View Full Version : How good are those Stealth Paints for PLAAF and PLAN fighters ??
Su-27 Pilot
10-12-2005, 08:33 PM
I know they are painted with those paints to conceal their existance. But how good are they ??
Azn boy
10-12-2005, 08:37 PM
Well to my knowledge China does not have stealth paint.(correct me if i'm wrong)
Su-27 Pilot
10-12-2005, 08:39 PM
Well to my knowledge China does not have stealth paint.(correct me if i'm wrong)
I dont have a link to a site but I read some PLAAF magazines. PLAAF said that their "NEW" paint to the planes arent as good as " THEIR's" "rolleyes"
IDonT
10-12-2005, 08:49 PM
I know they are painted with those paints to conceal their existance. But how good are they ??
They are as good as concealing as regular paint is at concealing against radar. But from a visual point of view, camoflauge patterns are used.
Su-27 Pilot
10-12-2005, 08:57 PM
They are as good as concealing as regular paint is at concealing against radar. But from a visual point of view, camoflauge patterns are used.
Why camo-planes ?? Eye candies for the pliots ??
MIGleader
10-12-2005, 10:28 PM
a camoplane helps in close combat. the other guy gets siezures(jk). perhaps ther pla has experimented with ram paint for their fighters. they already have it on ships, and the new russian mig-29s feature it too.
nice flanker icon, su-27 pilot. is it an su-27, 33, or 35?
Su-27 Pilot
10-12-2005, 11:30 PM
nice flanker icon, su-27 pilot. is it an su-27, 33, or 35?
Actualy ii is a Su-27 but i think it looks like a Su-37 too.
Mao23
10-13-2005, 02:30 AM
camo paint is supposed to conceal planes from the human eye when they are on the ground but these days it isn't as effective as before for photography has got really good and satellites see all.
ArjunMk1
10-13-2005, 06:42 AM
Doesn't Chinese fighters have those radar absorbing paint ??
Its present in Indian air force !! All frontline fighters of IAF are painted with this. It increases the weight of the plane by 50kg and reduces RCS upto 70% !!!
IDonT
10-13-2005, 08:39 AM
a camoplane helps in close combat. the other guy gets siezures(jk). perhaps ther pla has experimented with ram paint for their fighters. they already have it on ships, and the new russian mig-29s feature it too.
nice flanker icon, su-27 pilot. is it an su-27, 33, or 35?
European nations are painting a cockpit on the underside of their planes to confuse their opponets during a dogfigt.
I have seen the same thing on Canadian Hornets and USAF A-10's.
The problem with radar is that the fuselage it self gives a quite small ehco compared to e.g. the turbine blades. This is why the B-1B e.g. has a very effective shielding so that the blades will not be visible on radar. Different locations for the intakes have also been tried (as everyone knows...). So on an older aircraft I would assume that RAM-paint doesn't help that much, but on newer planes where the fuselage presents a relatively large part of the total RCS such paint probably will be more usefull.
MIGleader
10-13-2005, 10:19 AM
European nations are painting a cockpit on the underside of their planes to confuse their opponets during a dogfigt.
the opponent is still going to fire at you regardless of where your cocpit is
the opponent is still going to fire at you regardless of where your cocpit is
True.... but hey, sometimes u might just get lucky survive coz the enemy got confused for a split second.
Knarfo
10-13-2005, 12:08 PM
the opponent is still going to fire at you regardless of where your cocpit is
If a solution is achieved it does of course not matter anymore. The point of painting a canopy on the underside is to confuse. To make harder for the opponent to determine/predict which way you are going. Pulling or pushing on the stick?
MIGleader
10-13-2005, 12:28 PM
If a solution is achieved it does of course not matter anymore. The point of painting a canopy on the underside is to confuse. To make harder for the opponent to determine/predict which way you are going. Pulling or pushing on the stick?
in the world of bvr, such camo is going have a very minimal effect on air combat
Knarfo
10-13-2005, 12:43 PM
in the world of bvr, such camo is going have a very minimal effect on air combat
Naturally. But in wvr fights visual camo still matters.
Besides, loads of people here gets very excited talking about thrust vectoring and adding canards even though the importance of super manouverabilty is decreasing even in wvr combat due to HMS and high off boresight missiles.
MIGleader
10-13-2005, 12:49 PM
Naturally. But in wvr fights visual camo still matters.
Besides, loads of people here gets very excited talking about thrust vectoring and adding canards even though the importance of super manouverabilty is decreasing even in wvr combat due to HMS and high off boresight missiles.
supermanuverability allows you to ofted dodge a missle, but camoflouge will not!!
IDonT
10-13-2005, 02:27 PM
supermanuverability allows you to ofted dodge a missle, but camoflouge will not!!
The limits of the Human body is only 9G before blacking out. Modern missiles can do up to 50G turns.
Knarfo
10-13-2005, 02:59 PM
supermanuverability allows you to ofted dodge a missle, but camoflouge will not!!
Hmmm... Not too convinced about the often bit. In real life dodging a modern missile that has lock on is not like in the movies. For one thing the speed difference is huge. Couple this with all aspect seekers and low smoking/smokless motors it is difficult to get good visual warning and to visually track the missile (cutting down on reaction time). Missiles pull 40-60 g vs 9g at best for fighter. But of course because of the speed difference the difference in turning radius not that big. Another thing is that the Flanker series can not do those crazy manouvers at speeds over ca 600 km/h (or was even 400 km/h??). Which means that in a turning fight they are already unhealthy slow. Not necessary a catastrophe 1v1 but if out numbered they are sitting ducks. Most importantly modern missiles have a huge field of view and the seekers are fast tracking which add up to a big so called no escape zone. If you make a sharp turn at low speed you will not get far away from the turning point in a short time. Your best friend is definately good IRCM, not super manuverabilty. And of course not being easy to spot and visual track helps too.
