Hostile radar range cut on Su-35(Russian approach to Stealth

[Abbyy]

JANE'S INTERNATIONAL DEFENSE REVIEW - JANUARY 01, 2004


Russian stealth researchers have developed materials and techniques that can reduce the head-on radar cross-section (RCS) of a Sukhoi

http://forum.vif2.ru:2003/nvk/forum/files/Venik/su-35_001.jpg

Su-35 fighter by an order of magnitude, halving the range at which hostile radars can detect it. The research group - working with Sukhoi, but based at the Institute for Theoretical and Applied Electromagnetics (ITAE) at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow - has performed more than 100 hours of testing on a reduced-RCS Su-35 and has also experimented with the use of plasmas - ionized gases - to reduce RCS.

US and European aircraft manufacturers have used specially developed materials to reduce the RCS of basically non-stealthy aircraft for many years. Notable examples include the Have Glass and Have Glass II modifications to the F-16. However, Russian work in this area was undisclosed until ITAE researchers presented a paper to a conference on stealth in London in late October 2003, which was organized by the International Quality and Productivity Centre.

According to the ITAE presentation, Russian researchers have developed mathematical tools that can calculate scattering from complex configurations, such as an Su-35 carrying a full external missile load, by breaking them down into small facets and adding the effects of edge waves and surface currents. The antennas are modelled separately and then are added to the entire RCS picture.

"A problem of huge size" is how the researchers describe the Su-35 inlet, with a straight duct that provides direct visibility to the entire face of the engine compressor. The basic solution has been to apply ferro-magnetic radar absorbent material (RAM) to the compressor face and to the inlet duct walls, but this involves challenges. The researchers note: the material cannot be allowed to constrict airflow or impede the operation of anti-icing systems and must withstand high-speed airflows and temperatures up to 200ºC. The ITAE team has developed and tested coating materials that meet these standards. A layer of RAM between 0.7mm and 1.4mm thick is applied to the ducts and a 0.5mm coating is applied to the front stages of the low-pressure compressor, using a robotic spray system. The result is a 10-15dB reduction in the RCS contribution from the inlets.

The modified Su-35 also has a treated cockpit canopy which reflects radar waves, concealing the high RCS contribution from metal components in the cockpit. ITAE has developed a plasma-deposition process to deposit alternating layers of metallic and polymer materials, creating a coating that blocks radio-frequency waves, is resistant to cracking and crazing and does not trap solar heat in the cockpit. The plasma-coating process is then carried out robotically in a 22m3 vacuum chamber.

ITAE and its partners have also developed plasma-type technology for applying ceramic coatings to the exhaust and afterburner. The conference video also showed the use of hand-held sprays to apply RAM to R-27 air-to-air missiles.

ITAE has studied at least three techniques for reducing the RCS contribution of the radar antenna, in addition to the simplest method of deflecting the antenna upwards and treating or shrouding other components. One of these is to design a radome that can be switched from RF-transparent to RF-reflective. The interior of the radome would be coated with a cadmium sulphide or cadmium selenide thin-film semiconductor material which changes conductivity when illuminated with visible or ultra-violet light.

However, the problem of making such a film has not been solved.

A second technique that is also described in Western literature is to place a frequency selective surface screen in front of the antenna. This is a foil-like metal screen etched with small apertures which allow RF energy to pass within a narrow waveband, corresponding to the radar's own operating frequency. This reduces RCS, according to ITAE, but at the expense of radar performance.

However, ITAE has flight-tested a more exotic technology: the use of a low-temperature plasma screen in front of the radar antenna. The screen hardware is mounted in front of the antenna and is transparent to the radar when switched off.

When activated, the screen absorbs some incoming radar energy and reflects the rest in safe directions over all RF bands lower than the frequency of the plasma cloud. It switches on and off in tens of microseconds, according to ITAE.

In principle, this is the same as the 'plasma stealth system that was reportedly developed by the Keldysh Scientific Research Center (also part of the Academy) in 1999.

At the time, it was claimed that the system, using a 100kg generator, could reduce the RCS of any aircraft by two orders of magnitude, or 20dB. ITAE has not attempted to develop a whole-aircraft system, but researchers expressed the view that it would be difficult to apply except to a high-altitude, low-airspeed aircraft because the airstream would dissipate the plasma faster than it could be generated.

The ITAE paper also gave some indications of the direction of stealth technology for future aircraft. Test facilities include large compact indoor RCS ranges for large-scale models and outdoor ground-level ranges with short pylons that can be used to test full-size aircraft (rather than the models used for US pylon tests).

In future designs, one emphasis is on large, complex skin panels, reducing the number of gaps and mechanical fasteners in the skin

[2Sheds_Jackson]

....and if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you. When it comes to radar observability & the Sue, you simply can't polish a turd.

[seruriermarshal]

Just a test , no more message , But I hear B-2 use this technology .

[usa320]

I read a similar report about "plasma stealth" months ago, and it was ruled by some extremely educated and experience aviation folks as complete and utter BS.

[Abbyy]

I read a similar report about "plasma stealth" months ago, and it was ruled by some extremely educated and experience aviation folks as complete and utter BS.

USA simply doesn't have similar technologies. :)
Russia have only small prototypes and math models.

You're trying to imply that Jane's is producing complete BS? :)

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

I read a similar report about "plasma stealth" months ago, and it was ruled by some extremely educated and experience aviation folks as complete and utter BS.
Never ever underestimate Russian technology in my line of work we see the Russians coming out with stuff that no one else has, what's even funnier is that they say things like "we developed this in 1962 but there was no market for this product at the time" they are just full of surprises.

[Herrmannek]

I read a similar report about "plasma stealth" months ago, and it was ruled by some extremely educated and experience aviation folks as complete and utter BS.
Never ever underestimate Russian technology in my line of work we see the Russians coming out with stuff that no one else has, what's even funnier is that they say things like "we developed this in 1962 but there was no market for this product at the time" they are just full of surprises.

If Russians had that in 1962 I'm sure Germans had that in 1943 and then lost interest because of no market interest in it... jk

BTW Russians scientist can do **** alone not because they are worse than others but because there is not many of them and their resources are limited esspecialy in communism they were very limited because noone wanted to cooperate with them and share achievements(BTW I still have at home ****load of russian pirated western scientifical books)... that is the way science works and sci-fi stories about not having commercial intersts are pure BS esspecialy in Russia where idea of commercial interests didn't existed.

As for idea of plasma antiradar shield. This Idea is as old as plasma and there is nothing innovative in it...

EDIT in bold

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I read a similar report about "plasma stealth" months ago, and it was ruled by some extremely educated and experience aviation folks as complete and utter BS.

USA simply doesn't have similar technologies. :)
Russia have only small prototypes and math models.

You're trying to imply that Jane's is producing complete BS? :)

Oh come on now. This plasma mumbo jumbo has been floating around conspiracy websites since 1999. If this is from Janes...what did they do, just post some Sukhoi sales brochure? Post the link...I'm curious as to what context this is in.

IMHO, this is little more than sales talk - trying to convince investors and potential customers that the Sue can be made to look smaller than it is on radar. It is a BIG airplane.

The language of the article is classic double-speak.

ITAE has developed a plasma-deposition process to deposit alternating layers of metallic and polymer materials, creating a coating that blocks radio-frequency waves, is resistant to cracking and crazing and does not trap solar heat in the cockpit. The plasma-coating process is then carried out robotically in a 22m3 vacuum chamber..there's that plasma word. This has nothing to do with plasma-stealth, it's simply a coating. Big deal, use a spray can.


ITAE has studied at least three techniques for reducing the RCS contribution of the radar antenna, in addition to the simplest method of deflecting the antenna upwards and treating or shrouding other components. One of these is to design a radome that can be switched from RF-transparent to RF-reflective. The interior of the radome would be coated with a cadmium sulphide or cadmium selenide thin-film semiconductor material which changes conductivity when illuminated with visible or ultra-violet light.

However, the problem of making such a film has not been solved
Translation - this might work, but nobody has found a way to make this theoretical miracle film.


However, ITAE has flight-tested a more exotic technology: the use of a low-temperature plasma screen in front of the radar antenna. The screen hardware is mounted in front of the antenna and is transparent to the radar when switched off.

When activated, the screen absorbs some incoming radar energy and reflects the rest in safe directions over all RF bands lower than the frequency of the plasma cloud. It switches on and off in tens of microseconds, according to ITAE.

In principle, this is the same as the 'plasma stealth system that was reportedly developed by the Keldysh Scientific Research Center (also part of the Academy) in 1999.
Translation: we could use plasma stealth to make the Sue's radar antenna invisible. But when the system is on, it also blocks the Sue's outgoing radar. One can only wonder how a radar's sensitive receiver can withstand a 100kw "plasma cloud" only inches away. Even if this system did work (which I doubt), all it would do is make the Sue's radar antenna invisible...the rest of the airframe, including all those external missiles are not blocked to radar.


In future designs, one emphasis is on large, complex skin panels, reducing the number of gaps and mechanical fasteners in the skin
Heh heh, ever see the skin on one of these magnificent beasts up close? Looks like something from the 50's - all kinds of gaps & raised rivets. Of course they want to improve it, but this is nothting revolutionary.

Hey, I'm not taking anything away from the Russians. The Sue is an amazing aircraft & I totally dig it. And I'm sure they have all kinds of unique and innovative solutions...but don't think this is anything more than a "oh yeah, we have stealth too! Plasma stealth, which is way better than normal stealth, 'cause it has frickin' plasma, which is a neat word!" I just cringe whenever I see an obvious sales pitch being billed as something more than it is.

[GazB]

It is a BIG airplane.


And the B-2 is tiny... Size has nothing to do with RCS.

Shape and materials are what makes RCS.


This has nothing to do with plasma-stealth, it's simply a coating. Big deal, use a spray can.


Duh!!! This comes under the materials area of RCS reduction, and Plasma is a state of matter... ie ionised. The material in question is applied in an ionised form.


Translation - this might work, but nobody has found a way to make this theoretical miracle film.

Yeah, that is how theoretical physics works.. if no one has done it yet then it can't be done... :roll: rofl


Even if this system did work (which I doubt), all it would do is make the Sue's radar antenna invisible...the rest of the airframe, including all those external missiles are not blocked to radar.


A major source of radar reflection from a fighter from front on is the large antenna that reflects radar waves called the radar antenna. Reducing its reflection is fairly important.


Heh heh, ever see the skin on one of these magnificent beasts up close? Looks like something from the 50's - all kinds of gaps & raised rivets. Of course they want to improve it, but this is nothting revolutionary.


When it was designed RCS was unimportant as it was an interceptor and operated its radar all the way to the target. Rivets and gaps make no difference as the boundry layer above the skin is about 5cm, so unless the rivet is 6cm it has no effect on drag at all.

[OB Kenobi]

Plasma stealth, which is way better than normal stealth, 'cause it has frickin' plasma, which is a neat word!" I just cringe whenever I see an obvious sales pitch being billed as something more than it is.

Here you go, 2Sh*ts...

"Space-borne protective energy systems, like the deflector shields on the fictional starship U.S.S. Voyager, are on the drawing board of real-world scientists.

These "cold plasmas" -- analogs to the sophisticated defensive grids envisioned by Star Trek's creators -- are ambient-temperature, ionized gases related to those found deep within the sun’s core.

With the proper adjustments, a plasma can be made into a kind of energy mirror, reflecting back or away incoming electromagnetic waves, such as those emitted from ground-based radars. In essence, any spacecraft outfitted with this kind of plasma field would be completely cloaked from the probing attentions of radar operators.

"The idea is to deflect or absorb the energy completely," Laroussi said. "If you absorb the energy --- completely dissipating it within the plasma --- the radar doesn’t see anything. Nothing reflects back."

The U.S. Air Force allocates some $10 million a year for research geared toward satellite protection. Of that amount, $2 million is dedicated to low-temperature plasma studies."

http://www.space.com/images/h_lplas043_000724_03.jpg

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/cold_plasma_000724.html

[Herrmannek]

These "cold plasmas" -- analogs to the sophisticated defensive grids envisioned by Star Trek's creators -- are ambient-temperature, ionized gases related to those found deep within the sun’s core.

With the proper adjustments, a plasma can be made into a kind of energy mirror, reflecting back or away incoming electromagnetic waves, such as those emitted from ground-based radars. In essence, any spacecraft outfitted with this kind of plasma field would be completely cloaked from the probing attentions of radar operators.



Bouncing anything is asking for problems. plasma doesn't bounce waves it eats* them :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli:

*forgot that word... oposite to emites...

[Abbyy]

plasma doesn't bounce waves it eats* them :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli:

*forgot that word... oposite to emites...

Wrong. Partial absorption is only part of long list of effects.

[Herrmannek]

plasma doesn't bounce waves it eats* them :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli:

*forgot that word... oposite to emites...

Wrong. Partial absorption is only part of long list of effects.

but refelecting like mirror isn't how that shields works, maybe plasma disperse not absorbed radiation equaly in all directions but still reflecting isn't desired feautere...

[Abbyy]

plasma doesn't bounce waves it eats* them :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli:

*forgot that word... oposite to emites...

Wrong. Partial absorption is only part of long list of effects.

but refelecting like mirror isn't how that shields works, maybe plasma disperse not absorbed radiation equaly in all directions but still reflecting isn't desired feautere...

Also shift in spectrum of wavelengths of reflected signals exists. This also helps to avoid detection 'cause radar expecting signal with same spectrum it emitted.

[-Archon-]

In theory this is a "bright" ;) way to reduce RCS. For example a space shuttle that enters the atmosphere can not receive or send any transmittions due to the absorbing effect of a cloud of ionized air (plasma according to one definition) - hence, it works.

But if if can be applied to an aircraft in practice remains to be seen. I' don't think that it works other than on paper, but then again - prove me wrong.

[Herrmannek]

plasma doesn't bounce waves it eats* them :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli: :cantbeli:

*forgot that word... oposite to emites...

Wrong. Partial absorption is only part of long list of effects.

but refelecting like mirror isn't how that shields works, maybe plasma disperse not absorbed radiation equaly in all directions but still reflecting isn't desired feautere...

Also shift in spectrum of wavelengths of reflected signals exists. This also helps to avoid detection 'cause radar expecting signal with same spectrum it emitted.
Every kind of absorbtion does spectrum/energy kind "shifting" to follow rule of energy retain, parts of energy is stored for prolonged time in absorbing material(as chemical, cinetical energy)other part is radiated "instantly" but sometimes slower than original impulse with altered characteristics(wavelenght) or as speeded up particles ussualy after few symultanous energy state changes... but this is not reflecting and shouldn't be called that way...reflecting isn't way plasma shields works.

[Deuterium]

Do I get any college credit in physics for reading this thread?

[Herrmannek]

Do I get any college credit in physics for reading this thread?

After that lame atempt to explain that thingy only you can get is headhache...

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Posting articles about Voyager & fanciful "shields". rofl Buy the new Su-35x, now with plasma! And photon torpedoes!

The systems producing plasma "shields" on any meaningful scale are the size of a school bus. The EM emissions can prolly curl hair at 200 miles. I'm not saying that it will never happen, but the tone of the article pretty clearly suggests that this is right around the corner.

The cold hard facts are that you can't polish a turd. The Sue will never be "stealthy" - and Sukhoi knows it. But they lack funding for a new airframe....so they're throwing out this fanciful project, full of keywords, complicated sounding chemical names, exotic language...all adding up to very little.

Typical "me too!" sales brochure hype. Caveat Emptor.

[usa320]

Russia can hardly afford gas for the planes they have, dont get your panties bunched guys, they wont be fielding this stuff....

[GazB]

but still reflecting isn't desired feautere...

Both the F-117 and B-2 and F-22 rely on reflecting radar signals away from the emitting radar. The faceted nature fo the F-117 makes it clear that it is designed to reflect radar waves sideways away from a radar at the front of the aircraft. Faster computers meant that with the B-2 and F-22 curved surfaces could be designed and made to be more aerodynamic but still reflect the radar waves away from the emitting radar.


This also helps to avoid detection 'cause radar expecting signal with same spectrum it emitted.

A pulse doppler radar will be trying to detect reflected radar signals of objects that are moving... all other signals will be rejected as clutter... otherwise the reflections from the ground and other radars operating would overwhelm the radar picture.


For example a space shuttle that enters the atmosphere can not receive or send any transmittions due to the absorbing effect of a cloud of ionized air (plasma according to one definition) - hence, it works.


This is ionised gas created by friction, the plasma the russians are talking about is being created by an intense electric field.


The systems producing plasma "shields" on any meaningful scale are the size of a school bus.

The current device generating the field weighs 100kgs... is it a bus made out of Hydrogen?


I'm not saying that it will never happen, but the tone of the article pretty clearly suggests that this is right around the corner.

The first aircraft designed to use it has already started production... the Su-34 strike aircraft to replace the Su-24 Fencer.


But they lack funding for a new airframe....

They have already designed the Su-47 for the MFI project that has been selected as the next Russian medium fighter.

They have sold hundreds of Flankers to China and India and of the Russian design bureaus they probably have the most money to spend.


The Sue will never be "stealthy" - and Sukhoi knows it.

They are not comparing it to F-22s, they are just saying that its RCS has been reduced. Grow up.

[Flagg]

Enough of the rocket science talk big brains.....All I want to know is:

Will one of these plasma doohickies fit on an Aprilia Mille R Factory?

And will it prevent me from getting pulled up by the coppers?

"Your honour...there is no way the highway patrol could have clocked me at 280KPH as I was undetectable while riding in "stealth mode"."

[Herrmannek]

but still reflecting isn't desired feautere...

F-117 and B-2 and F-22 rely on reflecting radar signals away from the emitting radar. The faceted nature fo the F-117 makes it clear that it is designed to reflect radar waves sideways away from a radar at the front of the aircraft. Faster computers meant that with the B-2 and F-22 curved surfaces could be designed and made to be more aerodynamic but still reflect the radar waves away from the emitting radar.

F-117 and other stealth planes have that strange shapes not because reflecting is good thing but because reflections are not avoidable factor with current materials. Those plane are made of materials ****e to absorbing large percent of radiation or materials being transparent to radar working wavelengts(1-10mm) unabsorbed part must be reflected in most conveniant directions ussualy up or in direction other than radar who send signal. Reflecting solutions can be easily defeated by multi seeker interconected radars with can recive signals bounced from plane with were send from other radar post. Reflectiing in its meaning by any way isn't way antiradar mesures works. Its flaw nothing more

Stealth planes aren't ivnsible for other planes as their reflecting areas are optimised for ground radars...Thats why they are rarely used when enemy planes are still capable to fight back...

[OB Kenobi]

Russia can hardly afford gas for the planes they have, dont get your panties bunched guys, they wont be fielding this stuff....

You sound like the guy in the horror movie who says "Stay calm, there's nothing to worry about... " and then gets his head chopped off by the monster.

[Abbyy]

Russia can hardly afford gas for the planes they have, dont get your panties bunched guys, they wont be fielding this stuff....

You sound like the guy in the horror movie who says "Stay calm, there's nothing to worry about... " and then gets his head chopped off by the monster.

http://game.vsi.ru/cs/forum/images/smiles/eusa_clap.gifhttp://game.vsi.ru/cs/forum/images/smiles/eusa_clap.gifhttp://game.vsi.ru/cs/forum/images/smiles/eusa_clap.gifhttp://game.vsi.ru/cs/forum/images/smiles/eusa_clap.gif

Nice said :)

http://game.vsi.ru/cs/forum/images/smiles/icon_pidu.gif

[Herrmannek]

rofl
Seriously I just don't think stealth technology with plasma or without has a bright future. Planes leaves many more other traces than green dot on radar and those can be and will be used to track planes...In very near future will be some says they are already employed more conveniant, cheaper* and less ****e to damage(ussualy passive or hard to localise) means of detecting enemy in skies(IR, Sound, Spectrum analysis, electromagnetic trace etc)...Sensors will be built in "sensor farms" where defeating one kind of sensors or part of sensors will change nothing or not much in possiblity to track planes...


*cheaper - this is debatable but in some way those systems will be cheaper and probably more afordable/easier to build for poor countries than curent ones.

[2RHPZ]

Interesting ...

Interview with Sukhoi test pilot


The Tester Has a Dream...

As air force commander-in-chief, General of the Army Vladimir Mikhaylov, reported the other day, the tactical-technical task for the fifth generation aviation complex has been approved. Any airplane receives its start in the sky, passing comprehensive tests. The airmen who make them know how close theory is to practical solutions. A Krasnaya Zvezda correspondent met with Sukhoy Aviation Holding Company (AKhK) test pilot, Hero of Russia Yuriy Vashchuk.

- Yuriy Mikhaylovich, the Sukhoy AKhK was determined as the lead executor and correspondingly the lead developer of the domestic fifth generation fighter program.
How is the fifth generation airplane viewed from your place of work?

- The fifth generation airplane is a most complicated aviation complex, a peculiar flying computer. Its development is underway based on the requirements produced for this complex by the Ministry of Defense, and also taking into account he trend for the development of the world market of airplanes of a similar class. The distinguishing features of the Russian combat aircraft will be super maneuverability- the ability to make controlled flight at low speeds and high angles of attack; multirole capability- the ability to resolve missions of the destruction both of aerial and of ground targets in any weather and at any time of day or night; low observability in the optical, infrared and radar frequency ranges, and also it will be able to takeoff and sit down on short runways.

Our firm's designers are trying to create as much as possible a "smart" aircraft that will allow an airman to execute a combat mission while not being diverted by 'trivia'. For example, a failure of any kind of system occurs, a back-up switches on immediately and the airman only receives information about it. In a situation of this type he would make the same decision that is automated. So why divert attention from the flight when there is another simple way?

We want to establish a dialogue between machine and man. Upon execution of a combat mission, the airplane itself will propose several variants of actions and the right for selection will stay with the airman. Everything looks simplistic with the following example. Several targets have been detected, the complex determines the most important of them. The airman makes the decision. Then follow the suggestion, with which weapon to destroy this target. All the logical ways are being studied of which all work of a military pilot consists. Both we and abroad are attempting this. The question is who will achieve the best result.

Huge work as been done on the airplane's maneuverability. The Su-35 looks the most striking in this plan.

- In your view, how ready are we for stepping into the fifth generation?

- Everything depends on two factors. First. Right now things are difficult with the delivery of modern aircraft to Russia's air force. Sukhoy AKhK has to sell new airplanes abroad, and the profit received is invested in the continuation of developments. A cardinal change of the situation that has been created is needed.

I express the opinion of the test pilots which conforms to the point of view of the Sukhoy AKhK general director, Mikhail Pogosyan. Without serious steps for the upgrade of aircraft equipment, it is impossible to speak about the introduction of a fifth generation airplane into the forces. As early as today, both airmen and technicians must be trained for work on tomorrow's aviation complexes. It is impossible to allow a large gap between what is being used now and that equipment which will come to replace it. The flight and technical personnel are supposed to learn how to make the transition from work with the so-called needle instruments to work with a flying computer, and that, I will repeat, is what the fifth generation aviation complex will be. Upgrade is a obligatory step on the way.

- Second. The holding company is not working alone in this direction, it has many collaborators, and a lot depends on them. The main thing is how timely and qualitatively all orders will be carried out. It is not secret that the manufacturing firms can offer 'spoiled goods' or half-done developments which have not passed the proper tests. And some entirely can inflate the prices for exclusive things. As a result, the lead developer suffers, mainly in the financial plan. Therefore, only the state is able and obligated to take on itself the coordination of all operations. Then Russian, using the potential it has, will remain in the ranks of worldwide aviation powers.

- What is in your 'flight bag', what aviation equipment have you mastered?

- In my own time I have flown in DOSAAF in the aerobatic team of the Soviet Union (Russia). I graduated from the Moscow Aviation Institute. I have mastered the L-39, the MiG-15 and MiG-17 trainers, the Yak-55 and Su-26. Since 1992, I have been working at the Sukhoy firm, which paid for my training at the test pilots' school. I have mastered the MiG-21, MiG-23, Su-24, An-24 and Tu-134. At the same time Su-29 certification took place, and I had, as is said, to study without a break from production.
Then there were still the sports Su-26 and Su-31. Of course, a special page of my flying biography is the Su-35.

- How would you feel if you lifted the fifth generation airplane into the air? Are you ready for that?

- It will be the happiest moment of my life! Every airman dreams about it.

Source: 03.06.04, Krasnaya Zvezda

[DPGLAW]

From what I have seen on this thread, many others, and news reports...I would have to lean twords the opinion that this is BS..I mean Russia apparently can't even get their AGE OLD missles that they have much experience with, to launch properly. Also, they don't even have enough parts or fuel to run the planes they DO have....

They should worry about feeding, clothing, housing their soldiers and civilians first before some technology that they couldn't get off the ground due to financial restraints...I mean I remember a thread a month or so agao showing almost all their subs rusting away and sinking in some harbor.....

I just don't think that they can even get it off the ground into even very limited production with the state of affairs in that country at the moment or in the near future.

[OB Kenobi]

They should worry about feeding, clothing, housing their soldiers and civilians first before some technology that they couldn't get off the ground due to financial restraints...I mean I remember a thread a month or so agao showing almost all their subs rusting away and sinking in some harbor.....

Zvezdochka received Delta-I sub for dismantling

The Russian navy handed over its 31 years old nuclear submarine Kislovodsk to the Zvezdochka plant, ITAR-TASS reported.

