REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events

Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events The off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-29-2010, 04:49 PM   #26
OMGWTFBBQ is a common word I say everyday
 
roastpuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,459
Thanked 3,181 Times in 1,351 Posts
Failed 46 Times in 26 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondaracer View Post
how can you compete against billion dollar jets?

sure the F22 may have lost in "mock" simulations, but isnt the F18 like 165-0 in dog fights? the F22 is superior in every way and your telling me it's going to lose in a dog fight?
In a air to air fight with BVR missiles - the F-22 is superior, yes, especially with stealth and its faster supercruise ability.

If you put the F-22 vs the EF2000 in a dogfight, the F22 will lose. The EF2000 is more maneuverable in a dogfight and can out-turn the F-22 in close combat. It's a smaller, nimbler plane, and is half the price ($120m for F-22 vs $65m for EF2000).

The F/A-18 is/was probably the best multi-role fighter out there - it does well as an air-to-air fighter, and as a bomb truck for ground support. So far, it hasn't really come across opponents that can give it a good run for its money... considering that it's mostly come up against obsolete Migs and Mirages in the Middle East.

The one supposed loss in the Gulf War was never confirmed - a kill by Iraqi Mig-25 with a radar guided missile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keitaro View Post
the f-22 is more of a shoot first, ask questions later type fighter. Can't even see it coming, and bam! your locked on w/ a AIM-7 or AIM-9 coming at you. The chances on getting into a dog fight has become rare.
Yep. Most air-to-air combat will take place in BVR with radar-guided missiles.

The AIM-120/120C replaced the AIM-7, btw.
Advertisement
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeanutButter View Post
Damn, not only is yours veiny AF, yours is thick AF too. Yours is twice as thick as mine.. That looks like a 2" or maybe even 3"?
roastpuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 05:27 PM   #27
Hypa owned my ass at least once
 
Noir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Japan
Posts: 6,745
Thanked 1,314 Times in 540 Posts
Failed 124 Times in 79 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by roastpuff View Post
Air superiority is nice and dandy, but it doesn't do jack for the ground forces who have to hold the captured territory against insurgents and local resistance.
Noir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 05:37 PM   #28
Captain Happy Bubble is my Homeboy
 
TomBox_N's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 318
Thanked 48 Times in 23 Posts
Failed 41 Times in 20 Posts
Yea, the American can wipe out the entire country if needed. It's just that they can't use their full power due to many polical reasons.

The insurgents on the other hand are not playing by the rules. They dun even care if they kill their own commerades.
Posted via RS Mobile
TomBox_N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 05:40 PM   #29
OMGWTFBBQ is a common word I say everyday
 
GabAlmighty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 5,324
Thanked 3,782 Times in 1,242 Posts
Failed 533 Times in 187 Posts
First flight January 29, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/v/S67zfmEqGxQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&


http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/9503/pakz.jpg





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA
__________________
'16 Ram 1500
GabAlmighty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 10:37 PM   #30
OMGWTFBBQ is a common word I say everyday
 
roastpuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,459
Thanked 3,181 Times in 1,351 Posts
Failed 46 Times in 26 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noir View Post
What, are you going to bomb every village that an insurgent is hiding out in without regard to collateral damage?

Air support is nice, but danger close situations suck.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeanutButter View Post
Damn, not only is yours veiny AF, yours is thick AF too. Yours is twice as thick as mine.. That looks like a 2" or maybe even 3"?
roastpuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 10:48 PM   #31
My homepage has been set to RS
 
tool001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 2,217
Thanked 811 Times in 274 Posts
Failed 170 Times in 63 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by roastpuff View Post
In a air to air fight with BVR missiles - the F-22 is superior, yes, especially with stealth and its faster supercruise ability.

If you put the F-22 vs the EF2000 in a dogfight, the F22 will lose. The EF2000 is more maneuverable in a dogfight and can out-turn the F-22 in close combat. It's a smaller, nimbler plane, and is half the price ($120m for F-22 vs $65m for EF2000).

The F/A-18 is/was probably the best multi-role fighter out there - it does well as an air-to-air fighter, and as a bomb truck for ground support. So far, it hasn't really come across opponents that can give it a good run for its money... considering that it's mostly come up against obsolete Migs and Mirages in the Middle East.

