Tupolev Tu 22 Backfire - from swords to plowshares

[surfgodx]

Unless my friend in the U.S. airforce is full of shit L band detection/VHF wave detection is meaningless and he explains it like this.....L bands WILL detect stealth aircraft if the resolution can be tuned to make the craft detectable through all the "static" of ambient carrier waves BUT and this is a HUGE BUT...only X-band carriers enough information to provide a firing solution to the missiles to lock onto...detecting an aircraft 60 kms away moving mach speeds give you about 3 seconds to react

[starknight97]

@surfgodx their static on any band from back ground radiation or a solar flare at times. it don't mess wit ship radar becuase their output is more yet in deep space yes any radar will work father out. yet a solar flare will jam any radar if it's big enough. X-bands sucks a stealth though do too finer waves which reflect every way but back. ram coatings absorb some too. same for the pilot too yet the s400 40N6 travels at mach 12 so even the f22 2.5 helps none for the 120km fly over.

[alexkills]

@starknight97 you actually spelled something right for once! I'm almost proud, except for the fact that you're living proof that it's easy to talk trash on the internet. I have a full time job, and it definitely isn't scanning people's comments on YouTube like you do, and assuming you do have a profession, I wouldn't be surprised if you were just a bottom feeder. Your attitude shows it.

I'll give you my address so you can come talk some of that trash to my face like a man, instead of on the net

[alexkills]

@starknight97 I think you should get a job. Being a dickhead on YouTube doesn't come with a paycheck. The comment (not spelled commit, smartest guy in the world) I made was in good fun. Take your flame war somewhere else like 4chan where douchebags like you belong.

[starknight97]

@alexkills i think you should get a real job oh that right you here on you tube to bitching about your self what a Archaea microbe you are lol. Good fun when it me yet not when you HS teacher lol. 4chan wait isn't that where pedos like you live is on 4chan? i remember reading something about that. get a life.

[surfgodx]

"fly by wire" ISN"T a necessity for most modern jets.the F-117 CANNOT fly without it, it has the aerodynamics of a shoe box and teeters on the edge of crash ever time it takes off. if you think the Su is better than a B-1 you obviously are just another interweb know it all pretending to have knowledge as the B-1 is superior in EVERY SINGLE SPECIFICATION including top speed.And I'm telling you for a FACT that SAMs searching with L band will detect a B2 about never because of resolution

[surfgodx]

So please don't compare the F-117's abilities to the B-2 or any other 5-6th generation craft we have now because they are not even close to comparison. That is like comparing the Su-37 to the MiG-21

[surfgodx]

The F-117 was a flying test bed, it was NOT a production aircraft and was more or less an operational prototype, I think we only built like 50-60 of them. It was nicknamed the "Wobbly Goblin" by the pilots and if it wasn't for the computers would have been completely unflyable because it was soo freaking unstable. It has to fly completely straight and level and slow down to like 300 mph on bombing runs and with hte doors open is basically a target waiting for someone to notice it

[starknight97]

@surfgodx no matter the f117 still has a 3d avg stealth of .003rcs m3. if it had been the s200/300 with x band radar it never had seen the f117. i will compare it too the b2 very much as their stealth rating almost the same but worse do to size(.02rcs) and being as big as the b2 is is even more restrictive in it's flight with a unstable airframe or fly by wire system.

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 again you demostrate that you have no practical experience and are just spouting nonsense..this time you included technical specs that are incorrect. in simplistic terms the radar signature of an F-117 is about the same size as a sparrow(the bird not the missile) and the B-2 has a signature the size of a 2-3 inch spider.the ONLY time a B-2 will be detected on L band is if it is with 10-20 miles of the SAM site and #2 if it has it bomb bay doors open and that is a proven 100% FACT

[starknight97]

@surfgodx oh no now you demo this as you are using a head on only rcs. as a rcs of 1m2 is a human. sorry not m3 is all that is wrong. Now the b2 Stealth is good about -40db yet she so big that this puts her stealth much higher the f22 which is also around -40db rcs. It's imposable for the b2 too have the rcs as the f22. as a marble and spider are about the same in size. if they have their bays open they have no stealth really at their rcs ping huge as nothing inside is stealth at all

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 and back to the B-2 it is perhaps the MOST STABLE airframe in existence..it was flow using simple mechanics by the Germans using prop engines and no electronics at all. we just happened to notice it is also magnificently stealthy when the proper materials are used.

longer radar waves increase the probability of detection of stealth aircraft but the operator will have to be amazing at reading it and to score a hit the target will have to be flying level and slow like the F-117 was

[starknight97]

@surfgodx Most stable here you have proven your idiot the b2 wing has been tried many times before and could not fly as it was too unstable till a computer could fly the aircraft it's self(fly by wire. some of the Fail wings are Horten Ho IV, Arado E.555,Boris Cheranovsky,& XB-35. then now you admit L band radar can see stealth. Sure it's see normal first but up the power and use computers and they see stealth fine and far like the s400 system does.

