World Airforces
Much of this discussion is beyond academic; instead it falls into the realms of fantasy. 1 x F35 will not face 50 MiG 17s (or MiG 21s). It's the same as the 'how many Spitfires could defeat a Typhoon?' discussions. Air Defence, (and counter-air) as any schoolboy (and Mr Noritake) should know is more than just fighters; do not forget the Air Defence Ground Environment (Radar and reporting, C3I, SAM, AAA etc), sustainment, doctrine, weaponry, training &c. Any inbound force would want to degrade the ADGE with defence suppression measures (ARM, ECM/active EW/cyber), possibly using LO UCAVs and Tomahawks, before sending in manned (legacy) platforms.
I'd like to see a flight of elderly, rusting MiGs (or Hunters, for that matter) try to operate against 4th or 5th generation fighters in the absence of a C2 system. In fact, I wouldn't. It would be a slaughter.
I'd like to see a flight of elderly, rusting MiGs (or Hunters, for that matter) try to operate against 4th or 5th generation fighters in the absence of a C2 system. In fact, I wouldn't. It would be a slaughter.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Far, far away.
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, Mr Navigator.
Whenurunhappy:
No need to be rude. I'm sure - if you try very, very hard - you can manage to be pleasant if not actually polite.
I'm obviously thinking of a scenario with which you're clearly unfamiliar, but which has, nevertheless, been seriously modelled by the likely participants.
I'm also aware that modern combat aircraft do not fly, Biggles-like, into the wild blue yonder to go mano-a-mano with an evil foe, but thanks for the heads up about the other important technical things you mentioned. I shall look them up in my 'Boys book of Aircraft and Other Important Technical Things'.
Should the sky fall in and the utterly amazing F 35 and it's even more amazing elder brother, the F 22, plus assorted Other Important Technical Things decide to defend the Taiwan Straits, I assure you they'll be meeting something other than 50 rusting Mig 17's flopping around the sky without any form of control.
However, without giving the game away, I'm sure that even you - if you think in an asymmetric manner (I know, it's not something taught at your Staff Colleges) - can work out that they may have a role to play in disrupting the highly structured and not very adaptable Western Command and Control Systems.
Sun Tzu should have said: 'Believing in your own invincibility against a theoretically less sophisticated adversary is only going to end in tears, and they'll likely be yours.'
Whenurunhappy:
No need to be rude. I'm sure - if you try very, very hard - you can manage to be pleasant if not actually polite.
I'm obviously thinking of a scenario with which you're clearly unfamiliar, but which has, nevertheless, been seriously modelled by the likely participants.
I'm also aware that modern combat aircraft do not fly, Biggles-like, into the wild blue yonder to go mano-a-mano with an evil foe, but thanks for the heads up about the other important technical things you mentioned. I shall look them up in my 'Boys book of Aircraft and Other Important Technical Things'.
Should the sky fall in and the utterly amazing F 35 and it's even more amazing elder brother, the F 22, plus assorted Other Important Technical Things decide to defend the Taiwan Straits, I assure you they'll be meeting something other than 50 rusting Mig 17's flopping around the sky without any form of control.
However, without giving the game away, I'm sure that even you - if you think in an asymmetric manner (I know, it's not something taught at your Staff Colleges) - can work out that they may have a role to play in disrupting the highly structured and not very adaptable Western Command and Control Systems.
Sun Tzu should have said: 'Believing in your own invincibility against a theoretically less sophisticated adversary is only going to end in tears, and they'll likely be yours.'
Mr Noritake,
My apologies to you if I appeared rude to you. That's not my style.
Yes, ADGEs are vulnerable, too, or at least can be, which is a point I make in my post. However, the levels of redundancy that exist and the resilience of the mission-critical components heavily, heavily favour the networked-enabled, cross-environment combattant. Even Sun Tzu (who didn't do a QWI course, as far as I know) would have appreciated this. Remind me, when did he die?
My apologies to you if I appeared rude to you. That's not my style.
Yes, ADGEs are vulnerable, too, or at least can be, which is a point I make in my post. However, the levels of redundancy that exist and the resilience of the mission-critical components heavily, heavily favour the networked-enabled, cross-environment combattant. Even Sun Tzu (who didn't do a QWI course, as far as I know) would have appreciated this. Remind me, when did he die?
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Far, far away.
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn't really upset. I simply enjoyed teasing you, but I suspect you knew this all along.
Yes, your systems are impressive and appear quite resilient. It would spoil the game entirely if I pointed out to you where weakness may lie. If you live long enough, and the world becomes 'interesting' enough, you may get to see how everything plays out in real life.
You need to brush up on Sun Tzu. The thoughts contained therein are far, far more relevant in this technological age than they were when he first wrote them.
Yes, your systems are impressive and appear quite resilient. It would spoil the game entirely if I pointed out to you where weakness may lie. If you live long enough, and the world becomes 'interesting' enough, you may get to see how everything plays out in real life.
You need to brush up on Sun Tzu. The thoughts contained therein are far, far more relevant in this technological age than they were when he first wrote them.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Far, far away.
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sense I'm being sucked into a conversation I don't wish to have, so I think I'll wish you a Very Happy Christmas instead.
Remember, Baby Jesus loves you and Link 16.
Remember, Baby Jesus loves you and Link 16.
