The gain of weight on the 22 was a structural problem, not a stealth one…they did not stuff in it 5 tons of RAM…they did refit the structural issues with composites (which, should not be confused with RAM, or stealth), and the related structural problems with their new high temperature engine..

These extra 5 tons had nothing to do with stealth

I don’t get what has to do the frequency, delay reaction etc, in all this

The 117 is a true stealth design, it needs extra structure to hide it engines, it needs extra structure for it faceted design and extra weight for it RAM

The 22 is not in the 117 league

You are bringing here the 17 tons of the Avenger, but the requirement of the 22 was 14 tons, even 12tons for early requests,…all these figures including the stealth flavor…

Are you sure these 17 tons required for the Avenger were not meant to be used to reinforce the structure for airborne operations, rather than your stealthy flavor?…

Can you tell me please what is the huge weight gain for the B-2 compared with the B-52???

no i cant explain it, but LM say the f-22 has a smaller RCS than the f-117

Everything can have smaller RCS…depends from where are you looking it

in a multistatic (networked) radar enviorment?

I can’t tell, i don’t know where are the sources, where are the receivers, you idea is very vague

The 117, was meant to scatter the signals away from the source,the source was meant to be SAMs, so it shape is not facing directly the ground.

There are more important things than “planform alignment”

which scatters large, but very narrow spikes over a controllet set of angles

Can you explain me how a curved topology can do this???, bet you are just watching the silhouette, and not the actual surface

Again I ask…What alternate universe are you living in?

In a universe called reality..

F-22 have already proven stealth works.

The only true stealth plane was the 117, the only true stealth concept was actually the “hopeless diamond”, hopeless diamond went more faceted, because a nasty little thing called boundary layer…the modern stealth design is a mix of compromises of LO and aerodynamics…

The deal with stealth was to take all the energy and reflect it on limited areas, so at certain areas the RCS will be extremely high while leaving some silent areas

The only efficient way to do this is with the faceted design, not even supercomputers can change the laws of physics..there is not such thing as “curved stealth”, the design must be faceted, and is better while it has less and less facets.

Curves are composed by infinite facets, more facets, less stealth

The F22 is not a full stealth design

before you reply, please, give me a real explanation, and don’t try to hide in the supercomputers thingy

The advantage of a hood you just blow off is exactly what you say – if the bay is recessed then the return is still low, so if you run out of them well it’s not going to matter much – you’re more likely to run out of things to shoot anyway.

Someone is going to come up with the “Keep it simple stupid” 4.5/5th gen fighter. Right now I suspect it will be China.

And if it’s widely exported, it’ll be a game changer.

I really thought the russians were on the target, but after i saw these bay doors on the berkut…i lost all hope 🙂

China will most likely copy the same overcomplicated designs

Mig was the man for the job, not sukhoi

Some kind of cheap compossite detachable plates to cover the bay, probably, still if is reccessed then the aspect to get a decent return is limmited with or w/o plates/covers

I agree, this is the kind of cheap and easy solutions we are not seeing

So you are volunteering to test that against IRST cueing?
What does F-22’s “LPI” radar have to do with full passive tactics?
I believe the OP’s idea of NO RADAR would have a pretty low emissions siganture, would you not? (obviously “you emit you die” applies about as equally to both ultra-low X-band stealth ala F-22 and moderate 4.5 gen RCS ala Typhoon)

I didn’t see anybody mention pulling 20-30-50 G’s in this thread, much less 2 G’s.

Could you give me a link for how one is supposed to be able to band-shift AB plumes?
But sure, aerodynamics (and active cooling) play a big part in IR sig management, particularly front-on/lateral when not using AB, i.e. for the purpose of choosing terms of engagement rather than helping your IR counter-measures when you’ve already been targeted and are being chased.

IRST is quite overrated, from russians to euros to US systems, all them quite overated, also is a problematic system

The g limit claim is popular on UAVs, many people think UAVs will be always small, for a UAV fighter of the capability of a EF, you need a UAV of the EF size 🙂

About AB and dry thrust, tell me what is the deal about plumes, plumes is a consequence of the exhaust velocity/temperature, that’s all, a plane supercruising will still have plumes, if don’t have them, then it engine is horrible inefficient and will throw to the system more heat than is needed…

Aerodynamics play a role way more important than the ones you are claiming, less drag, less thrust needed..

No radar is a dumb idea, the fighter is a hunter, it needs initiative, and should not depend on the enemy….stealth as you put won’t work…is actually a bad joke, i did put the F22’s example, because not even LM-USAF believe on that tale.