• Carmakazi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Gut feeling is modern ground force, as that’s what takes and holds territory at the end of the day, and Ukraine shows that modern AA makes things quite dangerous for modern air units to operate.

    • Revonult@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      4 days ago

      Modern Airforce would wipe WW2 airforce like it was nothing. They wouldn’t even see the F-35 or out maneuver their missiles. Remember they had no plane based radar, all visual, they wouldn’t even know they were already dead.

      Modern AA could hinder modern Airforce but the WW2 AF will eventually have to run Sorties into enemy territory or they are just patrolling above their own forces not doing a whole lot. There is a reason modern doctrine starts with establishing air superiority.

        • Im_old@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          Yeah, but it’s not in use in Ukraine (like it would work or make any difference lol, pretty much like the Armata tank). Nothing either side is using was developed in 21st century. Late 20th at most.

          F-117 (which is still 20th century but more advanced than cold war era stuff they are using now) and F-35 would shred any AA, in my armchair general opinion of course.

          • taladar@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            The ones they have been using that fly for dozens or hundreds of kilometers aren’t really just grenade or binocular levels of equipment.

              • taladar@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                19 hours ago

                I mean by the fucked up definitions in the US boats, planes and ground troops exist in all branches of the military but if you go by actual technology anything flying for more than a ballistic ground-powered throw (like artillery would have at most) should absolutely be considered part of the air forces.

        • Im_old@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Yes BUT! The drones they are currently using aren’t really an air force. If they’d be using Reapers and the like yeah, but BabaYaga is not really an air force. I guess we are a bit splitting the hair though here, we could nitpick forever!

    • nesc@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      There are hundreds of primitive suicide planes made of plywood and cardboard that fly every day and do damage on both sides. You can’t get more ww2 than that and ecomonically impossible to use modern aa against them, one missile costs more than a hundred probably. There is nothing modern about this war.

      • PuddleOfKittens@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Aren’t those planes brought up to the air by actual planes? If modern planes have air dominance, then those plywood planes had better have a functioning plywood engine because there won’t be anything else to get them skybound.