Do bombers usually have heavier armor than either fighters, attackers, or multirole aircraft?

795 views

Because I frequently look up military aircraft a lot on Wikipedia, and time and time again, I keep hearing how bombers are slower and less maneuverable than either fighters, attackers, or multirole aircraft. So does that mean that bombers are more heavily armored than the other three types of military aircraft? If not, and armor just weighs down *any* plane, why are bombers the largest, slowest, and leave maneuverable of the military aircraft, anyway?

In: 258

24 Answers

Anonymous 0 Comments

time to learn about the [Survivability onion](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHQakMQXYAEbgDL?format=jpg&name=small)

Don’t be there

if you have to be there, don’t be seen

If you are seen, don’t be targeted

if you are targeted, don’t be fired upon

if you are fired upon, don’t be hit

if you are hit, don’t be penetrated

if you are penetrated, don’t die.

In order to die, all these things need to happen. increasing protection of one of these things increases your chances of survival. In real life, changes to a system typically causes increases and decreases in different layers, and the algebra is to make the entire onion as big as possible.

Armor in planes is non-existent in modern times. because armor weighs you down. This makes you slower, which makes you easier to be seen, targeted and hit. While it helps to not be penetrated, you’re total “onion” is smaller, and therefore it isn’t worth it. We make planes “safer’ by adding speed (harder to see, target & hit), stealth (harder to see, target & hit), altitude (harder to hit), because these have little negative tradeoffs as opposed to adding armor.

edit: formatting change.

You are viewing 1 out of 24 answers, click here to view all answers.