There may be a misunderstanding here. I am not on a self-appointed crusade to defend individual writers journalists or journalists, or their profession en masse. What I an often trying to do is attack unreasoned opinions, such as:
1 Blind faith in alleged magical properties of technologies such as AESA radar, signal processing, or the hardware developed by a poster’s favourite country or company (for example).
2 Unreasoned criticism of specific weapon systems, companies, technologies (such as stealth), or specific writers/commentators on defence topics.
3 Unrealistic assessments of weapon-system survivability based on data samples that are too small to provide useful results (for example, aircraft loss rates during the campaign against the former Yugoslavia).
For some of our forum members to confidently declare that stealth does not work, that the F-16 was more survivable in combat than the F-117, or that a widely-respected journalist/magazine/publisher is peddling junk are all equally absurd. So you must excuse me if I occasionally beat to quarters, open the gunports, and fire off a broadside in response.
Oye, had fun shooting down a few basic MiG-29 which lacked spare parts for years, had little trained pilots, lacking missiles, barely airworthy? Wow, big tough men picking on unworthy opponents. Try taking on well maintained well trained Chinese J-11B and see what happens. :dev2:
Sign In
