Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: bash@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (thomas.w.basham)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: first-line hardware in small wars
Message-ID: <8600@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 26 Jul 89 02:22:24 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 36
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: bash@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (thomas.w.basham)



>From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
>>... just imagine the glee of the Libyans had they shot down a
>>B-2.  Could the Air Force afford to take a chance on this?

>This is a generic problem with first-line air forces fighting minor wars,
>in fact:  if they use their best equipment, they risk having it fall into
>enemy hands in a relatively unimportant war, jeopardizing its potential
>use in more crucial conflicts.  As I recall, USAF aircraft in Vietnam
>deliberately did *not* carry the then-latest IFF systems for this reason.

Wasn't the government originally reluctant to supply the Afghani rebels
with Stinger missiles for this reason, then learned that the Soviets
already had obtained classified info on these?

I've also read (I believe it was in the giant book, "The Great Book
of Modern Warplanes") that equippment scavenged from the
wreckage of F-4's shot down in Viet Nam contributed greatly to
modern Soviet radar technology.  This was probably speculation--I doubt
the Soviets would admit to it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Basham      AT&T Bell Laboratories    (312) 979-6336  
att!ihlpb!bash	                  
bash@ihlpb.ATT.COM          If you can't beat 'em, infiltrate and 
bash@cbnewsd.ATT.COM        destroy them from within.
-- 
Tom Basham      AT&T Bell Laboratories    (312) 979-6336  
att!ihlpb!bash	                  
bash@ihlpb.ATT.COM          If you can't beat 'em, infiltrate and 
bash@cbnewsd.ATT.COM        destroy them from within.