Re: Way OT :o) Stealth and Countermeasures...

ias@sprintmail.com (Imre A. Szabo):

>The problem is how many SU-27's and MIG-29's you can buy for 1 F-22. 
In
>a furball F-22 are not going to have a kill ratio favorable enough to
>justify their much higher price.

The exact same thing was said of the F-15 and the Mig-21, 25 etc....
The F-22 is more capable than either the Su-27, (Production version) or
MiG29.

>Current generation IR's are starting to be replaced by next generation
>IR's.	Please add about miles to your ranges...  Also, you seem to
>forget the both SU-27's and MIG-29's have built in IR sensors that can
>hand off their lock on to their IR missiles.

I've already seen the next generation IR sensors and seekers. There is a

difference between how the two operate. Limit for lock on is still under
10 
miles for the newest heads in anything but an aft aspect shot.

The IR sensors are used to visually track and lock onto a "target," they
can 
NOT pass off a lock until the missile seeker head has enough difference
to 
lock onto the target. Your still looking at anything but a rear angle
shot 
being under 10 miles.

>Great, but that doesn't change much. We were lucky in both Iraq and
>Serbia. Why??? Lot's and lot's of good bases nearby. Saudi Arabia had
>far more infrastructure then their airforce ever needed.

I have to ask. Where you there for Desert Shield/Storm? Saudi did NOT
have 
far more infrastructure than we needed. We had to drag a lot of it with
us, 
(part of the build up time). They had buildings and runways, and they
lent us 
the bunkers, but for the most part our aircraft resided in bunkers WE
built. 
We had to do major repairs to their airbases and facilities, (not to
mention 
WE repaired a lot of their aircraft for them) in order to use them.

>Large NATO airbases in Italy support most of the air operation in
Serbia.

That I know of neither Brindisi(sp) or Aviano are "Large." In fact
Aviano was 
my second station, and it was smallish back when it DIDN'T have an
actual 
mission. It was not built up until the problems in the Balkans began and
most 
of what was built up is overcrowded and temporary.

>If you go to fight somewhere where their isn't that much
infrastructure, and
>these massive attacks are going to be a whole lot smaller.

Actually, bare-basing is how we are TRAINED to fight a war. We practice
going 
to a bare base and hope we don't have to. We can be set up and flying
sorties 
within 12 hours.

>Do not assume that future opposition will be as incompetent as the
Iraqi's 
or as 
>outnumbered as the Serb's.

We never do. We train to do landing, buildup, generate and launch all
under 
WORSE conditions than we will ever face.

>By the way, how many months did it take build up the assets in Iraq to
>crush them so easily?	4 to 5 months, if I remember correctly.

Actually? We could have started the air campaign 24 hours after the
first 
assets arrived. It would have been rough, but we could have done it. We
took 
awhile to get the assets into place due to constant negotiation with the

Saudis as to what, when, how and how much. We also used the time to get
the 
facilities and equipment from our hosts up to snuff. My unit, (AWACs at
the 
time) was genned up to go within 24 hours of the news of the Iraq
invasion 
hitting the US. Some of the actual combat aircraft were ready in less
than 
12. We had to wait for the Saudi's to ask for our help.
(As an aside, I spent my first week in Saudi fixing Saudi AWACs rather
than 
working on my own. :o)

Randy