On Nov 4, 10:01*am, Mike Ash wrote:
In article
,



*Richard wrote:
Brian there are other things one might need higher speeds for, like:
Running away from the fight when your odds are 1:10 enemy AC or just
getting there faster. we have tankers that can fuel a fighter in less
than 5 minutes and go on about his intentions. I don't like to see the
West sucking hind teat in any area of AC design.

Bob..

Again, that's what AWACs is for...and where are you going to find:
1) *10 Mach 2+ fighters (the migs would run about 5 minutes then
bingo)
2) *10 pilots who can realistically fight the plane
3) *10 idiots who would go against anything coming out of the USA with
C&C support?

And this is about projection of power for strategic goals, not
measuring our dicks by mach number. *No one has ever beaten the SR-71
or X-15 in any case.

It seems probable that the F-35 project will be the last major manned
combat aircraft project to be funded in the US. This whole discussion
really sounds like a big exercise in fighting the last war to me.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

You're falling into the Iraqi trap. They may have had the planes but
really had no trained military. If we went up against someone our own
size (like the Russians once they get more oil money) your misplaced
complacency would be all too telling.

Bob Nixon..