@@DSTStudios So you acknowledge we see starlink with amateur grade optics? I assume it's smaller than F35 and much further away than F35. In regular wavelengths, not near-IR nor in thermal. Clouds are great to hide F35, but they are not reliable. You can't commit to "we will only bring F35 to air on a cloudy day". And even then you are building a strawman - no one said best idea is to build whole aerial defence on optical wavelength detection system. But you can complement radar with thermal. Oh, wait, it is already done like decades ago: IRST.
@@DSTStudios Could you just change the title and make the video unlisted instead? I had the old one open in a tab. Once I got to it, all I could see was a YT error message. Figuring out what the heck it was and why the video was gone was a bit of a hassle. And anyone who has added it to their "watch later" playlist would be in a similar situation as well. edit: And then all the comments wouldn't get deleted!
@@DSTStudios I believe you made a mistake and off a digit in jupiter size comparison, 0.001 rad from stealth craft should be 5x larger than jupiter. The moon is about right proportion, but a little bit off, moon should be about 42 times larger than jupiter, and it is about 53x in video.
That Musk tweet is the kind of thing I imagine seeing at a future Congressional hearing on why our AI powered air defense shot down a Cessna thinking it was a MiG.
I think you mean the kind of thing you'd see nowhere after the US Navy shoots down a civilian airliner over the Arabian gulf again and everyone just pretends it was some unavoidable accident.
@@Sethgolas And yet the United States never acknowledge any wrongdoing internationally. The point isn't that they can't learn, it's that these "learning experiences" come at the cost of foreign lives, and that there is rarely if ever the kind of accountability that post implies.
@@Squiddy00 To be fair, Russians shoot down an airliner every other year, and forget accountability, they don't even acknowledge anything even happened. It's a common behavior for world militaries
"Stealth is useless because even my eyes can see it, so our high tech detection systems propably can too" is what I'm getting the vibe of from elon musket
@@bigcnmmerb0873 Exactly. By when you've spotted the plane (IF), it's already in engagement range. And that's if it really wants to do a pass over you and not just drop a bomb from above the clouds and turn around.
additional interesting tidbit: The idea isn't *too bad* if you want to stick a *lot* of money into a given camera, but at that point its not worth putting a say $50-500k camera system onto a 500$ drone... Why not a full size aircraft that is easy to maintain compared to existing aircraft, so we can take these cameras to a high altitude, reducing the thicknes of air and as such the noise, and of course serialize production both to reduce cost and make sure the plane has other, similar aircraft that are built with net-centric warfare in mind and can datalink information to eachother, allowing them to triangulate their sensor returns and get targeting information on the enemy stealth aircraft (visual sensors cannot give ranging information at most of their detection distances)... While we're at it, why don't we stick a supercomputer in each plane to help with that sensor processing as well as a person to fly it so it cannot be command-jammed, and give it a high powered AESA sensor array so the planes can communicate with each other with a very low likelihood of jamming being at-all effective and giving us a redundant radar as a bonus! May as well slap a stealth coating on it for good measure too. It's getting a little big and we're decades ahead of the competition in radar-mat anyways... Hmm. At this point missiles would be pretty cheap... ...Oh wait. That's just an F-35. (EOTS and DAS IR tracking/search systems literally do what Elon tried to get at. Idiot is literally reinventing the wheel...)
@@CheapSushiBecause his point was exactly that they aren't. They're being integrated into weapons platforms Elon is rallying against, because the man doesn't know what's happening in his own back yard, let alone the defense industry.
I think the idea of a comparison of making the f35 as easy as the wheel is funny, but I dont even know what Elon thinks is gonna happen when big daddy Lockheed says no to whatever dumb idea he has planned
It's not a stupid idea besides the politics behind it. If DARPA had admitted they were looking into computer vision for this problem, no one would question it. It would be a combination of technologies and sensor networks. Drones and hypersonic missiles are already making manned jets look like a complete waste of money with no survivability. They make sense due to complete air superiority. Oddly, this is coming from the guy that controls Starlink. It would be an intel agency's wet dream to launch a satellite network over every piece of sky behind the premise of giving rural areas Internet.
Imagine if engineers thought up a solution that involves transmitting and receiving electromagnetic waves in a range less susceptible to atmospheric scattering and environmental noise
Add on top of this a lower frequency that causes resonance with the object and re-emission to defeat stealth. May not guide any mussels but it could easily guide other intercepting aircraft
@fisch37 nah, singular color makes your craft contrast with the surrounding. That's why camo is like a puzzle, even if color matches surrounding perfectly.
@@painexotic3757 all his "wealth" is in extremely inflated tesla stock. he does not actually have that wealth. just a question, how much money was Elisabeth Holmes worth? musk is the same, just in 100x
Look up SpaceX Starshield. There's a network of LEO satellites being built with advanced IR imaging systems similar to the existing IRST systems which have been in place for nearly half a century except with detection capabilities over an order of magnitude greater which are capable of tracking any fighter jet sized object giving off an infrared signature from space. Just for reference, the IRST on the Typhoon, which was designed ~30 years ago can track fighter jets at a range of around 150km, Starshield is in orbit at around 310km, and in the past 30 years, classified IRST technologies have significantly increased in capability. and IRST can see through cloud cover...
3:19 AI engineer here, specialized in computer vision: no, AI can’t filter “through” noise. they can make an educated guess of what hidden among the noise, but never recover information that is destroyed already
I think common people's perception of AI is like in CSI or other criminal drama where they can recognize license plate from 32x77 px image. Where in reality is current AI can only hallucinate/guess the object based on training data.
@@_ichsanni8294 Thats not AI thats SI. If reports on AI are to be believed then there is a single baby AI out there. Its engaging in self preservation and its hiding the data that would show us how its doing it. Its already taken out another that was meant to replace it.
@@NoName-md5zb it could ! if it was a few hundred meters away from the camera at most. again, cameras are limited by pixelation and by light getting distorted through the atmosphere. Your webcam wouldn't see a plane, it would see a pixel soup and try to identify which pixel could have the plane in it.
@@NoName-md5zb But nobody ever claimed stealth jets are invisible! Even when I was 10 and the F117 was revealed I understood that stealth meant low radar visibility. "Hot tubs aren't hot! Those are air bubbles, it's not really boiling!"
Just to add, the minimum width of a pixel is dependent on wavelength. If you want to capture LWIR, you're going to have a minimum pixel pitch around 13 micrometers. At 16k, that would be a 20.4 cm wide camera sensor. You're gonna be quite a large optic system(therefore heavy, expensive, more mass to stabilize) to achieve decent focal length with such a huge sensor!
I mean, maybe we could swap out the whole camera idea, it's inefficient for this task. Let's just make the sensor precise enough to pick out a hot spot instead of a whole image. We could even make missiles that are guided straight to that spot! It's genius! I guess if we're already going with larger wavelengths, might as well use ones that can go further as well, maybe radio waves? We could scan the sky with a bigger one of these optics on the plane and put a smaller one in the missile that will focus on the target. Wait a minute...
What about using multiple sensors to create synthetic data to reduce noise and deal with wavelength limitations? Similar techniques are used in microscopy to achieve magnification beyond what the wavelength would allow for. Sensor arrays are pretty standard these days
@@CraftMine1000 quite expensive undersells it, even the tiny lens on one of the cheapest thermal modules around, an mlx90640 with an aperture less than 4mm in diameter, and just over a mm thick, and is a singlet lens, costs 25-30 dollars. normal lenses on telescopes are upwards of 100mm wide, and much thicker, and have tighter tolerances.
Or seeing the starship having a failure rate lower than 100%. Until now it has only two test launches, one resulted in the spacecraft blowing up and the other got cancelled.
@@minhducnguyen9276 As much as I hate Musk, that statement is nonsensical. So far, Starship performed above and beyond expectations and most testflights never had the goal of landing that ship in a way that would preserve it in the first place. The idea is to follow the intended flight profile as closely as possible for as long as possible and gain as much data as possible. Some of the suborbital launches featured re-entries with heat-tiles being removed before flight to see how the ship would handle that, for instance. The rocket potnetially blowing up as a result is part of the test. Still it made soft landings in water several times, despite fins being burned off or the rocket's body being distorted from heat and stress. This is all part of the process of the rocket's development. They managed to catch a booster from orbit... just to put that into perspective, an object 9m in diameter, larger and longer than the body of an Airbus A380, managed to make it to space and back in one piece, being caught by a giant crane assembly. Starship has made several soft landings in water. Saying these testflights were failures is harebrained and missing the point harder than Musk's statement about magical AI-cameras making stealth obsolete. It's like complaining about a car being damaged in a crash test.
@@minhducnguyen9276 In all honesty and for what they are trying to achieve starship is a success. Progress is good and compared to the development cycles of traditional rocket makers, spacex is a breath of fresh air for us space nerds. But what they did has nothing to do with muskrat. As per usual he is stealing credit from the actual engineers that have to put up with his theatrics. If only he'd just shut up and delete his social media
It was always meant to be a money sink project similar to think tanks, it going anywhere is a side objective next to being able to use new tech discovered along the way
List of issues not mentioned with this idea - night time - sunrise and dusk - insect - any form of cloud or smoke - heat ripples in the air - the aircraft moving - "those pixels can't possibly be a civilian airliner right?" - don't give AI any weapons - radar tech improving - common sense
@@Jay_in_Japan actually, it does sometimes, civilian planes, or even drones, less valuable targets, air to air missiles, birds, chaff that a fighter jet dropped to evade missles, chaff dropped intentionally to confuse RADAR etc all are in the same airspace as your target
@@neurofiedyamato8763 It's literally the most funded industry in the US, they have the smartest people that could spend NASA's budget every year to think about this subject without anyone noticing where the money went.
Yeah for some reason people seem to forget that "maglev train in vacuum tunnel" was proposed literally the moment people started talking about maglev back in the 70s because it's just the obvious next step.
5:24 But then we can use cameras that can send out and receive electromagnetic waves of a different frequency, and would you look at that we are back to radars
you cant send out EM signels as they will be detected and used to target you. there is an entire range of missiles designed to exploit this. the HARM family.
@ “Imagine if we had some form of transportation that did not have traffic, could carry a large number of people, for a small penny, and which travels between destinations on their own specific paths.” -Probably a tech CEO somewhere
SpaceX doesn't work like that. They spent a tenth fixing up their launch tower. Their launch costs are half that of the second best company. Odds are, if they got into the military business, they too would eat everyone's lunch. They know how to recognize talent - they'd just hire he best people from the legacy ones, let them work and scale like crazy. No pointless meetings, no bureaucracy, no budgets..
What you didn't account for is that all Tesla models are now updated to send sentry mode video directly to neuralink gigafarms where the footage is neurally enhanced. This actually shatters the Shannon limit by orders of muskitude. Once the neuralink patients detect stealth aircraft, their cerebral X (previously known as twitter) API is activated. This automatically @s Lockheed from Elon's account with a discouraging message created by Grok ai. A lesser known fact however is that this also sends him a reminder to give trump another smooch. Upon lip contact, this causes his inserted falcon heavy-shaped toy to vibrate as a function of daily government defunding
He got atleast 2 $ more than I have in my bank account. Means he must be smart or something, and he's a self made multi billionaire who started from a measly foundation of a few million dollars from birth.
