets to F15s and send ground targets to F16 wild weasel jets. Not every fighter jet thats Stealth doesn't need a massive payload for this tactic and reason.

Saying that stealth can be detected on lower frequencies is a bit of an oversimplification. At best lower frequencies can only detect them at much closer ranges….and even at those ranges it is an intermittent inconsistent unreliable “detection.” You make it sound like that is the same kind or even in the same ballpark as a normal detection of non stealth aircraft.

Last I recall the point of stealth aircraft is making a jet look like background noise, or a bird or other non-man made object, thus not truly stealth but more of a advanced version of camoflauge technically speaking.

hi do you talk about more than USA

Sure, but the point of Stealth tactics is that you should NEVER get to the point where you're having to do the visual fight. It's more hit and run tactics... (or rather hit and hide).

is it even worth it to even try limiting ir? like the first aim9 heat-seeking mistle from the 50's was tested on a piston f6f drone. that plane puts out way less ir than any jet no matter what you do and the oldest heat seeking tech was able to track it. so jets cant get any colder and ir detection only getting better whats the point?

@ronjon7942

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe working towards minimizing engine IR emissions maximizes the efficacy of flare countermeasures? Or makes your signature less than the guy driving a gen4 fighter (don’t have to outrun the bear…:)) ?

Ward Carroll is an old-school F-14 backseater that lives in the past. He should know better that supersonic speeds have NOTHING to do with a visual merge. “Dogfights” are flown subsonic and go down to speeds well below 100 knots since 4th Gen jets have come online in the 70s/80s.

@brianfellows2024

2 жыл бұрын

He's also just wrong, anyway. F-35's *official* top speed (with full fuel/internal weapons load) is Mach 1.6. Fighters flying with weapons/fuel/pods on pylons will have greater problems breaking Mach 1 than a combat loaded F-35.

@xyzaero9656

2 жыл бұрын

@@brianfellows2024 Exactly. I don't want to badmouth Mr. Carrol here, but he has an extreme bias towards the Tomcat.

I’m not aware of a single incident -ever- where an aircraft was in a dogfight but ran out of missles” so it only had its gun. Why would you sacrifice capability anywhere else to make sure that your plane can outperform others in a combat arena that has never -or at most extremely rarely - occurred?

It's funny how people always dismiss bvr capabilities. It's real easy to say once you get up close to a stealth fighter the technology won't help. Everyone who knows knows theres 99% chance you won't get that close with all the supersonic rocketry BVR. Couple that with the amount of stealth fighters USA will have. Yes thats Not happening

@fistedbiscuits7639

2 жыл бұрын

Especially when an f-35 can see you and guide munitions' from other platforms on target. It does not even have to shoot.

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

Right! The whole point is to avoid a dog fight. To have the strategy to build jets to get into dog fights is so stupid

I'm ELATED to watch THIS is topic. HOW does radar go THROUGH the same nose that otherwise absorbs it from the opposite direction, without making it impossible to register the signals you sent which are then being returned !? Honestly, how RADAR goes through a nose at ALL is wizardry. How the nose-SHAPE doesn't outright interfere with EM (or at min interact with it)..?? is ALONE crazy to me.

So Ward Carroll says the F-35 can barely go supersonic? LOL, F-35 pilots rave about the jet's excellent transonic performance and acceleration and anyone who's seen the F-35 at airshows are witness to its agility and maneuverability. The F-35 would blow the F-14 out of the sky.

Stealth may be difficult, but the main part is the high cost of the tech. and engineering to make it work.

