-
Latest Posts
- Adam Smithereens
- Greg Sheridan on Roberts-Smith and lessons from Afghanistan
- You’ve Never Seen The Line?
- Netball Australia’s endorsement was less influential than hoped
- A misogynist might joke that it’s usually the other way around
- Vendetta lunch lasted longer than David Sharaz’s first marriage
- Hanoi Vane
-
Recent Comments
-
TCL Archive
- June 2023 (18)
- May 2023 (88)
- April 2023 (90)
- March 2023 (118)
- February 2023 (84)
- January 2023 (101)
- December 2022 (62)
- November 2022 (72)
- October 2022 (83)
- September 2022 (81)
- August 2022 (82)
- July 2022 (83)
- June 2022 (113)
- May 2022 (80)
- April 2022 (114)
- March 2022 (117)
- February 2022 (120)
- January 2022 (126)
- December 2021 (116)
- November 2021 (112)
- October 2021 (126)
- September 2021 (84)
- August 2021 (6)
-
Post Categories
- Art, music, letters
- Australian police state
- Climate hoax
- COVID
- COVID hysteria
- Culture
- Defence and national security
- Economics and the economy
- Education
- Elections
- Ethics and morality
- Fake conservatism
- Fake news
- Fake science
- Federal politics
- Foreign policy
- Freedom
- General
- History
- Hypocrisy of the left
- Innovation and technology
- International
- Left-wing extremism
- Legal affairs
- Media
- Politics
- Religion and faith
- Rule of law
- Social media
- Sport
- State politics
- US politics
- War and peace
- War on Christianity
- Whatever
-
The Cat Empire
Blogroll
-
We’re already halfway there with Loyal Wingman, which is meant to act by turns as a bomb truck, extra sensor node, sacrificial missile decoy and maybe even a backup dogfighter to protect the manned aircraft directing it.
An aerial refuelling variant probably wouldn’t be too hard a thing to make, except that we’ve gone for US Air Force Boom instead of the US Navy/Marines/European Probe and Drogue aerial refuelling systems for the vast majority of our new aircraft types.
Great info, Rex, and very interesting.
Why do I get the feeling, though, that the gear we get is on the way out when we get it?
Why do I get the feeling, though, that the gear we get is on the way out when we get it?
That’s just this funny thing called ‘technical obsolescence.’ More often than not, it’s based on perception and propaganda, rather than actual hard, demonstrated data of failure.
Remember that 1950s, 60s, 70s and 80s-era guided missile designs like the SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 and SA-7 to 10 (All Russian designs) and Rapier and RBS-70, Patriot and so forth all still form the basis of most nations’ air defence systems, and the vast majority of combat aircraft worldwide (regsrdless of actual airframe age) saw their genesis in the 70s. Heck, the C-130 Hercules first flew in 1954!
And despite the occasional short, sharp regional slapfight that might expose the limitations of one particular radar or detection sensor, or a few weapon systems or a nation’s training paradigms, we have not really seen blanket technological progress since the Vietnam and Yom Kippur War eras.
We are presently facing the historical equivalent of Europe not having gone to war in 1939, where you might see Mk V Spitfires vs. Me109Fs in the mid to late 1950s.
For all the blather about hypersonic weapons and AI and cyberwarfare and so forth, a major air combat scenario in 2021 will not be vastly dissimilar to that seen over Iraq in 1991 or even 2003, or Serbia/Bosnia/Kosovo in the late 1990s. The grandkids of those generations will be at the controls or behind the triggers of more or less the same aircraft or ground defence weapons. There is just a skerrick more automation now, and the communications are better.