ORIGINAL: Stevechase
Serious academics and analysts
[Who?] have repeatedly identified gross inaccuracies with his reports.
[Citation Needed] Its not a question about his choice of variables, rather his whole approach. And this isn't one or two. Basically he is widely dismissed as a charlatan… particularly by people who actually have real knowledge and experience in air combat maneuvering.
[Weasel Words][Citation Needed] You don't see that because frankly, those people have better things to do than argue with some half baked analysis
[Needs Copyediting] who has no experience on aerodynamics or ACM at all yet purports to know that the F-35 is a bad fighter.
[BLP]
Again he is a charlatan, the company he and Goon hold stands to make millions if F35 is canceled by RAAF, because his company is contractor for parts and services for current inventory.
[Citation Needed] This is why he hates F35.
Most of what they (Kopp and Goon) purport sounds legit to those outside the industry. But when he debates real analysts you actually feel sorry for him. In fact he was brought before independent inquiry where F35 effectiveness was the issue. In it he could not defend his arguments. Members of the RAAF and aerospace analysts took apart each of his claims and embarrassed him in open court. At one point he appealed to the judge that he was being mistreated by the analysts questioning him. He was so humiliated by the end of the proceeding that he filed a motion afterward claiming the opposing analysts had damaged his reputation.
[Citation Needed]
Bluewolf you said,"Shall we pause on that laws of physics thing, then?"
Okay I will stop with the laws of physics......... ok now all those arguments make total sense. Infact that is the only way they can make sense. You do have to disregard physics for most of those arguments to be plausible.
Now back to physics and the real world. Seriously, what are you trying to say. If you are going to have this discussion how can you vacate science and fact. In that case anything goes. Physics is the real world. You are merely taking a trend that has come to exist through the internet with "claims" for or against stealth with no real data to support the positions. Just because a person can say x band or low freq dose not mean their conclusions regarding the subject are accurate. I have seen many of these all over the internet and people who don't know better see such posts become swayed with nothing more than hyperbole, guessing, assumption, fear-mongering based on loose and partial albeit convincing to the masses data. I get a little hot under the collar when such claims are made.
I am an engineer and work in aerospace my company makes parts for JSF, made parts for B-2 and F-22. That dose not make me an expert on the subject at all to be sure. And none of the parts we make are even RCS critical parts. I only mention that because it is the reason it is so close to me. And why I try to stay informed. I have no access to any info which is not available to anyone else, but I do have some understanding of physics and know who the legit sources for information are. And APA is not one of them. APA is a joke in the aerospace industry. None of this to say the F35 does not have true issues as everyone is aware it does as does every new teething design tech.
Regarding stealth in general;
Though difficult to implement, the principles of stealth are simple and basic. Physics are such that a ball is tossed at a wall: it bounces back toward the source, now the wall is sufficiently angled so as to ricochet the ball or the wall is of such material as to absorb or diffract.
Now in response you can mitigate the ricochet/absorb effect by changing size, speed, and or the composition of the ball, or better quickly get into position to catch the ball because you know how and where it will ricochet(tactics). And that is all you can do. The laws of physics dictate that you can only mitigate the effect. The same principles that govern that illustration govern radar and stealth. And all else being equal the physics will always favor stealth tech wining in stealth vs radar.
And stealth is the dominant tech of today and the foreseeable future. Most all nations are including it in there
next generation arsenals. Which means
next generation aka "foreseeable future" conflicts will involve these. How is that myopic.
)