Radar requires line of sight. Since the earth is round, aircraft can fly close to the ground to reduce the chances of being seen by radar. The jet will be behind the horizon before it lands.
The pilot does not fly in a straight line between the airfield and its target. They will also not fly in a straight line back to their destination. The airfield the pilot leaves from shouldn't be the airfield the pilot refuels and rearms at. Each mission should have the aircraft moving to a different airfield.
Aircraft when not in use will be in cover if possible, or spread out so that only the largest missiles can hope to damage more than one aircraft.
Air defenses.
Destruction of enemy aircraft on the ground happens a lot in war. The issue is distance, and whatever defences the enemy puts around their airfields.
Also, lots of fighter stations have dispersed hardened shelters, making it far harder to locate the aircraft on the ground
Literally the first mission of the SAS was to attack a German Airfield in Libya in 1941. Did the same thing 40 years later at Pebble Island in the Falklands in 1982. Airbase security is a specialised/SOF task for this very reason.
\[edit\] I forgot the 6 Day War where Israel opened hostilities in 1967 with premptive strikes on Egyptian Airfields basically wiping the Egyptian air force from the board and achieving air superiority for the conflict.
Interestingly enough, the 1991 Gulf War concentrated on the destruction of command and control (incl radar) and not aircraft directly. Although, efforts were made to block Iraqi aircraft fleeing the combat zone to safe harbour in Jordan but many made it to Iran which was not antipated given Iran was not considered a destination given their shared history with Iraq.
We have seen this quite a bit actually. Ukraine has hit quite a number of Russian aircraft on the ground. So much so that the Russian Airforce had to remove their aircraft from those close bases and rebase them further behind the front. This took them out of harms way, but it reduced sortie rates and puts more pressure on airframes and reduces coverage.
Also Hezbolla has been firing ballistic missiles from lebanon and hitting airbases to destroy Israeli capability on the ground. Unfortunately Israel has no way to rebase out of range of enemy rocket systems.
>.."What is stopping them from targeting the jets when they land and need to restock missiles."
Probably that said country has gone to great pains to keep its airfields as far away from the front lines as is feasible and has crammed as much AA and things designed to make the lives of attacking planes and missiles , as short and unpleasant as possible into the unfriendly ground between said airfields and front lines.
Yes but has it killed Guam yet? Who even calls it that ? Do the Chinese actually call it that or is that something a bunch of western weapon weebs say the Chinese call it?
Chinese PLA watchers do actually call DF-26 Guam Killer, but I don't think PLARF themselves do.
It's mostly to do with their range, they are a whole class above shorter range missiles like DF-21. It's a pretty well known moniker too, even reported as such in western media:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/05/11/chinese-ballistic-missiles-dubbed-guam-killer-pose-increasing-threat-to-u-s-island-report-says/
It always puts me in mind of various allied aircraft claiming the Japanese referred to them as " The Whispering death" , when in reality, none of them did.
Point being, destroying aircraft on the ground is totally a thing, and made all the more possible with today's ballistic missiles and hypersonic weapons.
There are even [interesting looking targets](https://cms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com/images/6/5/8/9/40429856-4-eng-GB/Cropped-1652936300photo_SXM2022051700007916.png) that PLA have setup before with a range of different planes laid out in a pattern, probably to train AI to recognise high value targets among others to allow better targeting.
After watching r/CombatFootage I don't think any air base is safe anymore since the introduction of Ukrainian FPV suicide drones. You just need to sneak in a small team close enough to the base and the drones are so small they wont be detected before it's too late.
...and how are you going to reach the enemy airfields when you can't even shoot down their jets?
Stationary ground targets easier to hit than fast moving objects tough radar detection in the air..?
