• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    28 days ago

    You know what else air defense can’t shoot down effectively? Stealth bombers. Also being hard to soot down doesn’t help if there’s already a better option.

    Oh yeah, that must be the reason US and Israel never fly them anywhere close to S400 systems in Syria. 😂

    Russia’s don’t cost much because they’re just old ballistic missiles strapped to a plane, nothing particularly hard to shoot down about those. China’s cost accounting is very opaque, so we can’t really get an idea of how much they cost. But anyway, what matters for whether they are useful to the US is the cost the US would pay, not China.

    Whatever helps you cope little buddy.

    Hypersonic missiles for hitting ground targets are an expensive stop gap for before you’ve developed stealth bombers.

    [citations needed]

    I love how you just make stuff up here when faced with obvious inferiority of western technology and industrial capacity. There’s going to be so much coping for you to do in the coming years. Hope you have a good copium dealer.

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      US and Israel never fly them anywhere close to S400

      Israel has b2s? That’s news to me! But it does make sense not to give to much signature info if there are other options available.

      Why is China developing the h20 if hypersonics are always the best option?

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        28 days ago

        Nobody flies b2s anywhere. Hypersonics are often launched from jets. Amazing that you can’t put two and two together. These technologies aren’t mutually exclusive.

        • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          28 days ago

          Why use them against asymmetric threats? Why in the world would you build a penetration bomber and then have it launch standoff munitions? The penetration role is mutually exclusive, no need to have two ways to do it.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            28 days ago

            It’s like you don’t understand that these bombers were mass produced before ICBMs were developed. It’s just an example of legacy tech that US overinvested in. You have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about, and it shows. 😂

            • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              28 days ago

              B52s were mas produced, only 21 b2s were built. B2s started in 97, after icbms. Which are you taking about?

              So are stealth bombers effective? If so, you don’t need hypersonics against land targets. If not, China is wasting billions on the h20. You can’t have it both ways.

                  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    28 days ago

                    They clearly don’t. Hypersonics can hit targets from a huge range in minutes, and they’re nearly impossible to stop. This has been proven in actual use. They’re also much easier to hide, cheaper to maintain and to produce. In fact, hypesonic weapons is precisely what you’d use to take out bombers on an airfield. These are just a few obvious things off top of my head. There’s been plenty written on the subject by many experts. Maybe go read up on that instead of trolling here?