Comment by etangent
10 years ago
Out of curiosity (and possibly a dumb question), what is the main constraint preventing modern (subsonic) bombers from carrying CIWS-type defense system against missiles? Is it size, weight, recoil, aerodynamics, or special radar requirements? The initial push behind removing gun systems appears to have been development of AA missiles and increased reliance on fighter escorts. Yet modern CIWS on sea vessels have become so effective against missiles that they significantly upped the cost and requirements of anti-ship warfare, to the point that a single missile fired at a ship is not expected to be successful. Given advanced enough CIWS (using directed energy in near future?) one basically doesn't need stealth or other fancy/expensive/less reliable features.
I'm just guessing here, but I'm going to bet that defensive ECM is probably deemed better effective per pound that CWIS.
It's worth noting here that CWIS' effectiveness hasn't really been proven. But what is certain is that it's theoretical effectiveness is being questioned as missiles get faster. The original 20mm CWIS had a pretty limited range. The Europeans went to 30mm with Goalkeeper, and now both are set to be replaced with either directed energy weapons (faster tracking, better accuracy) or systems like SeaRAM, which can engage further by switching to point defense missiles instead of guns.
I can see how directed energy weapons could be attractive to aircraft once the power density issues are solved, but right now they're simply too heavy.