Is there any chance that jamming tech and anti-IR systems become

>>32358190
Anything is possible

>tfw you're too close for missiles, switching to guns

Does anybody remember that game for ps1, warhawk? That's what that picture reminds me of.

>>32358190
Not so long as jets have big, hot exposed engine exhausts, which is sort of necessary for jets.

>>32358214
Back me up, Goose!!

>>32358190

>Burgers letting fishbeds that close to their tomcat brand tomcat

I don't think so

File: Air-defence.jpg (55KB, 710x325px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 710x325px

>>32358190

Yes, but it depends on the location and the scenario. The armchair general in me says that a faction wouldn't go so far to jam everything because it would inhibit their own combat capabilities, unless it's a life-or-death survival situation. For example, say WW3 is ongoing and nukes have fallen but the powers that be are hurt but still alive. In this case protecting the remaining assets (dams, railroad yards, factories, etc) would be hugely important and warrant extreme measures like total radio/GPS silence (wrought by intense radio jamming).

In these cases both aircraft guns, dumb bombs and artillery would be needed to knock out the jammers, which is when the main forces move in and pulverize the survivors.

File: 1477763996147.jpg (285KB, 2047x1288px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 2047x1288px

>>32358839
you make a good armchair general

>>32358458
Fuck yeah I do, shit was cash.

Vertibirds as gunships when ?

Unlikely, as jamming heavy enough to completely shut down long range options would be immensely prohibitive of your own forces, and in the case of static defenses, require that satellites are knocked out.

You're looking at a full on WW3 situation where armies become reliant on the Mk.I Eyeball, and one that got really really bad at that. Anti satellite warfare means nukes have dropped.
Even in that case old maps and backups exist so artillery and anything with a fixed trajectory can still be used to pulverize fixed targets, but mobile assets so heavily jammed would need to either be identified by direct contact forces or direct contact forces would first have to eliminate some of the jamming sources beforehand.
The thing about complete jamming is you can't do it with just one or two jamming vehicles, you'd need an entire array network to enforce total jamming.
That uses up a lot of power and assets, and require they all remain functional. Knocking out the power grid or one or two of the jamming vehicles and the system would lose a lot of its power. You only need a few systems to enforce long range scrambling, of course, but just a few jamming sources are vulnerable in their own right.
My best guess would ultimately be "no," however it's not unimaginable that guns will be used to score air to air kills in the future due to a variety of factors.

>>32358814
That's clearly an Egyptian tomcat (hence they pyramids)

Maybe. In LoGH (love it or hate it) jamming technology became so advanced that spaceships had to install huge mechanical optics because radar and other detectors don't work.

>>32361844
R u memeing me m8

>>32358190
No.

>>32361880
No, the US sold Egypt a bunch of F-14s and M1 Abrams at one point in time. But without the computer systems, they are not as good as US stuff.

Isreal broke a bunch though.

>>32361894
What do you mean by they broke them

Like literally they broke the plane?

>>32361894
It has USAF roundels you fucking moron. Also, Egypt never had F-14s at any point.

Not likely
-IR missiles have become MUCH better at tracking over the years
-the military is currently investing in / developing backup channel tracking. It's a measure-countermeasure game of cat and mouse where we're always developing.
-jamming signals themselves are a source to lock on to. See anti-radiation missile, specifically for use against RADAR but also helpful against RF jamming
-broadcast radio waves dissipate exponentially with distance. You can only jam areas so large because of this

>>32361894
>Israel and Egypt both had F-14s

m8 I knew u were memeing me.

>>32358468
Em-drive

File: Memphis Belle.jpg (285KB, 1120x1626px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1120x1626px

>>32361469

>>32358190
Unlikely, but even if it did happen, lasers are coming and unlike guns there's no real penalty to making them 360 degree traversable.

