|
|
 | | Re: Commanche Helicopter
|
| (...) Again, you're missing the point. The "Comanche" is meant to fight in an electronic-warface environment against TANKS! Even before that, it is a reconnaissance helicopter... Meaning it tries to avoid engagements and simply watches the enemy. (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Commanche Helicopter
|
| (...) I know enough about the Commanche. It is stealthier, with a much reduced noise signature, it's also smaller. If it's less detectable and harder to hit then it's got to be better. And I did say it should be reworked for today's missons. (...) (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Commanche helicopter
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Marc Nelson, Jr. wrote: -snip- (...) Thanks for the link, I don't follow navy news as much as I should. I have a soft spot for submarines, mainly because I believe they are the "true" (nuclear) deterrent. However, with (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Commanche helicopter
|
| (...) snip (...) Good stuff. Hopefully Rumsfeld will cancel the F-22 as well. And why exactly do we need (URL) thirty new attack subs>? Thanks for the links about the XM-8. Marc Nelson Jr. (21 years ago, 25-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Commanche Helicopter
|
| (...) No! Germany has no nukes. I got a little carried away. I just love their Leopord tanks. :-) (...) (21 years ago, 24-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
