] Would you care to elaborate???
(Off-topic alert.)
No problemo, dude.
As I was a flight-simmer, I prefer a fighter with a built-in gun, instead of in a gun pod that costs a hard-point.
Also, air-to-ship missions are rare. In the ’82 Falklands, the Super Etendards shot IIRC only five air-launched Exocets; the one that hit the HMS Glamorgan was ground-launched.
In the ’91 Second (Persian) Gulf War (or Desert Shield/Desert Storm), IIRC a Canadian AF CF-18 on SURCAP (surface CAP) strafed and fired a Sidewinder at a fleeing Iraqi gunboat, but missed.
And as the AFM editors may know, I’m one of the usual suspects amongst their contributors to their “Attrition” feature.
Given the evidently excellent maintenance of the Japanese military (relative to other Northeast Asian militaries with similar US hardware, such as the South Koreans and Taiwanese), and the transparency of the Jap media, news of Jap military aviation major accidents are rare.
F-2s were in active service for years, before one was written off.
1.F35A has an internal gun. Even on the B an C model the hard point for the gun pod is essentially dedicated for the pod.
2. While anti ship missile would be a problem for internal storage, the whole idea of an stealth aircraft you can close in onto a target without it knowing i.e. you do not need standoff weapon to attack the target, be it a ship or other things.
Sign In
