How would it protect itself from long range missiles?
>>64497572>How would it protect itself from long range missiles?Sudden and unannounced preemptive saturation bombardment with ICBMs carrying multiple megaton-level warheads against any country that may pose a potential thread.
>>64497572No clue but this picture got me wondering how big a plane could get before it falls apart due to its own weight. I dont think something the size of picrel would be able to actually exist with earth's gravity. I wonder if the c5 galaxy is close to the upper limit with current technology.
>>64497572How would the missile launch platforms protect themselves from the F-4 Swarm?
>>64497572My question is how would aircraft development be stunted if that thing was built? Would we still be flying phantoms as to not waste the giant bird?
>>64497614A camo net?
>>64497572>Cruising at .9 mach instead of 30 knotsImagine how much the Navy would seethe if the Air Force could project power like that.
>>64497610Just build it in the air at speed.
>>64497572Better yet, where could it take off and land?
>>64500444Just make it a xbox heug flying boat
>>64497610planes are extremely light (for their size) for obvious reasons. The main limit is thrust/fuel.But just strap some nuclear propulsion on that big boi and watch it fly around for months on end.
>How would it protect itself from long range missiles?It's not a problem if you get paid to develop the jet before their widespread adoption. This would have looked great in the 1950s where the plan was to bomb the USSR with waves of strategic bombers that would mostly get shot down in the first few days and the lessons being taken on were from WWII escort fighters.Now that'll be $1mil in 1950s money and a stay at your finest Californian resort with inclusive flights on Pan Am.
>>64500444Muh dick.
>>64497572Plane too big. Missile just bounce off, make small poke at worst. Plane will be fine.
>>64497572The most important issue is how to rearm the planes after each sortie.
>>64497610Skyscrapers exist.Dinosaurs existed made of flesh and bone including the flying Pterodactyl.With titanium alloys and aluminum alloys and especially with modern composites such things are physically capable.It isn't even bigger than a WW1 Zeppelin.
>>64500864>how to rearm the pylons of pylon mounted phantomsWingwalkers
>>64497610WIth nuclear power, it can.
>>64497572How would it protect itself from long range missiles?
>>64497610The Saturn V rocket is pretty big, 137 tons dry weight and there were much larger rocket designs made by guys that knew their shit.I think 200m + wingspans would be possible if you really wanted to build it.
>>64502083That's the neat part, it doesn't
>>64500737But OP's mom is already on your dick
>>64497572>How would it protect itself from long range missiles?With DEWs of course? It's got a nuclear reactor, power isn't an issue, and lasers are very effective at altitude with extremely long LOS, thin atmosphere, and no clouds in the way. Probably auto turrets and micromissiles would be good tertiary defense as well just in case, but AAMs are going to lose to powerful lasers pretty badly.Though I think if anyone was doing a serious capital nuclear air fleet you'd actually want more then just the stratocarrier, as with a surface fleet you'd probably want the big carrier and then a few nuclear escort aircraft focused even more heavily on anti-air and maybe some level of powerful anti-ground/ECM as well.
>>64502083>carrier criticism>AI slopit's uncanny how this keeps happening
>>64497572It unironically wouldn't have to as long as mission planners don't fuck up and put it too close to the enemyThe longest range S-300 has a maximum range of 400km. Air-to-air missiles have much shorter ranges than that.An F-4 has a combat radius above that when launched from an airfield. The actual combat radius would be even higher since the plane is getting launched midair, which gives it a boost in potential energy.The only way to shoot it down is to sneak a SAM system past enemy lines (fucking hard) or get past its fighter screen with your own fighters (also fucking hard)
>>64497732Poor birdie :(
>>64503256>or get past its fighter screen with your own fighters (also fucking hard)Trigger will get it done.
>>64503228>>carrier criticismSlop aside, I think anon's point is that a flying carrier isn't intrinsically more vulnerable to missiles than a floating one and the same arguments against that apply.
For long term nuclear powered aircraft is there any alternative to electric drive propellers?
>>64504070>For long term nuclear powered aircraft is there any alternative to electric drive propellers?Not anything left in our walled garden of a universe. The Finns had one but the use of it triggered physics censoring countermeasures that prevent us from rediscovering it.
>>64497610the C-5, and further the A380, B748, and a few others are in the FAA group 6 or ICAO group F size range. this is effectively the largest an aircraft can be made due to airport infrastructure. You can make bigger aircraft, but you'd have to revamp pavement spacing and pavement loading. Most airports are only designed around Group 4 (B767 sized), and Group 5 is a stretch for many B tier cities. Point being, that is the current limit on aircraft size in practice.
>>64502083what was the point of using a slop photo for this
>>64497572It would work in concert with AEW to launch an F-4 Phantom at the missile launch platform
