Author Topic: A question for radar/rf engineers  (Read 4814 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline max_torque

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 961
  • Country: gb
    • bitdynamics
Re: A question for radar/rf engineers
« Reply #25 on: September 27, 2016, 08:49:51 pm »
Sort of "On Topic" this, BTW, is a brilliant book, and includes a lot of stuff about the development of Stealth:

Highly recommended!   :-+

Offline CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3061
  • Country: us
Re: A question for radar/rf engineers
« Reply #26 on: September 28, 2016, 12:05:48 am »
Absolutely right Catalina, some folks refer to it as the fog of war, which cannot be computed.

When they say B2 spirit has RCS of 0.001 m2 or F-22 Raptor has a RCS of 0.001, are these numbers valid for certain band radar or does it mean it will have the same RCS for any kind if EM radiation? What does having small RCS mean for an aircraft? Does it mean it can't be detected at all? Or does it mean, you can detect it but the RCS is so small, you can't home your missiles on it? I suspect it means, it can't be detected at all, else enemy would scramble jets.

Its great asking a question like this because it sparks so many different paths of discussion. The basic concept is long wavelengths have a better chance of detecting a low rcs. Now the question becomes once detected, can we hit it. Thats the magic.

You missed the magic of the answer.  Stealth vehicles can be detected at any frequency.  The magic is how hard it is to do.  It is easier at long wavelengths, but hypothetically still harder than for a non stealth vehicle.  So more resources are required to achieve the same defensive effect.   Stealth isn't a magic cloak of invisibility, it is more like very effective camoflauge.

It is kind of like personal armor.  It started with people wearing corsets or tunics of hardened leather.  Did it make them invulnerable?  No.  Did it make them harder to disable or kill? Yes.  Even when armor had advanced to custom fitted steel mail with chain mail undergarments those wearing the armor weren't invulnerable.  And when longbows and firearms were invented armor didn't become totally ineffective.  It still would deflect a glancing shot, and reduced the damage of those shots that penetrated.  As it turns out the effort of building armor and training those who wore it was larger than the effort of building projectile weapons and training their users so armor dropped out of use for a while.  But it is coming back as technology has brought more effective materials that are cheaper to make and which have simpler requirements for the wearers.

Offline Voodoo 6

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Country: us
Re: A question for radar/rf engineers
« Reply #27 on: September 28, 2016, 05:34:37 am »
I don't think anyone here is disagreeing with what you are saying Catalina, Nobody said stealth is a magic cloak of invisibility.

That is a great book Max. Read it awhile back, but might need to find another copy.

Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo