Shape or materials? Which is more important for modern stealth planes? 

Thanks!

WW3 Nato+Eu+Japan Asean South Korea Australia New Zeland and Israel vs Csto Sco Arab league BRICS and North Korea + all Sco Observer applicants And Observer members

Russia vs Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland and Greenland

Usa vs China and Eu(with Uk)

Eu (with uk) vs China arena war

I would disagree, i get very excited when i see a new binkov video and then very disappointed when it isn't country vs country and thus end up skipping it entirely. Each to their own though.

Yup, mission planning and managing your emissions returns is key. Gotta wonder if the stealth jets have their own sensors that will give the pilot cues on how to position their plane vs real time threats. Sure they have something just never heard of or looked into it really.

@@Kman31ca Penetration missions are planned ahead with recon and intelligence gathering about all potential threats and their location to determin the optimal flight path. But after all in combat everything is possible, unexpected shit can occur then the pilot asses the situation and decide.

@@Kman31ca The F-35 has extremely comprehensive sensors and data sharing across many platforms, as well as a streamlined pilot VR interface to keep the pilot as well informed as possible. Avoiding giving radar stations (and possibly angles between split radar emiters/recievers) a broadside view of your flat surfaces is key. Plus avoiding giving IR platforms an up-skirt view as well. Low level flight helps immensely though, which is why the F-35 has such a high wing loading, it's very resistant to vertical wind sheer, making treetop level flight safer than most planes.

@War Wolf I mean , Egypt ( an African country) is among the top 10 strongest militaries soooo

Stealth aircraft also lose a lot in different aspects, because of their construction. First of all, with their price (and in particular the total monopoly of Lockheed Martin in the west, that drives the price through the roof) most air forces are unable to replace 4th generation fighters with nearly the same numbers of F-35. Quantity has a quality of it's own, and that means every loss is a powerful blow to their user. Secondly, weapon bays. They not only impact aerodynamic performance, relying on them means that your total missile load is less than half of a F-15 or Su-27. Opponent's planes can go turn around when shot at, waste your ammo (they are able to escape thanks to their overall better energy perfomance), and simultainously return fire with a bigger quantity of missiles. After one exchange, the side employing stealth fighters can be already out of ammunition. The impact of construction on the energy and maneuvrability can be mitigated in different ways, and 2-engined fighters will be vastly superior here. So flying like a brick is more of a problem of a single plane (single engine F-35), than the whole concept.

@@bogdanbogdanoff5164 Fair point, but the F-35 has a similar thrust-to-weight ratio to the F-16 when adjusted for the fuel capacity, it's no flying brick, many pilots pointed out that the F-35's kinematic performance is very similar to the F/A-18, allowing it to perform a certain post-stall maneuver that F-15 and F-16 can't, thanks to its all-moving horizontal tails. And at least from a rough calculation, it seems to be able to out-accelerate the SU-27 in subsonic region. Stealth planes' overall design is not as aerodynamic as non-stealth planes of a similar capability, but it's somewhat offset by a lack of parasitic drag from external load. The F-22 can carry as much air-to-air missiles as a Eurofighter, and the F-35 will have the Sidekick installed sometimes in early-to-mind 2020s, allowing it carry up to 6 AMRAAM equivalent internally in total. Non-stealth fighters will have to carry weapons externally, creating drag and higher radar return, and the increased drag and weight will reduce the range of the aircraft. That's why F-18, F-16, and F-15 never actually filled their hardpoints in combat because they can't get a meaningful range out of it. There's no point carrying 10 guns if you can only hobble it for a short distance. Also, the stealth plane can get into the range of its missile's no-escape zone against opponent's non-stealth aircraft, allowing a high probability of hit. BVR is mostly useful against large aircraft, such as bombers, AWACS, and tankers. Against fighter-sized targets, it must get closer, and to reduce the chance of your enemy employing the same tactic, having a stealth plane is a good idea.

