Isn't accuracy better the closer you are to the target, and if that is the case could it be the reason we're using F16 and not UCAVs ? with the range of 155km I'd say we don't need to use F-16 for bombing missions against terrorists.
F16s are used because MK83 and MK84 class bombs can only be delivered by F16 planes. Especially the bunker busting types. To be effective against deep caves dwellers we need these heavier bombs.
No it is not necessarily true that closer you are the more accurate your bombs will be. If you have a good seeker head, not too much weather anomalies, and you are not out of range, irrespective of your distance your hit accuracy should not change. These are, after all, ”Smart” bombs. Remember most of the modern missiles have data link to re target etc. They can easily use midcourse corrections. But the longer a missile stays in the air the more chance there is of it being subjected to jamming. Yet, modern missiles have many gizmos that overcome many jamming techniques used by adversaries.
The Siha-230 bomb used here has a relatively weak explosive charge (42kg of war head weight which may include non explosive components) if compared to a MK84 bomb that weighs 945kg and contains 429kg of high explosive charge, it is dwarfed. Due to its impact speed and the amount of charge it carries, Siha-230 could easily knock out even a tank. But it has no where near the destructive and penetration power of a MK84 bomb.
By taking our long-range missile development capabilities to more advanced levels, we will definitely reach a level of deterrence where no one will even think of harming Turkey.
www.savunmasanayist.com