Both Generals Hostage of ACC and General Bogdan have said the F-35 is more stealthy than the F-22. That means the F-35 is way more stealthy than the f-117.' .... And insofar as a visual fight is concerned, well the F-35 is always gonna enter in a superior position. In Red Flag 17-1, the F-35 often entered into a visual fight, but it did so on its own terms. It had such a superior view of the air battle that, when it chose to enter the visual fight, it entered in an advantageous position. That’s what the F-35 gives you with it’s sensors, sensor fusion, and stealth. It gives you a “gods-eye” view of the air battle, and despite being outnumbered by Red Air in Red Flag 17-1, the F-35 still kicked derriere in the visual fight..... Like German Ace Erich Hartmann said, ‘He who sees first has already half the victory.’ And then there's the fighter pilot saying, "If you enter aa dogfight in an equal position with your opponent, your tactics suck. " .... The F-35 will never enter a visual fight in an equal position. And if you think the F-35 is bad in aerodynamic performance, watch this. My favorite part starts at 0:53. kzread.info/dash/bejne/pXuAw66cXcnOhbg.html

@frankrenda2519

2 жыл бұрын

there is no way the f35 comes close to the f117 in stealth you are dreaming if you know anything about radar refraction you will understand shape is everything coatings come last.read the soviet stealth book since they experimented with stealth 20 years before america

@pindot787

2 жыл бұрын

@@frankrenda2519first of all, those soviet book isnt about stealth, you are just repeating other people said :/ second, the RCS of F-117 is considerably bigger than F-35, the diamond shape actually isnt the best shape for stealth. a smooth surface wing like B-2 is much much more stealthier than F-117

@frankrenda2519

2 жыл бұрын

@@pindot787 the soviet book is about radar refraction and we all know whats that applied to. get your fact correct.f117 is way more stealthy than the f35 end of story

@pindot787

2 жыл бұрын

@@frankrenda2519 lol no. Pyotr Ufimtsev’s paper didn’t discuss anything about stealth. The paper was about a study surface diffraction of EM waves and deriving a mathematical model to calculate EM reflection from a surface. thats it. it has nothing to so with application of stealth or anything. and F117 rcs is roughly twice the size of F35.

@777Outrigger

2 жыл бұрын

@@frankrenda2519 In 2005, the USAF said the F-35 would be about twice as stealthy as the F-117, and slightly more stealthy than the B-2. But a few years ago General Hostage of ACC said the F-35 was actually more stealthy than the F-22. That left a lot of people scratching their heads, since the F-22 has more disciplined shaping. It’s probably due to fiber-mat which Lockheed Martin announced in 2010, as a breakthrough stealth material. Not only did it make stealth easy and cheaper to maintain, (Full stealth for 40 years) it was probably excellent at absorbing radar waves at all frequencies

The f35 can go higher and faster that its official rating. But the maintenance of its RAM and flight control, weapons integration. One of the indications is its compliance and testing between 3I and 3F, where 3F finally clears it to pull 9Gs. Something to do with the planes flight control and limitations to maintain stealth and overall effectiveness. Its not possible for a jet to have much more thrust than an f16 but have less top speed. And all 4th gen speed ratings are under clean conditions, as in no external missiles or tanks. Most 4th gen cannot sustain mach 1.2 for long with payload unless they want to overstress the aircraft with drag or run out of fuel fast. F35 has more range and speed and better operational altitude with payload. There reasons for that..and the f35 can dogfight comfortably at supersonic speeds for sure. Its maneurverability at 3I is already very good. And the lastest block 4 is taking its capabilities as a battlefield node to the extreme. Also the last point with the f14 pilot, all i have to say is f35 f22 tactics will ultimately get the lock on an f14 first. Talk/listen to f15 or f16 pilots that have engaged f22s and f35s in overwhelming numbers to get an idea. The US themselves have had very little luck trying to achieve victory over their own stealth jets using 4th gen even with airborne radar support in training.

@trumanhw

2 жыл бұрын

Wow, that's very interesting and poignant. Thanks

@Gunni1972

2 жыл бұрын

Have they tested the F-15 EX? similar or even straight up same radar as F-35. But on a much higher performing platform.

@xyzaero9656

2 жыл бұрын

Very well said

@xyzaero9656

2 жыл бұрын

@@Gunni1972 F-15 EX has nothing that an F-35 could not handle. F-35 was flown agains the most modern 4,5 Gen fighters and in general the F-35 just obliterates them in large exercise.

@iamscoutstfu

2 жыл бұрын

I don't think its fair to say that F35 and F22 will always see the opponent first. There will never be a 1 on 1 fight this way. either the F35's were detected by ground radar for whatever reason, or they are getting the jump on ingressing opfor either in friendly or non-friendly territory.