The one supposed loss in the Gulf War was never confirmed - a kill by Iraqi Mig-25 with a radar guided missile.



Yep. Most air-to-air combat will take place in BVR with radar-guided missiles.

The AIM-120/120C replaced the AIM-7, btw.

Ef-2000 is a 4.5 gen aircraft and F-22 is 5gen. both planes and sustain mach speed without use of afterburners.
F-22 has advanced avionics but ef-2000 doesn't lag far behind. that said its not only the machine that makes and breaks aerial combat. its the aircrew.
and many other things.

if need more info. read this http://defensetech.org/2004/06/24/india-1-usaf-0/


a plane as old as mig-21 can defeat a f-15 due to its small radar signature

anyhow read this
its not about F-22 vs PAK-fa, but 4.5 gen vs 4.5 gen. 3 gen Air crafts vs 4 gen. etc. but ull get the point
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/06/30/54664.html
Quote:
Pages:

The American military amazed Moscow and the Russian media by saying that Russian-made fighter planes were superior to their American equivalents. How can these flattering revelations be explained?


BREAKING NEWS
Russia Tests Fifth Generation Fighter Jet


Russia's Fifth Generation Plane on Maiden Flight
More...


General Hal M. Hornburg told USA Today that India's Sukhoi Su-30 MKI multi-role fighters have been successful against F-15 C/D Eagle aircraft in mock combat. In fact, the Indians won 90% of the mock combat missions.

USA Today reported: We may not be as far ahead of the rest of the world as we thought we were, said Gen. Hal Hornburg, the chief of the Air Combat Command, which oversees U.S. fighter and bomber wings...The F-15Cs are the Air Force's primary air superiority aircraft...[and] the results of the exercise [were] wake up call.

The Inside the Air Force official newsletter also discussed the "Russian victory," and reported even more details. F-15 C/D Eagle fighters were pitted against not only Su-30 MKI fighters but also MiG-27s, MiG-29s, and even the older MiG-21 Bisons, which also performed well. The fighters not only defeated the F-15s but the French-made Mirage-2000 as well. According to the Washington ProFile Web site, the results of the exercises surprised the American pilots.

Meanwhile, Russian military experts and aircraft designers did not seem surprised by these victories. The Sukhoi general designer, Mikhail Simonov, has repeatedly told RIA Novosti and other news agencies the Su-27 Flanker and the Su-30 MKI, a modified version of the Flanker, which are now in service in the Indian Air Force, were developed in the 1980s in response to the F-15 Eagle. Moreover, Soviet designers had stipulated far superior specifications. Consequently, Russian experts were not particularly surprised that the performance of the fighters matched their specifications.

Why did an American general publicly admit this fact four months after the exercises?

India's Su-30 MKI fighters and F-15 C/D Eagles from Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, engaged in mock combat exercises in February 2004. However, no one mentioned that India won three of the four exercises at the time.

Russian fighters first defeated their US rivals when Sukhoi and MiG fighters had just started being shown at international aerospace shows in the early 1990s. At that time, several Su-27 fighters, under the command of Maj.-Gen. Alexander Kharchevsky, the head of the Lipetsk center for retraining air force pilots, went to Canada to demonstrate their impressive potential. (President Vladimir Putin flew in a Su-27 to Chechnya.)

Instead of missiles and artillery shells, Russian and American fighter planes used aerial cameras to record their mock air-to-air battles. American fighters were disappointed to learn the results of exercise - their cameras had not captured any Su-27s. The Russians, however, had filmed their rivals' vulnerable points from just about every angle.

Russian pilots owed their impressive success to the Su-27's spectacular performance and its substantial thrust-to-weight ratio. The fighter's unsurpassed performance has already become well known throughout the world because no other fighter (except MiG fighters) can execute such impressive stunts as Pugachev's Cobra and others.

The F-15, the F-16 and the F-18 have wide turning radii. Russian fighters, on the other hand, can turn on a dime by merely switch on their afterburners.

Apart from in Canada, MiG-29 fighters also fought mock air battles with South Africa's Mirage-2000s. Again, the Russia planes defeated their enemies.

