• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    450 minutes ago

    WW2 ground forces will win. Modern munitions stores are a lot smaller, so they will cease to be a factor within weeks of a full scale war. Ww2 munition stores on the other hand were gigantic.

    Then the WW2 ground forces will win, as air forces cannot hold ground.

  • @Aqarius
    link
    English
    22 hours ago

    I would ask why the attack helos are in the “air force” category.

    Other than that, there’s supposedly an old joke about two Soviet generals watching the tank parade drive down the Champs-Élysées, and one turns to the other and asks: “Say, Trofim, did we ever figure out who won the air war?”

  • @SkyezOpen
    link
    English
    168 hours ago

    Modern air wins, absolutely no question. Look at the gulf war. Baghdad, a HIGHLY defended city with an insanely sophisticated AA network got smashed to rubble and their air force destroyed and routed because the US got the leash taken off for a minute.

    Air dominance wins fights period. As long as those WWII boys have radios and maps, they just sit back and watch the fireworks.

  • @yesman
    link
    English
    611 hours ago

    WWII units collapse on both sides. Modern ground forces win easily.

    The problem with WWII units is are they manned with modern or legacy personnel? If modern, not even your best WarThunder leakier or DCS rivet-counter is going to be able to keep 1940s tech going. If you use legacy personnel, how do you motivate them to fight once they see what we’ve done with the world they left us?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2815 hours ago

    The modern air force would wipe out the ww2 air force, break for lunch, then the ground forces would start getting pummeled by precision munitions fired from outside the range they can retaliate at.

    Meanwhile, ww2 ground forces would be very bored.

  • HobbitFoot
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6718 hours ago

    21st Century Air Force. Modern ground forces rely on air superiority to win.

  • @[email protected]M
    link
    fedilink
    English
    41
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Modern airforce will result in ww2 airforce not existing, so what you’re left with is ww2 ground + modern air vs modern ground, which I’m sure favors the ww2 ground forces who have proper air support.

  • @zerosignal
    link
    English
    813 hours ago

    The BUFF should have been on both sides

  • @uservoid1
    link
    English
    2118 hours ago

    Are we talking about same amount WW2 vs modern, or WW2 amount of units vs modern amount of units?

    WW2 used huge amount of everything.

    • nukeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2318 hours ago

      I think it’s only fair we respect the number of units they had

  • @brucethemoose
    link
    English
    1118 hours ago

    Depends on how many missiles each side can afford.

    On one hand, modern AA is extremely good, and if the ground force is peppered with SAMs and forward recon/detection, a modern airforce will struggle mightily, depending on the terrain and intelligence.

    On the other hand… can the bombers just launch a boatload of cruise missiles, spotted by the WWII ground forces? This is even more expensive and impractical, but it would work.

    So I think modern ground wins with a sane budget, and modern air wins with an “infinite” ammo budget.

  • @Carmakazi
    link
    English
    818 hours ago

    Gut feeling is modern ground force, as that’s what takes and holds territory at the end of the day, and Ukraine shows that modern AA makes things quite dangerous for modern air units to operate.

    • @Revonult
      link
      English
      2017 hours ago

      Modern Airforce would wipe WW2 airforce like it was nothing. They wouldn’t even see the F-35 or out maneuver their missiles. Remember they had no plane based radar, all visual, they wouldn’t even know they were already dead.

      Modern AA could hinder modern Airforce but the WW2 AF will eventually have to run Sorties into enemy territory or they are just patrolling above their own forces not doing a whole lot. There is a reason modern doctrine starts with establishing air superiority.

    • @Im_old
      link
      English
      818 hours ago

      There is nothing modern in airforce in Ukraine in either side

        • @Im_old
          link
          English
          312 hours ago

          Yes BUT! The drones they are currently using aren’t really an air force. If they’d be using Reapers and the like yeah, but BabaYaga is not really an air force. I guess we are a bit splitting the hair though here, we could nitpick forever!

        • @Im_old
          link
          English
          315 hours ago

          Yeah, but it’s not in use in Ukraine (like it would work or make any difference lol, pretty much like the Armata tank). Nothing either side is using was developed in 21st century. Late 20th at most.

          F-117 (which is still 20th century but more advanced than cold war era stuff they are using now) and F-35 would shred any AA, in my armchair general opinion of course.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      317 hours ago

      There are hundreds of primitive suicide planes made of plywood and cardboard that fly every day and do damage on both sides. You can’t get more ww2 than that and ecomonically impossible to use modern aa against them, one missile costs more than a hundred probably. There is nothing modern about this war.