Gen3115
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2016
- Messages
- 152
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
You're right, PAC-3 is primarily for engaging missiles and are quad packed onto a canister as a result, althought they are still capable of engaging aircraft. But the reason why I support getting PAC-3's over the PAC-2's or the SAMP/T is because the combination or PAC-3's and NASAMS 2's + Oerlikons + AAW frigates make for an all-round IADS setup. And for the most part, we have zero TBM/cruise missile defense capability currently, and in a war against the PLA, you'd see them being a very common threat.
After I thought about it, actually make sense, since we're a maritime country most aerial threats are probably going to fly over the sea, so as long the AAW Frigates have long range SAM's like Aster-30 or SM-2's (which I still have doubts they will get) they can be the first layer of defense (other than fighter aircraft), the land based NASAMS 2 with shorter range can handle them if they get closer and the PAC-3's + Oerlikon's can handle the missiles if they get launched. Might be wrong on this one though
But still though I'd prefer we get both PAC-3 and PAC-2 if possible just so we'll have more options to shoot down missiles and/or the aircraft at way longer ranges, also if we are looking for long range land-based air defense system, the PAC-3 really isn't it considering its function and shorter range, CMIIW here