military@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker) (07/14/89)
From: brspyr1.brs.com!miket (Mike Trout) In sci.military Digest Tuesday, 11 July, 1989 Volume 2 : Issue 43 fiddler@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: > In article <8091@cbnews.ATT.COM>, ps01%gte.com@RELAY.CS.NET (Paul L. Suh) > writes: > > C-17 STOL transport aircraft > > Criticisms: too expensive to be risked ($250 M plane landing on an > > unimproved airstrip gives too great a chance for disaster) > It's worse: the assertion was made that the rough-field capability of > the aircraft would never be used because nobody wuld risk crashing one. > I should think that getting troops and equipment in closer to the FEBA > would be desirable...losing a war could more expensive than perhaps > losing some transports. I should think so too, but since when did logic enter into it? Remember, "military intelligence" is an oxymoron, and I would be far less surprised if I heard that C-17s were being used to shuttle air conditioners from Edwards AFB to Tinker AFB. I am reminded of how the decision to base the B-1 was made. Also, I would argue that the odds of the USA "losing a war" in the traditional sense are becoming more and more remote, simply because we may not be able to afford fighting another WW2 (nor may anyone else). Rather than an all-out USA/USSR death struggle, I would expect C-17s to be used in brushfire actions of questionable importance, such as Viet Nams, Afghanistans, Angolas, etc., where the risk of losing one might indeed be an important factor. Of course, if the BIG ONE did start, I would expect C-17s and everything else to be used to maximum capacity, but the BIG ONE is looking less and less likely. -- NSA food: Iran sells Nicaraguan drugs to White House through CIA, SOD & NRO. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110 (518) 783-1161 "God forbid we should ever be 20 years without...a rebellion." Thomas Jefferson