Stealth vs. Stealth (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series



Message

Craigkn -> Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 3:20:04 AM)

I did a few searches, and read older threads on the topic - most dating from 2015 - but I felt it was worth bringing this up as a discussion point. I am playing with an AAW scenario - eight U.S. fighters vs. eight Russian Su-57's. I have tried the matchup with F-22A (2020 version) and F-35A (2021 version). The scenario is the U.S. group patrols a box, and the Russians approach. Both groups are not using radar. The blue side is supported by a E-3G, which is largely irrelevant as it cant detect the Su-57's anyway.

Nearly always the Su-57's detects the U.S. fighters first via IRST, and often gets the first shot off. The F-22's are blind until they detect incoming missiles, and by then its often too late. The F-35A's do better usually, because they have IRST. The lack of IRST on the F-22A seems a massive oversight. The F-35's seem to do a little better once combat starts, and in some tests detected the Su-57's first. Most F-22 vs. Su-57 playthroughs result in the Russian side winning. The F-35A's usually win their battles, but still loose 50-80% of their aircraft.

Playing around with EMCON settings, using radar just gets the U.S. fighters killed faster, as the Russians detect them much sooner. I never engaged the Russian's radar, as it seemed unnecessary as they were kicking so much ass.

I feel this is realistic, and the key factor for victory will be how many decent 5th gen fighters you can deploy. Dropping the F-22's IRST capability as a "cost saving" measure just meant that the U.S. wasted hundreds of billions of dollars on a 5th gen fighter that cant fight other 5th gen fighters. The F-35 seems to be vastly superior in its capabilities, but still suffers a high kill:loss ratio - in that case, the economic output of the nation, in terms of how many 5th gen fighters it can deploy, will be the deciding factor.

Playing around more, I replaced the F-22's with F-15EX Eagle II with the Tiger Eyes Pod (IRST), and they did better than the F-22's.

So my questions are this: How do you employ F-22's vs 5th gen fighters? I dont see a good path to success here.




Zanthra -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 5:28:07 AM)

To start with, the F-22 was initially designed at a time when the US had an effective monopoly on stealth technology. The limitations of the F-22 were well recognized, and perhaps overcompensated for in the F-35. Your scenario however is advantageous to the side which presents the smallest IR signature to the enemy, and that will be the frontal IR signature of the Russian planes since the Russian planes are approaching the US planes on patrol. I don't believe IR sensors of the same "generation" have any different capabilities in Command, thus the one that spots the enemy first, all else being equal is the one with the smaller signature. You could also try other AWACS aircraft, such as the E-2D, which in game has a longer wavelength radar than the E-3G, and also has an AIM-120 datalink to do CEC with. Also try using more smaller groups and a bigger patrol area, that way even if one aircraft gets detected, you may have undetected planes in the area to engage with. If weather permits, you can also use cloud layers to cuneal your IR signature.

One thing that is not modeled in the game is the increased effectiveness of DECM, Chaff, and towed Decoys from stealth aircraft. During the terminal phase of the missile, it has to distinguish between the real radar signature and any ECM or Decoy contacts. If the actual radar return from the aircraft is very weak, it's much easier to mask it with noise or distract it with a bigger radar return. While the aircraft radar signature I think plays a role in the final hit calculation (possibly only for SARH missiles, but I don't recall exactly), it plays no role in the calculations for spoofing the seeker on the missile. I would expect the decoys like the FOTD on the F-22 and F-35 are likely more effective than the game gives them credit for, however that's something that we may never know for sure.



TempestII -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 6:56:00 AM)

I concur with above. Also:

It's also worth pointing out that Russian (and PRC for that matter) avionics / EOTS / IRSTs are pretty much carbon copies of the F-35's on CMO, due to lack of data on these systems. It's therefore unlikely (but not impossible) that these systems are quite as effective in reality, if you consider how more money and time the JSF programme pumped into this tech.

I think one thing that will be key in possible future Fifth Gen fights are the use of RPAS / UAV loyal wingmen. The Have Raiders UCAVs in CMO are VLO but don't have LPI radar, meaning that they'll usually be detected first. They're great silicone shields for manned aircraft. On the other hand, the Russians have the S-70 Hunter which can also be armed with A2A weaponary.

