Prev: Re: [DS] Vehicle sizes Next: Re: NIFT Stealth II Trial AAR

Re: NIFT Stealth II Trial AAR

From: devans@u...
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 17:45:28 -0500
Subject: Re: NIFT Stealth II Trial AAR

But is this a valid argument? The F117 is an aircraft turned stealth,
it's less aerodynamic than normal aircraft. Given the constraints of a
spacecraft, does it take more effort to make a stealthed, aerodynamic
spacecraft, than it does to make only stealthed or only aerodynamic
spacecraft? Those are very different matters entirely?

The manner of stealth now seen, and we all know extrapolations to future
AND outer space are dangerous, is mostly the material, though shape is
still important.

The 117's shape is flat on the bottom to allow small angle
waves to 'bounce' mostly in the other direction, while it's highly
sides tends to bounce other, say, airborne, radar upwards. Not sure
the B-2.

If you focus on extra material for stealthy-ness in space ships in 3-d,
extra material to make a ship's shape conformal for passing through a
medium, then you can PSB that they are related, though not the same,
i.e. I
can add material to the shape and pay a bit extra to make it high-tech
stealthy material, both additions to the surface of the ship.

Or you can PSB it some other way altogether.


Prev: Re: [DS] Vehicle sizes Next: Re: NIFT Stealth II Trial AAR