That's pretty much what I was saying. I have no doubt that the F-22 is the best fighter jet in the world. But when people make rash claims like it being able to comfortably go up against 2 Typhoons or Rafales, both of which would be supported by extremely advanced radar systems, I really have to disagree. Also, comparing the F-22 to any MiG-29, even the OVT, is just silly, they are incomparable. The MiG-29 and the F-15 are very comparable though.Stingray24 wrote:
I think the F-22 will be an amazing and deadly aircraft, not a disappointment in the least, though certainly not invincible.
And Bush took the door on the right, ending up in "The power of listening to your gut".Stingray24 wrote:
Ok, Parker, I'll give you an F-15 to fly over and make sure they're useless ... make sure to use your chaff.He took the door on the left and missed the diplomacy seminar across the hall. Instead he attended the "illlusions of jihadist grandeur" series.CameronPoe wrote:
Methinks Ahmedinejad needs to go to some diplomacy and media handling seminars....
Last edited by EVieira (2007-01-17 09:48:30)
Ultimately no one but the USAF really know how well it is shielded from radar because that information is classified. It does use the same stealth technology as the F-35 though (which other countries will use and contributed to development of - hence the working name JSF), yet the F-35 is not an unstoppable killing machine. The F-22s stealth technology gives it an edge, it does not make it invincible. One would suspect from the lack of further investment in the F-22 program, and the fact that the navy and marine corps have wthdrawn their bids for F-22s, that the stealth technology is not as infailable as you seem to believe. In fact in training missions the F-22 has suffered losses against inferior aircraft, albeit always when outnumbered. A F-22 is therefore considered capable of engaging upto 4 F-18 or equivalents. The numbers do matter, at least they have done in all the released test data.Parker wrote:
the numbers do not matter......ill say it again....pair up an F22 and a awacs, and they wont be touched.....you said earlier that they can be spotted with radar looking for stealth specificly....well lets hope they do that quick, cause once again, you cant shoot whats not there.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-01-17 09:58:43)
So I guess you are a Russian secret services aircraft designer and know all about their stealth aircraft technology and what they plan to release? Have you ever though that maybe the only reason you don't know about any Russian stealth aircraft is because you aren't in some secret US or Russian organization that knows about it or they have never been detected?Miller wrote:
Stealth allows the thread between life and death for a pilot to stay strong. The MiG has no hope against a modern US fighter anymore. There is also the supperior training the US pilots get. Once the F-22 is put into active military service, there won't be anything that can stand up to it for a long time.Bertster7 wrote:
They're all companies Iran military hardware is made by.Parker wrote:
what about it.....mikoyan is the only russian company you listed.....our planes are better.
correct me if im wrong, but h and k is a german company and lockheed is american.
Anyone who discounts MiG-29 SMTs (like Iran use), really doesn't know what they're talking about. The MiG-29 SMT is comparable to virtually anything the US use. It doesn't have fancy and expensive stealth technology, but on combat ability, you really want to watch out.
Last edited by spray_and_pray (2007-01-17 10:14:16)
You do know the czetchen's have technology which can spot stealth aircraft. The F22 isn't as stealthy as the F117 or B2 thats for sure its a Air to Air fighter with ground attack capabilities. It will be the best aircraft out but it cant take out 2 other aircraft in an air to air battle. Firing missles themselves lead to a heat emmision even if 1 aircraft is taken out the other can finish off the attacking Jet there are also flares and countermeasures. People will only learn when something happens. After the first F22 is shot down there will be a bunch of I told you so posts. You credit stealth technology way too much.Parker wrote:
the numbers do not matter......ill say it again....pair up an F22 and a awacs, and they wont be touched.....you said earlier that they can be spotted with radar looking for stealth specificly....well lets hope they do that quick, cause once again, you cant shoot whats not there.
He was still using crappy 70's radar tech and managed to use various techniques to get a fix on the position of stealth fighters. Using modern technology like Awacs or more likely S-400 Triumf, finding F-22s is far from being out of the question.Stingray24 wrote:
November 21, 2005: The Serbian battery commander, whose missiles downed an American F-16, and, most impressively, an F-117, in 1999, has retired, as a colonel, and revealed many of the techniques he used to achieve all this. Colonel Dani Zoltan, in 1999, commanded the 3rd battery of the 250th Missile Brigade. He had search and control radars, as well as a TV tracking unit. The battery had four quad launchers for the 21 foot long, 880 pound SA-3 missiles.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ … 51121.aspx
Exactly, "Stealth" tech isn't that good and uses a lot of short cuts. It has too much flaws for it to be deemed fully effective against a determined and well armed enemy.Bertster7 wrote:
He was still using crappy 70's radar tech and managed to use various techniques to get a fix on the position of stealth fighters. Using modern technology like Awacs or more likely S-400 Triumf, finding F-22s is far from being out of the question.Stingray24 wrote:
November 21, 2005: The Serbian battery commander, whose missiles downed an American F-16, and, most impressively, an F-117, in 1999, has retired, as a colonel, and revealed many of the techniques he used to achieve all this. Colonel Dani Zoltan, in 1999, commanded the 3rd battery of the 250th Missile Brigade. He had search and control radars, as well as a TV tracking unit. The battery had four quad launchers for the 21 foot long, 880 pound SA-3 missiles.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ … 51121.aspx
Yes, but as I said before, he only had a chance because NATO sent the bombers along established routes, allowing this guy to tweak his radar and fire his missiles at short range. This eliminated the ability of the pilot to respond with countermeasures and evasion like he'd be able to at long range. Very unusual situation.Bertster7 wrote:
He was still using crappy 70's radar tech and managed to use various techniques to get a fix on the position of stealth fighters. Using modern technology like Awacs or more likely S-400 Triumf, finding F-22s is far from being out of the question.Stingray24 wrote:
November 21, 2005: The Serbian battery commander, whose missiles downed an American F-16, and, most impressively, an F-117, in 1999, has retired, as a colonel, and revealed many of the techniques he used to achieve all this. Colonel Dani Zoltan, in 1999, commanded the 3rd battery of the 250th Missile Brigade. He had search and control radars, as well as a TV tracking unit. The battery had four quad launchers for the 21 foot long, 880 pound SA-3 missiles.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ … 51121.aspx
How would they have fared against an enemy with radar tech that is 30 years more advanced though?Stingray24 wrote:
Yes, but as I said before, he only had a chance because NATO sent the bombers along established routes, allowing this guy to tweak his radar and fire his missiles at short range. This eliminated the ability of the pilot to respond with countermeasures and evasion like he'd be able to at long range. Very unusual situation.Bertster7 wrote:
He was still using crappy 70's radar tech and managed to use various techniques to get a fix on the position of stealth fighters. Using modern technology like Awacs or more likely S-400 Triumf, finding F-22s is far from being out of the question.Stingray24 wrote:
November 21, 2005: The Serbian battery commander, whose missiles downed an American F-16, and, most impressively, an F-117, in 1999, has retired, as a colonel, and revealed many of the techniques he used to achieve all this. Colonel Dani Zoltan, in 1999, commanded the 3rd battery of the 250th Missile Brigade. He had search and control radars, as well as a TV tracking unit. The battery had four quad launchers for the 21 foot long, 880 pound SA-3 missiles.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ … 51121.aspx
they need AA missiles because israel will bomb it, good on israel, saves any more tony blair and george bush bashing, ehud olmerts now in the spotlight, well he will beStingray24 wrote:
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1247362.php/US_objects_to_Russian_sale_of_anti-aircraft_missiles_to_Iran
http://www.middle-east-online.com/ENGLISH/?id=19013
MOSCOW - "Controversial Russian contracts to sell anti-aircraft weapons to Syria and Iran are being fulfilled on schedule, Russian news agencies cited defence and industry officials as saying Tuesday. At least half of the 29 Tor-M1 missile systems bought by Iran for 1.4 billion dollars (1.06 billion euros) had been delivered, state-run ITAR-TASS quoted an unnamed source at the defence ministry as saying. "We are actively carrying out deliveries of the system to Iran. At least 50 percent of the contract has been delivered," the official was quoted as saying. The air defence systems are being stationed around Iran's civilian nuclear sites, according to ITAR-TASS."
Civilian nuclear sites ... riiiiight. That's why the need AA missiles.
They're gonna sell a lot of those. Yet another example of Russian military ingenuity at work. They've investigated the US stealth tech quite thoroughly too. The downed Nighthawk got sold to the Russians.UON wrote:
I thought the next gen Russian plasma screen (no, not that sort) stealth which can be added to any existing aircraft blows the American stealth technology out of the water.
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/10/19/stealth.shtml
That's right, before the F-22's even get into service there will be a cheap upgrade available for Mig-29's which give them all the bonuses of stealth without the ridiculous price tag. I doubt America will have their version of plasma screening ready nearly as quickly, since they have sunk so much budget into the wrong stealth technology. It's time to face facts that stealth by reflection was the wrong path to take. Must suck knowing that all that tax you American's have been paying was wasted on an overly expensive and complex design idea.
As always, simple is beautiful.
And that was the SA 3 series... the SA-400 can theoretically take out a stealth target at 400km and is going into mass production for sale to Asia and the Middle East.Bertster7 wrote:
How would they have fared against an enemy with radar tech that is 30 years more advanced though?Stingray24 wrote:
Yes, but as I said before, he only had a chance because NATO sent the bombers along established routes, allowing this guy to tweak his radar and fire his missiles at short range. This eliminated the ability of the pilot to respond with countermeasures and evasion like he'd be able to at long range. Very unusual situation.
