Jump to content

Talk:Fighter-bomber

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Efficiency

[edit]

Perhaps it should be noted that modern fighter-bombers are not more accurate than older ones. ie a P47 was just as accurate in bringing down large structures as an F16, and was equally efficient in theater [1]

References

Terrible Article

[edit]

This is a poorly-written article. The WWII section is entirely too long, and discusses many aircraft that weren't even used as fighter-bombers. Same with the Korea section. Finally, an article about fighter-bombers with NO mention of the F-105 Thunderchief? Dukeford (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Also no mention of any Soviet aircraft (Mig-27, Su-24)

This is garbage. The term "fighter-bomber" is never properly defined (IMO because it's a colloquialism). What it means is never explored and the "development" section is disjointed anecdote. The writing needs editing but most of it could be outright deleted. What little there is of value here should more properly sit in individual aircraft pages, or in campaign pages. Finally, as noted above, the focus is exclusively on Anglophone aircraft. 213.123.58.202 (talk) 00:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]