I've been digging around files on my computer and I found a collection of articles that I've collected in the past on Stealth Technology and ways to defeat it. Take a look!

It's a collage of a bunch of different articles, so it's quite long. You might need to scroll for the good parts.

What is Stealth Technology?
Stealth refers to the act of trying to hide or evade detection. It is not so much a technology as a concept that incorporates a broad series of technologies and design features. As a concept, stealth is nothing new, having been invented by the first caveman to cover himself with leaves so that he could sneak up on a dim-witted antelope. Soldiers hid behind trees. Submarines hid under the waves to sneak up on ships, and it was submarines that first used special coatings on their periscopes to avoid radar detection during World War II.

For airplanes, stealth first meant hiding from radar. After World War II, various aircraft designers and strategists recognized the need to design planes that did not have large radar signatures (a radar signature is how big the airplane appears on radar from a specific angle and distance; it is often referred to as the "radar cross section"). But their ability to hide from radar was limited for many years for several reasons. One major limitation was aircraft designers' inability to determine exactly how radar reflected off an airplane.

In the nineteenth century, Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell developed a series of mathematical formulas to predict how electromagnetic radiation would scatter when reflected from a specific geometric shape. His equations were later refined by the German scientist, Arnold Johannes Sommerfield. But for a long time, even after aircraft designers attempted to reduce radar signatures for aircraft like the U-2 and A-12 OXCART in the late 1950s, the biggest obstacle to success was the lack of theoretical models of how radar reflected off a surface. In the 1960s, Russian scientist Pyotr Ufimtsev began developing equations for predicting the reflection of electromagnetic waves from simple two-dimensional shapes. His work was regularly collected and translated into English and provided to U.S. scientists. By the early 1970s, a few U.S. scientists, mathematicians, and aircraft designers began to realize that it was possible to use these theories to design aircraft with substantially reduced radar signatures. Lockheed Aircraft, working under a contract to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, soon began development of the F-117 stealth fighter.

Aircraft designers generally describe an airplane's radar cross section in terms of "decibel square meters," or dBsm. This is an analogy that compares the plane's radar reflectivity to the radar reflectivity of an aluminum sphere of a certain size. The B-2 reportedly has a radar signature of an aluminum marble. The F-22 Raptor interceptor is roughly the same, and the F-117 is only slightly less stealthy. The newer Joint Strike Fighter has the signature of an aluminum golf ball. The older B-1 bomber, designed during the 1970s and 1980s, is about the size of a three-foot (one-meter)-diameter sphere, whereas the 1950s-era B-52 Stratofortress, a monstrously non-stealthy airplane, has an enormous radar cross section of a 170-foot (52-meter)-diameter sphere. The size of an aircraft has little relationship to its radar cross section, but its shape certainly does.

When designing a stealth aircraft, engineers try to either absorb radar energy or deflect it away from the radar receiver. They absorb it with special materials or "trap" it within the airplane's structure. They deflect it by carefully designing the structure. Certain parts of an aircraft structure are notorious for reflecting radar energy. Cockpits, for instance, bounce radar straight back to the source, so they must be carefully designed and coated with special materials. Engine inlets are often designed so that the radar energy cannot go straight into them and reach the face of the turbine blades. Instead, the radar energy is bounced back and forth inside the inlet. Tail surfaces are sharply angled, rather than vertical, so that they bounce radar in a different direction.
Stealth does not always refer to radar. Reducing an aircraft's heat signature is also important. This is usually done by channeling the engine exhaust through long tubes and mixing it with cooler outside air.

Because radar can still detect very small radar signatures, stealth aircraft are also operated in a careful manner and assisted by other aircraft. For instance, they try to avoid certain radars and operate in conjunction with aircraft designed to jam enemy radar. They try to hide in the electromagnetic "noise" of the battlefield.

While stealth was a major effort of aircraft designers of the 1980s and 1990s, the widespread availability of powerful computers and knowledge of stealth techniques has meant that it is no longer difficult to design an aircraft with some stealth characteristics, although achieving the degree of stealth incorporated into the F-117 or the B-2 is still difficult. Today, the research emphasis has shifted to developing various systems that can be used with a stealth aircraft, such as radar and weapons that will not be easily detected. Naturally, there is also an effort among missile and radar designers to develop systems that can detect stealth aircraft. Low-frequency radar will spot virtually any stealthy aircraft but is bad at determining its exact location. Communications networks enabling a defensive system to combine information and locate a target also connect these and other radars. Other systems attempt to pick up radio and television signals that may bounce off a stealthy airplane.
The development of stealthy airplanes teaches several important lessons about technology. The first is that often many different technologies must be combined to achieve a desired outcome. An advance in one field, such as materials or aerodynamics, must be accompanied by advances in other fields, such as computing or electromagnetic theory. The second lesson is that sometimes trial and error techniques are insufficient and advances in mathematical theory are necessary in order to achieve significant advances. Finally, stealth teaches the lesson that technology is never static - a "stealth breakthrough" may only last for a few years before an adversary finds a means of countering it.