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 #1 You are truly a retard if you believe that statement about the B-2 needing computers to fly. The German Horten did NOT have computer assisted capability and flew just fine, the Northrop YB-49 did NOT have computer assisted capability and flew just fine.#2 I still assert theat L band search radars will ONLY detect stealth aircraft within 10- 20 km and ONLY if it has it bomb bay/weapon doors open. At 900 kmh that gives the SAM operator about 3 seconds to aquire targets and fire

[starknight97]

@surfgodx name 1 modern fighter or bomber that don't use fly by wire today. Even helicopter use it a computer just do a better job. though yes a flying wing can tail spin easy with no tail fins.So no it's not stable. lol i was her from anther tu22 site is why the only sites i can for are mainly political. on these since i did once work for the war machine. I try point out our current e.q. is not as good as the press say it is. the u.s. has new tech but it gets mothballed all the time.

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 Fly by wire computer assistance is absolutely needed on the F-117 and Su-47 but not on "flying wing" designs. It DOES HELP as flying wings have stability issues WHEN TURNING at sharp angles but is not a necessity for stable flight. I hate fly by wire designs..all anyone needs to do is find a way to incorporate EMP devices with air defenses and all the modern fly by wire designs will fall from the sky like dead leaves

[starknight97]

@surfgodx Thxs for saying i'm right"flying wings have stability issues WHEN TURNING at sharp angles" yes all advance tech dies. even a p51 would fall out the sky with a emp burst strong enough.Spark plugs will not work and any electric system will sort. even older cars stall unless diesel in build.Lol L band a theory you keep believing you brainwashing. it has worked and is refined on several 1000 SAM systems now. then remember Russia designed 3dmathematical stealth not the u.s.

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 *shrugs* it doesn't matter anyways since we will never fight each other. Russia can sell these "advanced radars" to Iran and we will blow them up and prove they don't work and your scientists will start working on a new angle. I am sorry to have to disagree but 3d search radars #1 are impossible from a stationary ground array and #2 L band is only accurate at DETECTING targets within 10-20 kms but don't have the resolution to give guidance solutions for fire control

[starknight97]

@surfgodx So true russia often remembers our freind ship from ww2 even if the u.s. forgets. yet their is a chance to go war with Russia. Russia and china have a war pact. So if we go too war with Iran china steps in then Russia has too as well. Yet unless Iran uses nukes i sure it be a local and standard arms war. yet we have threaten china directly with war from their cyber attacks on high value targets.

[starknight97]

@surfgodx Lol Iran trying as the u.s. is so fear full of new russian tech they order russia not too sell or give them too Iran. Iran had too over pay and buy them from Syria just too get old s300 then is trying to update some s200 to s300 but it Iran tech. this means they're upgraded but not as good as modern Russia s300.Then vs modern Russian tech the u.s.has no way though a S400 with 2 Pantsir-S1 guarding it.Even if say a f22 get close enough as soon as it fire the s400 will kill it.

[starknight97]

@surfgodx i said 3d mathematical stealth no radar yet 1 day 3d rad will be true. Bigger array and more power push radar farther out. Case in point the 67N6E GammA-DE(L-band) radar will pick up the f22 at 35 NMI(64.82 km) about. The RLM-M Nebo M (VHF band) will pick up the f22 at 40nmi(74..08km). this out ranges most f22 air too ground systems. make the f22 or f35 very impotent vs modern SAM systems. Then they have newer radar systems for the s400 and s500 soon too be out.

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 so even though the L band can detect the aircraft it cannot guide the missiles/guns

[starknight97]

@surfgodx yes though 2 things this does in the pak fa case it's knows where go hunting it'll be stealth too after all. in the s400 case it points it's directed focused x band radar dead at the f22 till it gets a lock something the that radar can't normally do. then the 2 Pantsir-S1 also point in the right direction after all once they are on alert their nothing the f22 can do to the S 400. it's huge whats huge is the l band and vhs band power output. a jammier has too be < then to jam.

