A weapon of war is rarely useless but often redundant. A sword can still kill very effectively, but most soldiers today don’t need to carry one. Hence redundant, a battleship is still a formidable weapons platform and a very resilient too, but it is too big, too obvious and not as effective as a carrier. So if you need a big ship, you go for the carrier, not the battleship, hence redundant.
can there be more usage for the 25 and the 31? Yes, sure. Is it worth it? Probably not. The thing with combat jets is that they retain the same allure as classic cars. But they are a heck more expensive to keep using than an old Jag simply because they were pretty good when they came out.
They burn more fuel. They need more parts, they need more maintenance, they need different training perhaps, more ground crew also perhaps. All in all, it costs more.
Take the Greek F-4AUP. For all intends and purposes it is like having a two seater F/A-18 in your inventory. Carries the same weapons and has the same avionics.
But does it cost the same? the answer is NO. It costs more …
I understand as of the mid 1990s and introduction of AMRAAM, the mig-25/31 was certainly completely outdated but in the late 70s and 80s is a different scenario.
Sign In