Both the F-22 and F-35 radars are LPI and, while at short ranges can be detected, I'm not sure how good the Felon's ESM gear is. It might be worth keeping one flight's radar on to test it. The Felon's radar, on the other hand, is far more easily detected. By the sounds of it, in the scenario you've created, you've given the Russians an advantage as they already know roughly where to employ their visual sensors

Edit -
I forgot ask: how much micro do you employ on the Blue Force jets? Personally, once my 5th Gens have fired their missiles and have hostile ones incoming, I'll send them down to minimum altitude. This normally makes the enemy's initial salvo miss, although occasionally a wingman will not descend as fast as their flight leader meaning they'll sometimes get killed.



Gunner98 -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 2:00:09 PM)

quote:

One thing that is not modeled in the game is the increased effectiveness of DECM, Chaff, and towed Decoys from stealth aircraft.


I thought that this was modeled.

I think a variable not being pursued in the OP is that of tactics. I don't believe that having 5th Gen fighters burning circles in the sky at high altitude gives them a fare shake. A static DCA CAP works well if you're adequately covered by radar & ECM capable of detecting and hopefully degrading the threat AC. Not the case in this situation.

When your opponent is superior or even close to par with your capabilities, terrain masking, ambush, multiple axis etc need to be put in play. Put the F-22 in amongst cluttered terrain, distract the Su-57 even though you cannot see them, come up from below and behind and your results may be different.



Dimitris -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 2:28:37 PM)

With regards to IRSTs: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5017039&mpage=1&key=&#



thewood1 -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 2:56:06 PM)

Straight from the db. F-35C (2024) screen cap of decoy and chaff load.



[image]local://upfiles/18903/ED8062E88C7E4886897F63CEBDCC944D.jpg[/image]



alphali -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 6:16:52 PM)

Actually its not realistic, IR signature of stealth aircraft and IRST effectiveness is not modeled well in CMO currently. Read the post shared by Dimistris, they are working on better modeling, but for now, IRST seems to be kind of OP against VLO aircraft.



thrawn888 -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 8:01:46 PM)

If you don't mind cheesing as a possible option I can offer one:

Look up a facility called "globus II" it has the An/FPS-129 Have Stare 2001.

Now the reason this facility is useful is not the have stare radar as this facility is meant as an ABM warning/tracking facility.

What matters are the two other sensors:

- Globus II (Visual Tracker) and Globus II (IR Tracker) on the notes it indicates space object tracking, but if you look at the abilities it has a specific two words that matter on each "Air Search" if you add these sensors to an aircraft or use the facility itself on land or add sensors to something else and give it a whirl it will spot stealth aircraft at a reasonable distance ~ 200ish nm or at least in my case it did.

This approach is only for spotting and getting a fairly accurate location on the target, but not much more or at least not until some time has passed. The reason for this I think is because the sensor has a maximum range of 2000NM and designed to spot an ICBM launch so I figured hey if it can spot visual or IR of a stealth airplane at 10% of its max range that'd be helpful because just knowing they are there and roughly where they are is a good start to any situation IMO.

Combat however is a bit trickier if you don't want to loose anyone. E-2D + F-35 Radar off upfront can use data linked fire data, but APY-9 Radar only get solid weapons grade lock around ~100nm which is not ideal another option in conjunction with the E-2D is another F-35 in the back blasting its APG-81 and data linking weapons grade lock to silent F-35 up front.

Through testing I found the F-35 and I think E-2D can data link for the F-22 as well which was interesting with AIM-120D and AIM-260. I did this testing in conjunction with the F-24 and AIM-152 to see what works with what and while the F-24/AIM-152 wont data link (F-24/Aim-120D will link though) the F-22 can get it from F-35 and as I said I think E-2D not 100% on that.

Another option in the stealth war again hypothetical aircraft I suppose you could do with a B-2 as well?

