F-22和B-2能击败中国的防空系统吗？ [美国媒体]

[Quora]：Would the F-22 and B-2 be able to defeat Chinese air defense systems?

[Quora]问题：F-22和B-2能击败中国的防空系统吗？


Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty, studied at University of Antwerp
Nope.
Both system originated during the Cold War with the intention of penetrating Soviet air defences after a massive nuclear strike of some 3,000 warheads had already taken out most air defence sites.
The F-22A, as air dominance fighter, would sweep the remaining Soviet interceptors out of the sky while NATO fighter-bombers would attack Eastern Europe. The B-2A was to be used for deep penetration strikes into the heartland of the Soviet Union.
Neither system was developed to penetrate an intact air defence network. The current Chinese air defence systems can take both types on.

Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty，就读于安特卫普大学
不能。
这两种飞机都是为冷战设计的，它们的目标在于，当苏联的大多数空防设施在一场大规模的约3000枚核弹头袭击中被摧毁后，用于突破苏联的防空网。
作为空优战机的F-22A将扫除剩下的苏联拦截机，北约的战斗轰炸机会袭击东欧，B-2用来对苏联的中心地带进行打击。
这两种飞机都不具备穿透一个完整防空网的能力。目前中国的防空系统可以把它们俩解决掉。

Timothy Mauch, former Submarine sonar Chief Petty Officer at United States Navy (1976-1991)
There have been “yes” answers and “no” answers, all from people who couldn’t possibly know the answer (ESPECIALLY those from other countries).
Here’s a different perspective.

Timothy Mauch，前任美国海军潜艇声纳军士长（1976-1991）
对这个问题，有的人说“能”，有的人说“不能”，但所有人都不知道答案（尤其是对中美两国的人来说）。
人们对此有不同的观点。

The US is constantly trying new things and getting rid of old things when they don’t work anymore. Two examples:
1.  In the early-to-mid 50’s, theUSN had many “radar picket” ships, both surface ships and submarines, whosepurpose was to warn a task force about an incoming air strike. When theydeveloped early-warning aircraft (now know as AWACs) they got rid of the picketships and subs.
2.  Also in the early ‘50s, theUSAF developed the B-52 bomber, originally as a strategic bomber. When betteraircaraft were designed, did they moth-ball them? No. They repurposed them tocarpet-bomb Vietnam. When that mission dried up, did they moth-ball them? No.They repurposed them to launch cruise missiles.. Those airframes have over 60years of use, and are still going strong.

美国一直在不断研发新技术，并且在装备彻底过时后就不会再用了。有两个例子：
1.    在50年代前中期，美国海军有许多“雷达哨舰”，包括水面舰艇和潜艇，其目的是预警可能的空中打击。当他们开发出预警机（现在称为AWAC）后，美军就不再使用这些“雷达哨舰”了。
2.    同样在50年代初，美国空军开发了B-52轰炸机，它最初是一款战略轰炸机。当更好的飞机被设计出来后，它们是不是就被束之高阁了呢？不，B-52被派去越南进行地毯轰炸了。那任务完成之后呢？它们又被用来发射巡航导弹。这些飞机有超过60年的使用时间，但依然强劲。

What does that have to do with stealth aircraft?
1.    We’re still using most of theolder ones, today.
2.    We’re building more.
3.    We designing better ones.
So are the Russians, Chines, and other“western” nations.
We wouldn’t be doing that if they were nolonger effective, now, would we?
I’ve noticed, over the last few months,that the greatest military nay-sayers on Quora against the USN, USAF, USMC, andUSA, all come from countries that don’t have much of a military force of theirown. Sour grapes, perhaps?

那这和隐形飞机有什么关系呢？
1.    今天我们所用的多数是以前的老装备。
2.    我们正在生产更多装备。
3.    我们还在设计更好的装备。
俄罗斯、中国和其他西方国家也是如此。
如果这些装备不再有效，我们还会留着它们吗？
最近几个月我注意到，在Quora上有几个小瞧美国海军、空军、海军陆战队和陆军的家伙跳得很欢，他们都来自那些没啥军事力量的弱国。这怕不是在酸吧？

Dmitro Novosad, M.S. Systems Engineering& Robotics, Kyiv Polytechnic Institute (2016)
They are not supposed to defeat air defensesystems, so no, not alone anyway. Air defense systems will be overloaded withhundreds of targets first (UAV’s, decoys, cruise missiles, jamming e t c), thenafter revealing their locations their radars will be destroyed with advancedcruise missiles and anti-radiation missiles. Then the B-2’s would fly over allthat mess to release their loads over the strategic targets with F-35s takingout what's left of the tactical targets (SAM launchers and other stuff) At thesame time F-22’s and F-15’s will be busy protecting all the other platformsfrom the Chinese air to air threats.
And yeah, don't forget about the Chinesenavy, someone will have to deal with them too.
P.S. You’d be surprised, but there’s nomention of low observeability (LO) aircraft in the current US counter airdefense doctrine (JP 3–01)

