5 ms·
> Western sources routinely dismiss claims that plasma stealth is in practical use / is of practical Given that the A-12/SR-71 were designed to use A-50 fuel a
by jhayward 7y ago
> Western sources routinely dismiss claims that plasma stealth is in practical use / is of practical
Given that the A-12/SR-71 were designed to use A-50 fuel addition for plasma stealth I am confused by this statement.[1]
[edit: reworded from definitive statement of actual use]
[1] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29787/the-sr-71-blackbirds-predecessor-created-plasma-stealth-by-burning-cesium-laced-fuel https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29787/the-sr-71-blackb...
- icegreentea2 7y agoWell, my wording was a little imprecise. Plasma stealth as a physical concept is real, there's little doubt about that. I wasn't aware of the linked application (that's so cool! Thanks for sharing), but I would argue that that demonstrates a limited application of plasma stealth (rear aspect and plume RCS reduciton). Typical claims of plasma stealth involve somehow cloaking the entire fuselage and providing all-aspect stealth. I guess what I was trying to get at is that western sources typically downplay the threat posed by any mention of plasma stealth, typically usually some combination of "we don't actually know if their systems use plasma stealth in a meaningful manner" and "even if they did, we don't believe that it poses of a significant threat".