Geometry tells us nothing. You can use diffraction, dispersion and adsorption to handle incoming radar waves. Under certain circumstances you can even have radar waves travelling along the airframe. The main solution is dispersion. Meaning that incoming radar energy is dispersed into many different directions, just not back to the emitter. Careful design (in combination with using diffraction and RAM) allows the stealth aircraft to disperse much of the incoming radar energy.

Geometry tells you everything, IF you know how to read it.
Lockeed guys corroborate that and there is no in point arguing that, really.
You can use diffraction, dispersion and adsorption to handle incoming radar waves in theory, but not in the context of the aircraft skin, in the amounts you’re suggesting.

Again, if that was so simple, Mig21 would have been covered in Zimmerit, making it a LO plane.
To diffract radio wave in cm wavelength you need a prism of at least one half period length across (or an AESA T/R module), which means, you’ll get a skin made of chestnut sized elements and that plane would have immense troubles with heating, boundary flow, not to mention performance, etc…
So theoretically that works, but in reality it doesn’t and so engineers devised a flat surface to control the reflection AND to make an aircraft actually fly.

The RCS of the VLO aircraft will likely not be uniformly reduced (some angles will present more of a return than others) but the strongest radar return from a VLO fighter will still be much weaker than even the best angle for a conventional fighter if the VLO aircraft is properly designed.

Agreed, but I wonder what physics are you basing your bolded conclusion, on?

If VLO design involving curves like the B-2, F-22, or F-35 could be “eye-balled” without heavy use of computer modeling, then there would have been no need to use a faceted design on the F-117.

B2 is still comprised of flat surfaces, although its seams are not sharp like on F117, but smooth (CC) and this has been demonstrated in my previous post.
You need to quantify you statement, because it doesn’t tell us much, as such.

Ok cola you win

It’s not about winning, but understanding.

It’s obvious, which one is the stealthiest.

There’s no angle that an F-22 is less stealthy than a teen fighter.

LOL, I do my best to stay out of this, but Ww makes sure nonsense arrive in abundant numbers.

Ww, the point of planar alignment is that a plane has a few peaks, but average lower RCS.
LO means that the object has an AVERAGE RCS, lower than some yardstick and is thus OVERALL more difficult to spot, using radar.
Good luck finding a plane with higher RCS than B2, top-down (perpendicular to it enormous wing).

@Jessmo,
there are numerous stealth programs for ships and each and every one of them has faceted surfaces and even the LCS built by the very same LM, has FLAT surfaces to reduce RCS.

Does the radar pulse bounce of ship and plane differently?

RF clings and flows along the surface as electric charge. For an airplane, it clings to the outer surface. For a wave guide, it clings to the inner surface. If the surface has abrupt changes of contour, such as a facet edge, the RF will re-radiate. That is why you do not find wave guides with sharp bends and do not find modern VLO airplane designs with facets.

Exactly, but you still need to minimize the amount of reflecting angles and that’s done with flat surfaces.

1. We never said that plan from isn’t viable we said that the aircraft uses plan-form alignment and curvature.

Of course planes use both, but the point is in the amount…
Flat surfaces are still major (and I mean MAJOR) LO provider.

2. I present to you, the B-2

Let me just add F117…

Mod Edit: This image was far too large. Please either re-post in a smaller size, or post a link instead.

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/7026/f117b2.jpg

Ok, now it’s plain obvious that F117 and B2 have the same belly, except that B2 has logarithmically curved surfaces (CC), where F117 has sharp “seams”.
The point is that both B2 and F117, have only 3 (visible from this angle) planes in which they reflect radio signals and that’s the lion’s share of LO characteristics for both planes.

Now look at the Raptor, notice the nice clean curves? there would be more of a tear shape if it wast interrupted by the huge tails.

F22 is about as good as it gets for the requirements USAF nailed for ATF and it’s much more “square” than F35.
F35 is a stealth joke, particularly belly – the critical aspect…planar alignment (the amount of reflecting angles) between F22 and F35, is few LYs apart, hence my original comment on EF squeezing in between.

Now if you can’t see how an aircraft can have curvature, without being round, spherical, cylindrical, I’m not sure what else to tell you.

WW, THE GUITAR’S NECK IS CURVED IN 1!!! (ONE!) PLANE!!!

Do you know what a plane is??
Variable radius, doesn’t mean anything!

The curves have to meet this criteria, which I already posted- constantly changing radius and direction.

LOL

Curved doesn’t mean shaped like a ball, or even round per se.

Ok, so now we have surface that is curved, but not round?!

It means that you’re not dealing with flat panels, but that there is curvature in the shape. It just so happens that this curvature uses varying radii, which has been calculated carefully in the design process.

Is it because of variable radii that the the surface is curved, but not curved (round)?
Ww, do you have any idea what you’re talking about? 😀

That and they’re failing to explain the B-2/F-22, and their RCS improvements over the faceted F-117(or the fact that no new stealth designs from any nation, are using the “superior” faceted designs). It’s just gotten asinine.

Ok, so the Rafale is more “curved” than F35 and particularly F117, so I guess Rafale is way stealthier than both those types?

So Ww, the ball (or even continuous curvatured spheroid) has smaller average RCS then a flat plate, angled by let’s say 20° on 2 axes?

It must have been an idiot that aligned F22’s intake/engine sides with tails and bottom nose/radome, so that the plane reflects at only one angle…
Why don’t you point that out to Lockeed engineers?
The guys may smooth F22 a bit more to further reduce RCS and then it will truly be invisible! :D:D:D