Stealth:The History and Future of LO Aviation.

Lezt said:

How can we have the history of low observation aircraft without the Kozlov PS? 1935, airplane with clear transparent skin?

Click to expand...

because It was a dead end.
The concept of a transparent skin on a plane worked for a fabric skinned aircraft. however those craft were slow, demanded lightweight and flimsy furthermore they still require a skeleton and mechanical systems. As can bee seen in your photos the engine, fuel tank and pilot were still visible. Adding to issues the invisible skin suffered effects of debris and the Sun which stained the material making it more and more visible.
by the second world war Aircraft transitioned to metal hulls which made them stronger and more powerful engines which made them faster and the threat of radar emerged as the key seaking technology. if the human eye was the only threat then a transparent skin might have worked but with radar it's as visible as any other aircraft.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

because It was a dead end.
The concept of a transparent skin on a plane worked for a fabric skinned aircraft. however those craft were slow, demanded lightweight and flimsy furthermore they still require a skeleton and mechanical systems. As can bee seen in your photos the engine, fuel tank and pilot were still visible. Adding to issues the invisible skin suffered effects of debris and the Sun which stained the material making it more and more visible.
by the second world war Aircraft transitioned to metal hulls which made them stronger and more powerful engines which made them faster and the threat of radar emerged as the key seaking technology. if the human eye was the only threat then a transparent skin might have worked but with radar it's as visible as any other aircraft.

Click to expand...

I won't agree with that assessment, fabric and wood constructed planes have very minimal radar signatures. They are used nowadays (although without clear skins) to insert special forces.

Wood being a natural radar absorbent and fabric that doesn't really reflect that well. you still have your engine etc as you said, but it is a 1-2 m2 cross section for the plane instead of 20-20 m2 for the same metal skinned plane.

Are you trying to refer to the AN2 Cub aka Y5? Because that is all metal construction. I cannot think of a single modern military aircraft post 1950 made of wood and canvas outside of a flight trainer. Alternatively their are ultralight aircraft buts that's basically a hang glider with a engine and delusions of grandeur.
They cannot carry more than two men.
Wood and fabric aircraft do not have the strength or power and if one tried to, the internal features needed like internal fuel tanks, benches and floor and other mounted equipment would basically fill the aircraft and the weight would break the frame.
Solid wood or carbon fiber and composite is used but that is a whole other ball game and could not be transparent.
And as to radar yes the structure is not as reflective but the shapping is still not stealthy and there are in all of these metal features externally affixed along wings control features and engines.

Who ever said organic materials does not reflect radar waves?
Yes the reflection rate would be smaller but it does reflect radar. A popular example is a speed gun used to measure the speed of a ball thrown by the pitcher in baseball.
A ball used in baseball is basically made of cork, yarn and a deer skin. The speed is measured using radar waves emitted and calculates the time difference of the reflected waves that bounces back from the ball.

I said that wood is a natural absorbant, I didn't say be how much.

And, frabric reflect less than metal I did not say it didn't reflect at all...

Lezt said:

I won't agree with that assessment, fabric and wood constructed planes have very minimal radar signatures. They are used nowadays (although without clear skins) to insert special forces.

Wood being a natural radar absorbent and fabric that doesn't really reflect that well. you still have your engine etc as you said, but it is a 1-2 m2 cross section for the plane instead of 20-20 m2 for the same metal skinned plane.

Click to expand...

actually they are not, as to covert special forces, they jump from C-130s and C-17s? using the HALO, or are inserted by submarines, and ingress with small inflatable boats??

Wooden framed aircraft can be very strong, but wood is subject to moisture, degradation from the sun, etc, etc.

Aviation still recognizes the strength of wood as many aerobatic aircraft continue to be flown with wooden spars and ribs and structure overlaid with fabric or ceconite. They just need to be kept warm and dry?? LOL

AFB, you are right that alot of american SOCOM operations are jumping with C130s. That however is done when the adversary have no comprehensive air defense systems. ROC insertion of special forces / agents into the PRC up till the 1970s are by low flying (and often slow flying aircraft).

Iraqi ultralights flew over US positions in 2003 without being detected by US air defenses.



I also believe that north Korea uses slow terrain hugging aircraft (should be AN2) for their special forces insertion into south Korea. of ocurse, the AN2 is metal skinned, point being only that low and slow is still in some circles believe to be effective in evading detection.

Lezt said:

AFB, you are right that alot of american SOCOM operations are jumping with C130s. That however is done when the adversary have no comprehensive air defense systems. ROC insertion of special forces / agents into the PRC up till the 1970s are by low flying (and often slow flying aircraft).

Iraqi ultralights flew over US positions in 2003 without being detected by US air defenses.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I also believe that north Korea uses slow terrain hugging aircraft (should be AN2) for their special forces insertion into south Korea. of ocurse, the AN2 is metal skinned, point being only that low and slow is still in some circles believe to be effective in evading detection.

Click to expand...

Nope, with HALO jumps the plane doesn't need to cross the border while the para-troopers can drift 2Km behind enemy lines with this kind of jump.
As for low flying aircrafts they are good as dead if there is an AEW around with look down radars or if the terrain is flat like the sea where a radar will identify an flying object once they jump out of the horizon.

SamuraiBlue said:

Nope, with HALO jumps the plane doesn't need to cross the border while the para-troopers can drift 2Km behind enemy lines with this kind of jump.
As for low flying aircrafts they are good as dead if there is an AEW around with look down radars or if the terrain is flat like the sea where a radar will identify an flying object once they jump out of the horizon.

Click to expand...

actually, you are both right, and you are both wrong, LOL, my Daddy flew the very first MC-130Es in VIETNAM! he worked for MAC/V/SOG, those MC-130Es pioneered not only the HALO, but the MC-130E also had and still does have "terrain following radar", I quote my old man, "that thing will scare the KRAP right out of you", stated he'd never been so "skeered" in his life??? up the hill, down the hill at "tree-top" level about 150' more or less, it really did "creep him out".

Now they fly the MC-130 H's and J's, the Combat Talon II, and it has a new name as the J-Bird, but also has real armament, so yes I am the Air Force Brat, and I know a chick who is still working on that radar! she was one of my Hospice patients daughters, and told me all about my Dad's airplane, and her's.

By the way, they did call the Combat Talon I the "rivet yard", or "yards" for short, MAC/V took over most of the missions that "Air America" was forced to give up, the C-123 was just not enough airplane for the mission, but the 130, yep, it will fly low and fast, I remember one spring morning being awakened by 12 C-130s in an in-trail formation, at "tree top level", after I wet my pants, I ran outside and watched the show, it didn't last long.

and yes they do VERY LOW altitude "static line" drops, and I do mean "VERY LOW!"

oh, and yes those "black birds" had 400lbs of radar absorbent paint! and yes it does work, they did indeed fly deep into China.

and finally Lezt No relation ship to the afore mentioned Kozlov PS. It was a dead end. And as to the Ultralights, what could they do? I mean out of a James bond movie they offer little for payload at best small arms and can be destroyed by the same small arms. Although one or two over flew a position all it would have taken was a Ma Duce gunner to flatten them.
Their range is very short so they cannot go very far and they can't carry more then a man or two making them lousy transports.