FanBoy2006.01

WTF? So the Russians have basically designed nothing since the original Su 27 came out?!?!?! So there are no Su 25T, Su 39, Su 35, Su 37, Su 27 SMT, Su 30, Pak Fa, etc? It was Soviet philosophy that led them to not invest in the development of luxury vehicles. If you want to start an argument don't just dream up utter bull.

That is unfortunate. I prefer to hear news, even if it is bad news. And as a South African, I am really biased towards the Cheetah C for a flyable. By the way, the Mirage 2000 would be my favorite to add on to DCS.

As far as I know the F117 downed in Serbia was shot down while the operators was using an optical sight and remote control to guide the missile. Allot, if not most SAM systems in the world have similar capability. But let's assume my statement is wrong and that it was detected and shot down with radar. The shoot down happened very close to the radar system (Once again as far as I know.). So here's my analogy ("Borrowed" from somebody else...). When you sit in your living room watching TV you will easily spot the special forces operator walking past you, in front of your TV. But you won't see him when he is camouflaged outside and waiting for you. The F22 is designed with the ambush in mind. And it has proven that it excels at that. But up close it is still a real monster to deal with. The F35 is a monster as well and it will murder anything that is within it's parameters to use weapons on. But, against any thing flying today, the F22 will most likely be dictating how the fight will be fought.

Oh yes. While I originally wanted to post on this thread. The Mirage 2000 RAZBAM looks sooooooo purtyyyyy! (STARING BLANKLY AT SCREEN - DROOLING)

In any armed service in the world that would get you in deep @#$$!! At least in a MiG21 you will face extreme odds sitting on top of an ejection seat. In some countries your sick note will have you facing a firing squad! But like some of the guys said previously use the MiG21 for hit and run if the circumstances allow for that...

Unfortunately you can't tell them to loiter at a certain spot; but they are still useful. You can order him/them to attack your target (The one you locked up.). You can also ask him/them to attack the enemy that is attacking you. You can send them to attack air defense, while you go after the primary target ext. A useful trick when dealing with close in air defense systems when you are in A 10s with Mavericks is to lock up a target (Say Shilka.) and order your wingman to attack while you hang back. When you hear him say that he fired you order him to rejoin, thus pulling him away from the danger area. This way you can use both his Mavericks first and then both yours on air defense, then both of you can go in with bombs. With Su 25 with dedicated anti-radar missiles you can cause even more mayhem. Wingmen also warn you when you got you six pointed at a bogey. In air-to-air just getting horizontal separation with your wingman can help you split your enemy up so you can more easily ID and attack them on radar. In F15 you can launch at multiple targets forcing your enemy to go defensive while your wingman goes offensive. All this and we haven't even used all the commands available to control your wingmen!

In regard to the original topic. Yes, I also think that the F22 and F35 should be scrapped. The USA have a long line of crap aircraft. So I assume these two would be the same as the F15, F14, F16, F/A18, F4, A10, B52, B17, B24, F86 Sabre, P51, P47, F4U Corsair, F4F Wildcat, F6F Hellcat etc., etc. All junk:megalol: PS. I am being sarcastic.

RIP

I meant if the develop something like the JT-1 laser suppression system on the Chinese Type 99 MBT but for fighter aircraft against IR guided missiles. @Teknetinium Yes, that sound good. But remember if a missile is on a collision course with your aircraft it will look like it is remaining stationary in regard to you. Also light is extremely fast. This will most likely result in a simpler tracking system that missiles actually use today! But like I said. In my first post. I don't know. @=4c= Hajduk Veljko and Eddie Thanks for the info. Looks like these systems are very mature and extremely effective.

Agreed; but remember that previous versions of both missiles were great. So it is reasonable to expect two exceptional missiles. There are some amazing footage on Youtube of how AIM 9Xs take out maneuvering drones dropping lots of flares. Personally I hope that fighter countermeasure development will be able to keep up with these new missiles Maybe lasers that can track and blind incoming IR missiles? I don't know.