An A-12 avenger is pretty stealthy again you'd need to slap on some better sensors on it, but it has the Link-16 on it so in theory if the Globus II was on it as well it MIGHT data link something to other radar off aircraft like itself in other words the A-12 can act like a half ass E-2 because even if its radar gives it away the Russian/Chinese aircraft still need a weapon grade lock (harder to get on a flying wing) and if the A-12 data links something useful to a nearby F-35/ F-22 that should solve the problem plus the A-12 can have 10 Aim-120D as well.

** Somethin I forgot**

- A more fair/realistic? Option I have used to great amusing affect is the ADM-160C Mald-J decoy. Now this bad boy can be carried on a fair number of platforms including the B-52 I think F-18 and A-12 (hypothetical). The way this works is you toss some up front and fish for the stealth aircraft the AI always goes for them like a dog to a mailman hell you can kite visible fighters too and toss your aim-260s from a nice safe distance. Since you can control them for a while once you get a bite reel them in and change the decoy direction so you can setup an optimal shot solution. And if it dies no problem the AI usually expends most if not all missiles on them so they RTB taking an enemy stealth aircraft out of the battle for a while. Also this decoy has an active jammer D-J bands and an ESM on board so in theory the jammer may extend the life of the decoy a little bit.

***

Sorry for the long ramble, but I just wanted to put out most of what is floating around in my mind.



Craigkn -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 8:46:53 PM)

Thank you all for the excellent replies. To address specific questions - I did not micro anything, I set up missions, and let the AI handle the rest. This mini-scenario is part of a larger scenario I am developing. General setup:

NATO aircraft are flying out of Mihail Kogălniceanu International Airport (Romania), and patrolling a box that extends from the Romanian coast to about 100nm offshore - this engagement is over water. The airport is manned by a Patriot and a THADD system, both with radars set to Active. The air base also has a pair of AN/TPS-75 ground based radars, set to active. The Romanians also have several Spoon Rest P-18 radars on the coast. Flying about 50nm inland, a E-3G provides AWACS coverage.

The Russian flight, for sections of two aircraft each, is ordered to approach the airport at 36,000 feet, standard cruse speed - both sides set to hostile. The NATO aircraft are broken into four sections of two aircraft, and patrol the zone. A single A-50 Mainstay provides the Russians with AWACS coverage, it orbits over the Crimean peninsula.

As expected, as the NATO aircraft patrol, and turn away from the inbound Russians, the Russians detect them via IRST and launch missiles, usually AA-10/R-27's, usually at close range - at or about 20nm. The air battle is over in a minute or two, with very heavy losses on both sides - but the F-22A's nearly always are totally wiped. Any surviving Su-57's then continue to the target, where the Patriot battery picks them up at about 10nm and engages.

I do have EA-18G's available as well, but I am not sure if they would be useful in a primarily IR engagement - I can test that later today.

I am thinking that drones may help - if I include a few drones with IR sensors at the forward edge of the patrol zone, I could potentially detect the bogies before they detect the NATO flight. Something tiny, like a RQ-20B* or a MQ-1 might do the trick, but I am not sure if the RQ-20B can reach out 110nm into the open ocean (Wikipedia says no).

* (Note on the RQ-20B - it has an electric engine, but the rear facing IR signature seems really excessive for essentially a battery powered drone)



thewood1 -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 8:58:46 PM)

Can you post the scenario? I'd like to have a look at it.



dcpollay -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 10:21:21 PM)

Try flipping your sides. Have the Russians patrolling the box and the US on approach, and see what happens. That can test the above theory about the IRST profiles.



Boagrius -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/7/2022 11:50:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Craigkn

I did a few searches, and read older threads on the topic - most dating from 2015 - but I felt it was worth bringing this up as a discussion point. I am playing with an AAW scenario - eight U.S. fighters vs. eight Russian Su-57's. I have tried the matchup with F-22A (2020 version) and F-35A (2021 version). The scenario is the U.S. group patrols a box, and the Russians approach. Both groups are not using radar. The blue side is supported by a E-3G, which is largely irrelevant as it cant detect the Su-57's anyway.

