![]() |
| 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 |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
In message , Alan Minyard
writes On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:31:02 +0100, "Paul J. Adam" wrote: No, it's cheaper and easier to maintain than the F/A-22. (Notice the hasty redesignation? This aircraft can carry two 1000lb bombs, it's a mighty attack platform! Never mind that the P-47 was doing the same in 1943... that's progress for you). If you _really_ want to cripple the Arabs, sell them Raptors. Whether either is 'trash' will be a matter for squadron service to prove. Well, it has the RCS of a steel barn door, with or without outboard stores. Have you seen the plots, Al, or just LockMart propaganda? What aspect and frequency are we discussing? And "cheaper" is generally not "better" when it comes to weapon systems. The Raptor could eat the Eurobird for breakfast. Equivalent value, the Raptor is outnumbered: it's better but not _that_ much better. On current trends the RAF will get more Typhoons than the USAF will Raptors... -- When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite. W S Churchill Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 04:17 PM |