Multirole planes Vs. Specialised planes, Good or bad? |  |  |
| Romanian Army in the Second World War · Forum Guidelines |
 Help
 Search
 Members
 Calendar
|
| Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register ) | Resend Validation Email |
   |
Multirole planes Vs. Specialised planes, Good or bad?| Iamandi |
Posted on April 16, 2005 03:04 pm
|
 General de divizie  Group: Members Posts: 1386 Member No.: 319 Joined: August 04, 2004  |
Tornado, Typhoon, Rafale... Some Examples. It is good to make multirole against Jaguar, AMX, IAR 93, A-10... ? F-16, F-15 with E, F-14 with air to ground, etc.. Su-34 is one of the last? I don't like too much "Joint Strike Fighter" ideea, or Rafale, or F-16, or... whatever multirole name.. I expect your considerations with pleasure. Iama |
  
|
| Imperialist |
Posted on April 17, 2005 07:58 pm
|
||
 General de armata  Group: Members Posts: 2399 Member No.: 499 Joined: February 09, 2005 |
Iama, the question is a bit fuzzy... Are you talking about efficiency, cost, flexibility... And what exactly are you comparing? I dont think you can compare an A-10 with an F-16... or maybe you can, but compared from what perspective? take care -------------------- I
|
||
|
|
| Iamandi |
Posted on April 18, 2005 08:30 am
|
|
General de divizie Group: Members Posts: 1386 Member No.: 319 Joined: August 04, 2004 |
Well, my english is not good enough to make me understand. But, let's try...
F-16, A-10. A-10 an excellent plane for his job. His pilot is trained to do the best in air to ground missions. F-16 is now almost an universal tool. His pilot is intended to do almost all aspect of missions. Fortunatelly, he don't make antisubmarine missions. F-16 do not have GAU-8 gun, heavy armor like A-10, etc. And his pilot, in all of his pilot life - is impossible to be 100 % good in all missions. Iama |
|
|
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
 |
|
[ Script Execution time: 0.0085 ] [ 17 queries used ] [ GZIP Enabled ]
Powered by Invision Power Board(U) v1.3.1 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.