A scene never to be repeated again: a sky filled with black stealth fighter jets

[Umair Nawaz]

The F-22 and B-2 were already in development while the F-117 was in active duty. Now we have the F-35. And what have in the back rooms are open to speculations. But I will tell you this: The US effectively defeated 'stealth' a few years ago. It matters not to me if you believe me or not. But essentially, the J-20 and the PAK-FA are DOA.

Yes i know this that US has learnt abt that from Serbian F117 incident. It is said to be a new type of Radar i think mounted on Satellites or something to do with them..........Correct me if im wrong or close to the reality.

F-117 has flat plates which effect their aerodynamic capabilities in a bad way and it's canopy had to be compromised.

Wow r u really an actress??

 

[vostok]

always wondered how these irons fly.

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

No one matches the US military might, period.

 

[My-Analogous]

why did they retire those planes?

It is already written that in 2006 they celibrate their 25th aniversary so on 2008 they are 27 years. pretty old.

 

[gambit]

Yes i know this that US has learnt abt that from Serbian F117 incident. It is said to be a new type of Radar i think mounted on Satellites or something to do with them..........Correct me if im wrong or close to the reality.

That F-117 shot down have been debated and debunked many times here before. If whatever that Zoltan Dani did worked so well, then why did throughout the entire air campaign, NATO lost only one F-16 and one F-117? NATO flew over 30,000 sorties, including about 60 B-2 sorties from continental US. If whatever Zoltan Dani did to detect and track the F-117, the physically larger B-2 would have been obvious, and yet not one B-2 was lost.

NATO scheduled the sorties predictably. It was well known back then that outside the gates and fences of Aviano (Italy), Serbian sympathizers were observing, recording, and calling out take-offs -- daily. Not only that, NATO restricted the freedoms of the planners on the ingress/egress air corridors, giving the Serbs plenty of air intelligence to plan their ground operations. The Serbian forces may not have been able to resist NATO air power with their own air power, but if they have even %65 assurance that X number of attackers are coming from this direction at so-and-so time, and among this group are a few F-117s, all it take is a bit of luck to hit anyone, and in this case, an F-117 got the short straw.

The F-117 pilot, Dale Zelko, recalled he had to dodge at least 3 missiles before a proximity fused detonation damaged his aircraft. He was not directly hit. That tactic is called 'spray and pray'.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

That F-117 shot down have been debated and debunked many times here before. If whatever that Zoltan Dani did worked so well, then why did throughout the entire air campaign, NATO lost only one F-16 and one F-117? NATO flew over 30,000 sorties, including about 60 B-2 sorties from continental US. If whatever Zoltan Dani did to detect and track the F-117, the physically larger B-2 would have been obvious, and yet not one B-2 was lost.

NATO scheduled the sorties predictably. It was well known back then that outside the gates and fences of Aviano (Italy), Serbian sympathizers were observing, recording, and calling out take-offs -- daily. Not only that, NATO restricted the freedoms of the planners on the ingress/egress air corridors, giving the Serbs plenty of air intelligence to plan their ground operations. The Serbian forces may not have been able to resist NATO air power with their own air power, but if they have even %65 assurance that X number of attackers are coming from this direction at so-and-so time, and among this group are a few F-117s, all it take is a bit of luck to hit anyone, and in this case, an F-117 got the short straw.

The F-117 pilot, Dale Zelko, recalled he had to dodge at least 3 missiles before a proximity fused detonation damaged his aircraft. He was not directly hit. That tactic is called 'spray and pray'.

Yes sir you r right.......But i was focusing on this line in your post.

: The US effectively defeated 'stealth' a few years ago.

If im not mistaken its some new generation of radar either mounted on a satellite or anything to do with it. Or is just a ground based system.

Correct me if im wrong.

 

[gambit]

If im not mistaken its some new generation of radar either mounted on a satellite or anything to do with it. Or is just a ground based system.

Correct me if im wrong.

Satellite based radar is nothing new. We have them for decades, just for different purposes. But what I meant when I said that the US effectively defeated 'stealth' is that we developed methods to recognize unique radar signatures of complex bodies and incorporated those methods into individual combat aircrafts' systems, allowing individual radar operators to make decisions based upon what they see through their own systems, not from any third party like a satellite based radar system.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Satellite based radar is nothing new. We have them for decades, just for different purposes. But what I meant when I said that the US effectively defeated 'stealth' is that we developed methods to recognize unique radar signatures of complex bodies and incorporated those methods into individual combat aircrafts' systems, allowing individual radar operators to make decisions based upon what they see through their own systems, not from any third party like a satellite based radar system.

Thank You sir for clearing up my confusion.

 

[Malik Alashter]

well Americans are truly great, they retire planes others are just inducting. That's power.

Some nations still hoping for 4th gen fighters while the American about to induct thousands of 5th gen fighters I just don't know what they going to do with the teens fighters they have.