Talk:Fighter-bomber
This level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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)
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)
- Start-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Technology
- Start-Class vital articles in Technology
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class military aviation articles
- Military aviation task force articles
- C-Class articles with conflicting quality ratings
- C-Class aviation articles
- C-Class aircraft articles
- WikiProject Aircraft articles
- WikiProject Aviation articles