2004-05-14 15:15

The US Cooperative Threat Reduction program, or CTR, will finance the dismantling works. Zvezdochka’s press secretary Nadezhda Sherbinina told ITAR-TASS that the plant received total over $60m from the CTR program what helped to establish an infrastructure for nuclear submarine dismantling and safe handling of the radioactive materials and waste. Besides, six submarines of Delta-I type have been dismantled. K-447 Kislovodsk (order no.311) was built in 1973 at the Sevmash plant in Severodvinsk, Arkhangelsk region. The submarines of this type have 139-m length, 550-m submergence depth, 26 knots speed and a crew of 120 submariners. Kislovodsk could carry 12 ballistic missiles of SS-N-12 type.

[Sergei]

From what I have seen on this thread, many others, and news reports...I would have to lean twords the opinion that this is BS..I mean Russia apparently can't even get their AGE OLD missles that they have much experience with, to launch properly. Also, they don't even have enough parts or fuel to run the planes they DO have....

They should worry about feeding, clothing, housing their soldiers and civilians first before some technology that they couldn't get off the ground due to financial restraints...I mean I remember a thread a month or so agao showing almost all their subs rusting away and sinking in some harbor.....

I just don't think that they can even get it off the ground into even very limited production with the state of affairs in that country at the moment or in the near future.

Besides feeding, clothing, housing and other important stuff for your belly, there should be always a place for research and development otherwise the country has no future, and I applaud the Russian scientists for not stopping at what they've got and continue with the researching effort. I am more than sure that they will produce a lot of interesting gadgets in the near future.

[perdurabo]

Sierioza has right country that dosent put money into R&D (Reserch and Development) is going backwards.
BTW Russian scientist are very good so maybe they will evelope something intresting.

[Herrmannek]

But Russia could spend money on better ideas :). This has no future even this will work...

[ArtofPain]

I read a similar report about "plasma stealth" months ago, and it was ruled by some extremely educated and experience aviation folks as complete and utter BS.
Never ever underestimate Russian technology in my line of work we see the Russians coming out with stuff that no one else has, what's even funnier is that they say things like "we developed this in 1962 but there was no market for this product at the time" they are just full of surprises.

If Russians had that in 1962 I'm sure Germans had that in 1943 and then lost interest because of no market interest in it... jk

BTW Russians scientist can do **** alone not because they are worse than others but because there is not many of them and their resources are limited esspecialy in communism they were very limited because noone wanted to cooperate with them and share achievements(BTW I still have at home ****load of russian pirated western scientifical books)... that is the way science works and sci-fi stories about not having commercial intersts are pure BS esspecialy in Russia where idea of commercial interests didn't existed.

As for idea of plasma antiradar shield. This Idea is as old as plasma and there is nothing innovative in it...

Sorry my crudeness, you said a ton of BS! About resourses to research: in USSR scientist may get so many as the wish. We've got dozens of Naukograds here. Just lack of money since 1991 made stagnation.

[Abbyy]

Polish folks always produce BS. Anyway BS is better than **** though both smells very similar :)

[Herrmannek]

I read a similar report about "plasma stealth" months ago, and it was ruled by some extremely educated and experience aviation folks as complete and utter BS.
Never ever underestimate Russian technology in my line of work we see the Russians coming out with stuff that no one else has, what's even funnier is that they say things like "we developed this in 1962 but there was no market for this product at the time" they are just full of surprises.

If Russians had that in 1962 I'm sure Germans had that in 1943 and then lost interest because of no market interest in it... jk

BTW Russians scientist can do **** alone not because they are worse than others but because there is not many of them and their resources are limited esspecialy in communism they were very limited because noone wanted to cooperate with them and share achievements(BTW I still have at home ****load of russian pirated western scientifical books)... that is the way science works and sci-fi stories about not having commercial intersts are pure BS esspecialy in Russia where idea of commercial interests didn't existed.

As for idea of plasma antiradar shield. This Idea is as old as plasma and there is nothing innovative in it...

Sorry my crudeness, you said a ton of BS! About resourses to research: in USSR scientist may get so many as the wish. We've got dozens of Naukograds here. Just lack of money since 1991 made stagnation.

You didn't understood me... There are resources and resources.. Money are one of them and its obvious you don't have much of that at the time, in commie era you lacked resource called cooperation, you had to steal or invent thing people in free countreis developed and shared. You will agree with me that russian scientis aren't more than 10% of scientists in general.. so 10 Russian\Demolude scientists have to do work of 90 free world ones or steal that knowledge because noone wanted/was allowed to share heir job with them. Even you had twice better scientist you still couldn't follow Free world...
My parents are scientist(chemists), and they cooperate with russian ones. We have advanced equipment bought in Israel, Germany, USA... russians can't afford them, Rusia has lots of expensive
chemicals for cheap :) ... And this is way science works... Not matter how you try and how many money you will put without external science you will loose...
As for plasma shield I didn't said Russians couldn't develope it alone, my post was of general nature.

[GazB]

F-117 and other stealth planes have that strange shapes not because reflecting is good thing but because reflections are not avoidable factor with current materials.

Radar reflections are unavoidable with any known materials that you can make jet engines out of. Even if the entire airframe was completely invisible to all radar frequencies that would just mean that the radar signal would hit the engines or the pilots belt buckle or whatever. By shaping the aircraft to deflect the radar signals away from the radar they came from you are basically becoming impossible to track or detect by that radar.


Reflecting solutions can be easily defeated by multi seeker interconected radars with can recive signals bounced from plane with were send from other radar post.

Bi polar radars (ie with seperate transmit and receive antenna that are seperated by significant distances) are not really the answer as the reflected signals are fine spiky points of energy instead of broad beams that can easily be detected. In other words knowing where to put the transmitter and the recievers would basically mean you would have to actually know where the target is and which angle it will deflect the energy to. You also need some serious computing power to determine what reflection came from where, when it was sent, what it hit and where the thing that it hit is now. Not an easy task.


Stealth planes aren't ivnsible for other planes as their reflecting areas are optimised for ground radars...Thats why they are rarely used when enemy planes are still capable to fight back...

Most weapons like AMRAAM, or SARH BVR AAMs rely on the radar reflection of the target. If the stealth jet is an F-117 with no armament except for a couple of laser guided bombs the an enemt fighter is a serious threat if it can close in an engage you with cannon or IR guided missiles. If the stealth jet is an F-22 that can fire AMRAAMs at you but you can't fire similar weapons back at it then you have one serious advantage that should give you very good scores in AA combat.


In very near future will be some says they are already employed more conveniant, cheaper* and less ****e to damage(ussualy passive or hard to localise) means of detecting enemy in skies(IR, Sound, Spectrum analysis, electromagnetic trace etc)...Sensors will be built in "sensor farms" where defeating one kind of sensors or part of sensors will change nothing or not much in possiblity to track planes...


