3 ms·

Air to air combat kills are rare because the strategic circumstances that would make them numerous enough to be unexceptional would likely tree up to minor-to-m

Air to air combat kills are rare because the strategic circumstances that would make them numerous enough to be unexceptional would likely tree up to minor-to-major nuclear conflict. More directly, am struck that the average person has yet to internalize that in modern high-intensity conflict detection roughly = mission kill if not outright destruction. Everything operationally important (air, sea, ground) that wants to survive needs to avoid emission/detection long enough to detect something else first and destroy it.

the__alchemist 5y ago
> More directly, am struck that the average person has yet to internalize that in modern high-intensity conflict detection roughly = mission kill if not outright destruction. Everything operationally important (air, sea, ground) that wants to survive needs to avoid emission/detection long enough to detect something else first and destroy it. Only if you're willing to go in the enemy's weapons engagement zones - whether that's a fighter or surface-based system. Detection/track ranges are generally much higher.
- Tuna-Fish 5y ago
  > Detection/track ranges are generally much higher. This is absolutely not true. For modern weapons, the effective range is generally limited by detection, whether you are talking about heavy SAM (like the S-400, with it's 400km range) or modern AAM (like the Meteor or R77M, with ranges ~200km). As a rule, it's relatively cheap and easy to increase missile range, so they are not limited by ability but by choice. SAM ranges are pushed past reasonable detection ranges because it allows siting the missiles more to the rear, which is safer, and for the missile batteries to provide mutual support. AAM ranges are pushed past detection to increase the size of the no-escape zone, which is usually thought to be more important than the actual maximum range.
  - the__alchemist 5y ago
    I'm not sure where you're getting those numbers, but your ranges are off by an OOM. Maybe if you're talking a lofted shot from high speed, high alt against a non-maneuvering target, with low PK expectations.
    - Tuna-Fish 5y ago
      Er, most of them are conservative if anything. The Meteor for example is advertised with a 60km nez, against a mach 2.5 plane starting from a tail chase. It's fairly easy to calculate that the pure kinematic maximum range against a stationary target will have to be way higher than 200km. R77m has been claimed to be similar, and while there might be some exaggeration there, it's not that hard to believe given that it's a ramjet missile that's quite large.

the__alchemist 5y ago

> More directly, am struck that the average person has yet to internalize that in modern high-intensity conflict detection roughly = mission kill if not outright destruction. Everything operationally important (air, sea, ground) that wants to survive needs to avoid emission/detection long enough to detect something else first and destroy it. Only if you're willing to go in the enemy's weapons engagement zones - whether that's a fighter or surface-based system. Detection/track ranges are generally much higher.

Tuna-Fish 5y ago
> Detection/track ranges are generally much higher. This is absolutely not true. For modern weapons, the effective range is generally limited by detection, whether you are talking about heavy SAM (like the S-400, with it's 400km range) or modern AAM (like the Meteor or R77M, with ranges ~200km). As a rule, it's relatively cheap and easy to increase missile range, so they are not limited by ability but by choice. SAM ranges are pushed past reasonable detection ranges because it allows siting the missiles more to the rear, which is safer, and for the missile batteries to provide mutual support. AAM ranges are pushed past detection to increase the size of the no-escape zone, which is usually thought to be more important than the actual maximum range.
- the__alchemist 5y ago
  I'm not sure where you're getting those numbers, but your ranges are off by an OOM. Maybe if you're talking a lofted shot from high speed, high alt against a non-maneuvering target, with low PK expectations.
  - Tuna-Fish 5y ago
    Er, most of them are conservative if anything. The Meteor for example is advertised with a 60km nez, against a mach 2.5 plane starting from a tail chase. It's fairly easy to calculate that the pure kinematic maximum range against a stationary target will have to be way higher than 200km. R77m has been claimed to be similar, and while there might be some exaggeration there, it's not that hard to believe given that it's a ramjet missile that's quite large.