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

Do you know what "semiactive" is/means?

I guess so.

Command guidance? I'll bet a HARM would just LOVE that.

Sure,but you will need a HARM with at least 150+ miles range to start with.


An active radar seeker on a AAM likely wouldn't work very well against
stealh. You'd be better off with an IIR seeker.

If you can come close enough to stealth (or stealth comes close enough to you
)everything works.
If you want to increase your chances you might even upgrade SAMs with multi
spectral seekers.

A high frequency radar against a stealth aircraft?

But of course,during terminal phase everything works.We are talking about very
close ranges.

I like that. The F-22 will be the T-rex of fighters.

Agreed ,It will be highly regarded as a valuable object in every museum.

On 25 May 2004 03:32:55 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

I like that. The F-22 will be the T-rex of fighters.

Agreed ,It will be highly regarded as a valuable object in every museum.

Yeah I imagine everybody who isn't getting them is knawing on their
liver. I don't blame you for being bitter.

On 25 May 2004 03:27:40 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

Do you know what "semiactive" is/means?

I guess so.

Doesn't sound like it.

Command guidance? I'll bet a HARM would just LOVE that.

Sure,but you will need a HARM with at least 150+ miles range to start with.

Why? You damn sure aren't going to be able to hide a 150+ mile SAM.
We'd be taking those babies out with JASSM and Tomahawks before *any*
aircraft got near. That's if someone were to actually deploy such a
system of course. And if it actually worked. Besides, to use your
150 mile SAM you'd have to bring your command link online and that's
when the HARM would pop him. It could be 10 miles away, it doesn't
matter.





An active radar seeker on a AAM likely wouldn't work very well against
stealh. You'd be better off with an IIR seeker.

If you can come close enough to stealth (or stealth comes close enough to you
)everything works.

You're talking *maybe* a couple miles. An IIR would see it further
than that. No way, NO way will an active radar seeker in an AAM pick
up a stealth aircraft from fifteen or twenty miles. They don't even
do that for NON-stealth aircraft.




If you want to increase your chances you might even upgrade SAMs with multi
spectral seekers.

Multi-spectral? Do you just stick these terms in wherever you think
it might sound right? You essentially have various form of radar and
light. ALL forms of active radar in a missile are high frequency or
REALLY high frequency. Non of which are useful against a stealth
aircraft. There is laser beam-riding, but not on a 150 mile range
missile. Optical guidance for SAMS means optics on the ground and the
missile is command guided. They don't have cameras in the nose of
SAMs like a Maverick. Because of LOS limitatons (among MANY other
things) you aren't going to be able to use optical guidance for a 150
mile SAM. Using a laser designator won't work for many of the same
reasons. Nope, IIR is your best bet. Use your Magical Multistatic
Vaporware Radar (MMVR) to cue the missile and the IIR seeker for
terminal guidance.





A high frequency radar against a stealth aircraft?

But of course,during terminal phase everything works.We are talking about very
close ranges.

What, a mile?

We'd be taking those babies out with JASSM and Tomahawks before *any*
aircraft got near. That's if someone

Interesting,but didn't I say "US multistatic system is also very effective next
generation of stealthy cruise misilles that use terrain masking in addiditon to
passive stealth".

JASSM or JASSM counterparts will be shot down long before they reach their
targets.

That's if someone were to actually deploy such a
system of course. And if it actually worked. Besides, to use your

Multistatics are not new,in applications that the money is no problem,like
defense in national level,US used them for years,for example the space based
multistatic system for the defense of of CONUS,but problem was the theater
level applications where a similar system need to be realized much cheaper.So
it had to wait for some innovations.

50 mile SAM you'd have to bring your command link online and that's
when the HARM would pop him. It could be 10 miles away, it doesn't
matter.

Forget HARM type weapons,current ones have not enough range to keep HARM trucks
outside lethal range of SAMs and next generation long range HARMs themselves
will become targets.
If were an attacker I would try to disturb the command link.

You're talking *maybe* a couple miles. An IIR would see it further

than that. No way, NO way will an active radar seeker in an AAM pick
up a stealth aircraft from fifteen or twenty miles. They don't even
do that for NON-stealth aircraft.

Yes I am talking about a couple of miles and its more than enough as
terminalguidance as we all learned in Balkans.

