Radar cross section of a B-2

[-]

deleted_by_reddit@reddit

Is that the radar cross-section of an African Swallow or a European Swallow?

[-]

Illustrious_Farm7570@reddit

It swallows so that’s all that matters.

[-]

jmswshr@reddit

This is not correct. this shit is the most top top secret.

[-]

crosstherubicon@reddit

And, of course, it depends on frequency and aspect. I can see a massive B2 from much further away than i can see a swallow so, at light frequencies, this chart is obviously incorrect.

[-]

decollimate28@reddit

Radar does not include visible frequencies. It includes radar frequencies. Visible light cross sections are typically just called… cross sections.

[-]

Radar is just a word but the concept of using EM pulses to detect and range an object is a concept from ELF to gamma waves. Everything has a cross section and debating the coverage of the word RADAR is irrelevant if you've been detected and are being targeted.

[-]

skyfire1977@reddit

I feel like we saw this a week or so ago. IIRC, the numbers for the stealth aircraft are all wrong.

[-]

lollvastus@reddit

Assuming E to M Band Radar:

Model	Front (m²)	Side (m²)	Rear (m²)
F-117A Nighthawk*	0.0031	0.0051	0.0031
F-35A Lightning II*	0.0012	0.002	0.0012
F-22A Raptor**	0.00072	0.0012	0.00072
B-2A Spirit Blk 30*	0.00015	0.00024	0.00015
F-16A Falcon*	1.8	2.9	1.8
SR-71A Blackbird**	10.0	16.2	10.0
Boeing 747-300**	186.2	269.2	186.2
Citabria B**	1.2	2.1	1.2
Generic Drone**	0.00095	0.00229	0.00095

*: Empty loadout. **: For reference, some popular aircraft.

For A to D Band Radar:

The values for the first four are about ten times larger.
The values for the F-16 and SR-71 are about 25% larger.

[-]

LandscapeGeneral9169@reddit

How in the actual world a bunch of rotating turbines at the back of the engine have the same RCS as the front of an aircraft ( which strictly uses an "S duct" intake to hide the compressor blades spinning and reflecting radar waves ) ?

[-]

Schwaggaccino@reddit

*empty load out

Bruh it’s like posting the weight for cars without any fluids. What’s the point?

[-]

alcohollu_akbar@reddit

No missiles attached to the wings

[-]

Tasty_Carpenter_9669@reddit

Which exact reasons in your opinion cause Raptor (50% bigger in surface) to be actually 50% smaller on RCS?

My theory... 1) Iridium paint on frontal canopy 2) One piece canopy (F35 has 2 piece with metal joint)

3) Older RAM paint was more effective but more melty 4) More sharper geometry instead of plenty rounded areas (F35) 5) Inferior radar with less radar catching surface 6) Less mounted electronic warfare suits that cause radar pings.

How am I doing xD?

[-]

Ibgarrett2@reddit

Read the book “Skunk Works” (by Ben R. Rich & Leo Janos) on the development of the F-117. During the testing they had three bolts 1/8” out of alignment causing the airplane to light up like a Christmas tree on the radar.

[-]

Gajanvihari@reddit

"I cannot see your pole, something must be wrong". Then a bird lands on it. "Oh, there it is."

"If they can do that with a pole, what can they do with an airplane?"

Great book

[-]

toorigged2fail@reddit

What book?

[-]

Longjumping_Ebb_3635@reddit

The RCS of the B-2 is actually 0.0001, and the F-35 is 0.00015.

So the Wumao who made this childish image, claiming they have giant RCS is pathetic.