"Sthealt" é detectável?

Assuntos em discussão: Força Aérea Brasileira, forças aéreas estrangeiras e aviação militar.

Moderadores: Glauber Prestes, Conselho de Moderação

Mensagem
Autor
Avatar do usuário
soultrain
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 12154
Registrado em: Dom Jun 19, 2005 7:39 pm
Localização: Almada- Portugal

"Sthealt" é detectável?

#1 Mensagem por soultrain » Seg Out 20, 2008 7:47 pm

Rand Study Suggests U.S. Loses War With China
By wendell minnick
Published: 16 Oct 11:45 EDT (15:45 GMT)


TAIPEI - A new RAND study suggests U.S. air power in the Pacific would be inadequate to thwart a Chinese attack on Taiwan in 2020. The study, entitled "Air Combat Past, Present and Future," by John Stillion and Scott Perdue, says China's anti-access arms and strategy could deny the U.S. the "ability to operate efficiently from nearby bases or seas."

According to the study, U.S. aircraft carriers and air bases would be threatened by Chinese development of anti-ship ballistic missiles, the fielding of diesel and nuclear submarines equipped with torpedoes and SS-N-22 and SS-N-27 anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), fighters and bombers carrying ASCMs and HARMs, and new ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

The report states that 34 missiles with submunition warheads could cover all parking ramps at Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa.

An "attack like this could damage, destroy or strand 75 percent of aircraft based at Kadena," it says.

In contrast, many Chinese air bases are harder than Kadena, with some "super-hard underground hangers."

To make matters worse, Kadena is the only U.S. air base within 500 nautical miles of the Taiwan Strait, whereas China has 27.

U.S. air bases in South Korea are more than 750 miles distant, and those in Japan are more than 885 miles away. Anderson Air Force Base, Guam, is 1,500 miles away. The result is that sortie rates will be low, with a "huge tanker demand."

The authors suggest China's CETC Y-27 radar, which is similar to Russia's Nebo SVU VHF Digital AESA, could counter U.S. stealth fighter technology. China is likely to outfit its fighters with improved radars and by "2020 even very stealthy targets likely [would be] detectable by Flanker radars at 25+ nm." China is also likely to procure the new Su-35BM fighter by 2020, which will challenge the F-35 and possibly the F-22.

The authors also question the reliability of U.S. beyond-visual-range weapons, such as the AIM-120 AMRAAM. U.S. fighters have recorded only 10 AIM-120 kills, none against targets equipped with the kinds of countermeasures carried by Chinese Su-27s and Su-30s. Of the 10, six were beyond-visual-range kills, and it required 13 missiles to get them.

If a conflict breaks out between China and the U.S. over Taiwan, the authors say it is difficult to "predict who will have had the last move in the measure-countermeasure game."

Overall, the authors say, "China could enjoy a 3:1 edge in fighters if we can fly from Kadena - about 10:1 if forced to operate from Andersen. Overcoming these odds requires qualitative superiority of 9:1 or 100:1" - a differential that is "extremely difficult to achieve" against a like power.

If beyond-visual-range missiles work, stealth technology is not countered and air bases are not destroyed, U.S. forces have a chance, but "history suggests there is a limit of about 3:1 where quality can no longer compensate for superior enemy numbers."

A 24-aircraft Su-27/30 regiment can carry around 300 air-to-air missiles (AAMs), whereas 24 F-22s can carry only 192 AAMs and 24 F-35s only 96 AAMs.

Though current numbers assume the F-22 could shoot down 48 Chinese Flankers when "outnumbered 12:1 without loss," these numbers do not take into account a less-than-perfect U.S. beyond-visual-range performance, partial or complete destruction of U.S. air bases and aircraft carriers, possible deployment of a new Chinese stealth fighter around 2020 or 2025, and the possible use of Chinese "robo-fighters" to deplete U.S. "fighters' missile loadout prior to mass attack."

The authors write that Chinese counter stealth, anti-access, countermissile technologies are proliferating and the U.S. military needs "a plan that accounts for this."

