16.06.2011, 04:57
Comparing costs is interesting. The average WW1 biplane was a labour intensive exercise to build, and although not especially difficult for the craftsmen of the day, one that required a measure of skill. You couldn't just knock one together from bits of plywood and expect it to fly.
Today of course mass production of jet fighters would be a massively expensive and difficult exercise. The range of suppliers for technical parts, the specialist manufacturing processes, and the vulnerability of networked factories would not be obstacles easily overcome. Of course the aircraft can't be easily 'reduced' in complexity as happened in WW2 because of the flight regime that exists for modern aeroplanes, not to mention the demand for aerodynamic andtechnical superiority, something that was unthinkable back in 1914. And lets not forget, those apparently rickety biplanes were going to war eleven years after the first official succesful powered flight of a heavier-than-air craft.
Today of course mass production of jet fighters would be a massively expensive and difficult exercise. The range of suppliers for technical parts, the specialist manufacturing processes, and the vulnerability of networked factories would not be obstacles easily overcome. Of course the aircraft can't be easily 'reduced' in complexity as happened in WW2 because of the flight regime that exists for modern aeroplanes, not to mention the demand for aerodynamic andtechnical superiority, something that was unthinkable back in 1914. And lets not forget, those apparently rickety biplanes were going to war eleven years after the first official succesful powered flight of a heavier-than-air craft.