@@mickeyg7219 Stealth aircrafts should be used as intercepters, i agree. But they are too expensive to be a front-line fighter. If it's all up to WVR, stealthiness has no mean. Their duty should be intercepting by getting close before being detected and supporting agile, cheap (that's why many) fighters to start their close combat. Fighter mafia members once simulated a close combat between F-15's and F-5's that are worth the same price in total. For example 1 F-15 vs 10 F-5. And F-5 was the winner. Higher quality and price is defeat in this incident. So there must be diversity among aircrafts. If a stealth aircraft is requested to carry more weapon by compromising stealthines why is this aircraft exist in the first place? There are so many aircraft can carry tons of weapons without stealth feature. In future combat rules may change. Laser weapons may chance everything we think about WVR. But fundamental rules will remain same, if the aircraft is more agile it's ability to survive a missile is more. A fronline fighter also doesn't need to much weapons because in combat with 200 fighters launching missiles each other, probably aircrafts won't be flying for long. They should face the enemy with agile characteristics and get support from the interceptors with their long-range missiles. Surviving fighters can get fuel from a tanker, this isn't a big deal after managing a combat.

@@mickeyg7219 By brick I meant excessive energy bleed during maneuvers. If the lightning 2 has to turn tail and dodge a BVR missile, it likely won't climb back into the fight because of how inferior it is in this department. Comparing it to a viper really doesn't help your case, as it is also not an energy fighter, but a one engine multirole. It is a one trick pony, and the expensive trick it does is under a threat of multiple technical ways to detect it, which can be perfected at any time of it's service. And they project it to serve for 30 years?? Thanks lockheed, my greatest ally

@@bogdanbogdanoff5164 wanna know how i can tell you didn't read the post you replied to jk you obviously walked in with the clueless notion that f35s are one-trick ponies so it's not like explaining anything to you a second time would matter

What Ad, I did not see one

Gg

That's exactly US stealth tech had adopted,, Active STEALTH is a RADAR JAMMING capability.. only SUPER COMPUTER/ AVIONIC and powerful RADAR can do that's TASK..

@@riorazzer1090 Not radar jamming. That's been around for a long time. ECM. Broadcast signals and white noise over the radar's frequency to produce false returns. But everybody knows you're around once you've flipped on the ECM. And missiles such as the HARM can be designed to home-on-jam. I'm talking about real-time analysis and processing of an incoming radar signal, and then emitting back an out-of-phase signal to cancel out the returns. No one knows you're there.

Go into the literature and learn physics

@@Julle399 I wanna go in engineering newt year but I have to finish high school (French here ) and I need to find the litterature you are talking about. That's why I am asking for a wee bit of help

Michael Estala stealth drones are used for refueling only so far. China and Russia both has stealth technology.

Chengdu J 20/ sukhoi pak fa // shenyang J31 coff coff

LOL 1000 But they are still far behind the US in terms of technology. China steals most of their technology, but reverse engineering doesn’t mean they’ve truly understand and mastered the techniques needed to perfect it. Russia has fantastic engineering capabilities (My money would be on a Pak-FA over a J-20 any day) but because of economic issues they aren’t able to put the resources needed to mass produce their aircraft. A J-20 was detected by an Indian (Russian designed) Su-30 in 2018.

Dallin Shepherd i know f35 is invencible even there are some black stealth hawks around there. B2 is also one of the best in its kind.

J-20 was detected but India fighters and ground radar, the SU-57 has also been detected by Israeli radars, I wouldn’t say China and Russia are close to a stealth fighter

Instead of RAM use Radar Absorbing Material. Instead of Stealth, use Low-observable. Of course, I believe the original comment to be a joke.

Mebbe from the rear aspect ?

@@rigormortis6481 do you mean that s70 is like a flying dee1-doh and a us pilot would like to stick that in their bum or what?

@@freedomvanguard8185 don't understand the jargon used. But yeah, frontally and sometimes that is all that matters for a drone, S 70 , especially 4 S 70's with a Su 57 looks good. Well, ofc the US has something better, mebbe yes. But still more than good enough.