Imagem

NNIIRT-NEBO-SVU-RLS-1S

Imagem

1L13-3-NEBO-SV-RLS-7S

Imagem

1L13-3-RLS-Spec



Russia Nebo SVU VHF Digital AESA e China CETC Y-27:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Nebo-SVU-Analysis.html

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-Low-Band-Radars.html





"O que se percebe hoje é que os idiotas perderam a modéstia. E nós temos de ter tolerância e compreensão também com os idiotas, que são exatamente aqueles que escrevem para o esquecimento" :!:


NJ
Avatar do usuário
Penguin
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 18983
Registrado em: Seg Mai 19, 2003 10:07 pm
Agradeceu: 5 vezes
Agradeceram: 374 vezes

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#2 Mensagem por Penguin » Seg Out 20, 2008 7:56 pm

Os russos podem dar uma boa dica da resposta a esta questão pelo montante investido no projeto PAK-FA. Alias, os franceses tb com o seu Neuron e futura plataforma de 5a geração. Até os chineses com o seu projeto local de caça de 5a geração.

[]s




Sempre e inevitavelmente, cada um de nós subestima o número de indivíduos estúpidos que circulam pelo mundo.
Carlo M. Cipolla
Carlos Mathias

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#3 Mensagem por Carlos Mathias » Seg Out 20, 2008 8:18 pm

Aí pode haver uma visão equivocada sobre como se contrapõem aeronaves stealth. Para vasta maioria dos radares, a tecnologia funciona, como por exemplo, os SAMs, que não podem portar (ainda) um radar deste tamanho, além dos caças, que não tem espeçao para antenas deste tamanho. Por outro lado, os radares de baixa frequência podem fornecer a posição aproximada o bastante para que caças equipados com os atuais IRST detecte-o num ataque passivo via armas e sensores IR, cuja diminuição de assinatura frente aos atuais sensores é quase irrelevante.

Assim, aeronaves furtivas ainda vão ter muito uso, mas creio que deixarão de ser a panacéia, a bala de prata, a mágica que resolve tudo contra todos.

E o texto tem outras informações muito importantes, muito mesmo.




Avatar do usuário
Thor
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 1558
Registrado em: Dom Set 23, 2007 10:17 pm
Agradeceu: 34 vezes
Agradeceram: 185 vezes

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#4 Mensagem por Thor » Seg Out 20, 2008 8:23 pm

Não existe aeronave invisível, existe aquelas com tratamento de redução de RCS, para dadas características de polarização, comprimento de onda, direção da radiação, etc...
As aeronaves ditas Stealth foram projetadas para diminuirem a reflexão das ondas da faixa dos atuais radares de busca/aquisição, os quais operam na faixa de 1-9 Ghz, com um comprimento de onda da ordem de poucos centímetros. Quando se usa ondas na faixa VHF/UHF, o comprimento de onda mostra-se bastante elevado, chegando a vários metros, o que exigirá grandes antenas, dificuldade mecânicas para rotacionar o conjunto, grande célula de resolução radar, porém com maior probabilidade de resposta para os alvos. Para se contrapor ao tamanho da antena necessário, podemos observar que são usados dipolos para tal, com uma rede (esqueci o nemo técnico disso) de antenas que simulam grande extensão.
Como exemplo da influência da redução do RCS, podemos observar que, por exemplo, reduzindo um RCS de 5 para 0,5m2, ou seja, uma redução de 90%, haverá uma redução de 44% do alcance de detecção; continuando a redução para valores perto de 0,005m2, haverá uma redução de até 82% no alcance de detecção.
Existem ainda materiais absorvedores de radiação. Embora um MARE perfeito pudesse absorver todos os comprimentos de ondas e proteger a aeronave em qualquer ângulo de aspecto, isso é praticamente
impossível de ser atingido. Todos os materiais empregados apresentam faixas de freqüências ideais de absorção, não sendo capaz de atender a todas as faixas de freqüência de atualizações.

Abraços e parabéns por um tópico um pouco mais técnico e menos especulativo.




Brasil acima de tudo!!!
Carlos Mathias

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#5 Mensagem por Carlos Mathias » Seg Out 20, 2008 8:25 pm

Falei besteira? A pergunta é sincera. :)




Avatar do usuário
Thor
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 1558
Registrado em: Dom Set 23, 2007 10:17 pm
Agradeceu: 34 vezes
Agradeceram: 185 vezes

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#6 Mensagem por Thor » Seg Out 20, 2008 8:34 pm

Carlos Mathias escreveu:Falei besteira? A pergunta é sincera. :)
Acho que está na idéia CM. Mas o texto está bem simplório, pois pode até detectar, mas guiar um sistema d`armas é outra história. Erros da ordem de 400 metros para célula de resolução radar implicariam em um artefato quase que nuclear para acertar o alvo... ou nKPi munições de saturação de área. Mísseis IR também podem ser anulados, uma vez que possuem tratamento também de baixa assinatura IR, talvez não excitando o sistema de guiagem (normalmente empregado cabeças resfriadas por nitrogênio e antimoneto de índio (acho que é isso...). E para interceptação visual da aeronave, certamente essas missões são executadas no breu total, com baixíssimo Lux (sem lua, etc...).
É, acho que ainda teremos muitos anos de emprego para essas aeronaves.
Abraços




Brasil acima de tudo!!!
Avatar do usuário
soultrain
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 12154
Registrado em: Dom Jun 19, 2005 7:39 pm
Localização: Almada- Portugal

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#7 Mensagem por soultrain » Seg Out 20, 2008 8:40 pm

Oi Thor,

Obrigado pela explicação.

Eu criei este tópico especificamente por esta parte de texto :shock: :

The 1L119 Nebo SVU is the first Russian VHF Band Active Electronically Steered Array (AESA antenna equipped radar to be disclosed publicly. While a limited amount of technical literature has been disclosed on this design, the VHF antenna array permits considerable additional analysis. This paper explores, in radar engineering terms, antenna and transmit receive channel design features, and the cardinal performance parameters for this radar. Published performance data indicate that this radar has sufficient accuracy to be used as a battery target acquisition radar for the S-300PMU-1/2 / SA-20 Gargoyle and S-400 / SA-21 Growler Surface to Air Missile systems. Numerous Russian sources are citing exceptionally good performance against VLO/LO aircraft targets. :shock:

[[]]'s





"O que se percebe hoje é que os idiotas perderam a modéstia. E nós temos de ter tolerância e compreensão também com os idiotas, que são exatamente aqueles que escrevem para o esquecimento" :!:


NJ
Jolly Roger
Intermediário
Intermediário
Mensagens: 342
Registrado em: Sex Jun 30, 2006 1:11 am
Agradeceu: 2 vezes

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#8 Mensagem por Jolly Roger » Seg Out 20, 2008 8:55 pm





Imagem
Imagem
Avatar do usuário
Penguin
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 18983
Registrado em: Seg Mai 19, 2003 10:07 pm
Agradeceu: 5 vezes
Agradeceram: 374 vezes

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#9 Mensagem por Penguin » Seg Out 20, 2008 9:21 pm

Stealth principles
Stealth technology (often referred to as "LO", for "low observability") is not a single technology but is a combination of technologies that attempt to greatly reduce the distances at which a vehicle can be detected; in particular radar cross section reductions, but also acoustic, thermal and other aspects specifically:


Radar cross-section (RCS) reductions
Main article: Radar cross section
Almost since the invention of radar, various techniques have been tried to minimize detection. Rapid development of radar during WWII led to equally rapid development of numerous counter radar measures during the period; a notable example of this was the use of chaff.

The term 'Stealth' in reference to reduced radar signature aircraft became popular during the late eighties when the F-117 stealth fighter became widely known. The first large scale (and public) use of the F-117 was during the Gulf War in 1991. However, F-117A stealth fighters were used for the first time in combat during Operation Just Cause, the United States invasion of Panama in 1989. Since then it has become less effective due to developments in the algorithms used to process the data received by radars, such as Bayesian particle filter methods. Increased awareness of stealth vehicles and the technologies behind them is prompting the development of techniques for detecting stealth vehicles, such as passive radar arrays and low-frequency radars. Many countries nevertheless continue to develop low-RCS vehicles because low RCS still offers advantages in detection range reduction as well as increasing the effectiveness of decoys against radar-seeking threats.

