On Jun 13, 5:42*pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jun 13, 2:10*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jun 13, 1:11*pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jun 12, 8:34*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
What? No HARM on the F-22? Maybe that's not its role, 2pid. Ooooops.
Maybe the current HARM is so big and fat it won't fit in the weapons
bay and gives a stealth aircraft a big fat radar signature?
Just like the external hard points do, 2pid. That's why its weapons
bay is internal.
And the current HARM is a standoff weapon dependent upon the
enemy turning on their radar, so all the Iranians need do is the
same thing the Iraqis did,
keep their radar off until the big bombers come in.
That's a weakness of anti-radar weaponry, to be sure. If they do not
turn it on, how do you propose to detect it?
Thankfully our planners would not rely exclusively on your dumb plan
as it is so easily defeated.
I have no "dumb plan", 2pid. All I point out is that the F-22 is not a
SEAD weapon, as you proposed.
Some other weapon will also be required against fixed missile sites.
But not the F-22.
Mobile ones are a bigger problem requiring hunt and destroy.
After they turn it on, yes?
Is the F-16 suited for that?
It's what we have, like it or not.
*They get litup, they will get shot down.
Against Iran? GMAFB.
So is a new HARM in the F-22s future?
Still searching for a mission for the F-22 I see. Maybe it is SEAD.
Lol
*http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...p?channel=awst....
Apparently it is....so much for your limited role.
Gosh, 2pid. So sue me. Military planners tend to consider weapons on
hand, not some "maybe, might happen someday well down the road if it's
approved and budgeted for and the designs are approved and function as
designed and the tests work out as they should and there is a
perceived need" scenario such as you propose here.
"The U.S. military is increasingly interested in developing a new
generation of high-speed air-to-surface missiles that could be
integrated into stealth aircraft to attack an enemy’s radar sites or
fleeting targets."
So how many decades in your 'scenario' of attacking Iran's nuclear
capability do we have? Do you have any clue at all as to how long this
would take from the "interest at the Pentagon" level to an
"operational" weapons system?
God, 2pid, declare 'victory' if you must, but please quit being so
****ing stupid.
People ignorant in tactical or strategic options pin their hopes on
wishful thinking.