
New Stealth Spy Drone Already Flying Over Area 51 - electic
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/12/new-stealth-drone/
======
WestCoastJustin
As a side note: Aviation Week is an incredible magazine. Next time you are at
the magazine rack, be sure to check it out. Our office has a subscription and
it just blows me away what is happening in the aviation sector. They cover
everything, from jets, military, spy technology, to satellites.

------
zyztem
Aveation Leaks article is much more informative:
[http://www.aviationweek.com/Article/PrintArticle.aspx?id=/ar...](http://www.aviationweek.com/Article/PrintArticle.aspx?id=/article-
xml/awx_12_06_2013_p0-643783.xml&p=1&printView=true)

~~~
shutupalready
Yes, it is more informative. Does Wired just steal the content by adding the
words, _" according to Aviation Week and Space Technology"_, to their own
article. Or do they pay a fee to Aviation Week to license the content? If it's
the latter, why don't they just reprint the original and better article? Can
anyone familiar with the magazine business explain this?

------
Theodores
Sounds to me like this is the UAV follow-up to the U2 programme rather than
the SR-71. It almost certainly flies s-l-o-w-l-y as per a B2 rather than at
SR-71 insane-mega-speed. It has 24 hours or so of loiter time with no in-
flight refuelling.

Good luck with that, flying over the Crimea, with Russian S-400 missiles just
a few kilometres away. Imagine the consequences, anything up to full-on war
just because they shot down one of our drones.

~~~
eliteraspberrie
That's my impression too. The most basic air force can defend against drones,
let alone Russia's. Even this supposedly stealth drone is very obvious, from
behind. Any IRST system would detect it immediately.

~~~
nether
IR attenuates rapidly in the atmosphere and is only useful for very short
range detection (short range missiles, TV remotes, "laser" tag guns). The
artist's concept seems to show the standard flat exhaust intakes (first
employed on the F-117) which increase efflux "surface area" (versus a circle)
to promote mixing with ambient air. There might be pre-exhaust mixing too.

~~~
greedo
IRST systems are actually quite long ranged for detection, it's identification
that is more problematic. F-14D IRST systems were quite good at long range
detection, and those were much older legacy systems with nothing like today's
technology.

~~~
nether
Yeah, but still very limited by aspect angle to engine exhaust. Detection is
ok, tracking is poor unless very close or with LoS to the tailpipes. Anything
ground-based will almost never be able to stare directly at the aft end of an
aircraft except during egress (i.e. after it's done its job). What I'm getting
at is there are huge limitations to passive tracking of IR emissions,
otherwise we'd be using it instead of (active) radar.

~~~
greedo
An aircraft moving at near Mach speeds has a significant amount of friction
caused by air. It's not necessary for an IR system to be able to see the
exhaust of an aircraft. In fact, all aspect IR missiles have been around since
at least the AIM9L which was used in the Falklands War in 1982.

------
lwhalen
What I'm curious about is, what sort of advanced technology are our rivals and
'allies' flying over us? Is our air/surveillance superiority absolute, or do
they spy on us like we spy on them?

