Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!military From: fiddler@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Military Cuts Message-ID: <12750@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 4 Jan 90 04:24:32 GMT References: <12686@cbnews.ATT.COM> Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Lines: 59 Approved: military@att.att.com From: fiddler@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) > From: randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) > Whether or not you think there should be cuts in military spending, surely > everyone will agree that there are programs that provide less "bang" per > "buck" that we really want. So my question becomes, what do you think they > are? > > Here is an personal example. The U.S. Army still has more than 100 OV-1's, and > the Marines have many OV-10's. These are light turbo-prop aircraft used for > battlefield recon. The OV-1 Mohawk fit the bill as primarily recon, but the OV-10 Bronco showed up as the implementation of the LARA (Light Armed Recon Aircraft) program: it can throw things at the ground, as well as snoop around. > I wonder how long they would live in a world filled with sholder launched SAM's. With luck, as long or longer than a helicopter. Depends on terrain, tactics, and abilities of the missile/user. > Also, there function can be filled by helicopter, > which has tha added advantage of being able to hide behind trees. The helicopter would have a slower transit speed, shorter loiter, smaller ordnance payload (than the OV-10, anyway), and would spend more time in the missile's threat envelope. There is a noticable lack of trees in most desert areas, which would be a likely arena for conflict. Both aircraft could use local hills, etc., for cover, however. > A second example is the SR-71. The AF felt they could get similar > intelligence from satelite, at much less cost. It may not be quite as clear-cut as that. Satellite recon can often be overcome since the things have pretty regular schedules. An aircraft may often be able to check on some new development before a satellite is in position to cover it, and the aircraft is more likely to able to be dispatched so as to suprise whoever is being spied on. As for the SR-71's mission being fully taken over by satellites, it may not actually happen. There have been for a couple of years rumblings of something called "Aurora", rumored to be a Mach 5 air-breather. It may be nothing more than rumors, but there are interesting reports of odd stuff out in the Nevada desert, as mentioned recently in AW&ST, among other places. The AF recce folks know quite well what the tradeoffs are between satellite and high and low aircraft intelligence gathering. ------------ "...Then anyone who leaves behind him a written manual, and likewise anyone who receives it, in the belief that such writing will be clear and certain, must be exceedingly simple-minded..." Plato, _Phaedrus_ 275d