Vehicle shape

Certain shapes offer better stealthThe possibility of designing aircraft in such a manner as to reduce their radar cross-section was recognized in the late 1930s, when the first radar tracking systems were employed, and it has been known since at least the 1960s that aircraft shape makes a very significant difference in how well an aircraft can be detected by a radar. The Avro Vulcan, a British bomber of the 1960s, had a remarkably small appearance on radar despite its large size, and occasionally disappeared from radar screens entirely. It is now known that it had a fortuitously stealthy shape apart from the vertical element of the tail. On the other hand, the Tupolev 95 Russian long range bomber (NATO reporting name 'Bear') appeared especially well on radar. It is now known that propellers and jet turbine blades produce a bright radar image; the Bear had four pairs of large (5.6 meter diameter) contra-rotating propellers.

Another important factor is the internal construction. Behind the skin of some aircraft are structures known as re-entrant triangles. Radar waves penetrating the skin of the aircraft get trapped in these structures, bouncing off the internal faces and losing energy. This approach was first used on SR-71.

The most efficient way to reflect radar waves back to the transmitting radar is with orthogonal metal plates, forming a corner reflector consisting of either a dihedral (two plates) or a trihedral (three orthogonal plates). This configuration occurs in the tail of a conventional aircraft, where the vertical and horizontal components of the tail are set at right angles. Stealth aircraft such as the F-117 use a different arrangement, tilting the tail surfaces to reduce corner reflections formed between them. The most radical approach is to eliminate the tail completely, as in the B-2 Spirit.

In addition to altering the tail, stealth design must bury the engines within the wing or fuselage, or in some cases where stealth is applied to an existing aircraft, install baffles in the air intakes, so that the turbine blades are not visible to radar. A stealthy shape must be devoid of complex bumps or protrusions of any kind; meaning that weapons, fuel tanks, and other stores must not be carried externally. Any stealthy vehicle becomes un-stealthy when a door or hatch is opened.

Planform alignment is also often used in stealth designs. Planform alignment involves using a small number of surface orientations in the shape of the structure. For example, on the F-22A Raptor, the leading edges of the wing and the tail surfaces are set at the same angle. Careful inspection shows that many small structures, such as the air intake bypass doors and the air refueling aperture, also use the same angles. The effect of planform alignment is to return a radar signal in a very specific direction away from the radar emitter rather than returning a diffuse signal detectable at many angles.

Stealth airframes sometimes display distinctive serrations on some exposed edges, such as the engine ports. The YF-23 has such serrations on the exhaust ports. This is another example in the use of re-entrant triangles and planform alignment, this time on the external airframe.

Shaping requirements have strong negative influence on the aircraft's aerodynamic properties. The F-117 has poor aerodynamics, is inherently unstable, and cannot be flown without computer assistance. Some modern anti-stealth radars target the trail of turbulent air behind it instead, much like civilian wind shear detecting radars do.

HMS Helsingborg Stealth ShipShips have also adopted similar techniques. The Visby corvette was the first stealth ship to enter service, though the earlier Arleigh Burke class destroyer incorporated some signature-reduction features [1]. Other examples are the French La Fayette class frigate, the USS San Antonio amphibious transport dock, and most modern warship designs.

Propulsion subsystem shaping
Now in research, fluidic nozzles for thrust vectoring with aircraft jet engines, and ships, will have lower RCS, due to being less complex, mechanically simpler, with no moving parts or surfaces, and less massive (up to 50% less). They will likely be used in many unmanned aircraft, and 6th generation fighter aircraft. Fluidic nozzles divert thrust via fluid effects[2][3][4]. Tests show that air forced into a jet engine exhaust stream can deflect thrust up to 15 degrees.

Non-metallic airframe
Dielectric composites are relatively transparent to radar, whereas electrically conductive materials such as metals and carbon fibers reflect electromagnetic energy incident on the material's surface. Composites used may contain ferrites to optimize the dielectric and magnetic properties of the material for its application.

