[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 1759132728715929.png (137 KB, 372x447)
137 KB
137 KB PNG
What if instead of meme fighter planes you just had expensive heavy bombers with loads of missiles and an awac coordinating said bombers?
You can probably fit a revolver system with S500 sized missiles on a B-52 plus more missiles to intercept whatever missiles the enemy sends at you.
Hell you could probably flood an entire airspace with enough ordnance to shoot down any stealth plane out of the sky.
>>
>>64327303
>how do the missiles acquire a targeting solution
>how do the bombers prevent themselves from being shot down BVR by the stealth fighters
>>
>>64327366
>Awacs
>Shoot missiles at BVR missiles,
>>
>>64327303
It's stupid because you're putting all your eggs (missiles) in the same basket (plane). Also you'll probably never or very rarely need to fire that much missiles before running out of fuel. Dropping cruise missiles with a bomber from a controlled airspace makes sense and it's been used in the past.
>>
>>64327303
even better idea OP, how about you strap a bunch of long range missiles to a pallet and throw it out the back of a cargo plane, that way you don't even need to use your heavy bombers



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.