if F-117 Nighthawk as the ultimate air fighter back in the 90's....

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
It was given many design capabilities that would make it nearly improbable to be "locked" onto. The venting and design of its thrust was designed to masks its heat signature. An onboard radar of another aircraft would probably not even pick it up or if it did, it would have the signature of something much smaller and be discounted as either noise or a flock of birds.

I remember back in the 1990's quite a stir was caused between the US and the UK because, quite amusingly, the RAF's Rapier SAM system had no problem "locking onto" the F-117 and they released the video of it to the media, just for giggles. Needless to say, the Yanks were most upset by this "showing up" of their "ultimate fighter".

Granted, the Rapier is an WVR optical/thermal guided system so has a short range, but it still would merrily lock onto the exhaust from the Nighthawk, which as it happens glowed white hot on the screen.

So I join the others in the critique of the F-117 being the ultimate anything, to be honest. Personally, I think it was a concept design that got out of hand and ended up in production. It really is a bit naff and a waste of money, to be honest. It doesn't even like to get wet for crying out loud....

I don't know precisely what is going on at A51, but I have seen anti-grav technology demonstrated and it is remarkably simple. You can do it yourself.

That would be my guess anyway.

I have a comment on the Commanche and technology being 50 times ahead of where it is now in (Area 51). Why bother productionising a helo which is better than the one you currently have when the one you currently have is better than anything anyone else possesses.

Was this a case of the technology getting out of the bag too soon, cos now the enemies of the US will probably be thinking, OK, we need to counter stealthy helos and which will make both Apache and COmmanche obsolete and therefore skip a technology step?

Could have messed up if the UK thought, hang on, why buy Apaches when the US already has the Commanche, we will go straight for that. I know its been cancelled but even still, your buying end of generation airframes, OK the sensors inside can be cutting edge but sorry, next step is stealthy helo's and you have bought a brick which can be sighted by a manpad.

the f22 has seen its day, check out the F35 due to be out this year in hill AFB, the F22 will be retired by 2015? depending on who's site you visit.

reply to post by bekod


The F-35 isn't a replacement for the F-22 and I find it hard to believe they would retire them in 2015 when the first squadrons only went active a couple of years ago. They may have scaled back the order for the F-22 but it's going to be around for a lot longer than 5 years.

I don't think it would be fully retired by 2015 but they will have something new by then or a short time later. Both Russia and China have 5th generation fighters being developed at the moment. The Russians is said to be competition for the F-22. These fighters are supposed to come out around 2018. So I would imagine that the U.S. Air Force would want to stay ahead of these other countries and develop a better fighter by then, making the F-22 out dated.

www.digitaljournal.com...
www.reuters.com...

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
It was given many design capabilities that would make it nearly improbable to be "locked" onto. The venting and design of its thrust was designed to masks its heat signature. An onboard radar of another aircraft would probably not even pick it up or if it did, it would have the signature of something much smaller and be discounted as either noise or a flock of birds.

I remember back in the 1990's quite a stir was caused between the US and the UK because, quite amusingly, the RAF's Rapier SAM system had no problem "locking onto" the F-117 and they released the video of it to the media, just for giggles. Needless to say, the Yanks were most upset by this "showing up" of their "ultimate fighter".

Granted, the Rapier is an WVR optical/thermal guided system so has a short range, but it still would merrily lock onto the exhaust from the Nighthawk, which as it happens glowed white hot on the screen.

So I join the others in the critique of the F-117 being the ultimate anything, to be honest. Personally, I think it was a concept design that got out of hand and ended up in production. It really is a bit naff and a waste of money, to be honest. It doesn't even like to get wet for crying out loud....

That video wasn't of the F-117 but the B-2. The location was the Farnborough Airshow in 1996. Any aircraft stealth or not will show up on any such infra red system at those ranges. The B-2 was conducting an airshow fly by at a few thousand feet.

Link to image from the Rapier system - Farnborough 1996.

media.defenseindustrydaily.com...

TJ

Originally posted by bekod
the f22 has seen its day, check out the F35 due to be out this year in hill AFB, the F22 will be retired by 2015? depending on who's site you visit.

The F-22 isn't going anywhere. The F-22s service life will be comparable to the F-15.

TJ

reply to post by tommyjo


That was actually a seperate incident. The F-117 was much earlier than 1996 and I distinctly remember seeing the video on the News and it showed an F-117. I know the difference between one and a B-2.

The French have also embarressed the US with their anti-stealth radar systems in 1991 tracking the F-117 on approach to a Paris airshow. The there is the Serbs tracking one and shooting it down in 1999. It's not all it's cracked up to be, really. The B-2, on the other hand, is an awesome beast.

I remember back in the 1990's quite a stir was caused between the US and the UK because, quite amusingly, the RAF's Rapier SAM system had no problem "locking onto" the F-117 and they released the video of it to the media, just for giggles. Needless to say, the Yanks were most upset by this "showing up" of their "ultimate fighter".

