I don't understand stealth?

File: 1445518658809.jpg (388KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 1920x1280px

F-22 has smaler RCS.

>>31976905
you have to be over 18 to post here faggot

>>31976905

WHAT'S THE POINT OF CAMOUFLAGE, THE SOLDIERS ARE BASICALLY THE SAME SIZE, HOW CAN ONE BE SEEN FROM 200M AND THE OTHER FROM 40M BY EYES.

I THINK IT'S JUST BULLSHIT

>>31976905
I'd suggest you read a book about radar to see exactly why it works, but it is a difficult subject to fully understand even for smart people, and honestly you seem like a dumbfuck.

>>31976905

Read up on the inverse square law.

>>31976905
Argument would be more clear if you posted image of these aircraft in the radar spectrum.

File: FUUUUUUUUUU.png (786KB, 705x625px) Image search: [Google]

786KB, 705x625px

>>31976905
Did you even graduate high school?
You can't even use google search?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_technology

File: 330px-Corner_reflector.svg.png (17KB, 330x263px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 330x263px

>>31976905
That is the beauty of it. Radar works like this: you send an electromagnetic pulse and look what comes back to you. Imagine a pond and you throw a stone into the middle. Waves will form and start propagating in circles, centred around the origin. As a wave hits an object in the water, it will reflect this wave, also in circles propagating from where the wave hit the second object. Eventually this second wave will hit the origin of the first wave. It will be a lot weaker, but with sensitive equipment it can still be detected. Stealth works by reducing the amount of energy which returns to origin. Two methods are possible: either you try to generate no return wave, which is a material and dimensional property, or you scatter the wave so much in any other direction but the origin. This is determined by the shape of aircraft, hence the interesting shapes of stealth aircraft. For example, you will rarely find 90° angles on stealth aircraft: know the cat eyes for your bike or on your car? They consist of several hundred small cells, each with three surfaces perpendicular to each other (see figure). This results in a beam of light being reflected exactly into the direction it came from. By not arranging surfaces perpendicular, you can reach stealth even for large objects.

>>31978091
>know the cat eyes for your bike or on your car? They consist of several hundred small cells, each with three surfaces perpendicular to each other (see figure). This results in a beam of light being reflected exactly into the direction it came from.
Dude, that's super cool, I never thought about those. (not OP)

File: 124187943795.jpg (138KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1200x900px

F-22 is a cute.

A CUTE!

File: airtoairpture.png (28KB, 1236x122px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1236x122px

>>31976905
F22 easily took down 5 f15e.
The f15s were no able to pick up the f22 on radar or Irst

Then the f35 did the same test and got the same results.

Stealth is awesome.

>>31976905
>I never graduated high school, much less know about EM radiation or physics in general.

Read a book.

>>31978273
I had no idea how huge the Raptor was until I saw it next to a B17 at an airshow. It is a giant beast.

>>31976905
Imagine trying to see a plane made entirely of mirrors which are arranged so none are pointing at you- all you'll see is sky.
Now try doing the same at night (as background radiation is far from sunlight strength and consistency), so now you need to activate a searchlight to see this mirror plane.
It's like that only for radars.

>>31976905
They use it as a siphon to pay for black project stuff to keep us much further ahead of other countries and species.

>>31978924
Most planes are a lot bigger than people think. Fighter jets especially.

Why does nobody think the F-16 is cute? She's small, agile and carries a decent sized payload for an aircraft her size.

>>31979503
F-16 was cute in early models.
Late models are fugly with all the antennae everywhere and the strange CFTs.

I don't understand troll threads, I think it's just propaganda by moot to create more boards.

How can one thread get 200+ replies and then mine only get 4?

I think it's just bullshit

>>31979747
>moot
Anon I have some bad news for you

File: YuYAWlf.jpg (2MB, 1333x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1333x2000px

Absolute qt

File: 1420291909.05264[1].jpg (15KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 320x240px

>>31976905

Radar is a wave. The wave hits a surface, and deflects back. The radar picks up the deflected signal, seeing a signature that looks like what the wave deflected off of.

There are two ways to stop the wave from deflecting.

1. Design a surface so that, when a plane is flown in a certain direction relative to the radar, all of the waves bounce in directions away from the origin of the radar.

2. Design a material that soaks up radar waves, so the ones that do deflect are far weaker than they should be, giving you a smaller signature.

When your plane's computer can see the radar waves, the computer can plot a trajectory that points your plane in a way where you can get close to the target, but deflect as little radar as possible.

This works better against some kinds of radar than others, but it makes you generally harder to see with radar and lock on to with radar-guided weapons.

The tradeoff is that the aerodynamic and performance qualities (speed, maneuverability, armament) of the aircraft are limited by the need to shape it to deflect radar. Building and maintaining these planes is also insanely expensive compared to conventional aircraft.

The main counter to stealth technology is radar saturation. If you have radar sources looking from multiple directions and those radar sources are networked and sharing information, the plane simply can't orient itself in a way to properly deflect all of them. If they're networked, they will all see the plane and be able to lock onto it.

If you have radar looking from multiple altitudes (potentially a high altitude radar site but more likely an AWACS), the stealth plane is fucked.

Barring that, it's a great way to be effectively invisible against the weaker enemies America typically fights, and a decent way to get locks for ground-based missile sites when satellites aren't available, and those ground based targets can't see the target because radar is limited by the curvature of the earth.

>>31980022
>The main counter to stealth technology is radar saturation. If you have radar sources looking from multiple directions and those radar sources are networked and sharing information, the plane simply can't orient itself in a way to properly deflect all of them. If they're networked, they will all see the plane and be able to lock onto it.
>If you have radar looking from multiple altitudes (potentially a high altitude radar site but more likely an AWACS), the stealth plane is fucked.
And this is why part of any rollback of a country's IADS system involves blowing up their radars.

>>31980046

Yep, and targeting those preliminary sites is mostly done using satellites. Fortunately, nobody has fought a war yet where either side's satellites are targeted. Assuming they were, the weaker parts of the enemy's IADS would probably still be vulnerable to stealth aircraft, and the strongpoints probably would not be.

>Han, Is it true that /k/ is the easiest board to bait?
>Are the tales of epic troll threads true?