Message from @Grenade123
Discord ID: 494361212906110976
Now, there are exceptions like the F-22
which is not inherently stable, and relies on thrust vectoring
no, but the tech has
The thing is, much like in software, the urge to adopt technologies for the sake of it is among the worst instincts we have
only so much you can do retrofitting
au contraire
you can retrofit ANYTHING
to do ANYTHING
adopting tech is not the problem, its defeating enemy tech that is the problem
retrofits can always be as good as new aircraft
you can, but not before becomes too costly and unstable
Well
that's unlikely if you're retrofitting the same class of aircraft
depends on what you need to retrofit
I mean, computational equipment is not that large
laws of physics hasn't changed much since the 40's, i don't see retorfitted spitfires flying around
if that's what you're adding, then it's not a big deal
The spitfire class is now irrelevant
because it was largely concerned with addressing aircraft which were similar to it
we currently have aircraft which are substantially similar in capability to the competing ones, if slightly inferior in some subset of characteristics
22 can't hold its own in a straight up fight
its not designed to either
ask yourself why the Su-34 and Su-35S look so similar
and look substantially similar to the Su-30
and the Su-27
they are all very similar aircraft, in the broad sense
they really don't
or more accurately, they look similar to an f-18
sure, you could say so
Now why is it that we pretend that we're going back to the drawing board on EVERYTHING
when ultimately we are going to produce something substantially similar to its predecessor?
just because it looks the same on the outside, doesn't mean it is the same on the inside.
The Russians know the answer to this question
Have you done design work?
the Su-35, Su-35S and Su-27m are decades apart
the Su-35 is more or less a new Su-27M
30 years later, they are still related enough that they have the same info bar on Wikipedia
you sure that is why?
same-but-different is the approach
it is different in the ways they cared about