​@@rigormortis6481 Aahah, okay, nevermind that ;) They may look good, but please, don't forget that basically, Su 57 is made around an old soviet-era tech, such as mig 29 or similar. Also, those birds will never get into mass production because russia is a 3rd world country (huge? duh) with resource-based economy, incapable of a modern manufacturing. It's a miracle that it somehow managed to copicat chinese j20 and a us drone

@@freedomvanguard8185 umm..wot ? I wuldn't really say who copied what. That much is pretty apparent and known. Regardless, continue to underestimate whatever whoever. Yeah, looks good; and in a couple of years will carry, say around 3000 kg of ordinance. Looks REAL good then yeah !

You made me laugh

They'll just think you're AWACS.

funny how Binkov may speak your language but for the sake of international appeal we're all using English (i'm not a native English speaker).

Rest of the world declares war on Liechtenstein. Switzerland uses blackmail, Power of Money ability activates, turning it into Global Revolution It's Super Effective. Rest of the World faints.

The cost of actually saturating an area with radar coverage to the degree you're proposing might see through stealth most of the time, but then an enemy will just start building $15million drones that can be economically sacrificed by throwing them into the grinder. So long as they destroy some of the radar coverage then the stealth is suddenly applicable again and the enemy spent less to destroy the radars than you spent building them. Also, because you are firing missiles at the drones, you are telling the enemy where your missile launchers are located. In reality these radars are used to help defend key positions.

motmontheinternet Yes not an unreasonable point you make! Whatever technology exists there'll always be ways to try and counter it. And then there's a way to counter the counter. And so it goes, ad infinitum....

Yes. Except for the targeting part. Not sure how much is wise to say on that topic. But your comment kinda defines much of the escalation process in this arena. Ultimately it's a measures & countermeasures spending arms race. If you have more money to work with, or you deploy a measure who's countermeasure is more costly than the measure, you're playing to win.

The allies did something similar to this with chaff and balloons during the d day invasion. They dropped tons of chaff and had reflective balloons far up the coast from normandy to make it look like the main invasion force was coming across there. Here is a link about it en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Day_naval_deceptions#Glimmer_and_Taxable

Yea that's what decoys mean

I think that is also what jamming aircrafts do, the basically send false radar returns

Yeah, but you must know exactly what signals to return, because the enemy surely knows what a true radar return looks like. In fact, chaff is becoming less and less effective to confuse missiles, because the missile guidance system takes into account things like the speed of the wave and the Doppler effect. Chaff doesn't move at the same speed as an aircraft, and with that parameter alone, it can be easily filtered out. You can, however, just saturate the everloving fuck of the electromagnetic spectrum, and hope that the enemy is out of anti-radiation missiles.

@DarkAgit Backup No one has made that claim. It just gives stealth planes the advantage of being able to see the enemy far further away than they see you.

@@Kman31ca "immortal to radars" is particularly amusing because it looks like it's saying that f35s can now be cooked by radar

russkies can't make anything more complicated than a potato-gun

VHF will get many false positives from weather conditions (e.g. the Davis VHF radar). And even if you do detect a plane, because of the poor resolution you do not know how many planes, what type, or what heading or velocity. You still need a more accurate fire control radar as you cannot fire a missile at where a plane is, but rather you must fire the missile where it's likely to be in order to make a successful intercept. VHF radars are also big and relatively immobile - easy targets. If the Gulf Wars any indication of US operation, early warning radars didn't help the Iraqis. They were blinded or disabled before the air campaign even began. Not that it really mattered as all it could tell the Iraqis were they were stuffed; the skies were full of wild weasles, decoy drones, cruise missiles, jamming aircraft / munitions, and anti-radar munitions that float in the air and destroy any active radars. Meanwhile, the Nighthawks were very successful evading defenses and hitting the heavily defended Republican Guard positions around Baghdad.