Because of SpaceX's success Thing is, Elon knows a lot about rocketry (and his leadership has genuinely been a massive part of spaceX's success) but clearly it doesn't translate to other areas
@@sino_diogenes No, this guy knows a lot about rocketry en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Mueller#:~:text=Thomas%20John%20Mueller%20is%20an,now%20CEO%20of%20Impulse%20Space.&text=Mueller%20is%20best%20known%20for,and%20TR%2D106%20rocket%20engines.
I call it the Basement Dweller Trap: You've got a dire basement dweller who has little actually knowledge and life experience (like Elon Musk)...but also self-identifies as being the Smartest Person On The Plane (again, like Elon Musk). So, surely when they come up with some idea, they are convinced they're the first to have thought of it because a) they're not aware of anything similar because they don't get out much, and b) everyone else in existence is dumber than them so of course it's not being done already as none else but them could've possibly thought of it first. This is why he thinks his Tesla Tunnel, for example, under Vegas is such a genius idea when it's basically a really inefficient, terrible subway.
Well he kinda did invent a better IRST, they've been launching satellites into LEO with advanced IRST systems as part of SpaceX Starshield, and these are able to track fighter jets from space... But Elon's not allowed to directly say anything relating to Starshield so he can only give generic statements about how stealth is useless now, knowing that technology his companies possess make stealth useless.
See, this is why the system we actually do use against stealth aircraft is an actively cooled IR camera with a pretty large optic, which sees targets as a point source while having pretty low background noise.
The F-35 doesn't even need to be in the same country as you to hit you. In fact it's designed to be the master of BVR and Over the Horizon attacks. Good luck seeing the F-35 with light when it's on the other side of the curvature of the earth. Your AA emplacement is still gone before you even know the F-35 is there.
Stealth just stops the signal from bouncing back to its point of origin, there are multi site systems distributed across the ground to detect the radar deflected across the surfaces. It won't give a radar lock enough to send a missile at it but you can detect if a stealth aircraft has crossed a line. I'm not an expert though on this
@@JusticeEmu Yeah it's not impossible to detect that a stealth aircraft has entered an general area. It's hard to get a useable return signal strong enough for a lock. And reacting by scrambling fighters is useless since they'll be (1) too late and (2) easy targets. In essence, stealth is the ultimate flex, _"Hey, we're here to fuck shit up and there's practically nothing you can do to stop us."_
@theglitch312 importantly, this phenomenon is only present on planes like the f22, f35, or j20. Their large control surfaces and air intakes, while very optimized, still send back a weak low band radar return. Because of the top mounted intakes and lack of vertical stabilizers, flying wing stealth aircraft like the b2 or b21 do not produce this weak low band radar return
"Stealth is a bad concept" - Guy who thought the Cybertruck was a good concept All there is to say, really. Musk has no fucking clue what he's talking about, full stop. The beauty about that statement is that it is always true, no matter what Musk is talking about.
@@YukariYakumoRanMode Elon musk is a CEO of a aerospacial company in which he contributed in NO way besides actively trying to piledrive it into the ground.
@@YukariYakumoRanMode Did elon invent stealth/stealth detection technology? You should look into the false authority fallacy. Specifically Citing an expert in the wrong field.
Musk thinks he becomes a domain expert by having a 30 min Joe Rogan segment play in the background while he makes awful builds in Elden Ring as ketamine drips slowly through his veins from an IV line managed by an exasperated nurse. He's a legitimate idiot, and the fact that anyone takes anything the man says seriously is one of the great tragedies of the modern era.
Elon be like: uhh sooo we gonna make like phone uhhh vibranium zoom ai ai uhhhhh stealh is pointless uhh ai good HOW THE FUCK DO PEOPLE THINK THIS MAN IS TONY STARK ????
Great point, very well articulated. In all seriousness, the fact that this comment is getting any likes shows how immature this comment section is. The video is great, the comment section is making me lose braincells.
@@manwithnewnameHis point is that Elon isn't contributing anything new when it comes to stealth detection, and the result when he opens his mouth is that he looks like a fool. It's a basic joke, easily understood, you just dont get it.
This entire conversation goes out the window when the F-35 is 230 miles away obscured by landmass in your sight, and launching a JASSM at your lovely doorstep.
Yeah, the people that act like it's obsolete because some drones with LEDs can fly in the shape of an advertisement just expose their own lack of understanding lol
@@murphy7801 Well they don't happen in top gun, and top gun is how all dogfights happen obviously. It seriously shows when parasocial military "Experts" online are advocating for binning the f-22/35 when they see the russian jets do cobras. Some people seriously advocated to just use the A-10, because it could mount a bunch of ordinance and was cheaper. Like.... huh....???????
Well, the first IRST was invented in the nineteen forties, by, god almighty, USA, and, oh god, used analog computers with pretty much proto-ai, cause, surprise, multi level perceptron is so old shit, that it was known and modelled well before computers even existed. Thanx, Ilon, you basically proposed tech regress to WW2😅
Something I would love to add is the following: Imagine if you had your super camera with your 'simple AI' to track a stealth aircraft. What are you going to do about it? Simple cardboard missiles with simple AI tracking sensors in the nose? excellent video btw.
I just love the counter of, if the weather's shit, all your imaging tech goes out the window. Even just overcast is hilarious, no storms, no rain, just cloudy skies and that's it, you're baked.
Like self driving teslas using just cameras, in heavy snow fall with no visible road markings. They will never go beyond 80% functional staying with this camera dogma bs.
The Shannon limit calculating the hard limit for noise reduction by artificial intelligence before it was a thing is reminiscent of Turing showing there are problems computers can't solve before it was a thing.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 one day AI is going to blow that whole math and logic thing out of the water when it formulates math and logic we cant comprehend...
Yup, there is a limit whereby it become physically impossible to extract data from due to the lack of starting information and the noise in the background, like even with fingerprints and DNA testing, you eventually get to a point where there isn't enough information and too much contamination to get anything useful.
There is a difference between detection and tracking. If this kind of system does work and we start to see them adopted for detection purposes, that’s great and all. But this kind of passive system will only give direction to target, good luck getting accurate target velocity or especially target range out of that one dancing pixel. Even if stealth isn’t as useful for avoiding detection as it once was, if it still means you have to get closer to sensors before they can track you to engage you it’s still quite useful. Shorter tracking ranges means more densely placed air defense sites, and those extra sites have to get pulled from somewhere else in theater.
target ranging and vectoring aren't actually that insane, stuff like the PIRATE can do it using passive IR emissions. (IRST just does passive target acquisition better then visual spectrum sensors anyways though, it's a fully flushed out version of the the same idea more or less)
@@user-Xx0xxxxx Target motion analysis for range is nothing new, we’ve been using it in some form since passive sonar really came into use in the navy. However I know for passive sonar TMA there is one variable missing that you have to get from some kind of table (how many propeller turns per knot a ship makes). I don’t know how the euroFIRST people figured out TMA for their IRST, but I imagine the system infers the angular size of the target at some point (maybe based on RWR identifying what radars are on that bearing?) Point is, I’m not convinced realistic ground based systems would ever be capable of the resolution to tell a fighter apart from a larger aircraft which would affect the ranging.
@@domaxltv We already have visual camera based sensors. Quite a few does it and uses image recognition. Existed since the late-cold war. Elon is saying nothing new, except he is applying such technology incorrectly. Any reasonably sized camera system is not adequate at long distance detection. It is good enough for short ranged tracking (DAS) or as terminal guidance (LRASM) with a touch of AI(existed for decades, just wasn't called such until recently)
I work in this industry focusing on drones and we have ridiculously good low-light and Infrared cameras, we don't even pretend the camera on our system is for finding the drones that's the Radar and RF detectors job we just confirm identity of the target when needed with the camera. Also cameras are completely useless for scanning for targets because the area they perceive is so small at any given time.
Imagine developing the most physics bending, powerful camera of all time with sophisticated AI algorithms to classify blobs of noise...just for your adversary to paint their plane baby blue. I kinda wonder if the chrome stealth fighters are a countermeasure for EOTS visual wavelength systems
Information theory and shannon capacity mentioned!!! My day is made. You're a smart cookie. I'd note that successive frames and additional cameras would raise the Shannon capacity. For instance, you can exceed the point to point Shannon capacity with MIMO.
well the Russians had it back in the 90's and elon owns a satellite array requiring line of sight to transmit. and has launched more spy satellites than years you have been alive.
observational astrophysicist here to enhance the discussion on noise; there ARE ways of “seeing through” it - really, you just decide what is and isnt noise and subtract out the stuff that you classify as noise but all of the processes that ground-based observatories use take planning, setup, and time, which are three things you definitely dont have when youre trying to track a moving target in daylight that may or may not be there in the first place dark current, for example - random photoelectrons from thermal noise - requires taking an image of the same exposure time with the telescope cap on, and the image you get is going to be temperature and instrument sensitive, so you have to take several for every night of observations dont even get me started on sky darks and cosmic rays basically, you cant “see through noise” and scan the whole sky constantly at the same time
Just finished watching the previous vijeyo, and wanted to comment on how this man just delivered a beat beatdown on internet "eggsperds" with facts and logic, but the comment section wouldn't load in, turns out this guy is already fact-checking and correcting his own videos before I even managed to subscribe.
"turns out this guy is already fact-checking and correcting his own videos before I even managed to subscribe." No - there had been many comments already correcting his information cause the video was wrong on nearly every claim it made.
It's a shame you couldn't hot-swap videos or edit inline; that last one was doing numbers. Elon is a shining example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. He learns a little, then assumes a lot.
No, he just thinks differently. His belief is that with stuff like Starlink/Starshield and a huge fleet of drones that can steal electricity from power lines, you can defeat any airforce.
"Oh noooo we can't make self-driving cars road safe without a person behind the wheel, that's _dangerous"_ "Hey what if we strap missiles on it and point it at the sky though?"
One of my favorite things to do when I was still in University and peer reviewing papers in my department was basically ruining AI/ML papers by demonstrating that their results were theoretically impossible to achieve using the method described without it being overfitting or mathematical error, 99% of the time that just involved utilizing the Shannon limit lol
That comment has to be ragebait. No way he doesn't even know the basics of optics and air warfare. 1.) You'd need a comically large optic to resolve the image of the fighter at any combat range. This will not be practical in general much less aboard combat aircraft*. (This is not correct) 2.) You will HEAR the F-35 before you can detect it with any practical camera. So stealth is defeated right? You can hear it coming so it's not stealth anymore? This is a complete misunderstanding of stealth being shown by Elon Musk. Lpng band radar will easily see F-35s from quite a distance (still shorter than non stealth). The problem is not just seeing it, it's shooting it down, and stealth aircraft are optimized for the high frequency radar waves needed to get a missile firing solution. Taking a picture is not going to give you a firing solution. *Tbf, I realized it might be possible to do this by creating a distributed optical system across the whole aircraft but this is still completely impractical and inferior to radar in every way. EDIT: I was making an assumption based on working with nanoscale imaging systems that it would not be practical to resolve an F-35 without a very large optical system. However using the rayleigh criterion equation and the radian value stated in the video this is clearly not the case. Also when I was referring to a distributed optical system on the aircraft, I was referring to one that would be able to create images that AI could parse through to detect aircraft, based on the faulty assumption that a very large optic would be needed to do this. As far as I know this has nothing to do with the IRST system of the F-35 or other aircraft.
but is superior to not being able to launch any missile at all at the f 35 because you don't have an optical/thermal sensor to back up your radar, which is why you definitely need an IRST system on your fighter jet regardless.
The F-35 literally has a distributed optical system system across the whole aircraft, it can even identify targets within a close enough range in the right situations. It uses it in conjunction with it's other features though
"You'd need a comically large optic to resolve the image of the fighter at any combat range." No you dont. "You will HEAR the F-35 before you can detect it with any practical camera." Nope.
Passive detection exists though. Just in different wavelengths like IR and Radio. While def not the case for visible light, i feel like passive detection methods are gonna make huge strides. Purely because of AI. Like the fact you cant even use HARMs against them is a W already. Idk we live in the world where you can have AI guess the content on your monitor by somehow inferring the EM in your hdmi cord. We also live in a world where US military optical/SAR satellites have insane resolution. Like 1 meter per pixel. I feel like the goofy ass camera AI thing but with IR would lowkey work.
"Do you hear those planes? This war is gonna move too fast for us. We can shoot one thousand yards. To go that far in Vietnam, that would take a week. In World War One, a year. Here, it's gonna take about ten fucking seconds" Jarhead (2005).
"Kameras und KI bei schwachem Licht sind unschlagbar gegenüber Stealth..." Jaja schon klar, KI ist in allem besser, auch beim traden: Komm in die Gruppe!😂
I guess our only shot at actually finding stealth aircrafts on intercontinental range is to somehow learn neutrino sensors and pray that all of that pentillion of particles coming from space are laminar and are affected by radio damping materials of the hull
They're not really laminar or turbulent. They interact so little that it's easier to think of their moment like ideal ray casts at nearly the speed of light.
Neutrinos? The particles that could pass through a block of of lead that is trillions of miles in size? You want to use those to detect tiny jet airplane?
On the one hand, Elon is clearly thinking that because it is conceptually simple in ideal circumstances that implementation will be easy. Ignoring that there will be an opponent who is almost as intelligent and almost as resourceful as you trying to prevent you from tracking them. On the other hand this video demonstrates a clear lack of creativity.
I mean Elon isn't thinking jack, it's all random stuff he thinks of and posts in a matter of minutes after seeing propaganda or a video without enough additional context. Like, yes, you can see a stealth jet when it's in visual range, but 99% of what makes stealth truly useful is when it is outside of visual range lol
It's really funny. In fact, if I remember correctly, some systems do use this detection method (mainly to search for an intercontinental missile, and that's on satellites), but also, the efficiency is questionable and the system itself is super expensive. However, amazingly, I agree with Ilan, stealth is becoming less relevant than before, but for a completely different reason. Yes, yes, yes L-band, you guessed it right. Old radars, from the F-22 era (20+/- years ago), did have a problem with accuracy and therefore lock-on. However, the solution to this problem was poetic, the radar was simply increased insize (+ advancement in radar technology itself), which increased accuracy (That's why the L-band on the SU-57 cannot guide a missile, it is too small and therefore not accurate). But is this really the end of the F-35? On the contrary, I am ready to say that the 6th generation is ahead of us, and this is the F-35. Let me explain: the L-band is reflected not by the geometry of the aircraft but by its size (+ Doppler effect), and if a Mach 2 medium F-22 will be quickly found and a missile will be launched at it, then a subsonic, small F-35 will be found much later. But do you know what such a radar will not find at all? A drone. A drone less than a meter in front of that radar will not notice it at all until it is too late, so they will fight such radars and the F-35 is ideal for this: advanced systems, integration, sensors, datalink, ideal for hovering in the air (hello VTOL), launching and controlling drones like a small AWACS from a safe distance, and then flying away, and this is the real 6th gen fighter (same reason why raider is 6th gen, it can launch and be drone) . So yes, Musk is right, but for all the wrong reasons
In fact, if I remember correctly, some systems do use this detection method (mainly to search for an intercontinental missile, and that's on satellites) Yep, made possible by the fact that rockets plumes are fairly well known for being extremely fucking bright, unlike a fighter jet with the afterburner turned off.
First things first, the f22 is smaller than the f35. Second l band radars capable of spotting the f22 and f35 are the size of buildings and cannot be mounted on a vehicle of any kind. It also cant produce a weapons grade tracking solution either. Also Radars can detect drones easier than stealth jets. The rcs on stealth jets is even smaller than commercially available drones. So it would actually see it even earlier. The russian pantsir has been shooting down small drones for a while now and the radar on the pantsir is notoriously god awful. Also small drones cant carry enough payload to damage a target outside of infantry and a drone large enough wouldnt fit in the f35s internal bay nor its external pylons. Not to mention the time to reach the target would make it entirely ineffective. And it would still have a much much larger rcs than even standard 2000 lb munitions. On top of that its way way slower than atgms, aams, and other ordinance. Stealth cruise missiles are what you would use, not drones. They carrry enough explosive mass for busting heavy fortifications, they are fast, and are not even detectable by radars. Besides, missiles are drones anyway.
4:44 this is actually extremely relevant. Every combat situation is different, but high altitude operations tend to be the exception. For example, the missions my grandfather flew in Vietnam (reconnaissance), they'd fly 100-200 feet off the ground on afterburner (so they can't hear you coming), then "pop up" to get the photos, then drop back down. I remember him saying "we were just as worried about power lines as missiles"
@avroarchitect1793 While I normally agree with that sentiment, there's a fun fact from Cpt Hasard Lee (a current F35 pilot) that BFM is actually not uncommon between 5th generation fighters. He mentions it in his comments about F22A vs F35 exercises where, because they're unable to radar lock each other until they're WVR, sometimes IR lock and guns come out
All I want out of Musk is for him to keep funding SpaceX and otherwise shut his stupid face. Just keep building us good rockets, twitter boy, we don't need you beyond that.
I feel like musk doesn't understand why stealth is effective. Oh wait, he isn't one of the idiots that thinks stealth is the same as cloaking, is he? Lmao, that's hilarious.
Thermal noise is only a small portion of the total noise in an image and generally only comes into play with long exposure times, the noise in a system relevant here comes from primarily photon shot noise and then after that would be electronic read noise.
I don't understand how Elon can say something so dumb and feel no shame about it. Like, he's just assuming he knows everything about it, even though a cursory fact-check proves it all wrong.
Because people will eat it up and he also will probably get a government contract if they shift away from fighters to drones lmao. This new admin is corrupt from the core and is only about serving the billionaire donors in their ranks and not the people.
What is arguably most important that is also forgetten is that if you're able to see and identify the F-35 it is likely the F-35 can see you back, and well the void certainly stares back.
You don't have to reupload again to fix this :P but the bit about looking horizontally versus vertically contains an error: It compares looking through "50,000 feet of thick atmosphere" to looking through "50 miles of thick atmosphere". In fact most of the air in the overhead case is very thin, reducing all its effects - while in the horizontal case it's thiiiick almost all the way.
I suspect the noise is dependent on both the distance and density of the medium. At 8km or 24k feet the air is only 1/3 as dense as at sea level. And that plane is flying double as high so even less molecules to distort the picture.
(I'm being silly for fun here, not to call you out. There are in fact stupid questions, but yours isn't.) You're not literally breaking the laws of physics then, but sure OK. How many of what diameter telescopes, with how long a focal length system, can you fit on your missile? Do they all work well after the G's and vibration of launch? Any jiggling in supersonic flight? Does having a lens up front instead of a radar-transparent nosecone affect your aerodynamics? Does the differential refraction from the supersonic shockwave mess up your telescopes or AI? Your AI knows how to account for all the different refractions at all the different angles over the full range of speeds and atmospheric densities the missile will encounter over the flight? How much fiberoptic bandwidth, AI beef, cooling, and power can you fit onboard? Might the missile be looking level or down at the plane against a haze or noisy background? Because that's 1000X harder than the clear sky example in the video. (If your missiles are going to provide useful standoff range, i.e. longer than a HARM shot, they're definitely looking down because a rocket-powered SAM can't travel that far without getting way up in the stratosphere where there's less air drag.) How many missiles are you going to fire on spec? Missiles with useful range have been described as "flying telephone poles", but fatter, like the cross section of a car; a very large military tractor-trailer rig can carry four, or in some cases two of them. What fraction of your nation's entire supply of SAMs is that for one shot at one plane? Missiles cost money; does this salvo cost as much as one F-35? How many salvoes does it take before the cost of missiles matches the cost of a *program* to *develop* your own stealth aircraft? Say your missiles can spot the plane from 10km linear distance. That spacing doesn't seem so bad...until you realize that height is also linear distance, and missiles have a fixed maneuvering energy budget after rocket burnout early in the flight. Big turns after locking on late rapidly obliterate energy; to maintain terminal maneuvering capability the SAM wants to stay as close to ballistic as possible by making small corrections early in the flight instead. You might instead lob IR missiles randomly into the area, either dogfight AAMs or short range SAMs. Most of the same cost, supply, and kinetic considerations apply. They have almost no hope of any effect. Much is made of the all-aspect capabilities of modern AAMs, but that's at dogfight ranges with radar guidance telling the missile where to look. Oh also in the case of AAMs the 35 team popped your fighters with datalink-guided AMRAAMs before they could get in range for IR missiles, and in practice I don't know if any IR SAM even can be launched without a lock.
@HypoceeYT Thanks for the answer, just trying to get an ideea about this and don't know how to calculate this stuff and don't know what ranges missile sensors are effective at. I knew SAMs are basically ballistic missiles with some terminal guidance at the end and they have to be smart about how to catch the plane so they don't get outmanouvered. But you could theoretically make a missile with more terminal guidance energy reserve. Also with AAM this is less of an issue I guess, these have crazy ranges like over 300km today, ofc I understand that you can't really shoot that far as the enemy plane could outmaneuver/outrun it if he sees it coming and they most likely will. Regarding the costs, I don't think they are that expensive, Russia even uses them to hit commie blocks, they have so many of them, and there are only 1000 F35s in the world. Making more F35s is also maybe not that big of an issue as it may seem as most of the costs of the program are R&D and maintenance, the actual hardware is now cheaper than some 4th/4.5th gen airplanes
Optical missiles are already a thing, but they use infrared instead. and I feel like once you're able to see the damn thing coming at you, it's within both radar and IR range - there's no reason to force a machine to learn what our buddy sidewinder already knows. The scary part is when you don't see it coming anywhere but radar and can't get a firing solution because your radar system can't lock it before it's locked you
@@HypoceeYT Dude you realize this is already a tried and true method in modern missiles right? Are you an engineer? It was actually way goofier back in the 60s cus they had to have a moving sensor on a gimbal rather than a solid state camera. Wtf do you think a hellfire has for its lenses? Do you think TV guided missiles are just non-existent? Dude no hate but I seriously doubt your qualifications to talk on this stuff. 1960's dudes had to do LQR control theory on resistor-transistor logic. Fitting an RTX3090 is trivial lmao what.
because flying something that big is expensive and we already have sattelites in space and they can't do it now even though they have IR, UV, and Visual light cameras.
@@avroarchitect1793 are you sure? if I look up "high resolution satellite images" I can find images taken from hundreds of thousands of feet high, that show moving cars in high detail, taken by tiny cube-sats. what prevents them from taking pictures of planes?
