future of jet fights

Probably not. Though stealth means shorter detection ranges, modern fighters also have passive IR/optical sensors that mean detection ranges are still quite long.

And close in dogfight missiles have gotten much better, capable of engaging targets at any angle, more consistent, more lethal warheads, better range/higher delta V.

BVR might be unviable but modern air combat would not look like a WW2/Korean dogfight.

>>34092003
>Future

They have none. Visual sensors and passive detection are getting better and better - you can hide from radar waves, you can not hide from the air your jet displaces around it.

Together with cheap and powerful lasers i see no future for anything in the air in non-caveman wars.

It will be way more expensive then the old dogfights.

We are probably nearing a point where they're going to put RAM coating, and built-in stealth in missiles, and drones.

A shitty f124 engine mated into a drone with a gun and thrust vectoring can kill any current fighter jet. It can go faster, turn tighter, and be programmed to win any conceivable engagement.

That drone won't be able to avoid being detected by IRST then hit with a HOBS IR AA missile before getting in gun range.

>>34092140
>and be programmed to win any conceivable engagement.
oh boy

>>34092003

Typical Detection range vs fighter sized target with eyes is about 5-2 nm (max is between 15-8 depending on aspect and fighter size, however scanning the sky for a target that size takes minutes)
Modern IRST can see a subsonic/ front aspect target from 20+ nm, if the target is supersonic/ side/rear aspect that can stretch out to over a hundred nm.
Something like an F-35 could detect and target you with DAS and then blat you with a HOBS shot well before you got into visual range.

>>34092606
why don't we have something like DAS in tanks yet? i can imagine that a device capable of allowing the tank commander to see through his tank, as well as alerting him of all hostiles within a few miles would be extremely useful.

File: Suicide_drone.jpg (53KB, 800x497px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 800x497px

>>34092140
>F124
>go faster

I bet a drone with a trust vectoring expendable SRBM, EO targeting system and fragmenting warhead would be better desu

>>34092606
all those acronyms made me feel like I was in a Nutnfancy video

>>34092003
The next gen of aircraft will be pilotless. I would guess that guns won't be necessary.

>>34092140
A drone with a gun is still going to lose to a manned fighter with a missile.

The age of gun combat is over. The strength of autonomous aircraft is in better situational awareness and better tactics, not "muh G's" which cap out at 20G anyway due to turbine strikes.