Being fair, true peer level combat has not happened post WW2
2025 Victory Day parade thread (workup, 3rd Sept)
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Ugh. They don't exactly excel at buying high numbers of AEW aircraft when compared to Pakistan, but it was clearly there.
And jamming - even more so. India has land-based EW, and in 5.7 it certainly had way more in terms of self-defense jammers (and almost certainly - escort jammers, which it even has in the first place) than Pakistani side; Pakistani unique enablers(which India doesn't possess) aren't operational yet.
Frankly speaking, one can say that one of the reasons IAF suffered so heavily is they seriously overestimated their capability to get out of "what if" contingency - i.e. relied on jammers far too much.
Combat isn't just checkboxes. On China-related forum of all places we should remember it(two months till aniversary of PLA's entry into Korean war).
Looking at specific engagements is enough. Most model "peer engagements"(say, ww2 daylight gun battles between RN and RM) were just inconclusive.
What is true peer engagement matters very little to engagement between infantry platoon and similar force of irregulars in Afghanistan mountains. Two Infantry platoons will interact the same way in a global nuclear war.
Sindoor is absolutely a viable scenario how engagement can go even between 1st tier air forces, provided 5th gen a/c aren't present.
Last edited:
Any indication on the range?
Or not reveal too much. Why give adversaries clues on everything?
True. I have a crazy thought though, the laser source does not need to be at the same place of the turret, it just need to be connected to the turret through an optical path. So you can place the heavy bit of the laser system below bridge height AND place the turret at the top.
Anyone play Children of a dead Earth btw? same idea in the game
Last edited:
Instant hard kill of 20KM against drones and loitering munitions. Cruise missiles will be a bit closer. But against sensors the range probably can double or triple.
IMO range is less important than time needed for the beam to kill a target (say an ashm), comparing this time to how fast target is approaching will determine the viability of lasers
It could kill two subsonic cruise missiles in succession but probably not against saturation attacks. Moot point anyway since it could kill the optical sensors on those missiles much quicker and laser CIWS is pretty much the last line of defense anyway.
If that is true it is already better than CIWS
Edit: wonder how does it fare against supersonic though, M3 incoming the system has one third of the burn time to deal with it. Current 1130 is supposed to be able to deal with supersonics
