Blue Angels and Thunderbirds

BTW: I saw the F-117A, but did anyone see the B-2? I didn't think it
was
that stealthy.

Hilton


well.. stealthy is not how easy it is to "see" with your Mark-I eyeball...
but painted black for night flying does help..

The STEALTH is how it looks on RADAR.. what type of radar return it
REFLECTS..


I may be wrong, but I think he was trying to make a bit of a joke...

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
...
BTW: I saw the F-117A, but did anyone see the B-2? I didn't think it
was
that stealthy.

Hilton


well.. stealthy is not how easy it is to "see" with your Mark-I
eyeball...
but painted black for night flying does help..

The STEALTH is how it looks on RADAR.. what type of radar return it
REFLECTS..


I may be wrong, but I think he was trying to make a bit of a joke...


you could be right...

In article HqDkb.54323$La.52035@fed1read02,
"BTIZ" wrote:

BTW: I saw the F-117A, but did anyone see the B-2? I didn't think it was
that stealthy.

well.. stealthy is not how easy it is to "see" with your Mark-I eyeball...
but painted black for night flying does help..

The STEALTH is how it looks on RADAR.. what type of radar return it
REFLECTS..

Black paint is for nighttime low observable (LO) qualities--visual
stealth. Seems to be a significant mission requirement for lots of
military aircraft. I initially was going to say "these days," but WW2
airplanes were sky blue on the bottom sometimes, weren't they?

I don't recall the details, but I think I saw someone actually trying
the active camouflage that Dale Brown (Day of the Cheetah?) put it a
book years ago. The aircraft essentially shows you a picture of what's
on the other side, making it disappear.

- Nathan

"Nathan Gilliatt" wrote:

Black paint is for nighttime low observable (LO) qualities--visual
stealth. Seems to be a significant mission requirement for lots of
military aircraft. I initially was going to say "these days," but WW2
airplanes were sky blue on the bottom sometimes, weren't they?

I understand that pink is actually a better color for night camouflage, but
there are problems with getting macho military pilots to fly pink airplanes,
so we make do with black paint instead.

In article ,
Craig Prouse wrote:

I understand that pink is actually a better color for night camouflage, but
there are problems with getting macho military pilots to fly pink airplanes,
so we make do with black paint instead.

When I was in college, the campus feminist group had a print ad with a
fighter jet on their wall of shame, pointing out the obvious phallic
symbol. I wonder if painting it pink would have pleased them? Kind of
tough on the male ego, though--except maybe worse on the guy in the
other plane who just got shot down by the "girl" fighter...

In article ,
Nathan Gilliatt wrote:

I don't recall the details, but I think I saw someone actually trying
the active camouflage that Dale Brown (Day of the Cheetah?) put it a
book years ago. The aircraft essentially shows you a picture of what's
on the other side, making it disappear.

Check Out Dean Ing's books.

Nathon

Navy painted their birds dark blue on the top so they would blend in
with the ocean and light blue on the bottom so they would blend in
with the sky. They also painted their birds and accepted the hundreds
of pounds of weight penalty, to help prevent corrosion from the salt
air. The Navy F2H3 (Banshee) I flew in 1955 was painted all gray. Not
sure when they changed their paint schemes over the years.

The Air Force ended up not painting most of their aircraft and took
the several hundred pounds of weight savings. They did paint some when
corrosion was a factor as I recall.

The stealth birds they fly at night, F-117, B-2 are painted black (of
course G

Any 'old' Navy types who remember when the Navy changed their paint
schemes?

Big John


On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 00:45:32 GMT, Nathan Gilliatt
wrote:

In article HqDkb.54323$La.52035@fed1read02,
"BTIZ" wrote:

BTW: I saw the F-117A, but did anyone see the B-2? I didn't think it was
that stealthy.

well.. stealthy is not how easy it is to "see" with your Mark-I eyeball...
but painted black for night flying does help..

The STEALTH is how it looks on RADAR.. what type of radar return it
REFLECTS..

Black paint is for nighttime low observable (LO) qualities--visual
stealth. Seems to be a significant mission requirement for lots of
military aircraft. I initially was going to say "these days," but WW2
airplanes were sky blue on the bottom sometimes, weren't they?

I don't recall the details, but I think I saw someone actually trying
the active camouflage that Dale Brown (Day of the Cheetah?) put it a
book years ago. The aircraft essentially shows you a picture of what's
on the other side, making it disappear.

- Nathan

Nathan Gilliatt wrote:

I initially was going to say "these days," but WW2
airplanes were sky blue on the bottom sometimes, weren't they?

Paint jobs were an art form during that period. The Germans actually came up
with a paint that was durable but could be wiped off easily if the aircraft was
transferred to an area that required a different paint job. Flat black or dark
brown was used for night fighters. The British used a glaring medium blue for
high altitude aircraft; it was startlingly vivid at low altitudes but the planes
disappeared at 40,000' or more.

Allied aircraft used in the desert were painted a pinkish color that blended in
with the North African sand. There is or was recently a P-40 on the warbird
circuit painted this way. It caused quite a stir. The Germans used a very light
tan for the same reason, usually with a grey underside and splotches of brown on
the top surfaces. I once saw a photo of Joachim Marseille flying a 109 over
Tunisia taken from above. You could see two crosses and barely make out the
cockpit; the rest disappeared in the scrub.

You are likely thinking of the standard U.S. Navy paint job, which at one time
used sky blue for the underside of the planes.

I don't recall the details, but I think I saw someone actually trying
the active camouflage that Dale Brown (Day of the Cheetah?) put it a
book years ago. The aircraft essentially shows you a picture of what's
on the other side, making it disappear.

National Geographic had a recent article that stated that suits for ground
forces are being tested that accomplish this. They're basically made of fiber
optic threads. The ends of the threads are carefully placed to conduct light
from one side of the suit to the other, making the soldier nearly disappear.
They aren't good enough for issue yet, it seems.

George Patterson
To a pilot, altitude is like money - it is possible that having too much
could prove embarassing, but having too little is always fatal.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ...

National Geographic had a recent article that stated that suits for ground
forces are being tested that accomplish this. They're basically made of fiber
optic threads. The ends of the threads are carefully placed to conduct light
from one side of the suit to the other, making the soldier nearly disappear.
They aren't good enough for issue yet, it seems.


I've seen one of these in action. They're pretty darned good. In
the open, you can see a blurry human shaped outline of the suit. With
some cover, I imagine the wearer would just disappear.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


National Geographic had a recent article that stated that suits for ground
forces are being tested that accomplish this. They're basically made of
fiber
optic threads. The ends of the threads are carefully placed to conduct
light
from one side of the suit to the other, making the soldier nearly
disappear.
They aren't good enough for issue yet, it seems.


Holy cow! I wonder how much that suit would cost!