You call the radar station ahead of time and tell them there's some 600mph birds flying around. Honestly, stealth jets are like hacking in that it's mostly social engineering.
there's no continuous object on a radar screen, you just get blops on your every time you scan a certain area, then a computer tries to make sense of it and concludes that these two blobs are the same object separated by time
if you lower the rcs (size) threshold the screen gets cluttered with shit & noise so much that the computer would no longer be able to make a connection between two blobs
You need better components for that, the kind not usually accessible to the people who'd really like to be able to detect and target stealth aircraft
then you need a better computer to be able to process all that data at a higher frequency as well, same story as before
You could be able to deduce some patterns of what is and isnt for example a f35 if you had a lot of data and knew what exactly in that data is f35, but this the reason why most of the time f35s fly with essentially "stealth spoilers" to make them completely visible and thus give no insight into their steal characteristics (picrel)
[...]
and a second thing is that the smaller the rcs (size) of your stealth plane is, the smaller and cheaper you can make decoys to fly with them (maybe dozens per real plane)
so I mean sure you can lower the size threshold and scan more often, go ahead take your pick
there's no continuous object on a radar screen, you just get blops on your every time you scan a certain area, then a computer tries to make sense of it and concludes that these two blobs are the same object separated by time
if you lower the rcs (size) threshold the screen gets cluttered with shit & noise so much that the computer would no longer be able to make a connection between two blobs
omg stfu you don't know shit about fuck
There are fundamental limits to what you can detect enforced by things like diffraction and thermal noise. It's not a matter of muh better components.
To detect a tiny RCS object you need >short wavelengths (which may have shitty atmospheric propagation characteristics) >clever signal "marking" tricks like spread spectrum or muh quantum entanglement to aid in differentiating signal from noise
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>the stealth plane will have the same rcs at all distances to the radar
ok retard
yeah at some distance f14 will become fundamentally undetectable too
also go explain this shit using wave-particle duality, uncertainy principle or planck limit
see how many people will stick to read past the first paragraph
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
...what? schizo gay. See
https://i.imgur.com/nkVQcus.png
>RCS of X square meters
doesn't mean >radar sees an object X square meters in size
it means >the amount of energy returned by this object is the same as that of a steel ball X sq m in cross section
Which is to say, it's too fucking small for the radar to see.
RCS is a function of shape and material properties. Of course it's not constant with range, it's actually extremely variable with angle as well, known as specularity. But it's MOSTLY distance invariant, which is the whole point of the metric. That way you can reason about how close or far an object needs to be before you can discern it from background radiation.
This is all besides the point. You don't seem to understand how radar works at all yet try to speak with authority. I suspect you're underage.
You need better components for that, the kind not usually accessible to the people who'd really like to be able to detect and target stealth aircraft
then you need a better computer to be able to process all that data at a higher frequency as well, same story as before
You could be able to deduce some patterns of what is and isnt for example a f35 if you had a lot of data and knew what exactly in that data is f35, but this the reason why most of the time f35s fly with essentially "stealth spoilers" to make them completely visible and thus give no insight into their steal characteristics (picrel)
and a second thing is that the smaller the rcs (size) of your stealth plane is, the smaller and cheaper you can make decoys to fly with them (maybe dozens per real plane)
so I mean sure you can lower the size threshold and scan more often, go ahead take your pick
General detection and precise guidance aren't identical; you might detect there is a probable plane somewhere over there, but actually guiding a missile to that location is not practical as the location is not precise.
a small object moving sporadically caused by ECM jamming, a computer would probably remove it as noise. you can get around this by scanning more frequently but that takes more power and computing power along with more precise equipment
>RCS of X square meters
doesn't mean >radar sees an object X square meters in size
it means >the amount of energy returned by this object is the same as that of a steel ball X sq m in cross section
Which is to say, it's too fucking small for the radar to see.
depends entirely on the radar and the material properties of the bird
sometimes flocks get picked up as rain by weather radars, but that's looking for the radio emissions of water and its resolution is much too low for actual target tracking
i should also add that the material properties being looked for by the radars being used for this purpose are strongly implied to be metal given the use of steel balls as a stand-in for return cross-section
OK, so now your screen is filled with thousands of false returns from completely nonexistent targets because your noise floor is so close to your detection threshold.
