About What if....WW3 and the air war over Europe
|February 28th, 2010||#1|
| || |
What if....WW3 and the air war over Europe info
Given what we know now that the bulk of the Warsaw Pact air forces were made up of obsolete planes, how could they have possibly won in the air?
I'm thinking specifically about the period of time (1980 and on) when Reagan took over, and when the US would be putting F-15s and F-16s in the air. The only way that I can think of that the Warsaw Pact could have negated US air power is with mobile SAM launchers.
|February 28th, 2010||#2|
| || |
Some one is living in the past, hasn't much of the old Warsaw pact joined NATO and haven't many of those countries joined the EU, so no longer come under the Russian influence
LeEnfield Rides again
|March 1st, 2010||#3|
| || |
However, USSR get a good lesson on air defense during WW2, and regarded air defense very seriously after.
Besides, any modelling of war should be viewed in complex - including ground forces too, not only air. For example - air froce could be destroyed by launching of large number of tactical missiles at air fields... without air fields, even the superior side has to retreat for a while to in tact airfields.
|March 4th, 2010||#4|
| || |
In fact if you read up its the West including USA that tried to negate Soviet airpower with oodles of AA.
|March 27th, 2010||#5|
| || |
Re: What if....WW3 and the air war over Europe info
In order to prevent going nuclear NATO needed the F-15 to have at least a 6:1 kill ratio and the F-16 in air to air and air to ground have at least a 3:1 kill ratio. In a conflict between NATO and the WP, there would have been some horrible surprises on both sides.
BAD SURPRISES FOR THE WP INCLUDE;
The F-117 was as good as the KGB/GRU said it was, the Soviet commanders did not believe it.
Soviet air combat tactics were further behind NATOs than the WP realized. The WP would push for the 'furball' (many versus many fighters) while NATO would work to get air battles of 4V4 or less.
The radar warning receiver (RWR) on the MiG-29s could not detect lock-ons of the F-16s. Signal strength was lower than the WP had estimated.
The Alamo Missile was less effective than anticipated! About one-half the Sparrow's success rate.
Economic problems in the USSR were beginning to be felt early in the 1980s. By 1984, the Soviet AF reduced the flying time of combat pilots due to budget cuts. The excuse given was that simulators were good enough to keep up the pilot's proficient.
BAD SURPRISES FOR NATO INCLUDE;
The HMDS on the MiG-29 would have been a horrible surprise.
The 105mm cannons on most NATO tanks would not penetrate the frontal armor on the 'Soviet' T-72s. The other T-72s of the WP did not have armor as thick.
There are many other surprises for each side but, I can't think of them right now. The PGW#1 in 1991 showed former members of the WP what an around the clock allied air offensive would have been like, it surprised many.