Iran Military Forum

Numbers this is why you cant find any confirmed data about the f-22.

Numbers,

The "2meters" you saw is a misunderstanding. Radar Cross section is measure in square meters, but I cant type 1 meter squared like one would right it on paper (with a small number slightly above the larger number). So when I typed the F-22 perhaps has a RCS of 0.001m2 I mean it is One Thousandth of a meter squared. This is much smaller than most birds for a better visual..Long story short, very small target (I've also seen claims of it being even smaller!)

Secondly, shape is only one factor in modern stealth. The two aircraft are generally similar in shape but most experts (including the people at AUPOWER) think it much larger than an F-22 on radar. Its airframe isnt nearly as smooth in appearance to the F-22's. Also, the engine exhausts of the F-22 are much stealthier thanks to be flatter (designed for both stealth and 2D thrust vectoring). Also, overall the control surfaces on the F-22 are much thinner (which makes its head-on RCS smaller) than the F-35. The other big difference is the intent of the design. The F-22 was designed for Air Superiority while the F-35 was not.

Here is good article on the differences between the two aircraft including their comparative stealth:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-JSF-Analysis.html

Ultimately though, no one knows what either aircrafts' RCS really is but close study by most experts predict the F-35 will not be as stealthy as the F-22 is, though both are still quite stealthy (Though the Air Force did reveal somewhat vague RCS descriptions in 2005). However, I think the NEBO is a greater threat to the F-35 than the F-22 largely because of the F-35's inferior manueverability, range, speed, and internal payload. This is why there are so many people skeptical of the F-35, considering its high cost, most are not pleased with performance compared to the slightly older F-22.

The NEBO is obviously still a threat to the F-22 or any other stealth aircraft (including the even stealthier B-2 bomber), its all a matter of coverage and integration. The NEBO can/could detect the F-22 but at what range is a big factor. Traditional stealth aircraft tactics involve avoiding such advanced radar by moving beyond their detectable range, but if the defenders can arrange the radars in such a way to make such avoidance manuevers more difficult. Combine this with sophisticated Infared detection system, one could make it easier for stealth aircraft to not only be detected by possibly even tracked. The biggest problem I see to this is setting up the radars is the proper location. Systems like the NEBO should be set up around only Iran's most hardened sites where they are many cross-secting survellience systems to aid them in triangulating a possible stealth aircraft's position. Putting such systems along the coast is a waste since they range against Stealth aircraft is limited and therefore they can be avoided more easily than if they were having to avoid a more saturated airspace like around more strategic locations (such as Natanz).

Long story short, Stealth is very very difficult to counter, but its hardly impossible. One of Stealth's biggest advantages was the element of surprise, as in the enemy know very little or nothing of stealth technology (its strengths and weaknesses). However, in today's world, stealth technology is well known publically and Iran has likely been planning on the possibility of stealth aircraft being used for several years now which at least gives them the advantage of being able to study all known uses of stealth aircraft and prepare as best they can and now that they have tech like the NEBO and other systems it gives Iranian Air Defense commanders a much better chance of counter stealth then the Iraqis or Serbians had (and the Serbs still manage to shoot down a F-117). So I think its quite possible for Iranian Air Defense to take out stealth aircraft. But I think we have been focusing on the F-22 too much..It isnt going to be the aircraft carrying out the actual strikes, that would likely be the B-2 bomber which is a different aircraft all together (uses different and has a more well-rounded RCS from all angles compared to the F-22).

I dont understand exactly how they calculate RCS, just that is how aircraft are normally measured in terms of their relative appearance to Radar systems. The RCS is also different from each aspect (Front/Rear, Side, Above/Below) though when generally when an aircraft's RCS is discussed it is referring to its Frontal RCS. However I have also seen RCS measure in 'dB' (including some Russian articles).

The USAF actually 'revealed' the RCS of the F-22 and F-35 in 2005 though they were also a big vague as well. They said the F-22 has the RCS equivalent of a Steel Marble. Marbles of course vary in size and this gives a rough RCS range of 0.0001 meters squared to 0.0014 meters squared. Compare this to most modern fighters having a 'clean' RCS of 1-3 meters squared (clean meaning no external armament or payloads). The F-35 was claimed to have a RCS equivalent to a Golf Ball which gives its a RCS range of ~0.001 meters squared. Now obviously the USAF could be exaggerating these figures but even so these are some small objects on radar.

That can't be correct since F-16's have a 'clean' RCS smaller than that!

And how did you come up with 95% stealth?

Here is chart created by Aerospaceweb.org giving a general comparision of the Frontal RCS of different objects:

there will come a day when iraq && iran will produce a irnirq s-1200 and sell it to the chinese and russians... inshallah

This comes from the people at AUSAIRPOWER..

This chart shows Range performance of several well known Early Warning Radar systems against Stealth Aircraft with varying levels of RCS. I have converted Nautical Miles to Kilometers for clarity. Here is my overview of the Iran-related parts of chart:

1. P-18M- We have seen an image of Iranian Early Warning Radar similar to the Russian P-18M Spoon Rest, likely with some digital improvements and more mobile than the original system. The P-18M has a Max Range against the following RCS targets- In Square Meters
0.1= 92km
0.01= 64km
0.001= 35km (F-35 sized target)
0.0001= 17km (F-22 sized target)
2. NEBO-SV- I am not sure whether Iran has SV or SVU model, AUSAIRPOWER believes Iran has the SVU variant, so I will list both, this is the older SV's Max Range to RCS targets- In Square Meters
0.1= 148km
0.01= 84km
0.001= 64km (F-35 sized target)
0.0001= 37km (F-22 sized target)
3. NEBO-SVU
0.1= 166km
0.01= 92km
0.001= 66km (F-35 sized target)
0.0001= 38km (F-22 sized target)

This information was compiled from Russian reports, and apparently their claims of range against a F-22 sized target are fairly accurate.

