Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!dptg!ulysses!andante!princeton!njin!rutgers!att!cbnews!military From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: B-2 Question Message-ID: <8801@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 4 Aug 89 13:06:28 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Lines: 27 Approved: military@att.att.com From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: "Andrew P. Berman" >... how did they knock down enemy aircraft before the >invention of radar, and could those tactics be used against the B-2? The quick answers are "with difficulty" and "yes, but". They used what they could: binoculars by day, searchlights by night, listening equipment to spot engine noise, intelligence reports on aircraft movements and possible targets. It didn't really work terribly well, which is why radar was such a tremendous improvement. If you want an example, look at the trouble Britain had during WW2. They had a good early-warning radar network looking outward, but virtually no radar coverage within the country. This led to a lot of groping in the dark (sometimes literally, for night raids!) when it came to actually putting fighters into contact with bombers. The pre-radar methods, and modern versions of same, are probably good enough to cause serious attrition in a stealth-bomber force in a prolonged campaign. Stopping a single attack cold, which is what's really wanted for a nuclear war, is much harder. With something of effectiveness comparable to radar, it *might* be feasible; without, no. Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu