[Gunslingr3]

I find it kind of worrying.
The Germans had designs in WW2 that were technical marvels, and besieged by teething and reliability problems as consequence.
To what degree are we making the same mistake.
Fighters so expensive you can only afford a handful means they have to be spread thinner, and losses become even more dear.

[Nowhere Man]

I find it kind of worrying.
The Germans had designs in WW2 that were technical marvels, and besieged by teething and reliability problems as consequence.
To what degree are we making the same mistake. Fighters so expensive you can only afford a handful means they have to be spread thinner, and losses become even more dear.

True, the Germans made remarkable stuff ahead of its time but there was no time to work out the teething problems to say the least plus the complexity and cost was so bad, they could only make so many. We and the Soviets on the other hand decided to "Zerg Rush" the Germans where you had 4 or 5 Shermans/T-34's to each King Tiger. As Stalin said, there is a certain quality in quantity."

[Myrddin]

The same lesson we should take away from the AK-47 reliability in the field. It was a 5 MOA rifle. Not exceptionally accurate, but very rugged. Operating reliably in spite of loose tolerances.Our M16/M4 actions have pretty close tolerances. They require frequenct cleaning and the correct lubrication for the environment. The CLP that was OK at home was a disaster in the powder fine sand of Kuwait/Iraq. A dry lubricant was required to avoid a gummy mix of the oily CLP and powdery sand.