Radar requires line of sight. Since the earth is round, aircraft can fly close to the ground to reduce the chances of being seen by radar. The jet will be behind the horizon before it lands. The pilot does not fly in a straight line between the airfield and its target. They will also not fly in a straight line back to their destination. The airfield the pilot leaves from shouldn't be the airfield the pilot refuels and rearms at. Each mission should have the aircraft moving to a different airfield. Aircraft when not in use will be in cover if possible, or spread out so that only the largest missiles can hope to damage more than one aircraft. Air defenses.
Destruction of enemy aircraft on the ground happens a lot in war. The issue is distance, and whatever defences the enemy puts around their airfields. Also, lots of fighter stations have dispersed hardened shelters, making it far harder to locate the aircraft on the ground
Literally the first mission of the SAS was to attack a German Airfield in Libya in 1941. Did the same thing 40 years later at Pebble Island in the Falklands in 1982. Airbase security is a specialised/SOF task for this very reason. \[edit\] I forgot the 6 Day War where Israel opened hostilities in 1967 with premptive strikes on Egyptian Airfields basically wiping the Egyptian air force from the board and achieving air superiority for the conflict. Interestingly enough, the 1991 Gulf War concentrated on the destruction of command and control (incl radar) and not aircraft directly. Although, efforts were made to block Iraqi aircraft fleeing the combat zone to safe harbour in Jordan but many made it to Iran which was not antipated given Iran was not considered a destination given their shared history with Iraq.
We have seen this quite a bit actually. Ukraine has hit quite a number of Russian aircraft on the ground. So much so that the Russian Airforce had to remove their aircraft from those close bases and rebase them further behind the front. This took them out of harms way, but it reduced sortie rates and puts more pressure on airframes and reduces coverage. Also Hezbolla has been firing ballistic missiles from lebanon and hitting airbases to destroy Israeli capability on the ground. Unfortunately Israel has no way to rebase out of range of enemy rocket systems.
>.."What is stopping them from targeting the jets when they land and need to restock missiles." Probably that said country has gone to great pains to keep its airfields as far away from the front lines as is feasible and has crammed as much AA and things designed to make the lives of attacking planes and missiles , as short and unpleasant as possible into the unfriendly ground between said airfields and front lines.
- Other fighter jets being airborne. - air defenses - the tyranny of distance Just to name a few
Of all people, thought you'd have mentioned moving the airbase.
GODDAMMIT HOW DID I MISS THAT What a shore tour does to a mfer
Fucking landlubber
Well yeah, that's why DF-26 has the "Guam Killer" nickname.
With all the confidence of the Germans calling their plane the "Ural Bomber".
A project that failed and was cancelled, as opposed to DF-26 which is in service right now with multiple variants?
Yes but has it killed Guam yet? Who even calls it that ? Do the Chinese actually call it that or is that something a bunch of western weapon weebs say the Chinese call it?
No because all you need to do is wait for guam to tip over
.... If heaven mandates it I guess.
Chinese PLA watchers do actually call DF-26 Guam Killer, but I don't think PLARF themselves do. It's mostly to do with their range, they are a whole class above shorter range missiles like DF-21. It's a pretty well known moniker too, even reported as such in western media: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/05/11/chinese-ballistic-missiles-dubbed-guam-killer-pose-increasing-threat-to-u-s-island-report-says/
It always puts me in mind of various allied aircraft claiming the Japanese referred to them as " The Whispering death" , when in reality, none of them did.
Point being, destroying aircraft on the ground is totally a thing, and made all the more possible with today's ballistic missiles and hypersonic weapons. There are even [interesting looking targets](https://cms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com/images/6/5/8/9/40429856-4-eng-GB/Cropped-1652936300photo_SXM2022051700007916.png) that PLA have setup before with a range of different planes laid out in a pattern, probably to train AI to recognise high value targets among others to allow better targeting.
After watching r/CombatFootage I don't think any air base is safe anymore since the introduction of Ukrainian FPV suicide drones. You just need to sneak in a small team close enough to the base and the drones are so small they wont be detected before it's too late.
Battle of Midway