So why didn’t US Navy or USAF drastically increase the size of the warheads on their missiles to compensate for the supposed fact that a B-29 could shrug off a close-in explosion from a 40kg warhead and shrapnel damage? How come there is not any footage of B-29s tanking hits from Aim-54 or missiles like Sparrow?
3 Likes
24ST aluminum alloy is still capable of stopping this explosion’s overpressure wave at 20 meters, just with deformation. The overpressure generated at 20 meters through this plate is still only 3 PSI, and fragmentation would still need to pass through a 4.76 mm 24ST aluminum alloy plate, which is still competitive to steel in strength for its weight. While the fragmentation would pass through, the B-29 is mostly space, and it would not kill the pilots in the place demonstrated in the Mig-25 video.
You’re making countless assumptions here, and you have no math to back it up. Calling me a clown does not disprove my math. If I’m wrong, explain how my math is wrong; don’t insult me.
“Why is there no footage of b29s tanking hits from sprrows or aim 54s” because these b29s are abhorrently expensive, too much so ti be used as target drones assuming they werent recycled by the time the aim 54 even came about with the absolute breakneck speed bombers were developingnduring the cold war
Hes projecting heavily at this point man, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for sense to come to him
1 Like
There’s no need to disprove the math of someone who compares a B29 armor to a BT-5 with a supposed 20m explosion
4 Likes
You know how far 20m is, right? 40kg is a big boom, but not a 20m boom
Correct me if I’m wrong, but since the Tomcat has a radar specifically designed to fire missiles head-on, wouldn’t that change the position of impact to the front of the fuselage, not where we keep seeing people fire them?
You would be correct but the main RCS return on a propeller driven aircraft would actually be the spinning propellers showing up as massive dishes, the radar averages out the return, both on the f14 and the aim 54 itself
It’s called a Simile.
You’re so right. Radar missiles should be targeting those, which would result in a loss of power and get the downed bomber result rather than obliterating the airframe.
Source?
1 Like
Not only that, propellers and helicopter rotors cause some really weird returns on pulse doller radars, which COULD end up making prox fuses not work as intended with early detonations, though im not sure war thunder models it to that degree, or any game as a matter of fact, ofc this is negated with more modern electronics, but so is multipathing and yet in war thunder we got Aim120Ds eating dirt when someone flies below 20m
does this feel like 20m to you? Because the fuze sensitivity of the R-40 is <15m
but muh math
1 Like
Look at it from the side lol, hell, look at the lighting on the bomber, thats not a direct hit at all, that explosion is barely lighting up the wing and tail, and the fuselage is barely getting flashed
One B-29, accounting for inflation as of 2025, would cost approximately $14 million dollars.
Who ever said it was a direct hit are you high
Im getting high even talking to you, my IQ is dropping with every message I read coming from an Orange “O”
Zero (0) damage to the super heavily armored naval grade steel wing btw
1 Like
Honestly why would you make target drone b29s with the massive surplus of cheaper b17s