Not to sound like an F-22 cheerleader but I thought this was interesting. . .

On 26 May 2004 03:50:00 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

Well then it's just like I said. Exactly who with what system is
going to be a threat to US stealth aircraft anytime in the near
future? Besides that, having an airborne TRANSMITTER is just begging
to be shot down.

Not countries like Iraq,Afghanistan,Panama,Somalia,I guess.


Well why don't you tell us about all these MSVRs and MSVR guided
missile systems they have?




Having one airborne ,space or ground based transmitter is one thing having
thousands of them another.

Obviously. And just has obviously nobody has them in service.





What are you smoking?
You seem pretty clueless,a clue for you this is a space and ground based system

So point me to a website that describes this space based, multistatic
radar missile guiding system. Yeah, about what I thought.







We're talking about stealth aircraft here. Say you somehow detect a
stealth aircraft at 600 miles and you have a SAM that can hit a target
at 150 miles. 1. You're going to have to hide those big-ass missiles
somewhere they can't be destroyed. Good luck.

You know where they but you can not kill them easily,as I said HARM is too
short legged,cruise misilles and other long range weapons have only little
penetration chance.

Which missile system that has demonstrated the ability to destroy
stealth aircraft at beyond 80 mile range are you talking about? Point
me to some information on it. Yeah that's what I thought.





Active
guidance with a MMVR will never work so forget it. You obviously
don't know how the two work. 3. High frequency radar of ANY type
doesn't work against stealth unless

If you can bring your fathers backscatterers close enough to ANY stealth
platform they will detect it.period.


Hell, if I can bring myself close enough I can reach out and detect it
with my hand. So what? You've proven nothing.





Some will detect it at 0,6 m some others at 10 m but they will detect lt.

And I'd trade them all day. A next generation HARM against a next
generation S-400+? That's like saying "I'm going to defeat all of
your Maverick missiles by putting tanks in front of my bunkers"

If you think next generation HARM will be cheaper than next generation SAM,you
are simply wrong.

LOL. Support your assertion. You could probably buy three or four
HARMs for the price of an SA-10. Add in all the R&D, support
equipment and so on and the next generation, stealth destroying
fantasy SAM will skew it even more.






(BTW I think there wont be any next generation SAM)

Yeah. I'd disturb it with a HARM.


Good Luck then,you will need it


I don't know. We seem to be bombing the **** out of pretty much any
SAM site we choose so the history doesn't support you.




ou obviously don't have a clue what happened there. Why don't you
tell how you *think* it happened. My guess is you've got some things
confused.

I think I know what happened,if stealth fleet continued to fly like stealth
aircraft supposed to fly ,US would probably lose whole stealth fleet in
Balkans.

Because it had nothing to do with stealth. It had to do with dumbass
tactics.


Two back to back hits were enough change tactics and make them to fly like
F14s,15s,16s ,Mirages,Tornados.
After changes,their vulnerability reduced to the F14,15,16,Mirage,Tornado
levels.

You couldn't have mangled it more if you tried. The loss had nothing
to do with stealth technology though I could see why you like to
believe it so. You just keep telling yourself that.






But flip side,that was starting point of Jammer Crisis.

rWell you want to hit the thing don't you? You want to hit the
aircraft before it can hit you back don't you? Doesn't do you much
good if your SAM only flies twenty miles but the airplane can hit you
from a hundred.

Sure,In order to take advantage multistatic tracking and detection systems long
range
SAMs are a must.

You mean long range, expensive, easy to spot from orbit SAMs right?






Shorter range SAMs might be used aganist next generation stealthy long range
HARMs or cruise misilles though.

The more likely it is to hit you.

