gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
Then what are you doing here, if not to troll ?I don't find a need to clarify to you,...
Then you have NOT done your homework.There are pros and cons for each technology and how realistically systems are tested(both tactical and strategic capabilities) and I found from their views and my own analysis that many systems are not tested for operational conditions(for example no target drone in the market can simulate threat evasion maneuvers or deploy decoys with the timing a manned aircraft would do combat).
In radar detection, a hit by a transmission is considered the same as a hit by a missile or bullet. The goal of creating a radar low observable body is to avoid detection by the most common radar designs. That is as realistic as any can get.
You are correct. I DO NOT agree. Right now, the US military, specifically the USAF, is the most experienced in combat in terms of radar avoidance. Do not tell me how 'biggest, nastiest teacher' is combat when your India is struggling in the same field you are criticizing US.The same way "stealth"(I hate to use the word, as only amateurs,marketing goons and fan boys do that ) has so many considerations like aspect of the aircraft during maneuver,IR emissions,acoustic emissions,electronic emissions,wavelengths used,the processing used,operating environments,human skill,maintenance quality that usefully deploying it in combat is questionable. I believe so and I stand by it, don't agree???????? wait till combat occurs till then none of us are correct because combat is the biggest,nastiest teacher.
Like you stated that combat is the nastiest teacher. Let US know when there is such a jammer and whoever has one is willing to take US on -- in real combat....a well designed repeater jammer can give the data link a run for its money,...