Is the supersonic interceptor dead for good? It seems that close air support is the flavor of the month.
here is some glorious Starfighter howl
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GcfZXqPJf4
>>28455244
Unfortunatley we have missiles to do the job now.
RIP interceptor 1944-1980
You will be missed.
>>28455244
Anyone have any good MIG-25 and MIG-31 footage?
>>28455987
Seconded. Any 25/31 webms would be bloody tops.
>>28455244
Fleet Interceptors, anyone?....
Grumman F-14 Tomcat in HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y45rzmDaABI
>>28455244
>Is the supersonic interceptor dead for good? It seems that close air support is the flavor of the month.
The one has nothing to do with the other.
The supersonic interceptor will make a comeback, anon. It will come back as a multirole AWACS/missile truck.
It will coordinate swarms of UAVs, and expand a nation's air defense envelope well beyond its borders.
>>28457216
And then get blitzed by a 6th gen air superiority fighter it was unable to see cause lol plasma stealth.
>>28455244
I think right now the focus is on stealth. But stealth is an evolutionary dead end because there is only so much you can mask while detection techs will catch up. Eventually, the advantages of stealth will be overcome and we will revisit speed and manuverability.
>>28457232
There will never be a day when a stealthy aircraft is easier to detect than a non-stealthy plane.
>>28457230
Anon, the interceptor and its UAV swarm *are* the 6th generation of air superiority.
You'll need to go all the way to 7th gen Kraut space magic to defeat it.
>>28455244
Sadly, I think so. Modern day fighters are plenty fast enough, and more versatile. Also, like >>28455870 said, our missile systems are leagues better than at the time we were first developing interceptor aircraft. The focus now is more towards electronic warfare and stealth. Unfortunately, the air to air development has kinda stagnated (limited to minor tweaks of existing missile systems), because nowadays air to air engagements are rare. Sure, NATO forces will intercept a TU-95 every now and again, but the interceptor role has come and gone for the most part.
We live in an age of faggotry where there are no jet interceptors or battleships.
>>28457650
Aren't jets like the F-22 and Eurofighter basically just interceptors though? I mean, sure they're more maneuverable than older interceptors but that's just to be expected from technological progression yes?
>>28457683
Basically. Same thing that happened to light, medium, and heavy tanks. Things progressed until it was possible for one tank to be fast and tough at the same time.
>>28455870
Agreed.
>>28456179
>Fleet Interceptors, anyone?
It's called the SM-6.
>>28457216
>swarms of UAVs
Love this meme, it never ceases to amuse
>>28457700
Things "progressed" until big wars didn't happen anymore, and all the lessons of the previous wars could be forgotten
>>28457683
Interceptors are like night fighters and all weather fighters: Their capabilities are rolled up into more modern planes as technology improves.
You don't call an F/A-18 an all-weather fighter.
And you don't call an F-22 an interceptor.
>>28457750
You're implying that we've regressed in capability. Seriously.
>>28457851
Send the abrams and bradleys and strykers back to the vietnam war
See how far you get with them
>>28457871
...Holy shit you're fucking serious. Oh my god.
Please. Enlighten me.
>>28457888
>All the vehicles get stuck in mud
>Run out of gas trying to pull them out
>>28457905
>Mud still exists therefore technology hasn't advanced.
>>28457905
....you know he's laughing at you
>>28457320
But they are not interceptors nor are they AWACS. Drone swarms will likely not be all they are hyped up to be either due to electronic warfare.
>>28457905
unlike those invincible M113's and Pattons right?
>>28457905
Abrams A2 has nearly double the power to weight, despite being nearly twenty tons heavier than M48A3.
Go the fuck to sleep Pierre.
>>28457750
>Things "progressed" until big wars didn't happen anymore, and all the lessons of the previous wars could be forgotten
Modern MBT's are more mobile than preceding medium tanks and better armed and armored than preceding heavy tanks.
Only thing that kept light tanks relevant was the fact that there is places where MBT's are too heavy for roads and terrain. IFV's have replaced most light tanks. Few are still around and there would be big gun turrets for IFV's, but those haven't become popular.
Similar thing with modern air superiority and multirole fighters. Those are equal or better in special tasks of specialized combat aircraft of old times.
>>28455244
if you like that noise, go listen to an F-15 with PW-229s.
This, times two, with a weird shriek in the front.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvCVyCqunRM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWusRIdF0sU
https://youtu.be/yrFs_jqH6Tc?t=216
Here, this is what it sounds like in normal engine run, not taxi.
>>28457232
Metamaterials are getting better and better. While you can always build better sensors, there's only so far you can deduce without catching more photons. If your plan to detect something that's nigh-invisible is to carry a 10m diameter telescope / radar aperture around, you've run into a spot of trouble.
>>28459871
I miss double burner trim pad runs
>>28455244
The age of the pure interceptor is long dead. Air superiority fighters can do everything an interceptor can do while also being able to stay on station longer and actually deal with any escorts.
>>28460769
yes broham. me too. I was the only career field that could arugable get away with sitting on top of the jet during a burner run, testing out the ECS pack with a nicart. Feels. Still, no fucking regrets at this point about getting separated. The airforce has gone full retard as far as culture goes right now.
>>28455244
>Unfortunatley we have missiles to do the job now.
This. But it's a tradeoff. Supersonic interceptors can cover a certain area within a certain time. Base the interceptors closer together and you need less speed to get out in front of an incoming threat. OP's Arrow made more sense for Canada with wide open spaces and greater distances to cover quickly. The alternative is a lot of ground bases. But with ground-based missiles, you don't have the luxury of delaying the decision to fire like you do with interceptors. So you have to get your targeting done up front, before you launch. So, more fixed radar as well.