But how is this even newsworthy? Of course those plans have to be trackable at times, so radar reflectors are extended to aid in that for air traffic control radars. Same with the B-2, and probably with the F-22

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by tommyjo

 

That was actually a seperate incident. The F-117 was much earlier than 1996 and I distinctly remember seeing the video on the News and it showed an F-117. I know the difference between one and a B-2.

The French have also embarressed the US with their anti-stealth radar systems in 1991 tracking the F-117 on approach to a Paris airshow. The there is the Serbs tracking one and shooting it down in 1999. It's not all it's cracked up to be, really. The B-2, on the other hand, is an awesome beast.

There was no other incident. The only news footage was of the B-2 tracked by the Rapier at the airshow. You are simply mistaken. I served in the RAF and there was no other Rapier footage shown in the media other than the B-2 Farnborough incident.

Yet another myth in regards to the Paris Airshow. ALL the stealth aircraft types operating under non-operational conditions such as airshow conditions are fitted with radar reflectors in order to increase their radar signature. The aircraft such as B-2, F-117 and F-22 all carry the reflectors for safe tracking and movement in congested civilian airspace. Even the F-22s that visited the UK this year all carried them.

See following for images of where some of the reflectors are carried.

www.f-16.net...

No stealth aircraft is invisible to radar. The Serbs only managed to shoot down one F-117 aircraft out of thousands of sorties. They were never able to repeat it. The F-117 continued to penetrate Serb defences night after night and strike their targets even after the shoot down. Even the Serb Officer in charge of the shootdown admitted that everything fell into place that night and he couldn't repeat it.

Originally posted by metalpr
if F-117 Nighthawk was the ultimate air fighter back in the 90's, now 20 years later, I wonder what could be the ultimate airplane the USAF have.

Once I heard in a documentary, that in the area 51 there is technology 50 years in advance of what we see today...and I believe it.

When the USAF disclose a technology is because is almost obsolete for them...but amazing for many of us that has never heard if it before.

I still remember when I saw the if F-117 Nighthawk for the first time back in the 1992 I think...it was unbelievable at the time.

what new toy could they have today? any idea?

edit on 4-10-2010 by metalpr because: (no reason given)

I suppose this has been said multiple times ahead of posting in this thread, but it needs to be repeaed because too many people simply refuse to look ahead beyond what they are being told about the F-35 and other whiz-bang aircraft.

For a quick refresher--if you saw an F-117 in '92, you evidently believed your eyes even though you didn't know exactly what you were seeing because that stuff was all hidden back then. Jump forward to today where we seem to have operational craft in the form of the black triangles--which definitely are not conventional AIRcraft. All you have to do is search the broad specturm of media, small town newspapers, video news, talk to a neighbor/friend or read military reports out of Belgium, etc. and you will learn about what you are being unofficially introduced to, the next giant leap in aeriel transportation devices. The biggest advance in transportation since the inventionof the wheel.

Of course, if you are a conventionalist, you won't want to believe that these craft that can fly, slow, low, hover, silently and can make instanteous starts, stops and right angle turns are possible because, well, they sound too similar to decades of UFO reports. But that would be your problem of not accepting what is clearly, almost daily, shown right in our faces.

Originally posted by tommyjo
There was no other incident. The only news footage was of the B-2 tracked by the Rapier at the airshow. You are simply mistaken. I served in the RAF and there was no other Rapier footage shown in the media other than the B-2 Farnborough incident.

Fair enough, I am willing to concede I may be mistaken, but your condescending tone is not welcome. So you served in the RAF, so what? It doesn't make you more superior to others, you don't know what my background is. I've seen you adopt this stance in other threads too.

Originally posted by tommyjo
Yet another myth in regards to the Paris Airshow. ALL the stealth aircraft types operating under non-operational conditions such as airshow conditions are fitted with radar reflectors in order to increase their radar signature. The aircraft such as B-2, F-117 and F-22 all carry the reflectors for safe tracking and movement in congested civilian airspace. Even the F-22s that visited the UK this year all carried them.

Indeed, I am aware of the US rebuttal of that particular event and it stands to reason that travelling through airspace in a "normal" setting will require them to be visible to conventional ATC peeps. Again, the tone though...

Originally posted by tommyjo
No stealth aircraft is invisible to radar.

Again, I know. All stealth aircraft can be detected by longer wavelength radar, but this usually comes at a loss of targetting resolution so makes it not much use. The Uk and others are also working on using cell tower (and other transmitting stations) radio frequencies as a detection system by monitoring the change on power levels caused by LO aircraft moving through the transmission. It is known as CELLDAR, but being an RAF expert I am sure you're aware of this?

It was also made known years ago that "stealth" merely reduces the visible signature of the aircraft in question so that detection ranges for radar stations is effectively reduced, allowing the craft to move around the detection zones and reach their target. Even if spotted, chances it would onyl be fleetingly and certainly not enough to target.

See, I know stuff too...

Originally posted by tommyjo
The Serbs only managed to shoot down one F-117 aircraft out of thousands of sorties. They were never able to repeat it. The F-117 continued to penetrate Serb defences night after night and strike their targets even after the shoot down. Even the Serb Officer in charge of the shootdown admitted that everything fell into place that night and he couldn't repeat it.

Actually, you're doing the Serbs a total disservice. The commander of the AA battalion that shot down the F-117 should be commended. He oversaw modifications of his radar for longer wavelengths so he could see them coming, he deployed manual observers using IR and NV to visually track F-117 flightpaths and moved his batteries around accordingly (also to stop them being hit) and even the actual target aquisition and engagement was done visually (IR most likely). Yes, luck played it's part, but it took significant effort by the Serbs to make it happen in the first place.

Originally posted by Mercenary2007
i agree with ownbestenemy the F-15E was the best fighter during the 90's the F-22 is nice but yet to be tested by a real enemy in the air But will probably be the best fighter this decade. as for what the new toys are. I could only imagine.

It's kind of funny actually i was just thinking about this lastnight. I live Southwest of Whiteman AFB and seeing the B-2's even to this day is pretty amazing but last night i ran out for a smoke and saw something headed towards Whiteman's direction from me and it wasn't a B-2, A-10 or T-38 all of which are based at Whiteman. But from the lights on it, it almost looked like a F-117 but traveling a helluva lot faster than an f-117. and the moon wasn't up yet so no silhouette maybe it'll make another appearance some night and i can get a better look at it

F-15C Eagle not the F-15E Strike Eagle. Those CFT's don't exactly make for more speed. Also as said before the F-117 is worthless when it comes to being a "fighter" which is something it wasn't designed to do. Its sole purpose is precise strikes against targets, more often then not deep strikes / BAI, using the stealth to operate through integrated air defenses.

As for the new top dog? The F-22A. The Russians love to hype up their aircraft (MiG-25 anyone?) and I don't see anything that can match its operational capability. That goes for China and North Korea also. The F-15C fleet can still hold its own in the air and the F-16's aren't slouches in the dogfight either. But with the new avionics suite and performance envelope the Raptor is far above the greatest air-to-air fighter of all time, the Eagle.

I wouldn't count out the russians yet... and honestly we have never had a top tier f 15 versus top shelf mig battle... yes the eagle has been undefeated but that could be a mechanism of the INTENSE disparities at ALL levels of every single confrontation.

As for the f-22 it's vaunted kill ratio advantage is not going to do it much good in a straight up confrontation against another big power... Quite frankly there just isn't enough of them to achieve the numerical concentration to keep a CAP with sufficient numbers up 24/7 in a combat situation in SUFFICIENT DENSITY to maintain the kill ratio advantage needed to keep themselves alive...


The F-117 though there was an aircraft that was a victim on every level...

The russians released a paper that was meant to push us in a certain direction... which we built the f 117 around...

Then the Air FARCE .... well the f 117 and the Sea Shadow both suffered from We don't want it syndrome.

Unfortunately celldar and other interferometry based RF detection methods were always possible and I have a feeling ALREADY integrated into first line defenses inside russia from shortly after the stealth paper was released onward.

They basically thought they were "too good" for their wobblin goblin as it didn't fit their concept of what they were meant to be flying... "like justin timberlake they want to bring sexy back!"

Hence the hundred and ninety million dollar moon doggie that'll take IR or UV hole seeker mode SAM's and burn just like every other airplane. because the f-22 turns at the same 9 g's as an f-18 ! S-300's turn at 100 g's !!

ANd the lack of sexy for the air farce, and the lack of CREW SIZE for the sea shadow killed them!

Yes you heard me right... we killed materiel REVOLUTIONS because our officer corps THREW A FIT because they weren't sexy enough .

The F117 was never a fighter aircraft but they tried there was a version of the aim-9 missile that was in development just for the F117.

It was a folding fin aim 9 with a steerable nozzle on the rocket motor.
This would have allowed 4 AIM-9s to fit in tubes in the bomb bay doors.

The problem was as soon as you open the bay doors the F117 no longer was a stealth aircraft.
this was what got one shot down Over Serbia.
The pilot had opened the bomb bay doors to drop a bomb when the Serbs got a lock on and fired.

My 3 favorite planes of the 90's right there. F-117A,F-22,F-15... Just amazing works of aviation and art. I was actually at the Air show at Martin Air Force Base in Maryland in 97 when the F-117 crashed. It crashed in the woods behind my Aunt's bar. Within minutes there were tons of black cars and roads closed all around. I believe it was a few fasteners missing on the left wing that caused the crash. That was a moment I will never forget.. Pilot did a damn good job getting the plane away from people and high population areas ejecting at the last minute.