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Evolution_of_Technology/Stealth_tech/Tech18.htm

British Team Claims to Detect Stealth Aircraft?

A British research and development company, which claims to have invented a method to detect stealth aircraft, has clammed up on details about its technology.

Roke Manor Research has decided not to speak to the press after UK national the Daily Telegraph ran an article on the detection system. Roke claims the Telegraph misquoted the company's head of projects. [The truth or arse covering? - you decide, Ed]

The system uses a traditional mobile phone network to detect stealth aircraft as they pass silently through the ether. Although the aircraft have advanced coatings which absorb conventional radar signals, they apparently still reflect back enough radiation emitted from mobile phone masts to be detected by special ground receivers.

The receivers are linked to a central computer which - in sync with a GPS satellite - is able to position the aircraft to within 10 metres.

The central computer could conceivably be a simple notebook operated by ground troops. Once exposed, the stealth aircraft would be easy prey for convential ground-to-air missiles.

Disabling the system would require the complete destuction of a target country's mobile phone mast network - in reality, an impossible task.

Considering the potential of this system to completely undermine the US's stealth aircraft programme, it might be reasonable to assume that the military there is taking a close interest. Not so, according to Roke Manor Research, despite claims by the Daily Telegraph.

According to the Telegraph Peter Lloyd, head of projects at the laboratory's sensor department, said: "I cannot comment in detail because it is a classified matter, but let's say the US military is very interested."

Lloyd today denied ever having said that the project was classified, or that the US military has expressed an interest. He added that the article was a "gross distortion of the truth", and that he was under instructions not to talk to the press. Details on the project have been removed from Roke Manor Research's website.

Despite the company's assertions, it is indeed unlikely that the US military has not taken a degree of 'interest' in this project. After all, the US is the only country currently actively deploying stealth aircraft - the F-117 and B-2. It also has the F-22 'Raptor' in development.

The Telegraph article claims that, according to 'military sources', the Serbs may have used a crude version of the same technology to shoot down an F-117 during the Kosovo crisis.

If this is true, then the US will be keeping a very close eye on an ingenious idea which could, at a stroke, render its multi-billion dollar stealth programme obsolete. ®

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/20/stealth_detection_system_disappears/

More Information about Stealth aircraft

A stealth aircraft is an aircraft which has been designed to absorb and deflect radar (via stealth technology); these are not completely "invisible" to radar, they are simply harder to detect than conventional technology. In general the goal is to allow a stealth aircraft to execute its attack while still outside the ability of the opposing system's detection. Stealth aircraft were most notably used during the Gulf War (1991); although stealth technology has since become less effective, the United States continues to develop stealth aircraft.

How stealth aircraft avoid detection

The main method stealth aircraft use to avoid detection is by using a body shape that deflects radar signals in a direction roughly perpendicular from the radar signals origin, rather than reflecting the signal back to enemy radar sensors. To a lesser extent, they also use a covering of some type of radar absorbing material. Stealth aircraft are also harder to detect and track via other methods:

* The normally hot exhaust is cooled by ambient air before leaving the aircraft and partially shielded from below, as a result the infrared signature of stealth aircraft is minimized.

* Stealth aircraft are painted in dark colors and typically fly at night to make visual identification more difficult.

* Stealth aircraft are not supersonic, they have no afterburners, and the exhaust nozzles are tuned for low noise rather than peak performance, making them difficult to detect via sound waves.

First-generation stealth aircraft include the F-117 Nighthawk. First-generation planes tend to be composed mostly of flat radar-deflecting surfaces that were also covered with radar absorbing materials, so as to attenuate the radar signal and deflect radar waves in a direction other than that of the radar transmitter. Second-generation aircraft include the B-2 Spirit and F-22 Raptor. The design of these aircraft benefited from sophisticated computer modeling of radar response that allowed them to incorporate curved surfaces, which are more aerodynamic than the flat surfaces on first-generation stealth aircraft.

