"The greatest battle implement ever devised."

>>29824218
Atleast put an image of a M1A2 Sep v3. Artillery still beats it though.

File: Sopwith_F-1_Camel_2_USAF.jpg (448KB, 1800x1218px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 1800x1218px

>>29824218
Airpower beats firepower like scissors cuts paper.

>>29824253
Not even close
Easy to turn a tank into an SPAAG, imagine a battlefield filled with thousands of SPAAG, what is your aircraft going to do?

File: type45.jpg (43KB, 966x493px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 966x493px

>>29824253

Type 45 beats Airpower like Paper covers Rock

>>29826651
Do its equipment and weapons even work? Have they been tested? How many missiles can it intercept within the minute or w/e warning you'll get?

>>29825786
Fly higher, duh. SHORAD isn't enough anon.

>>29826780
Large caliber SPAAG wouldn't be SHORAD m8

>>29826980
Semantics :^D

>>29826721

It's capable of tracking in excess of 1,000 targets at ranges of up-to 400 km, can launch 8 missiles in under 10 seconds while simultaneously guiding up to 16 missiles to designated targets at any one time. Also with the new Sea Ceptor Missile it has just doubled its payload capacity

File: Df-21d-on-the-highway1[1].jpg (53KB, 550x313px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 550x313px

>>29826651

And ground power beats sea power

File: vanguard_class.jpg (82KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 600x450px

>>29827224

Glub Glub power beats Ground Power

If your answer isn't multirole fighter/attack jets you're wrong and you should give up.

File: 9iJXAwQ.jpg (798KB, 960x1311px) Image search: [Google]

798KB, 960x1311px

>>29827817
Pics related

File: 1396019534016.jpg (1MB, 4176x2616px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4176x2616px

>>29827817
Oh don't worry man, just a bunch of F-22's

File: image997.gif (294KB, 630x446px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 630x446px

vroom vroom

File: 1424112318865.jpg (781KB, 1280x852px) Image search: [Google]

781KB, 1280x852px

>>29827817
>What're you wearing, Jake from State Farm?

"The future of western airpower?"

File: 1401162647938.jpg (1MB, 4928x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4928x3264px

>>29827817
How many firefights have ended with a JDAM flying off the wings of multirole fighter attack jets?

File: tornadogr_06_1280.jpg (259KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1280x1024px

>>29827817

Agreed

Submarines are literally invincible

nb4 ruskies

Where da fuck is Vlad?

putting that glorious crown molding on that ugly as fuck Hiney?

File: 1327157498437.jpg (113KB, 620x400px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 620x400px

>>29826721
Nick Brown, the editor-in-chief of Jane’s International Defence Review, was quoted by The Huffington Post (a US online news aggregator and blog) saying, "It’s [Type 45 destroyer] certainly one of the most advanced air defence ships in the world... The US Aegis system is similar, but Sea Viper is more advanced."[51]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/02/03/hms-dauntless-royal-navy-falklands_n_1252548.html

>>29828273

I think there's certainly a point to be made that only AN/SPY-3 is AESA, whilst AN/SPY-1 is PESA.

File: 1451929519218.jpg (69KB, 469x698px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 469x698px

>>29828308
SPY3 is still X band and therefore inferior to L band.

T45 has a shit load of computing power allowing it to tell insects from stealth jets and waves from periscopes.

Ontop of that EVERY aster dart has exo-atmospheric capability (lateral thrusters) allowing it to have an incredibly high hit probability.

When the 3000km BMD Aster enters service the Americans are going to be very far behind Europe (read as UK) in all aspects of air and area defence.

>>29828447

Really?

I thought only Aster 30 could do BMD.

File: 12-011-1000x1302.jpg (340KB, 1000x1302px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1000x1302px

>>29828686
only aster 30 is for SRBM

However the only difference between after 30 and aster 15 is the booster.

The kill vehicle on both missiles is identical. So having lateral thrusters and control surfaces in atmosphere (plus the mid course guidance from SAMPSON) and the AESA seeker on each missile, allows it to have a very high probability of hit compared to other platforms.

The only step needed to make an Aster dart LRBM capable is the booster phase as all darts are identical.

In development there is a version of Aster 30 with a booster (presumably muti-stage) that will fit in the SYLVER 50 launcher. This missile was given the design brief of being 3000KM+ (SM6 is 2500+).

However range is a very fickle subject when talking about BMD, as target speed, location, LOS range, detection range and altitude all change that figure.

File: f35.png (123KB, 500x334px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 500x334px

>>29827817
This. The F-35 is the ultimate battle implement.

>>29828804

Great to know.