I dont thing that any aircraft ,stealthy or not,would like idea of hitting a
missile !.If you wanted to come up with an anti stealth system a good way to
do


it would be to have a MSVR that actually WORKS. Proven, in service,
non vaporware and you have more than one. You use that to collect
your x,y,z positions of stealth aircraft. Using cellular, radio, or
freakin' internet, communicate those positions to *mobile* LPI
transmitters that talk to your SAMS. For missiles use something like
an ESSM with an AIM-9X seeker that can do LOAL. Stick two or four of
them per truck-mounted launcher. The idea being to have the two or
four missiles and a truck be CHEAP. I don't mean stick them on a
forty year old rust bucket rescued from the scrap heap but then again
I'm not talking about one of those big eight-wheeled vehicles either.
So you deploy you launchers God only knows where but make sure you
have adequate coverage. They pull up to their site and hook up to the
internet. All the truck gets is "launch missile, tell it to go to
x,y,z". After that the nearest LPI transmitter takes over and the
missile launcher is back on the road. It updates the now in-flight
missile intermittently and stays off the air the majority of the time
LPI or not. As the missile gets closer to the target it gets more
frequent updates. Once the IIR seeker has locked on to it's target
the LPI transmitter forgets about it. Numerous missiles on cheap
trucks, hard to detect transmitters, and a distributed comm network.
All spread out, realtively cheap, with no one unit worth a Tomahawk
and mobile to boot. The only vurnerable spot would be the decision
maker which would likely be the first thing hit.

Actualy GPS is an excellent multistatic radar emitter,specially for the space
based receivers.

So is the moon. Sheesh.

Well why don't you tell us about all these MSVRs and MSVR guided
missile systems they have?

If I say they are even (much) better than Silent Sentry would be enough for
you?

BTW some of them do not even need multistatics for stealth detection and
tracking,they can turn any stealth or non stealth platform into high flying
lighthouse so that "anybody" could detect them.

Obviously. And just has obviously nobody has them in service.

Obviously you think all black projects should have wings and life support
systems and all of them are made in USA.

o point me to a website that describes this space based, multistatic
radar missile guiding system. Yeah, about what I thought.

Unlike ultra classified ,much publicized,sight-sensitive stealth platforms that
you can see everywhere everyday,some things are still kept behind the
curtain,even 35 years after their first introduction.

Thats the difference between the Showboats and the important assets.

On 27 May 2004 04:43:09 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

Well why don't you tell us about all these MSVRs and MSVR guided
missile systems they have?

If I say they are even (much) better than Silent Sentry would be enough for
you?

Not by a long shot. You could just as easily say Russia has a Death
Star on the far side of the moon. As the saying goes "talk is cheap".
Give us some sources. Hell I could say the US has time traveling,
mile long, space going battle ships designed and built on planet
Poontang by aliens and it would have all the credibility of what
you've been telling us so far.



BTW some of them do not even need multistatics for stealth detection and
tracking,they can turn any stealth or non stealth platform into high flying
lighthouse so that "anybody" could detect them.

Obviously. And just has obviously nobody has them in service.

Obviously you think all black projects should have wings and life support
systems and all of them are made in USA.

So prove me wrong. Show us any evidence other than your word that any
of these systems are in service or even close to it. Saying "oh it's
top secret" doesn't cut it because if it's so secret how is it YOU
know about it. Share your sources with us.





o point me to a website that describes this space based, multistatic
radar missile guiding system. Yeah, about what I thought.

Unlike ultra classified ,much publicized,sight-sensitive stealth platforms that
you can see everywhere everyday,some things are still kept behind the
curtain,even 35 years after their first introduction.

Like them alien autopsies?





Thats the difference between the Showboats and the important assets.


No, that's the difference between pipedreams and reality.

No, that's the difference between pipedreams and reality.


Lets say a seventy years old imported (polite version of stolen) technology
(stealth) defeated by another seventy years old imported technology.

I wonder why they demonstrate the abilities of f22 aganist f15 (not designed to
detect stealth targets) and use demonstration results in their PR campaign?
Why not aganist silent sentry which is designed to detect and track stealth
targets?

Heck even Germans and Brits knew during WWII that significant backscatterer
reductions were possible by hard body shaping but forward scatterer reduction
was not.
Now US is learning hard way what Brits and Germans knew sixty years ago,after
spending zillions of dollars for a dead end technology.

Thats the difference between advanced Nations and advanced Countries.

On 28 May 2004 03:24:16 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

No, that's the difference between pipedreams and reality.


