Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
plz watch this documentary very intresting how the usa got stealth tech from russia
+15
havok
Singular_Transform
Isos
GarryB
miketheterrible
moskit
Werewolf
jhelb
max steel
Mindstorm
Pugnax
medo
SOC
TR1
ricky123
19 posters
Russian Stealth Technology
ricky123- Posts : 221
Points : 325
Join date : 2012-08-21
GarryB- Posts : 39168
Points : 39666
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
More accurately the US was working on stealth, but their work was very slow and very hit and miss.
They would build a model and then test it, and then redesign the model and test it again. They understood the basics of RCS and there were obvious things they could do, but mostly it was just largely guesswork.
What the Russians did, or one particular Russian did was create a mathematical model that explains RCS, what creates it and how to minimise it.
This mathematical model meant that the US engineers could design based on proper calculations, so with the use of computers they could test hundreds or even thousands of shapes and designs without having to go through the process of building a model and testing it in a radar range.
The advent of super computers further helped so instead of simple faceted models like the F-117, they could develop much more complex shapes that included curves yet still remained stealthy.
They would build a model and then test it, and then redesign the model and test it again. They understood the basics of RCS and there were obvious things they could do, but mostly it was just largely guesswork.
What the Russians did, or one particular Russian did was create a mathematical model that explains RCS, what creates it and how to minimise it.
This mathematical model meant that the US engineers could design based on proper calculations, so with the use of computers they could test hundreds or even thousands of shapes and designs without having to go through the process of building a model and testing it in a radar range.
The advent of super computers further helped so instead of simple faceted models like the F-117, they could develop much more complex shapes that included curves yet still remained stealthy.
ricky123- Posts : 221
Points : 325
Join date : 2012-08-21
i wish russia could have taken advantage of this .the world would have been a better place 
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-07
ricky123 wrote:i wish russia could have taken advantage of this .the world would have been a better place
The USSR was no good cookie either.
SOC- Posts : 565
Points : 608
Join date : 2011-09-14
Age : 46
Location : Indianapolis
ricky123 wrote:i wish russia could have taken advantage of this .the world would have been a better place
There are precisely zero examples of cases where airborne VLO technology has enabled the US to do something it couldn't or wouldn't have done otherwise. It's been used to make some things easier, but they'd have been done anyway.
Unless Russia and the US are going to war with each other directly, Russia's use or non-use of airborne VLO technology has no bearing on anything. And if they are going to war, it won't really matter anyway as that will be an nuclear exchange.
GarryB- Posts : 39168
Points : 39666
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
There are precisely zero examples of cases where airborne VLO technology has enabled the US to do something it couldn't or wouldn't have done otherwise. It's been used to make some things easier, but they'd have been done anyway.
Unless Russia and the US are going to war with each other directly, Russia's use or non-use of airborne VLO technology has no bearing on anything. And if they are going to war, it won't really matter anyway as that will be an nuclear exchange.
X2
And with the added factor that stealth is expensive... to design, to build, to operate, and to keep secret.
It is also a bit of a pandoras box because although stealth is useful to the US... it would also be very very useful to the enemies of the US that can afford it.
Without the F-22 and F-35 there likely would be little need for the PAK FA.
Because of the F-22 and F-35 there will be a PAK FA which means the west has created a situation where Russia and India will have aircraft superior to most of their existing fleets of non stealthy legasy aircraft.
Without the F-22 and F-35 both the US and Europe could have given their existing aircraft upgrades and relied on the fact that they have a full, well equipped and trained force with all the little force multipliers that make them even more capable and could have continued for a couple of decades with superior capability to anyone they are likely to come up against in real combat (where the result will not be determined by nukes).
Instead they have a few F-22s and lots of plans for thousands of F-35s which may or may not be realised, but the potential for who knows how many PAK FA and FFGA aircraft.
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-07
Well as things stand right now, I find it exceedingly hard to believe PAK-FA and derivative numbers will come anywhere close to the numbers the US and allied nations will operate.
Just a simple game of budgets and numbers.
Just a simple game of budgets and numbers.
GarryB- Posts : 39168
Points : 39666
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I agree completely, but the problem now for the US and her allies is that previously they could probably have just kept F-117s and perhaps B-2s and a limited number of F-22s for homeland defence and I rather think India and Russia would have found it hard to justify having hundreds of PAK FA/FFGA type aircraft themselves.
