13 thoughts on “Interesting…

  1. This type of problem is not new as requirements change faster than the technology. WW2 saw many good, even great, designs become obsolete before use because time passed them buy and made them useless before they were used. The problem today is development time, increasing complexity and cost vs a changing style of conflict. I suspect there is also an arrogant view that soft ware can compensate for poor basic aerodynamics. While that’s true to a point the laws of physics still apply to the design shape and weight. Designs like the A10, F15, F16, F18, B2 even and the ancient B52 remain great because the basics were great at inception and time didn’t pass them by because they have enough versatility to remain useful, if operated correctly, in the new conflicts appearing.

    Presently Russian and Chinese stuff doesn’t worry me too much. The serviceability rate of Russian equipment in Syria is very poor compared to western standards and anything Chinese is a poor copy of something else poor. The Chinese face the same dilemma the Japanese did after about 1943 in that they have some sound ideas on the drawing boards but lack the technical knowledge to keep up with the west when the pressure is on.

  2. This is the military. It and oceanic waste go hand-in-hand. Always has done. Despite what you read in gung-ho warrior books and see in the movies.

Comments are closed.