View Single Post
  #7  
Old February 10th 04, 06:07 PM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"sid" wrote in message
om...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message

...

rant snipped


Look, we are NOT sending them into contested airspace, OK? Period.
There is that strange "OP-2E's" you keep ranting about... And again, we

are
not going to send these assets in against "undue risk".

Some guys whose remains finally made it home to Arlington recently
were certainly ordered into contested airspace in their ISR
assets...Even in the face of "undue risk". The job had to get done.
Thats what war-real war-is about Kevin.


Are you talking about the DASH-7 ARL that punched into a freakin'
mountainside? Geeze, just what kind of damage tolerance are you demanding?

snip


I don't know where you get these ideas, but the E-8 JSTARS surveillance
range reportedly reaches out to around 250 km--SA-10/12 manage what,

maybe
90 km?

Since I'm sure you didn't open up the link on the S-400 , here is what
it says:
http://www.aeronautics.ru/s300site.htm
KEY CHARACTERISTICS
S-300PMU1 S-300MU2 S-400
Range, km (max) 150 200 400
Altitude, km (max) 25-27 25+ 25+
Altitude, km (min) 10 10 10


Uhmmm...isn't S-400 the ABM derivitive? Which explains it longer
range--against targets waaay upstairs in their radar horizon at that range?
As to the others....250 km is greater than either of them. Now, how often
are you going to see those systems up near the FLOT? That's right--pretty
much never. Talk about being an ATACMS magnet...

snip

My beef is that these airframes represent easy kills and the COTS
culture is ignoring the problem. The threat to them while airborne
isn't there today, but some guys who mean us ill will are working hard
on that problem. Easy kills on the tarmac are another issue as well
and certainly possible today. A few bits of shrapnel and its Buh-Bye
shiny new 767-400. An airframe that can be expected to take a measured
amount of battle damage is a necessity for ALL military aircraft.


Oh, gee whiz, what about those C-40's? And those aircraft specified to go
into low threat areas? I guess you would discount the future use of CRAF
assets as well, right? What with all of those nasty super long range
AAM's...oops, that's right, they are just ghostware.

snip


And, oh yes, I DO know what the "L" in ARL means...


I don't think you do, from the angle of your rants. It does NOT mean "low
altitude", nor does it mean "low chance of surviving its mission".

Brooks


sid