Dmitro Novosad，毕业于基辅理工学院（2016），系统工程与机器人技术专业硕士
它俩不应该去对付防空系统，所以不能打败中国的防空网，这活不该它们去做。作战时防空系统首先会在对付数百个目标（无人机、诱饵弹、巡航导弹、干扰弹之类的）时超载并暴露位置，接着会被先进的巡航导弹和反雷达导弹摧毁。此时B-2会来轰炸战略目标，F-35会解决掉别的战术目标（萨姆导弹发射器和别的东西）。与此同时，F-22和F-15会保护它们免遭中国空军的威胁。
对了，别忘记中国海军，也得有人去对付他们。
P.S. 别惊讶，目前美国空军的突防理论里真没提到隐形飞机

Tom Watkins, I taught flying in my 21 yrsin the Navy and have 6,600 flight hours.
Yes…but not because of the abilities of thetwo A/C. It would be our tactics that would win.
First we blind them and then cut off theirability to communicate and coordinate. Then we take out their defensivemissiles and aircraft. Then we take out their tactical command centers,transportation and supply systems, in that order. Much of this would be donewith stand-off weapons.

Tom Watkins，我在海军教了21年开飞机，有6600小时的飞行时间
能……但不是因为这两个飞机的作用，而是我们的战术会带给我们胜利。
首先，我们要致盲他们，切断他们的交流协调能力。然后解决掉它们的防御导弹和飞机，接着干掉他们的战术指挥中心、运输和供应系统。这些事情都由远程武器来搞定。

First we launch anti-radar missiles (ARM)like the HARM AGM-88 from a stand-off position (70 to 90 miles away). At over1,400 MPH, they will be nearly impossible to knock down and a swarm would wouldguarantee a kill of the enemy defensive radars and their missile guidanceradars. These attacks will be supplemented with cruise missiles fired fromoff-shore to target the larger missile sites and command centers and air forcebases.
Then the F-22’s and cruise missiles wouldtake out as many of the enemy fighters as possible on the ground and then inthe air using air-to-air missiles (AAM) like the AIM-7, AIM-9 and AMRAAM). Mostground attacks will be with smart bombs and most AAM’s will be beyond visiblerange encounters. The newest BVRAAMs have a 100 mile range.

我们先从远处（70-90英里远）发射类似哈姆AGM-88的反雷达导弹（ARM），在1400多英里/小时的速度加持下，它们几乎不可能被击落。大规模发射能保证摧毁敌方的防御雷达和导弹制导雷达。这些攻击将辅以从海上发射的巡航导弹，它们会攻击导弹发射场、指挥中心和空军基地。
然后F-22和巡航导弹将尽可能把敌人的飞机消灭在起飞前。空战中会使用空空导弹（如AIM-7“麻雀”、AIM-9“响尾蛇”、阿姆拉姆）。对地攻击会使用制导炸弹。大多数空空导弹都是在视距外发射的，最新型的超视距空空导弹能在100英里外发射。

Then the B-2’s will come in at night athigh altitude and smart bomb the missile sites, then the communications sitesand then the tactical command center sites and then the supply chain.
The strategic command centers and the headsof government will be allowed to live long enough to surrender. If they don’tby the time the rest of the targets are exhausted, then they are next.

然后，B-2会在夜晚进入高空，对导弹发射场进行轰炸，接着是通信站点、战术指挥中心和补给线。
战略指挥中心和政府的头头能活得够久来让他们投降。如果在最后期限前没投降，他们就会是下一个目标。

Of course the Chinese have defenses forthis kind of an attack but we also have our own counter-meaures and CCM,overload and swarm tactics and simply effective weapons that will eventuallydefeat their defenses. This approach would be to simply roll forward acrosstheir defenses in a sequential manner.
An alternative tactic might be to drop ahigh altitude EMP burst weapon about every 700 miles across the battle front totake out all of their unhardened electronics. It is very difficult to hardencommunications equipment against EMP and especially radar.
The F22 and B2 are very effective at whatthey do but it is their weapons systems and tactics that will win the fight.