F-35s in mass production however will likely require a force of at least 250 PAK FAs into the mid to late 2020s, and will require a level of quality that will likely give them a significant edge because a large majority of USAF aircraft will be level one standard but those sold to US allies will not be so well equipped and not so capable.
There are no current plans for 1,000 PAK FAs and I rather doubt there ever will be, but as their aircraft age they will need replacement, so I suspect a smaller cheaper mass production 5th gen fighter would be on the cards.
To put it in terms of computers in the 1980s there was the Amiga 500 computer that was a pretty good games machine for the time. It had an old Motorolla 68000 CPU but had custom graphics chips for graphics performance that was way ahead of IBM clones and indeed Macs of the day.
The point is that the Amiga could do pretty much anything you needed it to do, though today it would be slow and obsolete. Rebuilding an Amiga now with modern components you could probably create a super Amiga the size of a palm computer for a fraction of the original cost. The original Amiga had a floppy disk and you could attach a side mounted SCSI hard drive with a capacity of maybe 10MB. The entire operating system was on 2 x 880K floppy disks and RAM was 512K as standard, but if you added the hard drive there was extra space for about 8MB or so.
The important feature however is focus.
Making a new Amiga now could lead to simply trying to change it into a standard android driven palmtop.
This relates to aircraft because in the future when the Russian AF decides it wants to replace its non stealthy aircraft with stealthy aircraft if they try to make it a super plane like the US has with the F-35 it will end up over weight and expensive... which is the total opposite of what it was supposed to be.
Of course rather than trying to recreate an old Amiga it makes rather more sense to simply buy a playstation portable or equivalent.
The key to any new PAK FA jnr is to keep it small and light... it doesn't need to be able to carry enormous weapon loads thousands of kms... a good engine, reasonable level of stealth, good sensors, and sophisticated effective weapons is all that is needed.
Right now the situation is that the F-22 spends most of the time on the ground and they don't seem actually very keen to use it. The F-35 is bogged down with weight issues and cost issues and will likely be delayed, but because of its existence necessary upgrades and improvements to existing aircraft are not being implemented.
F-35s in mass production however will likely require a force of at least 250 PAK FAs into the mid to late 2020s, and will require a level of quality that will likely give them a significant edge because a large majority of USAF aircraft will be level one standard but those sold to US allies will not be so well equipped and not so capable.
There are no current plans for 1,000 PAK FAs and I rather doubt there ever will be, but as their aircraft age they will need replacement, so I suspect a smaller cheaper mass production 5th gen fighter would be on the cards.
To put it in terms of computers in the 1980s there was the Amiga 500 computer that was a pretty good games machine for the time. It had an old Motorolla 68000 CPU but had custom graphics chips for graphics performance that was way ahead of IBM clones and indeed Macs of the day.
The point is that the Amiga could do pretty much anything you needed it to do, though today it would be slow and obsolete. Rebuilding an Amiga now with modern components you could probably create a super Amiga the size of a palm computer for a fraction of the original cost. The original Amiga had a floppy disk and you could attach a side mounted SCSI hard drive with a capacity of maybe 10MB. The entire operating system was on 2 x 880K floppy disks and RAM was 512K as standard, but if you added the hard drive there was extra space for about 8MB or so.
The important feature however is focus.
Making a new Amiga now could lead to simply trying to change it into a standard android driven palmtop.
This relates to aircraft because in the future when the Russian AF decides it wants to replace its non stealthy aircraft with stealthy aircraft if they try to make it a super plane like the US has with the F-35 it will end up over weight and expensive... which is the total opposite of what it was supposed to be.
Of course rather than trying to recreate an old Amiga it makes rather more sense to simply buy a playstation portable or equivalent.
The key to any new PAK FA jnr is to keep it small and light... it doesn't need to be able to carry enormous weapon loads thousands of kms... a good engine, reasonable level of stealth, good sensors, and sophisticated effective weapons is all that is needed.
Right now the situation is that the F-22 spends most of the time on the ground and they don't seem actually very keen to use it. The F-35 is bogged down with weight issues and cost issues and will likely be delayed, but because of its existence necessary upgrades and improvements to existing aircraft are not being implemented.
