Live data from Hacker News

New fighter jet camouflage schemes

markosun.wordpress.com

31–40 of 61 posts

Re: New fighter jet camouflage schemes

#31
post #29
post #5

Does camouflage really helps in modern air combat? Aircrafts engage each other mostly on beyond visual range distances, and dogfighting in kinda rare now. Also, HUDs should assist in tracking of targets and highlight them, so camo will make no difference. The only use for camo I can think of is to hide the aircraft while it's stationed on the airstrip - in a relatively vulnerable position.

dogfighting in kinda rare now. This is true, now. In large part because the USAF dominates the air so thoroughly that opposing air is toast the day the war starts. This may not always be so.

I don't have any information about the second Iraq war, but a relative of mine works with radar systems. From what he told me, Iraq's air defense during the first Gulf war was ridiculously poor - the Iraqi air defence forces just turned on their air defense radars and waited to get a bomb dropped on top of them.

Apparently, there was a NATO exercise in Norway a couple of years ago where the US expected the same tactics to be used and hence to easily achieve air superiority. However, the opposing force moved their radar and missile systems around, used the terrain for cover, performed feinting maneuvers by giving the impression that the air defense systems were located in different locations and also obverved using mobile observers on the ground. Apparently, the US lost the air battle spectacularly.

Imagine a military conflict with an enemy that doesn't follow conventional doctrine like this. It's very hard to extrapolate from history how things are going to play out. A large-scale war with today's technology is going to look a lot different than the assymetric warfare the US currently seems to be optimizing for.

Re: New fighter jet camouflage schemes

#32
post #4

An better camouflage scheme would be to identify the general direction of the aggressor, and take a photograph of the terrain (or sky) in the opposite direction, then tint or color of the airplane with that background, so it blends in. If the computer could establish the exact location and direction and velocity of the looker, it could make itself partially invisible by projecting to the viewer the same colors that w…

Like that one? : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIGzpi9lCck&feature=youtu...

Re: New fighter jet camouflage schemes

#33
post #2

This is a pretty old idea however not applied to aircraft, it was used on ships in WW1 and WW2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage

And similar to German WWI "Lozenge" aircraft camoflauge, which I'm surprised the OP didn't mention: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lozenge_camouflage

Re: New fighter jet camouflage schemes

#34
post #31
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dogfighting in kinda rare now. This is true, now. In large part because the USAF dominates the air so thoroughly that opposing air is toast the day the war starts. This may not always be so.

I don't have any information about the second Iraq war, but a relative of mine works with radar systems. From what he told me, Iraq's air defense during the first Gulf war was ridiculously poor - the Iraqi air defence forces just turned on their air defense radars and waited to get a bomb dropped on top of them. Apparently, there was a NATO exercise in Norway a couple of years ago where the US expected the same tacti…

This has been played out in a huge war game in 2002 involving Lt General Paul Van Riper and your assumptions are correct: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Re: New fighter jet camouflage schemes

#35
post #31
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dogfighting in kinda rare now. This is true, now. In large part because the USAF dominates the air so thoroughly that opposing air is toast the day the war starts. This may not always be so.

I don't have any information about the second Iraq war, but a relative of mine works with radar systems. From what he told me, Iraq's air defense during the first Gulf war was ridiculously poor - the Iraqi air defence forces just turned on their air defense radars and waited to get a bomb dropped on top of them. Apparently, there was a NATO exercise in Norway a couple of years ago where the US expected the same tacti…

I'm sure there are some surprises that would catch the Air Force off-guard, but from all of the training exercise results I've seen (and this is just publicly available stuff, nothing from a relative on the inside or anything) the US Air Force (with F-22s) just completely dominates anything else.

The F-22s had close to 200:1 kill to death ratios in most of the training exercises I've seen. Enemy aircraft are dead before they are even aware that an F-22 is in range.

Re: New fighter jet camouflage schemes

#38
post #29
post #5

Does camouflage really helps in modern air combat? Aircrafts engage each other mostly on beyond visual range distances, and dogfighting in kinda rare now. Also, HUDs should assist in tracking of targets and highlight them, so camo will make no difference. The only use for camo I can think of is to hide the aircraft while it's stationed on the airstrip - in a relatively vulnerable position.

dogfighting in kinda rare now. This is true, now. In large part because the USAF dominates the air so thoroughly that opposing air is toast the day the war starts. This may not always be so.

> the USAF dominates the air so thoroughly

It's more like the USAF never engages opponents that could really pose any threat. It's not very hard to achieve air supremacy against an enemy operating planes 20 years folder than yours. Which is fine in my book: you should pick your fights carefully.

Re: New fighter jet camouflage schemes

#40
post #31
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dogfighting in kinda rare now. This is true, now. In large part because the USAF dominates the air so thoroughly that opposing air is toast the day the war starts. This may not always be so.

I don't have any information about the second Iraq war, but a relative of mine works with radar systems. From what he told me, Iraq's air defense during the first Gulf war was ridiculously poor - the Iraqi air defence forces just turned on their air defense radars and waited to get a bomb dropped on top of them. Apparently, there was a NATO exercise in Norway a couple of years ago where the US expected the same tacti…

Not true. Baghdad had very heavy air defenses. Dangerous enough that the U.S. lost 2 F-16s and decided to only use F-117 stealth aircraft afterwards. See: [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_Q_Strike [2] http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/LucasStL/1180/
Post reply on HN