Are guns obsolete against aircraft?

>>33777167
not guns that shoot guided missiles.

>>33777167
Not when it's on a plane. Though you really should stick with missiles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2APUcbjnsY

>>33777193

>Not when it's on a plane.

Guns only accounted for like 5% of kills even in Vietnam.

>>33777217
So missiles?

>>33777167
gun are not obsolete against aircraft

they are just not as effective as missile

not worth the weight

File: bFehrwV4rrg.jpg (798KB, 2560x1621px) Image search: [Google]

798KB, 2560x1621px

Would you rather a Tor or a Panshit?

Enable tanks to elevate their cannons, give them a nice cheap short range AESA radar, computer aiming

They could easily shoot down aircraft with guided airburst rounds

Creating a large no-go zone

>>33777600

The US's SPAAG radar technology is hilariously out of date and has been ever since the disaster that was the Alvin York-Class SPAAG.

File: SmugT-14.png (160KB, 517x252px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 517x252px

>>33777405
AA shill, please

>>33777650
They want to be building special SPAAG's, that won't work because the US won't ever need them to shoot down aircraft

They are. AAA hasn't brought down a competent AF's fighter jets in a very long time. AAA by this point is just something third world armies use to make their troops feel better. It's a placebo.

Even SAM's are of questionable effectiveness against modern aircraft. Unless you have a modern AF AND modern SAM network, your air defense WILL fail. This is why the "Iran has S-300s zomg" memes are so stupid.

>>33777725
Nonsense
Obviously when the US brings a trillion dollar airforce to bear against a 1 billion dollar air defense networth, things are going to go bad for the defense.

But if you are talking relatively even opponents, its a different story.

>>33777735
Israel has fucked over Syria's AD countless times, despite Syria having tons of aid from the Soviets/USSR.

>>33777743
Yea ok and I beat up a retard in elementary school once, doesn't make me a martial artist

>>33777743
>Israel has fucked over Syria's AD countless times, despite Syria having tons of aid from the Soviets/USSR.
The Syrians actually BTFO the Israelis with SAMs in the first round actually. Then they got complacent and ended up getting their ass spectacularly handed back to them by the IAF.

File: Hot Airspace.webm (3MB, 1700x730px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1700x730px

>>33777167
>18 missiles
Eugen plz I need this in my Red Dragon

>>33777167
They're still good against helos and subsonic shit.

Air defence works in layers, gun based AA has its role in deterring low level infiltration

>>33777167

Well, lets put it this way. Enjoy spending a 500 000 USD missile on a 30 dollar ISIS-drone

>>33777372
This.

With guns, you have to get close. Decent defense would see you coming and take you out with something longer range first. Most of the time. But if someone manages to get in close, then guns will work.

>>33777924
where is this video from?

>>33780257
Korea 1955 (colourised)

>>33780257
Wargame
>>33780367
kek

>>33777217
>Guns only accounted for like 5% of kills even in Vietnam.

Well because

>THE ERA OF GUNFIGHTERS IT'S FUCKING OVER

And they proceed to bring missiles that were

>locking a gook that was taking a piss outside his tunnel
>splash into a river
>fly towards the sun and land in Syria
>fail to launch
>lose the lock cause they dropped fire and forget tech due reasons
>had a restrict set of rules to gain a secure lock without shooting down your buddy flying next to you

Then when they realized that guns were needed

>make random gunpods
>all go full brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrt and you run out of ammunition in a blink
>aiming with SUU pods was a pain in the jam

Sure they had aircrafts with guns but they were used in the mud moving business.Muh fucking Mach 2 fighters and the F-104C was a failure cause the engine would just flame out as soon t ingested gun gasses,F-102 was rushed in but Falcon missiles couldn't shot down a fucking C-130 drone flying straight and slowly at short distance,project Six Shooter only applied to the F-106 which didn't serve in Nam,barely any fighter went past Mach 1.8.Crusaders were the only ones who could jink better against Mig but their guns were prone to jamming and everyone and their own mother were switching with F-4 Phantoms which had lot of drag and G limitations problems,sure they manage to shot down some planes,but that's it.

No wonder gun kill accounts are so low

>>33777167
No really, anti-aircraft guns aren't really meant to shoot down planes effectively, they're supposed to deny them the area, making it risky enough that the enemy would rather avoid flying too close to you.

Also anti aircraft guns can be very effective against unarmored ground targets.

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

File: F89 Gentlemen.jpg (51KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 800x600px

>>33781649

you forget the awkward phase in the 50s when they decided guns weren't stronk enough to kill bombers, so everything got fitted with 70mm rocket pods, that would give like 3 bursts.

File: F-94_rockets.jpg (209KB, 876x740px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 876x740px

>>33784063