Immanuel
New Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 3,605
- Likes
- 7,574
This nigga right here, taking about tactics is absolutely hilarious. This dipshit keeps comparing a strategic military airlifter capable of taking off and landing in dirt strips and harsh conditions to commercial airliners. Nigga please.Why would anyone carry 1 agni 5 launcher? Moreover, the weight of Agni 5 is 50 ton. I wonder how will such big missile fit in C17.
About carrying other missile like Akash missile, QR SAM, S400, MRSAM, why will someone transport 1 single system of these to any place? These things need networked radars and large power station. They aren't something one can just carry around arbitrarily. They may be mobile platforms with onboard generators but even then they work in a networked manner. So, they still need a set of radars and other systems to work.
Seriously, why would anyone carry 2 helicopters in a transport plane? What is the great need to do that in the first place? Similarly, transporting 2-3 APC is not a good move tactically. APC can't be used unless their path is secured by other means. And these also need to be present in large quantities. Moving 2-3 APC is tactically unsound strategy.
C17 can do many fancy things but the main question is about its real tactical utility.
I know the difference. I was just telling that you are over exaggerating the troop carrying and payload carrying capabilities. Even C130 with 33ton payload can have 64 airborne troops. So, Il76 can definitely have close to 100 paratroopers. You were simply exaggerating the ability to carry 102 troops and putting down Il76 without any basis. So, I just made off the cuff remark about Airbus carrying that many people.
By the way, your justification for 80 ton payload still is invalid. 100 troops would weigh at best 10tons. So, why 80 ton payload is needed?
Secondly, mass airborne Operations are obsolete due to advancement of radars and weaponry. It is now considered suicide to simply paradrop in enemy territory as done in WW2. IN WW2, countries didn't have SAM or other anti air weapons. But in today's era, things are very different. Also, these slow moving transport planes are highly susceptible to radar guided AAA guns too. So, carrying paratroopers is not really priority
C-17 can carry atleast a couple of Akash/ Spyder/ QR SAM, 4-5 C-17s can airlift an entire battalion or fire unit of such SAMs, You're the dumbshit who understand as being used as a lone unit. Same goes for 3 APCs, we have enough C-17 to push plenty of APCs into any theater. 1-5 Agni-5 Missile launchers on a short notice and can be airlifted out to any place in the country.
Also no comparison VS IL-76 either, 102+ 8 pellet loads of kit/ammo, is far more than possible in either the C-130J or IL-76.
While you are mentally challenged to say the least, this doesn't mean the IAF will send out the C-17 alone in a war, it will have escorts heck even fighter bombers in the IAF have dedicated air escorts, same goes for all other large platforms including AWACS. Paratroopers can use the HAHO method to be air dropped more than 30-40 km into enemy territory while being 15-20 km in our air space.
Nigga, APCs and other mobile units in the Strike corps have a need to be deployed in area which are contested, they are needed for thrusts deep into enemy. You obviously have doggy doo knowledge of how Indian forces specially the Strike Corps work.
Whatever, you say about the C-17 in terms of vulnerability to air is applicable to fighters, AWACS, helos and other platforms. Hence, by your logic we should just shut down our forces and light a candle to your pussy. Very Napaki Logic.
Carrying paratroopers is not a priority but heck hmmm surgical strike oh wait call in the Para SF. Again, nigga please. They'll be among the first on the battlefield fucking shit up.