From my previous post. "(Editor’s note: white phosphorous and Agent Orange are not considered chemical weapons by the Chemical Weapons Convention)" What does stability/volatility have to do with my statement? With low and high explosives chemical reactions leads to the liberation of energy. Thus you are using an "chemical agent" for a weapon or in a weapon. Eh, what? I was pointing out that it is against the law to use flamethrowers, I didn't say it was impossible to use them. So what is you point? You quoted me on how I laid the emphasis on the word claim, yet you do not even seam to notice that. I pointed out that incendiary weapons might already have been used, alluding to the paragraph before that about flamethrowers. Man I always want to burst out in laughter when somebody come up with this critical thinking OBE BS. Think critically. What is more horrific: Somebody that is dying from coming into contact with nerve gas or somebody that is dying from being blown open by high explosive? To me, my opinion on the waring factions in Syria (Which I am not going to state.) is not formed by the weapons that they use; but rather by their motives and intended targets.

I read up on the two subjects. Firstly I read flamethrower and got stuck there and didn't look any further than that. So I talked about a normal flamethrower. Secondly I looked up on white phos and was surprised to see that it kills through toxic effect as well. I knew white phos is poisonous but didn't think that this is an issue in the way it was used. But WP seems to be an area were it overlaps between conventional and chemical weapons. In my defense: " (Editor’s note: white phosphorous and Agent Orange are not considered chemical weapons by the Chemical Weapons Convention)" http://www.globalresearch.ca/canadas-use-of-chemical-weapons/5350597 So I will have to say that I still say WP is not a chemical weapon.

@ Kaktus29 White phosphorous is not a chemical weapon. Chemical weapons are mostly poisonous, although mustard gas is "corrosive" to human skin and flesh. If white phos is a chemical weapon then so are all explosives and propellants as well. Because of the the chemical reaction that takes place when the stuff is used. And, as far as I know, flamethrowers have been banned by international treaty. But I have have heard a claim in the news last week that Syria dropped incendiary weapons on civilians. Bare in mind that I said CLAIM.

Yes, fighting in built up areas are horrible. A shot can come from any direction and there are lots of spots for your enemy to hide. But in the end only dedicated ant-tank weapons can take out a tank (And some other stuff that causes huge explosions.). On the other hand, if you are on foot there are a hell of allot of horrible things that can happen to you...

@ Kunze. You forgot the all of the above option. But if I had a gun to my head, I would also go with the Su-30. :thumbup:

Yes. The government shut-down in the USA is extremely alarming. I was shocked to see how far reaching it is. I hope their will be a positive outcome to this whole thing.

I would put my money on the F-15 I. Most likely more modern avionics than Iranian F-14 A. Israel is one of the world leaders in ECM. Does Iran have any thing to counter this? Will Iran be able to utilize the superior range of the AIM-54 in battle? AS Krebs have pointed out: AIM-120 is designed to deal with fighters. AIM-54 bombers and cruise missiles. Israel most likely will have the best IR homing missiles. Iranian pilots are not as well trained as Israeli pilots. F-15I have more modern avionics. Israeli aircraft will most likely be better maintained and fewer hour airframes. So less failures. Do any body knows how good the two country's AWACS compare to each other? A big problem for Israel on the other hand, is it's small size. If caught by surprise, fast attack aircraft can very quickly be near strategically important targets. I asked so many questions I think I should finish with: And if so, were ancient aliens involved?

Yes 688(i) was great. Still got the box wit manual and disc. Loved that one. Also got Dangerous Waters. My favorite subs are the two Kilos but I really hated the graphics. The whole nose profile of the 688 wanted to make me puke. It was also the same for 688(i). But that was the first sub sim I could play with an actual outside view. Tried to install graphics mods for it; but I couldn't get it to work so I gave up eventually...:cry: I would love to see a modern sub sim with the graphics on par with even SH3! Back to 688(i). That was the first sub sim I bought (Only saw WWII others at friends and never played them.). Then SH2, SH3 and SH4. Loved them all but SH3 is my favourite. SH4 plain is a buz kill with useless Destroyers that you can duke out with on the surface. The mods/updates are needed to make SH4 a challenge. That being said. I would rather prefer a modern sub sim like 688(i) and Dangerous Waters. I prefer the resent past and current era in sims.

R.I.P JuJuman. My condolences to his family and friends.