[surfgodx]

@surfgodx China is going to do something stupid soon. They are waging internet and economic warfare on the world without thinking/caring if there are consequences. They devalue their currency,copy everyone's tech and products and are attacking many country's government computers, They are going to either be stopped or annihilated

[starknight97]

@surfgodx we are now behind in feilded tech in many fields, missiles, tanks, APC, IFV, landing vehicles, Soon air and even bombers. yes this why the German Horten as well as any flying wing as so many faults. YB-49 prototype suffered a high-speed taxiing accident and, as previously noted, was totally destroyed in the ensuing fire. here the thing you get a return it power and array size for how far l band radar will see.You can look up Russian studies it sees even the f22 rcs just fine

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 The L band theory is just that...a theory.It has not been SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN because the U.S. will not give up a stealth aircraft to test the theory on.

[alexkills]

@starknight97 yes I'm very aware of the capabilities of the TU-22 and the F-22. I do know that the tupolev is a bomber and not a bomber. No need to get riled up over a simple comment.

[starknight97]

@alexkills hmm then why the dumb commit of a fighter can down a bomber?

[alexkills]

@starknight97 Before you call me dumb, check your spelling first.

[alexkills]

@starknight87 no need to be a douche. Just saying.

[starknight97]

@alexkills will you brought it up now you want too here how dumb you original commit was. The tu22 can launch Kh-22 from 400km away. true the f22 might just be seeing this bomber on radar. Yet could do nothing too stop it's attack. tu22 could turn and burn and even if the f22 burn full it would run out fuel before it got into range of the tu22 at 72km.

[starknight97]

the tu22 make a good high load fast transport moving goods fast from point a to b in emergency or health risk. so the tu22 would become the fast load transit system or maybe the FT-22

[surfgodx]

TU-22 is outdated,non-stealth,and too slow to outrun interceptors

[starknight97]

@surfgodx yes still better then the b52 though or f111.

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 well that may be true in certain cases. we only use the B-52 in conflicts where we have established total air superiority and as far as I know we don't use the F-111 at all anymore. the B-2 is our established first strike bomber and when used in conjunction with our 5th gen stealth fighter bombers will pretty much be able to demolish anything we want day or night. it's kind of sad that Russia hasn't invented a new bomber platform in 30 years

[starknight97]

@surfgodx no we have no mid range bomber anymore yet the f111 is used by other country's. then yes the b2 is usefull vs these 2cd and 3rd world countries. yet vs advanced countries that use the s400 system with L band search radar the b2 is past it's prime. the s400 SAM would make sort work of the b2 now a days and see it come from far away with a RCS of only .02 rcs m2. the tu160 is being updated and has been not long ago. then watch out the pak da will put all bomber too shame.

[starknight97]

@surfgodx A major reason Russia hasn't made any thing to major for a little wile was the economic collapse of the soviet system.Then a huge mistake most u.s. people make is that Russia is still poor.With oil in the black sea and Siberia then Russia 2/3 claim on the new oil found in the north pole they will have more oil&gas then the entire middle east.Then of course Russia has ever other major resource know on the planet. they just current fear debt is all.Now it's the u.s. turn for $<

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 The economic situation in Russia shouldn't necessitate abandoning their responsibility for mid-range bomber platforms.I think it was probably something involving a pissing contest between the department heads.As far the L-band search radar is concerned...that is complete and total bullshit.I don't know if it was spread as misinformation by my country or yours but the fact remains that L-band has NOT been PROVEN to detect stealth aircraft but is merely a theory.. just like VHF waves

[starknight97]

@surfgodx And why not their mid range bomber better then the u.s. mid range bomber oh that right the u.s. no longer has one lol. L band radar bs yeah tell that too the f117 downed by a old ass s-125 sam lol. wrong again.

[surfgodx]

@starknight97 #1 the U.S. still has the B1-B (which the Su was designed to counter/copy) #2 the F-117 was shot down because ALL stealth aircraft lose some of their " radar invisibility" when the weapon doors (bomb bay doors) are open or the landing gear is down.the commander of the S.A.M. site Dani was VERY good at his job and had switched to long wave length search patterns (which are effective within 10-15 miles / 20-30 km).F-117s are unstable as hell and HAVE to fly level on bombing runs

[starknight97]

@surfgodx 1. you mean tu right the tu 160 just a better version of the b1b bomber. 2. funny cause it was just shot down going over a old s-125 SAM it wasn't firing when the SAM got a lock and fired. no such thing as radar invisibility yet just RCS reduction massive amount for the df22 and pak fa. 64 count as a production plane though she was the first 3d mathematical stealth made by a Russian scientist. all modern fight are fly by wire with unstable airframes as this get more agility.

[alexkills]

An F-22 can beat this plane into a plowshare any day.

[starknight97]

@alexkills hmm bomber vs air Superior fighter no duh. Can we hear a drrr dhh duuu with that statement.

[wward35634]

umm. ok