![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:26:04 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:
Unless there's some exteme qualifiers, you have to assume it's a fairly general average. With even moderately ambitious stealth, you can get a good reduction in cross section across the board (even a 10% reduction gives you several extra miles of "shoot first" at long ranges). To be precise, 1 mile at 40 miles range. Consider the old-tech F-117. They fly it through some of the most heavily-defended airspaces, *ever*, Oh? Did Serbia and Iraq have modern AA systems? I think not. and manage to not get shot down (except for one case when they got nailed in a low-level raid by visually-sighted AAA). And it's practically obsolete, in most "stealth" respects. The F-22 may have a couple of weaknesses (the aforementioned intake and exhaust), but even those are relative. How detectable is the F-117 (and F-22) using visual or IR sensors? A quick BOTE calculation suggests that with clear air conditions, a F-22 would in principle be detectable at 100 km with the sort of digital equipment you can buy in a high street shop (a 10 m wide object would produce an image 10 pixels across, assuming a 1000 mm lens and a focal plane with 100 pixels/mm) though I'm sure in real life conditions wouldn't be good enough to spot it in daylight. Spotting the exhaust at night might be easier, especially for IR sensors. -- A: top posting Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |