Was the Mosquito the worlds first stealth aircraft?

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by pbfoot

Birds show up on radars so do trees and both are non conductive so what gives the wood in the mossie special properties . It all depends on the aspect of the aircraft to the radar . Yes the Mossie will naturally have a smaller signature then the slab sided bombers. It will also depend on which band radar one is using and most of all power of the radar

All true but plywood (along with balsa and other woods) absorb radar at certain bands. The problem (unknown during WW2) was if there were any imperfections on the surface (seams, cracks, screw heads) they would not absorb the radar.

[Seawitch]

...Hi Flyboy
Reading your signature...Just to have you stand back I've changed my avatar to a Tern towing a.....RED DUSTER!

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Seawitch

...Hi Flyboy
Reading your signature...Just to have you stand back I've changed my avatar to a Tern towing a.....RED DUSTER!

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Soren

The first truly stealth a/c is the Ho/Go-229 which would've been undetectable by any radar equipment of the time.

The Ho/Go-229 was not a stealth aircraft. Jet engines are high radar reflective devices with nice rotating radar reflectors. The beams don't even have to hit the compressor or turbine directly to get a good return. They just bounce around the inlet/exhaust until they come out. The Ho/Go-229 may have had reasonable low reflection from the sides but when coming or going, I'd say within plus or minus 45 degrees of the heading, those engines would have lit up a radar set. And, of course, coming or going is what is important. All modern stealth aircraft expend loads of money reducing the radar reflection of the engines. The F-117 has a grid over buried engines and the B-2 has buried engines with sophisticated desined inlets and exhausts. The F-22 and F-35 aslo has very sophiscated inlets and exhausts. There is also the cockpit which would have provided a lot of right angle reflections for a radar to feast on.

Also, the B-2 body design is designed and manufactured to very tight tolerances of curvature and gaps, tolerances that were not available until computer technologies were available to calculate the curvature requirements.

The Ho/Go-229, like the XB-35, was a unknowing step in the right directions, but was billions of dollars and years from becoming a true stealth aircraft.

[antoni]

The Mosquito's engine cowlings, spinners, radiator skins, underwing panels, tailcone, ailerons, elevators and various access panels were aluminium. The rest was skinned with birch plywood. (The fuselage was made in two halves using a concrete mould to form them.) All wood surfaces were covered with Medapalin, and aviation fabric, applied with red-brown dope. Then it was sprayed with aluminium paint. Finally camouflage was applied over the top of this.

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by Seawitch

....I wonder if Geese ever got intercepted as the high flying Mosquitoes

geese are aften tracked in the Jetstream if you look at some flight supplements you'll notice they include the migratory patterns of the Canada Goose

[Soren]

Davparlr,

You must not know allot about the radar equipment of the time. The radars of WW2 weren't going to detect the Go-229, and if they did it would look nothing like an aircraft, just a way too small blob.

Also jet engines don't give larger radar signatures than a propeller engine.

In short if you think that the radar of the time was going to detect the Go-229 you seriously lack knowledge on their effectiveness in general.

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by Soren

Davparlr,

You must not know allot about the radar equipment of the time. The radars of WW2 weren't going to detect the Go-229, and if they did it would look nothing like an aircraft, just a way too small blob.

Also jet engines don't give larger radar signatures than a propeller engine.

In short if you think that the radar of the time was going to detect the Go-229 you seriously lack knowledge on their effectiveness in general.

Read Davparir's post he is right on .He knows what he is saying

[Soren]

Nope, Davparlr is thinking of modern radar, not WW2 radar, and there's a BIG difference!

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by Soren

Nope, Davparlr is thinking of modern radar, not WW2 radar, and there's a BIG difference!

Whats the difference please enlighten me .

[Soren]

Are you kidding me ???

Does resolution ring a bell ?

[pbfoot]

Wow what don't you have an expert opinion on .

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

Davparlr,

You must not know allot about the radar equipment of the time. The radars of WW2 weren't going to detect the Go-229, and if they did it would look nothing like an aircraft, just a way too small blob.

Also jet engines don't give larger radar signatures than a propeller engine.

In short if you think that the radar of the time was going to detect the Go-229 you seriously lack knowledge on their effectiveness in general.

A small radar signature - yes. A blob? I doubt it,

Wrong about the jet engines too - even if surrounded by radar absorbing material - in this case wood, the intake and exhaust would show up. The area has to be "diffused" as done on the F-117 and B-2. That technology wasn't even thought of by anyone in WW2.

The Mossie and Go-229 could be considered "stealthy" but no way by intention.

Bottom line, Dave hit the nail on the head....

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

A small radar signature - yes. A blob? I doubt it,
....

Never seen a blob on primary radar unless the gains were cranked way up but thats the way a PPI looks on the movies

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by pbfoot

Never seen a blob on primary radar unless the gains were cranked way up but thats the way a PPI looks on the movies

BINGO!