SOC- Posts : 565
Points : 608
Join date : 2011-09-14
Age : 46
Location : Indianapolis
GarryB wrote:F-35s in mass production however will likely require a force of at least 250 PAK FAs into the mid to late 2020s
With 100 Nebo-M kits and expanding numbers of S-400s entering service, the only reason for 250 PAK FAs is because you want to be able to say you can counter an airplane with an airplane.
ricky123- Posts : 221
Points : 325
Join date : 2012-08-21
what i really meant was if usa dint get that tech .most prob usa wouldnt have been the only super power it wouldnt have the kind of influence it has now ....
also i agree with most of the things gary said .
india and russia willmake 1000 pakfa 600 of them will be divided between india and russia while 400 are for export. also india has its own AMCA project .if india is able to build a good fighter .i dont see any reason why wont russia buy that as well ..
and we should not forget brazil they would be intrested in this too. i think they already want the pakfa
also i agree with most of the things gary said .
india and russia willmake 1000 pakfa 600 of them will be divided between india and russia while 400 are for export. also india has its own AMCA project .if india is able to build a good fighter .i dont see any reason why wont russia buy that as well ..
and we should not forget brazil they would be intrested in this too. i think they already want the pakfa
SOC- Posts : 565
Points : 608
Join date : 2011-09-14
Age : 46
Location : Indianapolis
ricky123 wrote:what i really meant was if usa dint get that tech .most prob usa wouldnt have been the only super power it wouldnt have the kind of influence it has now ....
And my point is that yes, it would still have turned out this way. Stealth is a fun toy to play with and very useful in the right environment, but I've never heard of a military operation being cancelled because they couldn't use stealth, or more to the point we haven't done anything that has been so reliant on stealth that its absence would equate to failure. In fact, the 1986 Libya bombing originally considered the F-117, but they decided to use the F-111Fs and carrier-based jets for security. Take stealth out of the 1991 Iraq war, and you'd have seen more TLAM firings the first night. Take it out of Yugoslavia, and all that you have is one less shootdown. Take it out of Afghanistan or Iraq II, and all you end up with is greater reliance on B-52s and B-1Bs initially as long-range bomb trucks.
ricky123- Posts : 221
Points : 325
Join date : 2012-08-21
but it gives them propoganda .they live on that kind of stuffSOC wrote:ricky123 wrote:what i really meant was if usa dint get that tech .most prob usa wouldnt have been the only super power it wouldnt have the kind of influence it has now ....
And my point is that yes, it would still have turned out this way. Stealth is a fun toy to play with and very useful in the right environment, but I've never heard of a military operation being cancelled because they couldn't use stealth, or more to the point we haven't done anything that has been so reliant on stealth that its absence would equate to failure. In fact, the 1986 Libya bombing originally considered the F-117, but they decided to use the F-111Fs and carrier-based jets for security. Take stealth out of the 1991 Iraq war, and you'd have seen more TLAM firings the first night. Take it out of Yugoslavia, and all that you have is one less shootdown. Take it out of Afghanistan or Iraq II, and all you end up with is greater reliance on B-52s and B-1Bs initially as long-range bomb trucks.
GarryB- Posts : 39168
Points : 39666
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
They love the idea of a super high tech weapon...
Of course ask Nazi Germany how uber weapons won WWII for them.
In many ways their uber weapons were their downfall, at the start of the war they were far more successful but ended up relying on smaller numbers of uber weapons when the tide was against them and they failed completely.
It is not like Hollywood hasn't shown them their weaknesses...Super high tech aliens killed by country song in Mars Attacks!, bacteria kills super high tech alien invaders also from Mars... in fact many of Hollywoods best movies eliminate technology and firearms and pit the hero against the enemy like in Alien (the first movie) or Predator.
At the end of the day the US Strong! team will talk about mach 6 secret spy planes called Auroura and secret based on the moon and all sorts of rubbish because they read it on the internet or some guy from school told them.
Of course ask Nazi Germany how uber weapons won WWII for them.
In many ways their uber weapons were their downfall, at the start of the war they were far more successful but ended up relying on smaller numbers of uber weapons when the tide was against them and they failed completely.
It is not like Hollywood hasn't shown them their weaknesses...Super high tech aliens killed by country song in Mars Attacks!, bacteria kills super high tech alien invaders also from Mars... in fact many of Hollywoods best movies eliminate technology and firearms and pit the hero against the enemy like in Alien (the first movie) or Predator.