Nearly always the Su-57's detects the U.S. fighters first via IRST, and often gets the first shot off. The F-22's are blind until they detect incoming missiles, and by then its often too late. The F-35A's do better usually, because they have IRST. The lack of IRST on the F-22A seems a massive oversight. The F-35's seem to do a little better once combat starts, and in some tests detected the Su-57's first. Most F-22 vs. Su-57 playthroughs result in the Russian side winning. The F-35A's usually win their battles, but still loose 50-80% of their aircraft.

Playing around with EMCON settings, using radar just gets the U.S. fighters killed faster, as the Russians detect them much sooner. I never engaged the Russian's radar, as it seemed unnecessary as they were kicking so much ass.

I feel this is realistic, and the key factor for victory will be how many decent 5th gen fighters you can deploy. Dropping the F-22's IRST capability as a "cost saving" measure just meant that the U.S. wasted hundreds of billions of dollars on a 5th gen fighter that cant fight other 5th gen fighters. The F-35 seems to be vastly superior in its capabilities, but still suffers a high kill:loss ratio - in that case, the economic output of the nation, in terms of how many 5th gen fighters it can deploy, will be the deciding factor.

Playing around more, I replaced the F-22's with F-15EX Eagle II with the Tiger Eyes Pod (IRST), and they did better than the F-22's.

So my questions are this: How do you employ F-22's vs 5th gen fighters? I dont see a good path to success here.



As Dimitris pointed out, the game does not currently model the IR stealth features that VLO fighters and weapons possess, so IRST's are having a disproportionate role in determining the outcome of VLO vs VLO engagements. A new system is currently in the works.



Craigkn -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/8/2022 3:01:50 AM)

This is my very basic "Black Sea 2022" scenario. NATO can either deploy F-35A or F-22A for the CAP mission. Russia is set up to launch its Su-57's into the same zone. I tested this with a forward picket line of DARPA TERN UCAV, which have the BRITE Star II IR sensor, which did successfully detect the inbound bogies often. The TERN's fly slow, so you need to manually (edit mode) move them into position, but having a drone picket line (with IRST) helped detect the Su-57's early. You need to macro it a bit, and flag the un-identified targets as hostile, but then the F-35's engage and the battle generally plays in NATO's favor. The side that detects the opponent first generally comes out on top, which is obvious but really brings me back to the F-22A - its lack of IRST is "fraud, waste, abuse" in my opinion.

Modern militaries need cheap, disposable, IRST sensor swarms that can act as a picket line to detect hostile 5th gen fighters. I am not aware of any projects leading to that outcome, but it seems needed when the real threat is VLO aircraft. Also, as an aside, in a contested battlespace - with area denial systems like the S-400 - anything not VLO is obsolete.

(note this scenario has my monster Black Sea SAG that I proposed in an earlier thread, but for the purposes of this testing, its parked off Turkey and not involved. I did send the Su-57's after it once, the AEGIS systems detected the Su-57's early and downed all the bogies before they could get any ASM launched. AEGIS is a "area denial" system on par with S-400, it seems)



Boagrius -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/8/2022 9:55:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Craigkn

This is my very basic "Black Sea 2022" scenario. NATO can either deploy F-35A or F-22A for the CAP mission. Russia is set up to launch its Su-57's into the same zone. I tested this with a forward picket line of DARPA TERN UCAV, which have the BRITE Star II IR sensor, which did successfully detect the inbound bogies often. The TERN's fly slow, so you need to manually (edit mode) move them into position, but having a drone picket line (with IRST) helped detect the Su-57's early. You need to macro it a bit, and flag the un-identified targets as hostile, but then the F-35's engage and the battle generally plays in NATO's favor. The side that detects the opponent first generally comes out on top, which is obvious but really brings me back to the F-22A - its lack of IRST is "fraud, waste, abuse" in my opinion.

Modern militaries need cheap, disposable, IRST sensor swarms that can act as a picket line to detect hostile 5th gen fighters. I am not aware of any projects leading to that outcome, but it seems needed when the real threat is VLO aircraft. Also, as an aside, in a contested battlespace - with area denial systems like the S-400 - anything not VLO is obsolete.