Iran is still not doing enough to confront f-22.
For gods sake somebody answer me whats Iran doing to confront these type of fighters and how successful will it be during war?

Do not worry so much. Iran does have the radar to see them far far away. The rest of the problem is easy to solve by building enough ground to air missiles to intercept them.

By the time Iran admits the technology, Iran has mass produced enough anti aircraft missiles and stored then in multiple locations across the country.

Iran is now like a black hole, US will never know what kind of surprise awaits them in Iran.

RCS targets- In Square Meters
0.1= 148km
0.01= 84km
0.001= 64km (F-35 sized target)
0.0001= 37km (F-22 sized target)

I still do not believe that RCS of F-22 is 1 centimeter by 1 centimeter.
Especially for Anti Stealth Radar that sends 2 meter Amplitude waves.

More importantly the chart came from Russian military sources and the Russians have claimed the NEBO can track "LO" targets like the F-22 at ranges of roughly 40km and as the chart shows, 40km with the chart matches up to a 0.0001 meter squared target, just like the Russians claimed. There are always two major elements to stealth and determining its RCS:

1. Shaping- A stealthy aiframe design like the F-35 are designed to be hard to detect by X-Band radars, but this shaping isnt nearly as effective againt Low-Band radars like the one you refer to because the aircraft is too small for such shaping to ever help. For example, the B-2 bomber's size means its stealthy shaping is much more effective against such radars than smaller fighter sized targets. So, against Low Band radars, shaping is much less effective than it is against X-band radars (for which most Fighter radars belong to)

2. Materials- This is where both the F-35 and F-22 get most of their stealth. These materials, ranging from radar absorbent paint to foam absorber and other technologies, are effective to almost all radars including Low-Band/Low-Frequency but it doesnt make them invisible (no stealth can).

Therefore, when it comes to trying to defeat Low-Band radars with stealth, Fighter-sized aircraft have to relay much more on their RAM than their stealthy shaping than they would against other fighter radars. And this material can only go so far, hence why Low-Band radars can track Stealth aircraft better than most tradtional radars. Only large stealth aircraft like the B-2 can relay on their shaping and materials to counter such systems.

This article may help better explain what I am talking about.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-230408-1.html

This brings up another idea, the possible existence of Iranian Over The Horizon Radar systems. I have seen satellite images of a possible site but I have been trying to figure out lately how well these systems work against stealth. My educated guess its they can detect them but likely would have problem accurately tracking them (just as Low-Band radars do traditionally because the long wavelengths they emit). Regardless such OTHR would be invaluable to Iran.

My reason for skepticism Katty is even the Russians don't claim to be able to detect stealth quite that far (though I will do some more research to confirm/refute this). This doesnt mean they couldnt have a secret system that no-one knows about but the Russians are much more open about their military technology compared to many nations so If they could sell such technology I would think they would advertise it but I dont know that for certain.

Stealth in Air to Ground operations has already been proven by the F-117, so clearly Stealth does work even in air to ground missions, since those were the only missions the F-117 ever performed. While a F-117 was lost it was the only one lost in a service life of several thousand sorties over enemy territory, and compared to newer stealth aircraft like the F-35 and F-22, the F-117 uses 'old school' stealth tech. However I have to emphasize the F-22 is not likely to be used against ground targets. The B-2 will likely be used for such missions and it isnt nearly as visible to Low-Band radars as the F-22 or F-35 (thanks to its much larger size), though its stealth isnt perfect either. As I've said before, there is no such thing as perfect stealth. There are ways to beat it, it just takes alot of proper planning and the right equipment.

Can Nebo Radar be minimised to 4 meter x 4 meter size, mounted on military jeep?
Then it can easily be hidden into the bunker to counter HARM missiles launched in large numbers from US air planes.

I would also put I-HAWK missiles on military jeep so they can also be hiden by driving jeep into the bunker.

Oerlikon (35 mm), ZSU-23-2 (23 mm) Anti Air guns can also be deployed on jeeps to cover advancing infantry against Cruise missiles and Assault Helicopters.

Sure Iran could buy or develop a complete IADS, but how long would that take, either spending years negotiating with a supplier and waiting for delivery, or years developing equivalent systems, as well as the billions that would go into their procurement.

Iran has already reverse engineered Oerlikon (and updated it with Infra Red optics and Radar auto guidence), Nebo Radar, Igla MANPAD, probably I-HAWK and soon will reverse engineere S-400/HQ-9 high altitude Anti Air missile. It is all going to IADS direction.

Completely agree on all other points. Especially small groups of Infantry hiding in tunnel connected bunkers. Small group lowers the chances of Infra Red Thermal detection by UAVs and Satelites. Taliban in Afganistan also operates in small groups that disperse in different directions after they attack US targets.