Russian Stealth technology

Originally posted by iqonx

Originally posted by youngiceman87
Stealth technology
look at the new ver of the SU-27,Su-35 etc.
do they use Stealth technology ?
will we SU_27 go Stealth
could they put the tech from the Su-47 and put in su-27

and why are there not as many ver of the F-15?

i would like to point out a few things in general russia has been right upto date witht he west in everything including topol-m,s-37/su-47,mig-1.42/1.44, kornet,iskander,sa-18 igla, ?black eagle? tank etc............

it would be foolish to assume they dont have anything to match stealth fighers or that only america is capable of creating such a thing.

russia currently is trying to clear all forign debt that it has if people check russian news russia is paying back all its world debt at record pace it wants to be debt free in the next decade or so and its using its growing economy and the current high oil prices to its advantage to rapidly pay back what it owes. the point of this is russia is not wasting its money on stuff that is not urgent right now and in reality stealth aircraft are not needed becuase lets face the fact nobody in todays climate of politics is even stupid enough to lauch a war against russia.

i have absolutly no dought that after russia clears its debt that russia will pull out some new toys for its millitry. think about it russia has been upto date with everything including tanks,aircraft,anti-ship cruise missiles, ATGM, sams like s-300/s-400 and igla sa-18 etc... but some stuff they havent put into full production even though they can like the su-47/s-37 they already have a full version of it whats stopping them from putting it into full production? they have the technology but they dont have the money right now to make it but they will have plenty of money once they clear there debt off.

russia is in my opinion in possession of stealth or has a full functioning prototype of a stealth aircraft that is ready to go into full scale production the only thing that is stopping them is the money.

\

so what od u think fo the S400?? i think its a overhyped SAM lol! the rusky peopel on the forum areblinded by its capabbilities its better than the patriot but like most russian equipment its gonna be unreliable and only carries 3 missiles

Originally posted by urmomma158


so what od u think fo the S400?? i think its a overhyped SAM lol! the rusky peopel on the forum areblinded by its capabbilities its better than the patriot but like most russian equipment its gonna be unreliable and only carries 3 missiles

Some evidence... heck, any evidence to back up this position would be greatly recieved.

How old is Patriot now? How old is the S-400? Is it not entirely feasible for a newer design to be better than a baseline patriot? (excluding the upgrades they are getting/have recently got)

Originally posted by urmomma158


so what od u think fo the S400?? i think its a overhyped SAM lol! the rusky peopel on the forum areblinded by its capabbilities its better than the patriot but like most russian equipment its gonna be unreliable and only carries 3 missiles

well lets be real the s-200/s-300 are a good system there no reason to doubt there capabilities. even countries that have the ability to buy americans or european systems are buying the s-300 even india which could easily purchase any western sam has the s-300 so does china becuase its a good system also from what i remeber some arab countries that have traditionaly been american buyers even purchased it altough they recived an export version while china india recied a different version also i think it was greece? that also has the s-300.

i personally dont know much about the s-400 though, but i am willing to bet thats its much better then the s-300 or there would be no point of making it. thats what happens with tech if you look at the version numbers of the s-300 it has many variations now they made the s-400 meaning they maxed out the performace and upgrades of the s-300 and now they needed a new platform to evolve the series hence the s-400 it would be sensible to assume that it does exactly what the makers claim it will do becuase from the sales of the s-300 it would be wise to assume that it does exactly what it claimed it could do as well hence its popularity.

i will admit though its not the golden bullet that every body claims it is they assume that the s-300/s-400 will win a war this is wrong becuase wars are not won by missiles but by stratergy combined with other factors but the s-300 will make a huge difference to an airdefence.

i heard that the s-400 has anti-stealth capabilites where it is capable of seeing low obseravle aircraft.
do you guys think they are using duel radar frequencys with low and high frequency radar running at the same time this would help the radar pinpoint the direction of the enemy altough it would not pinpoint there location completely and allow them to continue searching for the aircraft using the more accurate radar freqency?

Originally posted by waynos

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

I could be wrong but I dont know of any fighter that use internal weapon bays that wasnt designed with stealth in mind from the get go.

[edit on 11-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]

How about the Convair F-102?

I stand corrected

50s era plane I wonder why they went with a external weapons bay in that thing. Was it just that they were trying to make the F-102 such a fast interceptor they tried to get every last bit of speed out of the plane?

Basically yes, it was just done to minimise drag, likewise the subsequent application of area rule, the F-102 was the most aerodynamically clean aircraft of its era. Tere were other little touches too like the v-shaped windscreen profile rather than the more usual flat screen, all designed to squeeze out every drop of speed.

Speaking of advanced design, look at the air intakes of the TF-102 trainer version and the way they are sculpted into the fuselage. Then have a look at Rafale's intakes. Spooky huh?

Originally posted by waynos

Speaking of advanced design, look at the air intakes of the TF-102 trainer version and the way they are sculpted into the fuselage. Then have a look at Rafale's intakes. Spooky huh?

Yeah there is a uncanny resemblence

The F-102 is really a interesting design more so when you consider how old it really is

Originally posted by kilcoo316

Originally posted by urmomma158


so what od u think fo the S400?? i think its a overhyped SAM lol! the rusky peopel on the forum areblinded by its capabbilities its better than the patriot but like most russian equipment its gonna be unreliable and only carries 3 missiles

Some evidence... heck, any evidence to back up this position would be greatly recieved.

How old is Patriot now? How old is the S-400? Is it not entirely feasible for a newer design to be better than a baseline patriot? (excluding the upgrades they are getting/have recently got)

thats exactly wha ti am trying to say i wasnt bashing the SAM specifically jusr russ equipment such as crappy rifles and excessive maintencne for them and russian tank shavent been all that reliable eithe. their strong points rmisssiles,aircrat SAMS etc but suck at rifles and sometimes tanks. sorta like akia or hyundaii=good features and reliable but oo much maintenace

[edit on 20-3-2006 by urmomma158]

Originally posted by iqonx

Originally posted by urmomma158


so what od u think fo the S400?? i think its a overhyped SAM lol! the rusky peopel on the forum areblinded by its capabbilities its better than the patriot but like most russian equipment its gonna be unreliable and only carries 3 missiles

well lets be real the s-200/s-300 are a good system there no reason to doubt there capabilities. even countries that have the ability to buy americans or european systems are buying the s-300 even india which could easily purchase any western sam has the s-300 so does china becuase its a good system also from what i remeber some arab countries that have traditionaly been american buyers even purchased it altough they recived an export version while china india recied a different version also i think it was greece? that also has the s-300.

i personally dont know much about the s-400 though, but i am willing to bet thats its much better then the s-300 or there would be no point of making it. thats what happens with tech if you look at the version numbers of the s-300 it has many variations now they made the s-400 meaning they maxed out the performace and upgrades of the s-300 and now they needed a new platform to evolve the series hence the s-400 it would be sensible to assume that it does exactly what the makers claim it will do becuase from the sales of the s-300 it would be wise to assume that it does exactly what it claimed it could do as well hence its popularity.

i will admit though its not the golden bullet that every body claims it is they assume that the s-300/s-400 will win a war this is wrong becuase wars are not won by missiles but by stratergy combined with other factors but the s-300 will make a huge difference to an airdefence.

i heard that the s-400 has anti-stealth capabilites where it is capable of seeing low obseravle aircraft.
do you guys think they are using duel radar frequencys with low and high frequency radar running at the same time this would help the radar pinpoint the direction of the enemy altough it would not pinpoint there location completely and allow them to continue searching for the aircraft using the more accurate radar freqency?

lol nice one i ws bashing russ equip in genral such as rifles.
bad idea dual frequecny dont mean squat u can us elow frequency yes but the highre frq radar cant get a lock on it =no fire control . The F 22 is built for combating advanced SAMS. Here aanother reason the F/A 22 has wideband stealth capabilities degrading performance on all freqncies over a broad range( best at degrading fire control). Plus i'd like u 2 perform fire control with simply a long wave radar thats being degraded in performance not entrirely but significanly and while the AIrcraft is supercruising at mach 1.7. Can u do that/ i guess u cant its not that easy

My question is: Why in the world don't the Russian sell the plans for this stuff? They'd make a lot of rubbles

Comming back to the topic of russian stealth. Some people mentioned plasma stealth.
I remember something about a Russian system to use (cold?) plasma around the plane to achieve hypersonic speed. I don't remember where I read it, but I'm gonna look for it and post an update with some links when found.

