The other thing no-one mentions is that there are a LOT of civilian aircraft out there. One heck of a lot. And not all are sited at airports or airfields that will be hit by nukes.
Why is this an issue?
Well, while civilian aircraft generally aren't designed to carry weapons, that doesn't mean that they cannot do so.
Consider the Biafran Airforce ... flying Mfi-9Bs/Bölkow Bo 208 (light aircraft) which mounted six 68mm rockets under each wing.
Then there are ex-military trainers ... Biafra also flew a number of T-6 Texans forex.
Not all of these sorts of aircraft require avgas, some, at least, can run on normal petrol.
And then there are all those C-47s still out there ... 'Puff the Magic Dragon' AC-47s anyone?
High performance jets or ground attack aircraft? No. Strategic Bombers? No. Helicopters (as fuel hogs)? No.
But combat airpower? Too useful to not have.
(Not huge numbers ... probably AF Squadrons would have as many of these converted aircraft as the Army units still had tanks ... i.e. maybe a single handful or less, rarely a double handful.)
It's one thing about TW:2000 that simply made no sense to me. Even just using them for recon would be a huge advantage ...
YMMV,
Phil
|