Brief intro and questions about the current mach 2.0 limitations ofWestern designed F/A AC

Mike Ash wrote:
In article
,
Richard wrote:

Brian there are other things one might need higher speeds for, like:
Running away from the fight when your odds are 1:10 enemy AC or just
getting there faster. we have tankers that can fuel a fighter in less
than 5 minutes and go on about his intentions. I don't like to see the
West sucking hind teat in any area of AC design.

Bob..

Again, that's what AWACs is for...and where are you going to find:
1) 10 Mach 2+ fighters (the migs would run about 5 minutes then
bingo)
2) 10 pilots who can realistically fight the plane
3) 10 idiots who would go against anything coming out of the USA with
C&C support?

And this is about projection of power for strategic goals, not
measuring our dicks by mach number. No one has ever beaten the SR-71
or X-15 in any case.

It seems probable that the F-35 project will be the last major manned
combat aircraft project to be funded in the US. This whole discussion
really sounds like a big exercise in fighting the last war to me.


One hopes so as most of the traditional role of the fighter has been
rendered obsolete by missiles and what remains is best done at speeds
less than mach 1.

An airborne missile frigate full of radars and assorted missiles would
be more appropriate today.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.