![]() |
| 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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where have we heard that before? Brings back a lot of memories of past arguments in this group. I won't want to revisit them except for these last words. 1. There was once a History Channel series on the best fighters... (WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam era and post Vietnam.) Every pilot who ever flew a combat plane invariably praised his plane model as the best. There were no lemons. I think it was two Tornado pilots who said modern warfare is pretty much what I had wrote in my original post. All the years of training and experience doesn't give much of an advantage in aerial combat. The rookie who is first in a good position to press the fire button has as good a chance to score as a twenty year pilot. The other comment was, in a modern mission, once you have dumped your bombs as per mission you get the hell out fast. Its suicidal to hang around and search for targets of opportunity. 2. The Russians in WWII had adequate planes that were tough, cheap and easy to build. Their pilots had to fight straight out of a very elementary course in flying school. The Russians relied on numbers to overwhelm the mighty German war machine and they took out even their most experienced German fighter pilots. Bombers were shot out of the sky. The Russian losses were enormous. But they had the manpower and production capacity to replace their losses. The Germans couldn't and lost the war. In mass battles numbers win every time over skill, technical superiority, tactical superiority, etc. (provided we are not pitching bows and arrows against a maxim.) This is also a good place to remind all that the Germans lost over 85 per cent of their manpower and materiel in Russia. By the times the Allies invaded France the Germans were essentially defeated. It is remarkable the Germans managed to keep fighting on for almost another year. The unsaid assumption on discussions of fifth generation US aircraft is that China is the only possible opponent. For any other enemy third generation aircraft will be more than adequate. China has too big a land mass and her war production facilities mostly out of reach of conventional attack from outside China's borders. You cannot knock out a city of one million with any number of conventional strikes and there are more than 200 cities with more than a million population in China. Terror bomb attacks won't work. China has the materiel in surface based antiaircraft and anti shipping missiles to defend herself. Her air force's tactic (my recommendation) will be to harass any attacking planes but keep out of range, then close in when the attackers are forced to return to base as they run low on fuel. No one has learned how to defeat the law of gravity yet. This way numbers count more than technical or skillset superiority. The US ace may shoot down one or two Chinese defenders. PLAF number three and four will get him anyway. Combat in any form means higher fuel consumption. That's a mighty big ocean below even if no one shot him down. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Who Is in Control of China's Aircraft Carriers? | Sound | Home Built | 2 | March 10th 07 08:48 PM |
| "Bravo Sierra" check (was "China's Army on Combat Alert") | redc1c4 | Military Aviation | 19 | April 3rd 04 10:21 PM |
| The "Lightweight" Fighter is on the verge of overtaking the F-105 as the heaviest single engine fighter of all time. Talk about irony. | Scott Ferrin | Military Aviation | 1 | November 24th 03 04:12 PM |
| China's Chengdu J-10 Fighter - Big Trouble? | Kevin Brooks | Military Aviation | 0 | November 18th 03 03:06 PM |