Technology is expanding at an exponential rate forcing defense technologies to become out of date at faster rates.

Stealth is difficult for top companies with stealth experience, in 2021. It's not hard. It was pretty hard in 1990. It was hard in 2000. What is hard.....or highly impractical.....is throwing best practices out of the window, designing a terrible program, and then trying to meet those unrealistic expectations after 20 years of development. Lockheed and the Pentagon did this hard. It did not have to be. Why? The biggest of all defense payouts, the program that can't be killed.

@bighands69

2 жыл бұрын

Better to spend the money on stealth than to spend about three trillion on a welfare program that keeps people poor.

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

It's just hard to maintain. For the jet to keep 100% of its Stealth capabilities is to constantly repaint it and replace panels even with just a scratch on it

I think even in a WVR fight stealth is going to give you a huge advantage, if the enemy spots you with their eyes than yes you're in trouble, but if you're aware of your enemy and they don't know you're there, you could easily gun them down. This exact scenario happened with the F-22 sneaking up on the Iranian F-4. He got behind and checked weapons then flew up alongside and told him to "go home". This was over an area covered by Iranian radar assets. Stealth is a direct result of statistical review of combat air losses. The majority of pilots shot down in all air engagements were shot down by an enemy they did not see or know was there.

@iamscoutstfu

2 жыл бұрын

and just because they see you doesn't mean they see your wingman.

Well-Done, stealth is just one of numerous means/tools to more-importantly minimize your oppose's chances across his entire kill-chain (the earlier the better).

6:05 that figure is being misrepresented, yes it might absorb 70% of radar waves, BUT only around 10% of the entire radar wave is absorbed, while the rest 80 to 90% of the radar wave energy is DEFLECTED. so it's 70% of the 10% that is absorbed, not 70% of the total.

👍

min 12:32 properties

Because we lack invisibility

When you go Winchester?😅😆😁

Chinese and Russians were taking notes from those textbooks, I mean come on!

Outright speed is a useless point of attack against the F-35. There is a video about the speed of (jet) fighters in the Vietnam war. That was fascinating. It would appear that very few of us bother to learn our lessons. Also people often refer to the F-18 as "legendary" or "worlds best multi-role fighter". It is only 150mph faster than the F-35. Not a mach 2 machine. Even a clean F-16 can't do it. There's a video for that too...

@bighands69

2 жыл бұрын

The F-18 is cheap and can easily be adapted for multiple roles. The F-35 is a very versatile aicraft and also an amazing one trick pony when it comes to steal and battlefield awareness. But the F-35 would not have the exact same performances as a specialized F-16 or F-18.

Stealth is so hard because Radar is so good..

Stealth is when a observed object with the silhouette profile of a cricket drops an object the size of a station wagon

When you run out of missiles run, but if you must dogfight have an F-22. In a dog fight you still use radar gunsights, stealth can still help.

@Relayer6a

2 жыл бұрын

I recall hearing a story early on in the F-22 deployment of war games against Australia. There was reportedly an Australian pilot that was screaming because he could see the F-22 but his weapons wouldn't lock on to it to allow him to fire. They had some stupid kill ratio of 100's to 1 in the F-22's favor. They were allowing the opponent fighters to regen because the engagements were basically over before they started in the F-22's favor. I firmly believe that all these capabilities that are attributed to our "near peer enemies" are more the defense department wanting to maintain funding. The Chinese, even with their spending increases, and the Russian militaries are massively underfunded compared to the US. When I see these systems that they develop and then look into it I see that they can't really deploy them in any kind of sufficient numbers to be a threat. The Russians have one Soviet era aircraft carrier that seems to be in complete mechanical disarray. The Chinese have one that they bought from Ukraine and one that they've built that as far as I know they have never actually been able to deploy them beyond cruising around the coast of China. And apparently they only have 50 of the J-15 fighters. Odds are against a US carrier group 50 fighters wouldn't last an hour. And how many of those 50 are actually serviceable?