Here is the link about what the Rand Corporation published themselves: http://www.rand.org/news/press/2008/09/25.html “Recently, articles have appeared in the Australian press with assertions regarding a war game in which analysts from the RAND Corporation were involved. Those reports are not accurate. RAND did not present any analysis at the war game relating to the performance of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, nor did the game attempt detailed adjudication of air-to-air combat. Neither the game nor the assessments by RAND in support of the game undertook any comparison of the fighting qualities of particular fighter aircraft.” So if the the guys that were supposed to have said it state that they didn't. Well... **EDIT**

In my post I was supporting the MiG-29. And that is just the thing. There are many factors that contribute to the victories in real combat over the MiG-29 specifically. But what I revered to was that the USA tried to engage on their terms (Meaning the strengths of the F-15 in particular.) and not that of the MiG-29. What the Vietnam People's Air Force achieved is extremely impressive; but you must also remember that there were certain restrictions placed on the USA. If the USAF, USN and USMC just bombed the Hell out of North Vietnam's Airbases, there wouldn't have been much of an fighter threat against them in the first place. They also had other restrictions about which ground targets they could attack. The USA also didn't give chase to aircraft that temporarily fled into Chinese airspace. They flew predictable paths into enemy airspace. And, like you said, they weren't trained for ACM any more, etc. I am not the kind of person that keeps yelling: "Mine is better yours!". But I have seen in many fields that in competition, a small advantage can be exploited to triumph over your opponent.

I think it is because that is exactly what happens. But the US and allies then develop tactics to deal with these fighters before hand (When they get intel on a specific aircraft.). So they use their strengths and try to exploit the enemies weaknesses. For instance. Fighter pilots flying conventional aircraft like the F-16 and F-15 are developing tactics of how to dogfight against thrust-vectoring aircraft like the Su-30 MKI by flying against the F-22. A Youtube clip of this was posted on these forums. Remember that Top Gun and Red Flag predates aircraft like the MiG-29. The USA started to simulate the capabilities of the MiG-29 and Su-27 as soon as they became aware of them. They didn't wait till they got one in hand. Correct me if I am wrong here. As far as I know, the MiG-29s downed by the USA was all from missile shots with no real ACM (Dogfights). The USAF used force multipliers (Like AWACS.) and used their superior avionics against Serbian MiG-29s to get the upper hand. The only case where a F-15 and MiG-29 got into a dogfight was during the Gulf War (1991.) and the MiG-29 crashed shortly after the merge. That did not seem to be the fault of the MiG-29 but rather pilot error. The pilot that flew the F-15 also said that they were instructed not to dogfight with the MiG-29 because it was viewed as superior to the F-15 in ACM! That was after the West got to see the capabilities of of the reunified Germany's MiG-29s. One thing that I have heard many times, that come from American fighter pilots is: "If you aren't cheating then you aren't trying!".

In regard to the Rachel Maddow clip. I have read official reports in response to these media claims. All the claims made by Rachel are either wrong or half truths. In regard to the cost of F35. It will cost allot more to keep current fighters up to date with upgrades for future opponents (Although I will be sad to see them retired.). As for F22 not taking part in operations in Afghanistan. I don't think the F-15 C did either. You don't need air-to-air over a gang of terrorists. If F22 and F35 was such a joke, why are other big players also developing their own 5th gen fighters? Apparently more countries than the original ones are interested in F35. Rule of thumb don't trust politicians or the media.

What?!?!?! Did they mean in one fight!!!!!! Man I haven't seen that even happening in SciFi movies!:doh: Thought they meant for whole of the pilots' tour.

In regard to the question of the forum. As far as I know the F-86 and MiG-15 was very evenly matched. You all know this. In some regards the MiG-15 was better and in some the F-86. The F-86 was a more forgiving aircraft to fly though. Also I think I read it on these forums that the F-86 pilots had G-suits while the MiG-15 pilots didn't. That is a huge advantage. As for 3 MiG-15s chasing off a superior number of F-86s. It sounds possible to me. What if the F-86s were low on fuel and got jumped? RTB. Also WWII is full of stories where a couple of fighters jumped a superior number of opposing and caused great chaos. As for three F-86 pilots downing 50 MiG-15s. That is also possible. 50/3=16.67 So if you took the three top scoring USA aces you will get a number like that. Remember there is no such thing as a fair fight. Like Vanir said. Circumstances plays a big role in the outcome. Also you get an experienced pilot killing a novice. This happens on both sides. Also strikers getting taken out by CAP. Or interceptors going after bombers but get bounced by the escort, etc. I must say that I agree more or less with every post in this thread. That must be some kind of record!