Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: fhapgood@world.std.com (Fred Hapgood)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: ATF Survivability
Message-ID: <1991Jun19.005806.8977@cbnews.cb.att.com>
Date: 19 Jun 91 00:58:06 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.cb.att.com (william.a.thacker)
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die
Lines: 21
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: fhapgood@world.std.com (Fred Hapgood)


I don't understand the logic by which the survivability of the
ATF is defended.  It is my impression that the *Patriot* can
shoot down any plane flying now, _including_ the F-22!  This
might well be wrong -- there's a lot about the F-22 I don't know
-- but it's obviously easier to get more functionality out of the
antiair missile side than the manned fighter side.  Surely in ten
years, with all the work going on now in active missiles,
millimeter radars, emissions tracking, IR and optical sensing,
combined with the current state-of-the-art electronics, it will
be impossible for an air superiority fighter, or for that matter
a manned aircraft of any kind, to survive against a technically
competent opponent.

And if the assumed opponent is a third-world country like Cuba,
who needs the F-22 to begin with?