- Posts: 16
- Joined: 13 Sep 2010, 23:09
- Location: The Netherlands
count_to_10 wrote:tacf-x wrote:I'm pretty sure there's a big difference between blinding a missile and initiating all out structural failure of an aircraft wing via rapidly applying a heat load to the wing fuel tank.
If you can blind the missile, you can blind the aircraft. More, there is reason to believe that optical filters will make it impossible to blind a missile without destroying it. Further, you have a lot more burn time to take down a fighter than you have to take down a missile closing in on you.
When the long range missile is made obsolete, it will be in favor of even longer range weapons, not for a return to gun fighting.
In a hypothetical situation, what do you think is the survivability of a flight of F-22's be against a Dutch "Zeven Provincien" Class anti air "Frigate" (LCF)?
For as far as I understand, the LCF has 2 different radar systems regarding search and track of airborne objects and fire control.
One is called APAR which operates on X-band and the other is called SMART-L Which mainly operates on the L-band.
What would the survivability of lets say a flight of 4 Raptors be if they were to be engaged by an LCF?
I find it hard to believe that Raptors will be outmatched against a few semi-active Mach 4 missiles.
Also, will the Raptor not be able to overload those missiles' own radars/receivers with its EW capabilities?
If the Raptor's survivability is low in this scenario, then how in the world could it survive in a much more harsh environment in let's say Russia, going against double-digit SAM's coupled with much more powerful ground based radar systems?