Tell me what SA-2 type is this diagram related to? The Sa-75, Sa-75M, S-75, S-75M, S-75M2, S-75M3 or the latest S-75M4? Must be for all, bcs they would not tell you BS in their propaganda books, right?.:rolleyes:
Using your jargon, all your country men must be smarter than dozen of former PVO operators I talked recently who had “on screen” experience with the Blackbird and surely your classified document is smarter than dozen of classified documents I have seen in the past on soviet SAMs systems. Looking at the diagram you posted I have no doubt for what SA-2 type it is for, but pointless to tell you.

Wild ass guess, but it’s related to a SA-2 type that would/could/did shoot at SR-71’s????

Not sure what the latest, greatest version has to do when we are talking about a plane retired 15+ years ago.

Matt

I wonder if there is a ‘Merican search engine???

I am, fittingly, a C-47 Dakota, the wife is a DH84 Dragon (no comment) :dev2: and our freshly minted little one is a BA Swallow or a X’Air microlight 😎

Matt

I thought the Vikings were all retired now??? :confused:

Matt

I wonder if you can find out, at all. If you hire a construction company to build you a house, you will hardly find one with purely American crew, there will be foreigners working there for sure.. Wanna go and personally check every man’s visa and green card? Do you have right to do that, at all? :confused:

Ummm, no.

I’ve worked in various aspects of the construction trade for ~10 years. 95% of the time, I was the only guy there who even spoke Spanish, never mind being a “foreigner”, let alone an illegal one.

In fact, I can only think of 5 foreigners on all the crews I worked with.

2 legal Mexicans (Great guys, honest days work for honest days pay.)
1 Kenyan (Quiet, composed, very competent)
2 Canadians ( pretty much useless)

Matt

I think LM has come up with a crappy plane in the F-35B because they’re not really improving on what they are replacing enough to justify the insane cost, it is bigger, heavier and more complex than a harrier, while only having a slightly higher total payload capacity and combat radius (and that’s going on LMs estimates, no hard figures yet), it has no thrust vectoring, the only benefits it has are its speed, and its much mentioned stealth, and it has the 2 HUGE disadvantages of its massive IR signature and the reduced sortie rate that always comes with stealth planes,

With the exception of the “Emergancy Back” stop, which is of dubious use in combat, I find it hard to believe that there is a maneuver that the Harrier CAN do with TVC, that the B CANNOT do without TVC.

Matt

I guess a production restart would come with lots of changes and sophistication. The A-10 was quite unsophisticated for USAF standards. Now it would be stuffed with a truckload of avionics. Most of some quite useful I guess.
People will say: “Why not add a radar?”
It would surely get a different cannon (the Avenger is a huge cannon but not really needed in terms of caliber, maybe a 25mm version would do the job and save weight).

The fact I like most on the A-10 is that it can take punishment to some extent and does not fall apart immediately. That is so real life … so non-composite, just like a real weapon.

I wouldn’t mind a more integrated sensor suite, full pgm capability, ect. Adding a radar and the rest is a waste, imo.

Replacing the Avenger is easier said then done, Fairchild started with the cannon and built a plane around it. I would like to see more ammo capacity, for the times it absolutly, positively, HAS to be done the hard way 😉

Matt

The Hog being fairly simple in construction, even if all the toolwork doesn’t exist, rebuilding the tools would be a pretty simple chore, compared to designing a whole new airplane to do the same job.

Matt