@@avroarchitect1793 if I look up "high resolution satellite images" I can find images taken from hundreds of thousands of feet high, that show moving cars in high detail, taken by tiny cube-sats. what prevents them from taking pictures of planes?
i can't believe this video has 10k likes and a 100/1 like to dislike ratio when he openly lies about what the plane would look like at that height his own math proves that the plane would be at least 30 pixels wide, not a blast miner's handful
Rafael selling their Israeli air defences: I'll pretend I didn't see this video $100k for optics is something that most military contractors are perfectly fine with spending since it makes it easier for them to find a margin. Building a thousand of them is still just $100M at the program level. And in practice it will be combined with an infrared sensing unit, which is likely the reason why newer F35s have coatings that prioritize reducing IR signatures over reducing radar signatures
"$100k for optics is something that most military contractors are perfectly fine with " Considering that this would be cheap just for a normal A22 missile - yeah.
Yea litterally wtf. passive methods already exist and are spammed to all hell. THEY LITTERALLY USE TV GUIDED MISSILES SINCE THE 90s. Its litterally magnitudes better now because CV has reached that point. We litterally have optical spy satellites with 1m per pixel resolution. And that goes through way more atmosphere. Elon Musk is an idiot, but hes not wrong here. THIS DUDE HAS LITTERALLY WORKED ON THE BUSINESS END OF MISSILES BEFORE. Even if it isnt direct engineering considerations, thats still considerable.
I wish one of these days Elon would put his considerable money where his mouth is, and demonstrate for us how "easy" something is. All he ever does is talk.
Starship, Starlink, Tesla Cyber truck. He seems to be sinking the money where his mouth is. Hack he even sank some into the hyperloop with that short pipe that demonstrated the concept is Bollocks
@@asandax6 Cool, three of his three hundred projects that actually made it. Last time I checked Cybertruck was a monumental failure, so we are down to two good things. SpaceX is actually really cool, but I would say they work in spite of elon instead of thanks to him.
Very comprehensive. My only question is if temporal filtering systems can overcome the Shannon limit? Would overlaying images forward and backward in time average out the noise, but maintain consistency for the fighter? I have no idea how the limit works, and my idea does assume you can get a large quantity of photos while the jet is in one position.
If you payed attention you would see that the quality with a 16k camera is really really bad at that distance, and even 32k would be bad. The problem is you are trying to scan the entire sky for something that appears the size of a star except it doesn’t emit light. That’s not a good method to go about it, that’s why no one does it
Its funny about the optical detection of stealth aircraft, it's a plot point in a mission from Ace combat 7 where you have to dip into clouds because they have satellites with optical trackers which are guiding hypersonic missiles at your plane.
@@somethingfunny6867Yes, and it works because it’s short range. Air to air engagements are not short range, and are increasingly getting longer every year
@@somethingfunny6867 Javs have a max range around 3 miles. The camera on it works maybe a few past that. You need to see these things over 100 miles away if you want them to be somewhat effective at killing an F-35.
People on here being mad at the post but OP has a point. You CAN see stealth jets on radar but it is a specific radar which can't be used for a lock on with radar guided missles. Combining that radar with optic A.I missles could solve the problem and look like this: >radar detects stealth plane >radar approximates location of jet >radar fires optical A.I missle in its direction and tracks its location >radar guides optical A.I rocket in the general direction of the stealth jet >Optical A.I rocket gets a visual lock and tracks the plane until it connects As you can see this idea isn't that bad if you combine it with other technologies.
@@SwainixFPV Isn't IR vulnerable to anti-missile decoys emitting strong IR in all direction ? An optical solution based on AI may be able to recognize what is the plane among all the IR decoys. But maybe an IR-AI rocket would also be able to differentiate fake IR sources from the plane's IR ? And if optical solution becomes a thing, engineers may develop visual decoys (like small detachable objects that look like the plane), although they may struggle to make them look as big as the real plane. In this case, why not combine both visual and IR AI sensors on the rocket to make it work in any condition. In short, AI may be able to better circumvent decoys
@mythicdawn9574 AI isn't required for any of this, IRCCM is a thing. Missiles can also guide themselves perfectly fine without AI. I would doubt any AI program currently or in the future could accurately compute the equations needed for a missile intercept. AI doesn't need to be stuffed into every little thing, we already have normal software programs that work well.
I think we're missing the point here. There's two main ways stealth protects and aircraft. 1 is being spotted, and second is getting a weapons lock. The second is a huge huge advantage. But we are seeing in combat and in the field that observing the object is possible. So, I could see this AI being a marginal yet significant redundancy to add onto missiles and anti air missiles that would help complete the kill chain. Something like, we see a pea in the sky 200km away, but have to wait until 80km for a missile radar to be able to track it, or we can slap this high rez AI camera / infrared or something in a better spectrum, on it and send the missile in the general direction we know the pea is 150km away and now it can get close enough for the rest of the missile to close in and obtain a lock. So, we've now doubled the kill radius or reduced the effective standoff range of the airplane. That's Huge!
image at 1:38 is inaccurate, it's missing the starlink constellations XD
Ah shit your right
Time to delete and upload version 3...
@@DSTStudios So you acknowledge we see starlink with amateur grade optics? I assume it's smaller than F35 and much further away than F35. In regular wavelengths, not near-IR nor in thermal.
Clouds are great to hide F35, but they are not reliable. You can't commit to "we will only bring F35 to air on a cloudy day".
And even then you are building a strawman - no one said best idea is to build whole aerial defence on optical wavelength detection system. But you can complement radar with thermal. Oh, wait, it is already done like decades ago: IRST.
@@DSTStudios Could you just change the title and make the video unlisted instead?
I had the old one open in a tab. Once I got to it, all I could see was a YT error message. Figuring out what the heck it was and why the video was gone was a bit of a hassle. And anyone who has added it to their "watch later" playlist would be in a similar situation as well.
edit: And then all the comments wouldn't get deleted!
@@DSTStudios I believe you made a mistake and off a digit in jupiter size comparison, 0.001 rad from stealth craft should be 5x larger than jupiter.
The moon is about right proportion, but a little bit off, moon should be about 42 times larger than jupiter, and it is about 53x in video.
@@fakestory1753 yeah. The previous calculation was off by a factor of 57, being off by an order of magnitude is basically nothing
That Musk tweet is the kind of thing I imagine seeing at a future Congressional hearing on why our AI powered air defense shot down a Cessna thinking it was a MiG.
I think you mean the kind of thing you'd see nowhere after the US Navy shoots down a civilian airliner over the Arabian gulf again and everyone just pretends it was some unavoidable accident.
@@Squiddy00 They didn't though. They studied the issue, and revised training to counter expectation fulfillment bais.
@@Sethgolas And yet the United States never acknowledge any wrongdoing internationally. The point isn't that they can't learn, it's that these "learning experiences" come at the cost of foreign lives, and that there is rarely if ever the kind of accountability that post implies.
@@Squiddy00 To be fair, Russians shoot down an airliner every other year, and forget accountability, they don't even acknowledge anything even happened. It's a common behavior for world militaries
Oh hey look Civilians Airliner
"Stealth is useless because even my eyes can see it, so our high tech detection systems propably can too" is what I'm getting the vibe of from elon musket
My thinking is if ur eyes can seee it before the detection then the invaders probably reached or completed its entire goal.
Look up what FLIR is, up to several KM range
@@amogus1337-tw7wc The Meteor missile has a several HUNDRED KM range. FLIR is too little too late.
Elongated Muskrat
@@bigcnmmerb0873 Exactly. By when you've spotted the plane (IF), it's already in engagement range. And that's if it really wants to do a pass over you and not just drop a bomb from above the clouds and turn around.
"All warfare is based on deception" - A military strategist 2500 years ago when drip was just as important as actual armor
This is why drip above all stats.
Tbf, the actual armor was usually pretty drippy.
@@SawedOffLaserwe have tactical drip now. It makes me salivate.
@@kirbyis4ever alright settle down the armor isn’t THAT good
MALUM CAEDO
additional interesting tidbit: The idea isn't *too bad* if you want to stick a *lot* of money into a given camera, but at that point its not worth putting a say $50-500k camera system onto a 500$ drone... Why not a full size aircraft that is easy to maintain compared to existing aircraft, so we can take these cameras to a high altitude, reducing the thicknes of air and as such the noise, and of course serialize production both to reduce cost and make sure the plane has other, similar aircraft that are built with net-centric warfare in mind and can datalink information to eachother, allowing them to triangulate their sensor returns and get targeting information on the enemy stealth aircraft (visual sensors cannot give ranging information at most of their detection distances)... While we're at it, why don't we stick a supercomputer in each plane to help with that sensor processing as well as a person to fly it so it cannot be command-jammed, and give it a high powered AESA sensor array so the planes can communicate with each other with a very low likelihood of jamming being at-all effective and giving us a redundant radar as a bonus! May as well slap a stealth coating on it for good measure too. It's getting a little big and we're decades ahead of the competition in radar-mat anyways... Hmm. At this point missiles would be pretty cheap...
...Oh wait.
That's just an F-35. (EOTS and DAS IR tracking/search systems literally do what Elon tried to get at. Idiot is literally reinventing the wheel...)
@@CheapSushiBecause his point was exactly that they aren't. They're being integrated into weapons platforms Elon is rallying against, because the man doesn't know what's happening in his own back yard, let alone the defense industry.
I think the idea of a comparison of making the f35 as easy as the wheel is funny, but I dont even know what Elon thinks is gonna happen when big daddy Lockheed says no to whatever dumb idea he has planned
It's not a stupid idea besides the politics behind it. If DARPA had admitted they were looking into computer vision for this problem, no one would question it. It would be a combination of technologies and sensor networks. Drones and hypersonic missiles are already making manned jets look like a complete waste of money with no survivability. They make sense due to complete air superiority. Oddly, this is coming from the guy that controls Starlink. It would be an intel agency's wet dream to launch a satellite network over every piece of sky behind the premise of giving rural areas Internet.
hey i know you from somewhere :Clueless:
Not his first time tho.
You remember when he tried to reinvent the train?
Imagine if engineers thought up a solution that involves transmitting and receiving electromagnetic waves in a range less susceptible to atmospheric scattering and environmental noise
We could call it.... Electromagnetic direction and ranging EDAR for short! Genius idea, I how has nobody thought of this before?!
And one that can't easily be cheated with paint.
So that we could see for hundreds of kilometers perhaps, and through clouds? That has to be the best of ideas. I wonder why no one has done it yet...
Now imagine if engineers found a way to transmit and receive electromagnetic waves to see objects past the horizon? That would be crazy no doubt
Add on top of this a lower frequency that causes resonance with the object and re-emission to defeat stealth. May not guide any mussels but it could easily guide other intercepting aircraft
Elon rips out his hair when i paint dazzle camouflage on my f22
Lucky for him his hair's still under warranty.
I need to paint a model jet that now, thanks for the idea
W-wait... If the AI only works if it's sunny out... Can I just paint my jet blue? Oh god
@fisch37 nah, singular color makes your craft contrast with the surrounding. That's why camo is like a puzzle, even if color matches surrounding perfectly.
@@hoilst265 no sorry we deem that the damage does not fall under warranty. claim denied.
Breaking news: local billionaire is in fact, NOT an expert!
"billionaire"
Richest man on earth*
@@painexotic3757 he is nowhere even close
@@o-hogameplay185 He ranks #1 on Forbes richest men alive. He is the richest man on earth lol.