>flocks of ducks flying around
>your entire AD system is effectively jammed
You call the radar station ahead of time and tell them there's some 600mph birds flying around. Honestly, stealth jets are like hacking in that it's mostly social engineering.
Radars are generally not set to look at individual birds, otherwise displays would be uselessly cluttered at all times.
You could just ignore objects moving below certain speeds.
there's no continuous object on a radar screen, you just get blops on your every time you scan a certain area, then a computer tries to make sense of it and concludes that these two blobs are the same object separated by time
if you lower the rcs (size) threshold the screen gets cluttered with shit & noise so much that the computer would no longer be able to make a connection between two blobs
Why not just scan more frequently?
You need better components for that, the kind not usually accessible to the people who'd really like to be able to detect and target stealth aircraft
then you need a better computer to be able to process all that data at a higher frequency as well, same story as before
You could be able to deduce some patterns of what is and isnt for example a f35 if you had a lot of data and knew what exactly in that data is f35, but this the reason why most of the time f35s fly with essentially "stealth spoilers" to make them completely visible and thus give no insight into their steal characteristics (picrel)
omg stfu you don't know shit about fuck
There are fundamental limits to what you can detect enforced by things like diffraction and thermal noise. It's not a matter of muh better components.
To detect a tiny RCS object you need
>short wavelengths (which may have shitty atmospheric propagation characteristics)
>clever signal "marking" tricks like spread spectrum or muh quantum entanglement to aid in differentiating signal from noise
>the stealth plane will have the same rcs at all distances to the radar
ok retard
yeah at some distance f14 will become fundamentally undetectable too
also go explain this shit using wave-particle duality, uncertainy principle or planck limit
see how many people will stick to read past the first paragraph
...what? schizo gay. See
RCS is a function of shape and material properties. Of course it's not constant with range, it's actually extremely variable with angle as well, known as specularity. But it's MOSTLY distance invariant, which is the whole point of the metric. That way you can reason about how close or far an object needs to be before you can discern it from background radiation.
This is all besides the point. You don't seem to understand how radar works at all yet try to speak with authority. I suspect you're underage.
and a second thing is that the smaller the rcs (size) of your stealth plane is, the smaller and cheaper you can make decoys to fly with them (maybe dozens per real plane)
so I mean sure you can lower the size threshold and scan more often, go ahead take your pick
Because if you turn up your radar's sensitivity enough to detect birds, you're just going to end up with a fuck ton of noise.
How stealth works
>radar sends signal
>huge % of said signal doesn't come back because it's deflected or absorbed
>radar thinks nothing is out there
its obviously a UFO.
General detection and precise guidance aren't identical; you might detect there is a probable plane somewhere over there, but actually guiding a missile to that location is not practical as the location is not precise.
So what exactly does a radar system "see" when it picks up a potential stealth aircraft vs a normal aircraft?
a small object moving sporadically caused by ECM jamming, a computer would probably remove it as noise. you can get around this by scanning more frequently but that takes more power and computing power along with more precise equipment
>what is noise
fucking retard. finish high school.
>RCS of X square meters
doesn't mean
>radar sees an object X square meters in size
it means
>the amount of energy returned by this object is the same as that of a steel ball X sq m in cross section
Which is to say, it's too fucking small for the radar to see.
Well, can radar systems detect birds at long ranges?
depends entirely on the radar and the material properties of the bird
sometimes flocks get picked up as rain by weather radars, but that's looking for the radio emissions of water and its resolution is much too low for actual target tracking
i should also add that the material properties being looked for by the radars being used for this purpose are strongly implied to be metal given the use of steel balls as a stand-in for return cross-section
OK, so now your screen is filled with thousands of false returns from completely nonexistent targets because your noise floor is so close to your detection threshold.