Hell yeahhttps://www.twz.com/air/usaf-confirms-bombers-could-have-a-major-air-to-air-combat-role>Aviation Week was first to report on the potential for bombers to help bolster the Air Force’s air-to-air combat capacity after obtaining a copy of a new long-term fighter force structure report submitted to Congress last week. https://aviationweek.com/defense/budget-policy-operations/usaf-outlines-new-fighter-goals-may-eye-bombers-ccas-help>a B-21 that also has air-to-air capabilities” and can “work with the family of systems to defend itself, utilizing stealth – maybe that’s where the sixth-generation airplane comes from.”https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/USAFs-Dogfight-Power-Curve/
>family of system>Sensor centric>Ai>Enemy data center>CCWsWar has gotten so puzzed its using corpo marketing buzzwords
Makes sense.Modern air to air combat is just about spamming missiles from max range where the target info is forwarded by an AWAC or another powerful radar source.My schizo theory will be that future fighters won’t have crazy speed and agility like the F-22 they will basically just be large missile hubs with some stealth coating.
>>656043507 year old article about a report from a literal whoNah, I’m good>>65604363Journalists and think tanks are not war
>makes air to air combat really gay
>>65604381looks like he's laughing about it too.
>>65604363Yes. Using single words to boil down complex ideas or concepts is how people generally communicate in technical fields. >family of system>Sensor centric>Ai>Enemy data center>CCWsis easier than saying >a large and complicated collection of different types of military vehicles, aircraft, ships, weapons, computers, electronic equipment, communications devices, and supporting machinery, each of which performs a particular function but is designed to exchange information and coordinate its activities with the others, making use of various types of equipment capable of detecting objects or activities by observing visible light, measuring heat, transmitting and receiving radio waves, intercepting electronic signals, or collecting information from satellites orbiting the Earth, with the information gathered by all of these different devices being transmitted through interconnected communications networks to computers running specially developed programs that examine, compare, organize, and interpret large quantities of information in order to identify patterns, distinguish potentially hostile activity from ordinary activity, estimate the location and movements of opposing military forces, and present possible courses of action to human personnel responsible for making decisions, including identifying, locating, monitoring, and potentially [post too long]
>>65604363>>65604439>attacking the buildings, underground facilities, communications installations, electrical infrastructure, and computer equipment used by an opposing military organization to receive information from its forces, store and process that information, communicate instructions to subordinate units, and coordinate military operations, with attacks potentially being carried out using guided weapons equipped with conventional explosive warheads rather than nuclear devices, which may be launched from aircraft flying through the atmosphere, naval vessels operating on the surface of the ocean, submarines operating beneath it, or stationary and mobile launching equipment positioned on land, and which use various combinations of satellite navigation, onboard computers, terrain measurements, and other guidance equipment to travel toward predetermined locations before detonating an explosive charge intended to damage or destroy the selected physical object, thereby interfering with the opposing military organization's ability to gather information, make decisions, transmit instructions, coordinate the activities of its personnel, and continue carrying out its intended operations.
>>65604377If you can afford it, you want both.That's what B-21 + F-47 isBoth provide similar capability, the F-47 trades range/payload for kinematic/aerobatic performance. B-21 does the opposite.Together they allow the USAF to provide a heavy compute node to direct CCAs in basically any situation. In heavily contested/pentrating roles the F-47 takes point while the B-21 stays back to provide long range A2A/A2G capability, and in less contested environments you can forgo the F-47's entierly and use a B-21 as the heavy compute node along with CCAs and F-35s.The US and China are realistically the only two nations that can afford a heavy manned stealth platform like the B-21, the only other manned 6th gen program in the world is GCAP, which is looking to be F-111 sized, or a heavy fighter/light bomber in size/scale/payload. Basically trying to blend both the F-47 and B-21 into a single airframe (though it's much closer to the F-47 than B-21 in scale/role).
>>65604447>F-47>Constructor: Boeing grim
>>65604474F/A-XX tooBoeing has a 6th gen monopoly.
>>65604474Boeing/McDonnell fighter programs have historically run pretty smoothly. Super Hornet was probably the smoothest new fighter airframe acquisition since the end of the Cold War. By all available evidence they also demonstrated a much better product than either Lockheed or Northrop in both competitions.
>>65604496Literally how, I thought Lockheed Martin had this kind of stuff in the bag?
>>65604350Can we bring back the Genie missile while we're at it?