Sun Tzu's aphorisms are distilled commonsense, and nothing else. They need to be seen in the context amongst which they were formed. Nelson was a successful strategist but no one is saying - as far as I know - the the RN adopt Nelsonian tactics today.
Don't get me wrong; I am a keen historian, have published a few papers and given a number of lectures on military history. But that's not the same as slavish adherence to dogma.
Don't get me wrong; I am a keen historian, have published a few papers and given a number of lectures on military history. But that's not the same as slavish adherence to dogma.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm coming at this one a bit late, but the whole point of this thread is flawed from the start - John F, you are not quoting Flight when you say that the USA has 13,902 fixed-wing combat aircraft. That is their entire fleet of all military aircraft categories across all services. Likewise, it does not say that France has 1,200 combat aircraft (it's 283 fixed-wing across the air force and navy, Melchett01); that includes everything in military use, bar VIP types. And the numbers most certainly aren't plucked from the air!
The issue with one Typhoon versus 50 old MiGs would be that HM Govt only purchased 15 AMRAAM missiles as a cost saving measure. Obviously the supply chain would only let our steely eyed killers have 14 of them because they would have to keep one back in case anybody needed it.
Then having taken out 14 MiGs, there would be the painful pregnant pause as we looked to Uncle Sam to bale us out......... again!
Then having taken out 14 MiGs, there would be the painful pregnant pause as we looked to Uncle Sam to bale us out......... again!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
PA, Statistics to the rescue.
In an endeavour to avoid the threat a number of collisions my be assumed.
Of the remaining 30 we can assume two kills per missile leaving
1v2
Allowing for a gun kill we can terminate a 1v1 with close merge.
The Typhoon is now redundant.
In an endeavour to avoid the threat a number of collisions my be assumed.
Of the remaining 30 we can assume two kills per missile leaving
1v2
Allowing for a gun kill we can terminate a 1v1 with close merge.
The Typhoon is now redundant.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or
Statistics losing us the battle.
Each side having serious equipment failures of between one and ten percent of their force!
No typhoons able to launch and forty migs swarming around free to cause mayhem.
Statistics losing us the battle.
Each side having serious equipment failures of between one and ten percent of their force!
No typhoons able to launch and forty migs swarming around free to cause mayhem.
Didn't statistics say that the Germans would win the Battle of Britain? Or that the North Vietnamese Air Force would stand no chance against the modern US fighters facing them? Or that the Sea Harrier would come off second best against the Mirage III?
Statistics are one thing. Reality can be quite another.
Statistics are one thing. Reality can be quite another.
Last edited by Martin the Martian; 19th Dec 2014 at 11:27. Reason: spilleng
I doubt that we will see a major combatant against major combatant air to air war. The big risk for UK air assets is that they might end up employed in a proxy war/invasion situation, where they are vulnerable to a capable surface to air threat. Our tiny numbers of combat aircraft mean the enemy only has to knock out a few and it will be game over.
OAP
OAP
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Far, far away.
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting comments about the superiority on a real world basis of the latest Western aviation wundermachines. As the more realistic amongst you have noted, maintaining their superpowers in the field may prove problematic, to say nothing of the length and complexity (and therefore vulnerability) of the supply chain required to support snag-free operation.
Anyway, I'd have assumed that the West would have learnt by now that the next major air war is unlikely to be influenced by the superiority or otherwise of the equipment employed. The outcome is far more likely to be determined by the asymmetric warfare techniques each side uses. In other words, it's far easier (and cheaper, though maybe not in terms of loss of human life) to stop an F 35 or AWACS getting into the air than it is to down them once they're flying. One or two carefully trained and motivated individuals on a carrier or air base who are prepared to sacrifice their life for their 'noble cause' could effectively remove - at least temporarily - an air wing from the conflict.
The world has changed. A few hundred crazies with explosive belts have proved that even without air cover you really can take on a major power and win, or make it so costly they decide to declare 'mission achieved' and wander back home mumbling about the unfairness of it all.
Anyway, I'd have assumed that the West would have learnt by now that the next major air war is unlikely to be influenced by the superiority or otherwise of the equipment employed. The outcome is far more likely to be determined by the asymmetric warfare techniques each side uses. In other words, it's far easier (and cheaper, though maybe not in terms of loss of human life) to stop an F 35 or AWACS getting into the air than it is to down them once they're flying. One or two carefully trained and motivated individuals on a carrier or air base who are prepared to sacrifice their life for their 'noble cause' could effectively remove - at least temporarily - an air wing from the conflict.
The world has changed. A few hundred crazies with explosive belts have proved that even without air cover you really can take on a major power and win, or make it so costly they decide to declare 'mission achieved' and wander back home mumbling about the unfairness of it all.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Statistics are one thing. Reality can be quite another.
Statistics don't tell you this is going to happen, we interpret that. Statistics give you a probabilities of something happening. 4,5,6,7 etc. standard deviation events in the negative are still possible, no matter the decreasing likelihood.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there were a metallic scraping sound at the bottom of a cylindrical object, we could always count the 15 G-REG Hawker Hunters in the UK as well (plus a few Meteors, Vampires, a Sea Vixen and a few Lightnings/Buccs at Brunti that might do a trip).
Well, if we're counting MiG15/17s, then we might as well...
Does that get us back in the Top 100?
LJ
Well, if we're counting MiG15/17s, then we might as well...
Does that get us back in the Top 100?
LJ
