How Aircraft Fool Radars by Flying Low
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 มิ.ย. 2024
- Flying at extremely low altitudes in the Ukrainian warzone is a standard for both the offensive and defensive sides of this war. Fly too high and you will most certainly be shot down by a missile. Fly too low and you would probably make it, although the risk of hitting trees, powerlines or even a truck means a similar destiny as being hit by a missile. How can flying low save airplanes from radar detection? There are 4 reasons, and no, they are not flying "under the radar". This is #NotWhatYouThink #NWYT #long
Music:
Flightmode - Chris Shards
Thyone - Ben Elson
Into Hiding - Marten Moses
Infiltrator - Christoffer Moe Ditlevsen
Torpedo - Tigerblood Jewel
Footage:
Ukrainian Ministry of Defense
Russian Ministry of Defense
Getty Images
Shutterstock
Videoblocks
National Archives
US Department of Defense
Note: "The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
0:00 Intro
1:10 How Radars Work
2:21 Reason 1: Line of Sight
4:27 Reason 2: Terrain
5:16 Reason 3: Clutter
7:58 Reason 4: Multipath Interference
8:50 The Dangers of Flying So Low
![[TH] VCT Masters Shanghai Playoffs DAY 4 // 100T vs GEN | G2 vs TH](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/UkTGSxdCUQw/mqdefault.jpg)
This *magical* *link* will tell you if you are not yet subscribed 😁
th-cam.com/users/NotWhatYouThink
Hi
He
ofcourse i am😈
hi
It said it’s not what I think. 😉
"Fly low to avoid detection"
The vehicles on the road:
"Must have been the wind"
To fly low is to assert its dominance. And to fly high is to assert supremacy.
what does that even mean
@@TheFalseShepphard
Dominance:- I am going to take over your nation.
Supremacy:- I have taken over your nation.
@@TheFalseShepphard It means if you fly high, you clearly took out all the enemies anti-air capabilities, flying low is to show you are not afraid to operate in the contested airspace most likely.
What?
@@TheFalseShepphard no one knows what it means but it gets the people going
It's incredible to think of the bravery of these pilots, to know that every time you climb into your aircraft you roll the dice. What must this do to a man's mind?
Experience helps. I do a lot of extreme sports and it always starts with a single "can I at least do this?" and ends with testing the limits of the sport, my body and skills. I think Alex Honnold told it best when an interviewer asked him whether he is worried when free soloing to which he replied that something must have gone wrong if you're worried. :)
@@whatsupbudbud It's different, Alex Honnold was in complete control of his own level of risk. These pilots have to set out with very little knowledge. They fly with extreme risk already by keeping low and fast, then they have to cope with knowing that whatever their skill level they have a significant chance of a rapid, fiery death.
There's a base level of confidence and experience just to make the first flight. After that, there are two paths. Experience and the resulting ego, or flat out insanity, testing every possible limit.
It sucks, but it's still better than being infantry.
@@lubumbashi6666 he isn’t in complete control, especially when you’re free soloing a fucking mountain. You never have complete control in life, plenty of factors.
NWYT changes titles/thumbnails faster than the UK changes their Prime Minister.
I was serving in the Navy back in 1980' and the radar we had then on our ship, had MTI, Moving Target Indication. I was in the harbor looking on a surveillance radar towards land. 25 km away there was an airfield (civilian) and despite there were no clear line of sight, I could see on the screen when the plane turned on the platform. What it does is that it exclude all static echoes on the ground and only displays moving taget by extracting the doppler signal in the return echo. There's no problem detecting helicopters, since it detects the rotation of the hub for the rotor blades, not the blades themself. It's even so concise that you can detect if it is a helicopter or a moving car.
Yeah, I struggle to even think about the possibilities of modern computational radar. I know the upgrades my former colleagues got in ATC. And that's civilian tech...
This might be a stupid question but can you just use another radar system or put one on a helicopter to emit random beams to clutter the enemy's screen? Like disturbing a radio frequency
@@woozy7405 Radar jamming aircraft do exist.
@@pvt.potato1943 too expensive for cannon fodder aircrafts
luckily, that was an american system.
The russian counterpart probably says "movement, 500 meters, north" and then needs a reboot that only the quartermaster can perform because he sold every rebooter the unit had and now he keeps the last one on his keychain.
My uncle flew recon during WW2. He flew below treetop level, popping up to go over rows of trees around farm fields and even over stone walls. He said "the minute you're a dot up in the air, every idiot with a rifle is shooting at you". Flying so low, even if someone heard him coming, by the time they got the rifle off their shoulder and ready to shoot, he was already gone.
Yeah, I think the point of them in the russo-ukraine conflict flying low is more of to avoid the random dude with a manpad or nlaw, not to avoid sam radar detection.
But most people in the comments are focused on the radar tech. As some of the radar guys here have mentioned, even a helicopter starting to rotate the rotor blades at an airport 25km away, the radar systems can detect that since 1980s.
@@FireflyAereids it’s so the AA batteries can’t get ya, a heat seeker will loose track of your signature if your masked behind an obstacle and radar guided first need that initial lock-in which will be hard if your in the tree line
US radar man: “warning enemy aircraft incoming!”
The moon: “IT’S NOT WHAT YOU THINK!!”
I would rather hear: 'Warning! Enemy aircraft incoming', than 'Warning! The Moon incoming!'.
@@werfault4076 Link, before playing his ocarina of time: “ITS NOT WHAT YOU THINK!”
Detection range of radar is also limited by power output, antenna size, and PRF (pulse rate frequency).
Frequency is key. Low frequency radars are far more difficult to fool
Though with more power bigger target the radar becomes. Once you activate the radar dish, it becomes huge ass red target to enemy anti-radiation missiles. I would not want to be poor bastard that mans the radar dish in the battery.
In the early 90's working a trawler in Australia just south of a bomb range . I used to be able to pick up f111's on my commercial radar at 90 miles.
@@deven6518 Low frequency radars will detect stealth objects in scan mode, but with low frequency radar you can't track an object, you can't lock on to it and you can do measurements to guide a missile into it. So low frequency radard can only be early warning and nothing else, no other good use of them. They will signal you that a stealth bomber is coming in over a wide area, but you wont be able to tell where exactly or shoot it.
This is because high frequency (and by high frequency this is not Pulse Repetition Frequency, but high carrier frequency - with conjunction with high PRF), has a short wavelength (compared to the size of the object) that gives good readings and thus measurements. But when object is stealth, it will dissipate exactly those high frequencies that could be used by Fire Control Computer, and radar will not get enough of them back to see the object.
Long wavelength radars however, they have a a wavelength so long it will not be affected by stealth materials, plane will still reflect energy back to the radar, but since the wavelength is A LOT longer than the plane itself, the received signal will not be accurate enough. Also the PRF for low frequency radars also has to be low or continuous, and there goes away your tracking (you cant have a small enough range gate or azimuth gate to get a good reading from a low frequency radar.
Radar resolution is directly proportional to its wavelength and with low frequency comes long wavelength and low (unusable) resolution.
PRF is basically picture refresh, necessary for computation of distance, azimuth, elevation, direction and speed of movement, high PRF is used to get firing solutions, but high PRF limits the time radar waits for signal return so thus it limits its range. Low PRF is for long range scan modes.
The one thing Arma taught me: power lines are deadly
Oh shit, still remember that helicopter mission on ARMA2 where you have to fly under 30 meters (or feet?) To reach the target. That shit messed me up as someone new to the game.
@@SuperhotdogZz I fly under 30 meters almost all the time in multiplayer, my channel is mostly Arma flying 😅
John McCain III survived them just fine in Spain.
Getting Malden ptsd with its super low power lines
@@ghillie_guys7808 I was JUST playing arma invade and annex on malden
I don't usually leave comments but I gotta say I've been watching your videos for the last year and there always great and you give a good non bias breakdown. Keep up the good work! and i look foreword to watching more!
We appreciate your comment, Marcus 👍🏼
Really haven't you seen his video on the Nord Stream Pipelines.
this channel is almost as good as Real Life Lore. I hope this guy is on Nebula
It is obviously biased to a russian favor: too much concentration on their capabilities especially nuclear wich is the main trump card of kremlin narrative
@@iammuscular4326 why what did he say? can't find that video
Pilot : *fly low to avoid radar.
The Plane : ALTITUDE !!! PULL UP !!! PULL UPP !!! ALTITUDE !!! PULL UP !!! PULL UP !!!