Radar absorbing material
Radar absorbent material (RAM), often as paints, are used especially on the edges of metal surfaces. One such coating, also called iron ball paint, contains tiny spheres coated with carbonyl iron ferrite. Radar waves induce alternating magnetic field in this material, which leads to conversion of their energy into heat. Early versions of F-117A planes were covered with neoprene-like tiles with ferrite grains embedded in the polymer matrix, current models have RAM paint applied directly. The paint must be applied by robots because of problems of solvent toxicity and tight tolerances on layer thickness.

Similarly, coating the cockpit canopy with a thin film transparent conductor (vapor-deposited gold or indium tin oxide) helps to reduce the aircraft's radar profile because radar waves would normally enter the cockpit, bounce off something random (the inside of the cockpit has a complex shape), and possibly return to the radar, but the conductive coating creates a controlled shape that deflects the incoming radar waves away from the radar. The coating is thin enough that it has no adverse effect on the pilot's vision.

Radar stealth countermeasures and limitations

Low frequency radar
Shaping does not offer stealth advantages against low-frequency radar. If the radar wavelength is roughly twice the size of the target, a half-wave resonance effect can still generate a significant return. However, low-frequency radar is limited by lack of available frequencies which are heavily used by other systems, lack of accuracy given the long wavelength, and by the radar's size, making it difficult to transport. A long-wave radar may detect a target and roughly locate it, but not identify it, and the location information lacks sufficient weapon targeting accuracy. Noise poses another problem, but that can be efficiently addressed using modern computer technology; Chinese "Nantsin" radar and many older Soviet-made long-range radars were modified this way. It has been said that "there's nothing invisible in the radar frequency range below 2 GHz". [5]


Multiple transmitters
Much of the stealth comes from reflecting the transmissions in a different direction other than a direct return. Therefore detection can be better achieved if the sources are spaced from the receivers, known as bistatic radar , and proposals exist to use reflections from sources such as civilian radio transmitters, including cellular telephone radio towers.



Acoustics
Acoustic stealth plays a primary role in submarine stealth as well as for ground vehicles. Submarines have extensive usage of rubber mountings to isolate and avoid mechanical noises that could reveal locations to underwater passive sonar arrays.

Early stealth observation aircraft used slow-turning propellers to avoid being heard by enemy troops below. Stealth aircraft that stay subsonic can avoid being tracked by sonic boom. The presence of supersonic and jet-powered stealth aircraft such as the SR-71 Blackbird indicates that acoustic signature is not always a major driver in aircraft design, although the Blackbird relied more on its extremely high speed and altitude.



Visibility
Most stealth aircraft use matte paint and dark colors, and operate only at night. Lately, interest on daylight Stealth (especially by the USAF) has emphasized the use of gray paint in disruptive schemes, and it is assumed that Yehudi lights could be used in the future to mask shadows in the airframe (in daylight, against the clear background of the sky, dark tones are easier to detect than light ones) or as a sort of active camouflage. The B-2 has wing tanks for a contrail-inhibiting chemical, alleged by some to be chlorofluorosulphonic acid[6], and mission planning also considers altitudes where the probability of their formation is minimized.



Infrared
An exhaust plume contributes a significant infrared (IR) signature. One means of reducing the IR signature is to have a non-circular tail pipe (a slit shape) in order to minimize the exhaust cross-sectional volume and maximize the mixing of the hot exhaust with cool ambient air. Often, cool air is deliberately injected into the exhaust flow to boost this process. Sometimes, the jet exhaust is vented above the wing surface in order to shield it from observers below, as in the B-2 Spirit, and the unstealthy A-10 Thunderbolt II. To achieve infrared stealth, the exhaust gas is cooled to the temperatures where the brightest wavelengths it radiates on are absorbed by atmospheric carbon dioxide and water vapor, dramatically reducing the infrared visibility of the exhaust plume. [7] Another way to reduce the exhaust temperature is to circulate coolant fluids such as fuel inside the exhaust pipe, where the fuel tanks serve as heat sinks cooled by the flow of air along the wings.



