• FALGSConaut [comrade/them]@hexbear.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    5 days ago

    This was inevitable given the economics of cheap missile vs expensive anti-missile missile, especially if/when it takes multiple interceptors to take down one incoming missile. Bespoke wunderweapons are more or less fine and good if you get to use them in limited or relatively controlled circumstances (ex defending against smaller barrages from Gaza/Lebanon) but the second they’re faced with significant opposition from a peer enemy then you find out why quantity has a quality all of it’s own

    • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      5 days ago

      It’s kind of insane that every hardkill system designed so far fails at either “what if you just throw a bit of rubbish at it first” or “what if there’s more than one missile”

      • FALGSConaut [comrade/them]@hexbear.netM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        5 days ago

        So long as these interceptions have to rely on physical ammunition and all of the limitations that entails the attacker will always have the advantage. If you can only launch X number of interceptors even if you have a 100% success rate all it takes to defeat it is launching X+Y missiles and you know Y number of missiles will get through. And since simple missiles are always going to be cheaper than expensive interceptors you’re almost guaranteed to be able to defeat defence systems provided you have the capability to launch enough rockets