Posted on 05/17/2020 7:45:48 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
so if we buy em for 150 million can we sellem at walmart for 188 mil?
Extreme long range AA missiles are inaccurate because they give the target time to react. Our old Phoenix AA missile never scored a hit besides on the test range.
The purpose of the Chinese super long range AA missiles isn’t to shoot down enemy fighters - it’s to attack and kill or drive off our AWACS, forcing our fighters to have to radiate themselves to find targets and thus exposing their positions.
It’s a lot easier for an extreme long range missile to hit a target if it is actively radiating or jamming. Which the AWACS is going to be doing.
That’s assuming that China would have any functional satellites in any conflict with us. An assumption they probably have as well.
It’s really a shame we never developed an Air Intercept Controller rate in the Navy. Then we could have been able to operate in the absence of E-3’s and E-2’s.
Seems to me we’d have satellites replacing AWACS roles, or even possibly X-37B’s or lower orbit drones performing that role.. I have no idea but a manned AWACS seems a bit sluggish in today’s hyper missile theater.
Their fighters have to be flown by pilots. Do you think they can match our boys? Nope.
What about the Air Force’s secret space plane?
Never underestimate your enemy. In a population of 1.4 billion, I think they should be able to find a few hundred smart and capable young men.
Satellites are not required for this scenario. The Navy’s standard tactics is to have AWACS up and radiating for days prior to any strike.
Radar on orbit is possible but impractical. They would also be obvious targets and China has demonstrated (as in, actually used in reality) a functional and robust anti satellite capability.
That’s the X-37B.
Indeed. And there are quite a few Chinese studs in the worldwide gamer competitions. Attach wings to today’s video games and you have a J-20.
They don’t have to. They just have to haul missiles into range and get a lock. Additionally, if they throw up dozens of not great fighters for every one we send, we lose unless the other side is putting up guys that can barely fly. Quantity has a quality all its own, and they have the thousands and thousands of fighters to lose. We built only 187 F-22s and we don’t even have that many now.
Also, keep in mind that most exercises where the US forces have to fight without AWACS, the F-22s take massive losses as they have to locate targets on their own. The Germans, Indians and according to some the British have all beaten F-22s in AWACS-less exercises.
Also, there are some reports that their latest mark fighters *don’t* have to be flown by pilots in them. Ours, not so much.
The longer the flight, the more time for ECM to screw them up. The AMRAAM was very resistant to jamming back when, even if it does not have huge range.
Any actual conflict we have with China will be integrated from sea floor to low Earth orbit in ways we cannot discuss here, with weapons that do not exist in the public domain.
The world forgets that our front line production aircraft are what we want the world to see. The F-117s are a good example, appearing in quantity over a distant battlefield for the first time.
Recent patents by the US Navy point vaguely in the right direction.
Have read that the Russians and Chinese are very intent on the ability to take out the AWACS and tankers to cripple the fighters relying on them. A long range missile is bad news to those big radar targets.
We aren’t the only people with home-on-jam capability any more...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.