Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion


  • While I agree often with your technically insights, I think this time your comment are made too rash


    There are a lot western defense technology journals where you can find information on the SU57

    If you had read them you would know that the SU57 relies less on its reduced radar cross section but more on active changing the radar signal aimed at the aircraft. This active manupulation of the radar signal makes the SU57 appear on the the radar of the F22 at a total other location then where the aircraft is.

    You can look at it in this way : the radar signal of the F22 is reflected in circles, like the circular waves in the water when you drop a stone in it.

    At any poin on a receiving wave (And thus also at the radar reciver) the direction of the target is the normal to the wavefront.

    By actively giving properly timed/phased signals on the same radar frequency back you can distort the wavefront at the reciver of the targeting radar, thereby modifying the position/direction where the receiver thinks where the target is.

    And you can't do anything about this. ( I have done military research in this area)

  • Agreed,


    Politics, religion, philosophy, psychology are all subjects susceptible to mental manipulation of people who chose not to think for themselves.

  • LDM


    Rash? Fair enough, and that's interesting. I guess that explains the seeming lack of stealth principles, (surface coatings, exhausts, dodgy cowl, etc). And although you might be able to fool a radar like that, I'd hazard a guess that infra-red is a different story?


    And can't the F-22 have something similar? There's clearly a lot of secret technology on it - I imagine that's why the US doesn't sell any. Surely there's some secrets that Jane's etc hasn't uncovered?

    Ultimately, in the event of a clash between the two, I'd suggest the price-tag/technology level is going to decide the outcome, (as opposed to pilot skill, at least) and would seem obvious that Russia can't really compete on that basis.


    Edit: It seems that by using the SU's radars to spoof it's location, it would blind itself to it's enemy's location. Perhaps dogfighting will make a come back...


    Edit2: Seems they've lasers to handle the infra-red as well. You can't underestimate those crafty Russians.... (Shane! ^^). Adrian, I take that back...

  • frequency hopping.

  • frequency hopping.


    That would indeed be a possible counter measure

    However radar antenna's and/or related waveguides tend to be tuned to the radar frequency, so that limits the frequency span which you can use.

    Also current processor power likely (But I don't know about recent developments) probably allows to follow the frequency hopping in real time.

    But as alway, there are counter measures, counter-counter measures, ....., etc.

    Developping these keeps some people of the streets

  • What are you babbling on about now Adrian? Thinking an aeroplanes manoeuvrability has any bearing its capabilities, shows that you are at least 25 years behind the curve.

    Babble? You don't know what you are talking about. Russia or me 25 years behind? Really? Read the whole article. https://www.lewrockwell.com/20…supremacy-publicly-ended/

    It's off topic so I won't go into details, but Russian radar can now "see" stealth aircraft. You should read what aeronautical experts say about the Su 57 (1/10 the coat of the F 35 disaster.)


    Why should anyone believe an anonymous babbler?

  • Here in the UK many domestic oil boilers (of different makes) use burnes made by Riello...


    http://www.rielloburners.co.uk


    So one option for Rossi might be to design a module that replaces a common Riello burner. Minimal additional training would then allow existing service engineers to upgrade oil boilers to LENR in the field. The Riello burner on my own boiler can be removed in a few mins for maintenance.


    But I'm sure he will have a reason why this isn't possible.


  • That article is entirely unreferenced - and written by a man who stores food in a bunker, deep inside the earth, in preparation for doomsday.


    All so that he can live for a few months longer than everyone else. And then he tells people about it, so that we all know where to head for, with explosives, when it happens. Or just smoke him out like a badger.

    i.e. He's probably nuts... Secretly wishing for the end times to arrive - to prove that he was correct all along. Subconsciously biasing his article with his favourite apocalypse scenario, likely involving Russian weapons.


    (And please don't try the "but, he's a doctor...", because, well... y'know...)


    Why should anyone believe an anonymous babbler?


    Well I'm not convinced you're a real person Adrian.... I mean, are people actually this ridiculous in real life?

  • Babble? You don't know what you are talking about. Russia or me 25 years behind? Really? Read the whole article. https://www.lewrockwell.com/20…supremacy-publicly-ended/

    It's off topic so I won't go into details, but Russian radar can now "see" stealth aircraft. You should read what aeronautical experts say about the Su 57 (1/10 the coat of the F 35 disaster.)


    Why should anyone believe an anonymous babbler?

    ...

    ..

    .

    Adrian?


    Please, can You finally stop insultin people constantly, by calling them babbler ? You do the same , all the time.

  • Babble? You don't know what you are talking about. Russia or me 25 years behind? Really? Read the whole article. https://www.lewrockwell.com/20…supremacy-publicly-ended/

    It's off topic so I won't go into details, but Russian radar can now "see" stealth aircraft. You should read what aeronautical experts say about the Su 57 (1/10 the coat of the F 35 disaster.)


    Why should anyone believe an anonymous babbler?


    Adrian - the internet is a wonderful place - you can find whatever views you like there, and one risk of this is that people tend naturally to pay attention to only the viewpoints that confirm their existing feelings.


    Doing an internet literature review - rating the likely accuracy of different internet comentators, it is essential to have context.


    This guy, as Zeuss has pointed out, is a highly opinionated fringe ideology person with a clear case to make - in this case that doom from Russian nuclear might is scary and not properly understood by mainstream opinion.


    As with all such views it can be considered, and may well be factually correct in most of its points. That however does not mean that when contextualised it is accurate, and it is almost bound (because from a specific agenda-led perspective) to be somewhat biassed.


    My starting point for a sober and accurate consideration of Russian nuclear military threat would be:


    https://www.tandfonline.com/do…080/00963402.2018.1462912


    As well as the obvious common sense. All through the cold war Russia and the US have had, individually, the capacity to destroy the world with nuclear attack. That remains true.


    This post is not quite OT for Rossi watching because there is a connection. rating information gleaned from the internet is quite a skill. And as humans we all tend to be over-convinced that things written by others that sound good are in fact true. This is especially case when we read things that are in line with our hopes, prejudices, etc.


    So as good citizens it is I believe in the modern world an absolute duty to engage with opposite points of view, to seek credible opposing opinions without dismissing them, and to try to put ones own views into context.


    I just got sent, out of the blue, an intelligent book that more or less espouses this idea (this is one of my biasses, and of course there will be alternate views no doubt:


    Post-Truth by Evan Davis


    It notes the psychology of human belief, observing the fact that so many false arguments are martialed, whilst being both positive and respectful towards the people who hold views buttressed by such.


    Useful reading I'd say for anyone engaged in Rossi watching.


    And your calling those with opposing views "babblers" shows that here you have no such respect for contrary views, and are stuck emotionally in a tribal mindset.


    It is particularly ironic that you do this, since you have not yourself advanced many non-babble facts relating to the Rossi phenomenon, whereas those you accuse of babbling - while no doubt indulging in the typical pointless internet opinion masquerading as argument that we all do - have also advanced quite a store of pertinent facts.

  • THHuxleynew

    Your link was extremely long and didn't describe or analyses the new weapons. Please son't waste my time with links like that.


    From yourlink. “Russia possesses significant advantages in its nuclear weapons production capacity and in non-strategic nuclear forces over the U.S. and allies."


    "information gleaned from the internet is quite a skill."

    Dom't be so damned insulting if you want future replies.

  • Rossi says he thinks he will decide on whether to use the QX or the SK next week, following the current trials of the SK.


    He state the January demo will mark the start of production. I don't expect news about a commercial system until mid 2019.


    So, little over three months before we get much new information. I forecast the babblers will turn and run in 2019 probably saying they knew all along..