We have >1.2 TWR jets, fly by wire, and thrust vectoring now. Bring back tailsitters.
>>64412040They are only good for interceptors because you don't care about carrying a heap of bombs, we don't make interceptors anymore because SAMs do the same job better and cheaper.
>>64412056what if the interceptor can plink 20+ drones in one go
>>64412040Sikorsky is trying to, with a drone at least. Which honestly probably the best way to do it. No fucking way would I trust myself to back a plane into the ground
>>64412070For counter drone can can make a small cheap tail sitter drone if you really want.
Okay, but they'll be bigger than they used to be.
>>64412073VBAT has been very successful as well.
>tailsittersMore like, sitting on your ASS LMAO. This is a zero-length launch board, get outta 'ere.
>>64412040They're already back, in drone form.
>>644120401.2 TWR with 50% fuel, no drop tanks and light loadout*
>>64413378>>64413381>>64413387>>64413399Zero Length Launch was an impressive technology demonstrator, a few decades ago - but the future is CATOBAR carriers floating above cloud level. Get with the times old man.
>>64412040Didn't Ukraine already field some kind of tailsitter defense drones?
