This should be interesting.....two superpowers and one nearly superpower countries
Trolling is a method of fishing in which some form of bait, such as a fishing lure or a living fish, is drawn on a line through the water. Trolling
from a moving boat is a technique of Big-game fishing and is used when fishing from boats to catch large open-water species such as tuna and marlin.
Trolling is also a freshwater angling technique.
The first-named consists of three hooks - two large ones, tied back to back, with their barbs pointing different ways and one smaller hook tied on at
the top of the shanks of the others, and pointing straight out from them. The spring-snap is generally used with dead bait; it requires deep insertion
in the bait to allow the spring to act, which it will not do without some considerable resistance.
Forgive me moderators, but the imagery of the 'hooks and dead bait' in particular was just too appropo here. After all, isn't an encyclopedia
meant for public reference use?
Personally, when I want a the attention of the wee fishies, I throw in a stick of something apt to make a lot more Alka Seltzer fizzy-bubbles.
Which is of course the principle problem with the Russian approach to 'superfightering' in that they demand you pay attention to a
duelist-confrontational nature rather than just throw the dynamite and drive on.
Which is peculiar because a lot of duelists will die trying to 'prove their point' to a soldier and they just don't have the prototype numbers to
be throwing them away like that. Indeed S-37 is exactly that a 'Swept' #'d testbed. Of which I believe there are still just the two examples.
While the 'Su-35' the Russians are currently working on is more akin to the Su-27SMK than the original testbeds of which there were also only about
10. About right for a small FSD fleet. But not for combat.
Even from a purely engineering standpoint, testbeds do not a service fleet make. Simply because all the /integration/ of weapons systems, of new FLCS
codes, of radar and EW, all has yet to be done.
With the numbers of superfighters being built by /all/ nations, the reality is that the only thing which saves us from 'horde' tactics is standoff.
Not the F-22 but the E-3B and E-8C which makes it's GBU-39 and AIM-120C6 'smarter'. Not the Rafale or Flubber but the SCALP/Storm Shadow and
BVRAAM they carry.
How ironic then that, rather than compare 'what happens' when say a combination of No-Dong, or Shahab boosters is given SS-21 or better accuracies
to make a J-10 or LCA or Shafagh threat _not have to deal with_ the standoff disparity. You make it about whose dingdong swings the most-long from
the perspective of 1v.1.
Let me tell'ya bucky. We fly 200 million dollar planes into battle and the 'whose better' debate is gonna come down to AMRAAM vs. Sorbitsaya as
much as MAKS vs. AIM-9X.
And 'when I'm done, I'm gone' (Winchester, bye-bye) will be the 20-50nm turnoff rule for jets whose value is so high that ONLY through _COE_ or
Contempt Of Engagement tactics can they survive against the numerically superior threat which their WEAPONS LOAD dictates the 'winner by forfeit'
Of course, I dunno, maybe from their own peculiar perspective, the notion of being the last man 'anywhere in sight' on today's battlefield is
But from the average thinking man's perspective, 8 Su-35's vs. 2 F-22 Raptors, the Raptors launch 12 AMRAAM, the Su-35 division loses 5 aircraft.
The Raptors retire from the field.
Is still pretty much a 'king of his own ruins' Pyrhhic Victory.
Because tomorrow, the F-22s will be back. With another 8 AMRAAM. And 8 GBU-39. And there will only be 3 Su-35 then.
Never Bleed For Dirt. Bleed For Time. Bleed For Lives. Bleed For Victory. But Never Bleed For Nothin'. Cause that's what the 'value' of
tactical ownership of DIRT is.