4 ms·
Or maybe the lesson to learn is that modern military aircraft are simply not particularly useful weapons. Fighters are way too expensive relative to the cost of
by NohatCoder 5y ago
Or maybe the lesson to learn is that modern military aircraft are simply not particularly useful weapons. Fighters are way too expensive relative to the cost of ground-based AA systems, while a combination of missile and shell-based artillery can do most bombing jobs way cheaper.
In general modern military seems to be focused on delivering as much power as possible in a single unit, never bothering to ask if multiple lesser units could do a better job combined. And so we get destroyers and cruisers that look mighty, but can nevertheless be rendered inoperable, if not outright sunk, by a single torpedo.
- tim333 5y agoOr that they need to be stealth.
- NohatCoder 5y agoThat is even more expensive, with less payload capacity, trading every other quality for a gamble that the enemy does not posses decent radar systems.
- tim333 5y agoI guess maybe drones are the way forward.
- wolverine876 5y agoYou understate the capabilities of stealth, at least according to any expert I've seen, but yes, like any measure and counter-measure, it is not flawless. Stealth is designed to work against the best radar and other detection systems. > less payload capacity Not much is needed with precision guided muntions (which the Russians don't seem to be using, if they have enough).