I know most people here don't like the United States very much, and probably have an even lower opinion of the USAF but here's an interesting read, fwiw.
P.S. Sorry about the funny characters, collateral damage from the pdf conversion:
> “Vega 31 is Going Down!â€
F-117 shootdown over Bosnia
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
I don't think that the SAM knew hold old it was in relation to the F117 
We have no way of really knowing (given that we don't have all the information), but I'd wager that one of two things happened:
-The SAM site had a good angle. The F117 is low observable, but not invisible. Even an old SAM could have gotten a good lock from the right range/angle/etc.
-Some Soviet designed SAM's have a secondary IR homing capability. If it had ceased to guide with radar, it might have been able to pick up an IR signature. I can't recall offhand which model(s) have it, or how effecive it is.
We have no way of really knowing (given that we don't have all the information), but I'd wager that one of two things happened:
-The SAM site had a good angle. The F117 is low observable, but not invisible. Even an old SAM could have gotten a good lock from the right range/angle/etc.
-Some Soviet designed SAM's have a secondary IR homing capability. If it had ceased to guide with radar, it might have been able to pick up an IR signature. I can't recall offhand which model(s) have it, or how effecive it is.
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
Is that with or without their transponder?
Seriously, though...
If an F117 pilot decided not to be seen by a particular air-search radar, he'd have a pretty good chance of not being seen.
A combination of low altititude, carefully chosen headings, and avoiding any actions that would increases his signature (such as lowering gear or opening weapons bays) would make him hard indeed to find.
It's still hard to get real facts, but based on some things that I've seen, the radar cross-section of an F117 at a favourable angle is approximately the same as that of a duck. How close does a single duck need to be to your emitter to be seen on radar?
Seriously, though...
If an F117 pilot decided not to be seen by a particular air-search radar, he'd have a pretty good chance of not being seen.
A combination of low altititude, carefully chosen headings, and avoiding any actions that would increases his signature (such as lowering gear or opening weapons bays) would make him hard indeed to find.
It's still hard to get real facts, but based on some things that I've seen, the radar cross-section of an F117 at a favourable angle is approximately the same as that of a duck. How close does a single duck need to be to your emitter to be seen on radar?
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
I agree the pilot wasn't trying to evade the radar, but on the same altitude, route and speed, our prime radar had a harder time tracking a T114 then it did a F117, and the T114 wasn't trying to evade the radar either. So which a/c has the larger signature?
We can see birds (and track them) on some of our older radars out to 60nm. The newer radars don't pick up as much ground clutter, birds, trucks on highways, etc. I wonder if the F117 was designed to evade the newer stuff. It sure doesn't seem to evade the older stuff all that well.
Remember, we are talking about civil radar here. Most of the military prime radars are more powerful and longer range than ours.
We can see birds (and track them) on some of our older radars out to 60nm. The newer radars don't pick up as much ground clutter, birds, trucks on highways, etc. I wonder if the F117 was designed to evade the newer stuff. It sure doesn't seem to evade the older stuff all that well.
Remember, we are talking about civil radar here. Most of the military prime radars are more powerful and longer range than ours.
I don't really have answers to offer you here, since like everyone else I don't have access to classified US documents. But I can make the following suggestions...
#1. Your newer radars probably pick up less in the way of ground clutter and birds because they're designed to "not see" those things. They probably have filters built in the oxclude radar targets that are below a certain size or aren't moving at a certain minimum speed.
#2. As far as respective radar cross sections go, I don't really know. It could be that the angle between the F117 and your radar was a "sweet spot" in terms of reflections from the airframe. I'm not sure what a T114 is. Any airframe will have certain angles from which it returns very little radar energy, and angles from which it returns LOTS of energy. The F117 just has a lot more angles where it doesn't return a lot of energy.
#3. Military radars are indeed a different animal. If the F117 was designed to minimize it's signature with respect to certain wavelengths that were built into Soviet air defense radars in the 70's and 80's (because that's when it was built). Those design features may not work all that well on modern civil radars. I don't have the knowledge to make an informed statement about respective wavelengths of different systems. The one guy that I know that does have that knowledge has to be VERY careful about what he chooses to say about his "old job".
#1. Your newer radars probably pick up less in the way of ground clutter and birds because they're designed to "not see" those things. They probably have filters built in the oxclude radar targets that are below a certain size or aren't moving at a certain minimum speed.
#2. As far as respective radar cross sections go, I don't really know. It could be that the angle between the F117 and your radar was a "sweet spot" in terms of reflections from the airframe. I'm not sure what a T114 is. Any airframe will have certain angles from which it returns very little radar energy, and angles from which it returns LOTS of energy. The F117 just has a lot more angles where it doesn't return a lot of energy.
#3. Military radars are indeed a different animal. If the F117 was designed to minimize it's signature with respect to certain wavelengths that were built into Soviet air defense radars in the 70's and 80's (because that's when it was built). Those design features may not work all that well on modern civil radars. I don't have the knowledge to make an informed statement about respective wavelengths of different systems. The one guy that I know that does have that knowledge has to be VERY careful about what he chooses to say about his "old job".
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
Another possibility that I didn't mention is that the F117 might be flying in a configuration designed to provide a good radar target (or with some sort of add-on radar reflector). This might be done for two reasons:
#1. Safety. If their transponder were to fail, a truly "stealthy" aircraft would present a real hazard. Especially if the pilot were lost.
#2. Intelligence. In order to limit the spread of information about the real "stealth" performance of the F117, they might choose to artificially enlarge the radar-cross section of the aircraft when they are flying around on non-tactical operations.
Please note that all of this is pure speculation on my part.
