I was responding to "MANPADS",
etc. Such a device will need
detectors of some kind, e.g.,
heat, radar, and the usual approaches
to stealth should help.
For close air support, maybe the
US wants to use fast, stealth
aircraft firing missiles to spots
specified with laser designators,
GPS, etc.
As I recall, at times the USAF
claimed that to kill tanks
an F-16 with a missile was better
than the A-10: Sure, the gun
on the A-10 is amazing, but the
A-10 flies low and slow and
should be vulnerable to, say,
MANPADS. The F-16 flies
higher and faster, fires a
missile, and then is out'a there.
Maybe the USAF wants the F-35 to
be better, still: Use stealth.
Sure, maybe soon the USAF will want
its missiles to kill tanks, etc.
fired from drones, maybe even
stealth drones.
Not aware of any MANPADS that can use radar. AFAIK they all use heat seekers. Not much you can do other than deploy flares. Stealth doesn't help you in close visible range.
>For close air support, maybe the US wants to use fast, stealth aircraft firing missiles to spots specified with laser designators, GPS, etc.
Yeah, the Air Force always says that, and the ground troops always demand A-10's Apaches, etc.
>As I recall, at times the USAF claimed that to kill tanks an F-16 with a missile was better than the A-10: Sure, the gun on the A-10 is amazing, but the A-10 flies low and slow and should be vulnerable to, say, MANPADS. The F-16 flies higher and faster, fires a missile, and then is out'a there.
The Air Force always claims that they have a good reason to get rid of the A-10.
The fart-gun while awesome, isn't the real reason troops love it so much. The ability to loiter on station for a long time and keep enemy forces down in defensive mode is. Neither fast-movers, nor helicopters can loiter as long.
>Maybe the USAF wants the F-35 to be better, still: Use stealth.
Stealth isn't a panacea, it's a buff against the enemy's radar. And, yeah, drones/unmanned are the future.
I mentioned both radar and heat.
If MANPADS are heat seekers, okay.
Some versions of stealh try to lower
their heat signatures, e.g.,
hide the jet engine output from
the ground by an extension of the
part of the plane below the engine
and mixing the jet exhaust with cool
air. For the F-117, can get a
little view of its engine output
at
For close air support, maybe the US wants to use fast, stealth aircraft firing missiles to spots specified with laser designators, GPS, etc.
As I recall, at times the USAF claimed that to kill tanks an F-16 with a missile was better than the A-10: Sure, the gun on the A-10 is amazing, but the A-10 flies low and slow and should be vulnerable to, say, MANPADS. The F-16 flies higher and faster, fires a missile, and then is out'a there.
Maybe the USAF wants the F-35 to be better, still: Use stealth.
Sure, maybe soon the USAF will want its missiles to kill tanks, etc. fired from drones, maybe even stealth drones.