From: "Peter Webb", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I notice that this thread is refusing to die quietly.
Being a curious little soul, I passed this subject on to a friend of mine
who just happens to be current and instructor qualified in fast
jet-fighters. Here is the body of his reply to my query:
From: "Derek Bernard", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Anyone who undertakes a serious study of the subject will soon realise
> that the best place to destroy enemy aircraft is when they are still on
> the ground (in their HASs for example using a precision munition). The
> *least* effective place to **at
From: "Richard Loweth", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I cannot see the logic behind also selecting a European missile, at twice
the cost, that is promoted as having greater range than the American
alternative, when, regardless of missile future wars may well demand visual
identification of the enemy target
From: Jonathan Spencer, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'll keep it short.
>From: INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>The decision not to arm the Eurofighter is bloody stupid,
Anyone who is interested in learning about air superiority and the
weapons, strategy and tactics best suited to achieve it should do so
From: Jeremy Peter Howells, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The gun on a modern fighter plane is an effective air-to-air or
air-to-surface
tool.
The Harrier pilots are apparently bitterly regretting the loss of their
30mm
Aden cannon on the latest version of that aircraft. And even F3 fighter
versions of t
From: David Chappell - UK, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EJ Totty - Uses the example of the F4 Phantom as a fighter armed with
guns - Not a good example at all I'm afraid, as it was not until well
into the Vietnam conflict that F4's were retrofitted with 20mm Vulcan
cannon in pods. It was not designed to
From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
Not quite: I was questioning whether cannon
still have a role on modern aircraft.
[...]
Okay, allow me two American cents worth, in
exchange for what passes for what ever it is you spend
these days - inflation adjusted
From: "John Sukey", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I seem to get the idea that Mr. Spencer believes the gun is not really
necessary on the on the new Euro fighter. This is a fallacy that was
proven the hard way in the Vietnam war. 1. missiles have a minimum firing
range so if the bad guy is in close you ar
From: Jonathan Spencer, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>RAF insiders say that the Government has decided that it cannot afford the
>ground support equipment needed to operate the 27mm Mauser cannon fully.
Surely it already exists in the Tornado fleet? More pointedly, any
aircraft that strafes ground tro
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10 matches
Mail list logo
