Back to Squawk list
  • 31

Russia introduces new fighter jet, with stealth technology

提交時間:
 
Looks very similar to the F-22! Russia's new stealth fighter jet made its public debut Tuesday, the Sukhoi T-50. (news.blogs.cnn.com) 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


PVUpilot
PVUpilot 0
Now, I don't want to sound dumb but I thought the US was the only one that knew how to use stealth technology?
dmanuel
dmanuel 0
I guess if other countries have really good stealth technology, by virtue of what it is, we'd never know. ;-)
lboyette
Are you f$ing retarded? The T-50 has been announced for quite some time and this is NOT the first photos to leak. Even China has a stealth fighter that looks similar to the T50 with the exception that it has Canards. And, no, has very different features than the F-22. Without question.... very clean in comparison.
alistairm
alistairm 0
At least this stealth fighter flies ;)
weatherman04
Russia and China got their hands on stealth technology in March 1999 when a F-117 was hit and crashed in Yugoslavia. The USAF was supposed to bomb the crash site, but government officials worried that too many civilians would be killed in the process. As a result, pieces were sent off to Russia and China, and some pieces still remain at the Museum of Aviation in Belgrade. Although the T-50 has stealth features, it still should have a larger radar cross-section than the F-22, unless there are major design changes before production.
thunderland2
the f-22 is now on the way of being olde technoligy. whats on the drawing board now in the west will be awesume. hope we keep our newest technoligy to our selves. since when do our allies help to design a/c that can be used againest us
alistairm
alistairm 0
Check out the Horten Ho 229 or Uboat U480.... both German designs. No, the US is not the only country that knew or knows how to develop stealth technology.
TomCarroll
Tom Carroll 0
The T-50 is less of a hedge against the US and much more of a defensive posturing against the Chinese. Wouldn't surprise me to see T-50s and F-22s/F-35s fighting side-by-side at some point in the future...
weatherman04
@Alistair Morrison, the Ho 229 wasn't developed as a stealth aircraft, but as a flying wing. Research by Northrop show that it wasn't all that stealthy either, using 1940s-era radar. Most subs are fairly stealthy given their round shape. What has made the US aircraft so stealthy isn't just the design but also the materials they're made of (RAM). Until the F-117 crashed in 1999, no other country on earth had access to stealth materials. Certain things, such as the exhaust on the B-2, are still secret because of how it hides the heat signature. So yes, true stealth technology is a product of the USA!
SkyBaby2
If it's true they made the T50 after reverse engineering a downed F117, then we have nothing to worry about. :P
Drag0nflamez
@Al: The JSF was never, ever designed by any other country than the US and Lockheed. We never got to selecting one of the proposals (Boeing or Lockheed). Only the US was allowed to. So it shouldn't be called a Joint Strike Fighter, it should be called the American Strike Fighter.

@Tom: Me too.
navydoc192
Another rip off of an american design
alistairm
alistairm 0
Nope, the Horten was not developed as a stealth aircraft; though, there were efforts to introduce anti-radar capabilities - they used carbon powder in the adhesive of the plane to absorb radio waves. Stealthy because of their round shape? It has more to do with the radar absorbing material that is has on it - as the U480 did. Bounce sonar off of a sub that does not incorporate any radar absorbing material, it will come up nice and clear. You can also look at the Avro Vulcan. This aircraft has a very low radar signature for an aircraft of it's size, but was not designed to be a "stealth" aircraft. So, there are many aircraft that have long since gone that were some what stealthy, but were never intended to be a fully fledged "stealth" aircraft.
weatherman04
The DH.98 Mosquito was also stealthy too, but it was by mistake more than anything. Engineers found that its wooden construction actually absorbed radar, much like the honeycomb materials used on the F-117. The curved (round) edges on the B-2 scatter radar returns, and modern submarine designs are similar in function. The Vulcan did have a small radar cross-section, but it again wasn't designed with stealth in mind, so much like the Ho 229, it was somewhat stealthy by mistake, not by engineering. The SR-71, on the other hand, was designed for high speed/high altitude, but Kelly Johnson took steps to make the design stealthy as well (certain design elements were later used on the F-117). What I'm getting at is that yes, certain previous aircraft had stealth characteristics by dumb luck, but most aspects of stealth were developed by the United States, and until recently, no one else knew how to accomplish a true stealth aircraft.
alistairm
alistairm 0
If one embeds or stamps grooves and angled fractal-like patterns such as S-curve or Tire-thread-like patterns into high density polyethylene (i.e. truck bed liner) they trap specific frequencies within the sonographic spectrum used by modern military sonars. The sound waves will bounce around WITHIN those grooves and tracks until they lose enough power that they become TOO WEAK to make up an effective acoustic return signal and thus the sub becomes stealthy. Therefore, the sub being round, really does not have much do with the sub being stealthy. The desgin of the screws also will contribut to it's "stealthiness" by making the sub more quiet. Comparing a B-2 bomber to a submarine is really not a good example. The height cross section of a sub is far bigger then a B2. A sub, no matter which way you turn it, has a preety large cross section. Whereas a B2 from the side or from head on, has a very slim cross section. The radar absorbing material will help even more by absorbing some of the energy and not returning enough to make a big enough blip on the radar to be concerned about. Yes, shape matters as it did on the F117 where you had all sorts of angles to break up the radar energy, along with the radar absorbing material. but a huge cylinder just by it's shape, will hardly break the energy from sonar to the point of being "stealthy". It is what is covering that big cylinder that matters. Subs are of course shaped round or roundish. That is due to it needing to withstand the pressure of deep water. It is also due to the fact that the shape does very well hydrodynamically.
meeverett
meeverett 0
First, there're only so many ways to do "stealth," so the fact that this looks similar to a Raptor isn't totally surprising.

Secondly, do you honestly believe for a second that the Soviet Union collapsed and the Russians quit spying on us (and us on them for that matter)? Do you think the Chinese aren't spying on us, too? After all, one of their big exports in the last 5 years has been "Chinese language teachers" to countries like the US.

Don't allow the fact that you feel superior to the Russians or the Chinese cloud your judgement. They are more than capable of producing stealth aircraft, especially if they have a little help.
alistairm
alistairm 0
Nicely said Matthew. There seems to be numerous people on this site who think that they are superior to anyone else in this world. Just read the thread concerning the Chinese carrier. You are right, there are plenty of Chinese spies all over North America (Canada and the US). Many times i have asked people from China who have just moved here, what their job is. Almost everytime the answer is, "i study computer science" or "i am working in a computer related field", and they don't mean selling computers at BestBuy. And yes, Ivan is still in the spie business. Just troll the internet for the news articles.

登入

還沒有帳戶嗎? 現在就註冊(免費),設置諸多客制化功能、航班提醒等等!
本網站使用cookie。您使用並繼續瀏覽本網站,即表示您接受這一點。
退出
您知道FlightAware航班跟蹤是由廣告支持嗎?
通過允許展示來自FlightAware.com的廣告,您可以幫助我們使FlightAware保持免費。我們努力使我們的廣告保持相關性,同時不顯突兀,以創造一流的體驗。在FlightAware上將廣告加入白名單快速而簡單,或者請您考慮選擇我們的高級帳戶.
退出