3 ms·

Yes, I know what the F-35 is. So you feel comfortable now that it's been actively demonstrated that the U.S. can't detect such a jet in its airspace? Even its o

by bmitc 3y ago

Yes, I know what the F-35 is. So you feel comfortable now that it's been actively demonstrated that the U.S. can't detect such a jet in its airspace? Even its own jet it knew about?! It sounds like they had to basically wait until some farmer called it in after it crashed in their field. Also, the F-35 is stealth only to some bands of radar (I would assume given certain windows of altitude), is not invisible, and is not silent.

Arrath 3y ago
I mean, your average air traffic control radar won't exactly be on par with that fielded by AWACs, Patriot batteries or Aegis systems.
inferiorhuman 3y ago
Can't or won't admit to it? There's plenty of reason to play dumb even if only to sell a few more.
jychang 3y ago
Why is that a problem? Hiding has always been easier than detecting in the real world. People are too used to computers which make detection easy. But before computers, a king would have to physically send tax collectors to gather money and soldiers to guard the borders. Being able to spot all enemies sneaking in was never practical, and still isn’t. The US government wishes it was that effective.
thefurdrake 3y ago
> So you feel comfortable now that it's been actively demonstrated that the U.S. can't detect such a jet in its airspace? Even its own jet it knew about?! It's a stealth aircraft specifically designed to thwart radar systems. During an ejection, it is specifically designed to zeroize its sensitive data. It only broadcasts limited-range IFF. In an operational environment like hostile airspace, this is the behavior you would want, and our pilots train in battle-like conditions where possible. This is standard, expected behavior. I'm not sure why you wouldn't feel comfortable knowing that we have radar-defeating tech, because pretty much everyone does at this point... ... Okay, I'll be specific. I don't see why you'd be MORE UNCOMFORTABLE than you already are. Stealth tech has outpaced radar tech at range. It sounds like the conditions weren't favorable for detection, either. Edit: Just realized this. Boy if you're worried about us not being able to detect where an aircraft is when the operators have left, I've got some real bad news for you about nuclear submarines...
- trogdor 3y ago
  >During an ejection, it is specifically designed to zeroize its sensitive data. How do you know that?
  - thefurdrake 3y ago
    Aside from being able to read the article, I've worked with the kind of crypto used by the USAF. Maybe not the f-35 specifically, but protections like this are both blatantly obvious to anyone who thinks about it for a moment, and generally requiredd.
    - trogdor 3y ago
      So you assumed it. Got it. I read the article. It does not say what you claimed.
      - thefurdrake 3y ago
        > “Upon pilot ejection, the aircraft is designed to erase (or ‘zeroize’) all secure communication.” So much for that reading comprehension. > So you assumed it. I worked loading crypto on aircraft. Stop running your mouth.

by bmitc 3y ago

Arrath 3y ago

I mean, your average air traffic control radar won't exactly be on par with that fielded by AWACs, Patriot batteries or Aegis systems.

inferiorhuman 3y ago

Can't or won't admit to it? There's plenty of reason to play dumb even if only to sell a few more.

jychang 3y ago

Why is that a problem? Hiding has always been easier than detecting in the real world. People are too used to computers which make detection easy. But before computers, a king would have to physically send tax collectors to gather money and soldiers to guard the borders. Being able to spot all enemies sneaking in was never practical, and still isn’t. The US government wishes it was that effective.

thefurdrake 3y ago

> So you feel comfortable now that it's been actively demonstrated that the U.S. can't detect such a jet in its airspace? Even its own jet it knew about?! It's a stealth aircraft specifically designed to thwart radar systems. During an ejection, it is specifically designed to zeroize its sensitive data. It only broadcasts limited-range IFF. In an operational environment like hostile airspace, this is the behavior you would want, and our pilots train in battle-like conditions where possible. This is standard, expected behavior. I'm not sure why you wouldn't feel comfortable knowing that we have radar-defeating tech, because pretty much everyone does at this point... ... Okay, I'll be specific. I don't see why you'd be MORE UNCOMFORTABLE than you already are. Stealth tech has outpaced radar tech at range. It sounds like the conditions weren't favorable for detection, either. Edit: Just realized this. Boy if you're worried about us not being able to detect where an aircraft is when the operators have left, I've got some real bad news for you about nuclear submarines...

trogdor 3y ago
>During an ejection, it is specifically designed to zeroize its sensitive data. How do you know that?
- thefurdrake 3y ago
  Aside from being able to read the article, I've worked with the kind of crypto used by the USAF. Maybe not the f-35 specifically, but protections like this are both blatantly obvious to anyone who thinks about it for a moment, and generally requiredd.
  - trogdor 3y ago
    So you assumed it. Got it. I read the article. It does not say what you claimed.
    - thefurdrake 3y ago
      > “Upon pilot ejection, the aircraft is designed to erase (or ‘zeroize’) all secure communication.” So much for that reading comprehension. > So you assumed it. I worked loading crypto on aircraft. Stop running your mouth.