At the end of the day the US Strong! team will talk about mach 6 secret spy planes called Auroura and secret based on the moon and all sorts of rubbish because they read it on the internet or some guy from school told them.
medo- Posts : 4342
Points : 4422
Join date : 2010-10-25
Location : Slovenia
On the other hand stealth planes could become quite a big problem for USAF. F-22, F-35 and other older stealth planes were build in different times than they are today and will be in future. A decade or two ago US was full of money and could buy large numbers of expensive toys, but stealth planes are even more expensive than other planes like 1 billion $ for 1 B-2A and also expensive are spare parts and maintenance of them.
After a decade and more of constant wars, majority of classical planes are worn out and will soon have to be retired. Because of financial and debt crisis, US and European militaries will face huge cuts if states will want to survive. With retire of cheaper classical planes only smaller number of expensive stealth planes will remain and with additional financial cuts their number will be also reduced and less capable to fly because of high maintenance costs.
US will be still capable to defend itself, because they have two big oceans in defending lines, but Europe in few years will not be able to defend itself. Majority of European militaries are professional and with budget cuts those militaries will be significantly reduced without reserves and surplus equipment sold.
After a decade and more of constant wars, majority of classical planes are worn out and will soon have to be retired. Because of financial and debt crisis, US and European militaries will face huge cuts if states will want to survive. With retire of cheaper classical planes only smaller number of expensive stealth planes will remain and with additional financial cuts their number will be also reduced and less capable to fly because of high maintenance costs.
US will be still capable to defend itself, because they have two big oceans in defending lines, but Europe in few years will not be able to defend itself. Majority of European militaries are professional and with budget cuts those militaries will be significantly reduced without reserves and surplus equipment sold.
Pugnax- Posts : 85
Points : 72
Join date : 2011-03-15
Age : 59
Location : Canada
Excellent point Medo!,Thee classic model of ever diminishing returns of a collapsing empire.The Roman legion soldier analogy- he was never out fought as much as overwhelmed,expensive to maintain,never maintained in the numbers required to hold,a slippery slope indeed.
SOC- Posts : 565
Points : 608
Join date : 2011-09-14
Age : 46
Location : Indianapolis
medo wrote:stealth planes are even more expensive than other planes like 1 billion $ for 1 B-2A
In fairness to the B-2, the only reason it's a billion dollar aircraft is because we only ended up buying 21 airframes. The entire development and testing cost was therefore spread over a very small number of airframes, ridiculously inflating the per-unit cost. It's like the F-22. Lockheed was building airframes at a cost of about $95 million at the end of production due to a host of gradual production process improvements, but as everything else was factored in you ended up with a much bigger sticker price.
Mindstorm- Posts : 1133
Points : 1298
Join date : 2011-07-20
Try to argue on the absolutely central role played by the first four “open scientific literature” publications of Professor P.Y. Ufimtsev PTD on the main course and general development of American modern stealth sector is totally pointless; from a strict scientific point of view it represented a real game-changing, revolutionary element for the US field.
I think that the words ,on the subject, of the same Dr. Kenneth Mitzner of Northrop (the theoretical architect behind B-2 Spirit's design) on this subject will be more clear than other 10000 by anyone else :
This, instead is from the foreword wrote by Dr . K. Mitzner to the publication of "Fundamentals of Theory of Diffraction" :
What would represent an infinitely much interesting question is why in plain Cold War ,with the very powerful Soviet intelligence security services rendering totally unavailable (cancelling often even the trace of theirs same existence ,up to ours days !) mountains of less important and critical scientific works ,seen as without any potential for an applicative derivations for URSS , for the mere risk that the Great Enemy could find a way capitalize theirs achievements, allowed quietly and just to the Ufimtsev’s works, to be publicized in open scientific journals ,while covering with the higher degree of secrecy the achievements and solutions to the same problem produced by others big names of the field working at the same Lab....
I think that the words ,on the subject, of the same Dr. Kenneth Mitzner of Northrop (the theoretical architect behind B-2 Spirit's design) on this subject will be more clear than other 10000 by anyone else :
"We began to refer to Ufimtsev's theory as the 'industrial strength' theory, the one that could be applied to a broad range of problems and give us real numbers to put into our calculations."
"I cannot imagine the B-2 having been designed without the influence of his work," Dr. Mitzner added. "Let me put it this way: Without Ufimtsev, today's stealth aircraft would probably have looked the way the speculative artists portrayed them, before their real shapes were publicly disclosed."
This, instead is from the foreword wrote by Dr . K. Mitzner to the publication of "Fundamentals of Theory of Diffraction" :
The first form of PTD developed by Professor Ufimtsev, the vector form applicable to electromagnetic scattering from three-dimensional bodies , has played a key role in development of modern low-radar-reflectivity weapons systems such as the Lockheed F-117 Stealth Fighter and the Northrop B2 Stealth Bomber, functioning both as a design tool and as a conceptual framework.
These systems in turn have revolutionized the conduct of large-scale government-versus-government warfare and thus have helped to shape history.
Ben Rich, who oversaw the F-117 project as head of Lockheed's fabled Skunk Works, refers to Professor Ufimtsev's work as "the Rosetta Stone breakthrough for stealth technology."
At Northrop, where i worked on the B-2 project, we were so enthusiastic about PTD that a co-worker and I sometimes broke into choruses of " Go, Ufimtsev" on the tune of "On, Wisconsin". At both Lockheed and Northrop we referred to PTD as "industrial-strength" diffraction theory to distinguish it from the approach to diffraction then being favored in the universities, which was not well enough developed to handle stealth design"
What would represent an infinitely much interesting question is why in plain Cold War ,with the very powerful Soviet intelligence security services rendering totally unavailable (cancelling often even the trace of theirs same existence ,up to ours days !) mountains of less important and critical scientific works ,seen as without any potential for an applicative derivations for URSS , for the mere risk that the Great Enemy could find a way capitalize theirs achievements, allowed quietly and just to the Ufimtsev’s works, to be publicized in open scientific journals ,while covering with the higher degree of secrecy the achievements and solutions to the same problem produced by others big names of the field working at the same Lab....
havok- Posts : 88
Points : 83
Join date : 2010-09-20
No, 'stealth' is not a Russian concept. Not even a Russian idea. Please do not bring up Ufimtsev. I have his textbook on my shelf. It is not, and never was, a sort of 'cookbook' for low radar observability. Ufimtsev's truly admirable work, was essentially mathematically formalized outline of how waves behaves on edges and surfaces. It does not say: 'Do A, B, and C so that radars X, Y, and Z cannot see you.'max steel wrote:little do you know stealth concept is russian .
If radar low observability was truly a Russian idea, then why did the US came up with the F-117 before the Soviet Union? You probably did not know it, but when Ufimtsev completed his work, the Soviet Union still exist.
Which mean Ufimtsev's work would have been immediately classified as state secret. Instead, his work was sufficiently bland that he was allowed to publish internationally.Radar low observability is about the exploitation of wave behaviors towards a specific goal, so from that perspective, the SR-71 could arguably be the world's first 'stealth' aircraft. But the F-117 is the world's first 'stealth' aircraft because the jet's radar response behavior was placed nearly on par with aerodynamics and Ufimtsev's math made that exploitation possible.
Little do you know...
GarryB- Posts : 39168
Points : 39666
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
No, 'stealth' is not a Russian concept. Not even a Russian idea. Please do not bring up Ufimtsev. I have his textbook on my shelf. It is not, and never was, a sort of 'cookbook' for low radar observability. Ufimtsev's truly admirable work, was essentially mathematically formalized outline of how waves behaves on edges and surfaces. It does not say: 'Do A, B, and C so that radars X, Y, and Z cannot see you.'
You are quite right radar stealth was developed well before Ufimtsev... very simply flying very low was stealthy in WWII.. it was the Soviets that developed the mathematic model that takes the hit and miss guesswork out of stealth design. With Ufimtsevs model you can calculate RCS and try hundreds of thousands of different designs rapidly via computer and just built the most promising... it was the US that made stealth expensive...
If radar low observability was truly a Russian idea, then why did the US came up with the F-117 before the Soviet Union?
In fact even to this day Russia has not developed an F-117... perhaps a short range light bomber was of little use to them... a cruise missile offering double the flight range at a fraction of the cost and with no risk to a pilot...
You probably did not know it, but when Ufimtsev completed his work, the Soviet Union still exist. Very Happy Which mean Ufimtsev's work would have been immediately classified as state secret. Instead, his work was sufficiently bland that he was allowed to publish internationally.
Yes, it took peace loving America to weaponise an area of mathematics and turn it into something that kills. Mendelev creates the table of elements... the US sees a list of chemicals it can use to torture and kill with.
Radar low observability is about the exploitation of wave behaviors towards a specific goal, so from that perspective, the SR-71 could arguably be the world's first 'stealth' aircraft.
Not by any measure... the SR-71s were reliably tracked from take off to landing during operations near the Soviet Union and over Vietnam by the Soviet Union and China respectively. If they can be tracked from take off to landing then they are not by any measure stealthy.
The U-2 spy plane was not stealthy either despite also being painted black.
But the F-117 is the world's first 'stealth' aircraft because the jet's radar response behavior was placed nearly on par with aerodynamics and Ufimtsev's math made that exploitation possible.
The F-117 was the first operational stealth aircraft to enter operational service, and had as much to do with the ability of a flight control system to enable a brick to fly as it did with the maths from the Soviet Union... BTW Soviet maths for stealth... Titanium for building SR-71s... Nazis building your Saturn 5 rockets... is there anything the US can do on its own? It doesn't even invade countries on its own anymore now...
havok- Posts : 88
Points : 83
Join date : 2010-09-20
It was an understandable fuck-up that they failed to realize Ufimtsev's potential.GarryB wrote:it was the Soviets that developed the mathematic model that takes the hit and miss guesswork out of stealth design.
As if that was unique to US.Yes, it took peace loving America to weaponise an area of mathematics and turn it into something that kills. Mendelev creates the table of elements... the US sees a list of chemicals it can use to torture and kill with.
You missed the point, which is understandable. I said that if the Soviets recognized Ufimtsev's work with military potential, most likely he would have been stashed away in one of the many secret cities where scientists are privileged and pampered in order to get them to produce weapons. So who is really good at turning something benign into weapons ? Your Soviet Union was. In fact, weapons development was the best thing your Soviet Union was really good at.
Could the microwave oven came from the Soviet Union ? No. It could not.
Did EM effects on materials unknown to Soviet scientists ? No. Were electronics technology unknown to the Soviets ? Absolutely not. And yet, the microwave oven came from the West. When the microwave oven was under development, public opinions revealed that people wanted to see their food being heated/cooked. Why ? What is the rationality behind the need to see the food being heated/cooked ? There were none. And yet that is what the public wanted. If the door's window was plain glass or clear plastic, EM radiation would leave the chamber. The solution ? Place a metal screen with the glass or clear plastic window. The holes in the metal screen are physically smaller than the physical wavelengths of the EM radiation, so none or only a very small amount of EM radiation will escape the chamber. Did Soviet scientists and engineers not know of this behavior ? Nonsense. They knew. And yet it was the West who solved the technical issues that conflict with consumer want. It was our way of life that enabled people -- entrepreuners -- to create non-military tools and devices that made our lives easier to bear.
Your Soviet Union made the world's first man-made satellite. What happened then from the Soviet Union ? Nothing but military satellites. Whereas with the West, the satellite was used to make telephone calls easier, communicate data easier, and entertainment easier.
Could the Internet came from the Soviet Union or Russia ? Absolutely -- NOT.
The SR-71's shaping was an attempt at radar low observability by intentional design, and even though Soviet radars detected it, the detection was less effective than with other aircrafts.Not by any measure... the SR-71s were reliably tracked from take off to landing during operations near the Soviet Union and over Vietnam by the Soviet Union and China respectively. If they can be tracked from take off to landing then they are not by any measure stealthy.
No one said anything about black paint, buddy.The U-2 spy plane was not stealthy either despite also being painted black.
We did all those things on our own.The F-117 was the first operational stealth aircraft to enter operational service, and had as much to do with the ability of a flight control system to enable a brick to fly as it did with the maths from the Soviet Union... BTW Soviet maths for stealth... Titanium for building SR-71s... Nazis building your Saturn 5 rockets... is there anything the US can do on its own? It doesn't even invade countries on its own anymore now...
max steel- Posts : 2930
Points : 2955
Join date : 2015-02-13
Location : South Pole
what you want to prove ?
GarryB- Posts : 39168
Points : 39666
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
It was an understandable fuck-up that they failed to realize Ufimtsev's potential.
Hardly.
Not every technology needs to be used to kill people and dominate the rest...
As if that was unique to US.
Of course not... it is not their fault they are good at "rape and pillage and murder"... just a shame they think they have the right to tell others how to live, and manage to end the lives of so many whether they are listening or not...
You missed the point, which is understandable. I said that if the Soviets recognized Ufimtsev's work with military potential, most likely he would have been stashed away in one of the many secret cities where scientists are privileged and pampered in order to get them to produce weapons. So who is really good at turning something benign into weapons ? Your Soviet Union was. In fact, weapons development was the best thing your Soviet Union was really good at.
