Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What are typical RCS values for fighter, bomber, and cruise-missile targets used in radar range calculations?
Executive summary
Open-source figures for typical radar cross section (RCS) used in radar-range calculations vary widely by platform and source: many conventional fighters are quoted in the single-digit m2 range (roughly 1–15 m2 in various reports), large non‑stealth bombers can be several m2 while dedicated stealth aircraft and some modern cruise missiles can sit well below 1 m2 (examples include reported B-2 and Tomahawk numbers) [1] [2]. Available sources show large scatter, modeling studies and forum estimates—all highlight orientation, frequency, and loadout as decisive factors; precise canonical “typical” values are not consistently reported across the open literature [3] [4].
1. Why a single “typical” RCS number is misleading
RCS depends on many variables: viewing aspect (head‑on vs side), radar frequency band, whether the aircraft is clean or carrying external stores, and surface treatments. Wikipedia and simulation literature stress that RCS is orientation‑dependent and varies greatly over frequency and geometry, so a single scalar number can mislead radar‑range calculations if these dependencies aren’t included [3] [4]. Academic RCS estimation work uses 3‑D models and physical‑optics computation precisely because simple point estimates fail to capture real detection behavior [5].
2. What open sources say about fighters
Open‑source and trade reporting place many conventional fighters in the 1–15 m2 range depending on vintage and type: one blog/forum compilation lists older 4th‑generation MiG platforms around 3–15 m2 and Su‑34/Su‑35 values around 1–3 m2; other reference material states conventional fighters like the F‑4 near ~6 m2 [1] [2]. Simulation and research papers note that even for a given type (e.g., F‑16, F‑35) computed RCS depends on assumed configuration and aspect, making single numbers useful only as rough inputs for sensitivity studies [4] [5].
3. What open sources say about bombers
Bombers span a large range in reported RCS. Public reports contrast large conventional bombers (which can present many square metres of RCS) with low‑observable designs: GlobalSecurity.org cites one estimate of the B‑2’s RCS near 0.75 m2 and notes even smaller head‑on estimates (down to ~0.01 m2 in some claims), showing wide disagreement in secondary sources [2]. Other commentary emphasizes a lack of reliable public data for many legacy bombers and states that published numbers often conflict [1] [2].
4. What open sources say about cruise missiles
Cruise missiles are often quoted with much smaller RCS than fighters, but values vary by design and era. GlobalSecurity.org reports typical cruise missile RCSes around 1 m2 for “UAV‑like” designs and notes Tomahawk RCS estimates below 0.05 m2; research into cruise‑missile RCS (and academic modeling of specific missiles like DF‑15 or Tomahawk) confirms that computed RCS depends on nose shape, fins, materials, and radar band [2] [6] [4] [5]. Authors emphasize that some modern missiles (and “NG” variants) are explicitly designed to reduce RCS [7].
5. How people use these numbers in radar‑range calculations
Practitioners commonly use representative RCS ranges in sensitivity studies rather than single values: pick conservative (large), nominal, and optimistic (small) RCS inputs to see how detection ranges change, because radar equation outputs scale with the fourth root of RCS in monostatic detection thresholds. Research and forum discussion both show analysts often use order‑of‑magnitude bins (e.g., stealthy <0.1 m2, small cruise missiles 0.01–1 m2, fighters 1–15 m2) while acknowledging configuration dependence [1] [8] [9].
6. Competing viewpoints and caveats in the sources
Open sources disagree sharply. Popular/blog/forum figures (e.g., the “MiG = 3–15 m2” or “PAK‑FA ~0.5 m2 ≈ Tomahawk”) appear alongside more conservative technical writeups (e.g., F‑4 ~6 m2, B‑2 estimates from 0.01–0.75 m2) [1] [2]. Academic simulation work highlights that measured or computed RCS depends on modeling fidelity and frequency; some forum claims lack rigorous citation, while peer‑reviewed RCS prediction papers present methodical—but case‑specific—results [8] [5]. Sources do not provide a single authoritative table of “typical” RCS values applicable in all radar calculations [3] [9].
7. Practical recommendation for your radar‑range inputs
Based on the spread in available reporting and the modeling literature, use ranges, not fixed points: for preliminary sensitivity work consider fighters ~1–15 m2, non‑stealthy bombers several m2 (and treat B‑2‑class stealth bombers as <<1 m2 in head‑on aspects according to some reports), and cruise missiles from <<0.1 m2 (modern/stealthy) up to ~1 m2 for older designs—then run detection‑range scenarios across those bands [1] [2] [4]. If you need platform‑specific precision, available sources recommend 3‑D simulation or consulting classified/industry data—open sources do not supply universally authoritative RCS tables [5] [9].
Limitations: open reporting is inconsistent, forum/blog numbers vary in rigor, and public literature often omits frequency/aspect/loadout details that materially change RCS; the sources above illustrate both numerical ranges and methodological reasons for their spread [1] [2] [5].