"redc1c4" wrote in message
...
Baron Huntchausen wrote:

"Tank Fixer" wrote in message
k.net...
In article m,
on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 19:45:11 GMT,
Admin attempted to say .....


Actually, a little of both. The F-16 is cheap, does just about
anything
short of Cargo duty and is still in production. But, the F-15 is
long
on
the tooth and needs replacing. While the F-16 is second to none in
a
knife
fight, it lacks the standoff capability of the F-15. The F-15 has
lost
it's
superiority in the standoff. And, like most fighters will be
relegated
to
the Attack role sooner or later.

They are both from approximatly the same vintage...

The F-16 is just a fraction of the cost of a frontline fighter. It's
even
cheaper than an A-10 if the A-10 were to be produced today. The F-16 is
still under development while the F-15 is not. They won't put
development
money into something that already has the follow-on AC ready for
productions.

The fact remains, there is hardly anything in a gun to gun arena that
can
compete with an F-16 dollar for dollar. Plus, the F-16 has been
modified
for the ground attack role. It's small, light, carries a decent load
and
after pickling it's load, it can out turn most frontline fighters. I
saw
something I just didn't believe it was possible with anything short of a
Rocket. A Danish F-16 floated to just overhead in level flight. The
Pilot
forced the nose to a 90 degree angle. The AC seemed to be completely
stopped. He poured the coals to it (full AB) and went straight up.
Talk
about a better than a 1 to one power to weight ratio. I don't know of
any
other AC that could do that short of having an Atlas Rocket attached to
it's
butt. The Dane was showing off to the US F-15C models at Bitburg AB,
GE.
The F-15 would have smacked the ground doing that manuever even though
the
F-15 has a better than a 1 to 1 power to weight ration.

Even though the F-16 is from the same era, it's not your fathers
Oldsmobile.
The F-15 is.

coupla things here for the RAM folxs:

Yes, put your troll in RAM while you are at it.


1. it seems to me that coming to a more or less "complete stop" is
suicidal in ACM. it sure as hell would make the AAA solution easier.

And when did I say it was done while Ack Ack was shooting at it? Your
statement is a troll statement.



2. are the F-16 claims valid, or just more of the usual DM schise?

More troll statements.




3. A-10 vs. F-16 acquisition cost: does anyone really think the
current Falcon is cheaper than a Hog, assuming the production
lines were both open?

Considering the A-10 is no longer in production, what would be the cost to
retool it again? That is only a minor Troll Statement from someone that
needs to stay on the ground.



your thoughts, please. TIA!

redc1c4,
(PS to the Baron: it's "ratio" not "ration" %-)

More trolling? Or are you now the official spealink cheker?