@AdamosDad

2 жыл бұрын

@@Relayer6a You are seeing reality my friend, rather than what you want to see like many that post here. The fact is we have the largest most capable airforce in the world, and our Navy is the second largest airforce after our own. People need to let that sink in.

@keyboardt8276

2 жыл бұрын

@@Relayer6a and these "near peer" enemies don't have any designs on attacking the US anyway, unless the US goes up to their doorstep to attack them

@bighands69

2 жыл бұрын

Best Dog fighter the US has is the F16.

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

Military strategy is to never just send 1 type of jet up in the air. The F22s and F35s fly with F15s and F16s. F22s and F35s radar will send targets to F15s and send ground targets to F16 wild weasel jets. Not every fighter jet thats Stealth doesn't need a massive payload for this tactic and reason.

Yeah, our aircraft maybe out of missiles. But the have back up. And we have not left a fighter with out a forwards looking gun for back up. Don’t forget the F-22 or the F-15 or the F-16. Two of the most successful killers to lose victories.

@nexpro6118

2 жыл бұрын

Military strategy is to never just send 1 type of jet up in the air. The F22s and F35s fly with F15s and F16s. F22s and F35s radar will send targets to F15s and send ground targets to F16 wild weasel jets. Not every fighter jet thats Stealth doesn't need a massive payload for this tactic and reason.

Has anyone seen the large gaps in Saab gripen fighter. It looks like school children have put the fighter together.

stealth is never hard; way person understand stealth; based on it; to produce what they want is hard; but stealth itself is never hard;

Just think this is late 70/80’s tech

When stealth isn't enough , they will go fast again . Speed wins . Stealth makes stealing money easier for developer , Top Secret is perfect

Forgot fuel and everything that goes along with long flights.

Building Stealth aircraft is just a knowledge that most of the world is not interested in building. Afterall, do they really care about their pilots, by not building them, is my question.

It's hsrd to build Stealth because the cost of maintaining it. To be able to keep 100% of its Stealth capabilities 24/7 the jet must be maintained at factory standards. Which is why all Stealth jets now, look brand new still. Lol. The paint is always being repainted and the panels are always being replaced. Can't even have a rinckle and or scratch on it. Look at the F22, last one was built in 2011 and all F22s look like they all just rolled off the factory line. Lol.

Why is stealth so hard? Money..

Why would anyone think that stealth would not be hard?

Because it's complex

Loving our American fighters. No need for dog fights. It’s more like if you see me, your already dead.

Why is stealth so hard? Let's be grateful that it is or everyone would have it

Stealth doesn't work against bullet? I like me some Ward Carroll but man is that outdated thinking. Quick, someone tell me the last time that fighters exchanged gunfire. If I am not mistaken, the last gun kill of one fighter vs another was in the Falklands roughly 40 years ago. That is, assuming you don't count the A-10 that aced an Iraqi helicopter with it's Avenger cannon in the first Gulf War I mean, if the limited internal stores of a stealth fighter was such a deal breaker, why is every nation trying to build Stealth Fighters? Plus, let's not act like modern stealth fighters are helpless in a gun fight. The F-22 is as good a close in fighter as exists. Only the newest air superiority fighters could beat an F-35 in a gun fight and only if those planes are flown well.

Stealth has killed Visual dogfights Idk if thats bad or good, i just know it did XD

And this is why we now have the F-15EX... because maintaining a stealth fighter ain't cheap, and throwing it at every mission where stealth isn't needed is like getting groceries in your Lamborghini. Why your you put the wear and tear on it, risk getting door dinged, and potentially get broken eggs on the upholstery, when you don't need to? Just drive the Toyota.

@Gunni1972

2 жыл бұрын

You also haul much more egg in the Toyota.

the guy named stealth:

Way to prep that War Bird 🦅. God’s speed Lady’s and Gentlemen. Move out the way we have a Country to Save. Giddy up little Doggie way to drive that Mule. All day long Yahoo

My butts been wiped

Only correction is that the F35 is not sleek. It is CHONKY!!

@blurglide

2 жыл бұрын

F-35 "Fat Amy". It's sleek compared to the F-117 though

The F-35 is not designed to fight enemies at close range. They are meant to perform as stealthy strike platforms and RTB as soon as their missiles are expended. F-35's don't need to dogfight, they could kill enemies BVR and return for reload without ever presenting a target themselves. They combine the best attributes of the Harrier and F-18 with the most advanced systems yet devised.

that aircraft is denser than air so they will find you like duh

Stealth projects hide money best , Top Secret is the best cover for theft

I want to see them build a super jet fighter with absolutely no consideration for stealth at all. Just aerodynamics and maneuverability.

@markallen7215

2 жыл бұрын

They kinda did with the F14 Tomcat and F15 Eagle purpose built pure fighters from the 70’s

@jaimearredondo787

2 жыл бұрын

F-15EX, F-16V Viper, & F-14

@user-do5zk6jh1k

2 жыл бұрын

So the newest 4th gen fighters?

@outatime626

2 жыл бұрын

They did. They mastered it and then they found ways to stop it. You can't stop what you can't see. That's why 5th gen is powerful.

@yellowboxster06

2 жыл бұрын

It always goes to your threat assessment and situational awareness. Not every situation requires a stealth aircraft; sometimes just being able to carry a lot of firepower, including smart munitions, is good enough, and of course, helping your pilots develop their skills by giving them enough stick time in a rigorous training environment. Stealth technology is certainly amazing but it is very expensive. So your comment is well taken.

That is why I never prioritised stealth at the first place. But as an additional capability. But a powerful VLF radar is enough to hunt an F-22.

@stevem2323

2 жыл бұрын

Really? Hunt him? You do know F 22 has powerful EW to use together with stealth? That it's one thing to observe it, completely different to track it or have a missile lock.

US : spends billions on planes that can wreck havoc in skies "stealthily", Le* asians : built hypersonic weapons to tale out the carrier from which they take off. 😂

Why is stealth so hard? Magnets. Nobody knows how they work. Just ask the renowned scientifical group ICP.

Its not. You're watching everything I do. You could, and do, stroll up on me while I'm sleeping.

If given a chance, I'd buy YF-22 & 23 instead of F22, F35!!!

@fatstacksfatlips8708

2 жыл бұрын

The YF-22 is a prototype F-22 why would you buy it over an F-22 if you could?

@anandhindu3123

2 жыл бұрын

@@fatstacksfatlips8708 : YF-23 stayed in prototype, because F-22 got the deal....... YF-23 is far better than F-22 or F-35....... if YF-22 was put into production, you'd know the difference...... kzread.info/dash/bejne/poKVutCFmJi1YbQ.html

@fatstacksfatlips8708

2 жыл бұрын

@@anandhindu3123 I am not talking about the YF-23. I am talking about the YF-22. How is the prototype raptor better than the actual raptor? YF-22 and YF-23 are not interchangeable designations they’re two totally different planes. The YF-23 is not at all better than the F-22 or F-35. There is over 30 years of avionics difference between the YF-23 and F-22/F-35.

@anandhindu3123

2 жыл бұрын

@@fatstacksfatlips8708 You are correct. Thank you for pointing my mistake. I meant only YF-23 (Northrop Grumman). YF-22 (Raptor); not denying it's a good plane, but I prefer the Widow!!!

And a nation is expected to do all this on a World War scale. Yeah, no.

USAF: " No one can detect our Nighthawks" Colonel Zoltán Dani: " And I took that personally"

@GowthamNatarajanAI

2 жыл бұрын

1 incident doesn't change anything

@williamdrijver4141

2 жыл бұрын

@@GowthamNatarajanAI The Serbs hit two F117s. One crashed, the other barely made it back to base.

@GowthamNatarajanAI

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamdrijver4141 Yes, but there were thousands of F117 flights. So 2 hits means it's more related to luck rather than Serbia actually have the ability to hit stealth aircraft.

BACK HOME GOT THE POP POP POP POP FOR HIM I SAW HIM LONG OVER COCTH BLACK LONG ONE WITH POP POP POP POP POP