![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Seems to me there's a lot of "apples vs oranges" so far in this
discussion. If you take a look at the air war in the Battle for France or the air war over Europe from August 1944 on you see what numbers can do for you. Numbers times quality gives you a down and dirty measure of capability but it nevertheless means it's tough on the side with the lower result. Also, picking one encounter out of the stack can give misleading results because of the large number of variables. Lnachester's Rule applies - generally - but Saburo Sakai in his A6M5 Zero was jumped by 16 Hellcats - and got away . . . . OTH Clarence Schomo in a P38 jumped a flight of Japanese fighters on a ferry hop (forgot what they were - Zeros or Franks, ISTR - and got 7 of them . . .. go figure. Or for real awesome technical superiority - the Bekaa Valley Turkey Shoot. Walt BJ |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cub Driver wrote in message . ..
True. No US ground force trains under conditions where it enjoys a 3:1, or even 2:1, superiority in terms of raw numbers. The original poster said "quality and quantity." Arguably, the U.S. had a better than 3-1 superiority over the Iraqi army and the fedayeen when the quality of American weaponry is considered. Quality *and* quantity? That can be taken in more than one way (i.e., a requirement that *both* be 3:1 margins). When the US Army trains, it does not set up an OPFOR that is severely lacking in terms of quality (we even saw the OPFOR, in an Iraqi scenario fought by corps and division commanders and staffs in 1999, credited with having a heck of a lot more precision guided weapons capability, not to mention useable airpower, than existed in reality). In actual modern operations, such as OIF, the preponderance of mass has generally always been on the other guy's side--remember all those cheap-seaters who were bleating about the lack of sufficient US combat power on the ground (a week before the rush into Baghdad, that is....they all got kind of quiet after that, except for ol' Wes, who has tried to now claim that he was *really* griping about the entire conflict in general...)? Again, the key was to pick out and isolate the required areas (such as that BAI effort south of Baghdad) and pinch off a more managable chunk in which we could apply our firepower to compensate for the lack of sheer numbers. The Army, like the Air Force, has trained to fight outnumbered and win for decades now. Brooks all the best -- Dan Ford |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Butch O'Hare comes to mind.
But he didn't prevail. The Japanese bombers did bomb the fleet. (They didn't prevail, either, since they didn't sink it.) Are you sure, Dan? Perhaps I'm remembering wartime propaganda, which may not have been exactly true, but it was that he shot down at least five and the others turned tail and ran. vince norris |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Are you sure, Dan? Perhaps I'm remembering wartime propaganda, which may not have been exactly true, but it was that he shot down at least five and the others turned tail and ran. There were 8 planes in the 1st Chutai, in two flights. He shot down 3 and badly damaged 2. Four planes managed to drop their bombs on Lexington. One bomb exploded 100 feet off. The command plane, shot out of the formation just before bombs away (and claimed by O'Hare), made a suicide run on Lex but was unable to match the carrier's evasive turns and was shot down by ack-ack. The Japanese, always optimistic in such cases, reported that it hit the carrier. A fourth plane (damaged and claimed by O'Hare) was shot down by Sellstrom. Of the 3 planes still in the formation, one was shot up by an SBD. Two of the bombers ditched successfully; one landed back at Rabaul, and of the 3, two eventually flew again. They claimed one warship sunk. I'm not sure if that was the Lex or not. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks, Dan. I apologize for doubting you. ((:-))
vince norris |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Proposed new flightseeing rule | C J Campbell | Home Built | 56 | November 10th 03 05:40 PM |
Hei polish moron also britain is going to breach eu deficit 3% rule | AIA | Military Aviation | 0 | October 24th 03 11:06 PM |
What about the AIM-54 Pheonix Missile? | Flub | Military Aviation | 26 | October 5th 03 05:34 AM |
Air Force combat search and rescue joins AFSOC team | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 30th 03 09:49 PM |
Combat Related Special Compensation update for Sept. 8-12 | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 17th 03 03:38 AM |