Delete comment from: Elements Of Power
Heh. Struck a fanboy nerve hard eh?
RE: " "BVR & BVR-alone" was the fantasy behind aircraft like early F4, F14 & F111."
'BVR and BVR alone' is a strawman argument. No rational advocate for BVR capability ever assumed it would prevent WVR. In fact it was (and is) seen as being the dominating factor in setting up a successful WVR engagement if the BVR one doesn't settle the matter.
RE: "Without Boyd, Sprey Christie etc, F16 would have never come into being."
No, the F-16, especially as it was execut ed, was a program that came about IN SPITE of Boyd, Riccione, Christie and Sprey.
RE: "F15A would have become another overly complex turkey (that would have killed F15E at birth)."
Been reading Coram's cr*p fiction about Boyd or something similar eh?
I'd place the F-15 requirements success on the shoulders of Lt Gen Glenn A Kent, Lt Col (Later General and AF Chief of Staff) Larry Welch and his TAC Avenger simulations, and then AFSC Commander General James Ferguson. But then, I know the history doesn't support the Boyd mythos in this case.
RE: Fast forward 30 years, deja vu F35, except for minor details like it will ultimately cost you $1 trillion...
I'd like to point out here, just to prove yet another point you don't know d*ck about, that the mythical $1Trillion value is already being pared back quite a bit and it includes all lifecycle costs for 55 years of operation in any case. Got any other weapon system data of similar scope for perspective?
RE: and another disastrous air war for arrogant armchair generals (who twist arms, discredit critics & bend history) like yourself to be proven wrong.
You can't really discredit critics unless they don't deserve the credit in the first place. Unbending of false history, and exposing the 'narrative' planted by the Coram's, Fallows, et al just tends to hurt little fanboy brains as they try to wrap themselves around the idea they've been spoon-fed cr*p as actual history.
I can back up every one of my factual assertions with sources- usually multiple ones. I MIGHT take the time to do it and expand this comment into a separate post if you can take the time to research the correct answer to the following questions about that 'disastrous air war' you allude to.
1. What was the Navy's Air to Air exchange ratio before and after the break in the war over North Vietnam?
2. What was the root cause of the difference in exchange ratios, if any, considering the Navy was using the same aircraft and weapons before and after?
3. What was different about the AF and Navy experience in exchange ratios and why was there a difference?
(corrected for clarity in question 1)
Jul 5, 2013, 11:54:06 PM
Posted to Pierre Sprey: Expert?