So what classified information do you have that Chuck Yeager doesn’t? If anything compared to program insiders, he doesn’t earn money off it which makes him less biased. And God forbid he made friends with younger dudes that he trained or commanded, or any other way. This guy is a legend after all.

Nic

I think the point is that the people with the classified information are continuing with stealth.

The F-22 was a waste of money but likely not for the reasons Chuck Yeager thinks. It was a waste of money because they built it in pieces across 42 states to make it politically bulletproof (oh the irony), which created a retardedly and unnecessarily complicated jig-saw to put together, which was often no easy task.

Are you really that stupid?! Or just a troll?

Two things. What has that thread got to do with me? I didn’t participate in it. It’s also the first time you’ve linked that specific post in this whole thread.

The only thing I posted says ‘Engage’ in big letters at the top. Now, I don’t have access to the article but your linked post says ‘detect’ in the text but ‘engage’ on the actual graphic. Neither would be particularly useful at that range. Other observations are that it’s using 0.0002m^2 for the F-22’s RCS.

Are you ******* blind?!

Almaz-Antey says the S-400’s 92N6E “Gravestone” fire-control radar can detect a 4-m2 radar-cross-section target at 250 km

It says ‘Engage’.

Yes and 250 * [(0.0001/4)^(0.25)] again gives us 18km*. Likely the quote in the other thread (not made by me and nothing to do with this debate) maybe stated detect instead of engage by mistake. So have a nice day.

So did Chuck Yeager get somehow time warped from WWII straight to his 2016 twitter account, missing all the technology developments in between?

Why not? Pierre Sprey did, so it’s definitely wouldn’t be a new precedent. Nobody is questioning his proven abilities to fly a plane but that doesn’t make him an authority on technological developments anymore than Matt Damon is an expert on foreign policy.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/08/the-f-35-vs-the-vhf-threat/

Electromagnetic radiation is known to scatter from bodies smaller than its wavelength. This phenomenon, known as Rayleigh scattering, is often used by F-35 critics to point out that the aircraft could be detected by enemy radar operating in the VHF range, given that some of the aircraft’s geometrical features such as the wing and elevator edges are smaller than the 1-3 meter wavelength within which such radars typically operate. Reportedly, this is also how Colonel Zoltan Dani, then commander of the 3rd Battery of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s 250th Air Missile Defense Brigade, managed to detect, and later down, Lt. Col. Zelko’s plane. According to The Aviationist, a series of in-field modifications carried out by the Yugoslavs further reduced the frequency of the 1960s vintage P-18 VHF acquisition radar under Dani’s command, which enabled his men to detect Zelko’s F-117 at a distance of 30 to 37 miles (50-60 km).

Because of their relatively long wavelength, VHF radars generally lack sufficient accuracy to guide a missile to a target on their own and are therefore used to cue higher frequency, shorter wavelength engagement radars to the approximate location of the target. Narrowband stealth aircraft such as the F-117, F-22 and F-35 were designed to be very low observable (VLO) in these higher frequencies in order to significantly limit the range at which they can be successfully detected by engagement radars. Consequently, despite inputs from the VHF acquisition radar, the X-band* engagement radar of Dani’s SA-3 battery was able to track the F-117 only at a distance of 8 miles (13 km), obtaining a lock and launching two missiles towards it only on the third attempt (the colonel would order his men to switch the engagement radar on for no more than 20 seconds for each attempt in order to avoid being targeted by NATO electronic warfare aircraft).

https://theaviationist.com/2014/03/27/vega-31-shot-down/

The F-117 82-0806 (whose remains are exhibited at Belgrade Air Museum) was shot down by the 3rd Battalion of the 250th Air Defence Missile Brigade of the Army of Yugoslavia, with one of several missiles fired by an S-125 “Neva” missile system (NATO reporting name, SA-3 “Goa”) at a distance of about 8 miles.