>>65604554F-35 is the biggest military procurement program in world history. This was a massive windfall for them. It also means the Lockheed Martin’s aeronautics division has not really had the bandwidth to focus on anything else for upwards of two decades. During that time Boeing was chasing down every bit of DARPA work they could get their hands on, as they had relatively little new going on. They also bet big on new production infrastructure before they won either contract. This all paid off greatly. They seem to have beat Lockheed to flying a demonstrator by several years, while also producing a better product.
>>65604350>Air-to-Air BombersSo a long-range missile? Like a cruise missile?
>>65604554Lockheed had a shit bid, they're full up on F-35 orders and there was zero reality where they were going to suspend F-35 production to shift things over to the F-47 or F/A-XX production.So Lockheed had to pony up billions on a manufacturing floorspace upgrade, or give realistic estimates on the impact the F-47 or F/A-XX would have on the F-35 ecosystem. Since they were already focusing a ton of effort on F-35 sustainment, production, and upgrades development. They really didn't have the spare engineering capacity to devote full effort to either the F/A-XX or the NGAD (F-47) programs, and the capital outlay required on an expansion with no definite contract award simply wasn't a gamble they were willing to make.Boeing on the other hand, WAS willing to make that gamble, they paid almost $2B to expand their St Louis production facility years before they got awarded either NGAD or F/A-XX contracts. That was a massive gamble for the company and it seems to have paid off.
>>65604350GIVE US THE B-1R YOU FUCKS
>>65605536>when the genie grants your air-to-air bomber wish
>>65605542Imagine it using the cannon in air to air combat
>>65605542Now give it actual genies (the nuclear unguided a2a rocket)
>>65605640>B1 rotary launcher filled with nuclear missiles
>>65605657Pretty cool. Sorry Chang, you can't match this. Boris is right out.
>>65604381Don't worry, it'll get worse.
explain to me why the fuck it would be a bad idea to revive those A2A nuclear rocketsI forgot what name they had
>>65604350>*autistic 0.50 BMG machine guns screeching*
>>65605721Have yet to see an AA intercept by drone.
>>65604474>>65604496Boeing's fighter group in St. Louis is just about their only competent branch.
>>65604363That pic makes me think you are a colosall retard.
>>65605492Plus Boeing's plane is apparently outstanding.
>>65604577Rocket. Genie was a rocket, not a missile. It had no guidance system.
>>65606023Didn't a drone down an Apache?
>>65605293>vigorous dragoni think the chinks might be compensating for something...
>>65604350>Hell yeahno offense but it's kinda hard to get excited for anything american anymoreamericans can't even properly obliterate sandniggers nowdays, they just look at you like picrel
>>65606468and other fantasies you can tell yourself as a third worlder with a chip on his shoulder.
>>65605994biggus dickus
>>65606468embarassing post desu
>>65604350How many BVR missiles do you think you could shit out the back of a C-17? I bet it's a lot
>>65605640We need a new SRAM with optional A-A capability.
>>65606029Which feels odd, given that Boeing's woes are heavily blamed on MDD's senior management.
Since this is pretty much the current US AirPower thread I’ll post this here. Retired Rear Admiral Mike Manazir was just on the DefAero Report talking about lot about F/A-XX. In his tenure as OPNAV N9 he helped spec out F/A-XX requirements, and later went on to work at Boeing so is possibly the best informed person on the program to have talked publicly about it at length. Here’s some of the key points covered:>F/A-XX will be a large aircraft, butting up to cat/trap limits, expect takeoff weights around 80000lbs>large size enables longer range and large internal weapon carriage>increased speed was also pointed out as a major benefit over current platforms>stealth against both radar and infrared apparently excellent>will be very capable in both a2a and a2g mission sets, likely prioritizing a2a early in a potential China conflict>will share significant F-47 DNA as Boeing is lead on both, believes this will allow cost and schedule savings vs Northrop>talks about drone quarterback capabilities potentially allowing one pilot to cover 100mi of the front with three drone wingmen>reiterated it’s also a Growler replacement implying strong EW capabilities but doesn’t go into it much>Northrop bid was competitive with cockpit visibility on landing approach apparently helping Boeing over the topMight be more I forgot to mention here. Relevant segment begins at ~15:30 and continues to the end of the podcasthttps://defaeroreport.com/2026/10/22/defense-aerospace-air-power-podcast-oct-22-26-season-4-e37-fa-xx-and-future-of-naval-aviation/
>>65606808They don’t like to take accountability for their own fuckups but their troubles started with their own guys. Condit was career Boeing and made the decision to move HQ to Chicago and away from all the engineers. Stonecipher was McDonnell but the issue was more so that he was a Jack Welch disciple from his time at GE. McNerney was again another Welch guy also from GE. He had a long tenure as CEO and was probably most responsible for commercial side woes. Muilenberg was career Boeing and started before the merger, he was responsible for a lot of the fixed price contract woes on the BDS side. Calhoun was another GE guy. Ortberg who is now righting the ship was career Rockwell Collins through to the RTX merger. Most of their issues were homegrown of imported from GE, not really a McDonnell issue.
>>65604350Based beyond belief
>>65606838>What is OPSec??Yeah, no wonder the chinese keeps one upping you murrican.
Throw a revolver chamber in the bomb bay and fill it with AMRAAMs
>>65607173so right chinksis, now join the rest of us wumaos for lunch. We've just stolen the neighborhood dog and are about to roast it with the rocket fuel brought cheap from the local missile base
>>65607193>rocket fuel brought cheap from the local missile baseNope, the perpetrator already executed. Unlike western law. Chinese law is strict and fair, not protecting the convict like the western one does.
>>65607173He said almost nothing that hadn’t already been speculated based off stated requirements and known winners from other programs. The only real new information was that Boeing apparently had better cockpit visibility than Northrop, who were compensating with camera systems.
>>65606838>cockpit visibility on landing approach apparently helping Boeing over the topHow are the yuros going to react to the soft confirmation that it doesn't have canards?
>>65607336>thinly veiled DnC propaganda
>>65607342DnC?
>>65607353divide and conquer
>>65607365It's not divide and conquer, I'm just poking fun at them since they've been getting uppity about renderings with canards. But any who knows about aero knows that canard+delta wing aircraft need a high angle of attack on approach to keep a reasonable landing speed, so if it's true that the Boeing bid had better approach visibility, then it likely doesn't have canards.
>>65607207>killing one scapegoat fixed it!you don't grill alone kek>Chinese law is strict and fairkek x2
>>65606800Zero because the US isn't going to put strategic airlifters into contested airspace in the first place. Even if they wanted to do that, the US doesn't have enough BVR missiles in the stockpile to make it effective.>>65606838Does he mention the fly away cost?
>>65607511He did not, though he did say Congress needs to fund both 6th generation procurement programs at a higher level so they can actually benefit from scale economies unlike the F-22. So I would expect it’s still quite high though probably not F-47 level.
>>65606838Fuck it close enough. F/A-36 here we come.
>>65607523>revolving door MIC shill wants mo money fo them programsI'm not sure I believe him. The biggest risk to these programs is the procurement cost ballooning to the point where it parasitizes the rest of the defense budget. This an especially huge vulnerability as the Trump debt binge destabilizes US finances.
>>65608149true
>>65604529That's old Boeing
B-21 for bombers / heavy payloadF-47 for air / light supportA-10 for cas / anti drone warfareThe future is looking good.
>>65604350I've been saying for ages that the F-47 is a waste of money. It's supposed to operate alongside subsonic loyal wingman drones, so why does speed matter? In every other respect, the B-21 is already as good or better than the F-47 is anticipated to be.
>>65608551Getting on station quicker is a useful capability.
>>65608557It can't get on station quicker because it's shackled to its subsonic wingmen.
>>65608580The subsonic wingmen aren't shackled to the F-47 though. Nothing stops the drones from being launched from a different location at a different time and rendezvous at an assigned point.
>>65606037>an arrow has guidance>Saturn V is a missile
>>65608592Why not launch a B-21 from that location as well? They're not more expensive and all of that R&D money could be put into building more airframes, and the economies of scale of maintaining a single model of aircraft larger than the combined B-21 and F-47 fleets will result in higher readiness rates as well as more airframes.
>>65608606Because airframes are expensive and if you can place them safely out of enemy range while being able to be brought on station within the required time you'd do that. There's also the issue where you simply don't have a convenient nearby platform you can launch the B-21s from. Loyal wingmen should easily be able to be launched off carriers and improvised airstrips.
>>65608615If the location isn't secure, you shouldn't be housing your drones there either. They're attritable, not disposable. Plus the ground crews are even more valuable than the airframes themselves.We can talk about carrier launched wingman drones when the USAF announces their plans to purchase an aircraft carrier.
