Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

VI-loser t1_izi2ahu wrote

Let's see....

Russia has already proven that stealth tech won't stop even the S300, let alone their more advanced systems.

B52s are more than good enough to carry long range missiles to be launched at a stand-off range.

While Russia is still flying about 200 sorties or more a day, few of them penetrate Ukraine airspace even though the AFU has a terribly coordinated air defense. No need.

The change has been compared to the obsolescence of the Battleship in WWII. Manned aircraft like the F35 are no longer viable when precision drones can be used instead.

−2

cyon_me t1_izi5d6k wrote

Russia doesn't have Stealth though. Also, do you really think you want a giant radio signal to your "stealth" aircraft? If so, then the stuff that you're relying on is to make it hard to hit, not to hide it (you'll need a manned support aircraft to keep up with it if you don't want the signal to be hijacked or jammed). This is a valid form of stealth, but it's not the fantasy-like stealth that the B-2 has. Also, drones are valuable in their effectiveness to cost ratio. As the US knows in Russia should have learned by now, human lives are extremely expensive, so a combat drone does make sense. However, don't expect it to dogfight. Dogfighting died with over-the-horizon targeting capabilities on planes (planes can magically explode [the missile is fast enough to blink through the attack], and they never saw their enemies).

Sorry about how I started this. I'm not deleting it because people need to put this in perspective. I'm not editing it because I'm tired.

3