#1. Safety. If their transponder were to fail, a truly "stealthy" aircraft would present a real hazard. Especially if the pilot were lost.
#2. Intelligence. In order to limit the spread of information about the real "stealth" performance of the F117, they might choose to artificially enlarge the radar-cross section of the aircraft when they are flying around on non-tactical operations.
Please note that all of this is pure speculation on my part.
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
Great read. Gotta love those handheld GPS units. So cheap now that there realy is no excuse to own a basic one.
As far as the radar stuff goes, we're all armchair experts. Who knows. I do wonder how rain on the skin affects visibility. I also heard that those things pick up ice like crazy. Could compromise the stealth, no?..
As far as the radar stuff goes, we're all armchair experts. Who knows. I do wonder how rain on the skin affects visibility. I also heard that those things pick up ice like crazy. Could compromise the stealth, no?..
I am new to AVCanada, but I think I can shed some light here. I am not am armchair expert, but actualy somewhat of an actual expert. I spent many years in the Airforce as an electronic inteligence analyst (specilizing in analysis of radar signal intercepts). I was rained by the top institutions in the world in this field. Of all these replies I have seen, I'd say that w squared has about the best answer. Think about it. for ATC purposes, they have to make themselves visible to radar sometimes. Go figure, an ATC guy sees them.
Wahunga!
-
monkeyspankmasterflex
- Rank 7
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:12 pm
Good read.
Here's a take on what happened:http://www.strategypage.com/dls/article ... 224417.asp
...and from CNN...
Here's a take on what happened:http://www.strategypage.com/dls/article ... 224417.asp
...and from CNN...
Silver bullett IMO.The reason it was shot down, as it turns out, was ppor mission planning. It was about the fourth time in a row an F-117 had flown that precise path in the Serbian defense apparatus, became wise to the whole plan and figured out how to spot it and more or less shot it down by eye. A little bit of luck and figuring out what the flight path was, allowed that F-117 to be shot down.
Well it doesn't have to be an "add on" reflector or flying around with the gear down. I'd lean towards an "Easy" button on the panel.Another possibility that I didn't mention is that the F117 might be flying in a configuration designed to provide a good radar target (or with some sort of add-on radar reflector).
Don't forget that a lot of ECM is actually active. Having a low signature makes it somewhat invisible to primary radar but it doesn't prevent it from broadcasting (not reflecting) a modified return wave that could make it either look further away or closer than actual. Closing at a great rate or even stationary. In theory it could just broadcast what it receives, making it look as it's got a big area.
The radar world is full of interesting possibilities.
Disclaimer: I am by no means a radar expert but shooting off an educated guess based on research and some discussions with various people (in various states of soberness)
Spokes can confirm this stuff, shoot it down, or neither confirm nor deny it
zzjayca, i talked to a F117 pilot at an airshow last year and asked how does air traffic follow you and he said while not flying in combat, the aircraft has bumps installed on each side of the plane that allows it to reflect radar. if you look at a picture you'll see what i mean... since it was those bumps that caught my curiosity at the airshow. he said without the bump installed on each side, the plane has the signature of a small bird and won't be picked up by ATC radar. if i had my pics on this computer i'd send them but i think you should see this in a photo... they are installed towards the rear on the sides where the back tapers off to the engines.
I've seen the bumps you're speaking of.
I also remember listening in on a conversation about the ECM jamming functions being reversed to produce a larger target on radar.
It's an interesting machine nonetheless..
Does anyone remember the article about the pilots trying to fly it without the flight control system? Pretty much a gong show I would not want to be a part of.
I also remember listening in on a conversation about the ECM jamming functions being reversed to produce a larger target on radar.
It's an interesting machine nonetheless..
Does anyone remember the article about the pilots trying to fly it without the flight control system? Pretty much a gong show I would not want to be a part of.
-
mellow_pilot
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: Pilot Purgatory
That's true of most modern fighters. Not many of them are stable enough to be flown by hand.Rowdy wrote:Does anyone remember the article about the pilots trying to fly it without the flight control system? Pretty much a gong show I would not want to be a part of.
Just a little side note on stealth...
Apperently the new F-22 is pretty good in the radar evasion area. As part of operational evaluations they put 2 Raptors up against 8 (thats eight) F-15 with the latest radar and trinkets. (so the story goes)
The 22's got simulated missile kills on all the opposing aircraft and were back to base without the 15s ever knowing they were there.
I guess that's what you get for $120 million a copy.
Dyslexics of the world... UNTIE!
zzjayca you're going to have some "visitors" if you post stuff like that 
I suspect the yank taxpayers wouldn't like to think their expensive toys aren't all they are advertised as being.
Bumps for ATC...uh - no. ATC relys on the transponder, not prime. No transponder usually means no clearence - even for 767.
"Active" prime returns..uh -no.
You can't trick prime radar - especially the really old stuff that used tubes. Energy out hitting something/anything = energy in and a return generated on the scope. Might be small but its there, unless it's filtered out.
As to the need for computers, I've heard some RC modellers have made flyable 117's. Don't suspect they have laptops in them for stability.
I suspect the yank taxpayers wouldn't like to think their expensive toys aren't all they are advertised as being.
Bumps for ATC...uh - no. ATC relys on the transponder, not prime. No transponder usually means no clearence - even for 767.
"Active" prime returns..uh -no.
You can't trick prime radar - especially the really old stuff that used tubes. Energy out hitting something/anything = energy in and a return generated on the scope. Might be small but its there, unless it's filtered out.
As to the need for computers, I've heard some RC modellers have made flyable 117's. Don't suspect they have laptops in them for stability.
