It’s all about deterrence. If you have a limited shield then it means the enemy will only retaliate with such force that it overwhelms you shield which in turn means you defeated the whole idea of a “limited” shield to begin with.

And with the limited shield you are not bulletproof, which means you have to decide what you are going to protect at the sacrifice to everything else being left vulnerable. And since missile shields demand precise placement in the path of the ballistic missile’s flight path you telegraph your defensive choices ahead of time, which means the enemy strikes elsewhere. If its not bulletproof then its strategically worthless.

There is not enough money in the U.S. GDP to deploy a perfect missile shield. And anything less than perfect is nonsensical.

This is true against a foe with the capability to hit you with a saturation of weapons. If they don’t have that capability, then it still has some efficacy.
The Soviet Union bankrupted itself trying to deal with SDI(among other aspects of Reagan’s buildup), and we never even had to deploy any hardware.

Why would there guess be wrong. considering World top scientist and filed experiance of radar manufacturers.
It can be wrong between .00001 and .0001 sqm but it wont make a difference.

Well if they make a drone with a lower RCS than the F-22/B2, then this is true. If not, then it doesn’t provide an accurate picture. You’re still having to assume that a manufacturer with considerably less experience in VLO technology, is achieving these goals.

i like your arguement LMraptor ,

what level of power of radar would be needed for mig-31 (in your opinion to detect the F-22)
then yes, potentially , Mig-31currently(without upgrade) will have to rely on GCI or kolchugaM/vega passive detection systems with datalinking , and what if the new russian radar may be capable of detecting the f-22 , at much longer ranges (70-100 km)

firstly, no fanboy of mig-31, but yes a fanboy of Tu-22m3 bomber and the AYAKS aerospace vessel
I do, and yes , my opening post was my main question …read…

so whats your opinion on the new upgrades and their capbilites

The F-22 is designed to be stealthy against not only fighter size/powered radars, but land based long range SAM/EW radars with considerably more power/antenna size. There are practical limitations to the size and power of any fighter radar. 70-100km detection ranges are simply not realistic given these limitations. You’d have better luck with an IRST. Even with datalinks from ground radars/AWACS, you still have the following problem-

certain types of radar may be more capable of detecting VLO aircraft than others, but they aren’t the correct band to guide a weapon. They can at best let you know that an F-22/35/B-2 is in an area. The interceptor still needs to get close enough for their targeting systems to get a lock, and the F-22 will most likely see them either with LPI or ALR-94 before the threat is able to engage.

this is not proven , firstly and yes , mig-31 has a much larger nose cone that Su-35BM which uses the Irbis PESA

that remains to be seen and proven too …

F-22 is no silver bullet , and with time anti-stealth radar and detection systems are catching up too……………….

So in the mean time we’ll speculate on the possible capabilities of one side vs. the possible capabilities of another, without any of us knowing what the true capabilities are. How do we decide who wins this argument. You don’t know what the F-22s capabilities are(or the MIG-31 for that matter), yet you’re perfectly willing to accept that the -31s will be sufficient to match or exceed them.

This upsets me then star49 – for you that is. Since one can’t find knowledge about the Su-35 from books or written word – that means you yourself know nothing about the Su-35, unless you designed it or fly it?

It also defies physics so I cant apply the basic fundamental laws to it either?

Sukhoi consulted with U2 when designing their latest aircraft to allow them to move in mysterious ways.:cool:

Size = more room – more room for larger radar, multiple radars, more weapons.

Larger engines = more power = more power for radar.

AKA, more room to expand. Mind-blowing concept here.

At what point does it start becoming a disadvantage to be larger? You can’t increase size indefinitely without there being disadvantages.

This Russians way of doing things. constant improvement of existing stuff. About S-400 they mentioned it is two to 4 times more effective. So if S-300P is alteast 300KM. So there shouldnt be any surprize with 600 to 1200km for S-400.

So every time a new improvement comes out, every piece of Russian equipment in their inventory is upgraded to the new standard? That would seem to be rather expensive no?

As has been mentioned, the word effective is not synonomous with range. All it means is that under the same conditions, the likelihood of a kill has been increased. This may be for any number of reasons.