How long until current 'stealth' techniques are compromised?

The [often duplicitous] Europeans are pouring significant amounts of
money
into anti-stealth radar and weapon systems to counter a hopelessly
bankrupt
Russia which cannot even afford fuel for it's current aircraft; and even
at
the height of it's power didn't come close to fielding a stealth
aircraft.

No, they had some reasonably-stealthy stuff, they just couldn't afford
to make it in large quantities. For enough cash, the old Soviet arms
labs would certainly make something stealthy for pretty much anyone who
has a cash.

That's correct. The FSU was engaged in the T-60S bomber project which
is still active as well as several stealth configurations put forth
from the design bereaus of MiG and Sukhoi. Then there's plasma stealth
research and anti-stealth missile systems of which one type is
operational.

Well, thats pretty much the problem; nobody has the cash. As it is now, the
USA can just barely afford stealth, the EU cannot afford it at all, and
Russia is hopeless.

Wrong. The UK (Bae), France (Dassault) and Germany (EADS) all have
stealth aircraft and missile research on-going. The British HALO and
German Firefly II might even be operational by now. EADS is moving
forward with its stealth cruise missile and anti-stealth missile
systems. Bae has several proposals for a wide range of stealth
aircraft and missiles (formerly from AVPRO, now open to others)as well
as the stealth ship SeaWraith. France has Dassault and the AVE which
may be either a UAV, UCAV, or piloted aircraft in the final design.

And nobody except the US has the research capability to make such a
breakthrough.

Total BS. Germany had visual stealth in WW1 with the Taube, a stealth
aircraft in WW2 (Go-229 with radar-absorbing paint), and independently
came up with the MBB Lampyridae (Firefly) stealth interceptor by 1981.
Like the Canadian CF-105 Arrow, however, the US Govt. exerted extreme
pressure on Germany to drop the program which would have been superior
to the F-117 as it was an armed interceptor. MBB, which became part of
DASA, DB Aerospace, then EADS never gave up the program. It has been
suggested that the program survived as a European multinational effort
since two German stealth triangles (Firefly II) were spotted over
South Africa's Overberg Test Range a few years back. Germany alone is
pioneering the anti-stealth missile and has designs for a metamorphic
aircraft beyond anything the US has planned for the same time of IOC
of 2020+

The export market for stealth is almost nil. The export market for
anti-stealth, is, however, vast.

True, but independent stealth capability is active. China, India,
South Africa, and Israel all are working on either stealth aircraft
projects, missiles, or both.

Not to mention the fact that Russia has sided with 'Old Europe' far more
often than not lately, and that these Europeans have taken seemingly
every
step possible to attempt to thwart any American geopolitical and
military
advancement in the last three years. But I'm sure these systems are to
counter all the imaginary Russian stealth aircraft that will never be
built.

Sarcasm aside, you have no clue as to why the Europeans have built this
hardware. If they were defending against an American threat, as you
suggest, they'd be building more actual *weapons* like planes and tanks,
instead of a few defensive systems that don't make sense unless you have
a superpower's military to back you up.

They are, according to the European military journals, responding to
the US attempts to keep stealth out of the hands of everyone,
including their friends. The UK was the first to break this agreement
by collaborating with Dassault on stealth development. The Germans of
course continued on without any agreement with the US. Russia still
has active projects but is strapped for cash. China is actively trying
to develop a stealth aircraft- the JXX. South Africa and Sweden both
have stealth missiles and ships under development.

Read my statements more carefully. I never meant to say that the Europeans
are hoping to defend themselves against a military attack from the USA
(which, regardless of political attitudes will just not happen anytime
soon). But that developing these systems could give them negotiating clout
in global matters which the USA may want to act upon in the future, as they
currently have almost no say at all. It's a political objective, not a
military one.

Take, for example the recent Iraq situation. The 'Old Europe' powers were
staunchly against the invasion (for various reasons, none of which are
relevant to this discussion), but the USA was obviously determined to invade
Iraq, regardless of their opinions. The European powers were, essentially,
powerless to protect their interests in Iraq, and had no effective
negotiating clout with the Americans. They were brushed aside and there was
nothing they could do about it.

Except of course not send the US any troops to aid in the
reconstruction of Iraq. As a direct result our military is
overstretched and in danger of not being able to wage two seperate
wars should one break out in the East. Our soldiers are dying daily
and Iraq will be an election year issue that might cost President Bush
a second term. Going it alone is only good in the short run as we have
no clear exit strategy and stuck in a financial quagmire that
irritates the American citizen paying for this "adventure".

However, imagine the situation if there was a possibility that, perhaps,
Saddam may be able to purchase (or be 'leaked'), through, say, the French, a
deterrant system capable of rendering our most valued and expensive weapons
systems vulnerable. Suddenly the European point of view on the matter
becomes far more relevant.

Think about it... what is the REAL market for anti-stealth systems?
Third
world dictatorships and despots who would like to carry an ace in the
hole
against the American forces, and are willing to pay highly to get it
(but
cannot develop it on their own). Period.

