Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Normal
Agree with you 100% pioneer. What if, perhaps I dare ask, all the stealth bling and advanced systems don't work properly in the next critical combat shooting war, just what if?Alot of these systems are unproven and extremely labor intensive to keep operating. What if they don't work properly in combat? We've spent trillions on sophisticated defense systems that may fail in combat. In Vietnam as you said, the F-4 had no gun, and its "advanced" sparrow system had a .10 kill rate. Just one out of ten worked and actually downed an enemy aircraft.There are some who criticize the extreme levels of defense spending on over sophisticated systems. I'm not against technology, on the contrary I fully support it. I just feel the more conservative, and cost effective approach is best. Like I said before a stealthy Gen 5 lightweight fighter.As far as WVR/BVR and IFF, the father of the LWF project himself (even some top Navy officials) say that BVR is a myth. In actual combat you simply cannot risk downing a friendly pilot sitting in a $150 million dollar aircraft that is 40-100 miles away, so therefore you MUST positively identify the aircraft first before firing. And the Russians are betting on a close in fight in their older aircraft. I'm just asking for some common sense. Shooting fish in a barrel from 100 miles out sounds great on paper, but real war has a way of throwing in a few unexpected variables. Obviously the Mig-21 shows this.
Agree with you 100% pioneer. What if, perhaps I dare ask, all the stealth bling and advanced systems don't work properly in the next critical combat shooting war, just what if?
Alot of these systems are unproven and extremely labor intensive to keep operating. What if they don't work properly in combat? We've spent trillions on sophisticated defense systems that may fail in combat. In Vietnam as you said, the F-4 had no gun, and its "advanced" sparrow system had a .10 kill rate. Just one out of ten worked and actually downed an enemy aircraft.
There are some who criticize the extreme levels of defense spending on over sophisticated systems. I'm not against technology, on the contrary I fully support it. I just feel the more conservative, and cost effective approach is best. Like I said before a stealthy Gen 5 lightweight fighter.
As far as WVR/BVR and IFF, the father of the LWF project himself (even some top Navy officials) say that BVR is a myth. In actual combat you simply cannot risk downing a friendly pilot sitting in a $150 million dollar aircraft that is 40-100 miles away, so therefore you MUST positively identify the aircraft first before firing. And the Russians are betting on a close in fight in their older aircraft. I'm just asking for some common sense. Shooting fish in a barrel from 100 miles out sounds great on paper, but real war has a way of throwing in a few unexpected variables. Obviously the Mig-21 shows this.
