<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gun Trouble</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/</link>
	<description>From the ancient Greek for equality in freedom of speech; an eclectic mix of thoughts, large and small</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2026 00:55:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Johnson</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2068408</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 15:32:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2068408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Agreed, Rollory. I was trying to demonstrate the absurdity of Grossman&#039;s claim by showing that the pattern he noticed is also present in a context where there is zero doubt that 100% of the men are trying to kill the enemy. Were those pilots missing a killing inhibitor or were they simply better combat pilots? I think it&#039;s pretty clear and the analogy is instructive.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed, Rollory. I was trying to demonstrate the absurdity of Grossman&#8217;s claim by showing that the pattern he noticed is also present in a context where there is zero doubt that 100% of the men are trying to kill the enemy. Were those pilots missing a killing inhibitor or were they simply better combat pilots? I think it&#8217;s pretty clear and the analogy is instructive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rollory</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2068050</link>
		<dc:creator>Rollory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:58:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2068050</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;4.8% accounted for 48.2% of the kills&quot;

I play the starfighter PVP minigame in the Star Wars MMO.  This seems about typical for scoreboard results at the end of any match that actually involves good pilots.  It&#039;s not because the bad pilots are avoiding trying to shoot the other guys down, it&#039;s because they don&#039;t know what the hell they&#039;re doing (and don&#039;t seem capable of learning).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;4.8% accounted for 48.2% of the kills&#8221;</p>
<p>I play the starfighter PVP minigame in the Star Wars MMO.  This seems about typical for scoreboard results at the end of any match that actually involves good pilots.  It&#8217;s not because the bad pilots are avoiding trying to shoot the other guys down, it&#8217;s because they don&#8217;t know what the hell they&#8217;re doing (and don&#8217;t seem capable of learning).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Johnson</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2067347</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 03:05:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2067347</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another tie in:

&quot;As shown in the last chapter, the dominant fact of air combat is that roughly 80% of all fighter victims in war are shot down unaware of their attacker -- and this appears to be at least as true of combat with radar-equipped Mach 2 fighters as with 90 knot biplanes. Stated another way, 80% of fighters shot down had no opportunity to use their maneuvering performance, their fire control or their weapons, no matter how superb these may have been technically.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another tie in:</p>
<p>&#8220;As shown in the last chapter, the dominant fact of air combat is that roughly 80% of all fighter victims in war are shot down unaware of their attacker &#8212; and this appears to be at least as true of combat with radar-equipped Mach 2 fighters as with 90 knot biplanes. Stated another way, 80% of fighters shot down had no opportunity to use their maneuvering performance, their fire control or their weapons, no matter how superb these may have been technically.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Johnson</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2067315</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 02:47:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2067315</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Space Nookie, that document is really interesting, and as a side note there&#039;s a tie in to the Grossman series:

&quot;Of all 800 F-86 pilots who flew more than 25 counter-air missions in Korea, about 4.8% accounted for 48.2% of the kills, a number typical of most air-to-air wars.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Space Nookie, that document is really interesting, and as a side note there&#8217;s a tie in to the Grossman series:</p>
<p>&#8220;Of all 800 F-86 pilots who flew more than 25 counter-air missions in Korea, about 4.8% accounted for 48.2% of the kills, a number typical of most air-to-air wars.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toddy Cat</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2066353</link>
		<dc:creator>Toddy Cat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2015 18:09:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2066353</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No doubt that the F-86 was a great fighter, but I&#039;d be willing to bet that if you asked a combat pilot which he would rather fly against a modern Russian fighter, or the latest Mirage, he&#039;d choose the F-18. As for the AKs, for all I know, they actually are better than M-16s; I&#039;ve never fired either one. I&#039;m sure that ease of maintainability for relatively untrained and uneducated troops has something to do with it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No doubt that the F-86 was a great fighter, but I&#8217;d be willing to bet that if you asked a combat pilot which he would rather fly against a modern Russian fighter, or the latest Mirage, he&#8217;d choose the F-18. As for the AKs, for all I know, they actually are better than M-16s; I&#8217;ve never fired either one. I&#8217;m sure that ease of maintainability for relatively untrained and uneducated troops has something to do with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Space Nookie</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2065619</link>
		<dc:creator>Space Nookie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2015 10:35:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2065619</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you are talking about &lt;a href=&quot;http://pogoarchives.org/labyrinth/09/08.pdf&quot;&gt;Comparing the Effectiveness of Air-to-Air Fighters: F-86 to F-18&lt;/a&gt;, it is a good read, a 1982 document, and he makes a good case.