Lets say a seventy years old imported (polite version of stolen) technology
(stealth) defeated by another seventy years old imported technology.

I wonder why they demonstrate the abilities of f22 aganist f15 (not designed to
detect stealth targets) and use demonstration results in their PR campaign?
Why not aganist silent sentry which is designed to detect and track stealth
targets?

Maybe because they want to demonstrate against something real? You'll
notice they didn't demonstrate it against flying saucers either.






Heck even Germans and Brits knew during WWII that significant backscatterer
reductions were possible by hard body shaping but forward scatterer reduction
was not.
Now US is learning hard way what Brits and Germans knew sixty years ago,after
spending zillions of dollars for a dead end technology.


I think you're missing the point entirely here. Take any fighter in
the world other than the F-22 and you have an aircraft that can be
detected by ANY radar in the world. You don't need to hang your hopes
on some mythical beast that someone might develope into a working
system in twenty or thirty years. You want to talk about "jurassic"
fighters? How 'bout Flankers, Fulcrums and pretty much every other
NON stealth aircraft in the world.






Thats the difference between advanced Nations and advanced Countries.

Good thing we're both.

aybe because they want to demonstrate against something real?

If you allowed to hand pick your opponent you win always.

Take any fighter in
the world other than the F-22 and you have an aircraft that can be
detected by ANY radar in the world. You don't need to hang

The proliferation of stealth platforms was the reason why multistatics and
other counter LO systems pop up everywhere now.
I think you are missing my point,my point is that both stealth and counter
stealth technologies were known for more than half century and if push one them
you pull another too.
Classical technological push-pull example.
Before investing zillions of dollars in any military technology you must check
if a technology to counter your technology is already available.

How 'bout Flankers, Fulcrums and pretty much every other
NON stealth aircraft in the world.

They are going to accompany Raptors in Jurassic Park.

Good thing we're both.

Countries that cannot produce their own scientific talent cannot be classified
as Advanced Nations they are only Advanced Countries and as such are easy preys
for the Advanced Nations.

On 28 May 2004 16:29:57 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

aybe because they want to demonstrate against something real?

If you allowed to hand pick your opponent you win always.

Exactly.





Take any fighter in
the world other than the F-22 and you have an aircraft that can be
detected by ANY radar in the world. You don't need to hang

The proliferation of stealth platforms was the reason why multistatics and
other counter LO systems pop up everywhere now.


Funny. For them being "everywhere" you sure don't seem to be able to
produce any information on them. Oh yeah, they're classified.




I think you are missing my point,my point is that both stealth and counter
stealth technologies were known for more than half century and if push one them
you pull another too.
Classical technological push-pull example.
Before investing zillions of dollars in any military technology you must check
if a technology to counter your technology is already available.

How 'bout Flankers, Fulcrums and pretty much every other
NON stealth aircraft in the world.

They are going to accompany Raptors in Jurassic Park.

Good thing we're both.

Countries that cannot produce their own scientific talent cannot be classified
as Advanced Nations they are only Advanced Countries and as such are easy preys
for the Advanced Nations.

Yeah you're right. The US isn't anywhere near as advanced as the
motherland. Boy I sure wish I didn't live here in the godd ol' U S of
A. I tell ya, I'm really hatin' it here. I wish we were as advanced
as. . .who is it you're talking about? I don't seem to remember.

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
No, that's the difference between pipedreams and reality.


Lets say a seventy years old imported (polite version of stolen)
technology
(stealth) defeated by another seventy years old imported technology.

I wonder why they demonstrate the abilities of f22 aganist f15 (not
designed to
detect stealth targets) and use demonstration results in their PR
campaign?
Why not aganist silent sentry which is designed to detect and track
stealth
targets?

Because the existence of "Grey Bears" is still an official secret, so they
can't talk about F-22 vs MiG-29/Su-27 testing.

Heck even Germans and Brits knew during WWII that significant
backscatterer
reductions were possible by hard body shaping but forward scatterer
reduction
was not.
Now US is learning hard way what Brits and Germans knew sixty years
ago,after
spending zillions of dollars for a dead end technology.

Thats the difference between advanced Nations and advanced Countries.