Chief designer Arkady Slobodskoi, the supervisor of the MiG-29 program, said, "if our plane is within range of an opponent and has a direct shot, the enemy can be considered destroyed. It only takes 5-6 machine gun bursts."

The United States, which is aware of the impressive combat potential of Russian fighters, had even purchased a squadron of MiG-29s from Moldova after the Soviet Union disintegrated. (That squadron was deployed at an airfield near Chisinau.) Germany, which had obtained a number of MiG-29s after reunification, helped repair the Moldovan fighters. Both Germany and the United States now use these aircraft to train their pilots, so that the pilots can cope with the 7,000 Russian fighters in the world. Britain's Military Balance magazine estimated that India had more than 500 Russian-made fighters. It was therefore not surprising that Indian pilots could defeat their American rivals, despite the U.S. Air Force's intensive combat-training programs.

On the other hand, American pilots have not confronted any serious adversaries for a long time. The U.S. Air Force dominated the skies over Yugoslavia in 1999 and in Iraq in 1991 and 2003. Iraqi planes were grounded during both campaigns. Therefore, mock combat is the only way to amass experience.

The long standing American Air Force mentality prevents its pilots from confronting their Russian counterparts because any possible setback would be detrimental to morale. An American Air Force pilot must be convinced that he can and must defeat the former "theoretical enemy." At the same time, these problems do not exist for mock combat exercises against Indian pilots because any defeats can be explained by inadequate training.

Why did the United States inform the world about its setbacks? Neither Russian, nor U.S. generals like to do this.

The explanation lies on the surface: The U.S. Congress discusses defense spending for the next fiscal year every June and therefore, top American military officials started talking about events in February 2004 now.

Last edited by tool001; 01-29-2010 at 10:55 PM.
tool001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 10:52 PM   #32
I have named my kids VIC and VLS
 
Hondaracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 38,789
Thanked 15,672 Times in 6,337 Posts
Failed 2,134 Times in 728 Posts
i'm no aviation buff so this may sound stupid but is/was achieving mach speeds without after burners a big achievement?
__________________
Dank memes cant melt steel beams
Hondaracer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 11:08 PM   #33
My homepage has been set to RS
 
tool001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 2,217
Thanked 811 Times in 274 Posts
Failed 170 Times in 63 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondaracer View Post
i'm no aviation buff so this may sound stupid but is/was achieving mach speeds without after burners a big achievement?
endurance, and (low) radar signature (less infra red signature) more stealth.
high thrust to weight ratio.

Supercruise is a must for fifth gen aircrafts.

better video of t-50

Last edited by tool001; 01-29-2010 at 11:15 PM.
tool001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 11:08 PM   #34
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
jlo mein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: burnaby
Posts: 2,705
Thanked 356 Times in 170 Posts
Failed 46 Times in 13 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengy View Post
Too bad all that tech ain't doing shit for them in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlo mein View Post
I'm confused. The US military has full air superiority control over Afghanistan and Iraq thanks to the F-22 and other air/anti-air technology. I'd say its working.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roastpuff View Post
In Iraq and Afghanistan, they didn't even face any *real* air to air challenges. Total overkill against the old 2nd/3rd generation fighters that they had - not even mentioning the "pilots" that the Iraqi air force fielded.
The F-22 was designed to be better than anything available from any country around the world. In this situation having the F-22 is overkill, but the F-22 was designed before these two Middle East conflicts occured.

Having total air superiority is something that gives the US a huge battlefield advantage. With full control of the skies, the US can launch A-10's, F/A-18's, helicopters, AC-130 gunships, and UAV's. It allows them to give air support to forces on the ground as well as troop/asset transportation and reconnaissance.
jlo mein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2010, 11:27 PM   #35
I have named my kids VIC and VLS
 
Hondaracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 38,789
Thanked 15,672 Times in 6,337 Posts
Failed 2,134 Times in 728 Posts

crazy
__________________
Dank memes cant melt steel beams
Hondaracer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 12:03 AM   #36
rsx
Lomac owned my ass at least once
 
rsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 6,259
Thanked 3,463 Times in 820 Posts
Failed 444 Times in 144 Posts
Air superiority is secondary in the modern battlefield because there is NO battlefield.

