← Home ← Back to /k/

Thread 64127530

27 posts 12 images /k/
Anonymous No.64127530 >>64127541 >>64127554 >>64127650 >>64127826 >>64127892 >>64130857 >>64130873 >>64132913 >>64133590 >>64133601 >>64135985 >>64136137 >>64136185
Is it too risky for bombs to actually carry bombs now, due to modern air defense?
Anonymous No.64127541 >>64127619 >>64133499
>>64127530 (OP)
Only if you're a third world shithole with a fourth rate military.
Anonymous No.64127554 >>64127560 >>64127650 >>64127732
>>64127530 (OP)
>bombs to actually carry bombs now,
War crime or something. Cluster munitions have been bad PR for decades.
Anonymous No.64127560 >>64127650
>>64127554
You're a few months behind, cluster bombs are back in fashion.
Anonymous No.64127619
>>64127541
This. Any country that can afford to field bombers that matter can afford to fill them with the air-launched cruise missiles that render a lot of enemy air defense a lot less threatening.
Anonymous No.64127650
>>64127530 (OP)
I thought the issue with bombs carrying bombs was finding a way to mount the bomb on the bomb, but >>64127554 and >>64127560
are probably right that you were talking about clusters.
Anonymous No.64127669
>minor spelling mistake
Anonymous No.64127721 >>64135977
bombs are still viable even in highly contested airspace. You just need a 4th geen multirole aircraft or barring that a hella low and fast 3rd gen not ancient lumbering turboprop slavshit navigated by a Garmin GPS and maintained by raped conscripts
Anonymous No.64127732
>>64127554
You just have to stop giving a shit like the USA did with Willy Pete.
Nothing cooks a goat fucker quite like the WP
Anonymous No.64127826
>>64127530 (OP)
No, the US could still theoretically drop dumb bombs on its enemies with the BUFF but glidebombs are more effective.
you can do it if you’re not an incompetent shithole without proper SEAD doctrine, if the skies are yours you can do whatever you want.
Anonymous No.64127892 >>64130869
>>64127530 (OP)
Tu-95MS never carried bombs in the first place. It was always designed as a cruise missile carrier
Anonymous No.64130857
>>64127530 (OP)
that looks like a flying stick insect
Anonymous No.64130869
>>64127892
>designed
It was modernized to carry cruise missiles, it didn't alter the original design.
Anonymous No.64130873
>>64127530 (OP)
yo dawg
Anonymous No.64132913 >>64133452
>>64127530 (OP)
Yeah
Anonymous No.64133452
>>64132913
1) Is that the gunpowder factory?
2) Is that the before or after pic?
Anonymous No.64133499 >>64133588 >>64135839
>>64127541
I don't get how new F-35's can carry six internal missiles and older one only four. The bays are still the same size.
Anonymous No.64133588
>>64133499
>I don't get how new F-35's can carry six internal missiles
no they dont
theyre shitty little revolver rack STILL doesnt work
Anonymous No.64133590
>>64127530 (OP)
only if you can't into western air superiority as other anons pointed out.
Anonymous No.64133601 >>64135366
>>64127530 (OP)
>Is it too risky for bombs to actually carry bombs now
Anonymous No.64135366
>>64133601
Kek
Anonymous No.64135839
>>64133499
Your picture shows 4 plus a long boi on the door.
Anonymous No.64135977
>>64127721
>OK GARMIN
Anonymous No.64135985
>>64127530 (OP)
If you are poor than yes. This is why the B2 is basically the game winner for now.
Anonymous No.64136137
>>64127530 (OP)
Didnt the US just use gravity bombs to neutralize or at least cripple a heavily defended base in the middle of one of the worlds most on-alert air defense regions without any arty, ground, or sead-campaign support?
Anonymous No.64136185 >>64137228
>>64127530 (OP)
If anything, we’re in a gravity bomb renaissance. The GBU-39 and JSOW massively increase the capability of non-powered bombs, Every report I’ve read on the GBU-39 seems to suggest that the program has massively outperformed expectations, and it outranges the vast majority of tactical precision weapons (hellfire, maverick, jdam) while also being almost 100% payload by weight and requiring virtually zero “airframe infastructure” (unlike weapons like cruise missiles which require large and high-capacity hardpoints, or weapons like mavericks, which require baseline avoinics), allowing even planes designed 100% for air superiority like the F-22 to extremely effectively carry them with minimal modification. We just saw one of the most historic gravity bomb strikes in the past couple of decades on Iran, and the US has made over 1,000 stealth capable bomb-dropping planes in the last decade thanks to the F-35 program wrapping up its teething issues and becoming the new F-16 in terms of production speed. The CEP of GPS INS weapons has been slowly decreasing since the gulf war to the point where they can be effectively used against individual stationary vehicles and troop positions with ease (Targets which used to require a laser or at least electro optical acquisition) and the JSOW Is at the very least low observable, and whatever replaces it will probably be stealthy if the LRASM/JASSM program continues to find success. Suddenly, every NATO country has access to multi roles that can fly right past S-300s and drop bombs without facing historic dangers, and suddenly the United States is churning out extremely long ranged and accurate gravity bombs that can be dropped even by third or fourth generation fighters from the edges of air defense pockets. There hasn’t been a better time for the gravity bomb since the invention of CCIP.
Anonymous No.64137228
>>64136185
>allowing even planes designed 100% for air superiority like the F-22 to extremely effectively carry them with minimal modification.
Main reason why GPU-39 was even developed in the first place to allow F-22 to carry more than 2 bombs internally while still carrying air to air weapons.