it was an F-16A, too. even the most updated F-16A Block 15 aircraft are still just… from another era of aircraft entirely. the f-16 may now be demonstrating itself to be the plateau of combat aircraft as it outcompetes more up to date jets and drone combat changes what aerial combat even is. the F-22 and F-35 are more advanced, to be sure, but i'm more and more questioning if that means anything, or more, if that's not actually a major design flaw in more modern craft

[–] jonsnothere@beehaw.org 2 points 6 days ago

We'll need to see in real life (and hopefully that doesn't happen), but in theory an F35 would have fired at a 4(.5) Gen aircraft before it was even detected.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I do believe most western armies have gone a bit too far into "a few advanced" over "many simple".

If I'm going to war I would prefer to have 200 Leopard 2A4 with me over having 20 Leopard 2A8. Same goes for aircraft: I would rather have 100 F16 than 10 F35. If only because a realistic war has a long front, and those few pieces of advanced equipment can't be everywhere at once.

We shouldn't forget that during WWII, the allies typically had the technologically inferior armour, but won out because it was easier to build and maintain, and they had more of it.

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

TLDR: Moar dakka trumps everything

[–] AnalogNotDigital@lemmy.wtf 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Both systems have a place. Your F-16's, F-18's are 'fighters of the line' while the 22 and 35 are more specialized aircraft for different missions.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh, absolutely. The best option is of course to have enough of everything. However, the past 20 years we've seen a bunch of western militaries phase out a bunch of their older, simpler equipment in favour of a few high-tech systems.

I think my point is that it may be a mistake to discard large volumes of older systems and replace them with a few new systems. If/when a war happens, we're going to need large volumes of simpler gear as well as the few specialised and modern systems we've developed the past 20 years.

[–] AnalogNotDigital@lemmy.wtf 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Oh I get what you're saying. But none of the NATO nations are really retiring everything to keep only the newest stuff.

The US has almost 762 active F-16's in the air force, 375ish F15's, 180 22's, and 300 35's. We have almost as many 16's as all the other aircraft, which makes sense. They still work lets fucking use em.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft