IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> So Much For Stealth, Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger
TheWanderingJewe...
post Jan 7 2013, 12:56 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 183
Joined: 10-January 10
Member No.: 18,025



http://gizmodo.com/5968827/quantum-physics...njammable-radar

and the tech curve just got blown if they make this thing work
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fatum
post Jan 7 2013, 01:26 PM
Post #2


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 2-September 09
From: Moscow, Russia
Member No.: 17,589



So, the way I understand, there are three ways to go about stealth technology.

First, build your plane in such a shape that it reflects the coming waves off to the sides, and nothing or nearly nothing back at the scanner (see F-117). That tech is unaffected by the development, because the waves are still not returning to your scanner, whether they are polarized or not.
Second, there's using wave-absorbing materials to reduce the power of the waves reflected. Again, unaffected: polarized or not, the power of the waves you're getting at the receiver is diminished.
Third, there's building aircraft with minimal possible RCS. That could potentially be affected, I guess, because RCS is a rather arcane thing to work with, depending on wavelength and complex shapes involved and whatnot; but I doubt that the change will be revolutionary (because why would it; principally the same RCS-reducing measures should work for the new radars, as well).

So all in all, I can't see how the development (at least as described in the article) makes stealth obsolete. It might make active radar ECM less effective, but that's far from the revolutionary change described.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpellBinder
post Jan 7 2013, 08:27 PM
Post #3


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,351
Joined: 19-September 09
From: Behind the shadows of the Resonance
Member No.: 17,653



Predator vs. Prey. When the scanner technology evolves, so too will the stealth technology.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Jan 7 2013, 11:59 PM
Post #4


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445



I imagine that the simplest anti-infallible-radar technology will remain the most reliable.

Detect incoming infallible radar signal > auto-launch anti-radiation missile at it > one missile journey later, the other guy no longer has an expensive infallible quantum radar.

So send in a few waves of drones whose only job is to present a target for the infallible radar to lock onto, blow the infallible radar away, and suddenly you could cruise overhead in a zeppelin and they wouldn't know it. (Hyperbolicly speaking, anyway.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umidori
post Jan 8 2013, 12:07 AM
Post #5


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,575
Joined: 5-February 10
Member No.: 18,115



Now I want a Quantum Zeppelin.

~Umi
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fatum
post Jan 8 2013, 01:02 AM
Post #6


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 2-September 09
From: Moscow, Russia
Member No.: 17,589



Still waiting for other engineers around to point out how that thing is in any way negating the current stealth technologies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
taeksosin
post Jan 8 2013, 01:34 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 428
Joined: 23-September 11
From: Vegas
Member No.: 38,733



It has quantum in the name, therefore it must be infallible. Duh. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/proof.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Manunancy
post Jan 8 2013, 07:47 AM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 821
Joined: 4-December 09
Member No.: 17,940



From my read, what it does is merely making the radar jamming proof, as you can automatically sort out what's a genuine signal bouncing back from something that's sent at the radar by jammers and active decoys (say a tin can emiiting o nthe radar's wavelenght to masquerade as a B-52) . But it still vulnerable to chaff - both the plane and the chaff appears to the radar as a genuine return of it's pulse - and 'passive' stealth which doesn't give a return signal to lock on.

It might be harder to fool with 'active' stealth based on canceling the incoming signal with an opposite one.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pbangarth
post Jan 9 2013, 04:58 AM
Post #9


Old Man of the North
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 9,652
Joined: 14-August 03
From: Just north of the Centre of the Universe
Member No.: 5,463



QUOTE (Umidori @ Jan 7 2013, 07:07 PM) *
Now I want a Quantum Zeppelin.

~Umi

That is so cool.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Halinn
post Jan 9 2013, 09:53 AM
Post #10


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,018
Joined: 3-July 10
Member No.: 18,786



QUOTE (Umidori @ Jan 8 2013, 01:07 AM) *
Now I want a Quantum Zeppelin.

Quantumn Zeppelin could be this generation's Led Zeppelin.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jan 10 2013, 06:26 PM
Post #11


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Fatum @ Jan 7 2013, 08:26 AM) *
So, the way I understand, there are three ways to go about stealth technology.

First, build your plane in such a shape that it reflects the coming waves off to the sides, and nothing or nearly nothing back at the scanner (see F-117). That tech is unaffected by the development, because the waves are still not returning to your scanner, whether they are polarized or not.
Second, there's using wave-absorbing materials to reduce the power of the waves reflected. Again, unaffected: polarized or not, the power of the waves you're getting at the receiver is diminished.
Third, there's building aircraft with minimal possible RCS. That could potentially be affected, I guess, because RCS is a rather arcane thing to work with, depending on wavelength and complex shapes involved and whatnot; but I doubt that the change will be revolutionary (because why would it; principally the same RCS-reducing measures should work for the new radars, as well).