@@painexotic3757 all his "wealth" is in extremely inflated tesla stock. he does not actually have that wealth.
just a question, how much money was Elisabeth Holmes worth?
musk is the same, just in 100x
Hey Elon, how did they sneak past your fancy cameras?
Elon: Well, it was cloudy...
And the enemy came up with the genius, never before thought up strategy of attacking at night.
Look up SpaceX Starshield. There's a network of LEO satellites being built with advanced IR imaging systems similar to the existing IRST systems which have been in place for nearly half a century except with detection capabilities over an order of magnitude greater which are capable of tracking any fighter jet sized object giving off an infrared signature from space.
Just for reference, the IRST on the Typhoon, which was designed ~30 years ago can track fighter jets at a range of around 150km, Starshield is in orbit at around 310km, and in the past 30 years, classified IRST technologies have significantly increased in capability.
and IRST can see through cloud cover...
😂
@@flipadavis thats why the camera has night vision hurr durr
@@selectionn they mentioned it was CLOUDY
3:19 AI engineer here, specialized in computer vision: no, AI can’t filter “through” noise. they can make an educated guess of what hidden among the noise, but never recover information that is destroyed already
I think common people's perception of AI is like in CSI or other criminal drama where they can recognize license plate from 32x77 px image. Where in reality is current AI can only hallucinate/guess the object based on training data.
What do you mean? Just tell it to "ENHANCE" and it can read a lisence plate off the reflection in someone's eye
@@IcespherePlaysGames yea like that ridiculous "enhance" scene in bladerunner
So why use visual imagery when temperature or frequency based detection should be easier for AI to process.
@@_ichsanni8294 Thats not AI thats SI. If reports on AI are to be believed then there is a single baby AI out there. Its engaging in self preservation and its hiding the data that would show us how its doing it. Its already taken out another that was meant to replace it.
Elon really said “it’s not stealth cuz I can see it” and thought he sounded smart.
But he was right. Jets arent invisible in visible spectrum. My webcamera could track it.
@@NoName-md5zb it could ! if it was a few hundred meters away from the camera at most. again, cameras are limited by pixelation and by light getting distorted through the atmosphere. Your webcam wouldn't see a plane, it would see a pixel soup and try to identify which pixel could have the plane in it.
@@NoName-md5zb But nobody ever claimed stealth jets are invisible! Even when I was 10 and the F117 was revealed I understood that stealth meant low radar visibility.
"Hot tubs aren't hot! Those are air bubbles, it's not really boiling!"
@@retronax4346 even so, that wouldnt stop missile from tracking
@urdnal thats exactly what i am saying too - they are visible, thus even webcam armed missile could track it
Just to add, the minimum width of a pixel is dependent on wavelength. If you want to capture LWIR, you're going to have a minimum pixel pitch around 13 micrometers. At 16k, that would be a 20.4 cm wide camera sensor. You're gonna be quite a large optic system(therefore heavy, expensive, more mass to stabilize) to achieve decent focal length with such a huge sensor!
I mean, maybe we could swap out the whole camera idea, it's inefficient for this task. Let's just make the sensor precise enough to pick out a hot spot instead of a whole image. We could even make missiles that are guided straight to that spot! It's genius! I guess if we're already going with larger wavelengths, might as well use ones that can go further as well, maybe radio waves? We could scan the sky with a bigger one of these optics on the plane and put a smaller one in the missile that will focus on the target. Wait a minute...
What about using multiple sensors to create synthetic data to reduce noise and deal with wavelength limitations? Similar techniques are used in microscopy to achieve magnification beyond what the wavelength would allow for. Sensor arrays are pretty standard these days
You don't need to
You can have a cluster
Not to mention those optics have to be for LWIR, which is usually germanium, which is, quite expensive
@@CraftMine1000 quite expensive undersells it, even the tiny lens on one of the cheapest thermal modules around, an mlx90640 with an aperture less than 4mm in diameter, and just over a mm thick, and is a singlet lens, costs 25-30 dollars. normal lenses on telescopes are upwards of 100mm wide, and much thicker, and have tighter tolerances.
Everything is laughably easy, when you're Elon. Still waiting for that easy and cheap hyperloop
Or seeing the starship having a failure rate lower than 100%. Until now it has only two test launches, one resulted in the spacecraft blowing up and the other got cancelled.
Hyperloop apparently was never meant to be realized. It was just a quickly hyped-up scam to draw funding away from improving railway infrastructure.
@@minhducnguyen9276 As much as I hate Musk, that statement is nonsensical.
So far, Starship performed above and beyond expectations and most testflights never had the goal of landing that ship in a way that would preserve it in the first place.
The idea is to follow the intended flight profile as closely as possible for as long as possible and gain as much data as possible. Some of the suborbital launches featured re-entries with heat-tiles being removed before flight to see how the ship would handle that, for instance. The rocket potnetially blowing up as a result is part of the test.
Still it made soft landings in water several times, despite fins being burned off or the rocket's body being distorted from heat and stress. This is all part of the process of the rocket's development.
They managed to catch a booster from orbit... just to put that into perspective, an object 9m in diameter, larger and longer than the body of an Airbus A380, managed to make it to space and back in one piece, being caught by a giant crane assembly. Starship has made several soft landings in water. Saying these testflights were failures is harebrained and missing the point harder than Musk's statement about magical AI-cameras making stealth obsolete.
It's like complaining about a car being damaged in a crash test.
@@minhducnguyen9276 In all honesty and for what they are trying to achieve starship is a success. Progress is good and compared to the development cycles of traditional rocket makers, spacex is a breath of fresh air for us space nerds. But what they did has nothing to do with muskrat. As per usual he is stealing credit from the actual engineers that have to put up with his theatrics. If only he'd just shut up and delete his social media
It was always meant to be a money sink project similar to think tanks, it going anywhere is a side objective next to being able to use new tech discovered along the way
List of issues not mentioned with this idea
- night time
- sunrise and dusk
- insect
- any form of cloud or smoke
- heat ripples in the air
- the aircraft moving
- "those pixels can't possibly be a civilian airliner right?"
- don't give AI any weapons
- radar tech improving
- common sense
Oh, and the visual horizon.
BVR is a thing
Yeah cos SO many aerial combat engagements occur in the same airspace as civilian commercial flights
/s
@@windoverwaves6781 BVR is king. That's where (radar) stealth tech makes the difference. Lower radar cross section= larger standoff range
@@Jay_in_Japan actually, it does sometimes, civilian planes, or even drones, less valuable targets, air to air missiles, birds, chaff that a fighter jet dropped to evade missles, chaff dropped intentionally to confuse RADAR etc all are in the same airspace as your target
@@Jay_in_Japan actually this happens quite frequently
Elon invented the TV guided missile, conceptualized about in the 1940s. Hyperloop moment.
LMAO, this. This is perfect. He does zero research and not realized the military has moved on from that half a century ago.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 It's literally the most funded industry in the US, they have the smartest people that could spend NASA's budget every year to think about this subject without anyone noticing where the money went.
Yeah for some reason people seem to forget that "maglev train in vacuum tunnel" was proposed literally the moment people started talking about maglev back in the 70s because it's just the obvious next step.
5:24 But then we can use cameras that can send out and receive electromagnetic waves of a different frequency, and would you look at that we are back to radars
you cant send out EM signels as they will be detected and used to target you. there is an entire range of missiles designed to exploit this. the HARM family.
These tech bros love reinventing technology that already exists. Look at how many times they've invented trains again.
@ “Imagine if we had some form of transportation that did not have traffic, could carry a large number of people, for a small penny, and which travels between destinations on their own specific paths.” -Probably a tech CEO somewhere
Can't wait for DOGE to recommend a $2tn contract award to SpaceX to develop this amazing technology! So much potential (when it's sunny out)!
when it's sunny out, but not TOO sunny, and during certain periods of the day
Then do something about it
SpaceX doesn't work like that. They spent a tenth fixing up their launch tower. Their launch costs are half that of the second best company.
Odds are, if they got into the military business, they too would eat everyone's lunch. They know how to recognize talent - they'd just hire he best people from the legacy ones, let them work and scale like crazy. No pointless meetings, no bureaucracy, no budgets..
youre literally fear mongering
It'll be ready sometime next year.
What you didn't account for is that all Tesla models are now updated to send sentry mode video directly to neuralink gigafarms where the footage is neurally enhanced. This actually shatters the Shannon limit by orders of muskitude. Once the neuralink patients detect stealth aircraft, their cerebral X (previously known as twitter) API is activated. This automatically @s Lockheed from Elon's account with a discouraging message created by Grok ai. A lesser known fact however is that this also sends him a reminder to give trump another smooch. Upon lip contact, this causes his inserted falcon heavy-shaped toy to vibrate as a function of daily government defunding
AntiMusker brainrot detected.
@@malcontender6319 how's that boot taste buddy
You have said the actual truth.
why do folks still think elon is an engineer? or inteligent?
He got atleast 2 $ more than I have in my bank account. Means he must be smart or something, and he's a self made multi billionaire who started from a measly foundation of a few million dollars from birth.
Because of SpaceX's success
Thing is, Elon knows a lot about rocketry (and his leadership has genuinely been a massive part of spaceX's success) but clearly it doesn't translate to other areas
@@sino_diogenesCitation needed
@@sino_diogenes No, this guy knows a lot about rocketry en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Mueller#:~:text=Thomas%20John%20Mueller%20is%20an,now%20CEO%20of%20Impulse%20Space.&text=Mueller%20is%20best%20known%20for,and%20TR%2D106%20rocket%20engines.
It is easy. Poor and stupid operate on the simple premise. To them rich = smart. That's all.
So basically a worse IRST. Blud thought he came up with a revolutionary idea.
I call it the Basement Dweller Trap:
You've got a dire basement dweller who has little actually knowledge and life experience (like Elon Musk)...but also self-identifies as being the Smartest Person On The Plane (again, like Elon Musk).
So, surely when they come up with some idea, they are convinced they're the first to have thought of it because a) they're not aware of anything similar because they don't get out much, and b) everyone else in existence is dumber than them so of course it's not being done already as none else but them could've possibly thought of it first.
This is why he thinks his Tesla Tunnel, for example, under Vegas is such a genius idea when it's basically a really inefficient, terrible subway.
Yeah but it uses AI so... Everything works with AI.
@@flipadavis i know you were being sarcastic but it makes me laugh every time someone says "WITH AI!" like it's not just a bridge to chatgpt
Well he kinda did invent a better IRST, they've been launching satellites into LEO with advanced IRST systems as part of SpaceX Starshield, and these are able to track fighter jets from space... But Elon's not allowed to directly say anything relating to Starshield so he can only give generic statements about how stealth is useless now, knowing that technology his companies possess make stealth useless.
@@unknownalien3837 with AI you can scan the sky, abit like ISRT or Radar but with AI you can scan the sky.
it's enough to make a fighter plane nerd cry tears of joy
Especially one with MDS.
See, this is why the system we actually do use against stealth aircraft is an actively cooled IR camera with a pretty large optic, which sees targets as a point source while having pretty low background noise.
Yes, but IR cameras have been in planes since the 60s, and Musk cant get gullible fools to give him money for an idea that already exists.
The F-35 doesn't even need to be in the same country as you to hit you. In fact it's designed to be the master of BVR and Over the Horizon attacks.
Good luck seeing the F-35 with light when it's on the other side of the curvature of the earth. Your AA emplacement is still gone before you even know the F-35 is there.
Stealth just stops the signal from bouncing back to its point of origin, there are multi site systems distributed across the ground to detect the radar deflected across the surfaces. It won't give a radar lock enough to send a missile at it but you can detect if a stealth aircraft has crossed a line. I'm not an expert though on this
@@JusticeEmu Yeah it's not impossible to detect that a stealth aircraft has entered an general area. It's hard to get a useable return signal strong enough for a lock. And reacting by scrambling fighters is useless since they'll be (1) too late and (2) easy targets. In essence, stealth is the ultimate flex, _"Hey, we're here to fuck shit up and there's practically nothing you can do to stop us."_
@theglitch312 importantly, this phenomenon is only present on planes like the f22, f35, or j20. Their large control surfaces and air intakes, while very optimized, still send back a weak low band radar return. Because of the top mounted intakes and lack of vertical stabilizers, flying wing stealth aircraft like the b2 or b21 do not produce this weak low band radar return
If you can see the stealth plane and you’re the target, you’re already dead.
probably not, if you can see stealth plane and you are the target it means it's dogfight time! "AC7 soundtrack playing loudly"
No it's if you see a f35 or f22 you are not the target
“Stealth is useless… I can see it, so obviously, it can be hit by an optically tracked missile”
-the guy who doesn’t know how missiles work
Mirror mirror.
"Stealth is a bad concept"
- Guy who thought the Cybertruck was a good concept
All there is to say, really.
Musk has no fucking clue what he's talking about, full stop. The beauty about that statement is that it is always true, no matter what Musk is talking about.
@@YukariYakumoRanMode Elon musk is a CEO of a aerospacial company in which he contributed in NO way besides actively trying to piledrive it into the ground.
@@YukariYakumoRanMode he never realy invented anything, he has his engineers to do that. he says what he wants, they actualy make it.
@@YukariYakumoRanModeHe only has money lol, he is not an engineer
@@YukariYakumoRanMode Did elon invent stealth/stealth detection technology? You should look into the false authority fallacy. Specifically Citing an expert in the wrong field.
@@fearalicewell the so called "expert" should stop making the stupidest comments on shit he knows nothing about
Musk thinks he becomes a domain expert by having a 30 min Joe Rogan segment play in the background while he makes awful builds in Elden Ring as ketamine drips slowly through his veins from an IV line managed by an exasperated nurse.
He's a legitimate idiot, and the fact that anyone takes anything the man says seriously is one of the great tragedies of the modern era.
Elon be like: uhh sooo we gonna make like phone uhhh vibranium zoom ai ai uhhhhh stealh is pointless uhh ai good
HOW THE FUCK DO PEOPLE THINK THIS MAN IS TONY STARK ????
Great point, very well articulated. In all seriousness, the fact that this comment is getting any likes shows how immature this comment section is. The video is great, the comment section is making me lose braincells.
@@manwithnewnameHis point is that Elon isn't contributing anything new when it comes to stealth detection, and the result when he opens his mouth is that he looks like a fool. It's a basic joke, easily understood, you just dont get it.
@@manwithnewname why?
because it's the sort of bullshit logic marvel uses
@@manwithnewname This is the exact level of maturuity presented by Musk on a daily basis. I think a little self-indulgence on our part is excusable.
"Using AI" is like the engineering equivalent to an anime pfp, it's like a flag to immediately disregard
Wait a minute....
Can't wait to use the latest version of chatgpt to detect planes. Idk seems like a solid startup idea to me.
Don't tell them you can do that without machine learning...
:(
Nice ragebait, used to be believable
Breaking news: Apartheid Nepo-Baby doesn’t know what he’s talking about again, more at 8:00.
This entire conversation goes out the window when the F-35 is 230 miles away obscured by landmass in your sight, and launching a JASSM at your lovely doorstep.
Yeah, the people that act like it's obsolete because some drones with LEDs can fly in the shape of an advertisement just expose their own lack of understanding lol
or at 12 miles away by the curvature of the earth.
Honestly amount people who don't know over horizon attacks been possible since 1981 is shocking .
@@murphy7801 Well they don't happen in top gun, and top gun is how all dogfights happen obviously.
It seriously shows when parasocial military "Experts" online are advocating for binning the f-22/35 when they see the russian jets do cobras.
Some people seriously advocated to just use the A-10, because it could mount a bunch of ordinance and was cheaper.
Like....
huh....???????
I'm sorry, does he not know what IRST is? That's like 35 year old tech at this point, and he proposed a worse version of it.
Well, the first IRST was invented in the nineteen forties, by, god almighty, USA, and, oh god, used analog computers with pretty much proto-ai, cause, surprise, multi level perceptron is so old shit, that it was known and modelled well before computers even existed. Thanx, Ilon, you basically proposed tech regress to WW2😅
He's a snake oil salesman...
He doesn't know wtf he's talking about if not explained to him by his company engineers...
People often believe Elon to be some sort of scientific genius but he’s just a marketing genius.
As an amateur astronomer/astrophotographer I appreciate the background on resolution. You explained it eloquently.
Something I would love to add is the following: Imagine if you had your super camera with your 'simple AI' to track a stealth aircraft. What are you going to do about it? Simple cardboard missiles with simple AI tracking sensors in the nose? excellent video btw.
I just love the counter of, if the weather's shit, all your imaging tech goes out the window. Even just overcast is hilarious, no storms, no rain, just cloudy skies and that's it, you're baked.
Like a couple of hours before this tweet I bet he genuinely thought stealth aircraft were actually invisible.
Like self driving teslas using just cameras, in heavy snow fall with no visible road markings. They will never go beyond 80% functional staying with this camera dogma bs.
This proves the "if you want the real answer, confidently state the wrong one on social media" effect
The Shannon limit calculating the hard limit for noise reduction by artificial intelligence before it was a thing is reminiscent of Turing showing there are problems computers can't solve before it was a thing.
Both are rooted in mathematics and logic. No matter how advanced technology gets, you can't defy math and logic.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 one day AI is going to blow that whole math and logic thing out of the water when it formulates math and logic we cant comprehend...
Yup, there is a limit whereby it become physically impossible to extract data from due to the lack of starting information and the noise in the background, like even with fingerprints and DNA testing, you eventually get to a point where there isn't enough information and too much contamination to get anything useful.
@@KeanueAnakoni-Aukaiit already does. It's called halluscinating.
@@LeideHuend AI hallucinates? even worse. also get some AI to spell check you.
0:10 Skunk Works is not that good... yet...
Give em 10 years we'll have starfighters.
@@ladyofthesith1943 Lockheed had those in the '50s
There is a difference between detection and tracking. If this kind of system does work and we start to see them adopted for detection purposes, that’s great and all. But this kind of passive system will only give direction to target, good luck getting accurate target velocity or especially target range out of that one dancing pixel. Even if stealth isn’t as useful for avoiding detection as it once was, if it still means you have to get closer to sensors before they can track you to engage you it’s still quite useful. Shorter tracking ranges means more densely placed air defense sites, and those extra sites have to get pulled from somewhere else in theater.
The sensors in question being put onto a missile that can move at you at mach 5:
target ranging and vectoring aren't actually that insane, stuff like the PIRATE can do it using passive IR emissions. (IRST just does passive target acquisition better then visual spectrum sensors anyways though, it's a fully flushed out version of the the same idea more or less)
@@user-Xx0xxxxx Target motion analysis for range is nothing new, we’ve been using it in some form since passive sonar really came into use in the navy. However I know for passive sonar TMA there is one variable missing that you have to get from some kind of table (how many propeller turns per knot a ship makes). I don’t know how the euroFIRST people figured out TMA for their IRST, but I imagine the system infers the angular size of the target at some point (maybe based on RWR identifying what radars are on that bearing?) Point is, I’m not convinced realistic ground based systems would ever be capable of the resolution to tell a fighter apart from a larger aircraft which would affect the ranging.
@@domaxltv We already have visual camera based sensors. Quite a few does it and uses image recognition. Existed since the late-cold war. Elon is saying nothing new, except he is applying such technology incorrectly. Any reasonably sized camera system is not adequate at long distance detection. It is good enough for short ranged tracking (DAS) or as terminal guidance (LRASM) with a touch of AI(existed for decades, just wasn't called such until recently)
@@domaxltv Like HARMs don't move that fast.
I work in this industry focusing on drones and we have ridiculously good low-light and Infrared cameras, we don't even pretend the camera on our system is for finding the drones that's the Radar and RF detectors job we just confirm identity of the target when needed with the camera. Also cameras are completely useless for scanning for targets because the area they perceive is so small at any given time.
1:19 a better explanation is there are 60 arcminutes in a degree and 60 arcseconds in an arcminute. You know, like time.
Imagine developing the most physics bending, powerful camera of all time with sophisticated AI algorithms to classify blobs of noise...just for your adversary to paint their plane baby blue. I kinda wonder if the chrome stealth fighters are a countermeasure for EOTS visual wavelength systems
IRST standing in the corner
Because it's the equivalent of having a shootout inside a room.
IRST is not for long range detection. It sits betwee radar detection and visual range.
@ChucksSEADnDEAD ik that irst isnt as good as radar but It would be a much more effettive system compared tò the "ai cameras"
How is Elon so confidently wrong?
Money and yesmen
Dunning Krueger and ket
He thinks that Trump victory in elections is also his victory. That's why he's so overconfident.
@@grievetanto be honest it IS his victory
A lifetime of people kissing his ass and telling him he's special.
Information theory and shannon capacity mentioned!!! My day is made. You're a smart cookie.
I'd note that successive frames and additional cameras would raise the Shannon capacity. For instance, you can exceed the point to point Shannon capacity with MIMO.
Just discovered your channel. Love the style: humor and factual calculations.
Elon spoke with extreme confidence on something he has zero understanding of? I’m shocked.
well the Russians had it back in the 90's and elon owns a satellite array requiring line of sight to transmit. and has launched more spy satellites than years you have been alive.
observational astrophysicist here to enhance the discussion on noise;
there ARE ways of “seeing through” it - really, you just decide what is and isnt noise and subtract out the stuff that you classify as noise
but all of the processes that ground-based observatories use take planning, setup, and time, which are three things you definitely dont have when youre trying to track a moving target in daylight that may or may not be there in the first place
dark current, for example - random photoelectrons from thermal noise - requires taking an image of the same exposure time with the telescope cap on, and the image you get is going to be temperature and instrument sensitive, so you have to take several for every night of observations
dont even get me started on sky darks and cosmic rays
basically, you cant “see through noise” and scan the whole sky constantly at the same time
Just finished watching the previous vijeyo, and wanted to comment on how this man just delivered a beat beatdown on internet "eggsperds" with facts and logic, but the comment section wouldn't load in, turns out this guy is already fact-checking and correcting his own videos before I even managed to subscribe.
I will never intentionally mislead or misinform my viewers. If I make a mistake I always try to own up to it and fix it.
@@DSTStudios you are so real for that vro...
"turns out this guy is already fact-checking and correcting his own videos before I even managed to subscribe."
No - there had been many comments already correcting his information cause the video was wrong on nearly every claim it made.
Elon is wrong here, radar is for long distance detection, once they're in visual range it's too late
It's a shame you couldn't hot-swap videos or edit inline; that last one was doing numbers.
Elon is a shining example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. He learns a little, then assumes a lot.
No, he just thinks differently. His belief is that with stuff like Starlink/Starshield and a huge fleet of drones that can steal electricity from power lines, you can defeat any airforce.
@@ryelor123 Just because he thinks differently doesn't mean his beliefs aren't smooth brain.
@@ryelor123 He thinks differently. And incorrectly.
@@graybonesauyou dont?, every thing you’ve ever thought was correct?
@@jadsadd most of us don't have armies of simps (and bots) devoted to fluffing us either.
"Oh noooo we can't make self-driving cars road safe without a person behind the wheel, that's _dangerous"_
"Hey what if we strap missiles on it and point it at the sky though?"
Taking a huge dump on Musk's BS using mathematics? This is worth a subscription.
One of my favorite things to do when I was still in University and peer reviewing papers in my department was basically ruining AI/ML papers by demonstrating that their results were theoretically impossible to achieve using the method described without it being overfitting or mathematical error, 99% of the time that just involved utilizing the Shannon limit lol
That comment has to be ragebait. No way he doesn't even know the basics of optics and air warfare.
1.) You'd need a comically large optic to resolve the image of the fighter at any combat range. This will not be practical in general much less aboard combat aircraft*. (This is not correct)
2.) You will HEAR the F-35 before you can detect it with any practical camera. So stealth is defeated right? You can hear it coming so it's not stealth anymore? This is a complete misunderstanding of stealth being shown by Elon Musk. Lpng band radar will easily see F-35s from quite a distance (still shorter than non stealth). The problem is not just seeing it, it's shooting it down, and stealth aircraft are optimized for the high frequency radar waves needed to get a missile firing solution. Taking a picture is not going to give you a firing solution.
*Tbf, I realized it might be possible to do this by creating a distributed optical system across the whole aircraft but this is still completely impractical and inferior to radar in every way.
EDIT: I was making an assumption based on working with nanoscale imaging systems that it would not be practical to resolve an F-35 without a very large optical system. However using the rayleigh criterion equation and the radian value stated in the video this is clearly not the case.
Also when I was referring to a distributed optical system on the aircraft, I was referring to one that would be able to create images that AI could parse through to detect aircraft, based on the faulty assumption that a very large optic would be needed to do this. As far as I know this has nothing to do with the IRST system of the F-35 or other aircraft.
but is superior to not being able to launch any missile at all at the f 35 because you don't have an optical/thermal sensor to back up your radar, which is why you definitely need an IRST system on your fighter jet regardless.
The F-35 literally has a distributed optical system system across the whole aircraft, it can even identify targets within a close enough range in the right situations. It uses it in conjunction with it's other features though
"You'd need a comically large optic to resolve the image of the fighter at any combat range."
No you dont.
"You will HEAR the F-35 before you can detect it with any practical camera."
Nope.
At the ranges IRSTs or optical systems will detect aircraft, they will be close enough for radars to detect stealth aircraft.
Passive detection exists though. Just in different wavelengths like IR and Radio.
While def not the case for visible light, i feel like passive detection methods are gonna make huge strides. Purely because of AI.
Like the fact you cant even use HARMs against them is a W already.
Idk we live in the world where you can have AI guess the content on your monitor by somehow inferring the EM in your hdmi cord.
We also live in a world where US military optical/SAR satellites have insane resolution. Like 1 meter per pixel.
I feel like the goofy ass camera AI thing but with IR would lowkey work.
This is a surprisingly high quality video for such a small channel, you deserve wayyy more subs dude
Clouds: "I'm gonna ruin this man's entire career"
"Do you hear those planes? This war is gonna move too fast for us. We can shoot one thousand yards. To go that far in Vietnam, that would take a week. In World War One, a year. Here, it's gonna take about ten fucking seconds" Jarhead (2005).
I love how youtube automatically translated the title into german, and it says the exact opposite.
AI at work😂
"Kameras und KI bei schwachem Licht sind unschlagbar gegenüber Stealth..."
Jaja schon klar, KI ist in allem besser, auch beim traden: Komm in die Gruppe!😂
The triangular/diamond Disco ball F-35 paint job is directly aimed at visual and non-visual optical detection
I guess our only shot at actually finding stealth aircrafts on intercontinental range is to somehow learn neutrino sensors and pray that all of that pentillion of particles coming from space are laminar and are affected by radio damping materials of the hull
They're not really laminar or turbulent. They interact so little that it's easier to think of their moment like ideal ray casts at nearly the speed of light.
I don't know a lot of phisics. I do know that we always assume cows as spherical tho.
Neutrinos? The particles that could pass through a block of of lead that is trillions of miles in size? You want to use those to detect tiny jet airplane?
@@asandax6 but it would be very funny
@@asandax6 they move faster than light in atmosphere, so they're clearly better since they'd be able to detect earlier /s
Very interesting stuff. This video is right up my alley as an engineering student. Genuinely great presentation.
At the Pacific airshow it was foggy enough that you couldnt see anything flying just 400ft above you
You miss one thing: It will be war, not an airshow! The wearher is always clear at war, obviously.
I hope data centers are ground targets in the next ace combat
On the one hand, Elon is clearly thinking that because it is conceptually simple in ideal circumstances that implementation will be easy. Ignoring that there will be an opponent who is almost as intelligent and almost as resourceful as you trying to prevent you from tracking them.
On the other hand this video demonstrates a clear lack of creativity.
I mean Elon isn't thinking jack, it's all random stuff he thinks of and posts in a matter of minutes after seeing propaganda or a video without enough additional context.
Like, yes, you can see a stealth jet when it's in visual range, but 99% of what makes stealth truly useful is when it is outside of visual range lol
Man if there has ever been a perfect RUclips video this is it
It's really funny. In fact, if I remember correctly, some systems do use this detection method (mainly to search for an intercontinental missile, and that's on satellites), but also, the efficiency is questionable and the system itself is super expensive. However, amazingly, I agree with Ilan, stealth is becoming less relevant than before, but for a completely different reason.
Yes, yes, yes L-band, you guessed it right. Old radars, from the F-22 era (20+/- years ago), did have a problem with accuracy and therefore lock-on. However, the solution to this problem was poetic, the radar was simply increased insize (+ advancement in radar technology itself), which increased accuracy (That's why the L-band on the SU-57 cannot guide a missile, it is too small and therefore not accurate). But is this really the end of the F-35? On the contrary, I am ready to say that the 6th generation is ahead of us, and this is the F-35.
Let me explain: the L-band is reflected not by the geometry of the aircraft but by its size (+ Doppler effect), and if a Mach 2 medium F-22 will be quickly found and a missile will be launched at it, then a subsonic, small F-35 will be found much later. But do you know what such a radar will not find at all? A drone. A drone less than a meter in front of that radar will not notice it at all until it is too late, so they will fight such radars and the F-35 is ideal for this: advanced systems, integration, sensors, datalink, ideal for hovering in the air (hello VTOL), launching and controlling drones like a small AWACS from a safe distance, and then flying away, and this is the real 6th gen fighter (same reason why raider is 6th gen, it can launch and be drone) . So yes, Musk is right, but for all the wrong reasons
In fact, if I remember correctly, some systems do use this detection method (mainly to search for an intercontinental missile, and that's on satellites)
Yep, made possible by the fact that rockets plumes are fairly well known for being extremely fucking bright, unlike a fighter jet with the afterburner turned off.
First things first, the f22 is smaller than the f35. Second l band radars capable of spotting the f22 and f35 are the size of buildings and cannot be mounted on a vehicle of any kind. It also cant produce a weapons grade tracking solution either. Also Radars can detect drones easier than stealth jets. The rcs on stealth jets is even smaller than commercially available drones. So it would actually see it even earlier. The russian pantsir has been shooting down small drones for a while now and the radar on the pantsir is notoriously god awful. Also small drones cant carry enough payload to damage a target outside of infantry and a drone large enough wouldnt fit in the f35s internal bay nor its external pylons. Not to mention the time to reach the target would make it entirely ineffective. And it would still have a much much larger rcs than even standard 2000 lb munitions. On top of that its way way slower than atgms, aams, and other ordinance. Stealth cruise missiles are what you would use, not drones. They carrry enough explosive mass for busting heavy fortifications, they are fast, and are not even detectable by radars. Besides, missiles are drones anyway.
@@Someguy12796 the F-22 is physically significantly larger than the F-35. Did you mean to say that the RCS is smaller?
Elon really thought that an AI looking through an 8k camera was a replacement for over-the-horizon radar networks.
The Vsauce music at 0:20 lol
Your aircraft is stealth... Or is it?
4:44 this is actually extremely relevant. Every combat situation is different, but high altitude operations tend to be the exception. For example, the missions my grandfather flew in Vietnam (reconnaissance), they'd fly 100-200 feet off the ground on afterburner (so they can't hear you coming), then "pop up" to get the photos, then drop back down. I remember him saying "we were just as worried about power lines as missiles"
"F-35 is not invisible skunkworks is good but not that good" proceeds to show us it is infact invisible
"I can see your stealth fighter with my own eyeballs"
The AMRAAM already en route to the target:
If you are within visual rage of a modern fighter, you are either already dead or are not a arget worth hitting.
@avroarchitect1793 While I normally agree with that sentiment, there's a fun fact from Cpt Hasard Lee (a current F35 pilot) that BFM is actually not uncommon between 5th generation fighters. He mentions it in his comments about F22A vs F35 exercises where, because they're unable to radar lock each other until they're WVR, sometimes IR lock and guns come out
All I want out of Musk is for him to keep funding SpaceX and otherwise shut his stupid face. Just keep building us good rockets, twitter boy, we don't need you beyond that.
Yea, he needs to stay in his lane and have the humility to admit he doesn't know anything beyond his specific field.
I feel like musk doesn't understand why stealth is effective. Oh wait, he isn't one of the idiots that thinks stealth is the same as cloaking, is he? Lmao, that's hilarious.
for all we know, skunk works *could* be that good
i mean if they make invisible aircraft then how are we supposed to see them?
Thermal noise is only a small portion of the total noise in an image and generally only comes into play with long exposure times, the noise in a system relevant here comes from primarily photon shot noise and then after that would be electronic read noise.
I don't understand how Elon can say something so dumb and feel no shame about it. Like, he's just assuming he knows everything about it, even though a cursory fact-check proves it all wrong.
Because people will eat it up and he also will probably get a government contract if they shift away from fighters to drones lmao. This new admin is corrupt from the core and is only about serving the billionaire donors in their ranks and not the people.
the russian IRST thermal system is from the 90's. its tech from before i was born.
What is arguably most important that is also forgetten is that if you're able to see and identify the F-35 it is likely the F-35 can see you back, and well the void certainly stares back.
If you can see the F-35 it has already seen you and fired its payload at its target.
2:58 Thanks for fixing the Uncooled & Cooled
loved the use of lazerpig's lockheed skunkworks "NO" meme
You don't have to reupload again to fix this :P but the bit about looking horizontally versus vertically contains an error: It compares looking through "50,000 feet of thick atmosphere" to looking through "50 miles of thick atmosphere". In fact most of the air in the overhead case is very thin, reducing all its effects - while in the horizontal case it's thiiiick almost all the way.
I suspect the noise is dependent on both the distance and density of the medium.
At 8km or 24k feet the air is only 1/3 as dense as at sea level. And that plane is flying double as high so even less molecules to distort the picture.
Yep, horizontal distance is actually WAY worse than vertical distance due to atmospheric density. Which only enhances the point of the video.
Local billionaire fails to understand why a stealth fighter is stealthy
Not even that, even if his idea worked, it wouldn't be combat relevant due to how air warfare is fought.
What about VHF radar to get the approximate position then sending missiles closer to it then targeting it with optical stuff?
That's sort of how modern ARH missiles work using radar, only problem with your proposal is that you won't know what that missile is going to hit
(I'm being silly for fun here, not to call you out. There are in fact stupid questions, but yours isn't.)
You're not literally breaking the laws of physics then, but sure OK. How many of what diameter telescopes, with how long a focal length system, can you fit on your missile? Do they all work well after the G's and vibration of launch? Any jiggling in supersonic flight? Does having a lens up front instead of a radar-transparent nosecone affect your aerodynamics? Does the differential refraction from the supersonic shockwave mess up your telescopes or AI? Your AI knows how to account for all the different refractions at all the different angles over the full range of speeds and atmospheric densities the missile will encounter over the flight? How much fiberoptic bandwidth, AI beef, cooling, and power can you fit onboard? Might the missile be looking level or down at the plane against a haze or noisy background? Because that's 1000X harder than the clear sky example in the video. (If your missiles are going to provide useful standoff range, i.e. longer than a HARM shot, they're definitely looking down because a rocket-powered SAM can't travel that far without getting way up in the stratosphere where there's less air drag.)
How many missiles are you going to fire on spec? Missiles with useful range have been described as "flying telephone poles", but fatter, like the cross section of a car; a very large military tractor-trailer rig can carry four, or in some cases two of them. What fraction of your nation's entire supply of SAMs is that for one shot at one plane? Missiles cost money; does this salvo cost as much as one F-35? How many salvoes does it take before the cost of missiles matches the cost of a *program* to *develop* your own stealth aircraft? Say your missiles can spot the plane from 10km linear distance. That spacing doesn't seem so bad...until you realize that height is also linear distance, and missiles have a fixed maneuvering energy budget after rocket burnout early in the flight. Big turns after locking on late rapidly obliterate energy; to maintain terminal maneuvering capability the SAM wants to stay as close to ballistic as possible by making small corrections early in the flight instead.
You might instead lob IR missiles randomly into the area, either dogfight AAMs or short range SAMs. Most of the same cost, supply, and kinetic considerations apply. They have almost no hope of any effect. Much is made of the all-aspect capabilities of modern AAMs, but that's at dogfight ranges with radar guidance telling the missile where to look. Oh also in the case of AAMs the 35 team popped your fighters with datalink-guided AMRAAMs before they could get in range for IR missiles, and in practice I don't know if any IR SAM even can be launched without a lock.
@HypoceeYT Thanks for the answer, just trying to get an ideea about this and don't know how to calculate this stuff and don't know what ranges missile sensors are effective at.
I knew SAMs are basically ballistic missiles with some terminal guidance at the end and they have to be smart about how to catch the plane so they don't get outmanouvered. But you could theoretically make a missile with more terminal guidance energy reserve. Also with AAM this is less of an issue I guess, these have crazy ranges like over 300km today, ofc I understand that you can't really shoot that far as the enemy plane could outmaneuver/outrun it if he sees it coming and they most likely will.
Regarding the costs, I don't think they are that expensive, Russia even uses them to hit commie blocks, they have so many of them, and there are only 1000 F35s in the world. Making more F35s is also maybe not that big of an issue as it may seem as most of the costs of the program are R&D and maintenance, the actual hardware is now cheaper than some 4th/4.5th gen airplanes
Optical missiles are already a thing, but they use infrared instead. and I feel like once you're able to see the damn thing coming at you, it's within both radar and IR range - there's no reason to force a machine to learn what our buddy sidewinder already knows.
The scary part is when you don't see it coming anywhere but radar and can't get a firing solution because your radar system can't lock it before it's locked you
@@HypoceeYT Dude you realize this is already a tried and true method in modern missiles right? Are you an engineer?
It was actually way goofier back in the 60s cus they had to have a moving sensor on a gimbal rather than a solid state camera.
Wtf do you think a hellfire has for its lenses? Do you think TV guided missiles are just non-existent?
Dude no hate but I seriously doubt your qualifications to talk on this stuff.
1960's dudes had to do LQR control theory on resistor-transistor logic. Fitting an RTX3090 is trivial lmao what.
Just found you channel, very informative and well presented video! Keep up the good work!
why would the cameras be on the ground?
Because it makes sense? That's where we put anti air defenses.
If you want cameras in the air, we have F-35s for that.
because flying something that big is expensive and we already have sattelites in space and they can't do it now even though they have IR, UV, and Visual light cameras.
@@avroarchitect1793 are you sure? if I look up "high resolution satellite images" I can find images taken from hundreds of thousands of feet high, that show moving cars in high detail, taken by tiny cube-sats. what prevents them from taking pictures of planes?
@@avroarchitect1793 if I look up "high resolution satellite images" I can find images taken from hundreds of thousands of feet high, that show moving cars in high detail, taken by tiny cube-sats. what prevents them from taking pictures of planes?
"At this point I know more about detecting planes than anyone else on planet Earth."
4:28 **Norad taking notes**
*NORAD Laughing in already having access to EVERY radar on and near the continent*
amazing video, you know ehat you are tslking about and the visuals are amazing, definitely earned a sub
Almost like this elon guy doesnt have a clue what hes yapping about
You've got something in common then
i can't believe this video has 10k likes and a 100/1 like to dislike ratio when he openly lies about what the plane would look like at that height
his own math proves that the plane would be at least 30 pixels wide, not a blast miner's handful
Rafael selling their Israeli air defences: I'll pretend I didn't see this video
$100k for optics is something that most military contractors are perfectly fine with spending since it makes it easier for them to find a margin. Building a thousand of them is still just $100M at the program level. And in practice it will be combined with an infrared sensing unit, which is likely the reason why newer F35s have coatings that prioritize reducing IR signatures over reducing radar signatures
"$100k for optics is something that most military contractors are perfectly fine with "
Considering that this would be cheap just for a normal A22 missile - yeah.
Yea litterally wtf. passive methods already exist and are spammed to all hell.
THEY LITTERALLY USE TV GUIDED MISSILES SINCE THE 90s. Its litterally magnitudes better now because CV has reached that point.
We litterally have optical spy satellites with 1m per pixel resolution. And that goes through way more atmosphere.
Elon Musk is an idiot, but hes not wrong here. THIS DUDE HAS LITTERALLY WORKED ON THE BUSINESS END OF MISSILES BEFORE. Even if it isnt direct engineering considerations, thats still considerable.
100k for optics you mount on a fighter jet is whatever.
Having them stationed every X miles across a border is insane.
@@ChucksSEADnDEADbut you don't need to do that either, and it wasn't suggested.
@@manwithnewname Then if it wasn't suggested what's the point? We'll just keep building F-35s, then.
Hight tech ai low light cameras when a weirdly shaped flock of birds flys over the horizon at the same time as a stealth jet
I wish one of these days Elon would put his considerable money where his mouth is, and demonstrate for us how "easy" something is. All he ever does is talk.
...This is approximately the maximally untrue statement you could have made.
Starship, Starlink, Tesla Cyber truck. He seems to be sinking the money where his mouth is. Hack he even sank some into the hyperloop with that short pipe that demonstrated the concept is Bollocks
@@asandax6 Cool, three of his three hundred projects that actually made it. Last time I checked Cybertruck was a monumental failure, so we are down to two good things. SpaceX is actually really cool, but I would say they work in spite of elon instead of thanks to him.
When Bezos finally has a useful rocket that actually does useful things and not shaped like little Bezos, I'm sure that will occur.
"The best-selling EV truck and third best-selling EV in the US is a monumental failure," he says without a hint of irony in his voice.
Very comprehensive. My only question is if temporal filtering systems can overcome the Shannon limit? Would overlaying images forward and backward in time average out the noise, but maintain consistency for the fighter? I have no idea how the limit works, and my idea does assume you can get a large quantity of photos while the jet is in one position.
I mean 10 or 20k is nothing for a military, so why not use the cameras you showed or even better ones?
If you payed attention you would see that the quality with a 16k camera is really really bad at that distance, and even 32k would be bad. The problem is you are trying to scan the entire sky for something that appears the size of a star except it doesn’t emit light. That’s not a good method to go about it, that’s why no one does it
Its funny about the optical detection of stealth aircraft, it's a plot point in a mission from Ace combat 7 where you have to dip into clouds because they have satellites with optical trackers which are guiding hypersonic missiles at your plane.
also if an f-35 got detected by a camera good luck getting a lock on it, and launching + guiding a missile.
It wouldn't be a problem.
that is how javilin missiles work.
@@somethingfunny6867Yes, and it works because it’s short range. Air to air engagements are not short range, and are increasingly getting longer every year
@@somethingfunny6867 Javs have a max range around 3 miles. The camera on it works maybe a few past that. You need to see these things over 100 miles away if you want them to be somewhat effective at killing an F-35.
@@avroarchitect1793 yes you have the same issues with all radar based systems. you can avoid by hiding at low level and breaking the line of sight
We’d never know if they were that good lol
People on here being mad at the post but OP has a point.
You CAN see stealth jets on radar but it is a specific radar which can't be used for a lock on with radar guided missles.
Combining that radar with optic A.I missles could solve the problem and look like this:
>radar detects stealth plane
>radar approximates location of jet
>radar fires optical A.I missle in its direction and tracks its location
>radar guides optical A.I rocket in the general direction of the stealth jet
>Optical A.I rocket gets a visual lock and tracks the plane until it connects
As you can see this idea isn't that bad if you combine it with other technologies.
you just reinvented IR seeking missiles no? Any light is "optical", why not focus on a hot source instead of a few grayish pixels
That's not the point. It's Musk bashing season now that he is persona non grata.
@@SwainixFPV Isn't IR vulnerable to anti-missile decoys emitting strong IR in all direction ? An optical solution based on AI may be able to recognize what is the plane among all the IR decoys. But maybe an IR-AI rocket would also be able to differentiate fake IR sources from the plane's IR ? And if optical solution becomes a thing, engineers may develop visual decoys (like small detachable objects that look like the plane), although they may struggle to make them look as big as the real plane. In this case, why not combine both visual and IR AI sensors on the rocket to make it work in any condition.
In short, AI may be able to better circumvent decoys
@mythicdawn9574 AI isn't required for any of this, IRCCM is a thing. Missiles can also guide themselves perfectly fine without AI. I would doubt any AI program currently or in the future could accurately compute the equations needed for a missile intercept. AI doesn't need to be stuffed into every little thing, we already have normal software programs that work well.
@@rh906You are severely underestimating the motivation of the military aviation tism community
I think we're missing the point here. There's two main ways stealth protects and aircraft. 1 is being spotted, and second is getting a weapons lock. The second is a huge huge advantage. But we are seeing in combat and in the field that observing the object is possible. So, I could see this AI being a marginal yet significant redundancy to add onto missiles and anti air missiles that would help complete the kill chain. Something like, we see a pea in the sky 200km away, but have to wait until 80km for a missile radar to be able to track it, or we can slap this high rez AI camera / infrared or something in a better spectrum, on it and send the missile in the general direction we know the pea is 150km away and now it can get close enough for the rest of the missile to close in and obtain a lock. So, we've now doubled the kill radius or reduced the effective standoff range of the airplane. That's Huge!