How stealth aircraft could potentially be detected

A number of methodologies to detect stealth aircraft at long range have been developed. Both Australia and Russia have announced that they have developed processing techniques that allow them to detect the turbulence of aircraft at reasonably long ranges (possibly negating the stealth technology). The United Kingdom has announced a system that uses the signals broadcast from the huge number of cellular telephone towers to generate a synthetic picture, although it is not clear if this method is actually practical. A general feature of these systems is that they use a large number of low-accuracy radar systems (or signal sources) combined with heavy computer processing to generate tracking information. For this reason they tend to be useful only in the early warning role, and have limited applicability to guidance radars for missile systems, and are rarely portable. The problem of successfully countering stealth aircraft on the battlefield remains essentially unsolved.

Use of stealth aircraft

To date, stealth aircraft have been used in several low- and moderate-intensity conflicts, including Operation Desert Storm, Operation Allied Force and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. In each case they were employed to strike high-value targets which were either out of range of conventional aircraft in the theater or which were too heavily defended for conventional aircraft to strike without a high risk of loss. In addition, because the stealth aircraft aren't going to be dodging SAMs and AAA over the target they can aim more carefully and thus are more likely to hit the target and not cause as much collateral damage. In many cases they were used to hit the high value targets early in the campaign (or even before it), before other aircraft had the opportunity to degrade the opposing air defence to the point where other aircraft had a good chance of reaching those critical targets.

Stealth aircraft in future low- and moderate-intensity conflicts are likely to have similar roles. However, given the increasing prevalence of excellent Russian-built surface-to-air missile systems on the open market (such as the SA-10, SA-12 and SA-20 (S-300P/V/PMU) and SA-15 (9K331/332)), stealth aircraft are likely to be very important in a high-intensity conflict in order to gain and maintain air supremacy, especially to the United States who are likely to face these types of systems. It is possible to cover one's airspace with so many air defences with such long range and capability that conventional aircraft would find it very difficult "clearing the way" for deeper strikes. For example, China license-builds all of the previously mentioned SAM systems in quantity and would be able to heavily defend important strategic and tactical targets in the event of some kind of conflict, for example if there were another Korean War and China decided to intervene. Even if anti-radiation weapons are used in an attempt to destroy the SAM radars of such systems, or stand-off weapons are launched against them, these modern surface-to-air missile batteries are capable of shooting down weapons fired against them! The surprise of a stealth attack, and the ability to penetrate the air defences and survive, may become the only reasonable way of making a safe corridor through which conventional bombers and other aircraft can enter the enemy's airspace. Once stealth attacks from the smaller stealth force have neutralised the most serious of the SAM systems, the larger conventional or simply less-stealthy force should be able to suppress the remaining systems and gain air superiority.

List of manned stealth aircraft

* A-12 Avenger II - McDonnel-Douglas / General Dynamics (cancelled)
* B-2 Spirit - Northrop-Grumman (in service)
* F-35 Joint Strike Fighter - Lockheed-Martin (under development)
* Bird of Prey - Boeing (technology demonstrator)
* F-117 Nighthawk - Lockheed (in service)
* F/A-22 Raptor - Lockheed-Martin / Boeing (entering service)
* Have Blue - Lockheed (developed into F-117)
* Tacit Blue - Northrop (technology demonstrator)
* YF-23 Black Widow II - Northrop / McDonnel-Douglas (prototype built, lost competition to YF-22)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_aircraft

BAE SYSTEMS and Roke Manor Research Team to Develop Revolutionary Cellphone Radar. They claim this could detect stealth aircraft!

Dr Bill Martin of BAE Future Systems and Paul Stein, Managing Director of Roke Manor Research, shake on the CELLDAR teamingBAE SYSTEMS and Roke Manor Research are teaming to develop in depth the concept of CELLphone raDAR - CELLDAR™ - to provide a revolutionary, totally covert and innovative approach to the detection of moving air, land and sea-based objects, maturing a technology which will significantly enhance military capabilities such as air warfare, littoral operations and Homeland Defence.

The two companies have signed an agreement to fund the development of the technology, already successfully developed by Roke Manor Research, exploiting the latter's in-depth knowledge of cellphone technology through its pivotal role within Siemens, a world leader in this market place, in enabling R&D. The BAE SYSTEMS Future Systems, C4ISR and other business units will be contributing their defence domain knowledge and systems integration expertise.

CELLDAR™ uses extended multi-static radar detection and data processing for the tracking, identification and cueing of objects moving in cellphone fields. The massive world-wide investment in cellphone technology and the ability to exploit the extensive electromagnetic transmission fields created to support them presents the opportunity for CELLDAR™ to offer high-performance, long-range, low-cost detection of objects moving in space in real time to user communities.

The capability of the technology extends across all domains and will be a key enabler in future Command & Control, Communications, Computing, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) solutions. It encompasses - for instance - the detection of moving vehicles or helicopters in foliage; of small maritime objects, such as periscopes; and even aircraft which would otherwise be invisible to traditional mono-static or bi-static radars through the exploitation of stealth technology.

CELLDAR™ utilises the radar frequencies associated with the current mobile telephone transmissions (GSM 900, 1800 and 1900) and future transmissions (3G).

This partnership complements earlier initiatives to combine the skills of these two world-class companies. These resulted in the SAMPSON active phased array, multi-function radar (selected for the Royal Navy's Type 45 destroyer) and the HALO® artillery location system now in service with the British Army and being supplied into the export market.

http://www.roke.co.uk/news/article.asp?id=38


Here's another interesting article about mobile phone masts and stealth detection. How much credibility does this have?

Mobile telephone masts 'can detect stealth bombers'

MULTI-BILLION pound stealth bombers could be rendered obsolete by a British invention that uses existing mobile telephone masts to detect and track aircraft that were previously invisible to radar.


Stealth fighters and bombers such as the F117, B1 and B2 played key roles in the Gulf and Kosovan wars as they are almost impossible to detect using conventional radar. However, the ease with which the mobile telephone mast system developed at Roke Manor Research at Romsey in Hampshire can be used to detect the aircraft has greatly concerned the military.

Peter Lloyd, head of projects at the laboratory's sensor department, said: "I cannot comment in detail because it is a classified matter, but let's say the US military is very interested." Stealth aircraft, each of which costs at least £1.4 billion, are shaped to confuse radar. A special paint absorbs radio waves, reducing the radar signature to the equivalent of a gull in flight.

The Roke Manor scientists discovered that telephone calls sent between mobile phone masts detected the precise position of stealth aircraft with great ease.

Mr Lloyd said: "We use just the normal phone calls that are flying about in the ether. The front of the stealth plane cannot be detected by conventional radar, but its bottom surface reflects very well."

Mobile telephone calls bouncing between base stations produce a screen of radiation. When the aircraft fly through this screen they disrupt the phase pattern of the signals. The Roke Manor system uses receivers, shaped like television aerials, to detect distortions in the signals. A network of aerials large enough to cover a battlefield can be packed in a Land Rover.

Using a laptop connected to the receiver network, soldiers on the ground can calculate the position of stealth aircraft with an accuracy of 10 metres with the aid of the GPS satellite navigation system.

Mr Lloyd said: "It's remarkable that a stealth system that cost £60 billion to develop is beaten by £100,000 mobile phone technology. It's almost impossible to disable a mobile phone network without bombing an entire country, whereas radar installations are often knocked out of action with a single bomb or missile."

Mr Lloyd said the range of the mobile telephone base station system is classified information, but it would be at least the maximum distance a mobile phone would work from a base station - about 15 miles.

According to military sources, a rough version of a similar system might have been used in Serbia to shoot down an American F117 stealth fighter 40 miles west of Belgrade during the Kosovo campaign. The Serbs fired several missiles into an area they suspected the stealth fighter was flying through.

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/06/11/nbom11.xml

Interesting article here..
'Invisible' plane in near miss with American airliner

THE pilot of an airliner carrying 173 people had to take evasive action to avoid a mid-air collision with an F-117 stealth jet after the fighter, which is supposed to be invisible to radar, showed up on his detector screens.

The stealth fighter was apparently flying into unauthorised airspace above Los Angeles international airport on Thursday morning as a United Airlines Boeing 757 took off bound for Boston. As the airliner climbed to 10,800ft, its anti-collision radar detected an aircraft approaching fast. The airline pilot stopped his climb and levelled off so that the other plane could pass safely overhead.

A spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration said the pilot told officials that the stealth fighter had passed within 500ft above him and less than 1,000 yards to one side. That is classified as a "near miss"; aircraft are supposed to keep three miles apart near airports.

A spokesman for the US air force confirmed that one of its F-117s, part of the 410th Flight Test Squadron, had been involved in the incident, but said there would be no comment until an investigation was complete. The spokesman added that the fighter was "not in stealth configuration", meaning that it was using a transmitter to let other planes know where it was.

