Reply to thread

Message

Interesting article. I disagree in places, the bit about computers and software as a maintenance burden is strange, software doesn't break. But what it perhaps doesn't emphasise enough is aircraft specific doctrine/tactics. It's all right talking about BVR and WVR tactics, but you need to also address that Typhoon wasn't built for the classic BVR shots, then merge and WVR dogfight. It's absolutely capable of WVR dogfighting with the best of them, but the supercruise and supersonic manoeuverability is there to allow BVR shot, disengage, re-engage, BVR shot, with a WVR merge only if unavoidable. That's just as significant as Gripen being designed to get in close without being detected, or the F-22 being able to stand-off without detection. Which raises the question of what doctrine/tactics the Su-35 is designed for

[QUOTE="DWG, post: 451789, member: 414"] Interesting article. I disagree in places, the bit about computers and software as a maintenance burden is strange, software doesn't break. But what it perhaps doesn't emphasise enough is aircraft specific doctrine/tactics. It's all right talking about BVR and WVR tactics, but you need to also address that Typhoon wasn't built for the classic BVR shots, then merge and WVR dogfight. It's absolutely capable of WVR dogfighting with the best of them, but the supercruise and supersonic manoeuverability is there to allow BVR shot, disengage, re-engage, BVR shot, with a WVR merge only if unavoidable. That's just as significant as Gripen being designed to get in close without being detected, or the F-22 being able to stand-off without detection. Which raises the question of what doctrine/tactics the Su-35 is designed for [/QUOTE]

Verification