In the meanwhile, anyone else here have some info on that technology?

Originally posted by OneGodJesus
My question is: Why in the world don't the Russian sell the plans for this stuff? They'd make a lot of rubbles

waht exactly r u trying to say? anywayz about RUssina stealth they make claims based on plasma stealth. Cold plasm is good however cold is a relative term to plasma cold plasma isnt necessarily cold just cold compared to other plasma. i.e. hot=1,000,000 Degrees F cold=15,000degrees F . And no matter what u still get a huge IR signature evn with cold. theres the light bulb effect and lets not forget that cold plsma isnt completely ionized in order for it to absorb or bend radar wave it has to be fully ionized. cold plasma isnt and uswould need to change the plasma density based on the wavvelngth and frequency of the radar beam> this is aslo extremely problematic since modern phased arrays and AESA's use freq hopping changing over 1,000 times a second,scanningextremly fast as well.

[edit on 20-3-2006 by urmomma158]

Originally posted by urmomma158
thats exactly wha ti am trying to say i wasnt bashing the SAM specifically jusr russ equipment such as crappy rifles and excessive maintencne for them and russian tank shavent been all that reliable eithe. their strong points rmisssiles,aircrat SAMS etc but suck at rifles and sometimes tanks. sorta like akia or hyundaii=good features and reliable but oo much maintenace

[edit on 20-3-2006 by urmomma158]

Uhm, was the AK-47 not viewed as a much more reliable assault rifle than the early M-16 in Vietnam?

Be careful with your maintenance comparisons. Alot of Russian equipment has been designed to be ad-hoc serviced by conscripts in the field [these are the service intervals quoted by most articles], but with full stripdown and rebuilds being much longer apart.

As for Hyundai, they are the only motor manufacturer I know of offering a 5 year warranty on their cars. They must be pretty confident in their maintainability and reliability

Originally posted by kilcoo316
As for Hyundai, they are the only motor manufacturer I know of offering a 5 year warranty on their cars. They must be pretty confident in their maintainability and reliability

Mitsubishi is offering 6 years or 120,00km

Originally posted by chinawhite

Mitsubishi is offering 6 years or 120,00km

Aww crap.

Good find

Originally posted by urmomma158


waht exactly r u trying to say? anywayz about RUssina stealth they make claims based on plasma stealth. Cold plasm is good however cold is a relative term to plasma cold plasma isnt necessarily cold just cold compared to other plasma. i.e. hot=1,000,000 Degrees F cold=15,000degrees F . And no matter what u still get a huge IR signature evn with cold. theres the light bulb effect and lets not forget that cold plsma isnt completely ionized in order for it to absorb or bend radar wave it has to be fully ionized. cold plasma isnt and uswould need to change the plasma density based on the wavvelngth and frequency of the radar beam> this is aslo extremely problematic since modern phased arrays and AESA's use freq hopping changing over 1,000 times a second,scanningextremly fast as well.

[edit on 20-3-2006 by urmomma158]

i would like to make a point. plasma stealth does not have to be turned on all the time only when in direct combat or danger zones. otherwise it could be left of and only turned on when there is a danger which would reduce the chanches of a large heat signiture. also plasma "stealth" could in theory be pulsed in clock cycles of certain time limits like eg. 5 seconds on 2 seconds off becuase theroretically from what i understand the coating on the aircraft would not disapear instantly this would give the aircraft the ability to keep a cooler airframe then with the plama on permenently.

i hope the above made sense.