4 years ago there was an allied exercise in Germany in which the 252nd SHORAD anti-aircraft group from the army of the Czech Republic took part. They had an optical target detection system and an RBS-70 SAM system at the training. during the training they were in role opforce, the optical survey operators were camouflaged in the area and for 2 days they reported all aircraft and all ground targets, within two days they reported the entire tank battalion with the designation of tanks and other vehicles. During the week when the exercise was taking place, they shot down all the blueforce air assets and it was decided 4 times to restart the air force, they lost each time. Colleagues showed me videos where helicopters flew 2-3m above the road, whenever they rose above the trees they were shot down. The kill was evaluated on the basis of aiming time and laser irradiation.
Not What You Think's videos always start with a spectacular introduction, and I'm always anxious to see what comes next, and it's always even better. These are amazing productions, and I learn a lot from them. The depth of research behind these videos is obvious. I'm grateful to find this kind of content.
No-nonsense video again. This is why I like your channel so much. So much technical information under 10 mins is so professional!!!!
Seems like you said it's not a matter of flying below the radar, then you go on to describe the various ways aircraft fly below the radar 🙂
Yours are among my favorite videos. Thank you for your hard work.
hehe I guess the differentiation we wanted to make was that you are not flying below the radar's range of scan. It's just that you are using a variety of interferences to stay hidden where the the radar scan is still present.
Thanks for the comment 😉
@@NotWhatYouThink Basically they are flying in the radar shadow of the terrain. So it is still under the radar (in that if they climbed, they would be seen) but not in the old timey sense.
But they're not flying below the radar. They're flying behind things that are between the aircraft and the radar.
Thank you for the transparency with both sides
No biased analysis, great work!
'Only' as low as 50 feet... that's just insane for a jet! Great video btw!
Depending on Terrain and radar antenna height, you are below the radar horizon of things like the S-300 at 100ft until you reach 30-40 miles.
Back in the day, Buccaneer pilots would fly as low as 30ft when practicing attacking ships or low level penetration of enemy air space and some Tomcat drivers "accidentally" flew down to 50ft or lower while over water while flying at mach 1.1
The JAS 39 Gripen is said to have an auto-pilot that can fly the plane safely at 15 feet. But its probably not safe for the older soviet planes that are used in this war.
@@pogo1140 While being an 'extra' on board of a frigate during a 'weekly war' exercise (in '93), I stood on the helo-deck (chilling out to not interfere with the exercise) looking at the horizon, when I saw a dot approaching from astern. It was a Buccaneer flying so low that I could look down into the cockpit when it passed the ship (and made a pop-up/break left manoeuvre to buzz the bridge of the ship). My eyes were about 26 ft above the surface of the water.
The old Eyeball Mk1 performed better than all the radars on board.....
Thank you for posting this good explanation. Too many sources like to pretend that Russian and Ukrainian SAM systems are simply not operational, depending on what side they favor.
This was one of your most informative ones, thank you!
this is the perfect background music for a video like this.. objective explanation of facts and figures over a synth arpeggio
In 10 minute video i under stand the absolutely majority of the 4 forms of anti / operational ways of radar operator haha
This channel is so cool
Very cool to learn how radar works!
Man quality of your videos are amazing
The role of Manpads in defeating enemy air power is now a crucial one. Not only is flying low to avoid radar unsafe, but once a stinger missile is launched the pilot would not know immediately what type of missile is heading towards him. So he'd have to dodge and try to save the plane instead of completing the mission.... even if he's flying way above range. This might just explain why Russia is having such a hard time conquering the skies of Ukraine.
It's still a reaction time thing, manpads are not "on" all the time, they have coolants and batteries that only last a short period of time. So first you have to hear the jet, The closer to the speed of sound, the less time you have (the time is the difference between the sound of the jet reaching you at mach 1 and the speed of the jet), Example at Pt Mugu I watched an F-14 surrounded by a cloud of vapor come towards us at near mach one, the sound of the jets did not reach us until the jet came over the edge of the runway and the Tomcat flew past us less then 2 seconds later. So if that had been a real attack run, the manpad shooter would have to get the launcher on his shoulder, turn it on, locate the target, get the seeker on target, get a target lock and launch the missile. By that time the jet would already be past and headed out, probably almost past the max rear quarter launch range of the missile.