There is laser beam-riding, but not on a 150 mile range
missile. Optical guidance for SAMS means optics on the ground and the
missile is command guided. They don't have cameras in the nose of

Who needs 150+ miles guidance radar,IR,laser or whatever.
Multistatics easily track every existing stealth aircraft at 600 miles.
(B2 has an excellent monostatic RCS value,but its "bistatic" RCS value is
bigger than B52 frontal monostatic RCS !)
As I said before as you come closer to stealth target you will receive
backscatter returns and if you need only a couple of miles range the band you
use wont make much difference.so better use whatever you have.

In article , Scott Ferrin
wrote:

On 23 May 2004 04:49:00 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

That's the joy of F-22 (and -23)--the interceptor dies long before
he/she ever gets within a range that would allow their radar to detect
the small RCS. You simply cruise along, passively detecting the enemy
and plinking them at your leisure. No sweating, grunting, groaning,

Is F22 (jurassicfighter) is a Bomber?


I like that. The F-22 will be the T-rex of fighters

Thank you, Sir. I now can't cleanse my mind of the image of a C-5 as a
brontosaurus and an AC-130 as a triceratops.

On 25 May 2004 16:42:16 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

We'd be taking those babies out with JASSM and Tomahawks before *any*
aircraft got near. That's if someone

Interesting,but didn't I say "US multistatic system is also very effective next
generation of stealthy cruise misilles that use terrain masking in addiditon to
passive stealth".

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.





JASSM or JASSM counterparts will be shot down long before they reach their
targets.

That's if someone were to actually deploy such a
system of course. And if it actually worked. Besides, to use your

Multistatics are not new,in applications that the money is no problem,like
defense in national level,US used them for years,for example the space based
multistatic system for the defense of of CONUS

What are you smoking?



,but problem was the theater
level applications where a similar system need to be realized much cheaper.So
it had to wait for some innovations.

50 mile SAM you'd have to bring your command link online and that's
when the HARM would pop him. It could be 10 miles away, it doesn't
matter.

Forget HARM type weapons,current ones have not enough range to keep HARM trucks
outside lethal range of SAMs

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. 2. Semi 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 they're practically on top of it.
So I'd forget that too. 4. Whatever terminal guidance you use you're
going to have to send updates to that missile until it can get close
enough for onboard guidance to take over. That means transmitting.
If you have the cash maybe you could get yourself some LPI
transmitters but I wouldn't bank on that though it might be your only
choice.


and next generation long range HARMs themselves
will become targets.

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 were an attacker I would try to disturb the command link.

Yeah. I'd disturb it with a HARM.



You're talking *maybe* a couple miles. An IIR would see it further

than that. No way, NO way will an active radar seeker in an AAM pick
up a stealth aircraft from fifteen or twenty miles. They don't even
do that for NON-stealth aircraft.

Yes I am talking about a couple of miles and its more than enough as
terminalguidance as we all learned in Balkans.


You 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.




There is laser beam-riding, but not on a 150 mile range
missile. Optical guidance for SAMS means optics on the ground and the
missile is command guided. They don't have cameras in the nose of

Who needs 150+ miles guidance radar,IR,laser or whatever.
Multistatics easily track every existing stealth aircraft at 600 miles.

Well 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.



(B2 has an excellent monostatic RCS value,but its "bistatic" RCS value is
bigger than B52 frontal monostatic RCS !)

Any sources for that? Didn't think so.



As I said before as you come closer to stealth target

The more likely it is to hit you.


you will receive
backscatter returns and if you need only a couple of miles range the band you
use wont make much difference.so better use whatever you have.


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.

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.

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

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


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.

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.

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.
(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

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.
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.

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.
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.

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.

On Mon, 24 May 2004 15:44:38 -0600, Scott Ferrin wrote:
On 23 May 2004 04:49:00 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

That's the joy of F-22 (and -23)--the interceptor dies long before
he/she ever gets within a range that would allow their radar to detect
the small RCS. You simply cruise along, passively detecting the enemy
and plinking them at your leisure. No sweating, grunting, groaning,

Is F22 (jurassicfighter) is a Bomber?


I like that. The F-22 will be the T-rex of fighters.

Wouldn't that make it a cretaceousfighter?

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)