tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post5806692820566079396..comments2024-03-27T20:37:08.065+01:00Comments on Defence and Freedom: SEAD and fair weather oppositionUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-63030619496024736642012-04-22T00:01:04.941+02:002012-04-22T00:01:04.941+02:00IIRC NATO did loose a plane over Libya to "me...IIRC NATO did loose a plane over Libya to "mechanical failure" that looked an awful lot like bullet or shrapnel holes in the pictures. Perhaps this contributed to the panicked tone of the article.Dr. Lunynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-65366315067811693382012-04-21T21:58:55.511+02:002012-04-21T21:58:55.511+02:00On the "newer is better" theme I always ...On the "newer is better" theme I always envision the M14 against the M16 or the G3 against the G36. Supposedly newer isn't always better. Even in technology. As of "pseudo-stealth". Well if you have older radar it will work on longer wave lengths. As a result the whole deflecting shape stuff doesn't matter any more.rosomaknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-69691115722426192282012-04-21T13:37:38.499+02:002012-04-21T13:37:38.499+02:00Maybe one major issue is the increasing complexity...Maybe one major issue is the increasing complexity of ways, means and combinations for air defence. Any strike planner will be faced with unknowable (and non-traditional) air defence efforts. As a consequence they may stick to cautious strike templates, peeling the onion very slowly. <br /><br />On the other hand the same complexity issue applies to the air defence planners as well. Given all possible combinations and tools for air defence it is unlikely that they can find the optimum solution to a given strike scenario, again sticking to templates and known equipment. <br /><br />Case in point, that lone serbian air defence officer with limited resources. He had a plan to maximise the effectiveness of his tools, whereas the rest of serbian air defence showed poorer performance.MMKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-9467740526752632132012-04-20T17:56:25.310+02:002012-04-20T17:56:25.310+02:00I don't pay much attention to this any longer,...I don't pay much attention to this any longer, but I can speak with some authority that Serbia's very poor (upgraded 1950s) air defenses scared the hell out of our Air Force. In fact that was the end of the so-called Stealth F-117. After things had settled down we were able to find out that all our problems were caused by one guy, a Lt Col if memory serves, who was left to his own devices. We will always show well against 7th century men in Afghanistan, but one of these days the US air farce will be swept from the skies and that will be the biggest paradigm shift in warfare since the invention of air craft. It's always wise to pick your enemies, I have no qualms about that, but it's not wise to judge technical performance based on fighting a very weak opponent. I doubt very much if we'd fair any better today, and maybe much worse, if we were to fight a thinking enemy like the NVA.ENhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12193563623321560413noreply@blogger.com