According to Sergeant Dragan Matić, the soldier later identified as the operator who fired the missiles, the stealth plane was detected at a range of about 50 to 60 kilometres and the surface-to-air missile radar was switched on for no more than 17 seconds to prevent the site to be detected by the NATO’s SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defense) aircraft.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a43_1429013746

At about 8:15 pm local time, with a range of about 8 miles (13 km) several missiles were launched. According to Sergeant Dragan Matić, who was identified in 2009 as the soldier who fired the missiles, they detected the F-117 at a range of about 50 to 60 kilometres (31 to 37 mi), operating their equipment for no more than 17 seconds to avoid being locked on to by NATO anti-air suppression.[2] According to Dani in a 2007 interview, his troops spotted the aircraft on radar when its bomb-bay doors opened, raising its radar signature.

So that’s now three sources and the above is a statement directly attributed to the operator. Both confirm WVR shoot down. One states early detection was down to bomb bays door opening.

Richthofen’s opinion surely would be more valuable than some random internet armchair expert who changes nickname every other month.

Nic

Would it? At least I’m living in the 21st century with knowledge of 21st century technology, whereas Richthofen would likely consider a radar to be sourcery.

And according to Chuck, everybody from the US, to Russia, to China, to Japan, To South Korea and all the interested buyers are wasting money. Early protagonists said computers were useless, see what Alan Turing was up against, now we all use them for nearly everything. Early protagonists said AAMs were useless, yet here we are with everyone using them and nearly all post-Vietnam kills coming from AAMs. Sprey even suggested fighters with no radar and, oh look, radars all round. Now people say stealth is worthless, seeing a pattern?

Naysayers are not something new, they were babbling when the first motor vehicles came out – horses were better. Then they fought against jet engines. They even fought against ship propellers in favour of paddle wheels. Rifles were crap too, muskets better. They have plagued humanity since the dawn of time and will continue to do so indefinitely, so excuse me if I call it as it is.

In other words – i was right, you aren’t able to provide any reliable source on APG-77 specs. Ok, got it.

Another one Straw man argument. Where i expressed dislike towards stealth technology? I just don’t see it as some wonder-waffe, in contrast to you and some other adepts of “invisible and invincible stealth”. Reminds me Vietnam era hype. Ended up with thousands of planes lost.

It does. You just can’t admit it. As well as you can’t admit you confused experimental Zaslon-M on experimental MIG-31M with upgraded Zaslon at MIG-31BM in RuAF service.

Wikipedia…

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%83-35

Nope, the same article mentions an export designation but does not state that the spec is for the export version, nor that there are two specs, and nor does any source. That’s mere assertion on your part.

Again, that’s only your assertion. The only evidence is of a WVR shootdown, which in no way proves a vulnerability in stealth besides what was obvious, i.e. not stealthy WVR.

It sounds like another one “true story”. There are many of them and each declaring itself just like that – true story.

There’re RCS figures from SAM producers and military. Not some cheap advertising in the media like CNN or FOX.

Than come to Syria with your F-22/35 and check. LOL

I don’t see any direct words from operator – only journalists statements. In other words – speculations.

You’re sooo deluded.

Not really, sometimes you have to go with the best information available. 10W is also a fairly regular output for 1 T/R module.

Wonder-waffe? Like SAMs that can hit insects at 300km?:highly_amused: You disagreed with an analysis but haven’t been able to disprove the figures in any way and all other available info seems to back them up.

Oh and the compulsory mention of Vietnam, which is a sure indicator of the mind set we’re dealing with here.

No it really doesn’t refute the 1.4m diameter.

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/focus-analysis-photo-report-aviation-defence-industry/aviation-defence-industry-technology/1451-kret-to-equip-future-mig-31bm-fighter-jets-with-new-zaslon-m-radar-system.html

More than 50 modernized MiG-31BM fighter jets will be delivered to the Russian armed forces by the end of 2018. The updated MiG jets will patrol some of the most important strategic areas, including the Arctic, as reported by TASS. The upgraded MiG-31BM will have the new Zaslon-M radar system, designed by the Research Institute of Instrumentation named for Tikhomirov, which is part of KRET.

The new Zaslon-M radar is different then its predecessor Zaslon due to its extended antenna, which is now up to 1.4 m in diameter.

The fact of the matter is they’re quoting a NIIP pdf for that 100 square degrees but it doesn’t change the core analysis of SAM engagement range anyway. You confused detection range with engagement range. The analysis stated ‘engagement range’ and you claimed it was wrong based on a comparison with the ‘detection range’ of the Irbis-E.