They never really got a chance to find out what they were good at, they spent most of their existence being hounded and baited by the west.
BTW Not my Soviet Union... never been there.
It was our way of life that enabled people -- entrepreuners -- to create non-military tools and devices that made our lives easier to bear.
Most western people are lazy and stupid and will spend $200 on a plastic piece of rubbish they are told will make them slim and fit... they will buy it, try it... find it actually requires effort whether it works or not they will put it under the bed or in the closet and never think about it again...
It was our way of life to get people to buy all sorts of shit they don't need and when it breaks to throw it away and make some more... the problem is that the system doesn't actually work because to be that throwaway society you need very very cheap labour to actually make all the stuff so cheaply everyone can afford it. Move all production overseas and let cheap foreign workers make it... but how do your people earn the money to buy the crap your companies design and build overseas? Especially when all the manufacturing jobs just got sent over seas... The rich get richer and the poor get poorer and at some stage the 99% are going to want a bigger share of the worlds wealth and there is only the 1% they can take it from...
Could the Internet came from the Soviet Union or Russia ? Absolutely -- NOT.
It came from the US military... it was a concept of data sharing and communication based on nodes where battledamage might break some links but the information could be rerouted around damaged or non function nodes and still get to those who needed it....
Your Soviet Union made the world's first man-made satellite. What happened then from the Soviet Union ? Nothing but military satellites. Whereas with the West, the satellite was used to make telephone calls easier, communicate data easier, and entertainment easier.
You mean the west that is listening to everyone... even its own allies, for the purposes of drone strikes... making telephone calls easier so they are easier to tap.
...the NSA... the only part of the government that listens to YOU.
The SR-71's shaping was an attempt at radar low observability by intentional design, and even though Soviet radars detected it, the detection was less effective than with other aircrafts.
They had no problem detecting it from takeoff to landing... and China did the same with SR-71 flights over Vietnam... this was detection from enormous ranges... In fact it was easier than with other aircraft... very few aircraft go into near vertical climbs and accelerate the way the SR-71 did.
No one said anything about black paint, buddy.
But it isn't stealthy if it hasn't got black paint...
We did all those things on our own.
Well we are the centre of the universe too aren't we... I mean Jesus was American...
what you want to prove ?
Perhaps that the US is a much better country than I am suggesting, or that the current or recent regimes reflect... so he does have a point.
jhelb- Posts : 1088
Points : 1189
Join date : 2015-04-04
Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About
GarryB wrote:They had no problem detecting it from takeoff to landing... and China did the same with SR-71 flights over Vietnam... this was detection from enormous ranges... In fact it was easier than with other aircraft... very few aircraft go into near vertical climbs and accelerate the way the SR-71 did.
Garry, the Soviet Union never had any problem in detecting the SR 71. The thing is the Soviet Air Force always knew when an SR-71 launch would occur, because the KC-135 fuel tanker would take off first since the SR-71 had to be immediately refueled once airborne.
China frankly had no SAM system even half as good as the S 200. Till this day they reverse engineer S 300 PMU2 without paying a cent as license fee to Russia. Very soon they will do the same with the S 400.
It is becoming very difficult for Russia to sell its military hardware because of such malpractices.
Werewolf- Posts : 5920
Points : 6109
Join date : 2012-10-25
havok wrote:
You missed the point, which is understandable. I said that if the Soviets recognized Ufimtsev's work with military potential, most likely he would have been stashed away in one of the many secret cities where scientists are privileged and pampered in order to get them to produce weapons. So who is really good at turning something benign into weapons ? Your Soviet Union was. In fact, weapons development was the best thing your Soviet Union was really good at.
Nonsense, he presented his work and it was considered unfeasible with the cost and benefits not to mention that shapes of aircrafts and physics were not considered worth wasting money on a flying brick. The same happened with ERA the best armor technology for most Anti Tank weapons over decades, the first trials and testing for this ERA effect was tried by NII Stali workers during WW2, the only thing one General of Tank Division replied to it "I am not crazy enough to strap Dynamite to my tanks. Find some other fool". So was this brilliant Technology delayed for some time.
havok wrote:
Could the microwave oven came from the Soviet Union ? No. It could not.
