@EmpireofWrightIsles yes.

@VDBFrostian1930 IS THAT A TNO REFERENCE (I've been tracking you down so I can say this to you)

@Graingy Idk

@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26 It's still an odd combo. And I'm no expert on radar, but are ground radars and aerial radars necessarily the same?

@Graingy most are though

@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26 Not all interceptors are large or long-ranged.

@Graingy yes, however an interceptor would be even better, due it's longer range and bigger size

@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26 And those were based off fighters. Unless you mean using a standoff platform. At that point, any aircraft could do that.

@Graingy light and medium bombers exist like the Su-34 the F-15E (all being medium)

@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26 Trying to combine high speed, high altitude aircraft designed for rapid response with bombers makes no sense.
Bombers need load capacity and range. That's why they're big. If they're not big then that's a strike aircraft.

@Graingy 1. if you think about it, it does, 1. because interceptors tend to be fast, so survivability 2. range, 3. interceptors also are larger than most aircraft
2. I don't know what that is

@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26 That... makes no sense whatsoever.
Feels like something you'd see on NCD tbh

Attach a 3,000 kilogram Brahmos missile on your builds and use Funky Trees to make it flyable like india did with the SU-30

F-111.

@Vitto191 how about an interceptor-bomber I feel like it's a less explored concept than a fighter-bomber