(note this scenario has my monster Black Sea SAG that I proposed in an earlier thread, but for the purposes of this testing, its parked off Turkey and not involved. I did send the Su-57's after it once, the AEGIS systems detected the Su-57's early and downed all the bogies before they could get any ASM launched. AEGIS is a "area denial" system on par with S-400, it seems)

Not sure if you missed my last post but, again, I would hold off on making sweeping conclusions until CMO actually simulates the IR signature reduction features that aircraft like the F35, F22 and (eventually) the Su-57 possess. The early models of the Felon have generally used engines with little/no IR signature reduction features, but this seems likely to change in future iterations.



Zanthra -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/8/2022 10:10:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Craigkn
...
The side that detects the opponent first generally comes out on top, which is obvious but really brings me back to the F-22A - its lack of IRST is "fraud, waste, abuse" in my opinion.
...


Hindsight is 20/20. When the first F-22s started production in 1996, the state of IRST technology was far from where it is today. At the same time, the new AN/APG-77 radar was a tremendous improvement over previous radar systems. It seems pretty reasonable for the time not to invest in low resolution, limited range IRST systems for the F-22 while it had what was likely the most capable airborne radar in existence at the time. The world changes, and digital cameras of all shapes, sizes, and spectral bands have improved tremendously since the F-22, and the F-35 takes full advantage of these improvements.



Craigkn -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/8/2022 12:31:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Boagrius


quote:

ORIGINAL: Craigkn

This is my very basic "Black Sea 2022" scenario. NATO can either deploy F-35A or F-22A for the CAP mission. Russia is set up to launch its Su-57's into the same zone. I tested this with a forward picket line of DARPA TERN UCAV, which have the BRITE Star II IR sensor, which did successfully detect the inbound bogies often. The TERN's fly slow, so you need to manually (edit mode) move them into position, but having a drone picket line (with IRST) helped detect the Su-57's early. You need to macro it a bit, and flag the un-identified targets as hostile, but then the F-35's engage and the battle generally plays in NATO's favor. The side that detects the opponent first generally comes out on top, which is obvious but really brings me back to the F-22A - its lack of IRST is "fraud, waste, abuse" in my opinion.

Modern militaries need cheap, disposable, IRST sensor swarms that can act as a picket line to detect hostile 5th gen fighters. I am not aware of any projects leading to that outcome, but it seems needed when the real threat is VLO aircraft. Also, as an aside, in a contested battlespace - with area denial systems like the S-400 - anything not VLO is obsolete.

(note this scenario has my monster Black Sea SAG that I proposed in an earlier thread, but for the purposes of this testing, its parked off Turkey and not involved. I did send the Su-57's after it once, the AEGIS systems detected the Su-57's early and downed all the bogies before they could get any ASM launched. AEGIS is a "area denial" system on par with S-400, it seems)

Not sure if you missed my last post but, again, I would hold off on making sweeping conclusions until CMO actually simulates the ... future iterations[/link].


I did - and the links to that discussion were interesting, I hope its patched soon. I think that the IR model needs a comprehensive review, as the example of a small electric UAV having a relatively huge rearward IR signature might not be accurate. Modeling IR signature's accurately will give aircraft the opportunity to show differences in technology, which should benefit more advanced NATO equipment for the time being. However, in that case, we are racking and stacking capabilities between a small number of VLO aircraft which also have IRST - non VLO aircraft are still missing the bus, and are susceptible to area denial weapons (S-400, Aegis, etc).



thewood1 -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/8/2022 6:15:59 PM)

I have run the first round of engagements three times. On average, 2 Su-57s are knocked out with no losses to the NATO side. One run through had an F-35 knocked out when a wingman went on a bender to chase down an Su-57.

This is the result from one engagement. Note the large numbers of AAMs fired and the decoy deployment.

SIDE: Russia
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x Su-57 Felon


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
29x AA-12 Adder C [R-77M]
11x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]

WEAPONS/STORES LOST:
-----------------------------
10x 30mm Gsh-30-1 Burst [30 rnds]
4x AA-11 Archer [R-74M2]
1x AA-12 Adder C [R-77M]
21x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
24x Generic Flare Salvo [4x Cartridges, Single Spectral]



SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
35x AIM-120D AMRAAM P3I.4
2x AN/ALE-70(V)/T-1687 Expendable Decoy
2x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]

WEAPONS/STORES LOST:
-----------------------------



Zanthra -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/8/2022 7:06:22 PM)

Note here that a B-1B and a F/A-18F both with the AN/ALE-50 decyos have the same probability of distracting the missile. The B-1B had a signature of 18.3 to 27.5 sq.m. while the F/A-18F had a signature of 1.5 to 2.5 sq.m.

It would be expected that the decoys used by an aircraft with the smaller signature would have a better chance of distracting the missile. One would expect it to be even better again used by aircraft with signatures around 0.0015 to 0.0025 sq.m. however there are no non-stealth aircraft with the same decoys as the F-35.

[image]local://upfiles/62189/DC20AB153A0A4AD99C9B18D2ADBDCEA5.jpg[/image]



Boagrius -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/9/2022 3:05:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Craigkn


quote:

ORIGINAL: Boagrius


quote:

ORIGINAL: Craigkn

This is my very basic "Black Sea 2022" scenario. NATO can either deploy F-35A or F-22A for the CAP mission. Russia is set up to launch its Su-57's into the same zone. I tested this with a forward picket line of DARPA TERN UCAV, which have the BRITE Star II IR sensor, which did successfully detect the inbound bogies often. The TERN's fly slow, so you need to manually (edit mode) move them into position, but having a drone picket line (with IRST) helped detect the Su-57's early. You need to macro it a bit, and flag the un-identified targets as hostile, but then the F-35's engage and the battle generally plays in NATO's favor. The side that detects the opponent first generally comes out on top, which is obvious but really brings me back to the F-22A - its lack of IRST is "fraud, waste, abuse" in my opinion.

Modern militaries need cheap, disposable, IRST sensor swarms that can act as a picket line to detect hostile 5th gen fighters. I am not aware of any projects leading to that outcome, but it seems needed when the real threat is VLO aircraft. Also, as an aside, in a contested battlespace - with area denial systems like the S-400 - anything not VLO is obsolete.

(note this scenario has my monster Black Sea SAG that I proposed in an earlier thread, but for the purposes of this testing, its parked off Turkey and not involved. I did send the Su-57's after it once, the AEGIS systems detected the Su-57's early and downed all the bogies before they could get any ASM launched. AEGIS is a "area denial" system on par with S-400, it seems)

Not sure if you missed my last post but, again, I would hold off on making sweeping conclusions until CMO actually simulates the ... future iterations[/link].


I did - and the links to that discussion were interesting, I hope its patched soon. I think that the IR model needs a comprehensive review, as the example of a small electric UAV having a relatively huge rearward IR signature might not be accurate. Modeling IR signature's accurately will give aircraft the opportunity to show differences in technology, which should benefit more advanced NATO equipment for the time being. However, in that case, we are racking and stacking capabilities between a small number of VLO aircraft which also have IRST - non VLO aircraft are still missing the bus, and are susceptible to area denial weapons (S-400, Aegis, etc).

IRST systems are actually proliferating in the US 4/4.5 Gen fleet, with IRST-21 on the Super Hornet, and the Legion Pod on the F16/F15 (for example).
It seems unlikely that IRST systems represent a panacea with respect to VLO opponents, since the signature reduction features of VLO jets also typically encompass the IR part of the EM spectrum, and these features are often just as elaborate as their RF-based ones.

Agree that non-VLO aircraft are likely to be heavily impacted by the A2/AD effects of a modern IADS, especially one that features a modern HIMAD system (S-400 w/ 40N6, Aegis w/ SM-6). This effect is likely compounded when the IADS includes Co-operative Engagement Capability (CEC) with elevated sensors like the E-2D, since they reduce the effectiveness of low altitude penetration tactics that might otherwise use the earth's curvature to stay out of sight by flying below the radar horizon. I suspect VLO is already a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for fighter aircraft to operate within these contested environments.






WillpowerDisturbance -> RE: Stealth vs. Stealth (2/9/2022 10:56:12 PM)

This is really good information to have. Should help me kill some of the J-20s in Chains of War.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.71875