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2000/09/09/wmis09.xml


A Lost Illusion: How did an American F-117A Night Hawk get shot down in Kosovo by SA-6 SAMs?

It's now official - Americans lost their pride and joy: at least one of USAF's stealthiest aircraft, the F-117A Night Hawk, is lost to Yugoslav anti-aircraft defenses. Russian Minister of Defence Igor Sergeyev announced that the stealthiest of the world's aircraft was brough down by two SA-6 surface-to-air missiles. Yugoslav Air Force officials said that the F-117 was also hit by one AAM launched from a MiG fighter aircraft. The downing of the "invisible" plane follows an announcement by NATO's command that they "feel comfortable" sending NATO pilots on low-altitude, low-speed missions over Yugoslavia, now that Yugoslav air defenses are "effectively suppressed." Pentagon now officially confirmed that the F-117A was tracked by an unidentified ground radar and that two SAMs were fired at the aircraft. First reports suggested that the F-117A might have been tracked by a Czech-made Tamara passive radar - three passive receivers, each mounted a truck. Yugoslavia operates such radars in a somewhat modified form. However, latest information suggest that the F-117A was tracked by an old Soviet radar - a mid-1950s radar operating in 165-190cm wavelength range. According to American aircraft designers and military, long-wave radars present a serious threat to stealth aircraft operated by the US. More info here.

Civilian witnesses to the downing of the F-117A said that they observed SAMs being launched and anti-aircraft artillery being fired in the same direction from which shortly after a "ball of fire" appeared and crashed into the ground. This was a 45-million-dollar USAF F-117A. The American pilot ejected and, according to NATO, was picked up by friendly forces (perhaps a rescue team). NATO spokesperson said that the pilots is in good shape. I find this questionable, however, because NATO also claims to have no knowledge as to the details of the F-177's loss. This either means that these "unknown" details are very grim for NATO's immediate plans of low-altitude bombing, or that the pilot is not OK. In any case, I am glad that the pilot is alive and I am even happier that he wasn't picked up by Serb soldiers. ABC News has recently published the details of the rescue operation: "...the rescue of the pilot of a stealth fighter jet downed northwest of Belgrade on Saturday was led by the Air Force using “Pavelow” and “Pavehawk” helicopters. The helicopters are specifically modified with global navigation systems and sophisticated radar allowing them to hug the terrain and avoid enemy detection.
Once he parachuted to earth, the pilot most likely signaled his location with a handheld transmitter.
The pilot was picked up by the smaller Pavehawk and flown back to his squadron at Aviano Air Base in Northern Italy.
Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon said the jet’s downing wouldn’t affect the expanded attacks. A senior U.S. defense official said there are strong indications that the aircraft was hit by a surface-to-air missile."

There is still some confusion in the press in regard to the model of SAM system that brought down the F-117A. Many American newspapers mistakenly call the system SA-3 (or even SA-7), while it was actually the SA-6 Kub self-propelled SAM system. This system has a triple-missile launcher (called among NATO pilots as "three fingers of death") mounted on a tracked chassis. Pentagon announced that the F-117A was indeed tracked by a Yugoslav ground radar and two SA-6 missiles were fired at the "invisible" aircraft. The doomed F-117A took off from the Aviano base in Italy, released its payload of precision bombs over Yugoslavia and was heading back to its base. The F-117A was detected by a ground radar and shot down by SAMs and probably by a AAA or a fighter aircraft, since there are bullet holes visible in the wing of the aircraft's wreck. The unidentified pilot ejected and landed some two miles away from the crash site. At 15:00 EST the pilot was reported missing and an USAF rescue team was dispatched on a HH-60G helicopter(s) protected by several NATO fighters. At 21:35 EST the pilot was picked up by the rescue team. At 21:52 EST the rescued pilot and the rescue team were out of Yugoslavia heading for the Aviano base in Italy.

Soon after, Yugoslav television showed a video footage shot by the military on the scene of the Night Hawk's final landing. I was really enjoying an argument between two BBC reporters one of whom was claiming that a military aviation expert "determined" that the wreckage shown was that of F-15E strike aircraft. I know one expert like this... Interestingly enough, Adolph Clinton said he's "...tremendously proud of the skills of the pilot...", in reference to the pilot of the destroyed F-117. Perhaps now American aircraft should be expected to go down in packs, as other US pilots will be anxious to deserve their president's "tremendous pride."

HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. -- Half a world away from the site in Yugoslavia where an American F-117 stealth bomber crashed, the flier's home base commander defended the warplane Sunday as a "premier weapon system," and vowed to send "a couple dozen more," if asked. "They are not invulnerable, they are not invisible, they are `low observable,'` the commander, Brig. Gen. William Lake, said at a news conference held here against the backdrop of a desert mesa. Rain was not a factor in the crash, said the commander of a base where pilots are accustomed to flying the cloudless blue skies of southern New Mexico. Asked if the kind of older radar used by Yugoslavia might have picked up the plane, he declined to answer. Although he described the jet as a top-secret plane, he said that NATO bombers have not returned to the site to destroy the wreckage.

New photos of the shot down F-117A here. A video here (3,551Kb, mpeg)

An official report by the Russian National News Service (03-28-99, www.nns.ru) indicated that a second F-117A was shot down shortly after. According to the report, Yugoslavs still haven't used their most advanced SAM systems, trying to save them until NATO resorts to low-altitude bombing strategy. In order to take out Serb tanks and artillery in Kosovo, NATO has no other choice but to send its ground strike aircraft on low-altitude, low-speed missions over Yugoslav army positions, well protected by advanced SAMs and anti-aircraft artillery. Serbs are also known to have a large number of modern man-portable SAM launchers that have proven to be exceptionally effective against low-flying aircraft in the war between Ethiopia and Eritrea. NATO may also be forced to use Apache helicopters against Serb tanks. Americans currently have 24 AH-64D Apache helicopters stationed in Bosnia. Helicopters present a particularly easy target for portable SAMs.

There is little question that a loss of the F-117A "stealth fighter" is a serious compromise of the aircraft's classified technology and, as a result, to F-117's effectiveness in the future. The wreckage of the plane will most certainly be analyzed by the Serbs and probably by the Russians as well. What information can possibly be extracted for a heavily burned wreck? Plenty, including the chemical composition of the materials used for the aircraft's construction and for its radar wave-absorbent coatings. I think that now it is entirely in Yugoslavia's interests to get the wreckage to Russia as soon as possible.

For more information about other aircraft lost during NATO agression in Yugoslavia click here.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/f117down.htm


The main problem is that NATO aircraft operate at high altitudes (over 15,000 ft, according to NATO command) to avoid Yugoslavia's numerous AAAs and man-portable SAMs. When an aircraft is hit by a large SAM missile (like SA-2, SA-3, or SA-6), what falls to the ground are very small pieces of the aircraft - hundreds or even thousands of them, possibly covering an area of several square kilometers. There simply would be nothing to photograph. This was often the case when high-flying Soviet aircraft were shot down over Afghanistan mainly by American-made Stinger man-portable SAMs, which were effective to the altitudes of just over 15,000 ft. I have seen numerous photos of Soviet planes crashed in Afghanistan - such images would be interesting only for aviation experts but completely useless in terms of propaganda: what remained from crashed planes could hardly be recognized as an aircraft by a non-professional. NATO claimed to have shot down many Yugoslav aircraft (according to NATO, they destroyed 50% of Yugoslavia's MiGs, which would amount to at least 35 aircraft), however, they also failed to provide any proof (except for the one or two MiG-29s of questionable origin shot down over Bosnia, at least one of which looks suspiciously more like an American F-15, and video images taken by an aircraft's targeting camera of, presumably, a Yugoslav Mi-8 helicopter - that's it). And NATO has very capable photo and video reconnaissance aircraft, including the U-2 and a number of highly advanced UAVs, such as Predator and Hunter, not to mention that all NATO aircraft are equipped with video recording devices. Yugoslav media was lucky to photograph the remains of the downed F-117. This was because the aircraft's pilot was probably trying to crash-land his aircraft or to eject at low altitude (which he did, since he landed only two miles from the crash site). There was a clearly visible landing gear of the F-117 in the video footage shown on Yugoslav TV: this is a good indication that the gear was lowered, perhaps as an attempt to crash-land. The pilot wanted to keep the aircraft in one piece, presumably so that it could be destroyed by a cruise missile or a laser bomb before Serb troops got their hands on the remains. Or, perhaps, the pilot was simply forced into low-level flight by the circumstances of his encounter with Yugoslav air defenses. There were reports in Russian military publications back from the Persian Gulf war against Iraq: Iraq claimed to have shot down a US F-117 (on 01-17-91 at 04:00 Baghdad time using Osa SAM system - SA-8 Gecko), but failed to present any proof because the aircraft's remains were hit by a laser-guided bomb before Iraqi troops found the crash site.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/natodown.htm