Strategic Consequences of Captured Stealth Tech

>>31048507
They gained the knowledge that stealth is op and they had no countermeasures. Both nations now invest oodles into different forms of detection in the attempt to make stealth ineffective since neither nation can actually make a stealth jet.

>>31048507
>What exactly did the Russians and/or Chinese gain from the shoot down of the F-117 in Kosovo?

Pieces of obsolete RAM coating.

OP here. It sounds to me that they at least got the composition on the RAM coatings on the plane, and have figured out how and what to use for their own stealth designs. It's been decades since the shoot down however, and no one seems to be capitalizing on a copy of that tech even in the next few years.

A lot of scientific theories that created stealth design are of Soviet Russian origin, yet I'm surprised that Russia hadn't made their own stealth aircraft much sooner. I wonder why that is?

>>31048560
Russian doctrine.

While americans want to send low observable aircraft into enemys airspace to enforce their air superiority with minimal losses (and provide airspace for other aircraft to operate freely - such as recon, bombers, air support, transport...), russians simply stay on the ground and aim everything with rocket boosters into the sky denying enemy presence. Even stealth has its own limits...

Why bother being stealthy or dogfighting when all you need to do is shine some radar beams into the sky and make sure everyone and their dog know you have plenty almaz-antey products at your disposal.

Hint - no country with S-300 or higher has ever been attacked by airforce. Even that POS is enough of a deterrent.

>>31048603
>Hint - no country with S-300 or higher has ever been attacked by airforce. Even that POS is enough of a deterrent.

No country with S-300 has attacked a nation with a competent airforce.

>>31048626
It does not seem to me that Russia has any plans to attack countries where any real resistance can be met. They seem to be focused on peacefully walking into enemy country without any insignia or markings, then declare independece of said country :D

Point stands, NATO is afraid as fuck to fly anywhere near active S-300s.. which are already ye'olde and replaced by newer versions. OP should have rephrased the question - what did NATO learn from this accident?

>>31048507
nothing. The F-117 is obsolete and the stealth and stealth coatings on the F-35 are radically different.

>>31048560
Inferior computing. Aside from free market economics, the American lead in IT is what determined a lot of the late cold war. It enabled smart weapons (and thus conventional defenses in Europe).

Early stealth designs had facets because the computing power available could only do 2d calculations.

>>31048603
>S300

*cough* Suter *cough*

>>31048603
Um, because literally every war has shown that air power always wins. All SAMs can do is slow down our airforce.

>>31048507
Given how little relation there is between the F-117 and modern VLO aircraft in terms of techniques and technologies used, I'd imagine not much. The airframe was on its way out even back then, frankly.
That being said, I don't know enough about where Russian VLO technology was before the incident to be able to comment on if it helped them in any meaningful way.

>>31048695
>Um, because literally every war has shown that air power always wins.

Uh, no. Remember Serbia? The USAF could bomb whatever they wanted, true, but that wasn't enough to exert control - that took the threat of ground invasion.

Tbf vatniks think that the crude sensors of the era are comparable to modern sensors, which is silly as modern sensors are several revolutions ahead and so are the computers woring with them...

>All SAMs can do is slow down our airforce.

Yes, but that's the point of SAMs - deter the enemy, or if actually fighting, slow them down enough that your land forces can then overrun their air bases. SAMs have never been intended to provide a strong counter-air defense; because aircraft (being faster more maneuverable than trucks with giant radars and missiles) can always out-maneuver them to concentrate force better.

Hence SAMs are a good strategy for Russia (a land power doing regional projection) but air is a good strategy for the US (a sea power doing global projection).

>>31048560
Russia had the theory but not the technology or industry to capitalize on it. The moment we entered the information age the Soviet Union was on the back foot and this trend has continued. There's a reason that they still don't have an operational VLO aircraft.

>>31048695

Well these days you can't replace lost airframes so quickly, nor you can't have vast reserves waiting to be sent to the front line. These are the days of superexpensive airplanes (B2), planes that are no longer possible to be made (F22), planes that are still experiencing baby diseases (F35), planes that are serving till their airframes rot (B52, A10) or planes that need their upgrades to stay relevant in these post coldwar days (F15-16-18).

If your airforce starts to lose those at medium pace, every now and then... well, it will hurt you a lot more than you think.

All that stealth does is that it makes it harder for enemies to detect you initially but even a golfball flying at mach1 at 30k feet is a tell-tale that something is going on. After that you just hope that your VLO aircraft will be hard to track by fire control radar...

>>31048603
That's because countries rich enough to afford S-300 are smart enough not to start shit with the US.

>>31048507
The best thing they got from it was material tech.

Shaping was pretty much known since the first real pics of it came out and the rest could easily be gleaned from educated guesses regarding how they operated.

>>31048770
>The Super Hornet is a failing, out of date cold war relic
Calm down, vatnik.

>>31048770
And at the same time, AA defenses have gotten more complex and expensive as well. They're highly reliant on powerful and easy to detect radars, which always have to be radiating if they want to have any hope of spotting a VLO plane, and there are weapons and countermeasures meant to directly counter or at the very least blunt the effectiveness of the SAM.

Plus SAM missiles have only gotten larger and more expensive, not to mention the launchers and radars they need as well. Similar to how the US can't just shit out millions of P-47s anymore, the Russians can't just park flak cannons on every square inch of their bases anymore either.

>>31048772
Well, not really. Look who has (had) them in place (or newer versions)

Belarus
PRC
Iran
Syria (!)
Egypt (!)
Ukraine (!)
Possibly Libyia

Remember when shit hit the fan in Syria for the first time? You know why coalition forces didn't even think of flying missions there? Exactly. They knew that whoever was controlling S-300s at the moment could take them down. It wasn't until Mubarak agreed to allow coalition forces to fly over his country to attack rebels that they dared to get any close to the shoreline...

Libya was similar story, some sources claimed that they might already have some batteries because they had intent to buy them... noone really knew till frenchies dared to go try some bomb runs first...

>>31048770
> a golfball flying at mach1 at 30k feet

Please stop pretending that radar works like a camera.

This is the kind of ignorance that leads people into believing "counter-stealth" early warning radars actually counter stealth.

>>31048507
Cancer.

>>31048772
Israel raped a certain S300 user in 2007/8 with a little help from the USA...and thereafter Suter was cleared for public disclosure.

Coincidence or magical Jewish superpowers?

>Suter 1 allowed U.S. operators to monitor what enemy radars could see. The capability enables U.S. forces to assess the effectiveness of their stealth systems or terrain-masking tactics.
>Suter 2 permits U.S. operators to take control of enemy networks as system managers and actually manipulate the sensors, steering them away from penetrating U.S. aircraft.
>Suter 3 was tested last summer to add the ability to invade the links to time-critical targets, such as battlefield ballistic missile launchers or mobile surface-to-air missile launchers.

Combat proven technology for countering IADS.

>>31048603
>Hint - no country with S-300 or higher has ever been attacked by airforce.

>what is Israel
>what is Syria

>>31048839
>Belarus

A "literally who" country that's not going to do anything on its own without Russia's say so.

>PRC

Despite all their saber rattling China is still a major trade partner with the US and they have a greater interest in maintaining the status quo.

>Iran

Knows very well if they step out of line it'll be Iraq 3.0. Hell, they've already been a victim to Israeli air attacks a number of times.

>Syria (!)

US doesn't really give a shit about Syria, at least not enough to even take the vague risk of losing pilots or planes over it.

>Egypt (!)

Nominal ally. No reason for them to start anything.

>Ukraine (!)

Fairly neutral with Western leanings. The civil war basically guaranteed they'd never act in Russia's interests.

>Possibly Libyia

Yeah, because Libya shot down so many NATO planes, right?

>>31048752
>Uh, no. Remember Serbia?

It got humiliated to such an extent that Serb's who were not even born yet have chafed anuses?

>>31048752
>Remember Serbia?

NATO bombing in the Bosnian war forced the Serbs to take UN hostages in response - already a sign that something is fucking up - and later forced the Serbs to remove heavy weapons from Sarajevo and bring them to the negotiating table.

>>31048507

What I heard was, the reason why Putin wasnt shot down and the Malaysian flight was (over ukraine) is because he had Stealth Planes flying with his jet that were masking or redirecting the signature of his jet.

So Malaysian Airlines got shot down instead of him.

So its likely that Russia now has stealth craft though their purpose may be Information Warfare.

> Radar Coating

I expect the capture of the F117 may have accelerated advancement of radar afterwards and its the reason why just about anybody who wants to can track or detect stealth now if they think they may be present.

Phase Gated Array radar and whatever else that may have developed since then.

Because if you've got the stuff, and you can reconstruct a mock stealth vehicle - whether or not you can reproduce an effective one you can have it sitting around to perform tests on how to Defeat it.

This is the real reason the F-22 and F-35 are both more or less obsolete at this point. If they want to track it, they can.

>>31050266
>Completely baseless speculation that doesn't match anything Russia or china are building

>>31048867
>>Suter 3 was tested last summer to add the ability to invade the links to time-critical targets, such as battlefield ballistic missile launchers or mobile surface-to-air missile launchers.

Does this... Does this means we can redirect their ICBMs to do a return-to-sender maneuver?

THAT'S IT! FUCK EVERYTHING! I'M VOTING CLINTON! CLINTON GOES TO WAR WITH RUSSIA! RUSSIA GET BLOWN THE MOTHERFUCKING FUCK OUT WITH IT'S OWN NUKES! I DON'T CARE IF I'LL BE A SLAVE FOREVER!
I!
WANT!
TO!
SEE!
THIS!
HAPPEN!

>>31049636
>>31048939
Why did we bomb them in the first place?

>>31052096

>muh ethnic cleansing
>we gotta protect dem Muslims dey gud bois dindu nuffin

>>31048507
Depending on the condition of the coating after the jet got shot down, which would be surprising as RAM tends to be very sensitive, and degrades very easily, and getting shot down is a pretty severe condition.

That being said, at most they could determine the chemical structure of the coating. Even with the structure, it is non trivial to reproduce the coating, simply because how you coat the object affects the chemical structure as well as solvents, the chemicals in the coating, temperature, time, humidity, etc. Hence why we haven't really seen this coating on any Russian or Chinese planes.

Hell the current Chinese RAM is suspected to be a older version of the F-35 coating that was stolen along with the design specs.

>>31052096
Serb's filmed themselves killing whole villages of anyone who wasn't a Serb.

>>31051771
>Meanwhile there are hints that Trump may be possibly subservient to Putin

File: 1471009388792.jpg (10KB, 264x191px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 264x191px

>>31052378

>Meanwhile there are hints that Clinton may be possibly subservient to ISIS

>>31052390
Uh huh, go back to Sputnik news.

Except for the screaming extremists who got him the nomination, nobody in the GOP thinks Trump is a good idea.

>>31051771
>Does this... Does this means we can redirect their ICBMs to do a return-to-sender maneuver?
sadly probably no since those missiles will not have the oomph to reverse their trajectories. Would have to happen prior to launch.

>>31052460
>Trump gets more votes in the Republican primary than anyone before him
>Republican turnout is at a record high
>Republican's don't want him

>>31052496
>Implying that's not because:
>A: The rest were a bunch of ridiculous, samey, boring politicians
>B: Trumps supporting base revs every time he says something insane

>>31048507
Two things. That they cant counter it with traditional measures and have invested heavily in technology to detect stealth, learning that still, stealth gets closer than they would prefer.

They also learned they are behind the curve. F-117 was an old ass jet, and yet, the stealth lessons on it still have not been included or even close to duplicated in the Sukhoi Pak-Fa, or any of their drones. Even simple things like inlet mesh/ grating.

Not even a tweak on the nose one off concept aircract going "we can do this, but we wont."

why? They dont have the ability to.

File: this isn'.jpg (47KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x375px

>>31048560
guys

what if

guys

what if they did make stealth aircraft... that are so stealthy we still haven't detected them????

>>31056448
We'd have been bombarded by "RUSSIA STRONK" propaganda posting about their super undetectable planes that will wipe out F-22 and F-35 on the way to market for vodka.

>>31052118
Keep in mind, during the 90s, this was basically true as long as it wasnt Israel related.

File: is-your-refrigerator-running-because-i-might-vote-for-it-3100925.png (72KB, 500x505px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 500x505px

>>31052390
>>31052378

>>31048682
>*cough* Suter *cough*
*cough* Was not used against S-300 *cough*.

>>31048890
>>what is Syria
Syria's S-300 delivery was halted before they received a single complete system

>>31048839
>Syria (!)
>Possibly Libyia
See above, and no.

>>31048867
>Israel raped a certain S300 user in 2007/8
No, they didn't.

>>31052390
>Meanwhile there are hints that Clinton may be possibly subservient to Saudi Arabia
fixed that for you

>>31056599
No it wasn't. The '90s was full of jihad activity in places that had little or nothing to do with Israel. Are you one of those morons that think a holy war that started in the 600s is actually the fault of a country founded in 1948?