Stealth means LOW OBSERVABILITY this basicly means the F-22 is detectable, the low observability of the F-22 allows to be detected too late to make any SAM or fighters interception attempt futil.

However there are several aspects that do not make so unobserved an F-22, first it still scatter radar radiation, it has platform aligment so several surfaces reflect the radar in the same direction.

Frankly stealth is not as unvulnerable in fact it surprise me how the US even plans to retire the F-117 when it is supposed stealth will givet invulnerability why?
The answer is very easy, stealth is not enough, that is the reason the F-22 has supercruise and super maneouvrability, stealth is vulnerable because also requieres too much planning in every mission

The possibility radars get better and better and detect even the B-2 and F-22 in fact is not a slim probability.

To put it in simple words, when the F-117 was shot down in Serbia, as far as it is concerned that war was a limited and low tech war, not what you can expect China, Russia or even India can fight.

It is true that the Russians are not going to fly for ever their Su-27s and MiG-29s against the F-22 and very likely soon they will field Su-35BMs or PAK FAs and that will equialize a lot the equation but definitively the threat from fighters like a highly modernized Su-35BM is not one we can disregard as low, but to the contrary if betetr radars are fielded the F-22 reign might be a short one ina time where the 4.5 genration fighters are being modernized with advanced engines such as the AL-41F

here the weapons some poeple claim can attack stealth fighters, the S-400

source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c7pSRR3nFQ&mode=related&search=

the video is of Tor M1 and not S-400. I could not find a video of S-400 in youtube. Tor M1 has zilch anti-stealth characteristics..

Originally Posted by djcross
The buzz word currently in vogue in the US is “Spiral Development”, where each successive production block adds new capabilities that can be retrofitted to earlier blocks.

Isnt this the way the software programs are developed?

Why does Pakistan need so many AWACS?

This statement is just typical for the whole thread.
There isn’t one single valid claim of any faults/hoops/design flaws of the Erieye here – yet certain (fill in what you think is the most likely nationality here) keeps implying this and that. You have been given credible sources such as Flight in defence to the Erieye – but all we have seen in return is some obscure papers from 60’s or mid 90’s talking about planar arrays in general or early Erieye versions.

Now I don’t expect to see a change in tactics here, but from time to time I’ll eventually drop by the forum and see if what we in west call credible sources (hint: not my dad’s cousin’s wife’s sister’s husband’s cow’s former owner) is being used.

The papers quoted are from reputed journals and are technically competent rather than the brochures/magazine reports. Any person with a technical background will give a higher weightage to an article in a journal than a magazine/brochure.

Until then, I’ll just carrying on ignoring the vast majority of threads created by either X or Y nationalities since these two fellas can’t have a serious debate without turning into a frenzy of teenage geniuses supporting their beloved country.

Regards,
Cliff

Even IF the intention of the person who started the thread is to malign someone, the points he raised are valid and you or anyone else have not given any proof to invalidate his claims

so why does Britain even bother to offer its Eurofighters for the MRCA program ? they wont be offered without radars will they ? :rolleyes:

and the “very risky” MiG-29K will be 1 generation ahead of what the SHARs would have been. :rolleyes:

very nicely put…
I dont think India will ever use SHARs for nuke deliuvery and as far as radars go, Vixen comes nowhere near 2052 offered by israel or Irbis, which India will have in 3-4 years.

usually when you have more than 50%, you’re the majority, so its more reasonable to call a country consist 76% jews, the state of the jews, and not Muslims who consists 15% from the country population.

No..it is state of Israel and not just state of jews..IF Israel constitution says that it is a jewish state , then it is a state of jews. If not, then it is the state of israel only.

And to continue the oftopic discussion, I read from the mosnews today that US officials have asked Russia to NOT sell the planes to Venezuela…they said that Su-30 wouldn’t be needed for Venezuelas defence requirements… :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

USA has taken over the defence ministry of Venezuela :confused:

reminds of the Stalma f-26 fighter which went round the forums some time ago 😉