bushpig1998
Active member
After discussing mass production of military equipment - such as during WW2, I thought this would be a nice topic to discuss.
Currently Op Noble Eagle costs America Billions of dollars annually. Would it not make sense to produce a smaller, lighter armed and more fuel effecient craft to patrol our skies?
http://www.4forums.com/political/showthread.php?t=4339&page=2
This opens another subject for discussion:
If a country is bootstrapped for a military budget - let's say a small country building its Airforce - would it not make sense to purchase small, lighter armed, fast aircraft such as the one mentioned in the article above? Maybe with a limited ground attack modification - 2 bombs or something similar?
It make perfect sense to me. Why purchase $20 mil piece of equipment when you can have something that is just as fast, costs less to operate and purchase and is probably a little easier to fly?
In some ways, I buy the Soviet concept of winning by numbers. Build simple systems that are cheap to rpoduce and operate, but build at least 2 for every 1 your potential enemy could build.
I know this plane will probably not stand up to the F16 and win, but few countries have the capability of the USAF and the pilots from "most" other countries tend to be trained a little less and have less experience than the current crop of US pilots (not I said SOME and not all).
Currently Op Noble Eagle costs America Billions of dollars annually. Would it not make sense to produce a smaller, lighter armed and more fuel effecient craft to patrol our skies?
http://www.4forums.com/political/showthread.php?t=4339&page=2
This opens another subject for discussion:
If a country is bootstrapped for a military budget - let's say a small country building its Airforce - would it not make sense to purchase small, lighter armed, fast aircraft such as the one mentioned in the article above? Maybe with a limited ground attack modification - 2 bombs or something similar?
It make perfect sense to me. Why purchase $20 mil piece of equipment when you can have something that is just as fast, costs less to operate and purchase and is probably a little easier to fly?
In some ways, I buy the Soviet concept of winning by numbers. Build simple systems that are cheap to rpoduce and operate, but build at least 2 for every 1 your potential enemy could build.
I know this plane will probably not stand up to the F16 and win, but few countries have the capability of the USAF and the pilots from "most" other countries tend to be trained a little less and have less experience than the current crop of US pilots (not I said SOME and not all).
