4 ms·

And what are those cheap drones supposed to do? Fire even cheaper missiles? Fire bullets at aircraft far faster, higher and more maneuverable than them?

• XorNot 5y ago
  Persistent-loitering ground support would be one idea. Keeping air support hanging around for ground forces is a big problem, and "more is better" is essentially the order of the day. So your enemy gets to have a problem: if they do nothing, then you rain close-air down with impunity for your ground forces. But if you start shooting at drones with all your high-tech missiles, you're both spending a lot more per kill then they are per loss, and giving away the location and position of your ground-based anti-air assets (as well as forcing them to commit their high tech anti-air assets to the offensive - and they have pretty limited AA payloads). People need to stop thinking in terms of single-branch military, because the order of the day for any modern military is combined arms - air power is in support of some objective, not "just because".
  • VectorLock 5y ago
    >air power is in support of some objective, not "just because". Thats called "air superiority" which then trickles down to "ground support."
    • XorNot 5y ago
      In a conflict between equivalent militaries, the idea of establishing air superiority doesn't exist - otherwise you've already won.