>>65608551>He doesn't understand why a $200 million manned fighter would need speed more than a $20 million drone
>>65608551The drone quarterback role is something they’re designing it to be good at doing, but not something it would always be doing. They’re in theory great extra sensor nodes and magazine depth on the frontlines of a large air battle, but they’re not going to chain them to Anduril Fury drones when doing penetrating missions. Mitchell Institute war games see those being done exclusively by B-21 or F-47 while CCAs remain a volume asset for defending friendly bases and harassing enemy forces near the frontline.
>>65606530>thirdworlder is mad america cucked out and didn't finish the job with iran>>65606751>y-you're embarassing not me begging puccia for oil because i couldn't go through with what i started despite having le much superior weaponrylike i said, it's hard getting excited about anything american anymore, it's mostly just mentally ill culture war slop
Why don't they first make the factories that will produce the munitions that such an aircraft will fire?
>>65608684>$200 million manned fighter$300m+
>>65608684Explain it to me.>they need the speed to run away from missiles!A B-21 wouldn't have missiles fired at it, anyway. It's for all intents and purposes invisible to our enemies.>>65608706Okay, so what's a situation that would require an F-47 and couldn't be handled by launching a B-21 in advance?
>>65608965Any kind of air combat. We’ve seen nothing to suggest there are any currently integrated air to air capabilities on B-21, everything being talked about is hypothetical. Even then, they seem to be looking at it as an outsized munition carrier that would be operating well behind friendly forces. B-21 is incredibly stealthy, but it is also large, slow, and not particularly agile. It’s all in on maximizing stealth, but that makes it very vulnerable in the event that you can find it and vector fighters against it. It would be run down and killed without a very capable escort. F-47 is intended to be that very capable escort. The F-47’s PCA mission set is what would enable B-21 deep strikes against an adversary with a large air force, or a large integrated air defense network, where they would be running ahead of the main strike package running SEAD/DEAD missions.
>>65609043>Any kind of air combat.How are you supposed to fight against a plane you can't see that will fire missiles at you from hundreds of miles away?
>>65606011> Pierre Sprey was found dead in a hotel room August 8th 2021. Toxicology found him with amphetamines and amyl nitrate in his system. The autopsy found blunt anal trauma and anal fissures. Surrounding him, was bottles of poppers, lube and large “adult toys”. Foul play was ruled out and it was determined he died of heart failure. Three witnesses stated they weee engaging in sexual intercourse when Mr Sprey lost consciousness, and they immediately called 911. >>65606468Brown fingers typed this
>>65609051Space Force claims IOC for some level of space based AMTI in 2028. That’s a massive early advantage for us, but it will eventually proliferate. “Can’t be seen” is not likely to be something you can still count on 10-15 years from now.
>>65609067There's no need for space based anything, the battlespace will be saturated with datalinked radars. If a counter to low radar observability in the near future were a genuine concern, the correct hedge would not be F-47 but development of an F-15 EX2.
>>65608965They need speed to run away from missiles.Unless Northrop has some black magic cooked up, it could be detected when opening doors to launch missiles, and even if that isn't detected, the missiles themselves would give a general idea of where the launch platform is. Speed helps with the throwing off the later and gives the option of running away just in case.
>>65609084It is a genuine concern. But the answer is still even lower observability and longer range weapons. AMTI is going to space because weapons have advanced enough that AWACS are currently too vulnerable. The self defense missile programs might mitigate that but they’re years away from producing an operational capability.
>>65604363Everybody knows future of warfare is drones droning drones with drone carrying drones.
>>65609106Mach 0.8 will still get you quite far away after opening your weapons bay doors for a couple of seconds to send anything that might pose a threat to you into GTFO mode.>>65609109>But the answer is still even lower observability and longer range weapons.Which means the B-21, with lower observability than is expected from the F-47 and larger weapons bays.
>>65609194B-21 could work as a spear carrier that datalinks with actual frontline assets from far behind the lines. It is not intended to be the new frontline combatant, as fundamentally it was designed as a strategic bomber in the 2010s, before all these new ideas about air combat really took off. It is also far to expensive and low volume of an asset to ever be more than a supplement
>>65604554Lockheed Martin has the F-35 which will probably have a very long service life
>>65609215Current plans have it in service until 2088presumably that date will get extended out another decade or two at a minimum as time goes on.
>>65609215IIRC it is still a higher value contract on its own than every next generation stealth contract won by Boeing and Northrop combined, and by a very large margin at that.
>>65609220By a massive marginF-35 is ~$1.8-2.2T estimated total contract value, with like $1.5T worth of value still left to fulfill over the coming decades.F-47 is expected at around $100-150B total lifetime costF/A-XX is expected to run a similar $100-150B total costB-21 is estimated around $200-250B total lifetime costsSo all together it's still only like 1/4 of the total F-35 program.
>>65609217>the year is 2100>African dictators own a small fleet of third hand F35 which they use to blow up Toyota trucks built in the 1980sHonestly not surprising to think about.
>>65609212>It is also far to expensive and low volume of an asset to ever be more than a supplementIt's nearly double the unit cost of the F-47, but if the money hadn't been wasted on the development necessary to bring that program to production, that money could have instead been spent on building more B-21s, increasing the total number of airframes beyond what spending the same amount of money on two separate models will get us. It would also result in economy of scale reducing the cost per airframe even further.
>>65606023
>>65609236Not even close. Northrop just got a $4.5 billion contract to increase production from 10 to 12 airframes annually. That’s on top of $2.5 billion of their own money. $7 billion to increase production rate by two aircraft. Boeing meanwhile has been pulling permits suggesting they plan to produce at least two F-47 airframes each month. It is not just a money issue, it is a supply chain issue. F-47 gets more capability to the USAF faster.
>>65609194>Mach 0.8 will still get you quite far away after opening your weapons bay doors for a couple of secondsAnd Mach 2 will get you over twice as far, plus the extra distance from not having to spend nearly as long turning around. You want every second you can get to ensure your missile is in the no escape zone, while theirs can never reach you.
>>65609289NTA but I think the post was trying to refer to fixed wing kills specifically. Ukies have downed slow-moving helicopters will all kinds of random shit.
>>65609106>Unless Northrop has some black magic cooked upDumb question, but why don't they eject the missiles backwards with pressurized gas through some small port and only then have it fire up its rocket engine?
>>65609855That was somewhat tried with the A-5 Vigilante, but proved too unreliable for use. Even if they got it working for one type of weapon, it would be nearly impossible to make a system work with the wide variety of payloads a bomber is expected to carry.
>>65610030Worth noting that also wasn't with munitions that needed any kind of guidance or communication with the host vehicle.
>>65609329Use the Boeing factories to make B-21s. Same shit as Northrop making F-35 fuselages.
>>65606838>he helped spec out F/A-XX requirements, and later went on to work at Boeing \holy revolving door, Batman!no wonder the US MIC is so inefficient, all it does everyday is fuck its own face while taxpaypiggies watch
>uhh actually the billion dollar bomber you don't need can actually be a fighter too Cope and shaheedThis thing is going to end up as a bus that flys drones around
>>65610321>and other fantasies you can tell yourself as a low IQ dronenigger
>>65604350Just shit out crates of 30 missiles at a time with a drag chute, and let the missiles do the fancy maneuvers.
>>65604443>>65604439Truth nuke, though anons won't like it
>>65610281They already do. Spirit Aerosystems is a major subcontractor for B-21.
>>65609855You must think in Russian.>You must think in Russian.
>>65604377>Modern air to air combat is just about spamming missiles from max rangeIt is not. First of all there is no single "max range" on an air-to-air missile, it's a continuously changing envelope that's dictated by the energy state and altitude of your own aircraft and the closure rate and reaction of the target aircraft. So if you're launching from a slow fatass missile truck or bomber then your weapons immediately lose like 25% of their kinematic performance that they would have had if launched from a fighter.Also after detecting the first wave of incoming missiles on their RWR the target aircraft will simply defend, your macross missile spam won't be able to reach them, and the fatass missile truck planes won't have the performance to capitalize on the opening that their long-range salvo created, to actually pursue and punish the now-defending target like a fighter does. All the missile truck could do is keep things at bay (for an enormous cost), unless the enemy was essentially forced to try and close with them.That's why these articles are describing this as a self-defense capability, a bomber will NEVER have a chance against a fighter even in bvr combat all things being equal. Now if you have a massive insurmountable technological advantage over your opponent then maybe a slow bomber is still enough to beat a fighter several generations old, doesn't mean that is the future.