Either way we have several calculations available that prove you wrong and the analysis ball park.

1. Detection range: [(1000/20)^(1/4)]x26.6km = 71km, OR [(1000/20)^(1/4)]x30km = 80km

2. http://thediplomat.com/2014/08/the-f-35-vs-the-vhf-threat/

Electromagnetic radiation is known to scatter from bodies smaller than its wavelength. This phenomenon, known as Rayleigh scattering, is often used by F-35 critics to point out that the aircraft could be detected by enemy radar operating in the VHF range, given that some of the aircraft’s geometrical features such as the wing and elevator edges are smaller than the 1-3 meter wavelength within which such radars typically operate. Reportedly, this is also how Colonel Zoltan Dani, then commander of the 3rd Battery of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s 250th Air Missile Defense Brigade, managed to detect, and later down, Lt. Col. Zelko’s plane. According to The Aviationist, a series of in-field modifications carried out by the Yugoslavs further reduced the frequency of the 1960s vintage P-18 VHF acquisition radar under Dani’s command, which enabled his men to detect Zelko’s F-117 at a distance of 30 to 37 miles (50-60 km).

Because of their relatively long wavelength, VHF radars generally lack sufficient accuracy to guide a missile to a target on their own and are therefore used to cue higher frequency, shorter wavelength engagement radars to the approximate location of the target. Narrowband stealth aircraft such as the F-117, F-22 and F-35 were designed to be very low observable (VLO) in these higher frequencies in order to significantly limit the range at which they can be successfully detected by engagement radars. Consequently, despite inputs from the VHF acquisition radar, the X-band* engagement radar of Dani’s SA-3 battery was able to track the F-117 only at a distance of 8 miles (13 km), obtaining a lock and launching two missiles towards it only on the third attempt (the colonel would order his men to switch the engagement radar on for no more than 20 seconds for each attempt in order to avoid being targeted by NATO electronic warfare aircraft).

Detection range: [(1000/380)^(1/4)]x50km = 64km, [(1000/380)^(1/4)]x60km = 76km

3. Engagement range: [(1000/250)^(1/4)]x13km = 18.4km (based on larger RCS F-117, with no EW, but we’ll assume that is counteracted by having better radar processing)

So we see detection range falling out at 64-80km and engagement range coming out circa 20km, which is exactly what the aviationweek analysis projected.

http://aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/uploads/2016/06/13/F-Stealth_diagram2.jpg

Except this story came from an interview with the SA-3 operator.

SAM producers trying to sell their gear. Yeah everybody, it’ll shoot down Raptors at 600km. Ignore what Sukhoi are doing, stealth is useless.:eagerness:

I believe the F-22s are already in Syria.

Come now, they’re paraphrasing but it’s definitely firsthand info.

Nope, you’re hugely – and I can’t state ‘hugely’ enough – deluded if you think an S-X00 is going to detect a Raptor before the Raptor detects it. It’s scientifically and mathematically impossible.

So, you have nothing better than Wiki and funny guy Carlo Copp? Just as i thought – no official sources.

It’s very strange that your “nice” sources didn’t tell you that 1,4m antenna was on Zaslon-M installed at MIG-31M. While MIG-31BM retained antenna from original Zaslon. I think your sources suck very-very hard.
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig31bm.html

It says index Sh135E, which in turn syas it’s an Export version. End of story.

What this has to do with a fact that S-125 is limited by its missile range, not radar? Straw man argument?

Your or not – it’s still a speculation.

You have to admit you have no facts that S-125 was limited by its radar.

Many things on the ground has a huge RCS. If you didn’t know that. You really don’t realise how complicated radar picture of the ground and how hard to find something specific on it, especially in the area of thousands of sq.km. Speaking about not emmiting SAMs – ever heard about SAM-ambushes? I guess not. Ask Zoltan – he knows how “useless” not emmiting SAM is. :rolleyes:

So far you have exactly zero sources official or unofficial aside from yourself and your inexplicable distrust and dislike of stealth technology.

