The rule of thumb is American and most European made missiles are still a threat. British AA missiles aren’t really seen as a threat and neither are Russian as missiles anymore. It’s hard to tell a British launched missile vs a different European missile so it’s good to treat every missile as a threat
would having a tail gun made to shoot down missiles make more sense then just dumb flares
a backward auto canon would be able to shoot flare rounds and flak frag thing and any fight who go its back would be fricked
Missiles can approach from many different angles that the gun doesn't cover; a saturation attack of several missiles will also overwhelm the capability of the gun to engage all the incoming missiles, and that doesn't get into the issue of running out of ammunition. Building the additional weight/complexity into an airframe is not free either, and will take up precious space/weight that could be used - and that's not accounting for the space/weight needed by the sensors needed to compute a firing solution.
Perhaps you could use the exact same weight and space to instead launch some sort of decoy that would distract the missile's sensors, like a flare that creates an IR signature, or a cloud of foil strips that create a false radar echo - you wouldn't have to worry about hitting the missile then, just launching the decoy in the general area would be enough. The weight and space saved makes this a very practical idea for aircraft. I wonder...
God you people. Even Soviet SAMs are major threats if their ground radar gets a lock because they have lots of fuel pushing them very fast for a very long range, and have big burst-frag warheads making them difficult to evade if you put yourself in that situation to begin with. Hence doing Wild Weasel takes lots of training with skilled pilots to attempt. Hence the huge doctrinal focus on doing SEAD / DEAD.
Shooting down missiles is not easy
They're fast and fairly small
How do you fricking shoot it down then?
The rule of thumb is American and most European made missiles are still a threat. British AA missiles aren’t really seen as a threat and neither are Russian as missiles anymore. It’s hard to tell a British launched missile vs a different European missile so it’s good to treat every missile as a threat
Why do you keep making these posts. You are obviously mentally deranged.
An AA missle is super small. The warhead is small because you don't need a big explosion to kill a plane.
The missles is super fast and close to impossible to shoot down
They're easy to spoof and/or avoid though. AA missiles are aways fighting a loosing battle
> one plane has been deposited to your account
wait shit all I need to do to get a free stealth bomber is shit post on /k/?
Did it stop Belgrade from being bombed though?
it certainly didn't stop from overexaggerated exposure photos being taken
The best part of this serb cope is that Dani is ethnically 0% serb.
Wasn't it some old ass AA cannon with sound locator that took down the nighthawk?
As long it appears on a radar, it can be shot down.
>how do you shoot down a missile
the same way a missile shoots down a plane
?t=24
How can this not work against AA?
because planes and helicopters are vulnerable to fragmentation
would having a tail gun made to shoot down missiles make more sense then just dumb flares
a backward auto canon would be able to shoot flare rounds and flak frag thing and any fight who go its back would be fricked
> be flying mach 2
> shoot bullet backwards
> bullet goes 0 mph toward target
>missile flies mach 3 towards bullet
speed is relative
yeah i know im just having fun making jokes online
a cloud of shrapnel would kill missiles and planes
basicaly this but backward on a plane
Missiles can approach from many different angles that the gun doesn't cover; a saturation attack of several missiles will also overwhelm the capability of the gun to engage all the incoming missiles, and that doesn't get into the issue of running out of ammunition. Building the additional weight/complexity into an airframe is not free either, and will take up precious space/weight that could be used - and that's not accounting for the space/weight needed by the sensors needed to compute a firing solution.
Perhaps you could use the exact same weight and space to instead launch some sort of decoy that would distract the missile's sensors, like a flare that creates an IR signature, or a cloud of foil strips that create a false radar echo - you wouldn't have to worry about hitting the missile then, just launching the decoy in the general area would be enough. The weight and space saved makes this a very practical idea for aircraft. I wonder...
God, the SA-11 has got to have the missle-iest looking missiles to ever be made. The only thing to have it beat is the SA-6.
God you people. Even Soviet SAMs are major threats if their ground radar gets a lock because they have lots of fuel pushing them very fast for a very long range, and have big burst-frag warheads making them difficult to evade if you put yourself in that situation to begin with. Hence doing Wild Weasel takes lots of training with skilled pilots to attempt. Hence the huge doctrinal focus on doing SEAD / DEAD.
the BUK system looks so dam good.