|
[quote=Ibram]F-16s are a lot tougher than youre giving them credit for, methinks... they can actually fly with a whole damn wing knocked off. [quote] F-16s use super-critical wings. Lose electronics - computers must constantly correct the wings - and an F-16 cannot fly. F-16s are not tough enough for ground support. Why were A-10s so damn successful in ground support and F-16s not? F-16s tend to stay about the bullets because gunfire does so much more damage to an F-16 - or F-15, or F-22.
Lose part of an F-16 wing - computers can no longer maintain the wing. Lose half a wing on an A-10 and pilot can even fly without hydraulics. F-16 without computer control or without hydraulics is abandoned like a flying garbage dump.
What is by far the most dangerous mission for any pilot? Ground attack. What is the primary purpose of an air force? Ground attack in support of those boots on the ground. Why did Swartzkopf have so much praise for the Marines in Kuwait? They did it without the F-18 air support. Carrier based planes back then were that inferior in a Navy who forgot what the Marines need from that carrier. Toughest planes are those that must survive the most difficult and essential task. Glory planes such as F-16s and F-18s stay high up because they are so easily shot down by simple guns.
|
10-03-2006, 09:10 PM
Threaded Mode