Should that still be a surprise - after the F/A-18E/F step back?

The USAF and the USN are just re-inventing air-to-air, after they realized
that the F-22 might otherwise get cancelled, and it could happen they to sit
there with F-22s and Super Horrors and have nothing to tackle all the
Flankers and PAK-FAs any more.

Tom Cooper
Freelance Aviation Journalist & Historian
Vienna, Austria

*************************************************

Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php

Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875

Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585

African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/

Arab MiG-19 & MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...=S6550~ser=COM

*************************************************

"Tom Cooper" wrote in message
...
"Denyav" wrote in message
...
No, that's the difference between pipedreams and reality.


Lets say a seventy years old imported (polite version of stolen)
technology
(stealth) defeated by another seventy years old imported technology.

I wonder why they demonstrate the abilities of f22 aganist f15 (not
designed to
detect stealth targets) and use demonstration results in their PR
campaign?
Why not aganist silent sentry which is designed to detect and track
stealth
targets?

Because the existence of "Grey Bears" is still an official secret, so they
can't talk about F-22 vs MiG-29/Su-27 testing.

And you would be claiming that these "official secret" adversary aircraft
have "silent sentry"..?


Heck even Germans and Brits knew during WWII that significant
backscatterer
reductions were possible by hard body shaping but forward scatterer
reduction
was not.
Now US is learning hard way what Brits and Germans knew sixty years
ago,after
spending zillions of dollars for a dead end technology.

Thats the difference between advanced Nations and advanced Countries.

Should that still be a surprise - after the F/A-18E/F step back?

The USAF and the USN are just re-inventing air-to-air, after they realized
that the F-22 might otherwise get cancelled, and it could happen they to
sit
there with F-22s and Super Horrors and have nothing to tackle all the
Flankers and PAK-FAs any more.

I don't know what is scarier--the thought that you actually think the USN
has joined in this alleged "evil cabal" to save the F/A-22, or the fact that
you are agreeing with a two-ton loon like Denyav in the first place. Would
that be "aviation journalist", or "aviation fantasist"?

Brooks


Tom Cooper
Freelance Aviation Journalist & Historian
Vienna, Austria

I wonder why they demonstrate the abilities of f22 aganist f15 (not
designed to
detect stealth targets) and use demonstration results in their PR
campaign?
Why not aganist silent sentry which is designed to detect and track
stealth
targets?

Because the existence of "Grey Bears" is still an official secret, so
they
can't talk about F-22 vs MiG-29/Su-27 testing.

And you would be claiming that these "official secret" adversary aircraft
have "silent sentry"..?

No, just you're running in the front of the car, and so have failed to
understand what that means.

Have you never heard about the Grey Bears as USAF unit?

Heck even Germans and Brits knew during WWII that significant
backscatterer
reductions were possible by hard body shaping but forward scatterer
reduction
was not.
Now US is learning hard way what Brits and Germans knew sixty years
ago,after
spending zillions of dollars for a dead end technology.

Thats the difference between advanced Nations and advanced Countries.

Should that still be a surprise - after the F/A-18E/F step back?

The USAF and the USN are just re-inventing air-to-air, after they
realized
that the F-22 might otherwise get cancelled, and it could happen they to
sit
there with F-22s and Super Horrors and have nothing to tackle all the
Flankers and PAK-FAs any more.

I don't know what is scarier--the thought that you actually think the USN
has joined in this alleged "evil cabal" to save the F/A-22, or the fact
that
you are agreeing with a two-ton loon like Denyav in the first place. Would
that be "aviation journalist", or "aviation fantasist"?

Again the same problem as above: that should have meant "F-15" instead of
"F-22", i.e. it was a typo, but you're so fast in attempting to make me look
silly, you don't even notice this.

Well, I certainly do hope you feel better now. In the meantime I'll continue
reading US and other reports about USAF and USN scrambling to pick up in the
air-to-air race, after being bushwacked on other international exercises....

Tom Cooper
Freelance Aviation Journalist & Historian
Vienna, Austria

*************************************************

Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php

Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875

Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585

African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/

Arab MiG-19 & MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...=S6550~ser=COM

*************************************************