wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (Alex Klaus) (03/30/91)
From: wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (Alex Klaus) Does anyone on the net out there know how sucessful, if used, were the Chaparral, Hawk or Vulcan systems were? Hopefully someone could maybe provide an answer Just an interested observer. Thank you for any help.
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (04/02/91)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (Alex Klaus) >Does anyone on the net out there know how sucessful, if used, were the >Chaparral, Hawk or Vulcan systems were? ... It will probably be years before we know for sure. There will be some sort of "official assessment" before too very long, I expect, but those are not always strikingly accurate. What's needed is a careful study by a third party, and it will be a while before the necessary evidence is all available. As an example of such a study, I note Ethell&Price's "Air War South Atlantic", still the best overview of air activity in the Falklands. E&P concluded, based on records and pilot interviews on both sides, that the Harrier kill count was accurate but the official British SAM claims were badly exaggerated, with the SAM systems being given credit for a number of nonexistent kills. -- "The stories one hears about putting up | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology SunOS 4.1.1 are all true." -D. Harrison| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry