How would you defeat today's stealth?

[Stormbringer]

With all the new stealth planes in production and on the drawing boards I was wondering this? How would you detect them and how you attack them once you did?

[Specialist]

With all the new stealth planes in production and on the drawing boards I was wondering this? How would you detect them and how you attack them once you did?

I don't know much about their specs here are my proposals:

1. Use high sensor planes to partol desired area.
2. Satellites in orbit if possible.
3. Get better spies

[Exonerate]

Would overlaping radar arrays work?

[Master of Ossus]

The problem is actually relatively simple in principle, but enormously difficult in practice. What you need to do is use lots of radar systems linked with spectacularly powerful computers. You track everything in the sky, and look for things that are moving fast. Stealth aircraft might have the cross-sections of small birds, but small birds usually don't travel at 400-500 mph. In theory, you could isolate such aircraft from the normal flow of things in the atmosphere by using such a method.

[TrailerParkJawa]

I would look into optical tracking. Might only be good for small sections of the sky though. Engine baffling or not, they still put out heat hotter than the surrounding air. That should show up on good thermal sites. I would think. Since Ive never looked through thermal sites myself, I could be full of it.

[tharkûn]

High precision measurement of the Doppler shift for that birdsized cross section should give you the relative velocity, which is a good indication that it is a stealth aircraft.

[XaLEv]

What would be the best way to watch the atmosphere itself for signs of the plane's passing?

[Wicked Pilot]

The only thing stealth does is decrease the effective ranges of radar. The most obvious was to conteract this is to tightly space many radar sights together in a kind of shield around whatever you are trying to defend. This however is costly, and all these sited must be defended.

High precision measurement of the Doppler shift for that birdsized cross section should give you the relative velocity, which is a good indication that it is a stealth aircraft.

That might work, but if it did it would also be easy to make decoys to fool that type of system.

I would look into optical tracking.

Extremely bad idea. Totally ineffective in bad weather.

[tharkûn]

Xalev: Not really, you can tag Stealth fighters with good IR detection (or vis LOS), but those have minimal effects. Seeing the effects on the atmosphere is not that easy as the random motion of the air tends to diffuse that signal quickly.

WP: Actually you can use cell phone towers, radio transmitters, and television stations as sources. The problem is still that you need the entire network for the detection to work so defending them is a royal bitch.

[XaLEv]

Xalev: Not really, you can tag Stealth fighters with good IR detection (or vis LOS), but those have minimal effects. Seeing the effects on the atmosphere is not that easy as the random motion of the air tends to diffuse that signal quickly.

I wasn't asking if it's the best way, I was asking what is the best way to do it.

[weemadando]

The Russian "Big-Ear" systems...

Listen for them acoustically.

[Wicked Pilot]

The Russian "Big-Ear" systems...

Listen for them acoustically.

The U.S. tried a similiar thing in Vietnam to track the vietcong throught the jungle. Once they were on to us, the system became worthless.

Besides, if a plane is coming at you close to or at the speed of sound, your reaction time would be minimal or none.

[Knife]

Stategic grouping of radar sites and using high power search radar when you have a possible contact is about the only way. If you have a large area to cover than the ability of a stealth to find a weak point in you radar coverage increases.

[tharkûn]

Stategic grouping of radar sites and using high power search radar when you have a possible contact is about the only way. If you have a large area to cover than the ability of a stealth to find a weak point in you radar coverage increases.
How long do you honestly think your high power radar is going to last?

You can defeat it with power or numbers, defending either is a royal bitch. High power radar acts as a giant "Bomb Me" sign.

I think your best shot in prolonged conflict is going for the doppler shift and then swapping over to LOS tracking (if possible) ... and even that is going to suck.

[Knife]

Stategic grouping of radar sites and using high power search radar when you have a possible contact is about the only way. If you have a large area to cover than the ability of a stealth to find a weak point in you radar coverage increases.
How long do you honestly think your high power radar is going to last?

You can defeat it with power or numbers, defending either is a royal bitch. High power radar acts as a giant "Bomb Me" sign.

I think your best shot in prolonged conflict is going for the doppler shift and then swapping over to LOS tracking (if possible) ... and even that is going to suck.

You wouldn't keep it on all the time. When the standard radar that is grouped around a stategic asset has a probable target, switch on the high beams to illuminate the stealth. Stealth is'nt a get out of jail free card, put enough radar into it and you can see it. The problem lies in that wide spread radar leaves spaces that a stealth can slip through the gaps in.

[weemadando]

Actually my first course of action in a war with the US would be to launch a terrorist action/hacking attack/whatever against the GPS nexus stations. Bring down the worldwide GPS and you have swung the tide of war AMAZINGLY in your direction as so much of the modern military tech relies on it.

[tharkûn]

You wouldn't keep it on all the time. When the standard radar that is grouped around a stategic asset has a probable target, switch on the high beams to illuminate the stealth. Stealth is'nt a get out of jail free card, put enough radar into it and you can see it. The problem lies in that wide spread radar leaves spaces that a stealth can slip through the gaps in.
Sure but any radio receiver is going to pick up the bleed from the "high beams" if they are looking for it and given enough of em you can triangulate its position ... which will promptly get bombed.


