Re: [GZG] [OFFICIAL] Question: was Re: [SG3]: What if?

["Binhan Lin" <binhan.lin@xxxxxxxxx>]

There is actually a significant amount of metal in a bi-plane - the entire engine is pretty much a solid chunk of steel.  In addition, while having a lower radar reflectivity than metal, other materials such a wood and composites still have a radar signature -(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-stealth.htm )

 

"While not invisible, the F-22's radar cross section is comparable to the radar cross sections of birds and bees." (see above web reference)

 

For radar, the F-22 uses an AN/APG-77 Radar, which is estimated to be able to detect modern jets at ranges in excess of 30 miles, most of which have smaller radar profiles than a WWI aircraft. In addition the APG-77 is capable of tracking a 1 square meter target out to 110 nautical miles (http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Raptor.html).

 

IR of a WWI plane is also not insignificant with a 3.75 micometer wavelength window (least background from sun, ground and clouds) being used by most IR homing missiles, the energy of reflected sunlight is sufficient for an IR missile to track - ( http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-IR-Guidance.html ) Modern Jets have paints that reduce this to 5-15% reflection, but older paints reflect as much as 60% of solar IR.  In addition, the heat of a piston engine is well into the detection range of IR detectors.

 

Airspeeds of a WWI aircraft are well into the range of modern helicopters, and the general consensus is that helicopters are easy pickings for modern jets.

 

A more detailed link on the F-22 Raptor is : http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Raptor.html or the official Air Force fact sheet: http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=199

 

Regarding your other comments - As we move to more UAV's, the computer systems running them will improve, especially once the people get over the idea that an autonomous machine is a dangerous thing.  Most people still have the hang up that they want a human "in the loop" to make final decisions.  The newest planes can not be flown mechanically and require computers to be flown, the pilot merely makes an overall choice and the computer executes it.  The same will occur with combat overall, the human merely makes the decision to engage and the computer will do the rest - piddling details such as maneuver, target acquisition, weapon selection and firing will all be left to the computer. Technology will force human action to higher and higher levels of decision making - the minutae will be handled by computers, so issues such a communication lag, communication loss etc. are moot - the computer knows what it needs to do and will do it, it doesn't need to be micromanaged.

 

-Binhan

 

 

On 2/6/08, john tailby <John_Tailby@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

That's exactly the sort of example I was talking about.

 

What's the radar signature of a WW1 biplane? there is very little metal used so they could be hard to spot. They fly so low and slow that a raptor would be hard pushed to engage it with it's cannon and even then I'd bet the WW1 plane could out turn it. With radar guided weapons and minimal infrared signature the raptor might have a hard time of engaging.

 

The WW1 plane has little chance of engaging the Raptor.

 

I don't know that remote controlled drones can fly as well as manned air combat. They are fine for surveillance but I don't think they could do air -air without an onboard AI and a large amount of bandwidth to transmit the sensor data to the human operators.

 

The other challenges of using remote control drones is maintaining communications. At the speed a warplane travels a few seconds delay to bounce the signal from one or more satellites to base and back could produce an unacceptable lag.

 

There is also the susceptibility of the "droid army" where if you command signal is lost then your remote drone would all lose control and resort to onboard computer backups and preplanned flight paths, Pretty easy for a human operated plane to take apart a drone then.

 

I certainly see why an airforce that makes fighter pilots the top of it's pecking order wants to keep funding to manned operations. The last thing you want is to be replaced by a geek with a games consol.

----- Original Message -----

From: Binhan Lin

Would a WWI biplane work as well as an F-22 Raptor?  The difference in spotting, propulsion, material and weapon technology is so vast that they really aren't comparable, and yet only 90 years separates the two levels of technology.

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l