So all in all, I can't see how the development (at least as described in the article) makes stealth obsolete. It might make active radar ECM less effective, but that's far from the revolutionary change described.


All of those are passive evasion of radar, not an active jam of radar. This new type addresses the second, not the first.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bearclaw
post Jan 10 2013, 06:55 PM
Post #12


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,632
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Portland Oregon, USA
Member No.: 1,304



Stealth is what is used to drop a couple of laser guided bunker busters. Radar jamming is what is used to protect multiple waves of B52's.
Stealth is most likely unaffected, but the jamming used for large attacks will need to be updated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Warlordtheft
post Jan 10 2013, 08:41 PM
Post #13


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,328
Joined: 2-April 07
From: The Center of the Universe
Member No.: 11,360



Assuming of course you can field this radar and it has no adverse affects and doesn't interfere with your own equipment. What about a quantum jamming pod on a drone that detected and then flooded the receiver with the exact same signal.


Sensors, ECM, ECCM, is just a game of one upmanship. Few countries do it well and have the expertise.





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jan 10 2013, 08:50 PM
Post #14


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Warlordtheft @ Jan 10 2013, 03:41 PM) *
What about a quantum jamming pod on a drone that detected and then flooded the receiver with the exact same signal.


It can't. It's actually, literally, impossible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fatum
post Jan 10 2013, 11:16 PM
Post #15


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 2-September 09
From: Moscow, Russia
Member No.: 17,589



QUOTE (Draco18s @ Jan 10 2013, 10:26 PM) *
All of those are passive evasion of radar, not an active jam of radar. This new type addresses the second, not the first.
Well, sure, just like I said in the last paragraph in that message you quote. The thing is, stealth aircraft is considered stealth primarily for the passive measures: every modern combat plane has active ECM. So the whole pompousness of the article is not exactly spot on.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jan 11 2013, 01:56 PM
Post #16


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Fatum @ Jan 10 2013, 06:16 PM) *
every modern combat plane has active ECM
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Jan 10 2013, 01:26 PM) *

This new type addresses active jam.

So the whole pompousness of the article is not correct.


Que?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fatum
post Jan 11 2013, 02:07 PM
Post #17


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 2-September 09
From: Moscow, Russia
Member No.: 17,589



Because it does not invalidate the stealth technology. Because stealth aircraft differ from not-stealth precisely by employing passive measures, ones the tech does nothing about.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jan 11 2013, 03:19 PM
Post #18


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Fatum @ Jan 11 2013, 09:07 AM) *
Because it does not invalidate the stealth technology. Because stealth aircraft differ from not-stealth precisely by employing passive measures, ones the tech does nothing about.


The article makes no reference to stealth technology.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fatum
post Jan 11 2013, 03:52 PM
Post #19


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 2-September 09
From: Moscow, Russia
Member No.: 17,589



QUOTE (The article @ Dec 16 2012, 10:10 AM)
A new kind developed by researchers at the University of Rochester however, dips into quantum physics and is unjammable and infallible.
Get ready for a quantum future, where everyone can see you see them.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Jan 11 2013, 04:02 PM
Post #20


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE
A new kind developed by researchers at the University of Rochester however, dips into quantum physics and is unjammable and infallible.
Get ready for a quantum future, where everyone can see you see them.


It says "unjammable" and "infallible." It does not say "unavoidable."
(Infallible in this usage is referring to spoofed signals, as the system can recognize the difference between a real signal and a faked signal infallibly)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fatum
post Jan 11 2013, 04:13 PM
Post #21


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 2-September 09
From: Moscow, Russia
Member No.: 17,589



QUOTE (Draco18s @ Jan 11 2013, 08:02 PM) *
(Infallible in this usage is referring to spoofed signals, as the system can recognize the difference between a real signal and a faked signal infallibly)
Infallible is infallible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SpellBinder
post Jan 11 2013, 10:06 PM
Post #22


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,351
Joined: 19-September 09
From: Behind the shadows of the Resonance
Member No.: 17,653



Do remember what happened to the ship that was claimed to be "unsinkable".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lionhearted
post Jan 11 2013, 10:24 PM
Post #23


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,930
Joined: 9-April 05
From: Scandinavian Union
Member No.: 7,310



"So guys we developed this new wiz tech, it makes it so we can't be jammed, like ever! We still can't see them, but if we could! we wouldn't be jammed (hmm, raspberry)"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th April 2024 - 02:42 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.