Can I ask how you came to understand both the T45 and Asters so well? I'm frustrating stuck at my mediocre level of understanding.

I read (excluding official literature):

Thinkdefence
ukdefencejournal
ARRSE / Rum Ras
Defencetalk
SavetheroyalNavy

Is there anything I'm missing?

>>29827224
>df-21s
>doing anything aside from accidentally starting nuclear war

>>29827817
Boeing shills gtfo

File: RIPJSDF.png (290KB, 647x520px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 647x520px

>>29828935

Go to the Wiki's and dont read them - follow the links to the sources.

go to the MOD website and read FOI (freedom of information requests) maybe submit some of your own?

Then visit forums and have a Jane's subscription.

>>29828980

Thanks, is it worth buying a RUSI subscription whilst I'm at it?

I remember they've done a couple of things on T45s with BMD.

>>29828447
The block 2 aster will have defense against 3000km range BMD threats, not have 3000km range itself.

>>29828273
AN/SPY-6 is most likey a step above.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SPY-6

>>29829040
That's true but Aster 30 blk 2 was not what i was refering to in >>29828804

>>29829094
Source of said missle?

>>29829080
Based on what ?

you linked a whole wiki page like I'm meant to have an epiphany ?

Even though AEGIS was deigned with software and hardware improvement in mind, it's still a system from the 70's.

Sea Viper is the benchmark for modern systems.

>>29829161
Calling the AEGIS of today compareable to the AEGIS of the 70s is fucking silly anon.

What made sea viper a step above was the sampson radar.

File: 1458587083980.jpg (585KB, 1200x1650px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 1200x1650px

>>29829191

that's not what i'm saying.

While AEGIS can and has been improved it is still based on much of the original 70's structure. while processing and ocde have improved it still has the same framework.

Sea viper is literally a super computer, combined with an excellent radar, controlling what is likely to be the most accurate AAW missile in service today.

There is a reason BAE is responsible for the sensor fusion on F35, and T45 was at the top of their CV.

>>29829105

digging through the archives now, but I believe it as discussed in https://rusi.org/sites/default/files/201508_op_ballistic_missile_defence.pdf

don't hold me to that though.

>>29828947
>sngle ballistic missiles flying on a trajetory towards the ocean
>starting a nuclear war

Pick one and only one.
If anyone was retarded enough to go nuclear just because there's a single ballistic missile start, we'd have had multiple nuclear wars by now.

>>29829257

Really?

Because nobody has fired ballistic AsSM that can be fitted with nuclear warheads.

>>29829282
But people have fired plenty of ballistic missiles that are nuclear capable.

Mistaking Scud or DF-21 for an ICBM is like mistaking a paper plane for a real plane. ne ascent you know the range and general target area of an ballistic missile.

To claim that ANY SRBM or IRBM would be mistaken for an ICBM on target to the US mainland is to seriously under value NATO's early warning ability.

>>29829255
>it is still based on much of the original 70's structure.

No, no, no. The MMSP alone drastically changed the structure, along with other programs.

>Sea viper is literally a super computer,

In taking this as hyperbole, as the DBR on ford class carriers actually use IBM supercomputers

>>29829339
Yet AEGIS is not able to engage targets in proximity to friendlies and nor is it able to hand off engagement mid flight to other warships. Additionally it is not able to pass off targets from one on-board sensor to another.

Sea Viper can do all of these things.

>>29829339
>In taking this as hyperbole, as the DBR on ford class carriers actually use IBM supercomputers

Zumwalt and Ford don't use AEGIS...

>>29829105
I'm >>29829255


That link isn't what i was looking for but it's 0125 in the UK so i'll get you it in the morning, the thread will probably still be alive in 8hrs. No doubt partly because I went to bed rather than provide a link.

>>29829411

Isn't that what CEC is for?

File: TODAY_2.png (75KB, 566x581px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 566x581px

>>29824218

>>29824218
I tend to forget that its a chassis on a gun and not a gun on a chassis. Kinda like and A-10.
Freedom

>>29829411
>Yet AEGIS is not able to engage targets in proximity to friendlies

Wew lad, what is 1D/1D(V)

>nor is it able to hand off engagement mid flight to other warships.

Wew laddy, what is NIFC-CA and CEC.

>Additionally it is not able to pass off targets from one on-board sensor to another.

Weeeeew laaaad, what is SQQ-89 in regards to ASROC systems.

File: 01020_full.jpg (423KB, 653x1000px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 653x1000px

"The greatest battle implement ever devised"

File: Zim Zam laugh.gif (2MB, 389x279px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 389x279px

>>29829609
Someone needs to make this into a Youtube video.