Plasma stealth will not make any thing invincible, but for the foreseeable future most anti aircraft systems use radar in some form or another... be it in an AWACS aircraft, or in the homing head of a missile.


BS..I mean Russia apparently can't even get their AGE OLD missles that they have much experience with, to launch properly.

Which missiles? The last few tests have gone well. They had a problem with two missiles a few years ago... how long are you going to hold that up as normal? Remember the Gulf War? During Desert Storm it took an average of 32 Patriots to intercept each Scud and even then many were not intercepted. Are we to assume the US SAM AD network is crap?


Also, they don't even have enough parts or fuel to run the planes they DO have....


Why do you think that? They have just started a major upgrade of their Flankers and their Helicopter fleet is getting night and all weather capability for the first time. Very strange they are fitting million dollar radars to their fighters and very expensive TI sights to their helos if they can't afford fuel.

Sorry to say this but anyone who suggests they can't afford fuel for their aircraft is not very well informed. Russia exports fuel.


But Russia could spend money on better ideas . This has no future even this will work...

Are you kidding?

The problems of generating an electromagnetic field around an object are what is stopping our exploring of space. One solar flare or solar storm during a trip in open space would doom any human inside a spacecraft outside the protection of the earths magnetic field. A better understanding of electric fields might even save mankind... there is a theory that the Earths magnetic pole changes every so often... while it is changing the Earth gets a burst of solar radiation that might be responsible for the mass extinctions we have always blamed meteorites for. Having your own EM field might be very important in the future.

[GazB]

but this is not reflecting and shouldn't be called that way...reflecting isn't way plasma shields works.

Plasma shields don't work by reflection but are made more effective by reflection. ie in the absolute worst case... a flat surface is covered by a plasma shield and a radar is pointed at the flat surface that reflects the signal straight back to the radar. The radar signal leaves the radar, passes through the shield and is partially absorbed... the energy that gets through hits the flat surface and is reflected right back at the radar... but it passes through the plasma shield again and again is partially absorbed.

If the plasma shield absorbs half the energy that goes through it then the radar will receieve a signal 1/4 of what is would be expecting (going through twice it is reduced to 50% the first time and to 25% going back through).

Radar signals already dramatically reduce in power over distance travelled. For smaller radars like those in BVR missiles the problem is far worse as power levels are lower and the antenna sizes are very small.

[-Archon-]

Originally posted by GazB
Which missiles? The last few tests have gone well. They had a problem with two missiles a few years ago... how long are you going to hold that up as normal? Remember the Gulf War? During Desert Storm it took an average of 32 Patriots to intercept each Scud and even then many were not intercepted. Are we to assume the US SAM AD network is crap?


13 years of developing robotics with new hardware and new algoritms should have a pretty decent impact on how well these systems perform, shouldn't it? ;)

New computers and higher order algoritms results in better precision and a smaller computional error. So I don't think it was luck that the tests with the missile defence are going well.

[usa320]

Both the F-117 and B-2 and F-22 rely on reflecting radar signals away from the emitting radar. The faceted nature fo the F-117 makes it clear that it is designed to reflect radar waves sideways away from a radar at the front of the aircraft. Faster computers meant that with the B-2 and F-22 curved surfaces could be designed and made to be more aerodynamic but still reflect the radar waves away from the emitting radar.



This is incorrect...

The RAM skin on the F-117 and B-2, combined with the shape of the aircraft, are designed to ABSORB radar waves, not reflect them or bounce them sideways, forwards, or anywhere else... There are still small amounts of reflection, but so little, that in the case of the F-117, it shows up the size of a large bird.

The Plasma thing has been debated billions of times at flying sites i visit...and its been ruled impractical, impossible and ineffective.

The Plasma would reduce the Su-35's RCS, but it doesnt address the issue of Heat siganature, which on the Su, is quite large, both because of the large, afterburning engines, as well as the heat caused by supersonic flight and stress on the airframe. Another thing to consider- the Su series of planes (and most Russian planes for that matter) are EXTREMELY loud. They could be heard miles away, especially if they are flying at mach speeds.

The F-117A on the other hand, as well as the B-2, are shaped to reduce IR emissions drastically. They are fitted with "vents" over the air intakes that reduce heat emissions from the engines.

Both aircraft are high subsonic aircraft, meaning they can fly up to 450, hell maybe even 500 knots, but remain slow enough to not produce and alerting sonic boom.

They also use special high-bypass turbofans that produce very little noise... you can barely hear an F-117 until it is to late.

The F-22 on the other hand, its shape and materials will reduce RCS, but IMHO the main thing that will keep the F-22 stealthy will end up being its ECM system...which very little is known about... and is likely to be given EXCESSIVE upgrades as time goes on.

[Seiyuuki]

Russians offer radical stealth device for export

"A Russian scientific research organisation is to offer for export a 'bolt-on' stealth device that it claims renders non-stealthy aircraft practically invisible to radar. The system, which envelops the aircraft in a cloak of ionised gas known as a plasma, is said to be fully developed, with work on a "third-generation visibility-reduction system" under way.

Keldysh NITs (Nauchno-Issledovatelskiy Tsentr or Scientific Research Centre) is making the claims. According to its director, Anatoliy Koroteyev, the system weighs less than 100kg and consumes little more than several dozen kW of power.

Given the state of the Russian economy, analysts consider it unlikely that any of NITs' work has been applied to Russian Air Force aircraft. According to Koroteyev, however, the system will soon be offered for export.

By installing the system, a typical aircraft radar cross-section (RCS) might be cut "by more than 100 times", Keldysh NITs officials said. This would be much the same RCS as dedicated US stealth aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-117 stealth fighter and the Northrop Grumman B-2 stealth bomber.

The claims are given credence by corroborating information on the status of Russian aerospace plasma research acquired by Jane's Defence Weekly last year. Russian work in the use of plasmas that purported to reduce aircraft drag by as much as 30% was collated by British Aerospace (BAe) in the mid-1990s. BAe has since been trying to verify the Russian claims in experiments carried out jointly with the UK Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) and the UK Ministry of Defence (JDW 17 June 1998).

One of the spin-offs of 'plasma aerodynamics', Russian officials told BAe, was that it vastly reduced an aircraft's RCS. The absorption of radio waves by plasmas is well known as the communications black-out that a space vehicle encounters on re-entry is caused by the shielding effects of plasma. This builds naturally in front of the spacecraft as it hits the Earth's atmosphere and shocks the air to high temperature.

The same principle applies to the absorption of radar energy. Although the aircraft would appear to glow like a lightbulb, using plasma generators all around the airframe, it would be almost invisible on a radar screen, Russian officials maintain.

