First batch of second-hand Russian jets arrive in Iraq
42 replies, posted
Why would the Jet be delivered by plane? Why not fly the jet there?
[QUOTE=Xron;45247638]Why would the Jet be delivered by plane? Why not fly the jet there?[/QUOTE]
Logistics.
Syria, Iraq, who's going full civil war next? Lebanon?
[QUOTE=zin908;45244970]Why are they giving it to the Iraqi army? Just give it to the Kurds, they will make more use of this stuff.[/QUOTE]
....Because they paid for it??
[QUOTE=Xron;45247638]Why would the Jet be delivered by plane? Why not fly the jet there?[/QUOTE]
Planes, especially fighters, especially older ones, have a very limited amount of airtime before they need major maintenance. If they can save two or three hours of airtime before next pitstop, that's pretty damn good, especially in an emergency like this.
OT but every time I see this thread title, I keep picturing a bunch of piping hot jets on a cookie tray being pulled out of the oven.
Hope this batch of Russian goodies does some good.
[QUOTE=Aman;45247893]Syria, Iraq, who's going full civil war next? Lebanon?[/QUOTE]
Yup Isis are already bombing then and they have had sectarian violence for years, albeit minor.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;45245206]Su-25 are jets, the A-10c has turbofans.
Which means the Su-25 haemorrhages fuel.[/QUOTE]
[B]Uh?[/B]
A Turbofan is a type of "jet engine". There's no such thing as a "jet engine". The Su-25 is powered by two turbojets and the A-10 is powered by two turbofans. The two types of engines are very similar in design.
And it doesn't "haemorrhage" (hemorrhage) fuel compared to the turbofan. The Su-25 has no problem carrying the fuel it needs and in fact has almost twice the combat range of the A-10.
[QUOTE=Mbbird;45251971]
And it doesn't "haemorrhage" (hemorrhage) fuel compared to the turbofan. The Su-25 has no problem carrying the fuel it needs and in fact has almost twice the combat range of the A-10.[/QUOTE]
First off, if you'd actually bothered to check you'd find that that's just the British spelling.
Second, your A-10 range statistic inclues almost 2 hours of loiter time over the target area, and the Su-25's is only achievable with two drop tanks mounted. Not really a fair comparison there.
[QUOTE=BMCHa;45259302]First off, if you'd actually bothered to check you'd find that that's just the British spelling.
Second, your A-10 range statistic inclues almost 2 hours of loiter time over the target area, and the Su-25's is only achievable with two drop tanks mounted. Not really a fair comparison there.[/QUOTE]
Ah you're right it does, missed that.
Loitering isn't something the Su-25 is going to want to do much of, but neither is flying out to their max combat radius, so it doesn't much matter here. The Su-25's speed and lower maneuverability lends itself much more to fast-in fast-out attack missions in any case. The A-10 is a far more solid plane all around, but the Su-25 has its perks and is plenty capable.
[QUOTE=BMCHa;45259302]First off, if you'd actually bothered to check you'd find that that's just the British spelling.
Second, your A-10 range statistic inclues almost 2 hours of loiter time over the target area, and the Su-25's is only achievable with two drop tanks mounted. Not really a fair comparison there.[/QUOTE]
You would*, not you'd.
[QUOTE=laserguided;45260041]You would*, not you'd.[/QUOTE]
"you'd" is also used as a contraction of "you had".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.