It already has with the Rafale and SPECTRA that forces enemies to get really close to it and use guns because SPECTRA jams all missiles. Thats what let it beat F-22 Raptor because Rafale is better up close and couldnlt be killed at long range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGuWadoTgkE

>>32362879
>EM-drive
>:^^^^^^^^^^^)
Literally not a thing (inb4 her der passing peer review means it works.)
But if we did actually live in a world where EM drives worked they would just be used to power perpetual motion machines and we'd either live in a star trek style utopia of peace and infinite emergy or, more likely, we'd use the infinite energy to blow the earth up like the fags we are. So jet warfare wouldn't matter.

>>32363025
>Implying the fight started at anything other than WVR

>>32363040

With SPECTRA it has to be WVR.

>>32363051
>Implying SPECTRA can do anything against an AIM-9X

>>32363059

SPECTRA jams missiles. It already proofed it when it had to go in first in Lybia and is in Syria too.

Video proof showing beating Raptor. SPECTRA is how stealth is done right while F-22 and F-35 not done shit lol.

>>32363085
>Video proof showing beating Raptor.

Oh dear

>>32363085
>SPECTRA jams missiles
With RF jamming (no different to what most US aircraft can do)
Against heatseekers like the AIM-9X all it can do is drop flares which are near useless

I was reading an article written by a genV aircraft pilot. (f35). He was saying that Its integrated stealth capabilities make it impossible to pick up with conventional onboard radar in the genIV and earlier jets. So basically he concluded that if they flew against other genV aircraft, radar could become moot, and they would have to rely on the naked eye to track enemy aircraft, and thus, use cannons instead of missiles.

>>32363417
Except the F-35 and every other 5th gen (besides the F-22) has infrared sensors that can be used well before WVR (at least with the F-35)

>>32363025

no you fucking mong, that was a BFM setup after the "war" was done at a Red Flag and they needed to burn gas before they could land back at Nellis. and the Rafale driver got his "kill" after the terminate, which is like running the ball into the endzone after the play's been whistled dead and expecting it to mean anything.

>>32358190
<<A YELLOW HAS BEEN HIT AND IS TRAILING SMOKE.>>

>>32363474

>driver

haha you dont even know they're called pilots the fuck do you know. Rafale won because SPECTRA kills the F-22s stealth and forces it up close. The Rafale does better with gun as its is 30 and not shit 20.

France has always done quality over quantity to have elite planes of NATO, where a few planes can take on loads of enemies at once thats why they can stay Rafale because they dont need F35.

>>32364099
>>driver

Driver has been customary USAF usage since Viet Nam at least. Learn 2 slang, trollboy.

>>32361906
>>32362414
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

>>32361910
Would JAG lie to me?

Maybe it was Iran...

>>32358190

No. If they can jam you, they can burn out your eyes with a laser.

File: F14s Iran.jpg (87KB, 840x527px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 840x527px

>>32361894
The Egyptians never bought the F-14. The only other operator of the F-14 is Iran.

The picture in the OP is from Gulf War 1, when a whole host of Western and Arab/Middle Eastern nations were aligned in their opposition to the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq.

>>32364303
I love how they still have the A model "glove vanes"

File: YF23.jpg (29KB, 452x339px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 452x339px

>>32358190

Not really and also Lasers are getting close. That would extend reliable dogfighting range to about 4-10 miles (which is a fuckton more than gatling).


TV guided air to air missile could be done, if you can find the guy you can look for his engine exhaust on IR and just track him manually. No flares or other shit he does is going to stop you since you're not going to confuse his exhaust the same way a missile would.
> we are of course speaking of night time air combat
> but even at night UV-enhanced night vision makes night scenes even brighter, you could still possibly see the outline of the plane

If its during the daytime, if you know where the guy is you can launch the missile, and as it gets closer you can literally SEE the fucker and he's just plain dead because now you're in a Ramming contest with your pilot skills. And even if he dodges well, if you're prepared for that you can press the detonate button and he gets sprayed with shrapnel anyway.

> it sounds involv
Its not elegant but

>>32367813
Not shrapnel.
That refers to a specific type of shell developed by a guy named...Shrapnel. WWI.