This has a certain amount of sense to it, but it's a pretty iffy
conclusion. For one, you have to assume that these things *work* versus
stealth planes to a huge degree, and that's definitely debatable.

Thats true enough, though it is disturbing to me that this research is being
carried on in the first place.

The detection systems alone do not render stealth aircraft useless...
but link it to the German anti-stealth seeking missile and it is an
effective counter.

Rob

Keep in mind that radar transmitters can be detected much farther out
than they themselves can detect a target. Iraqis found that out.

Yes,Iraqis found that out,probably
Iranians,Syrians,Somalians,Zambians,Micronesians and all Backwardistanians
will find out the same thing.

he USAF has put stealth aircraft in harm's way without jamming. Jamming
would be counterproductive, as it would indicate an attack is imminent.

Really? During Balkan conflict no US aircraft,stealth or not,flew without
Jammer support.
Two f117 were hit ,one lost,the other safely returned,both because of jammer
failures.

The originator of now famous saying "Jammers are like American Express never
leave home without them" is a f117 "driver".period.

or the FSU with them. The strange thing is that our "friends" are
putting more money into anti-stealth than our "enemies"...

Rob

A small but interesting note,German post WWII counter LO work started short
time after Harold Macmillan transferred British and seized German stealth
technology to US.

The detection systems alone do not render stealth aircraft useless...
but link it to the German anti-stealth seeking missile and it is an
effective counter.

But who needs missiles?
You dont even need exotic weapons like EM missiles,a multi static system
designed to detect stealth platforms might be turned into a "kill" system
instantly if you can keep frequencies and phases of several powerful emitters
under control,a kind of poor mans HPM weapon.

Take, for example the recent Iraq situation. The 'Old Europe' powers were
staunchly against the invasion (for various reasons, none of which are
relevant to this discussion), but the USA was obviously determined to invade
Iraq, regardless of their opinions. The European powers were,

Both US and Europeans were and are aware of next paradigm shift ,Europeans
simply want to wait,on contrary US got to act before it takes place no matter
what.

As I said before,I think the most powerful weapon in US arsenal is the
Greenback.
The most likely peer competitors of US are also the biggest lenders of US (and
US is the biggest borrower of them),that offers US a unique chance to
destabilize likely peer competitors by devaluating Dollar.

As Nixon said long time ago"Dollar is our currency,but your problem"

On 02 Jan 2004 06:06:59 GMT, Denyav wrote:
Take, for example the recent Iraq situation. The 'Old Europe' powers were
staunchly against the invasion (for various reasons, none of which are
relevant to this discussion), but the USA was obviously determined to invade
Iraq, regardless of their opinions. The European powers were,

Both US and Europeans were and are aware of next paradigm shift ,Europeans
simply want to wait,on contrary US got to act before it takes place no matter
what.

As I said before,I think the most powerful weapon in US arsenal is the
Greenback.
The most likely peer competitors of US are also the biggest lenders of US (and
US is the biggest borrower of them),that offers US a unique chance to
destabilize likely peer competitors by devaluating Dollar.

As Nixon said long time ago"Dollar is our currency,but your problem"

I suspect the days of the dollar as international reserve currency
are numbered:

http://www.cabalamat.org/weblog/art_145.html

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

(Denyav) wrote in message ...
The detection systems alone do not render stealth aircraft useless...
but link it to the German anti-stealth seeking missile and it is an
effective counter.

But who needs missiles?
You dont even need exotic weapons like EM missiles,a multi static system
designed to detect stealth platforms might be turned into a "kill" system
instantly if you can keep frequencies and phases of several powerful emitters
under control,a kind of poor mans HPM weapon.

Yes, you are talking about a theoretical ADW "aerial denial weapon"
that would knock aircraft out of the sky without knocking out powered
systems on the ground.
Trouble is, like the German situation in WW2, you would have to drop
such a weapon ABOVE the attacking force. German fighters did this near
the end of the war. Instead of fighting bombers traditionally, they
climbed above them and bombed them!
But US and coalition aircraft strikes today are seldom that
concentrated; rather, they operate in waves of aircraft or pockets. A
ground system would be better but then presents itself as a priority
target to knock out. Second problem would be the power required to
sustain these emitters.
The EADS anti-stealth missile has a multiple seeker system that is
initially launched into the path of the stealth aircraft. As it closes
rapidly it starts looking visually for the aircraft while sniffing out
the exhaust with the plume detector. Once located no manner of
aircraft defensive aids would prevent the missile from striking.

Rob

In article ,
(Denyav) wrote:

But who needs missiles?
You dont even need exotic weapons like EM missiles,a multi static system
designed to detect stealth platforms might be turned into a "kill" system
instantly if you can keep frequencies and phases of several powerful emitters
under control,a kind of poor mans HPM weapon.

....after you increase their output by a few orders of magnitude.

Not going to happen.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

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

"M. J. Powell" wrote in message ...
In message , robert
arndt writes
(Denyav) wrote in message
...
It seems alot of importance is put into stealth for aircraft these days,
just wondering who is working on a countering radar system for it?

Germany has its own version of the '90s Czech anti-stealth radar
(which they purchased)as well as EADs developing an anti-stealth
missile that uses multiple seekers to hunt stealth aircraft. One of
the seekers is a plume detector which goes back to WW2 and the
Feuerball weapon (aka Foo Fighter).

Would you mind expanding on your comments on 'Feuerball' and 'Foo
Fighters', Robert?

Mike


Sure, but as soon as I do a whole bunch of anti-German RAM regulars
are going to try to discredit what I say.
Anyway, it is believed by some people that the mysterious burning
balls of fire nicknamed "Foo Fighters" by US pilots that followed
their aircraft were either:

a) unknown aerial phenomenon
b) alien/UFO craft
c) German secret weapon

Most RAM regulars will just put this subject in the A category and
file it under unknown.
However, what these people fail to do is tell you that the Foo Fighter
sightings were heavily documented by the 415th NFS, caught on film,
and reported as a German secret weapon in 3 world newspapers in Dec
'44/Jan '45.
They only appeared over GERMAN HELD TERRITORY in the period from 11/44
to 4/45 and they came from THE GROUND, not the air which discredits
the UFO fanatics.
After Germany surrendered the ETO sightings stopped... only to resume
briefly in 8/45 over Japan- Germany's ally. It is now known that
secret U-boat technology transfers were going on and at the end the
Germans gave the Japanese all their most secret stuff which included:
jet and rocket engines, designs for jet and rocket aircraft, guided
missiles, proximity fuses, and uranium for their atomic bomb project.
It is logical that among the technology transferred was the Feuerball
(Fireball) weapon.
The Feuerball was an SS project and can be accurately described as a
flattened disc powered by an advanced engine that was used as a
psychological weapon against the bomber aircraft. At Messerschmitt's
Oberammergau facility an electrical field device with a range of a few
hundred feet was built. It is believed that that device was
incorporated into the Feuerball. When the weapon, launched off a
modified Enzian launcher, got into the air it used an advanced plume
sensor to home in on the bomber aircraft's engines. Then when it
closed to a few hundred feet sent out a damaging electrical field that
caused the bomber engines to malfunction/stop.
Those who are critical of this description fail to tell others that
the bombers that did come into CLOSE contact with the Feuerball became
DISABLED. The field effect is DOCUMENTED by the 415th NFS, 9th AF, and
others.
Quite often the gunners onboard fired at the strange burning objects
but they sped away at high speed (triggered by a trip mechanism under
the Feuerball's armor plate). The information here is partly from the
415th NFS documentation, newspaper reports, and Renato Vesco's books
on the subject.
The problem with identifying this weapon is that it is an SS project
and involves disc technology that is still kept classified. The USAAF
heaviliy documented the "Foo Fighters" by never offered any clear
explanation for them.
The origin of this weapon is also believed to have been initiated by
the Italian scientist Belluzzo which was working on the big SS disc
aircraft. During the war Belluzzo came up with the idea of an Italian
jet-powered round bomb called a "Turboproietta". When he was placed
under SS control and worked on the Schriever disc enlargement along
with Miethe and Habermohl the Feuerball project also came to life.
The burning halo effect of these objects has never been precisely
explained. One theory is that they match the Turboproietta which looks
like a round jet wheel with four exhausts. Trouble is no known German
jet engine could fit the dimensions of the Feuerball, let alone four.
Another theory is that the Feuerball was an aerial flakmine with eight
rotors, four of which held Pabst ramjets which produced the fire halo
in flight sort of like what the Fw Triebflugel would have looked like
in combat. Only problem with that theory is that there never were any
descriptions of rotors on these objects nor engines. The entire body
was engulfed in flame. Furthermore a flakmine was meant to carry an
amatol warhead and explode in the bomber stream. No Feuerball
exploded- ever.
So, we are left with Vesco's description which matches what was
encountered in flight. The electrical field weapon was captured at
Oberammergau along with the Me P.1101... but no Feuerball. These were
constructed by the FFO of Wiener Neustadt and launched from forest
airstrips where the Messerschmitt Enzian was tested, hence the use of
the modified launcher.
Anyway, I hope this information is not too confusing. All SS projects
concerning disc craft of the E-4 Unit are still highly classified. In
past threads I have documented the sight dates, location, etc as well
as provided the newpapers reported and dates and reference sources.

Rob

p.s. the fact that both German and Japanese pilots saw the craft to
and didn't know what they were is irrelevent. Unless they had a need
to know they wouldn't just like one of our F-16 pilots spotting a
black project aircraft in the air wouldn't be able to identify it
either. Please use common sense in evaluating the above. No aerial
phenomenon targets US bombers at random and alien UFOs don't come from
the ground in German-held territory. The weapon was reported as a
German one and from all accounts is.