I don’t know what you think your source says or how you think it backs up your claims but it doesn’t…

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/focus-analysis-photo-report-aviation-defence-industry/aviation-defence-industry-technology/1451-kret-to-equip-future-mig-31bm-fighter-jets-with-new-zaslon-m-radar-system.html

More than 50 modernized MiG-31BM fighter jets will be delivered to the Russian armed forces by the end of 2018. The updated MiG jets will patrol some of the most important strategic areas, including the Arctic, as reported by TASS. The upgraded MiG-31BM will have the new Zaslon-M radar system, designed by the Research Institute of Instrumentation named for Tikhomirov, which is part of KRET.

The new Zaslon-M radar is different then its predecessor Zaslon due to its extended antenna, which is now up to 1.4 m in diameter.

…and getting back to the original argumentative post you made….

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?136371-Russia-moving-tac-air-troops-to-Syria&p=2332743#post2332743

All of this is irrelevant to the SAM range analysis, which works equally well even if the range isn’t for narrow scan. However, even Russian wikipedia makes mention of the ‘100 square degrees’, which to me means 10deg x 10deg, and seems to reference a since removed niip pdf. Also says 150km ‘Dogon’, lost in translation.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%83-35

350—400 км (в зоне 100 кв. градусов, на фоне неба)

Nope, the same article mentions an export designation but does not state that the spec is for the export version, nor that there are two specs, and nor does any source. That’s mere assertion on your part.

Again, that’s only your assertion. The only evidence is of a WVR shootdown, which in no way proves a vulnerability in stealth besides what was obvious, i.e. not stealthy WVR.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/08/the-f-35-vs-the-vhf-threat/

Electromagnetic radiation is known to scatter from bodies smaller than its wavelength. This phenomenon, known as Rayleigh scattering, is often used by F-35 critics to point out that the aircraft could be detected by enemy radar operating in the VHF range, given that some of the aircraft’s geometrical features such as the wing and elevator edges are smaller than the 1-3 meter wavelength within which such radars typically operate. Reportedly, this is also how Colonel Zoltan Dani, then commander of the 3rd Battery of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s 250th Air Missile Defense Brigade, managed to detect, and later down, Lt. Col. Zelko’s plane. According to The Aviationist, a series of in-field modifications carried out by the Yugoslavs further reduced the frequency of the 1960s vintage P-18 VHF acquisition radar under Dani’s command, which enabled his men to detect Zelko’s F-117 at a distance of 30 to 37 miles (50-60 km).

Because of their relatively long wavelength, VHF radars generally lack sufficient accuracy to guide a missile to a target on their own and are therefore used to cue higher frequency, shorter wavelength engagement radars to the approximate location of the target. Narrowband stealth aircraft such as the F-117, F-22 and F-35 were designed to be very low observable (VLO) in these higher frequencies in order to significantly limit the range at which they can be successfully detected by engagement radars. Consequently, despite inputs from the VHF acquisition radar, the X-band* engagement radar of Dani’s SA-3 battery was able to track the F-117 only at a distance of 8 miles (13 km), obtaining a lock and launching two missiles towards it only on the third attempt (the colonel would order his men to switch the engagement radar on for no more than 20 seconds for each attempt in order to avoid being targeted by NATO electronic warfare aircraft).

So it sounds as if the operator had tried twice to lock it beforehand but it was too far away. I rest my case. Nothing to do with missile range.

As is most of your posts regarding what is an isn’t right, e.g. your disbelief of RCS figures. Your claims about SAMs being able to lock F-22/35s at longer distances than assessed from the available numbers. In fact not one thing you’ve said has a shred of logic or proof to it.

I just gave a source above, which comes directly from an interview with the SAM operator. Now where’s your evidence that these SAMs can lock stealth aircraft well outside optical range?

It’s actually pretty quick and easy scanning lots of ground with a modern electronically scanned array, especially when satellite surveillance has already told you where to look and given that there’s an S-300 system at Nellis AFB, I think they know exactly what to look for too. As regards pop-up threats, yes I’m aware, but you wouldn’t deploy a large SAM like an S-300/400/500 for that, you would employ something like a BUK/Tor/Pantsir in the regions between S-X00 coverage and have them pop-up on the command of the larger SAM radar, except with stealth aircraft, the large SAM radar won’t be able to see them in those gaps, so the system falls apart.