Forgive me for being thick but I understood even VLO designs reflect a small amount of radar back to be detected – I assume currently the return is so low that it is lost in the noise. If that is the case then almost certainly more powerful computers will be developed to allow real time processing to be able to detect the small radar return in the clutter – and given the rapid growth in processing power I would imagine that processing power will solve the problem within a decade.

Not thick at all, you may be right. When i think about the power out there right now on a single AWAC’s, both in terms of cpu and radar, it’s already amazing. In ten years, who knows. It’s still difficult for me to believe that shape and materials can absorb/deflect radar in the first place. That first F-117 guy over Baghdad was a hero.

Even, if you are correct, though, some of our peer adversaries are spending time and resources as well. Trying to out spend-um is better than a firefight, and cheaper too.

Radar has been around for 70 years, in countless mutations. It appears that LO technology has significantly thwarted it’s effectiveness. Speculation, yes.

I think the merge will always be a part of aerial combat. UCAV’s in a furball? Situational awareness in USAF drones appears to be less than excellant. Look at all the take-off & landing dings and even problems on the ramp.

What exactly is ‘super maneuverabilty’?
Is there any actual generally agreed definition for it to explain it, or are we just talking about performing Cobras at airshows?:confused:
Sounds a bit like another catch phrase in the style of ‘Stealth’ – much bandwidth expended talking about it, even if people say exactly what it is.:rolleyes:

Are the Eurocanards all that more ‘maneuverable’ than the F-16 or F/A-18 anyway…?:confused:

Is it just me, or are Eagles & SHornets regularly gettin the sh-t kicked out of ’em by various european storm fighthers.