5 ms·

It’s definitely BS. Transponders aside, the US has radar and near real-time satellite imagery of every square inch of American territory. There is a zero perce

It’s definitely BS. Transponders aside, the US has radar and near real-time satellite imagery of every square inch of American territory. There is a zero percent chance they don’t know where this plane is.

sebzim4500 3y ago
Isn't the whole point of an F-35 that it is really hard to track with radar?
- SkyPuncher 3y ago
  It can be. I believe for “routine” training they’ll keep a radar reflector in them. Very little need to have stealth when bouncing around the US.
  - AustinDev 3y ago
    I was in a stealth fighter squadron. It really depends on the mission profile as to determine if the reflectors will be on the plane during CONUS training. If we're doing BVR 'tag' drills, they won't have them installed. If we're just putting butts in seats to keep certs current or maybe some air to ground training, then the reflectors will be installed. Caveat, I was in the Air Force and I'm not too familiar with NATOPS which is what I believe the Marines would be operating under to determine SOP. I was not a pilot, but I was in operations and received the same briefings. My training was also from when we first got real stealth fighters and SOP has probably evolved a lot in the last decade. What's most interesting about this story to me is... What sort of mishap would lead to an ejection with autopilot left functioning? That all seems very peculiar. Weird way to join the Caterpillar Club.
    - robarr 3y ago
      “The Caterpillar Club is an informal association of people who have successfully used a parachute to bail out of a disabled aircraft. After authentication by the parachute maker, applicants receive a membership certificate and a distinctive lapel pin. The nationality of the person whose life was saved by parachute and ownership of the aircraft are not factors in determining qualification for membership; anybody whose life was saved by using a parachute after bailing out of a disabled aircraft is eligible. The requirement that the aircraft is disabled naturally excludes parachuting enthusiasts in the normal course of a recreational jump, or those involved in military training jumps.“ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caterpillar_Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caterpillar_Club
      - dctoedt 3y ago
        Brought back memories of my dad's "induction" into the Caterpillar Club in 1962. When we cleaned out and sold my folks' house, I took a picture of his framed membership certificate; he often wore the lapel pin on civilian sport-coat lapels. https://www.commondraft.org/Caterpillar-Club-certificate.png https://www.commondraft.org/Caterpillar-Club-certificate.png
        qingcharles 3y ago
        Amazing. Thank you for that. Do you exist because he had an ejection seat?
        dctoedt 3y ago
        > Do you exist because he had an ejection seat? No, I was a little tyke at the time. (The story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33348425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33348425)
    - EMCymatics 3y ago
      Dunno but if they dont find the aircraft it will be difficult to determine how it happened. My guess would be weird software. There might be something with the F35b's because there are a few crashes in the headlines. Worst case scenario someone slaved it to a netowrk and stole it since the f35bs have VTOL.
- The_Colonel 3y ago
  Outside of combat missions, stealth aircraft have little widgets on them which multiply their radar signature. Stealth aircraft are meant to be stealth only in real combat missions.
  - perihelions 3y ago
    Seems to be this thing discussed here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luneburg_lens#Radar_reflector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luneburg_lens#Radar_reflector (caption: "Luneburg reflectors (the marked protrusion) on an F-35") edit: Also here (with quotes from a US Air Force Avionics Technician): https://theaviationgeekclub.com/these-devices-make-stealth-aircraft-visible-on-radar-screens/ https://theaviationgeekclub.com/these-devices-make-stealth-a... ("How Luneburg lens radar reflectors are used to make stealth aircraft visible on radar screens")
- HarryHirsch 3y ago
  It's really hard to track with active radar, which is why the first thing NATO does in a foreign country is bomb all TV and radio stations off the air. With passive methods it's no problem at all.
  - rplst8 3y ago
    What do TV and radio stations have to do with active radar?
    - CamperBob2 3y ago
      Nothing. That's the point. You don't need active radar with the right mix of broadcast stations and math tricks.
    - itsyaboi 3y ago
      The other way around, it's easy to track these with passive radar which is why all radio emitters get bombed.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - opwieurposiu 3y ago
      TV and radio stations can be used for passive radar. Passive radar is when you use existing radio sources as you illumination source and your radar system is listen-only. Stealth aircraft tend to be more visible on passive radar since passive is usually a longer wavelength that the aircraft was not designed for. You can even DIY a passive radar. https://spectrum.ieee.org/passive-radar-with-sdr https://spectrum.ieee.org/passive-radar-with-sdr
    - bunabhucan 3y ago
      You could use a focused receiver to look for TV signals being emitted from an object thousands of feet in the air over (say) the ocean off the coast of California. Since you know there is no TV station antenna floating in the sky out there you know you are getting reflected rf from a plane. Your receiver is "passive" - it doesn't emit a signal - so the attacking enemy has to find it visually. If the enemy bomb all the TV antennas then you need to emit your own signal to generate the reflection.
- mcv 3y ago
  It seemed like such a good idea at the time.
nradov 3y ago
That's simply not true. The US military only has primary radar coverage over a small fraction of the country. (Air traffic control primarily relies on secondary surveillance radar.) Only the weather satellites in geostationary orbits provide near real-time imagery, and they lack the resolution to spot something the size of an aircraft. High resolution images come from spy satellites in highly inclined low orbits which provide only intermittent coverage of any particular location. And they can't see through clouds.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
ceejayoz 3y ago
Ah, yes, radar. Notoriously effective on a stealth fighter.
woodruffw 3y ago
The US military absolutely does not have total ground radar across the entire country. (And even if it did, radar is not magic. If the plane is at the bottom of a murky lake, then no amount of radar or satellite imagery is going to find it.)
- 0xffff2 3y ago
  >And even if it did, radar is not magic. If the plane is at the bottom of a murky lake, then no amount of radar or satellite imagery is going to find it. The purpose of the radar would not be to see the plane at the bottom of a lake, but to provide a flight path after the ejection. If they had radar coverage, they should be able to see either where it ejected with an unstable flight path that put it within a fairly small circle of the ejection or on a stable flight path that gives them a more or less straight line to search along.
naikrovek 3y ago
> the US has radar and near real-time satellite imagery of every square inch of American territory. have you been watching prime-time crime fighting drama TV shows? the implementation of that system is probably 8x as bad as it sounds, and it sounds too complex to implement in less than two decades. real-time (or "near" real-time, whatever that means) imagery of every square inch of the continental US? No.
- Arrath 3y ago
  Even if the imagery was real-time, the process to get access to it most surely isn't.
kkielhofner 3y ago
If you watch YouTube replay simulations[0] with ATC (air traffic control) when pilots violate a TFR (temporary flight restriction) for something like The President it's comical how long it takes for the interception fighters to find the target. It turns out the F-* radar is terrible at these kinds of situations. They almost always end up getting vectored in by air traffic control with their much more powerful ground based radar. Just one example of how this kind of stuff plays out in the real world. [0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Onx46fLyncM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Onx46fLyncM
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  The fighter response to 9/11 was proof enough of the incompetence of the modern american air defense system.
  - kkielhofner 3y ago
    Even after that event and two decades it's still a joke.
    - mschuster91 3y ago
      Which is why the regulations on passenger aircraft got tightened up, it's easier to get rid/impede the attack vector than to overcome the physical limitations of a radar antenna in a fighter jet's nose cone vs a many meters large ground radar antenna.
      - kkielhofner 3y ago
        All of these TFR violations are early/inexperienced Cessna 172 pilots (or similar) who aren't up on TFRs, just lost, etc. They often can't even manage the radio and just go completely silent, blissfully unaware anything is happening until an F-16 shows up next to them hailing them saying things like "US military armed fighter aircraft. Acknowledge this by rocking your wings.", etc. Of course assuming the fighter eventually finds them in the first place... What's really scary about ATC vectoring the fighters in is a bad actor could just as easily use that open comms to evade the fighter aircraft. Although they're obviously faster and more maneuverable it gets back to the first scenario I mentioned - the fighters can't find a target when they're not actively trying to evade them. It would be pretty easy and straightforward for a bad actor to get a few hours of lessons, take up a Cessna loaded with improvised explosives of some type, and do a lot of damage. A lot of smaller air strips/fields don't even have a tower so they could get up there before anyone really has a clue.
xeromal 3y ago
There's a handful of missing nukes in the US from some very large crashed planes that we still haven't found.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- egberts1 3y ago
  Still missing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961_Goldsboro_B-52_crash https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961_Goldsboro_B-52_crash
dghlsakjg 3y ago
This is not even close to true. ATC radar regularly loses small planes on 'primary' radar (primary radar being pure radar), and has to rely on the transponder. There are many areas where you simply don't have primary coverage, especially close to the ground. I've flown through military controlled airspace where they lose radar contact with me in a Cessna less than 10 miles from the base.
ianburrell 3y ago
BTW, the only real-time satellite imagery of all of the US is from weather satellites in geosynchronous orbit. Which has the resolution of a city. If near real-time, you mean a couple of times per day. There aren't enough LEO observation satellites to provide complete coverage.

sebzim4500 3y ago

Isn't the whole point of an F-35 that it is really hard to track with radar?

SkyPuncher 3y ago
It can be. I believe for “routine” training they’ll keep a radar reflector in them. Very little need to have stealth when bouncing around the US.
- AustinDev 3y ago
  I was in a stealth fighter squadron. It really depends on the mission profile as to determine if the reflectors will be on the plane during CONUS training. If we're doing BVR 'tag' drills, they won't have them installed. If we're just putting butts in seats to keep certs current or maybe some air to ground training, then the reflectors will be installed. Caveat, I was in the Air Force and I'm not too familiar with NATOPS which is what I believe the Marines would be operating under to determine SOP. I was not a pilot, but I was in operations and received the same briefings. My training was also from when we first got real stealth fighters and SOP has probably evolved a lot in the last decade. What's most interesting about this story to me is... What sort of mishap would lead to an ejection with autopilot left functioning? That all seems very peculiar. Weird way to join the Caterpillar Club.
  - robarr 3y ago
    “The Caterpillar Club is an informal association of people who have successfully used a parachute to bail out of a disabled aircraft. After authentication by the parachute maker, applicants receive a membership certificate and a distinctive lapel pin. The nationality of the person whose life was saved by parachute and ownership of the aircraft are not factors in determining qualification for membership; anybody whose life was saved by using a parachute after bailing out of a disabled aircraft is eligible. The requirement that the aircraft is disabled naturally excludes parachuting enthusiasts in the normal course of a recreational jump, or those involved in military training jumps.“ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caterpillar_Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caterpillar_Club
    - dctoedt 3y ago
      Brought back memories of my dad's "induction" into the Caterpillar Club in 1962. When we cleaned out and sold my folks' house, I took a picture of his framed membership certificate; he often wore the lapel pin on civilian sport-coat lapels. https://www.commondraft.org/Caterpillar-Club-certificate.png https://www.commondraft.org/Caterpillar-Club-certificate.png
      - qingcharles 3y ago
        Amazing. Thank you for that. Do you exist because he had an ejection seat?
        dctoedt 3y ago
        > Do you exist because he had an ejection seat? No, I was a little tyke at the time. (The story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33348425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33348425)
  - EMCymatics 3y ago
    Dunno but if they dont find the aircraft it will be difficult to determine how it happened. My guess would be weird software. There might be something with the F35b's because there are a few crashes in the headlines. Worst case scenario someone slaved it to a netowrk and stole it since the f35bs have VTOL.
The_Colonel 3y ago
Outside of combat missions, stealth aircraft have little widgets on them which multiply their radar signature. Stealth aircraft are meant to be stealth only in real combat missions.
- perihelions 3y ago
  Seems to be this thing discussed here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luneburg_lens#Radar_reflector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luneburg_lens#Radar_reflector (caption: "Luneburg reflectors (the marked protrusion) on an F-35") edit: Also here (with quotes from a US Air Force Avionics Technician): https://theaviationgeekclub.com/these-devices-make-stealth-aircraft-visible-on-radar-screens/ https://theaviationgeekclub.com/these-devices-make-stealth-a... ("How Luneburg lens radar reflectors are used to make stealth aircraft visible on radar screens")
HarryHirsch 3y ago
It's really hard to track with active radar, which is why the first thing NATO does in a foreign country is bomb all TV and radio stations off the air. With passive methods it's no problem at all.
- rplst8 3y ago
  What do TV and radio stations have to do with active radar?
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    Nothing. That's the point. You don't need active radar with the right mix of broadcast stations and math tricks.
  - itsyaboi 3y ago
    The other way around, it's easy to track these with passive radar which is why all radio emitters get bombed.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - opwieurposiu 3y ago
    TV and radio stations can be used for passive radar. Passive radar is when you use existing radio sources as you illumination source and your radar system is listen-only. Stealth aircraft tend to be more visible on passive radar since passive is usually a longer wavelength that the aircraft was not designed for. You can even DIY a passive radar. https://spectrum.ieee.org/passive-radar-with-sdr https://spectrum.ieee.org/passive-radar-with-sdr
  - bunabhucan 3y ago
    You could use a focused receiver to look for TV signals being emitted from an object thousands of feet in the air over (say) the ocean off the coast of California. Since you know there is no TV station antenna floating in the sky out there you know you are getting reflected rf from a plane. Your receiver is "passive" - it doesn't emit a signal - so the attacking enemy has to find it visually. If the enemy bomb all the TV antennas then you need to emit your own signal to generate the reflection.
mcv 3y ago
It seemed like such a good idea at the time.