当然，中国人有防御这种进攻的手段，但我们也有反制措施。饱和攻击会让他们的防御超载，群体战术和简单高效的武器最终会打破他们的防御，方法就是简单地碾压过去。
另一种策略可以是在战场前方每700英里放置一个高空EMP（电磁脉冲）武器，可以解决掉他们所有未经加强的电子设备。加强对EMP的防御是十分困难的，尤其是雷达等通信设备。
F-22和B-2在它们的工作上非常有效，我们的武器和战术会让我们赢得这场战争的胜利。

What the Chinese and Russians and Iraniansand others have done to offset the stealth technology is to go back to a WWIItechnology - RF/DF but updated with modern technology.
RCS is only effective and for only a shortperiod of time when an aircraft is trying to penetrate national boundarydefenses in a clandestine attack. During that brief period, the aircraft canshut down all emissions and go completely passive. That limits detection tovisual, sound and IR or very sophisticated radars.

中国、俄罗斯、伊朗和其他国家在破解隐形方面的努力不过是二战技术的现代进化版——找到飞机的电磁频率。
只有当隐形战机试图秘密穿越国界时，它的雷达截面积（RCS）才能被短时间探测到。就算在这短暂的时间里，飞机也可以关闭所有尾焰，进入完全静默的状态。这又限制了基于视觉、声音、红外辐射或是复杂雷达的探测。

That can’t last long. They need their radarto spot other aircraft and to navigate and they often need voice, data andvideo transmissions to make effective use of their complex integrated weaponssystems. In fact, if our modern combat aircraft could not emit any RF at all, asignificant portion of their weapons systems would be of no use. We have beenmoving toward fully integrated and networked combat weapon systems at least adecade and most of our aircraft, artillery, ships and even the foot soldierrelies heavily on that network.
PDS is the new fire control system. PassiveDetection Systems simply listen on a broad band receiver for any RF emissionsfrom the aircraft, triangulate and then send fighters or missiles. PDS issufficiently accurate to vector interceptors or missiles to the vicinity of thepenetrating aircraft so that their radars, IR detectors, Visual contact and/orRF homing can zero in on the aircraft to guide their weapons or intercept. Thismakes stealth and low RCS mostly obsolete.

他们不可能把雷达一直用来寻找隐形战斗机。他们的雷达还要用于寻找定位其他飞机和进行导航。他们需要声音、数据和视频传输来使整套综合武器系统高效地运作。如果我们的现代化战斗机一点电磁辐射都不发出的话，他们的大部分武器都会失效。我们已经向着高度集成化和网络化的作战武器系统迈进至少10年了，我们的大多数飞机、火炮、舰艇甚至步兵都严重依赖于该网络。
现在开发出了一套新的火控系统PDS（无源探测系统）。这套系统只需在宽频带接收机上监听敌机的任何电磁辐射，进行三角测量定位，就可以为战机和导弹导航。PDS系统的精确度很高，可以把拦截器或导弹送到突防的飞机附近，让敌机的雷达、红外探测器、视觉探测系统等失效。这套系统让隐身和低RCS技术很大程度上过时了。

In WWII, Up until they used radar, thedetection method of choice was high frequency direction finding (HF/DF) or“HuffDuff”. Very simple - just use a broad band receiver and a very directionalantenna and then rotate the antenna. The strongest signal comes from thedirection of the enemy’s emissions.
For a while, this was countered bysomething called frequency agility but newer technology can detect that also.Note that this works even if you cannot decrypt the signal that you receive andnew digital systems can detect even very brief transmissions.
In a way, this negates one of the majoradvantages of most of our more recent combat aircraft and without their stealthdefenses, they lose a lot of their advantage.

在第二次世界大战中，人们使用雷达时，采取的是高频测向的方法。这套方法非常简单——只需使用宽频带接收机和指向天线，旋转天线即可。信号最强的方向就是敌人的方向。
这套方法在一段时间中被频率捷变的东西克制，但在新技术下无所遁形。新技术能够检测到非常简短的传输。
也就是说，这消除了我们现在大多数战机的优势——即失去了隐形防御。

Of course, we know all about thisvulnerability and have tactics to counter it. One, of course, is the stand-offattack of the very detection devices that would be used in PDS. Once thosedetectors are wiped out, then we would regain a lot of advantage. Timing, speedand initial stealth would be critical but the reality is that a fast, lowflying, small cruise missile or a hyper-velocity homing missile are verydifficult to defend against. North Korea has relatively old technology systemsand are generally regarded as being easy to defeat and destroy. Chinese airdefense systems are a little better but still not state-of-the-art and not insufficient quantity to provide an effective defense around their entire border.
The bottom line is that at great expense,the US has a technological and tactical advantage that is hard to defendagainst. The expense comes from using $500,000 bombs and $130 million aircraft.Even a very brief conflict would cost hundreds of billions of dollars.Afghanistan has cost well over $1 trillion so far.

