If ground fire was “infinitely more deadly”, then how moronic were the US pilots to continue diving to the precipice. If the only effective way to avoid being killed by SAMs was to dive to the range of the “infinitely more deadly ground fire”, then the air defence setup was just working properly and effectively.

I don’t think diving to tree-top level was an option for the B-52, but they were still mostly able to survive. Same goes for the RA-5 as well?

There was no reason, for our Soviet MoD, to lie to themselves. This information was classified for decades and we didn’t have Defense Industry Magnates which contracts(or next President in White House?) could depend on numbers of combat effectiveness and losses. In contrast to Capitalists. 😉

Besides which, how did the Soviet MoD know how many US aircraft were shot down during the Vietnam war? You don’t really think that Soviet advisors and personnel based in Communist held Vietnam were allowed to freely travel all over North Vietnam counting airwrecks, do you?

I already gave you a source – “Aerospace defence” journal, quoting Soviet and Vietnamese MoDs. But commies lie, of course…coz during Desert Storm, for only ONE month Coalition lost dozens of modern aircrafts to the same Vietnam-era SAMs. True story, yeah – 150 for 10 years in Vietnam and dozens for a single month in Iraq.

Enough of these cool stories.

I can give you dozens of sources stating that only 17 B-52s were shot down by S-75 (out of 126,000 sorties) in the Vietnam war.

But commies lie, of course

As much as evil capitalists can be, I guess. They can also be very much mistaken.

Funny if anyone believe that for 10 years of Vietnam war US lost only 150 old planes, while in Iraq and Kosovo they lost dozens for months…from the same Veitnam-era SAMs. I have a strong feeling that someone is brainwashed by their own government. :rolleyes:

Nobody denies that the USA military loss thousands of aircraft to the communist Vietnamese in the war (mainly helicopters). Only a fraction were lost to missiles though.

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

More than thousand of aircrafts lost from SAMs is pretty good, for SAMs, result. And finally, it doesn’t change the main fact – US losses were insasnely huge, for such a war in some tiny poor Asian country. “Self-confidence – mother of all defeats.” (c)

Where did you get that figure? Only 150 or so US aircraft were shot down by missiles throughout almost 10 years of US aerial activity. It took the launch of 50 S-75 missiles to shoot down 1 American plane.

Hundreds of stealth fighters and bombers in service don’t change the fact that in reality, behind its bravade and fairy-tales about 0,000001sqm, USAF still sees these SAMs as a real threat.

I don’t think anybody is denying that. Of course, any kind of missile AD system will always be a ‘real threat’.

And in war time C-17 wont be able to land in most of the forward airbase with its promoted load capacity coz of the PCN classification required. In short, C-17 will be landing in all these airstrips with the same max weight as that permitted for the the IL-76. Fu$ked up, isn’t it??!!
Now we need to add this additional cost, in hundreds of crores of Rupees that is to be incurred for reclassifying all those airstrips for making use of C-17 load capacity, into the C-17 service life cost.

I will post the summary some other time for easy understanding…

C-17 is the most expensive aircraft that IAF is using now and with its very high cost, the too big to fail and getting damaged will always revolve around the IAF when ever it is employed. Coz any sort of damage/accident will incurr equally high cot of repair. So they are using it with utter care.

Its like a heavy hitter that diamond necklace provide for ladies. The very rich and affluent will be able to carry it on a daily basis, but not someone below that stata.

I had posted the C-17 utility earlier in this same thread. Here is a re-post of that info-graphic from The Hindu.

During Operation Raahat, C-17 was operating from a safe distance from Aden and flying out citizens from Djibouti. It was the heroic pilots of Air India (always have been like that when the Nation called upon them!) with their 2 x A-320 and 1 x B-777 that plunged into the combat zones to rescue stranded people and flew them out, including to safety of Djibouti.

Aircraft summary of Operation Raahat will look like this.

Don’t now where you are getting all of this information. The C-17 is designed to operate from rough airstrips down to minimum length of 3,500 feet depending on airfield altitude and air temperature.

1.3. Airfield Types. The C-17 can operate on paved or semi-prepared airfields and
matting. Paved airfields consist of conventional rigid and flexible pavements and are
generally used for routine operations. A “semi-prepared” airfield refers to an unpaved
airfield. The amount of engineering effort required to develop a semi-prepared airfield
depends on the planned operation, the service life needed to support these operations,
and the existing soil and weather conditions. Semi-prepared construction/maintenance
preparations may range from those sufficient for limited use to those required for
continuous routine operations. Options for surface preparation may include
stabilization, addition of an aggregate course, compaction of in-place soils, or matting.

3.2.1. Length. For a semi-prepared runway located between sea level and 6,000 feet
pressure altitude, the minimum length requirement for C-17 operations is 3,500 feet
with 300-foot overruns on each end. This length requirement, based upon an RCR of
20, assumes an ambient temperature equal Standard (1962) plus 31 ºF, and a landing
gross weight of 447,000 pounds.

https://www.wbdg.org/ccb/AF/AFETL/etl_97_9.pdf

Aaaand … speaking of prices – for the latest generation of jets.
it’s just been announced that Kuwait has signed a deal for the purchase of 28 Typhoons. They say that the total cost of the deal is €8 billion which works out at, wait for it … 8bn / 28 = 286 million a piece.
But it’s more than just the planes:

The Defense Ministry noted that the agreement signed Tuesday includes logistical and training support. The training support will include pilot training and technical training where pilot instructors will also be present in Kuwait; it will also include the provision of one full simulator and two partial simulators.

The Defense Ministry added that the contract includes the construction of operations buildings, maintenance buildings, and pilot and technician training buildings in a new extension of the Ali Al Salem Air Base to accommodate the development of the aircraft through the creation of a new runway.

Will the aircraft be fully tested by then? And will they have passed all tests? And will the bugs have been ironed out or simply ignored because of concurrency? The thing is that once you have encountered an error after 250+ jets have been produced, you will think twice before you start to call ’em all back for updates/mods/repairs..

The F-35 is not an untested aircraft, what bugs are you talking about?

…In February 2016, the F-35reached 50,000 flight hours, including approximately 26,000 for the F-35A, 18,000 for the F-35B and almost 6,000 hours for the F-35C… …As of March, 2016, a total of 171 aircraft have been delivered to our
test, operational and training sites…

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS25/20160323/104712/HHRG-114-AS25-Wstate-BogdanUSAFC-20160323.pdf