Defense Issues

Military and general security

  • Follow Defense Issues on
  • Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 272 other followers

  • September 2020
    M T W T F S S
  • Categories



Are more expensive weapons automatically more capable

Dangers of complex weapons

Infantry weapons

Hollowpoint bullets

F-22 Raptor

F-22 Analysis

F-22 fact spinning on USAF website

Is the F-22 really superior to all other fighter aircraft

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

F-35 Analysis

F-35 brief

How is F-35 destroying USAF and other air forces

Why F-35 cannot replace the Harrier

On F-35 export “success”

Why we must continue to fund F-35 rebuttal

F-35 and its troubles

F-35s air-to-air capability or lack thereof

How stealthy is the F-35

Actual F-35 unit cost

F-35 reality check

F-35 2016 DOT&E Report by David Archibald

Dassault Rafale

Dassault Rafale analysis

Rafale passive targeting capability

Eurofighter Typhoon

Eurofighter Typhoon analysis

Saab Gripen

Saab Gripen analysis


Why USAF hates A-10 and why it can’t be replaced

A-10 effectiveness assessment

Ground soldiers’ view of the A-10

A-10 Thunderbolt survivability design


On drones

Why UAVs cannot replace fighter aircraft


LCS – Little Crappy Ship


Air to air weapons effectiveness

Evading air-to-air missile

Myths about nuclear weapons

Why Red Flag exercises are not indicative of aircraft performance

Single vs twin engined fighters

Assessing the SAM threat

Characteristics of aircraft types

Note on stealth fighters

Military aircraft configurations overview

Light combat vehicles with high-calibre weapons

Bicycle at war

Radar in counter-battery role

Modern artillery munitions

Naval mines

23 Responses to “Weapons”

  1. Dennis said

    Picard, what would you think about an article about the Super Hornet in comparison to its legacy ancestors (F-18 A-D)? Since the F-35C faces serious problems, there have been assumptions on the US Navy ordering more Rhinos. So probably a comparison between those two could be interesting aswell?

    Greetings, Dennis


  2. There’s definately a great deal to find out about this subject.
    I like all of the points you have made.


  3. Lets hope the US Navy cancels the F-35 order.


  4. CNN Myths Debunked said

    @picard578 what is you review of the
    Hal Tejas


  5. CNN Myths Debunked said

    @picard578 will you be doing a Gripen E review anytime soon it looks promising


  6. altandmain said

    Just wondering how dangerous do you think the S-400 SAM system really is?

    It is one of those big radar guided missiles so I am thinking the hype is probably just that. A thread no doubt to large strategic bombers and AWACs, but for small agile fighters? Probably not nearly as dangerous as hyped.


    • altandmain said

      I remember this article:

      Nothing has changed? It seems everyone in the Western press is complaining about the strength of this SAM system.

      But yeah, re-reading it all, yeah I’m thinking it’s not nearly as dangerous as people say.


      • picard578 said

        Enemy weapons are always hyped up to justify increased “defense” spending (read: pork chops for contractors). One’s own weapons are also hyped up do justify their price. The trick is figuring out the exact relation between the two. But typically, price of a weapon is not a good indicator of capability, because more complex systems (e.g. radar SAMs) have more fault lines / failure points than less complex (and thus less expensive) systems (e.g. IR MANPADS). So I’d say that the most dangerous AA system are still optically-aimed air defense guns and IR MANPADS. S-400 is overhyped, because it is a complex system that requires similarly complex countermeasures – and this brings profits to defense industry.


    • picard578 said

      I don’t think it will be dangerous to fighters, or even attack aircraft such as the A-10. But strike aircraft loaded with large munitions? Might be problematic.


      • altandmain said

        Yeah I think so. Large aircraft like strategic bombers, AWACs, refueling tankers, cargo aircraft, and coastal patrol aircraft are probably in danger of SAMs.

        IMO, one thing that needs to be tried is a passive IR based ground SAM system. It would have a massive IRST system and IR guided long-range missiles. Stages would be used for the missiles. On the ground, a very large aperture could be used. You could also have multiple domes on the ground for redundancy. It could be combined with some cheap drones with small IRST systems or the proposed airships that have been proposed here for large apertures. Missiles would be fired from the ground and home in on IR signatures.

        It could also be paired with IR medium AA cannons. Combined with a rangefinder, a large ground based dome would be able to plot a firing solution quite well.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: