- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How do air fuel tankers not signal where a stealth plane is?
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:27 pm
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:27 pm
Phryctoria was the Greek method of a Fire signal with a secret message from mountain to mountain.
I promise this will make sense.
Sure the B2 evades most/all detection. (The undetected message)
But the K46 or KC135 is not stealth. (Greek mtn top)
So I assume that sophisticated militaries could track the tankers and possibly get an idea on where the stealth bombers are.
How do you make the Stealth refuel without being g detected near the tankers.
I promise this will make sense.
Sure the B2 evades most/all detection. (The undetected message)
But the K46 or KC135 is not stealth. (Greek mtn top)
So I assume that sophisticated militaries could track the tankers and possibly get an idea on where the stealth bombers are.
How do you make the Stealth refuel without being g detected near the tankers.
16
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:28 pm to dstone12
They stay at standoff distance and refuel there before the stealth stuff penetrates.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:31 pm to dstone12
You don’t refuel in contested air space or within range of enemy radar.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:31 pm to dstone12
B-2's reported range is 6,000 nautical miles.
We have multiple tankers in the area holding at different locations.
They won't be anywhere near the target when they refuel.
We have numerous bases all over the region where they could land if need be.
We have multiple tankers in the area holding at different locations.
They won't be anywhere near the target when they refuel.
We have numerous bases all over the region where they could land if need be.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:31 pm to dstone12
They not refueling over iran. 
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:32 pm to LSU2a
quote:
You don’t refuel in contested air space or within range of enemy radar.
This is probably where he’s missing it. Defense radar has range and can only see so far. It can’t effectively see a refueling area.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:35 pm to dstone12
You gotta be shittin me bruh, you think they are flying with a Wilber Wright fast tank?
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:36 pm to Sput
As an aside, as much as I oppose this “neocon” foreign policy bullshite, seeing our hardware at work will never not be impressive.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:37 pm to dstone12
Much like you don't stop for gas in ATL at 3am, you dont refuel over enemy territory.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:37 pm to dstone12
Because they are only together while refueling.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:37 pm to Bigbens42
quote:
seeing our hardware at work will never not be impressive.
Well we do make the best stuff.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:41 pm to UptownJoeBrown
quote:
Well we do make the best stuff.
Well tell the idiots to stop trying to cancel the F35. That thing is going to dominate the skies for the next three decades.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:41 pm to tigafan4life
quote:
They not refueling over iran.
It doesn’t have to be Iran. What about Russia or China? Can you answer the question now?
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:43 pm to dstone12
Near the forward edge of the battle area is where you will find things like tankers and AWACS.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:45 pm to dstone12
quote:They wouldn't refuel over contested airspace. This isn't hard to understand.
They not refueling over iran.
It doesn’t have to be Iran. What about Russia or China? Can you answer the question now?
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:51 pm to Night Vision
quote:
B-2's reported range is 6,000 nautical miles.
We have multiple tankers in the area holding at different locations.
They won't be anywhere near the target when they refuel.
We have numerous bases all over the region where they could land if need be.
FYI, China's whole developing strategy is to detect and take out our tankers and AWACS planes at 1500+ mile ranges from their coast. Our own simulations at RAND corp. predict this would neutralize both our long range air-based and carrier-based aircraft. This is one of the reasons the Navy is concentrating so much on their stealth drone tanker, the MQ-25 Stingray. The Chinese are also developing pulse-millimeter wave radar sets that are better at detecting shaped + RAM absorbent aircraft. They're also developing some passive measures designed to work hand in hand for long range detection.
Bottom line, the "just fuel them 500 miles away" strategy is going to be obsolete soon.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:53 pm to Bigbens42
quote:
Well tell the idiots to stop trying to cancel the F35. That thing is going to dominate the skies for the next three decades.
LOL, the F-35 is not the "best stuff". F-22 pilots call it "Fat Amy" and make fun of it. The F-35 is a big, expensive compromise because the F-22 was even more expensive.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:54 pm to Kcrad
quote:. Respectfully id like to ask you this:
They wouldn't refuel over contested airspace. This isn't hard to understand.
Chinese and Russian capability to track a KC 135 over pacific isn’t impossible. And I am certain that the range of a b2 is 6k.
It’s 5k to moscow and 7k to Beijing.
A b2 has to refuel twice to Beijing. China has better tracking than Iran. And who knows what their offense is for planes over the Arctic circle or pacific.
Just wondering if refuelers can give a general idea of where stealths are over two or three fill ups.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:55 pm to DesScorp
Which means we step up advanced capabilities to render the Chinese stolen assets useless.
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:58 pm to DesScorp
quote:
LOL, the F-35 is not the "best stuff". F-22 pilots call it "Fat Amy" and make fun of it. The F-35 is a big, expensive compromise because the F-22 was even more expensive.
The F35 is the multi-role plane of the future. Yeah, it doesn’t dogfight (it actually can, better than most 4th gens) but dogfighting is an antiquated tactic and that isn’t what it was built to do. It’s like being mad at modern tanks because they have a worse turning circle than mounted cavalry.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News