STEALTH TECHNOLOGY: PROGRESS IN CONCEALING PLANES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP92B00478R000800340005-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 23, 2013
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: May 31, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/23: CIA-RDP92B00478R000800340005-2
11,
TUESDAY MORNING, 31 MAY1983
NEW YORK TIMES 31 May 1983 Pg. 17
Stealth Technology: Progress in Concealing Planes
By DREW MIDDLETON
The United States apPears to be win-
ning the race with Soviet antiaircraft
defenses with its effort to produce
Stealth bombers and cruise missiles
virtually undetectable by radar.
Air Force sources report steady
progress, though they con-
cede that any innovative
program can be delayed by
"unknown unknowns" that
crop up when designers
venture into a completely
sew field, making a plane that cannot
tie detected by radar. A Prototype has
yet to be produced.
As things stand now, Stealth technolo-
gy, a combination of materials, coat-
ings, designs and surface shapes that
absorb or deflect rather than reflect
radar beams, will concentrate first on
the production of 100 B-1B long-range
bombers. There have been reports that
the Air Force is also developing a
Stealth fighter. According to current
planning; the 100 B-1B's should be
operational by 1986 at a cost estimated
at $20 billion. The plans also call for 110
Stealth craft known as Advanced Tech-
ritilogy Bombers, to be operational by
the early 1990's at an estimated cost of
$30 billion.
Critics Doubt a Need
Critics of these programs in Congress
and in the military-academic corn-
',nullity question whether both pro-
grams are needed. The Mr Force an-
swer is that the age of the B-52 bomber
force demands deploying of the B-1B to
provide a bomber that will be able to
penetrate the increasingly powerful
Soviet defenses.
Some important pieces of Stealth air-
craft technology have been built into the
B-1B. The cross section of the aircraft
that will be pic,ked up by radar is less
than one square meter as against 10
mare meters in the B-1A's and the 100
square meters of the more elderly
B-52's. A meter is equal to 39.37 inches.
Several new technologies are being
blended into the Stealth bomber to re-
duce radar reflections to the point that
the enemy device registers only an un-
detectable echo. If current develop.
ments prove successful, the resulting
aircraft is likely to resemble a flying
wing.
One step is to eliminate angular parts
of the airframe. This was done with the
B1-B and helped reduce its radar signa-
ture. In designing the Stealth craft, en-
gineers are considering placing the en-
gines at the rear and atop the wings,
where the turbine blades can be hidden
from radar.
Materials to Absorb Radar
Designers also are experimenting
with radar beam-absorbing materials
that will reduce the aircraft's radar re-
flection. Delta wings made of composite
materials that are lighter and stronger
Military
Analysis
than steel or titanium are being consid-
ered. Among materials under consider-
ation are carbon and fiberglass and
fiber-reinforced airframe skins. An-
other avenue of research is experi-
ments with special paints that can ab-
sorb or deflect radar signals.
The final Stealth aircraft also will be
stripped of engine nacelles and edges
that reflect radar.
An Air Force source said that if it was
possible to visualize the final result of
these developments, the Stealth
bomber would have V-shaped delta
wings and engines integrated into the
fuselage, an improvement on the flying
wing that was flown experimentally 30
years ago.
The Defense Department's program
for both the B-1B and the Stealth
bomber is a reaction to the steady ex-
pansion of Soviet air defenses, the larg-
est in the world, built to counter bomb-
ers and cruise missiles. The cruise mis-
sile, a winged jet-powered bomb, is de-
signed to avoid enemy radar by flying
close to the ground. It has a radar and
computer system that guides it over ir-
regularities in terrain.
The Military Balance, a publication
Issued by the International Institute for
Strategic Studies in London, reports
that the Soviet Air Defense Force in-
cludes 10,000 surface-to-air missile
launchers on 1,400 fixed sites, 13,000
launcher rails, 7,000 warning systems
with ground-control intercepting radar
sets, satellites and electronic warfare
systems, 2,250 interceptor aircraft and
9,000 pieces of antiaircraft artillery._
The Air Force's answer to these for-
midable figures is a bomber that will be
almost invisible to radar and will be
able to hug the ground at altitudes of 200
feet or less.
Current emphasis is on the Stealth
bomber9But highly qualified but unoffi-
cal sources report the Air Force is also
developing a Stealth fighter. One report
Is that this plane's airframe will be built
of a new composite material made of
glass fibers woven into a plastic base.
Additionally, the Air Force is moving
toward development of an advanced
cruise missile program that will be a
follow-up to the AGM-86B air-launched
cruise missile. Soviet progress in the
development of "look down" radar that
would spot the original cruise missile
and the advances in Stealth technology
for bombers prompted the switch to the
development of an advanced cruise
missile that woUld be impervious to
radar.
New Designs for Missile
New cruise missile designs that in-
corporate engines that may be made of
plastic parts and offer low fuel con-
sumption and greater resistance to hos-
tile radar are the goals. Two engines
now under consideration would raise
the cruise missile's rangg to 1,600 miles
NEW YORK TIMES
31 May 1983 Pg.19
Pentagon Is Criticized
For Inauguration Role
WASHINGTON, May 30 (AP) ? Mili-
tary personnel were improperly as-
signed to be ushers and social aides for
President Reagan's inauguration, Con-
gressional auditors said today.
The General Accounting Office study,
requested and released by Senator Wil-
liam Proxmire, Democrat of Wiscon-
sin, is the latest chapter in a long dis-
pute over the role of the Pentagon in
Presidential inaugural ceremonies.
Senator Proxmire said $1.8 million of
the cost of Mr. Reagan's inauguration
in 1981 came out of the Pentagon's
budget and should be repaid, by the
Presidential Inauguration Committee.
Military participation in inaugura-
tions is not new, but the G.A.O. said the
Pentagon's role has increased in recent
years. The researchers cited tense
Department figures showing 11,430
armed forces personnel providedsup-
port for activities associated with Mr.
Reagan's inauguration. According 'to
Mr. Proxmire, 8,329 military personnel
were used in the inatiguration of Presi-
dent Carter in 1977.
The G.A.O., an arm of Congress that
audits the performance of Government
agencies, questioned the assignment of
members of the armed services to such
Inaugural chores as personal escort, so-
cial aide, usher and chauffeur. They
also took part in the inaugural parade,
acted and parade route cordons, re-
moved snow and provided security.
from 1,500 miles.
The reduction of aircraft noise is a
relatively minor problem in the Stealth
development. Sound-absorbing materi-
als in engine housings, redesigned tur-
bine blades and new engines are ex-
pected to deal with the noise Problem.
While Air Force officers concede that
the Stealth program is a race with
Soviet efforts to improve radar and
other detection devices, they point out
that such a race is part of superpower
competititon. As an example, they cite
the race to establish a sure means of
submarine detection. And, they warn,
as long as the Soviet Union and the'
United States are military rivals, the
competition will continue.
5
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/23: CIA-RDP92B00478R000800340005-2
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/23: CIA-RDP92B00478R000800340005-2
TUESDAY MORNING, 31 MAY 1983
WASHINGTON POST 31 May 1983 Pg. 21
Philip .Geyelin
Covert' Means Last Resor
and adtually contributing to the insur-
gents' proclaimed purpose of overthrow-
ing the government in Managua.
But the minority members speak of
"attempting to disarm or neutralize
Nicaragua" in a way that ,unmasks
their .(and Ronald Reagan's) real de-
sign: to undo the past by replacing.the
Sandinista regime with one more con-
genial to U.S. interests. It is, with ap-
propriate modification, the "Bay of
Pigs" mentality at work. , .. ?
The majority argument, quite sim-
ply, is that this Won't work. The CIA
will be "hurt" by being asked to "con-
tinue an action whose principal ele-
ments are known to all the world." And
this common knowledge will fuel, hos-
tile propaganda in a hemisphere with
long memories of. heavyahanded and
imperious Yanqui intervention. .
More important., if the administra-
tion's own'cries of alarm are to be
tiken seriouslyb the year-long "inter-
diction" mission has failed; when it fits
the administration argument of the
moment, we are told that El Salvador
is endangered by an ever incrensing
flow of supplies from Nicaragua.
The administration (and the com-
mittee Republicans) would also have
us believe that inciting insurgency in
Nicaragua will turn the Sandinista
government inward in its own defense,
discourage external adventurism, en-
courage a willingness to negotiate. To
which the committee Democrats re-
spond that the results have been just
the opposite: ?
"Inflicting 'a bloody nose on nations
achieves a purpose no different with
nations than with individuals. It tends
to instill a deep desire to return the
favor. The Sandinistas are no different.
Their .polieies. We not iieftened: They
have hardened." _
- OSAupported
Nicaraguan insurgency actually "tenth
to bind the Nicaraguan population:-
even those with little enthusiasm for
the .Sandinistas?together against the
threat of attack."
The Democrats argue that their
open approach is the best way to show
U.S.. determination and commitment.
The RepubliCani. answer nada like a
declaration of bankruptcy: "With the
stakes so high and with the uncertainty
of U.S. resolve, the governments, in
Central America would be unwilling to
work with us in the overt progriun to
reduce the flow of eiternal support to .
the Salvadoran guerrillas." .
In the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs
:debacle in 1961, President Kennedy
wanted a postmortem from someone in
the White House who had not been di-
reed); involved so he asked Walt Ros-
tow for a recapitulation of how it went
so Wron ? ? . ?
. g..
-. The. report was. secret. But. I recall
Judelibly what .Roatow told me. was. his
'.bottom line leaving aside the execu-
iron .operation, he thought it
only fair td.bear in mind- that "the CIA
only gets terminal cases" when conven-
fibnarmeans have failed. The CIA was
ling. asked to undo covertly what the
policymakers on-high had been. Unable
tO..prevent overtly, for whatever rea-
sons:. lack ? of foresight; ideological
hang-ups; domestic political. inhibi-
tions; clumsy diplomacy; g mistrust .of
the potential of timely foreign aid. ? ?
Rostow's rule of last resort goes to the
heart Of the.eurient Controversy .over . the
Reagan. administration's Central Amer-
ican policy as .it is nicely laid out in a re-
cent report the House Permanent Sc-
it Committee on Intelligence. .
Contrary to the complaints of...gome
criticewho.would have preferred a mish-
mash of bipartisan compromise, the
force of this report is -in the refreshing
party-line precision with which the issue
is joined: The nine Democratic commit-
tee members tell why they voted to.end
covert. CIA support to insurgent forces
inside Nicaragua? while voting an extra
*80 Million in .overt help to Honduras
and El Salvador.. The money would
mostly be for building barriers and in-
stalling radar, sensors and other sophis-
ticated equipment to 'choke off Nicara-
gua's supply. lines to the leftist rebels in ?
El Salvador: The flVe Republicans
tell
whY they think ..thia :approach would
gravely undercut' the Reagan Policy.
The argument,was.overnmeans,.how-
ever, not ? ends. The .importance . of El
Salvador's salvation from communism
is taken as a given. So is the Marxist-
Leninist inenace from. Nicaragua. The
Salvadar:nteurgeney. "depends ? for
its upon outside assistance
froin NiMragunand.Cubai" the Demo-
._
eratic majority freely concedes.
At this -Phint we 'confront Woarow'a
Rule: the committee Republicans would
turn the patient oveito. theCIA.for
cv-
ert treatment. They are Careful' to argue
a distinction hetwhen covertly . aiding
NicareguanhIseigfor the piupoee of
"interdicting" supplies to El Salvador'
(which is..allAhe current law. permits)
WASHINGTON POST
31 May 1983
Pg. 16
I.S., to ?..c.nitplt.te
New Agreement on Military Bases
MANILA?The United States
and the Philippines will sign a new
multi-million_ dollar, five-year mil-
itary belies agreement governing the
use of two of America's largest over-
seas installations, it was officially an-
nounced yesterday.
? The announcement said the ac-
cord, to. be signed Wednesday, in-
cludes a !substantial compensation
package" from the United States,
but gave no figure, United-Press In-
ternational reported. ' ?
Howevei, Filipino sources said the
amount would ,be between $900 mil-
lion and .$1" billion. The new figure
would amount to a substantial in-
crease over the $500. million in the
last five-year agreement, but is lea
than the $1.5 billion the Philippines
was reportedly seeking.
The :United States operates two
major military installations in the
Philippines?Clark Air Base and
Subic Bay Naval Base. .
PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
28 May 1983 (31)
Pg. 5
Per** 2 test-firing
a success, Army says
IMIted Ptess literiyatoftal
CAPt .cA?riatitiL. ? The
Army .succesfally test-fired a Per-
shing 2,missiltoteat,i44?441 .981).
nille;flight 1MQ: 14 A141111:1; wean
south of Bermuda.
"As. far, as we now :know, every.
thing looked jusu fine Said Dave
tiarrAsiffp..0eqnlat for the U.S. Army
missile comae-lid at trutits4we, Ala.
It 3i the IOW Pirs1040 test ri!ght.
In pecetpher, 101 Of the Interim:di-
aid-range lifidailed to
be
If, that's so?if our friends won't
work openly with us in their own de-
fense?then the U.S. position may be
so weak that it cannot be salvaged by
either overt or covert means. But
overt-versus-covert is nonetheless what
the current debate is all about. And
Rostatv's Buie is an apt reminder that
when you are talking "covert," you are
talking last resort.
6
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/23: CIA-RDP92B00478R000800340005-2