Modern missle warning systems identify what type of missle is being tracked, locked, and launched at you.
@@pogo1140 or viggen flying mach1+ at 30m
Manpads have a limited range, but they are good for protecting the troops and certain point targets.
@@herptek exactly. They are like light aaa were during ww II which protected against low flying lighter aircraft
Thanks for featuring the lansen in your video. Appreciate it
That's actually really interesting that the US radar system could detect the moon. As it is so far away from the earth
Moon is big
@@daviddavidson2357 size is actually irrelevant, it's the movement that counts.
Go out and check the skies, you can detect the moon too
@@Argosh lmao
Radar signal goes at the speed of light, the Moon is 1 light second away.
This is a lot of great information I never knew. Thanks for the great video.
Thx a lot for this awesome content!!
This was a great piece, thank you
"It was the moon rising above the horizon."
What...? IN 1960?!
Don't worry they have landed on the moon by that time, so it already existed
Yes. The moon existed in 1960.
0:33 thanks for putting my favorite aircraft, the lansen :)
Amazing video bro
Also, the ground Radar staff/soliders have their own issues to deal with
Family problems/ fatigue/ toxic environment etc also affect the radar efficiency
You mentioned how early radar looked up because of terrain interfering with the scan. You could do a video on pulse doppler radar. The system that allows a radar to separate a fast-mover from the groundclutter.
Very nice footage
I wonder if defensive blimps could make a comeback?
No. They suk. Manpad can take em.
Doubt it, just too easy of a target. If you load it with a lot of expensive detection hardware its harder to go unnoticed when trying to shoot it down but also really increasing the costs of the inevitable crashing. Im definitly not an expert so correct me if im wrong :)
@@Sawer I think he's talking about those tethered balloons. They hoist up a steel cable that acts as an obstacle for low flying aircraft. They were famously used during WWII.
There we go, found their name. They're called Barrage balloons. Apparently they worked pretty well against the V-1. Considering drones are simply smarter versions of these, barrage balloons could possibly make a comeback as final defense, an actual wall, against air targets that get past AA systems.
Helium is already being rationed. It’s a rapidly increasingly expensive medium.
@@ivancorey7389 Unmanned aerostats don't and shouldn't require helium. They carry no passengers, only payload. A controlled scuttle should pose no threat if done properly.
That shot with the semi truck literally gave me a semi... Gawd dang that looked awesome.
Timestamp? And what do you mean by semi?
The amount of focus and attention required to do these low flying is insane, you’d also have to keep your composure and fear of crashing in check when you do this, bravo to both the Ukrainian and Russian pilots who performed these flying!
Excuse me but no. One pilot is defending his country. The other one is doing warcrimes.
@@ukrainermanlo8412 I didn’t say that they’re different, I’m just impressed by their flying regardless of what they’re doing.
That in-flight footage is mad. These pilots really aren't leaving any extra room like with most civilian acrobatic stuff.
0:39 Nice to see you slipped in some Saab 32 lansen footage, on its 70th birthday aswell 🎉 good one!
Very informative
Road traffic shows as moving targets for Doppler radar.. This results in targets moving at highway speed along being the road being filtered out. So a helo flying low at highway speed also gets filtered out.
Something I would like to mention are the drones that have highly RADAR reflective materials/shapes, to appear as a larger force/waste AA equipment on cheap(ish) drones. Iirc they were used as early as ww2?
You can still fly 'under the radar' by using terain and clutter. Trees hills mountains and even road traffic obscures radar and gets you over the target
TY for repeating what was said in the video.
I heard a random story a while back about some Russian or US pilots that had a chopper with faulty GPS unit that didnt know where they were. So they just resorted to following a highway either back to their base or till they recognised where they were
This really explains why in armed combat from the main implementation of radar in WW2, to today, a vital first step is to go in low, fast and first, to knock out radar arrays as one of the first priorities
And why Russia's dual lack of up-to-the-minute intelligence and precision munitions has cost Russia each major victory. The shooting in the Gulf War started with airstrikes that nearly eliminated their Air Force and SAM sites and thus ability to fend off future air or missile attacks. Then it was command and communications, putting Iraq in complete disarray and unable to effectively arrange their own defense. When the actual ground invasion began, the Iraqi artillery was smashed. These are very different wars, as the US-led coalition was effective with both unguided and early generation precision munitions. It accomplished its tasks, from preventing an effective defense to destroying artillery, tanks, facilities, etc. Russia's initial strikes were inadequate, they were unable to defeat Ukraine's Soviet air force, unable to blind UA's Soviet SAM's, unable to destroy UA's inferior Soviet artillery, unable to decimate UA's upgraded Soviet tanks, etc.