In the opinion of designers at Mikoyan and Sukhoi, the expense of all-embracing low-observable technology as applied in the US Air Force's F-117 and B-2 outweighs its effectiveness. Russians prefer to stress the 'balance' achieved in their latest-generation of fighter designs between aerodynamic efficiency and stealth. The Mikoyan 1-44 and Sukhoi S-37 technology demonstrators, both of which have been rolled out in the past 18 months, are supposed to make use of radar-absorbent paint and materials but are short of inherent stealth features.

Keldysh NITs said that "first- and second-" generation plasma-generators had been tested on the ground and in flight. The centre is working on a third-generation system "based on new physical principles", a possible reference to the use of electrostatic energy around an airframe to reduce RCS. Others believe the Russians could be attempting to duplicate secret work under way in the USA to make aircraft invisible to the human eye by using 'smart skins' that mimic their background."

You can't access the article online unless you have a subscription to Jane's Defense Weekly. Since someone kindly ask for proof of Jane's mentioning such thing, I type it up for your reading pleasure.

You guys read the "Smart Skin" thread? Frankly, if that it's a potential, I say plasma stealth, or plasma for that matter is fair game, we already got an ion engine on a satellite and a few years ago, that was nothing more than a Star Wars terminology.

[GazB]

The RAM skin on the F-117 and B-2, combined with the shape of the aircraft, are designed to ABSORB radar waves, not reflect them or bounce them sideways, forwards, or anywhere else... There are still small amounts of reflection, but so little, that in the case of the F-117, it shows up the size of a large bird.

So why the faceted shape of the F-117 at a time when computing power could only calculate radar reflections off flat surfaces? And now the special curves and sawtooth edges on the B2 and the F22 now that computng power has increased? Surely if it was materials and coatings then they could have made the f-15 a stealth plane.

The reality is that the F-117 technology level mostly deflected radar waves away from the source radar. B2 and F22 have better materials and coatings but still deflect radar waves away from the source radar.


The Plasma thing has been debated billions of times at flying sites i visit...and its been ruled impractical, impossible and ineffective.


And of course flying sites are where all the theoretical physicists hang out...

Look at the article above posted in Janes. Note in the article it mentions the "recently revealed" S-37 and Mig- 1.42. How many years old does that make this article?
The first aircraft to be fitted operationally with the Plasma stealth device (Built in... not a pod) will be the Su-34 FULLBACK, the replacement for the Su-24 strike aircraft. It is scheduled to enter service in 2006. Initial low rate production has already started.


The Plasma would reduce the Su-35's RCS, but it doesnt address the issue of Heat siganature, which on the Su, is quite large, both because of the large, afterburning engines, as well as the heat caused by supersonic flight and stress on the airframe.

You mentioned "billions" of conversations on aircraft websites... you didn't notice on those websites that modern fighters rarely if ever exceed the speed of sound in real use? The only exceptions are the ones designed especially for speed like the Mig-25 and Mig-31, and now the new F22 in super cruise mode.

Even assuming for a few moments that the Su-35 did go supersonic, what is the range of an IR guided Sidewinder missile and what is the range of an R-77 or R-77M medium range active radar homing AAM? We are talking 15km for the IR missile and 50km for the radar homing one. Engaging an Eagle the Flanker can fire at 50km but the Eagle must close to fire an IR guided missile because the plasma stealth means his AMRAAMs won't lock the Flanker. A bit of an advantage you think?


Another thing to consider- the Su series of planes (and most Russian planes for that matter) are EXTREMELY loud. They could be heard miles away, especially if they are flying at mach speeds.


Umm, first of all they would rarely exceed the speed of sound... and even if they did what are you going to shoot them down with? How many sound guided missiles are there? Maybe you think you could get him with a torpedo?


The F-117A on the other hand, as well as the B-2, are shaped to reduce IR emissions drastically. They are fitted with "vents" over the air intakes that reduce heat emissions from the engines.

But with IIR seekers they have to be the exact same temperature as the air around them to be invisible... and they are not the same temperature as the freezing cold high altitude air... which is why the Thermal sight on the Rapier 2000 battery at Farnborough easily tracked a B-2. Most fighters with IRSTs would also be able to track them and being bombers they would likely be brought down by cannon fire. The F22 on the other hand is a much more formidible aircraft.


Both aircraft are high subsonic aircraft, meaning they can fly up to 450, hell maybe even 500 knots, but remain slow enough to not produce and alerting sonic boom.


Yup, and at the heights they fly at they would be undetectible with sound detection equipment. With radar however... especially metric wave radar they would be relatively easy to spot... not many insects at 40,000ft doing 400 Knots...


The F-22 on the other hand, its shape and materials will reduce RCS, but IMHO the main thing that will keep the F-22 stealthy will end up being its ECM system...which very little is known about... and is likely to be given EXCESSIVE upgrades as time goes on.

Like the cancelled Commanche the F-22 will have minimal ECM. ECM is ACTIVE... you can't get less stealthy than an aircraft emitting jamming signals... you might as well be emitting radar signals... and how stealthy would that be? It would be like an SSN sailing around with active sonar blasting out every few seconds.

The F22 will rely on its high speed and high altitude plus the fact that normal radar guided (ie long range) AAMs won't lock on to it and it can detect enemy aircraft before they can detect it to fire AMRAAMs first and hopefully destroy the enemy aircraft at long range before it knows the F22 is even there. (The first warning the target will get is when the AMRAAM switches on its own radar at about 15km range to intercept it.)

[JS]

But when the system is on, it also blocks the Sue's outgoing radar. One can only wonder how a radar's sensitive receiver can withstand a 100kw "plasma cloud" only inches away.

If the system is ON, Su does not need a radar coz working radar on the plane makes it visible. It's one of the two - you are using radar, or you are stealth. Switch one ON means switch the other OFF.

[tuckerhat]

GazB, when I have more time I'll dig up the info but for now...

stealth fools radar by deflection and absorption. a crucial similarity between the f-117 and f-22 is the lack of RIGHT ANGLES.

ok i found some more info:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread71978/pg1


bad stuff:
1) Gaps and Breaks in the surface
2) Unshielded cockpits
3) External weapons
4) Exposed Engines
5) Large right angled tail surfaces
6) Right Angle wing design

fixes:
1) Shielded cockpits
2) No seams or gaps in the skin of the ship
3) No right angles on the tail surfaces
4) Having angled wings that direct the radar waves away from the surface rather than reflecting them.
5) Having its design by angular plates that reduce specular reflections and diffract radar waves into space
6) Screens cover engine ducts to prevent radar waves from entering, amplifying, reflecting and going back. These screens are similar to the screens used in your microwave ovens.
7) Serrated waves diffract radar waves away from the radar antenna.

*taken from http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/text2-22-2004-50858.asp

[Durandal]

I remember when the Russians were supposedly on the verge of discovering Cold Fusion.

[GazB]

I remember when the Russians were supposedly on the verge of discovering Cold Fusion.

Only if you believe the scripts from hollywood movies... that one was "The Saint" I believe... and of course it was developed in the west and stolen by the Russians of course.


2Sheds_Jackson wrote:
But when the system is on, it also blocks the Sue's outgoing radar. One can only wonder how a radar's sensitive receiver can withstand a 100kw "plasma cloud" only inches away.


Perhaps the same way they survive being immersed in the Earths enormous magnetic field that is powerful enough to bend the 900km/s solar wind of radiation that would otherwise hit us and wipe out all life on Earth in seconds and most life within about 100m of the surface of any body of water.

JS is quite right... don't thnk of it as an attempt to create a stealth aircraft... it is really an ECM device that protects you from all radar guided weapons. It is no coincidence that the first aircraft to carry it operataionally is a Strike aircraft.

tuckerhat
That is a good list, but you need to add that the only way to make weapons stealthy (as opposed to low observable) is internal carriage when using current American techniques. If Plasma stealth works then external carriage of weapons might be possible.

There are a much wider range of applications for plasma stealth too. Uses have been mentioned by the makers include to protect the periscopes of subs from radar detection, through to fitting them to the warheads of ICBMs to penetrate almost any ABM system.

To make the point about shape even clearer if you look at a Russian SAM called an SA-6 Kub. They now use them as an aerial target. When fitted with the normal semi transparent nosecone the Radar cross section is about 1m. In other words the flat antenna area reflects the equivelent radar energy of 1m square. With a sheet metal nose cone the RCS reduces to 0.1-0.3m square as the shape that reflects the radar signal reflects it more sideways than the flat surface of the antenna area.

Fitting a concave surface called a Luneberg Lense the RCS can be 3-5m square (to mimic a medium to large sized fighter).

The reality is that few modern aircraft have flat surfaces facing forward except their radar antenna and in action it could be turned to one side to prevent a large radar return. The careful redesign and reshaping to reduce RCS to stealth levels require very very precise design and manufacture and careful treatment and use. This makes it almost impossible to retrofit Stealth to existing aircraft and it makes stealth aircraft expensive and maintainence intensive. If this plasma stealth really does what it promises to do it will make stealth much more widespread and affordable... and flexible in that external loads will be possible etc.

[Durandal]

Only if you believe the scripts from hollywood movies... that one was "The Saint" I believe... and of course it was developed in the west and stolen by the Russians of course.

Not hardly. The Saint was what, released in the mid-90s? People were talking about it in the 80s. Several scientific journals, if I recall correctly there was even some mainstream stuff, Time Magazine back then.

[aartamen]

As far as the failed missile tests go, there were several (2-3 out of 4) missiles that went seriously astray or did not exit the launch tubes during a fleet exercise this year. Putin was present. Big embarassment for all concerned. That was about the same time the Russians declared that their new warheads could not be intercepted.

[usa320]

I aint gonna argue with gazB no more, ive spent years researching aircraft, and he clearly has not.

Bottom line is Plasma Stealth= NOT FEASIBLE.

[Herrmannek]

Bi polar radars (ie with seperate transmit and receive antenna that are seperated by significant distances) are not really the answer as the reflected signals are fine spiky points of energy instead of broad beams that can easily be detected. In other words knowing where to put the transmitter and the recievers would basically mean you would have to actually know where the target is and which angle it will deflect the energy to. You also need some serious computing power to determine what reflection came from where, when it was sent, what it hit and where the thing that it hit is now. Not an easy task.

Being not easy doesn't mean impossible... I wasn't talking about strict bipolar radars but "multipolar" ones or "areail".... working similiar to scentific telescopes where data from large amounts of small radio telescopes is merged to see things not visible by one small telescope but like super duper radar.... also with use of other medium seekers conected to system... It sounds terribly expensive... but whole idea is based on that this systems will be build on non expensive components interconected into distributed network by comercialy available computing and network components...

[aartamen]

Which would be terrifically susceptible to sabotage and attack.

[Herrmannek]

Which would be terrifically susceptible to sabotage and attack.

Do you can kill internet, sabotage it or do any harm? Its virtualy impossible. Same with that systems. They will be much more less ****e to any stopages, failures, attacks, counter mesures than systems we know now.

[aartamen]

First of all I-net's servers are taken down on a daily basis. Also whole IP's a slowed down to a crawl. Which might or not have bearing on a distributed radar network idea. But, it will be difficult to guard many more installations against a SF attack, there will be a lot more to camo and hide, etc. This system will be very complex and easier to interfere with than a single radar site. Yet it's goal is the same - track one plane or the same group of planes. You get a lot more hardware located all over the countryside in order to do the same job. You need to have antennae in the specific locations or the network is holed. And does not do the job. And there's hardly any mobility to this setup. Plus it is at least as vulnerable to the antiradiation attacks following a false targets wave. In the age of stealth ground-based radar is becoming obsolete.

[Herrmannek]

First of all I-net's servers are taken down on a daily basis. Also whole IP's a slowed down to a crawl. Which might or not have bearing on a distributed radar network idea. But, it will be difficult to guard many more installations against a SF attack, there will be a lot more to camo and hide, etc. This system will be very complex and easier to interfere with than a single radar site. Yet it's goal is the same - track one plane or the same group of planes. You get a lot more hardware located all over the countryside in order to do the same job. You need to have antennae in the specific locations or the network is holed. And does not do the job. And there's hardly any mobility to this setup. Plus it is at least as vulnerable to the antiradiation attacks following a false targets wave. In the age of stealth ground-based radar is becoming obsolete.

And thats the point: In worse case realy unprobable somebody can kill, conquer, or do anything he want with exacly 1/3 and ussualy even more % of the sensors and net is still is working properly... If you will have 1000 of them scatered on your teritory no world SF will be able to destroy that system without nuking flat your teritory. also hacking system will demand hacking all 1/3 of the components( secured with last secirity algorithms making hacking almost impossible). No one will have to guard that stations, only replace broken ones with new ones... few thousands of network enabled desktop computers with "aditional pheriferials" isn't thing armys can't buy.... Also you don't ride of older systems just plug them into net so they could coperate...