• CAVOK@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not jokes, but also not quite the long range interceptors that the Patriots are. We’ll get get there I’m sure, but we’re not there yet.

      • jenesaisquoi@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m not a military specialist, but according to Ukraine, SAMP/T outperforms Patriot against Kinzhals. What I mean to say is that the range is likely only one among many properties that determine the real-world effectiveness

  • RidderSport@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 days ago

    Good thing, that Germany and France have such a good track record with cooperating on weapons development

    • encelado748@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      You just need to add the italians to the mix. Then it will work with France, Germany and UK. But if you put together France, Germany and UK without Italy nothing will be done. It is actually strange that this is a thing. FCAS, MGCS, MAWS all failed. Tornado, Eurofighter, Meteor, FREMM all good enough. And even when things do not workout for the best between french (SAMP/T) and germans (IRIS-T) they both worked with ok italy. If they do not pull out because they are out of money they will make things go: they cannot afford otherwise.

      • RidderSport@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Italy probably supplies foods and drinks to the meetings that’s why they work.

        FREMM however was without German or British involvement

      • Rednax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Japan has been succesfully testing railguns for naval use. Not as big or fancy as the projects the US focused on. But limited in scope, and aimed at practical use. They seem to have solved the barrel degrading issues well enough to make the guns viable.

        That said. I think it is still too far out to focus on right now.

      • nosuchanon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        A lot of the missile defense systems are interceptors, which is basically destruction by impact. Honestly, direct energy weapons would also be better.

        • remon@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Honestly, direct energy weapons would also be better.

          Nice as a close-in weapon, but entirely useless for high-altitude interceptions.

    • IanM42@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Good for big stuff but we also need something for the swarm. Something fast firing or our own swarms.