Message posted by Andre' M. Dall'au on March 17, 2012 at 5:51:04 PST:
Every generation since WWII has said "this is last of the fighter; in the future it will be all missiles." The concept of ACM was relearned the hard way during Vietnam after our losses to clearly inferior (but gun equipped)opponents forced even the most pro-missile blue suiter to admit that a gun was needed to solve some problems. That of course led to schools like Top Gun that showed American pilots how to knife-fight. Yes, the whole gun package is heavy and requires a whole bunch of training and support both on the ground and in th air, and the AF would love to drop the inherent cost and complexity of a GAU on board. The first time an F-22 or other latest gen fighter gets his or her ass smoked by a gunfighting MIG we will adding a gun pod or package to maintain all profile viability. We just don't know when or where or who we will fight again so limiting our options even before the enemy is identified seems unfair to the people we put in the air to fulfill our national defense. Bottom line the Air Force brass who decided to eliminate all guns once before was wrong. Why would it be right now?
In Reply to: Re: Which is stealthier? F/A-22A v. F-117 posted by OldThudMan~!!~ on March 17, 2012 at 5:35:02 PST:
Replies: