This implies I do not know what I am talking about regarding basic radar detection principles and 'stealth'. So here goes...
There are three rules in designing a low radar observable body:
- Control of
QUANTITY of radiators
- Control of
ARRAY of radiators
- Control of
MODES of radiation
While I used the world 'rules', they are more like guidelines. They are not 'rules' that you can break but guidelines that you can have degrees of obedience to them.
While rule one -- Control of
QUANTITY of radiators -- is the first rule, it does not mean it is of higher value than the other two. All three rules are equal in importance with Rule One having the first consideration at conception.
You can take what I said above to Lockheed, Boeing, or your Iranian aviation/radar experts and
NO ONE will dispute. I am that confident.
So for the F-15SE, we cannot put the basic airframe under Rule One. We cannot remove any flight control structures. At best, we may reshape or even resize them, but we cannot remove any of them.
Which lead to Rule Two -- Control of
ARRAY of radiators. Twin canted vertical stabs eliminated the 90 deg corner reflectors created by the physical relationships -- array -- between the vertical and horizontal stabs. Enclosing the weapons load also falls under Rule Two because the conformal weapons bays (CWB) eliminated completely any geometric structures from the weapons.
For Rule Three -- Control of
MODES of radiation -- there is some application of absorber at strategic airframe locations. The curvatures of the CWB also affects radiation behaviors (modes).
So based upon the three rules, not likely the F-16 will be a candidate for any kind of RCS reduction package because the F-16's basic airframe cannot fall under rules One and Two. We cannot eliminate the single vertical stab and we cannot cant (tilt) it. We can install a V tail on the F-16 but that would make the new airframe less obedient to Rule One, but if we cant (tilt) the new twin vertical stabs to eliminate the 90 deg corner reflector structures, that would make the new airframe more obedient to Rule Two. Then we can apply absorber to make the new F-16 more obedient to Rule Three. Do you see where am heading here?
The F-15 is a larger airframe and that made it more flexible for modifications than the F-16. The F-16's basic airframe would make it difficult to modify it to have twin canted vertical stabs without having major structural reinforcement to that area. This further reduces the odds of the F-16 candidacy for any level of RCS reduction methods.
So yes, I do know what am talking about. And am willing to bet you just learned a lot more from me than from your Iranian military forums.
Aaahh...So just because you inserted the initials 'CIA' into the mix, that made the RQ-170 valid in your argument?
In my opinion, the RQ-170 does have some inherent low radar observable traits but it is not 'stealthy' in the deliberateness of the F-117, F-22, F-35, and B-2.
My opinion is based upon knowledge as posted above. Your opinion is based upon three letters of the English alphabet and readers' inferences.