Israeli Stealth???

Sorry - typo on my part. I meant a stealthy aircraft. Like the other posts
are saying stealth still isnt the be all and end all. I don't think true
stealth will ever exist (at least not within affordable costs)

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:23:23 +0100, "Ian Craig"
wrote:

You seem very sure that the UK doesnt have a stealth aircraft - how come?
Know something we dont? Just cos we havent got a batwing or f117 doesnt
mean
we dont have stealthy aircraft?

The UK does not have an operational "stealth" aircraft.


Al Minyard

(Denyav) schrieb:

BTW A couple of years ago in very same area an USAF transport plane collided
with a German transport plane.This event was strange enough I guess.

What was strange with this midair collision?

The german Luftwaffe plane was a Tu154M (taken from the GDR), the US
plane a C141 Starlifter. The german crew was on tour to South Africa -
the pax consisted of Bundeswehr officers and their spouses who wanted
to take place in a sailing race in Kapstadt on the 75th anniversary of
the south african navy. The C141 brought anti-land mine equipment to
Namibia.

The german crew prepared a flight plan for the route, but the algerian
pilots didn´t pass it along to their counterparts in Windhuk(according
to Der Spiegel, 22.09.1997).

Both planes lacked a TCAS, one crew chose the wrong height. The
Luftwaffe crew set a usual international radio frequency, while (as
Der Spiegel claims) the Air Force crew used a "private" one.

According to US Air Mobility Command, the Starlifter wasn´t even
equipped with a transponder.

Gruss, Roman

In article ,
"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

What does stealth get you on Day 1 of the Falklands?

Day 1? It's gets the Argentinians occupying the islands.

Day 29? It gets you the first serious British attacks...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In article ,
(Denyav) wrote:

You have a very shallow knowledge of how radar jamming works in the
years after World War II. What you describe is pretty much first
chapter "ECM 101," and has nothing to do with methods in current use.

Well,can you tell me which,past,current or projected,ECM/ESM sytem analyses
forward scatterers?
None.period.

That you know of.

But spoofing and jamming are pretty universal, and forward-scatter
radars are going to be more vulnerable to some types than others.

Chaff will make a big comeback, for example.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

But spoofing and jamming are pretty universal, and forward-scatter
radars are going to be more vulnerable to some types than others.

Chaff will make a big comeback,

Thats true, but chaff laying B2s?
That supposed not to happen according to what they told us only one decade ago.

What was strange with this midair collision?

Do planeful Luftwaffe or Bundeswehr officers usually take part in sailing
events in other parts of the Globe?.

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ...
In message , Chris
Manteuffel writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
Then you get into the operational analysis issues like "just when does
stealth actually provide a clear benefit anyway?" and that's when the
punch-ups usually start: it's a controversial question. (Sure, stealth
lets you fly through enemy IADS alone (sort of) and unafraid (well,
mostly)... but then the USAF can do that today and tomorrow anyway)

April 2, 1982.

What does stealth get you on Day 1 of the Falklands? A F-117-a-like
doesn't have the range, a B-2 is gross overkill (and lacks the targeting
data: sure, it can get down there and drop bombs, but on what?) Also,
there's a distinct lack of air defence for a stealth aircraft to have to
hide from.

I realize this. You are right that the money for new stealth bombers
just isn't there, and that the best that you can get is LO planes. I
was just arguing (in a minimalist way) that your statements about how
the RAF/FAA don't need stealth because the USAF can do that already
seem to me to be the same sort of thinking that British Exchequers
have made for 50 years, and which aren't really true.

Incidentally, what kind of investments are RAF/Army putting into
drones? I honestly don't know, I don't recall reading much about their
programs, but the push to graduation has meant that I'm rather out of
the loop on development programs.

Chris Manteuffel

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:39:17 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:

In message , Chris
Manteuffel writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
.. .
Then you get into the operational analysis issues like "just when does
stealth actually provide a clear benefit anyway?" and that's when the
punch-ups usually start: it's a controversial question. (Sure, stealth
lets you fly through enemy IADS alone (sort of) and unafraid (well,
mostly)... but then the USAF can do that today and tomorrow anyway)

April 2, 1982.

What does stealth get you on Day 1 of the Falklands? A F-117-a-like
doesn't have the range, a B-2 is gross overkill (and lacks the targeting
data: sure, it can get down there and drop bombs, but on what?) Also,
there's a distinct lack of air defence for a stealth aircraft to have to
hide from.

If you had to choose, would a small squadron of F-117-type aircraft be
more or less useful than (for example) AEW Sea Kings deployed and worked
up; CIWS fitted to at least the carriers, amphibs and Type 42s; better
boots; and more Chinooks?

That's what I mean by the analysis: where does stealth get you more
benefits than costs, and what scenarios do you gain in by pursuing that
option to the exclusion of others?

Well, the US has plenty of helos, boots, etc. We don't really give up
anything to get stealth. I can certainly understand that this would be
an issue for others.

Al Minyard

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 22:31:56 +0100, "Ian Craig"
wrote:

Sorry - typo on my part. I meant a stealthy aircraft. Like the other posts
are saying stealth still isnt the be all and end all. I don't think true
stealth will ever exist (at least not within affordable costs)

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:23:23 +0100, "Ian Craig"
wrote:

You seem very sure that the UK doesnt have a stealth aircraft - how come?
Know something we dont? Just cos we havent got a batwing or f117 doesnt
mean
we dont have stealthy aircraft?

The UK does not have an operational "stealth" aircraft.


Al Minyard

The B-2, F-22 and F35 are certainly close enough :-)

Al Minyard

In article ,
(Denyav) wrote:

But spoofing and jamming are pretty universal, and forward-scatter
radars are going to be more vulnerable to some types than others.

Chaff will make a big comeback,

Thats true, but chaff laying B2s?

Probably not. One small missile with a load of a couple of pounds of
chaff, spread over a wide area.

That supposed not to happen according to what they told us only one decade
ago.

"They" who?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.