Unless the US adopts a "Fuck You" foreign policy and bomb the living beejesus out of mid-east towns, ultra-modern air combat vehicles are pretty redundant in imposing real damage.

What they need are more UAV's and better recon.
rsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 12:26 AM   #37
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
J____'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 3,564
Thanked 893 Times in 352 Posts
Failed 356 Times in 87 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tool001 View Post
endurance, and (low) radar signature (less infra red signature) more stealth.
high thrust to weight ratio.

Supercruise is a must for fifth gen aircrafts.

better video of t-50
YouTube- Pak Fa (T-50) First Flight Full Video
lol why are russian women so hot yet the men so ugly. Like nature selected all the good genes when a girl is born and when a boys is popped out, he's automatically shafted with teh ugly stick lol.
__________________
yolo
J____ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 12:49 AM   #38
:: Sells McLarens, Not tofu :okay: ::
 
tofu1413's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: vancouver
Posts: 10,766
Thanked 11,841 Times in 3,338 Posts
Failed 211 Times in 89 Posts
looks like an enlarged YF22 + YF23 hybrid.



shame they didnt further use the concept on the SU 47 golden eagle...


hate to admit it, but in a dogfight, skills matter the most. american pilots usually have more hours clocked in, while the russian ones are usually fresh recruits not knowing how to use their planes to full potential.


Su 37 does have the edge over F22 in dog fights though.. but knowing how american pilots are trained, i'd say the americans have the edge on this one.
__________________
13' Nissan DBA-R35 GT-R Black Ed - Black met. - "Sophia"

90' Honda EF Civic HB // 04' Honda Pilot Granite

- The Drinker of Many Many Coffees @ McLaren Vancouver
tofu1413 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 01:44 AM   #39
Banned (ABWS)
 
orange7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: MacLeod
Posts: 7,298
Thanked 542 Times in 289 Posts
Failed 1,639 Times in 418 Posts
so let me get this straight.

N. Korea spends money on nuclear weapon.
Russia spends money on stealth fighter jets.
USA spends a lot of money in military in general.
Japan spends money on sex toys/dolls.
orange7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 02:26 AM   #40
My homepage has been set to RS
 
tool001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 2,217
Thanked 811 Times in 274 Posts
Failed 170 Times in 63 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange7 View Post
so let me get this straight.

N. Korea spends money on nuclear weapon.
Russia spends money on stealth fighter jets.
USA spends a lot of money in military in general.
Japan spends money on sex toys/dolls.
and canada spends money in paying off people, police have wrongfully arrested and/or beaten.
tool001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 02:28 AM   #41
:: Sells McLarens, Not tofu :okay: ::
 
tofu1413's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: vancouver
Posts: 10,766
Thanked 11,841 Times in 3,338 Posts
Failed 211 Times in 89 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange7 View Post
so let me get this straight.

N. Korea spends money on nuclear weapon.
Russia spends money on stealth fighter jets.
USA spends a lot of money in military in general.
Japan spends money on sex toys/dolls.
im leaning more towards gundams for japan.
__________________
13' Nissan DBA-R35 GT-R Black Ed - Black met. - "Sophia"

90' Honda EF Civic HB // 04' Honda Pilot Granite

- The Drinker of Many Many Coffees @ McLaren Vancouver
tofu1413 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 02:41 AM   #42
Banned By Establishment
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Skorpios
Posts: 437
Thanked 534 Times in 106 Posts
Failed 69 Times in 14 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tofu1413 View Post
im leaning more towards gundams for japan.
Yes... nothing like beating another country down with a 50 foot plastic model.



Seriously though with all this talk of Russia trying to move their military forward, you can only think of what would happen if Modern Warfare 2 becomes real.
Onassis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2010, 02:47 AM   #43
:: Sells McLarens, Not tofu :okay: ::
 
tofu1413's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: vancouver
Posts: 10,766
Thanked 11,841 Times in 3,338 Posts
Failed 211 Times in 89 Posts
big towering thing= psychological affect.
__________________
13' Nissan DBA-R35 GT-R Black Ed - Black met. - "Sophia"

90' Honda EF Civic HB // 04' Honda Pilot Granite

- The Drinker of Many Many Coffees @ McLaren Vancouver
tofu1413 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net