aircraft——J-10 vs F-22 (lol wat?)

[dray]

Just couple of points, some of you are differentiating between F-22 & Typhoon as "completely stealth" vs "low observable". actually there is nothing like "completely stealth", all planes are "low observable", but F-22 is more "low observable" than others.

2nd, this one I need to understand...IRST has limited range, for very long-range BVR engagements all planes need to switch on their radars to scan, track, lock, & fire their BVR missiles, so, when they switch on their radars, aren't they loosing their low observable/stealth advantage? As far as I know....they do!!
@Lure @gambit

 

[gambit]

Just couple of points, some of you are differentiating between F-22 & Typhoon as "completely stealth" vs "low observable". actually there is nothing like "completely stealth", all planes are "low observable", but F-22 is more "low observable" than others.

I explained all this a long time ago. People here know I prefer and often use the phrasing 'low radar observable' over of 'stealth'. In fact, it was years ago that I shocked this forum when I said in radar detection, nothing is invisible. People thought that as a 'stealth' proponent, I would be all over the word 'invisible'. I was, but not in ways people expected. Then I proceeded to explain the basics of radar detection and why the American 'stealth' aircrafts are not 'invisible'.

2nd, this one I need to understand...IRST has limited range, for very long-range BVR engagements all planes need to switch on their radars to scan, track, lock, & fire their BVR missiles, so, when they switch on their radars, aren't they loosing their low observable/stealth advantage? As far as I know....they do!!
@Lure @gambit

You are correct. Active transmissions is no different than radar reflections off a body.

But there is a catch: If under some circumstances radar reflections off a body are in such a way that the seeking radar cannot use them and dismissed them as part of background clutter, so can active transmissions have their signal characteristics in such a way that the target with its radar warning system dismiss those transmissions as part of background clutter. The process is called 'low probability of interception' (LPI) signal creation scheme.

 

[Lure]

Just couple of points, some of you are differentiating between F-22 & Typhoon as "completely stealth" vs "low observable". actually there is nothing like "completely stealth", all planes are "low observable", but F-22 is more "low observable" than others.

Yeap that's the point. However F-22 can't be detected with today's radar technology. But as the processing power increases behind the radars, they will be able to collect more data and maybe someday (and of course doesn't seem to in the near future) they will become sophisticated enough to locate stealth planes.

On the other hand Eurofighter case isn't like this. With most sophisticated radars in today's technology you can locate Eurofighter. But there is a probability (which is low I might add) that you can't locate them when they fly from certain angles. They will have much higher chance of being stealth against the old radar technologies since they have very little processing power, and much lower chances against state-of-art technologies.

2nd, this one I need to understand...IRST has limited range, for very long-range BVR engagements all planes need to switch on their radars to scan, track, lock, & fire their BVR missiles, so, when they switch on their radars, aren't they loosing their low observable/stealth advantage? As far as I know....they do!!
@Lure @gambit

Nope they don't. There is a certain standart for 5th generation planes, AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Arrays) radar. They use Radar Warning Receivers to do what you have stated. But radars such as AESA are low probability intercept radars which means that they don't get tracked easily.

Gambit is in the industry he may verify it better, but I've read that F-35 can track and jam (Despite AESA radars are very hard to jam) F-22's radars. F-35 has an AESA radar as well but of course it has an upgraded version.

So state-of-art radars are qualified (defensively) with mainly two features, resistant to jamming and their probability of being intercepted by Radar Warning Receivers.