@@aboutwhat1930 The Russians also made the mistake at the beginning of underestimating the help, support, training, and preparations the Ukrainians got from NATO during the past years, and so the Russians assumed that it's enough to do a show of force and they'll surrender. This is why they didn't bother too much with striking critical infrastructure right at the beginning, hey, they didn't even bother with logistics, as they thought that just crossing the border with a big enough convoy would make the Ukrainians surrender.
damn, this war is producing a lot of crazy video footage!
Also, about manpads, even if the airplane is subsonic and you hear it approaching, you have to discern wether is an enemy one or one of your own, which in Ukaine may be difficult because they happen to have the same models in service. and it would be impossible at night. Also, I don't think manpads have an IFF system.
Fascinating
Technically you *_can_* still fly below radar coverage. Given NOE flying and if you use terrain elevation to your advantage, given the terrain and placement of the radar system, you can be under it's azimuth range. And, again, if there is a mountain or hill in-between you and the radar and you're under the crest of said hill/mountain, you're effectively below the radar even if you're not truly under the radar's emissions physically. Then there's also radar horizon for longer range radars that are commonly used with more strategic SAM system like S-300, S-400, etc. Although the radar horizon is much further than people think with just drawing a line on the curvature of the earth - radiation energy from the radio can bounce off the ground and upper parts of the atmosphere (much like radio signals can) and return telemetry at times. This is not a weapons-grade lock, obviously, but you can detect enemy aircraft out past what many think is the maximum limit.
I feel like this video overlooked the relevance of air to ground radars in the form of the E3 Sentry or other aircraft of that kind.
We use the same technique when playing paintball. Low to the ground, and use structures to mask our body signatures. Or just quickly run from object to object in the field in a zigzag formation. Lol
let's not forget it's also a big motivation booster driving down the highway in your invaded country and seeing a frogfoot fly 15 feet over top of you
I can imagine the moon false alarm
“GUYS ALERT THERE IS A BALLISTIC MISSILE HEADING TO US”
“EVACUATE THE CITIZENS”
“READY THE COUNTERMEASURES”
“ITS GETTING CLOSER AT… 200,000 miles?”
“Oh my God it’s the moon…”
i agree
For low flying stuff you got the short range air defences like the tunguska or shilka and man pads
during falklands war this tactic was used by A-4 argentinian pilots to attack the British frigates
i agree
where do you get all the footage from the planes? realy cool
Telegram
I can barely get a wifi signal from my kitchen meanwhile 1960s radar is reaching the moon.
So Maverick's technique of flying low to the ground in Top Gun: Maverick *does* work to some extent.! Good to hit the naysayers with this thought! (may not be as bad as shown, though)
Do you mean when he fought the SU-57?
The missile he was trying to trick is not guided by radar. So no it wouldn't have worked.
@@Pman353 Of course
@@declaringpond2276 He wasn't trying to trick a missile. What was shown in the movie was the ground messing up the targeting system of the 5th generation fighter.
In that case, it was 100% false. At that range the radar “burns through” ground clutter. In addition, the search azimuth is only 30 or so degrees making it almost impossible to not be detected. Even the most stealth fighter will be locked at that range. In addition, aircraft do not use radar when acquiring a lock with an infrared guided missile.
Cool video
As a air defender great video
The one thing I absolutely love about the russian helis and such is the little fan in it gotta stay cool whilst using those things
i love the teddy bear in the cockpit of the plane at 8:03
It would be nice to scale down chaff launchers for mobile or manned/vehicle ground to air detonation to constantly bombard their radars with information that severely complicates target ID and counter measures.
That wouldn't do anything, those would very easily be filtered out.