They did have it. Someone posted here some weeks ago a picture of a Soviet Microwave from 40-50's. They could and did.
havok wrote:
Did EM effects on materials unknown to Soviet scientists ? No. Were electronics technology unknown to the Soviets ? Absolutely not. And yet, the microwave oven came from the West. When the microwave oven was under development, public opinions revealed that people wanted to see their food being heated/cooked. Why ? What is the rationality behind the need to see the food being heated/cooked ? There were none. And yet that is what the public wanted. If the door's window was plain glass or clear plastic, EM radiation would leave the chamber. The solution ? Place a metal screen with the glass or clear plastic window. The holes in the metal screen are physically smaller than the physical wavelengths of the EM radiation, so none or only a very small amount of EM radiation will escape the chamber. Did Soviet scientists and engineers not know of this behavior ? Nonsense. They knew. And yet it was the West who solved the technical issues that conflict with consumer want. It was our way of life that enabled people -- entrepreuners -- to create non-military tools and devices that made our lives easier to bear.
Microwave ovens were banned in 1976 for health issues, because such ovens are unhealthy not just for surroundings even with screening it, but also destroys nutrition.
The soviet Union wasn't focused on civil market because it does not exist nor was in political view necessary, poor poor people couldn't microwave their food and had to actually cook it and comsume actual food with actual nutrition, while the genius westerners eat and shit with the same amount of nutrition and consistancy.
havok wrote:
Your Soviet Union made the world's first man-made satellite. What happened then from the Soviet Union ? Nothing but military satellites. Whereas with the West, the satellite was used to make telephone calls easier, communicate data easier, and entertainment easier.
What purpose would Soviets had with a civilian Satellite in 50-60-70-80s? Watching american television? There was no market and no purpose for it, good luck trusting in West when they do something for Public it always will boil down to Controlling or Spying on civilians not for benefit, never for the benefit.
[quote="havok"]
Could the Internet came from the Soviet Union or Russia ? Absolutely -- NOT.
Another failure of explaining or understanding. What purpose had the Internet? it is a fucking MILITARY INVENTION, they would never spend a single cent on developing for the purpose of soley civilian needs or benefits a communication system, only when they can take advantage of it. Biggest CIA invention a spy network called Internet, brilliant those americans, filthy peseant soviets do not spy on their own people and rest of the world with out genius effeciency.
We did all those things on our own.
Jack shit you did on your own.
Operation Paperclip 2500 German Scientists have been hijacked and are working for the US on different levels. Engines, Rockets, Missiles, Tanks, Planes. The freakish NASA is a GERMAN program from 1945-1968 only after that time of period actual american content rose based on GERMAN engineering. Your damn space missiles are all German V-2 rocket based and run by Werner von Braun.
You did nothing on your own, NO Petr Ufimtsev's work and the US would be still trying to make stealth aircrafts by the jackshit Raimer has told them, but they scrabbed his work and took Ufimtsev's work and directed and elocated money and focus on his work and approach.
moskit- Posts : 23
Points : 83
Join date : 2016-05-19
Spike management,,, how russia rivals??
Stealth is one of the most important characteristic for a modern 5th gen fighter. Stealth of an aircraft is not same in all the directions. From the side, a fighter plane will present a much larger area than the same plane when viewed from the front. All other factors being equal, the plane will have a stronger signal from the side than from the front so the orientation between the radar station & the target is important. This is the area where US beats Russia and China through a revolutionary concept called “Spike Management”.
Fifth-generation aircraft such as the F-22 and F-35 have cockpit displays that indicate to the pilot the various angles and ranges from which their aircraft can be detected and tracked by various enemy radars. The pilots use that information to evade the enemy by making sure to avoid zones where they could be detected and engaged. It is a technology that took decades for the United States to master—through a lot of trial and error,, admins, please elaborate how far the russians grown with that technology,,
Stealth is one of the most important characteristic for a modern 5th gen fighter. Stealth of an aircraft is not same in all the directions. From the side, a fighter plane will present a much larger area than the same plane when viewed from the front. All other factors being equal, the plane will have a stronger signal from the side than from the front so the orientation between the radar station & the target is important. This is the area where US beats Russia and China through a revolutionary concept called “Spike Management”.
Fifth-generation aircraft such as the F-22 and F-35 have cockpit displays that indicate to the pilot the various angles and ranges from which their aircraft can be detected and tracked by various enemy radars. The pilots use that information to evade the enemy by making sure to avoid zones where they could be detected and engaged. It is a technology that took decades for the United States to master—through a lot of trial and error,, admins, please elaborate how far the russians grown with that technology,,
|
|
|