当然，我们知道这套系统的漏洞，并有对应的策略。其中之一就是对PDS中监测设备的攻击。一旦这些探测器被摧毁，我们将恢复优势。时间、速度和基础隐形将至关重要。但是现实中，一个快速、低飞的巡航导弹或超高速自导导弹是很难防御的。朝鲜古老的技术体系通常被认为很容易摧毁，中国的防空系统稍微好一些，但也不是最先进的，他们也没有足够的数量来对整个边界进行有效防御。
美国耗费巨大所成的巨大技术和战术优势是难以抵御的。这笔费用包括50万美元的炸弹和1.3亿美元的战斗机。即使非常短暂的冲突也会耗费数千亿美元。阿富汗战场目前的投入已超过1万亿美元。
（译者：这个老美的用语实在是太单调了，经常感觉指代不清；但是他又用了很多专业术语，相当不好翻译，如有错漏请多多包涵）

Ricky Rajesh, former Sr. Software Engineerat Mindtree (2011-2014)
If we practice a thing for long we would bemasters in it.
USA is a master in war tactics and theycarry huge experience with them. Just don’t confine them with available planeslike F22 or B2 spirit. It’s all about war tactics.
Tactic or plan can be mastered by repitiveimplementation which I believe in this case goes to the USA.
China got better radar equipment and eventhe stealth fighters. But when it comes to how to use them in a strategic way..I don’t think so they are so mastered compared to the USA.
Given that world doesn’t understand aboutthe full capabilities of F22 or B2 spirit which are always in a combat readystatus. I believe they can evade the air defense systems of China.
China’s stealth fighter is available fromlast couple of years ??!
F22 is available with USA from past 10years atleast ??! How many secret experiments and real fight simulations theymust have undergone by this time!

Ricky Rajesh，Mindtree前高级软件工程师（2011-2014）
（译者：Mindtree是印度的一家软件公司）
一件事情练习多次，你就会成为大师。
美国是战争策略方面的大师，他们有丰富的经验。要做到这一点（指穿透中国防空网），不应限制只可使用F-22和B-2。这是个战术问题。
战术和策略可以在反复尝试中验证，我相信美国充满这方面的经验。
中国有不错的雷达，甚至也有隐形战机，但在这方面的战术上，能比肩美国我是不信的。
鉴于世界上对F-22和B-2的完全实力并不了解，我相信它们能穿越中国的防空系统。
中国在近几年才刚研究出隐形飞机，而美国至少10年前就有F-22了！这么长的时间里他们得进行了多少次的秘密实验和战斗模拟！

Volker Hetzer, Software Developer (1996-present)
In a hollywood scenario, with the Chinesesitting around idly until some ground based radar shows a dot, probably.
However, China is not Somalia and a warbetween China and the US will start in space and be decided by missiles.Aircraft will play at most a minor role.
Forget the F-22 because it would requireeither a very suicidal Japan or a carrier and the carriers are no longerthreats as they rely on being outside the range of Chinese missiles orsubmarines.
The few bombers would be spotted eitherfrom above, or with indirect radar.

Volker Hetzer，软件开发者（1996-至今）
在好莱坞电影里，中国人可能会无所事事地坐在一旁，直到地面雷达上显示了一个点后才被惊醒。
然而，中国不是索马里，中美之间的战争将从太空开始，由导弹决胜负，飞机可能是最不重要的角色。
忘掉F-22吧，它真要发挥作用的话，除非日本送死或者牺牲掉一艘航空母舰（航母会进入中国导弹或潜艇的攻击范围内）。
少数几架B-2会被卫星或者间接雷达发现。

Filip Vidinovski, Science Editor at ArsLamina Publishing (2015-present)
It depends on the exact meaning of “defeat”in “…defeat Chinese air defense systems”.
“Defeat” could mean destroying Chinese airdefense systems. In that case: no. F-22 and B-2, in prsent numbers, areprobably not enough for neutralization of Chinese air defense.
But, “defeat” could also mean attack anarbitrary target in China with the Chinese air defence failing to protect it.In that case: yes. F-22 and B-2 probably could attack any target defended byChinese air defense, no matter where in China.

Filip Vidinovski，ArsLamina Publishing的科学编辑（2015-至今）
这取决于你怎么定义“击败”中国的防空系统。
“击败”可能意味着摧毁中国的防空系统，要是这样的话，答案是“不能”。目前F-22和B-2的数量不足以抵消掉中国的空防力量。
但是“击败”也可以指攻击了中国的某个目标，而中国防空系统没能保护好它。那样的话，答案是“能”。无论是中国的哪一处，F-22和B-2都能攻击到。