Is stealth technology a meme?

>Is there any chance that optical technology will evolve to the point where any attempt at camouflage will be virtually useless? Please help me guys, I really want to feed my hopes for the return of melee style ground combat.

[citation absent]

Incompetence-enabled golden BBs are not an argument.

When I read retarded questions like this, it reminds me of that dream scene in dumb and dumber. Except that in this case the moron behind it is imagining aircraft combat.

Seriously OP, what kind of retarded reasoning did you follow to come to the conclusion that stealth being useless would bring dogfights back?

But to answer the question, you need the exact opposite, for stealth to be so good that only close-range combat is possible. But that isn't going to happen because people would come up with better ways of dealing with enemy aircraft.

>Doesn't negate stealth. Maybe reduce it's effectiveness but even AESA doesn't negate it.

sigh
sigh no2

let me give an insight to enlightment

the MAIN advantage of aesa type radars is the fact that they can be used to hop frequencies in near instantaneous time at the same power as a PESA radar consumes..

HOWEVER
the second main advantage of aesa radars is the fact that because they can use a wide range of freq it means that if someone has made a pretty nice algorithm for them they can remove noise passively
BUT
but
but
this requires an INSANE computational power to the likes of a literal supercomputer to crunch all that data in real time

that is why you see the CC's from all the aesa stations around the world going from mere few KW like PESA were to few tens KW
stealth is a meme to whoever has the capacity to have aesa tech
thats the absolute truth

Yeah, I messed up. For a possibility of the return of dogfight, when talking about radar detection, we would need perfect stealth, not the other way around.

>Maybe missile spam but drones will only work until they get EW'd into stupidity.

EW is also an endless sequence of one-upmanship just like guns vs armor or radar vs. stealth.

Kosovo was actually under SEAD at the time and could only keep their radars running for a few seconds at a time.

That's cute.

But nice that you actually didn't provide any citation.

Not all bombings were covered by SEAD missions.

The F-117 was actually deployed to avoid the time and ressources bounding SEAD missions.

I noticed that as soon as I posted the thread. "Perfect stealth" was what I had in mind, actually.

The frequency hopping wouldn't give you a major advantage against stealth. You'd actually get a signal but it would be far less than what you'd see from a conventional aircraft.

Mainly, this is an anti-jamming tech rather than an anti-stealth tench.

>changing frequencies so far due the nature of aesa wont give you any advantage since you can practicly combine the results and create a target

you forgot that aesa radar practicly removed the need to have a decimetric radar eh?

True, and there are ways to tilt things in your favor. Keeping the drones near the controller, for one. This puts inverse square in your favor and lets you use harder to jam techs like infrared.

But don't just throw a fuckton of drones at the enemy like it's Star Wars and you want to bring down the Old Republic. The enemy just needs EW advantage for an instant and you've lost.

>sigh

Go back to tumblr with your effeminate garbage

Nah, that's the only reason AESA can see stealth at all. It's still massively disadvantaged when it comes to detection.

That’s precisely what happened, though.

>pre 2000
>F22 born
>out of era plane that's three decades too early to be true
>Two decades later
>F35 spawned
>literally abomination plane inferior than F22
Why shouldn't we invest more in F22 2.0 rather than moneysink F35.
>we need carrier based stealth plane
Just revamped F22 for naval version based on F14

[citation absent]

more power equals more power

and yes its exactly this aesa can scan wide narrow upper and lower band at the same time but as i said the main problem is filtering out the noise

Because just because an airplane has steatg doesnt mean it was made for the same job, the f35 is not meant to compete with or replace the f22.

I haven't seen a single citation either way. So as a slightly un-interested third party in this conversation you're all full of shit at this time.

>more power equals more power
More power equals more detection. You turn up the juice and the enemy will just lob a HARM at you

So did it happen that way or not?

Sounds like the F-117 all used the same approach corridor and gave away their position any time they fired missiles/dropped bombs.

Which is perfectly believable if you've got 100 flights planned a day.

But flying for long stretches with the bomb bay doors open is kinda...dumb. Like not even stealth-dumb but aerodynamically dumb.

The F-35 is basically a stealth F-18. Or maybe F/A-18, I keep mixing those up.

It Can dogfight but it's split between that and anti-surface work.

The bomb bay doors open part and the reusing paths part? Both are public knowledge.

They weren't literally flying the whole way open. The SAM crew was smarter than average, and given the multiple passes, had time to figure out what the door-opening signature meant.

yeah just use a harm senpai!

because we all know COMAO situations always carry anti radiation missiles

holy shit i really do wonder if any of you actually have any knowledge around anything regarding the military

>That denial
>Not a single sauce

5/5, and let's remember stealth covers all the wavelengths (visible light, IR...), including sound.

Radar may evolve to make stealth as we currently know it useless, however jamming and ECM will always exist to fool detection. A return to dogfight style air combat would need to be a result of countermeasures evolving to reliably defeat missile shots across all ranges and forcing aircraft to align themselves to take unguided shots.

I am not a fan of the F-35, but it has 2 really good reasons for existing. The first is cost, which took forever to come down, but it has. The second is operating off Marine's mini carriers.

The F-117 was shot down because of complacency and circumstance. Same bat time, same bat flight path for weeks on end. Radars got a glimpse of it because a bomb bay door was open, possibly by malfunction. I remember reading it was a full moon that night and they could be tracked optically.

I know that turning up the power just gets you shot at from further away. I mean, the Jeremy Clarkson method? Really?

You need an anime plot device to make air combat great again
>Minovsky generating bombs when?

No.

They didnt fly that way long. They open, bomb, scoot n close. What happened was that the sam site basically radiated until it picked up that exact moment, which was and is incredibly dangerous because a big F117 mission used to be SEAD/DEAD; in Iraq 1 they'd be paired with a "bait" plane and once the radar popped on to target the bait plane the F117 would blast the SAM site. For a SAM site to be radiating that long to get a lock was very hazardous, more so than normal. Unfortunately for the Serbs, such mistakes (regular path, poor screening) are easily corrected planning problems and can be accounted for. Hence why it didnt happened again. Now the F117 isnt a good benchmark for FUTURE air war, but it was a product of the era.

No. Even if detection greatly improves, a stealthy plane would still be harder to see than a non stealth plane, basically by definition. Stealth isnt about being invisible, its about making sure you can safely get to missile-chuck range while the other guy cant get a clean lock or ID, or in ground attack it makes it so you can get closer to a SAM-protected site without them targeting you. Its not invisibility, its not invulnerability, its about engagement range

OP here, actually, it's pretty close to that yeah.