I know - look up a few posts, I've already been singing its praises. It's probably next on Irans shopping list.UON wrote:
And that was the SA 3 series... the SA-400 can theoretically take out a stealth target at 400km and is going into mass production for sale to Asia and the Middle East.Bertster7 wrote:
How would they have fared against an enemy with radar tech that is 30 years more advanced though?Stingray24 wrote:
Yes, but as I said before, he only had a chance because NATO sent the bombers along established routes, allowing this guy to tweak his radar and fire his missiles at short range. This eliminated the ability of the pilot to respond with countermeasures and evasion like he'd be able to at long range. Very unusual situation.
http://www.janes.com/press/pc000308.shtml
I karma commented that I missed that bit just after I hit submitBertster7 wrote:
I know - look up a few posts, I've already been singing its praises. It's probably next on Irans shopping list.UON wrote:
And that was the SA 3 series... the SA-400 can theoretically take out a stealth target at 400km and is going into mass production for sale to Asia and the Middle East.Bertster7 wrote:
How would they have fared against an enemy with radar tech that is 30 years more advanced though?
http://www.janes.com/press/pc000308.shtml
Bloody owned plasma screen FTW. It's moments like these when you laugh at all the people that kept on saying that they have the most best tech in the world and no one can defeat them? +1 for the find.UON wrote:
I thought the next gen Russian plasma screen (no, not that sort) stealth which can be added to any existing aircraft blows the American stealth technology out of the water.
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/10/19/stealth.shtml
That's right, before the F-22's even get into service there will be a cheap upgrade available for Mig-29's which give them all the bonuses of stealth without the ridiculous price tag. I doubt America will have their version of plasma screening ready nearly as quickly, since they have sunk so much budget into the wrong stealth technology. It's time to face facts that stealth by reflection was the wrong path to take. Must suck knowing that all that tax you American's have been paying was wasted on an overly expensive and complex design idea.
As always, simple is beautiful.
Last edited by Stingray24 (2007-01-17 10:54:31)
Did you miss the link or what? If you did here it is again.Stingray24 wrote:
Skunk works FTW. I'm confident they are developing something superior to what we've already deployed. And our pilots will take any in the world.
Last edited by Stingray24 (2007-01-17 10:57:06)
yes the kursk was such a wonderful sub, that it carried torpedoes that lead to its demise.....so the sub was nice, but the hydrogen peroxide they used for torpedo fuel just wasnt a good idea.spray_and_pray wrote:
So I guess you are a Russian secret services aircraft designer and know all about their stealth aircraft technology and what they plan to release? Have you ever though that maybe the only reason you don't know about any Russian stealth aircraft is because you aren't in some secret US or Russian organization that knows about it or they have never been detected?Miller wrote:
Stealth allows the thread between life and death for a pilot to stay strong. The MiG has no hope against a modern US fighter anymore. There is also the supperior training the US pilots get. Once the F-22 is put into active military service, there won't be anything that can stand up to it for a long time.Bertster7 wrote:
They're all companies Iran military hardware is made by.
Anyone who discounts MiG-29 SMTs (like Iran use), really doesn't know what they're talking about. The MiG-29 SMT is comparable to virtually anything the US use. It doesn't have fancy and expensive stealth technology, but on combat ability, you really want to watch out.
To parker the Mig 29 program was started in the 1980's what you want is a Sukhoi Su-27 or Su-33 both superior or equal to US fighter jets. The Su-30 Russia's alternative to the F-15E has thrust vectoring just like the F22 and can perform a cobra manuever. The F22 is not in service yet and wont be for a bit. You don't know what you are talking about you know about small arms you make knives and go to a pawn shop. Even though you have some sligh association with weapons what you have said so far proves you know nothing about aircraft. Sukhoi and Mig produce some of the best aircraft in the world. Thats why the F-4's had trouble with Mig-21's in Vietnam the Mig-17 was old tech. I beleive your so called invisible jet F117A was shot down by a SA-3 that thing was made in the 1970's or 60's pathetic. The Mig 29 has the capability to take off from dirt strips etc and requires very little maintenance the Russian variant can carry nuclear weapons and all the migs other countries own are Export models. You are comparing the airforce training of Iran to Russia big mistake.
Biggest and strongest submarine ever made was the kursk it was the size of 2 jumbo jets and could take 3 direct torpedo's before sinking. It sunk when a torpedo blew up inside the sub. I have a friend who worked in anti submarine warefare for the US and went down to the Philipenes and was on Patrols off the West Side of the US. Alpha sumbarines pass 100 miles off the US coast in their patrol's this was my friends largest fear the Alpha submarine is one of the fastest there is and could have engaged them from such a range and got away.
Get educated on Russian military equipment other then Kaleshnikov's grand series of weapons and you will see how wrong you are. Saying that Kaleshnikov is the only peice of Russian war technology in the world that is proper is one of the most ignorant thing I have read on these forums and proves how some people are so up themselves they manage to ignore facts and refer an aircraft not yet in service then compare it to something being used for the last 20 years.
Last edited by Parker (2007-01-17 11:10:26)