Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
With reconnaissance satellites, long-range anti-ship missile armed drones, and medium range ballistic missiles a carrier based naval battlegroup is fish habitat.

The US Air Force hasn't attacked a modern, integrated, anti-aircraft defense since World War II.  

Either way, the attacking forces would be savaged.

(AFC, BBS)

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Sep 19th, 2008 at 06:54:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps an emblematic case was the Russian "attack" on the Kitty Hawk in November 2001 during manouvers in the Korean Sea. The Russian migs broke through the US defenses twice and were gone before the US forces caught on.

Russians and Americans have been having cat fights for decades, up to 280 a year, under-reported "incidents at sea." They're heavy sparing partners- and quite often the Russians get the best. A war with Russia would be a total disaster for the world.

As for the Georgia campaign, the Russian attack was a classic low-level operation. Perhaps one of the more interesting aspects of their campaign was the lack of precision bombing. The Russians are deliberately using non-surgical weaponry as an admonition. And if their nuclear warheads are just as imprecise?

by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 05:39:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
However, it is said airplane dogfights are passé, too: in a real aerial war, planes would shoot each other off the sky with rockets at a range of dozens to hundreds of kilometres.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 05:49:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The development of remote controlled aircraft, flying above radar acquisition - "drones" - armed with air-to-air smart missiles coupled with swarm technology - independent agents with cross-coupled communication - is leading to the potential obsolescence of manned attack aircraft.

AFAIK, this system is still in the 'talking' phase.  Throw some money at R&D and it could be developed.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 09:43:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
AFAIK the nightmarish (because enabling even more reckless wars by people behind screens) idea of automatic airplanes is a dream for two decades now, but it only produced expensive but aborted development projects (a lot of the newer X-planes).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 11:46:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Sometime - when I'm not exhausted - and I'll run through the problems and how I would answer 'em.

But not today.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 07:40:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Russians and Americans have been having cat fights for decades, up to 280 a year, under-reported "incidents at sea." They're heavy sparing partners- and quite often the Russians get the best.

LOL, that's not the impression one gets from watching Top Gun ;-)

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 09:03:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I refuse to see any film that has a so-called "scientologist" in the crew.

As for top guns, Karl Rove's "Mission Accomplished" set was stolen from Putin. To clench the 1999 elections Putin piloted a SU-27 over Checheny with a top gun as co-pilot, Maj. Gen. Alexander Kharchevsky.

General Kharchevsky is the head of the 4th flight training center (CBPiPLS) from Lipetsk, where one of the most capable Russian Air Force units is based. Several years ago Kharchevsky visited the United States, where he flew a number of simulated combat missions on his Su-27 fighter against some of the best American pilots. Kharchevsky won all of the 26 missions flown. (It was after Kharchevsky's trip to the U.S. that several Western military aircraft manufacturers, including Lockheed and Saab, declined an offer by Sukhoi Design Bureau to conduct a public one-on-one close combat simulation at an international air show between any of the latest Western fighters and the Su-35 air-superiority fighter.)

On May 1, 2003 (or the day before), Bush co-piloted a plane onto the USS Lincoln to announce the Mission had been accomplished. He however resorted to a normal guy pilot, a very American thing to do.

A proper film would pit the two pilots against each other, maple syrup and apple pie. I'll go see it if there's no fuckwit scientologist in the cast. Hell, I'll even write the script. Dick'll be the evil guy.

PS. It was Kharchevsky who "sank" the Kitty Hawk.

by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 09:59:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What that is saying is not that the US doesn't have a first-class navy or airforce, but rather that currently the balance between defensive and offensive weaponry is heavily slanted in favor of defense, at horribly asymmetric costs.

One can read recent weapons initiatives in the US as ways to get around that.  If you believe some of the hype, the more or less canceled F-22 Raptor was supposed to be the key to cracking modern air defense networks, and its cheaper and less effective replacement, the Joint Strike Fighter, is supposed to have a good chunk of that capability.

Then there are the various anti-satellite weapons the US has been developing, to deal with the satellite tracking issues.

None of its ready for use, though.

And your downthread comment about the US Army is right as well.

by Zwackus on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 07:30:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The F-22 has not been canceled. Actually it is already in service with operative units. Only 20 or so, but more are rolling of the line.

And if the F-22 is as good as the US propaganda claims it is...

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 08:23:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 09:16:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The link doesn't work for me, but by all means buy Gripen instead. ;)

Not that the Americans are selling the F-22 to anyone, but the F-35 has gotten into developmental trouble... ;)

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Sat Sep 20th, 2008 at 09:34:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series