Nice video as always keep up the good work. Can you make a video about Swedish submarines I’m curious now when they are joining NATO
2:30 Flat earthers watching this: NO, NO, NO, NOoooo
2:32 Love that F 5
Flying low must be a crazy experience
this is actully giveing me war of the world vibes
I think this is why cheap drones will turn the tide of the war due to their lower cost.
i agree
Given how much a single bomb costs, we're still far away from actually cheap drones
@@tuluppampam i agree
Russia: NO YOU CANT JUST TELL THE WORLD THAT I LOST MORE PLANE THAN YOU
Ukraine: Haha radar go brrrrrrrrr
Me: flies really low
Radar operators with their window open: anyone hear a jet engine?
Before stealth,. Low and fast was the standard for attack. Terain following radar systems were common to fly the plane safely 50 feet off the ground and not become a smoking hole.
Since helicopters cant be made stealth easily nap of the earth never stopped being the standard.
F-35 pilots are still taught to fly low and fast.
You should start a documentary on national geographic
What is that missile launch system shown at 1:40? The nose thrust vectoring on that is CRAZY!!
Im not 100% sure but i think its the Russian TOR missile system
It danger either way by LIDAR but higher altitudes less risky because if high altitude missile cost much more beyond most budget
VTOL VR players collectively making the choice to ignore this
"Americans identify the moon as a missile threat" 🤣
It's not mainly the radar.. flying low means you are in thick dense air and missiles have very limited range at low level due greater air resistance. They have a boost phase during launch and then "glide" without power until they hit or miss.
But flying low has a greater danger from MANPADS and aid defence guns. The S400 missile system has a range of 400kms... the search radar is on a tall mast that gives the radar a much greater range. The long range missile climbs to over 100 thousand feet then travels the huge distance to a target and then dive down to kill you with terminal radar from the missile homing in on you.
The best option is to fly very low and avoid detection in the first place...
On a personal level It does wonders to heat my food when enclosed in a little box.
This is why we need flying arensals. To be able to switch from air to ground and be agile as hell.
Also radars can detect living things in the sea.. so flying low over oceans can mask aircrafts as well I think
Epic
6:23 Now this confuses me a little. How does flying low trick Doppler radar? Flying low and slow (i.e. below the radar MDV), OK, but being low alone is not enough, or is it?
the doppler radar filters out stationary stuff from moving stuff. The trick where planes flying perfectly horizontal to doppler radars dont get picked up is because of this. It has to be moving towards or away from the radar. simply moving sideways to the radar appears as stationary.
Now, when you get low enough, as in very low, the plane can blend in with the ground. the altitude is so low and they are moving so fast that the radar just receives it as being stationary, just part of the terrain, so it filters it out. this usually works with terrain that has lots of trees, power lines, cars, hills, etc. in a completely featureless and flat surface it probably wouldnt work.
Yess finally notification worked
Mistook the moon for a missile gat me cracking up 😂😂😂😂
Finally a non propaganda video just like the good ol days
Literally ace combat missions incarnate
Ace combat is garbage game
Wait a minute! You are saying that the earth is not flat. That is a lot of new information for flat earthers to digest.
yes
POV you have a flashlight with a long curved handle “well what now”
Moon being detected as a threat? That was a strong, advanced radar
You can see the moon with the naked eye also using electromagnetic radiation in the visible light spectrum, this really isn't that impressive.
8:04 he had a tedy bear
Out of curiosity, the SR-71 Blackbird operated at extremely high altitudes to conduct surveillance, and would therefore need to avoid radar detection. Is flying close to space able to produce the same results as flying close to the ground?
The Blackbird's counter to radar was its speed. It couldn't avoid radar detection but it could out run thr missiles fired at it.
no, it literally just outran every missile and jet going for it. like, stepping on the gas was your countermeasure against missiles.
The SR-71 didn't avoid radar. It just flew so high and so fast, it was nearly impossible to shoot down
The speed used be its advantage but now, it would be useless
The Blackbird was pretty visible on radar. It had some radar absorbing materials but it's speed meant that the shape couldn't be optimized for avoiding radar detection. It kept safe by just outrunning any threat, not avoiding radar detection
Route is a way from one place to another ( pronounced "root"); Rout is to defeat decisively...
A man dream is able to flying @supersonic ,
They gotta be extremely special person to mastered these aircraft .
The lesson is that flying in a war zone is dangerous, high or low altitude.
I think that if I was in charge of radar I’d get an enemy plane then train an AI model to find it. Then train another AI model to do image recognition on the plane with and without the flares once the rocket is in mid air.