Reducing radio frequency (RF) emissions
In addition to reducing infrared and acoustic emissions, a stealth vehicle must avoid radiating any other detectable energy, such as from onboard radars, communications systems, or RF leakage from electronics enclosures. The F-117 uses passive infra-red and "low light level TV" sensor systems to aim its weapons and the F-22 Raptor has an advanced LPI radar which can illuminate enemy aircraft without triggering a radar warning receiver response.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_technology




Sempre e inevitavelmente, cada um de nós subestima o número de indivíduos estúpidos que circulam pelo mundo.
Carlo M. Cipolla
Avatar do usuário
soultrain
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 12154
Registrado em: Dom Jun 19, 2005 7:39 pm
Localização: Almada- Portugal

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#10 Mensagem por soultrain » Seg Out 20, 2008 9:23 pm

Hehehe o Santiago fica furioso com esse relatório, nunca percebi porquê!?

[[]]'s





"O que se percebe hoje é que os idiotas perderam a modéstia. E nós temos de ter tolerância e compreensão também com os idiotas, que são exatamente aqueles que escrevem para o esquecimento" :!:


NJ
Avatar do usuário
Penguin
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 18983
Registrado em: Seg Mai 19, 2003 10:07 pm
Agradeceu: 5 vezes
Agradeceram: 374 vezes

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#11 Mensagem por Penguin » Seg Out 20, 2008 9:50 pm

soultrain escreveu:
Hehehe o Santiago fica furioso com esse relatório, nunca percebi porquê!?

[[]]'s
Furioso eu?!

Ele eh um alerta tendo como base uma premissa especifica (a de que a USAF atuaria sozinha contra a China) em um conflito no estreito de Taiwan. Os analistas omitem B-1, B-2, US Navy, SSNs, misseis cruise lancados de diversas plataformas, etc.

De qq forma, acho que um conflito por Taiwan seria uma grande bobagem. Estive na China recentemente e posso dizer que Taiwan esta muito mais integrada a China do que a imprensa ocidental deixa transparecer. Diria que eh uma questao de tempo para estarem completamente integrados.

[]s




Sempre e inevitavelmente, cada um de nós subestima o número de indivíduos estúpidos que circulam pelo mundo.
Carlo M. Cipolla
hviana
Júnior
Júnior
Mensagens: 122
Registrado em: Qua Mar 26, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#12 Mensagem por hviana » Ter Out 21, 2008 12:10 am

Teclando um pouco mais na tecla que Santiago acabou de bater, se fosse pra china ter invadido taiwan, ja tinha feito a alguns anos, hoje em dia tal conduta seria muito mais.. artificial
alem do mais, creio que taiwan vai se jogar com os 2 braços no colo da china daqui a alguns anos.. lembremo-nos que a china sera a maior economia do mundo, e os taiwaneses são.. capitalistas[
;)

Mas aí uma pergunta interessante, aos que saibam: e no dia que tiverem descoberto uma forma de localizar, traquear, destruir avioes stealth? Que vem depois dissso? Paus e pedras?

Abraços!




Avatar do usuário
Penguin
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 18983
Registrado em: Seg Mai 19, 2003 10:07 pm
Agradeceu: 5 vezes
Agradeceram: 374 vezes

Re: "Sthealt" é detectável?

#13 Mensagem por Penguin » Ter Out 21, 2008 8:39 am

hviana escreveu:Teclando um pouco mais na tecla que Santiago acabou de bater, se fosse pra china ter invadido taiwan, ja tinha feito a alguns anos, hoje em dia tal conduta seria muito mais.. artificial
alem do mais, creio que taiwan vai se jogar com os 2 braços no colo da china daqui a alguns anos.. lembremo-nos que a china sera a maior economia do mundo, e os taiwaneses são.. capitalistas[
;)

Mas aí uma pergunta interessante, aos que saibam: e no dia que tiverem descoberto uma forma de localizar, traquear, destruir avioes stealth? Que vem depois dissso? Paus e pedras?

Abraços!
Jah se fala em 6a geracao: mais stealth ainda e mais alcance.
Eh por ai que caminha os projetos de novos cacas, ucavs, navios, submarinos, etc.

[]s




Sempre e inevitavelmente, cada um de nós subestima o número de indivíduos estúpidos que circulam pelo mundo.
Carlo M. Cipolla
Responder