nradov 3y ago

That's simply not true. The US military only has primary radar coverage over a small fraction of the country. (Air traffic control primarily relies on secondary surveillance radar.) Only the weather satellites in geostationary orbits provide near real-time imagery, and they lack the resolution to spot something the size of an aircraft. High resolution images come from spy satellites in highly inclined low orbits which provide only intermittent coverage of any particular location. And they can't see through clouds.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

ceejayoz 3y ago

Ah, yes, radar. Notoriously effective on a stealth fighter.

woodruffw 3y ago

The US military absolutely does not have total ground radar across the entire country. (And even if it did, radar is not magic. If the plane is at the bottom of a murky lake, then no amount of radar or satellite imagery is going to find it.)

0xffff2 3y ago
>And even if it did, radar is not magic. If the plane is at the bottom of a murky lake, then no amount of radar or satellite imagery is going to find it. The purpose of the radar would not be to see the plane at the bottom of a lake, but to provide a flight path after the ejection. If they had radar coverage, they should be able to see either where it ejected with an unstable flight path that put it within a fairly small circle of the ejection or on a stable flight path that gives them a more or less straight line to search along.

naikrovek 3y ago

> the US has radar and near real-time satellite imagery of every square inch of American territory. have you been watching prime-time crime fighting drama TV shows? the implementation of that system is probably 8x as bad as it sounds, and it sounds too complex to implement in less than two decades. real-time (or "near" real-time, whatever that means) imagery of every square inch of the continental US? No.

Arrath 3y ago
Even if the imagery was real-time, the process to get access to it most surely isn't.

kkielhofner 3y ago

If you watch YouTube replay simulations[0] with ATC (air traffic control) when pilots violate a TFR (temporary flight restriction) for something like The President it's comical how long it takes for the interception fighters to find the target. It turns out the F-* radar is terrible at these kinds of situations. They almost always end up getting vectored in by air traffic control with their much more powerful ground based radar. Just one example of how this kind of stuff plays out in the real world. [0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Onx46fLyncM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Onx46fLyncM

kjkjadksj 3y ago
The fighter response to 9/11 was proof enough of the incompetence of the modern american air defense system.
- kkielhofner 3y ago
  Even after that event and two decades it's still a joke.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    Which is why the regulations on passenger aircraft got tightened up, it's easier to get rid/impede the attack vector than to overcome the physical limitations of a radar antenna in a fighter jet's nose cone vs a many meters large ground radar antenna.
    - kkielhofner 3y ago
      All of these TFR violations are early/inexperienced Cessna 172 pilots (or similar) who aren't up on TFRs, just lost, etc. They often can't even manage the radio and just go completely silent, blissfully unaware anything is happening until an F-16 shows up next to them hailing them saying things like "US military armed fighter aircraft. Acknowledge this by rocking your wings.", etc. Of course assuming the fighter eventually finds them in the first place... What's really scary about ATC vectoring the fighters in is a bad actor could just as easily use that open comms to evade the fighter aircraft. Although they're obviously faster and more maneuverable it gets back to the first scenario I mentioned - the fighters can't find a target when they're not actively trying to evade them. It would be pretty easy and straightforward for a bad actor to get a few hours of lessons, take up a Cessna loaded with improvised explosives of some type, and do a lot of damage. A lot of smaller air strips/fields don't even have a tower so they could get up there before anyone really has a clue.

xeromal 3y ago

There's a handful of missing nukes in the US from some very large crashed planes that we still haven't found.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
egberts1 3y ago
Still missing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961_Goldsboro_B-52_crash https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961_Goldsboro_B-52_crash

dghlsakjg 3y ago

This is not even close to true. ATC radar regularly loses small planes on 'primary' radar (primary radar being pure radar), and has to rely on the transponder. There are many areas where you simply don't have primary coverage, especially close to the ground. I've flown through military controlled airspace where they lose radar contact with me in a Cessna less than 10 miles from the base.

ianburrell 3y ago

BTW, the only real-time satellite imagery of all of the US is from weather satellites in geosynchronous orbit. Which has the resolution of a city. If near real-time, you mean a couple of times per day. There aren't enough LEO observation satellites to provide complete coverage.