MIGleader
10-13-2005, 03:59 PM
you can always bleed the missle, make it run out of fuel or outrun it by manuvewring.
adeptitus
10-13-2005, 05:02 PM
you can always bleed the missle, make it run out of fuel or outrun it by manuvewring.
In 3rd world (African) air to air engagements, it's common to find pilots firing their missiles at maximum or near-maximum range. In those cases the missiles often fail to score a hit.
IMO the future is in UAE combat drones running on AI. Without the constraints of a human pilot, a combat drone can fly faster and harder, take greater risks, and do the job for less $. Combat AI R&D prolly cost a lot less than having to train a combat pilot for 10 years, and have the guy roll off to fly 747's.
Knarfo
10-13-2005, 05:29 PM
you can always bleed the missle, make it run out of fuel or outrun it by manuvewring.
Could work if you spot it and it is launched near the edge of its range. Although I somehow get the feeling you are not considering the impact of new seekers and other recent developments. It is not like you can stare at missle and do a last split second turn to fool it.
Think about it this: After the expanding their bvr missile the fighters are closing to launch wvr missiles. Provided that both parties are going for the kill the missile is likely to launched in frontal hemisphere. The closing speed is huge. In order to maintain lock on the missile will have to change its course relatively little at longer ranges = little speed and energy loss. To escape the fighter can try to manouver to maintain as big a displacement as possible relative to the tracetory of the incoming missile. Combined with good ircm this is probably the best chance . Since if the missile looses track even for a short moment, it will now have to do harder turn. If this happens when the missle is close it may not be able to reaquire even with a wide angle agile seeker. or turn tail and try to out run it which means turning loosing more speed in the process. All the time while the missile has reached it top speed of M3-4. No amount of jinking will fool a modern missile. Bleeding its speed works only if the motor already has burned out awhile ago and the missile is already fairly slow. You would now be in the "might get lucky zone" (which means the missile was less than optimally launched). Modern missiles like python do the hard costly manuovering immediatly after launch if launched at high off boresight angles which will not affect it its range so much and nowadays I think it even has a sustainer of sorts.
Today wvr is a different ball game compared to the olden days of tailchase aim-9b and the likes. If the missle is launched within parameters chance of escape by manuovering is slim at best unless you have some classy IRCM.
And the camo angle: In within VISUAL range combat obvioulsy anything messes with VISUALLY aquiring a target and correctly assesing its trajectory is going to affect the combat.
MIGleader
10-13-2005, 06:22 PM
In 3rd world (African) air to air engagements, it's common to find pilots firing their missiles at maximum or near-maximum range. In those cases the missiles often fail to score a hit.
IMO the future is in UAE combat drones running on AI. Without the constraints of a human pilot, a combat drone can fly faster and harder, take greater risks, and do the job for less $. Combat AI R&D prolly cost a lot less than having to train a combat pilot for 10 years, and have the guy roll off to fly 747's.
AI? the uavs think for themselves? the owrld is screwed. the mchinese will take over. well, training a uav pilot isnt so hard. the pilots probably wasted half their lives playing combat video games anyways.
Su-27 Pilot
10-13-2005, 11:59 PM
[QUOTE=MIGleader]supermanuverability allows you to ofted dodge a missle.QUOTE]
Camo is only good with poor weather aerical combat.
MIGleader
10-14-2005, 03:57 PM
The limits of the Human body is only 9G before blacking out. Modern missiles can do up to 50G turns.
actually, its proven that humans can sustain a short time of 40g, but it will be VERY painful, and have results such as temporary blindness. not good for a fighter pilot.
tphuang
10-14-2005, 06:48 PM
in Armageddon, I think they had to suffer 12g acceleration.
coolieno99
10-14-2005, 08:02 PM
I know they are painted with those paints to conceal their existance. But how good are they ??
It is said to reduce radar cross-section by 50 % . Initial application will be painted on cruise missiles. :coffee:
Source: Aviation Week
Su-27 Pilot
10-17-2005, 12:54 AM
It is said to reduce radar cross-section by 50 % . Initial application will be painted on cruise missiles. :coffee:
Source: Aviation Week
So its true after all.
sumdud
10-19-2005, 06:30 PM
China do have RAM. They are putting them onto the J-10s' bottom.
$50 for 70%, now that's a deal.
As for visual camoflage, China don't have planes with real camoflage. They are painted gray-white, so they'll probably hide in cloudy skies, but there are no cockpit-paint on the bottom or anything similar.
Knarfo
10-20-2005, 09:47 AM
As for visual camoflage, China don't have planes with real camoflage. They are painted gray-white, so they'll probably hide in cloudy skies,
But that is real camoflage!!! How could it not be??
walter
10-21-2005, 08:29 PM
AI? the uavs think for themselves? the owrld is screwed. the mchinese will take over. well, training a uav pilot isnt so hard. the pilots probably wasted half their lives playing combat video games anyways.
AI doesn't mean they think for themselves and do what they want. It just means very sophisticated programming that would allow a machine to act and react in a threat environment.
and dodging missles :roll:
It is very doubtful that mankind will be able to create machines that are self-aware for the next 200 years. However, self-aware robots make for very good movies.
MIGleader
10-22-2005, 02:04 PM
AI doesn't mean they think for themselves and do what they want. It just means very sophisticated programming that would allow a machine to act and react in a threat environment.
and dodging missles :roll:
if they can learn to, they will soon be self aware and start thinking for them selves in what to do.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.