Yeah but if ionize the air around you (plasma) you also staets lighting in some spectrums

You are talking about track-breaking radar jammers, and the technology for that is at LEAST 50 years old. It was used in Vietnam as the ALQ-51 and ALQ-100, and later as the ALQ-126.

Brazil would win? Argentina has horrible readiness rates.

@@kurousagi8155 true. And Arg is sabotating their own military, while Brazil bought fighters from Sweden and developing cruise missiles

China outnumbered ASEAN 2-1 in warships and nearly 5-1 in fighter jets. The only nation in ASEAN with dedicated attack aircraft is Myanmar who is more likely to side with China than fight China. Unfortunately for ASEAN, without Indian or American/Japanese intervention, it’s pretty hopeless.

Peter Smythe Interesting

44% is a lot when you are flying at mach 1.5

Wait, really??? You sure???

You're absolutely right . In fact , Pyotr Ufimtsev is the father of stealth technology . He was , actually , the chief designer of both the F-117A and the B-2 . He defected to the west when his designs ( principals for F-117 , back then Project Have Blue ) were rejected by the Soviet MoD . Back in his time all his equations and research was focused on how to make the aircraft's aerodynamical design to reflect waves .

@@sovietunion8158 You are full of crap and you know it as well as most that read your pathetic attempt of propaganda. While he did "develop equations for predicting the reflection of electromagnetic waves from simple two-dimensional and three-dimensional objects", he was in no way affiliated with the design of actual aircraft, and was living in the USSR when the F117 & B2 were designed by Lockheed and Northrop respectively. The fact that the USSR did not realize the possible implications of his work, and allowed his writings to be publicized internationally, was a colossal fuck-up of major proportions." Much of Ufimtsev's work was translated into English, and in the 1970s American Lockheed engineers began to expand upon some of his theories to create the concept of aircraft with reduced radar signatures." Thanks to the SOVIET UNION's blunder, the US has the most stealthy aircraft on the planet.

@@etech2xwon59 Stealth is old tech now . Dis you know back in 2017 a Russian Air Force Su-35S had an F-22A Block 40 Raptor on its IRST screen for 11 minutes without the Raptor even being aware of its presence ? And you can read Ufimtsev's biography and watch his documentaries .

@@sovietunion8158 The Raptor was definitely aware of the Su-35S's presence. There was simply no reason to react because we are not at war with each other and it is *never* a 1vs1 situation.

@@dumdumbinks274 It was not aware of its presence because the Su-35S had turned of its radar . It detected the Raptor using passive measures ( IRST ) which are undetectable .

That future is very far off. Right now a $20 million UCAV isnt even capable of engaging fighters at close range effectively, let alone BVR where a $80 million fighter can absolutely dominate a UCAV. Then you have to consider the effect of electronic warfare on UCAVs, because they rely on networking a lot more than any fighter does.

I'm not aware of any half-billion-dollar fighter jets. Unless you mean something big like a B-2 or A-380. Besides the main mission for fighter jets today is Ground Strike and SEAD.

Korean and Japanese military technology... As far as planes are concerned... Bought U.S. planes. Especially the fighters. lol.

Both derive their fighter jet project heavily from US, copy/reverse engineer

Detection isn't a matter of IF, it's a matter of how far away, and from what angle. Which is why internally, it's called "low observable", not "invisible". It takes good intel and clever flight planning to exploit fully. Pilot situation awareness in the F-35 make it arguably better able to remain hidden than an F-22, despite a larger RCS. People also really underestimate the value of treetop level flight though, the curvature of the earth hides you fairly quickly, without so much as a hill to hide behind. And ground clutter makes things hard on radars as well. Data sharing from a non-stealth stand-off platform, and a closer attack stealth plane, mixed with some jamming and other diversions can be devastatingly effective.

@rob 998 if MSM you mean russia having its pansir destroyed twice on two separate occasions by F35s and russia pulling it out of service and replacing it by tor, propaganda? Lmao iran also admitted it and fired their general, it was even news inside of iran from their state run media. But hey, the ignorance is on you.

