Incog_nito
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2016
- Messages
- 1,189
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Those are all great aircraft but the k-8 is better when you do a cost benefit analysis; especially if you consider that sensors and weapons matter more then the platform up to a point
K-8 are great in the plains because we already have them, and we just need to add the sensors and weapons. We need to keep costs down so we can procure enough assets (weapons and sensors, and new platforms where needed) to deal with the threat; 8 integrated Battle Groups; Brigade to Division sized, organized on the Soviet Motorized Rifle Battalion model, IMHO.
In the mountains using a turboprop which is just fast enough to chase down a helicopter (100 mph speed advantage to the turboprop) but slow enough and maneuverable enough to do "hit and run" and land on short mountain roads, after diving into mountain valleys to do evasive maneuvers.
The planes are just platforms, but they have to be tailored to the terrain and the threat.
Btw: here is the article on the Yemeni use of the R-27
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...h-r-27-air-to-air-missile-modified-into-a-sam
Also, either aircraft should be armed with the Chinese CM-501GA; a 40 km standoff weapon similar to the Spike NLOS, that can take out key elements of enemy forces, such as air defenses or command and control from a distance, so that our forces can have a better chance dealing with the enemy.
You are somewhat right. But what I quote is mainly for the training purpose. K-8s are good option to keep them in fleet and use them as multi-purpose machines.