On the AK question, I always found it odd that the Pentagon decided to equip the Iraqi National Army and Afghan National Army with AKs.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you are talking about <a href="http://pogoarchives.org/labyrinth/09/08.pdf">Comparing the Effectiveness of Air-to-Air Fighters: F-86 to F-18</a>, it is a good read, a 1982 document, and he makes a good case.</p>
<p>On the AK question, I always found it odd that the Pentagon decided to equip the Iraqi National Army and Afghan National Army with AKs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toddy Cat</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2063900</link>
		<dc:creator>Toddy Cat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2015 19:15:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2063900</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, sometimes our weapons are overly complicated, and we certainly pay too much for them, and using prototyping more would help us avoid some costly mistakes, but a lot of the &quot;defense reform&quot; crowd has jumped the shark. A few years ago, defense reformer Pierre Sprey wrote that modern U.S. Fighter aircraft were inferior to the Korean War era F-86. That&#039;s flat-out nuts, I&#039;ve never heard a single pilot agree with him.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, sometimes our weapons are overly complicated, and we certainly pay too much for them, and using prototyping more would help us avoid some costly mistakes, but a lot of the &#8220;defense reform&#8221; crowd has jumped the shark. A few years ago, defense reformer Pierre Sprey wrote that modern U.S. Fighter aircraft were inferior to the Korean War era F-86. That&#8217;s flat-out nuts, I&#8217;ve never heard a single pilot agree with him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scipio Americanus</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2061185</link>
		<dc:creator>Scipio Americanus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:30:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2061185</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And they were only kind of right about the A-10. I love it, it has great panache, and it&#039;s very powerful, but it&#039;s not really the right plane for the air-to-ground environment that&#039;s developed since the end of Vietnam, where it&#039;s pretty much suicide for a ground-attack aircraft to get as close to the ground as the Thunderbolt needs to for a gun run. 

That&#039;s part of the reason we spent as much money as we did to develop precision guided weapons, so that aircraft could do the ground-attack role from comfortably out of the range of radar-guided guns and MANPADS.

Note that the above only applies against someone who actually has those things, but that such air defenses are now possessed by even some third-world countries.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And they were only kind of right about the A-10. I love it, it has great panache, and it&#8217;s very powerful, but it&#8217;s not really the right plane for the air-to-ground environment that&#8217;s developed since the end of Vietnam, where it&#8217;s pretty much suicide for a ground-attack aircraft to get as close to the ground as the Thunderbolt needs to for a gun run. </p>
<p>That&#8217;s part of the reason we spent as much money as we did to develop precision guided weapons, so that aircraft could do the ground-attack role from comfortably out of the range of radar-guided guns and MANPADS.</p>
<p>Note that the above only applies against someone who actually has those things, but that such air defenses are now possessed by even some third-world countries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toddy Cat</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2061131</link>
		<dc:creator>Toddy Cat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:08:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2061131</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t know anything about M-16 vs AK vs M14, but I do know that if it&#039;s printed in the Atlantic magazine, and it concerns the topic of defense, it&#039;s suspect. James Fallows and his fellow  &quot;defense reformers&quot; just can&#039;t admit that, despite having some good points back in the 1970&#039;s with regard to military procurement, they were, overall, wrong. Yeah, they were right about the A-10, and they are probably right about the F-35, but being right about something once every decade ain&#039;t good enough.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know anything about M-16 vs AK vs M14, but I do know that if it&#8217;s printed in the Atlantic magazine, and it concerns the topic of defense, it&#8217;s suspect. James Fallows and his fellow  &#8220;defense reformers&#8221; just can&#8217;t admit that, despite having some good points back in the 1970&#8242;s with regard to military procurement, they were, overall, wrong. Yeah, they were right about the A-10, and they are probably right about the F-35, but being right about something once every decade ain&#8217;t good enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Isegoria</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2015/01/gun-trouble/comment-page-1/#comment-2060628</link>
		<dc:creator>Isegoria</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=37156#comment-2060628</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The AK is not a very good rifle. In practical-shooting competitions, &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt; uses an AR of some kind.

The AK&#039;s advantages are that it&#039;s cheap and easy to manufacture with Soviet-style industry, and it&#039;s low maintenance. (With good maintenance, an AR is quite reliable.)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The AK is not a very good rifle. In practical-shooting competitions, <em>everyone</em> uses an AR of some kind.</p>
<p>The AK&#8217;s advantages are that it&#8217;s cheap and easy to manufacture with Soviet-style industry, and it&#8217;s low maintenance. (With good maintenance, an AR is quite reliable.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
