Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II
Quote:
|
And the RuAF had a tough enough time dealing with Georgian SAMs that were RUSSIAN built.
|
I must say I never really understood this anti-Russian criticism for the Georgian war. If the Falklands, Lebanon 1982 and Gulf War showed us anything, it is that since around 1980 (+/- 5 years or so), antiair missiles have improved to the point where correctly employed, they are actually worth making (compare that with 60s-70s weapons from the AIM-9H to the SA-6, even in their prime). If this is true of the West, this is true for Russian weapons as well. So how does their 1980s missiles actually being effective become a denigration for the RuAF? |
I'm sorry, I worded this poorly. Russian SAMs are probably the best weapons the Russians make, far more capable than their fighters for anti air IMO. What I was saying was, they should have known better. They themselves built the system. As close as it was to their border they should have known where these things were approximately through ELINT, sat recon, and perhaps even HUMINT. They made the system. If not capable of knowing how to outright defeat it, they should have known EXACTLY how to avoid it.
The RuAF did OK with CAS in Georgia, but if they were ever to come up against a modern air force I have my doubts about them. Keep in mind the vast majority of their Air Force is the same stuff they were using in the 1980's. Ours is too (and earlier), but has seen A LOT of upgrading. The majority of Russian equipment hasn't. And the performance of their radar guided AAMs (as recently as mid 1990s) has been absolutely terrible, even compared to Vietnam era Sparrows.
PD