@@kathrynck no, incorrect. I have the rf profiles and I can tell you the F35 is stealthy from the front, narrow front especially. Other Angles it is decently stealthy, however it flew circles over the systems. Destroyed two pansir systems as well.

@@patrickrk44 Well I ever said it wasn't stealthy from the front. But to a trained eye it's easy to tell that It's at the rear where the stealth is less refined than the F-22 or B-2. And even from the front, the F22/B2 are somewhat better in RCS performance. But if an F-22 or B-22 pegs a couple mosquitoes on take off, then the bug splat makes them much more similar. So the F-35 has a more "pragmatic" stealth. It's not sloppy engineering, it's choices made in which compromise to take. IRST is the emergent "counter stealth" tool of choice. And the F-35 is designed around taking a slightly less extreme emphasis on RF stealth, in order to regain some design benefits in other aspects of it's design. From the rear jet aircraft are especially vulnerable to IRST detection, so the temptation to go with a more efficient but less stealthy engine nozzle was too tempting to pass up. It does have an interesting nozzle though, but I don't think it'd be a good idea to explain in detail, since it goes into ideas which aren't included in this video. But the F-35's RF stealth is very carefully matched to it's IR detection vulnerabilities. Which really simplifies the workload of avoiding detection. The F-35 does have a surprisingly constrained IR signature for a plane making, i think it's up to 46 or 48k lb wet thrust now. It's an amazingly smartly designed plane. I think it's the most deadly plane in the sky (although if they updated the F-22 to a "C" model, it would pull ahead).

That, or downwards directly into more of the plane

yes

Andy Hage nope not good, radar waves interact with few objects in the air so that when an airplane comes in their range it's presence is unique, while visible light interacts with too much stuff making the identification of desired objects hard.

the solution to having trouble locking onto something from a hundred kilometers away is probably not to rely on a platform that's more than thirty thousand kilometers away

@@wowfmomf6126 but detection is the main purpose of long wavelength radars right? And 10 centimeter per pixel should be enough to identify the jet. Locking on is something i didn't think about. Maybe laser guided could help that but that probably doesn't really exist yet on satellites.. so that wouldn't be viable anyways. But it may be a solution?

Thanks both for replying to my question!

​@@AndyHage you need an extremely powerful radar and the means to power it to compensate for the ridiculous increase in distance just so you can get stuck with the task of filtering out even more clutter since instead of pointing a radar up at the sky where you have to figure out what isn't a cloud, you're pointing it down at the ground where you have to filter out approximately everything including the clouds satellite imagery won't help even if it's good enough to see the pilot flip the bird at you. early warning means you want to know what's happening right away, not what happened above the clouds while the sun was up after analyzing all the images heat doesn't give you decent range unless you already know exactly where to look beyond 'somewhere over there', hence why longer-ranged missiles don't rely on heat. laser guidance is the same deal but harsher since you want the laser right on target. both of these are further degraded by crossing approximately the entire atmosphere, so good luck if you're somewhere humid. to add insult to injury, the f35 does things like sink heat with fuel and use nozzles that air-cool the exhaust while it's coming out

Komrad kermit

@@lancelotgohel8460 yea

@Brian Zhang yea same

ASEAN VS CHINA

Maybe stealth plane is cover with plastics?

@@hrvojemikulcic7074 but beneath it there have a metal which will do exactly the same job .. Of reflecting back radar waves

@@jacksononesmo7694 radar can't detect plastic, cardboard, rubber or water waves,shutting radar plane can create a problem?

@@hrvojemikulcic7074 still the steel will be beneath and make it visible to radars

Oh yeah, show me a picture of gravity....or are you speaking literally as in "nothing" has no shape, or mass to interact with anything?

Variable geometry in planes/bombers needs technical parts that have gaps in order to move or extract during heating/flying fast. Gaps are spots for radars to detect.

I m no expert but i think it's a weight issue. Considering the volume of ammo used by those things when functioning knowing the ballistic accuracy would be decreased shooting from a flying plane.

due to weight, aero-drag, structural and internal volume considerations

Maybe for bomber it may work.

I invented a very high performance heat emitting anti missile system on planes. It puts out a lot of heat, so incoming missiles will melt and fail to hit your airplane. GENIUS!

The reason why the US didn't sell the F-22 is because the US solely developed it. Other countries funded and contribute their R&D input towards the F-35 program.

​@@mickeyg7219 The US solely developed the F14,15,16, and so many other planes and sells to the world... Taiwan just bought 66 of the newest block 70 F16, making it now one of the most modern airforces. Building it solely has nothing to do with it. It's a better plane overall. The F22 is faster, better maneuverability, better stealth, etc the only thing the F35 does better is see and bomb ground targets do to its DAS system. Countries not even funding the project are allowed to buy... Japan for instance. It cost double the price for a reason, we don't sell it(along with also the B2) as they are the best stealth planes on the world. If we shared the tech making the F35s and they were better, wouldn't we just sell them F22's to then guard the F35s on their bombing runs? But it doesn't work like that since the reason the US doesn't sell the F22 and B2 are because they are our best aircraft and we keep those secrets close to the chest. The RCS above prove it and can be sourced from many different sources all which will be within that same range.

@@ThatCarGuy As Binkov stated earlier, the F-35's RCS figure is outdated. Even if the F-22 is painted with a new RAM, the materials that made up its internal structure can't be changed. The material that made up the F-35's airframe is pretty much stealth from inside out, making it less vulnerable to longer wavelengths as it practically act as several foots of RAM. Most countries have a small air force, so they don't really need a specialized fighter, they need versatile ones like the F-16 and F/A-18. Since the F-22 was designed mostly for an air superiority role, it can't carry most air-to-ground armament, its weapons bay only have enough depth for SDB and JDAM. The F-35 has a better range than the F-22, and is less maintenance-intensive. It may not be better than the F-22 in air-to-air role (and even that is arguable since in BVR, they should be about equal, but the F-35 has an edge due to the capability to cue target with helmet and its IR sensors are much more powerful). Basically, the F-35's adaptability is what makes it the best choice for allied states that doesn't need a specialized air superiority and ground attack fighters.

The F-35 also makes much greater use of electronics than the F-22.

​@@mickeyg7219 "As Binkov stated earlier, the F-35's RCS figure is outdated." No it's not, how hard it is to look it up yourself? "Even if the F-22 is painted with a new RAM, the materials that made up its internal structure can't be changed. " The F22 is designed better for stealth on it's design alone then the F35... At this point im starting to think you are a troll... "The material that made up the F-35's airframe is pretty much stealth from inside out" .... The F35 uses a cheaper version of the F22 materials... Please just stop already. This is one of the reason the F35 is so much cheaper then the F22. "Structurally, the F-35 drew upon lessons from the F-22; composites comprise 35% of airframe weight, with the majority being bismaleimide and composite epoxy materials. Newer production lots include some structural nanocomposites, such as carbon nanotube-reinforced epoxy." "Most countries have a small air force, so they don't really need a specialized fighter," The F22 is an air superiority fighter... It's not specialized... Im talking to a troll at this point. Every fighter has a specific role. Like the F16 also a air superiority fighter... "The F-35 has a better range than the F-22, and is less maintenance-intensive. " You literally have no idea what you are talking about. The longest range F35 can fly 1,200 nmi (2,200 km) the F22 can fly 1600+ nmi.... "It may not be better than the F-22 in air-to-air role (and even that is arguable since in BVR, they should be about equal, but the F-35 has an edge due to the capability to cue target with helmet and its IR sensors are much more powerful)." The F22 uses the AN/APG-77 radar which the F35 uses the AN/APG-81 which is literally a smaller weaker version... Though because of the DAS on the F35 the AN/APG-77 got a huge software upgrade for bombing, which as stated is the only area the F35 does better. Please stop trolling now, i literally broke down your entire comment.