Taking out the GPS is a good idea, but it is rather hard to do. Of course I'd just replace it with high altitude balloons that know their position from a LOS measurement from a secure ground position. It is obviously not as good, but it makes the GPS dependant weapons somewhat valueable. In the next major war every satellite in the sky will likely get shot down ... they are just too valuable.

[Sea Skimmer]

Actually my first course of action in a war with the US would be to launch a terrorist action/hacking attack/whatever against the GPS nexus stations. Bring down the worldwide GPS and you have swung the tide of war AMAZINGLY in your direction as so much of the modern military tech relies on it.

Almost nothing requires GPS to work except JDAM's. Everything else uses GPS to update INS systems. Rather then render thing useless, you're just increasing the CEP's by a fair margin. A real pain, but not crippling in any respect.

[Sea Skimmer]

Modern air attacks are becoming near impossible to defeat from the ground, both stealth and conventional. If you could assemble every air defense toy on the market your system might hold, but no one can do that. MALI will help some, but the power is still with the aircraft.

The best option is your own fourth Generation fighters defending a swarm of AEW aircraft, that takes away the simple "Fire a few hundred JSOW's at them!" option of SEAD/DEAD, which almost nothing can take.

You also need an offensive option. With modern attack aircraft and bombers priced as they are, a hoard of cheep cruise missiles is probably better. Blast the bases and the attackers are in trouble.

[Wicked Pilot]

Actually my first course of action in a war with the US would be to launch a terrorist action/hacking attack/whatever against the GPS nexus stations. Bring down the worldwide GPS and you have swung the tide of war AMAZINGLY in your direction as so much of the modern military tech relies on it.

Your plan is SERIOUSILY invconeived. U.S. aircraft rely on INS primarily, and GPS as a secondary source. Even if you could take down GPS, which you probably will not considering Iraq and Serbia probably tried their hardest, you would be taking down your own ability to navigate. What will you use, LORAN?

[weemadando]

Actually my first course of action in a war with the US would be to launch a terrorist action/hacking attack/whatever against the GPS nexus stations. Bring down the worldwide GPS and you have swung the tide of war AMAZINGLY in your direction as so much of the modern military tech relies on it.

Your plan is SERIOUSILY invconeived. U.S. aircraft rely on INS primarily, and GPS as a secondary source. Even if you could take down GPS, which you probably will not considering Iraq and Serbia probably tried their hardest, you would be taking down your own ability to navigate. What will you use, LORAN?

Australian navy and airforce don't rely on GPS as a system, and though it might remove a level of redundancy it won't be fatal. Much like it would be for the US.

I'm not sure of this, but isn't GPS one of the checklist items that you cannot take off without in the USAF?

And in the infantry, Australian infantry are taught how to map read and navigate by traditional means, rather than relying on tech.

The loss of GPS would by no means be a fatal blow, but it would dent the capacity of a military reliant on tech to work cohesively.

[Wicked Pilot]

Australian navy and airforce don't rely on GPS as a system, and though it might remove a level of redundancy it won't be fatal. Much like it would be for the US.

I didn't realize you're Australian. Your mentioning of terrorist made me think you were talking about commanding a less advanced military such as Iraq's or Serbia's.

I'm not sure of this, but isn't GPS one of the checklist items that you cannot take off without in the USAF?

I don't know of any aircraft in which that is the case We still use TACAN, VORs, NDBs, INS, and GPS.

And in the infantry, Australian infantry are taught how to map read and navigate by traditional means, rather than relying on tech.

Same here

The loss of GPS would by no means be a fatal blow, but it would dent the capacity of a military reliant on tech to work cohesively.

Lesser forces like GPS, as their forces are not as well trained in traditional navigation

[Sea Skimmer]

Actually my first course of action in a war with the US would be to launch a terrorist action/hacking attack/whatever against the GPS nexus stations. Bring down the worldwide GPS and you have swung the tide of war AMAZINGLY in your direction as so much of the modern military tech relies on it.

Your plan is SERIOUSILY invconeived. U.S. aircraft rely on INS primarily, and GPS as a secondary source. Even if you could take down GPS, which you probably will not considering Iraq and Serbia probably tried their hardest, you would be taking down your own ability to navigate. What will you use, LORAN?

Australian navy and airforce don't rely on GPS as a system, and though it might remove a level of redundancy it won't be fatal. Much like it would be for the US.

I'm not sure of this, but isn't GPS one of the checklist items that you cannot take off without in the USAF?

No...

Most USAF aircraft only got it in the last few years, many still don't have it, and almost none where produced with it as a built in. As it is most aircraft which do have GPS have a hand held unit strapped to the pilots map board. Only the most advanced pods and heavy bombers got built with internal receivers. And they still work fine without it, it just gets used to updte the INS and you can do that with the radar.

[HemlockGrey]

From what I've read in this thread, it seems that the best way to stop stealth aircraft is to blow them up before they take off.

[data_link]

From what I've read in this thread, it seems that the best way to stop stealth aircraft is to blow them up before they take off.

Of course. That's the best way to stop any aircraft, didn't you know that?