>>65614902There’s something to be said for the idea of large platforms launching very long range missiles and forcing hostile fighters to defend, at which point your actual frontline fighters take advantage of the situation to run the enemy down and either kill them or force them to cede the airspace. Not everything needs to result in a kill to be useful, suppression is valuable in and of itself
>>65614902>Also after detecting the first wave of incoming missilesNot going to happen. Ask the indian pilot that getting shot down by PL-15 for proofs.
>>65614902>First of all there is no single "max range" on an air-to-air missileFlat earther detected
I suppose a bomb bay stuffed full of fuckhuge missiles could be pretty fun I support it
>>65614902>a bomber will NEVER have a chance against a fighter even in bvr combat all things being equalthey wouldn't be equal. A bigass missile truck should be able to lug around larger missiles with greater range than what a fighter can carry.
>>65604381There is room to go even further and beyond.
Every fighter is a temporarily a bomber now
>>65605657The B61 bombs are obsolete. Even France replaced its bombs with cruise missiles in the mid-1980s....Currently, the French use the ASMPA-R (+340mi / 300 kt), and the hypersonic ASN4G will replace it (+620mi).
>>65619674They're not obsolete for real countries that operate stealth bombers.
>>65619674>>65619812Bombs are effective because they're cheap. Most high end weapon systems are designed to be used in incredibly short, high intensity engagements where by the end it is expected that the war is either won or a substantial percentage of the enemies combat power has been destroyed. Which history has shown; especially in recent years, that if that is not achieved, you're kind of fucked. It takes years to replenish stocks of even things like cruise missiles. You need something cheap like bombs if you want to actually sustain the fight.
>>65604377When both have stealth neither does and you need to get to visible range again. which means smaller jets and possibly even dogfights if they have IR stealth as well.6th gen was supposed to have visible stealth and the ability to go to space not just high altitudes with low air density but going by the progress itll be a while till we see those.
>>65620623>Bombs are effective because they're cheapWhat do you think about this bad boy?Is this the same size as these:>>65605657>The total development cost for the B61-13 nuclear gravity bomb program is estimated at $92 million (with some preliminary NNSA estimates around $114 million), and individual production units are estimated to cost around $30 million each
>>65620699>A mainstay of the air leg of the United States’ nuclear Triad, the B61 is the longest-serving and most versatile weapon in the U.S. nuclear stockpile. While the B61 family can be delivered by a broad range of fighter and bomber aircraft, the new B61-13 will only be certified for delivery by strategic bomber aircraft and deployed from bases in the continental United States. The B61-13 is one of seven ongoing warhead modernization programs NNSA is executing to ensure the reliability and effectiveness of the nuclear stockpile. >The B61-13 will provide the President with additional nuclear options against certain harder and large-area military targetshttps://www.energy.gov/nnsa/articles/nnsa-completes-assembly-first-b61-13-nuclear-gravity-bomb-ahead-schedule
>>65620703>"It was my honor today to stamp the first completed unit at the Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas, where all the efforts of NNSA’s labs, plants, and sites culminated in this amazing milestone. This achievement signals American strength to our adversaries and allies alike."
so glad Project Aces cooked up a giga juiced version of the coolest bomber for a boss fight.
>>65620765What do the downward sept ends of the wings do?
>>65620795Compression lift and high speed stability
>>65607168Incredible game, anon
>>65620699>Is this the same size as these:The B61-13 is, in fact, substantially smaller than those GBU-31(v)3s.
>>65606023Ultimately a missile is just a rocket-powered drone.
>>65620962Rocket propulsion is not required; there are jet powered drones like the Tomahawk. Drones don't actually exist. "One way attack drones" like the Shahed are actually prop- or jet-powered cruise missiles, "FPV drones" are rotor-powered TV-guided missiles, "sea drones" like the Sea Baby are torpedoes, and so on. You could argue that reconnaissance and supply drones are fundamentally different from their crewed equivalent, but the distinction between a "drone" munition and its equally uncrewed equivalent is meaningless.
>>65621075>there are jet powered drones like the Tomahawk.Jet powered missiles*
>pic relatedits the future fighter jet/missile truck/radar awac controller
>>65608551Operating alongside doesn't mean literally flying right next to them
>>65608637>They're attritable, not disposable"weve learned nothing" the post^thanks airmen
>>65614902>Also after detecting the first wave of incoming missiles on their RWR the target aircraft will simply defend, your macross missile spam won't be able to reach them
>>65614902lmao its>pic relatedposting but the air version
>>65604350
