counter this

> aim radar at sky
> stealth plane doesnt reflect radar so it looks like there is no plane
> shoot a missile at every part of the sky with no plane
> ????
> profit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >your country only produces 100-300 missiles a year

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >It's the only thing in the sky not sending back a reflection
    >Surely there's nothing there

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      kek. I was thinking this same thing. the atmosphere reflects radio waves thats how they bounce signals over the horizon. cant they just see a "shadow" cast over the reflective atmosphere and see the plane?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >cant they just see a "shadow" cast over the reflective atmosphere and see the plane?
        They can likely tell something is there, but it's not enough for a guidance system. Same issue as purely UV/VIS targetting really.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Can't you launch a missile at the expected object location and have the missile use IR/Radar/Visual target acquisition once it approaches the expected target position?

          Your radar might not be able to provide tracking information from dozens or hundreds of miles away, but if you have a rough idea of where the plane will be the missile itself can have a multi-mode seeker sensitive enough to find the target within a handful of kilometres.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Ok, so how do you tell a B-21 apart from a cloud?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I assume the B-21 is moving at somewhere between ~500-1200mph

              I somehow doubt too many clouds will be clocking those speeds.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ok what if it hits behind a cloud?
                also what about radio stations?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes but WHAT is moving at those speeds
                You can’t motion detect, that’s based on air currents which are a fucking non starter that high up and at those distances
                Its thermals are concealed
                No radar cross section
                You basically have to rewrite the book on LIDAR to make this method viable

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                not him but
                > thermals are concealed
                how do they cool down exhaust gasses?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >how do they cool down exhaust gasses?
                They mix the exhaust with cool air.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Mix with cool air, run fuel-to-exhaust heat exchanger at critical moments for further reduction, run at low throttle settings.

                this will be interesting to read about when the tech is declassified

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >2073
                Yeah.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                exhaust mixing has been a thing forever, it's not super secret, you can build one yourself for your car or boat if you want

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Mix with cool air, run fuel-to-exhaust heat exchanger at critical moments for further reduction, run at low throttle settings.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I look forward to when someone devises some acoustic technology to scan the sky high up for the noise of stealth fighters, and the stealth technologies use acoustic-canceling to mute their engine sounds in counter. The technological arms race is neat.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                that would be swag

                https://i.imgur.com/joOYMcE.jpg

                >make radar that has big long waves.
                >being stealthy make you show up like a T-34 in Berlin.
                >realize the radar is nearsighted
                ???
                >doesn't matter had sex
                >boiling my brains out from radiation #commie things

                please explain

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Stealth doesn't protect from the lower frequencies, but lower freq. requires a logarithmic increase in power for a strong enough return signal.

                Simple numbers, not necessarily realistic, just to get the idea across:
                1 Ghz radar can't see stealth (until it's too late)
                100 Mhz radar can see stealth, at 50 miles, with 50 kilowatt of power
                10Mhz radar -could- see stealth at 200 miles, but requires 1 megawatt of radar power.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                fascinating. if you make a more narrow "search window" or more directed beam would that take less energy?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That would be the purpose of AESA, yes

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                nice

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              since when do clouds burn jet fuel at 1500 degrees?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Anon, IR seeker missiles have been using image recognition for decades now.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, in the IR spectrum.
                Not in the visual spectrum, you understand?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                no, I genuinely don't understand why you think that's fundamentally different, the "visual spectrum" and "infrared spectrum" are adjoining bands of the electromagnetic spectrum and many sensors that can detect in one also detect in the other, imagine processing techniques don't care about your wavelength

                proof: point a TV remote at your phone camera and press some buttons

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because fundamentally you can make materials that make shit hard to see in IR. Meanwhile the visual spectrum has distinct challenges when it comes to image processing that are not present in the infrared spectrum and so far nobody has managed to make a plane invisible.

                Also I feel you misunderstand the point. It's not about shooting a missile at the plane, it's about finding it in the first place.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Your radar might not be able to provide tracking information from dozens or hundreds of miles away, but if you have a rough idea of where the plane will be the missile itself can have a multi-mode seeker sensitive enough to find the target within a handful of kilometres
            Yes you are describing doctrinal stuff which exists. This isn't a very effective idea however for a great many reasons.
            - The plane knows you are trying to target it because your radar is screaming, it can simply evade and your missile might miss by an enormous margin. Even a single degree of deviation at the ranges where air defences work, will mean a total miss.
            - The plane is probably trying to kill you, the longer your radar is on, the greater the risk that something like a HARM murders you.
            - Planes are fast, engineered to have reduced thermal signatures, and often operate in visually noisy environments. Electro-optical tracking (What you are describing as visual) is not yet reliable or cheap enough that it's a widespread guidance system, and it has very short range. Additionally, countermeasures to these future guidance systems are already rolling out in the form of dazzling lasers to kill any sensors built into the missile.
            - The more fuel your missile needs to burn searching on its own for its target, the less fuel it has to actually engage in a maneuver contest. Contrary to popular belief, planes can in fact evade missiles when they have an idea that they're coming.
            - You can't fit a meaningful radar into the cone of a missile. Any emitter large enough to detect a stealth aircraft even at very close range would be very large, and dominate the design of the missile itself, and also extremely expensive.

            And finally, cost. Surface to air missiles are very expensive, and very large. Shooting these large, expensive missiles at 'possible' targets which might actually just be anomalies, jamming, decoys, whatever is a great way to train your enemy to bait you into wasting ammo.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >He doesn't know how radar works

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    heh

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    wow anon invented Macross
    what's next, have a young girl sing a live concert for your troops while they're fighting to boost morale?

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    we've already had this thread
    captcha: MR MSM

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You can just set up a network of reflection radar stations.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      good to see you here from the last thread. I just wanted to talk and learn more about the subject.

      t. OP

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        admittedly I don't know that much about stealth and radar either, anyone who does probably can't talk about it anyway but in general finding a lack of return among noise is much harder than a big positive return
        Lots of things can absorb or deflect radar waves, the ionosphere isn't uniform. On top of that if it became such a big issue, stealth coatings would be tailored to mimic the background

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          that makes sense

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What if you had a kind of modern age Blackbird that basically went above that blue line? I'm guessing that it'd require stupid amounts of fuel and an engine that doesn't exist, but would a plane like that be undetectable?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The modern blue line against non-stealthed vehicles reaches into orbit.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the blue line is the ionosphere, so about 70-100 km up, that's the domain of spaceplanes and spooky glowie shit
        X-37 Aurora TR-3 Black Manta Astra

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >TR-3
          >Trainer Reconnisance
          Gets me every time.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Optical satellite can see them pretty easily

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The missile knows where it it because it knows where it isn't

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It sounds fucking retarded but it's the best way to explain it once you understand.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      YARR MATEY

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    you forgot the stage where you need to cover the entire sky in planes flying higher than the stealth bomber

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    what if you just covered the sky in weather balloons, so if the stealth bomber wanted to sneak past it'd hit the weather balloons and tell you where it is?
    Why not put nukes on those weather balloons for deterrence?

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Just send actual planes up to fly in a massive grid and eventually someone will see it

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >flood sky with IR laser grids
    >fire at anything larger than a bird that breaks the grid
    >????
    >prophet!

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >stealth plane
    >is clearly visible
    Our tax dollars at work

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'll just call in a scanner sweep from my command center

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Boy do I have a game for you OP

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Just shoot at the seagull doing 600mph on radar

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Mr. President...it's over...they figured it out...

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      LOL

      If radar and infared are constantly shielded against, why not have TV guided missiles but for use against aircraft?

      Just have a camera at the front of the missile fucking look at the sky for large figures and zero in on them
      Is it night time? stick a fucking flashlight on it lmao
      At least for the bombers, i dont think they can do fancy maneuvers to duck them while they close in

      would that require wire guidance? I think they have wire guided missiles with really long wires so it may not be a problem

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        maybe you could leverage that fancy fucking AI and put a computer onboard the missile to figure it out on the way

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If radar and infared are constantly shielded against, why not have TV guided missiles but for use against aircraft?

    Just have a camera at the front of the missile fucking look at the sky for large figures and zero in on them
    Is it night time? stick a fucking flashlight on it lmao
    At least for the bombers, i dont think they can do fancy maneuvers to duck them while they close in

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Retarded solution. Here's the real one.

    >send up drones with radar reflectors
    >scan the sky
    >see false plane returns everywhere except where the stealth plane is
    >lock the empty spot and shoot the stealth plane down

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the missile knows where it isn't

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Congratulations you have expended all your air defense missiles trying to hit one target.

    Now you've cleared the way for all the other aircraft to attack you with impunity. They didn't even have to SEAD and DEAD.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > he thinks we shot at the stealth plane with a billion real missiles
      those were decoy missiles

      heh

      nothing personnel

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    why can't you guide missiles with visual light alone?

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The b2 has a bigger cross section than the f117, which was already hit twice in serbia

    Stealth planes do not have some sort of invisibility cloak

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The b2 has a bigger cross section than the f117
      prove it
      >which was already hit twice in serbia
      this is all you have to support your "stealth is meaningless" strawman despite daily F-35 strikes against Syria (which operates S-300 and S-400)
      >Stealth planes do not have some sort of invisibility cloak
      Nobody has claimed this but you

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >make radar that has big long waves.
    >being stealthy make you show up like a T-34 in Berlin.
    >realize the radar is nearsighted
    ???
    >doesn't matter had sex
    >boiling my brains out from radiation #commie things

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >counter this
    China is too pussy to make a 1 gigaton nuke and use it in their own territory.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *