OT kinda : Venuzula may sell their f16's and replace with the SU37????

[nscode]

Did your planes hit anything?

 

No?

 

 

Thought so. ;)

 

Don't bother with the usual excuses, I know them.

Did your? Part from some old, barely flying airplanes fastest thing you could is a tracktor. And I don't mean to get political, just to show it's not enough to have all the toys.

 

And yes, our old no-radar-here-only-gyro-sights Galeb and Orao planes did hit lots of ground targets and cruise missiles. And all that hi-tech stuff above couldn't see them again... Stealth? Don't think so.

 

 

PS.

btw, the airport Veljko is refering to is now called Nikola Tesla :)

[mikoyan]

Did your planes hit anything?

 

No?

 

 

Thought so. ;)

 

Don't bother with the usual excuses, I know them.

 

Yeah they (f-15-f-16)hit lots of downgraded jets from the 50s and using the cover of the nato.

What about the gulf war ? The brits, USA , Germany, france ,spain and others vs what ? irak ? uh those are big numbers.

[RedBear]

Well guys i live in venezuela, and yes he say so. But it was because US don´t like to sell spare parts for the f16, they was looking for some kind of miliatary envargo, US politics doesn't like him and the true is that me either :( .They are not talking about upgrates to the planes, it is out of the scope. by the way The ones we have are f16A block 25. not the mid life upgrade on then AFAK.

 

But seens that now U.S. will sell the spare parts also will do it until 2009.This is just political stuff :( to stop the selling of the planes.

 

but any way as far as i know there are personal of our air force doing some trainnig in rusia(tehy have been there for almost a year) his is buying some helicopters. But the possibility of he buying some high tech ruissian fighter is open. Some in the congress and himself have talk about it but which plane? it is just speculation from now.

 

Here in Venezuela are some rolling stone about it. politics....... let see what it got. may be we will see a SU on a tactical tan two green and light gray camo ;).

[Maverick-90]

What about the gulf war ? The brits, USA , Germany, france ,spain and others vs what ? irak ? uh those are big numbers.

keep germany out there, we've never been down there

[ALDEGA]

Somehow "affordable" doesn't sound cool ;)

[Pilotasso]

Somehow "affordable" doesn't sound cool ;)

 

It does to me. In a war one of the objectives is to make the oponent run out of resources. When a fighter is expensive enough or maintenance consuming it only helps the enemy. For a smaller country, operating a larger aircraft might give its operator some headaches, even in peace time it may fail to reach readiness levels as desirable.

 

If you can poke on your enemy with hardware that works effectively without cherishing it like a baby all the time, it just feel all the sexier. You can use it so much better, and at any time you wish.

Just strap in and give your antagonists a run for their money and you dont have to worry about the fuel bill much or the 20 crew menbers required to pet the fighter before each flight. I need men to fight not to raise the arms up when the enemy has you outnumbered and all your manpower is babysitting the hardware LOL.

 

This is why I always been such a great fan of certain smaller multirrole types.

 

I love the japanese F-2 fighter (though its aquisition price is quite steep), the F-16 and the unfortunate F-20 tigershark wich would absolutely rock. They are still good enough to take on much bigger and expensive hardware.

 

The F-16 has made history by stoping an immense threat by a providential blow 1000Km from base and it already vastly outclassed its oposition should they apear at the time (Osiraq). This is as sexy as it can be. If you want it better, then be ready to pay exponentialy more. ;)

[Crusty]

Actually Greece is doing fine using aircraft that actually work, are 10 years ahead technologically of their russian-made counter-parts, and as always, Greece doesn't waste time drooling over aircraft which haven't even been fitted with combat avionics ... like the S-47. ;)

 

The next big thing will be the JSF, and it will out-do any Russian aircraft that's out there right now, purely due to first-look first-shot capability. The JSF is meant to be exported.

 

Hmm, the point is slightly moot,..... the jsf is not "out there" either, you can be sure the threat will change by the time it is

p.s., anyone wanna take a bet on the uk pulling out of the jsf?..:joystick:

[Dudikoff]

The F-16 has made history by stoping an immense threat by a providential blow 1000Km from base and it already vastly outclassed its oposition should they apear at the time (Osiraq). This is as sexy as it can be. If you want it better, then be ready to pay exponentialy more. ;)

 

That's a bold statement considering it lacked any kind of BVR missiles. That's why they had F-15s covering their back.

[Pilotasso]

Well, BVR missiles at the time were almost innefective against fighters, specialy in the scenario of look down-shoot down. At the time BVR engagements were all best donne high up. Russian fighters were all but blind scanning against the ground untill at very close ranges.

The F-15's were there so that the falcons wouldnt have to divert away from the attack. They could have used the falcons to fight any oposition but then they would be required dump the bombs and abort the main mission objective. And there wouldnt be a second chance. The F-15's were an insurance IMHO. So much so that the Iraquis never even managed to put any aircraft in the air in time anyway.

[Dudikoff]

Well, BVR missiles at the time were almost innefective against fighters, specialy in the scenario of look down-shoot down. At the time BVR engagements were all best donne high up. Russian fighters were all but blind scanning against the ground untill at very close ranges.

 

As far as that operation is concerned, ok, but you made a statement that the F-16A outclassed all oposition in general. It's like you say "It outclassed any possible opposition as long as they were flying low." :)

 

I wouldn't call the BVR missiles almost ineffective. Ten years later, using the same tech, MiG-25 did score a hit on the F/A-18.

[Pilotasso]

As far as that operation is concerned, ok, but you made a statement that the F-16A outclassed all oposition in general. It's like you say "It outclassed any possible opposition as long as they were flying low." :)

 

I wouldn't call the BVR missiles almost ineffective. Ten years later, using the same tech, MiG-25 did score a hit on the F/A-18.

 

Well, I have a book that says it was conjecture, because air surveilance failed to report any mig in the area as all the airfields had been sanitized already. The pilots reported an unidentified missile poping from a cloud, wich later was determined as in a Down-up trajectory. At the altitude that hapened, it was much more likely to have been an old fashioned SA-2 Guideline.

[Weta43]

Sanitized is a nice euphemism

 

:-)

[dynamocl]

p.s., anyone wanna take a bet on the uk pulling out of the jsf?..:joystick:

 

We will need something to replace the Harriers, we have the carriers (for VSTOL) and I can't see us scrapping the fleet air arm. JSF is the only current alternative on the horizon.

[Pilotasso]

How about the Super bug...ok BYE!!!:ufo:

[Dudikoff]

Well, I have a book that says it was conjecture, because air surveilance failed to report any mig in the area as all the airfields had been sanitized already. The pilots reported an unidentified missile poping from a cloud, wich later was determined as in a Down-up trajectory. At the altitude that hapened, it was much more likely to have been an old fashioned SA-2 Guideline.

 

GGtharos said it was the IR-version, so the crew should have been unaware of the incoming missile. Regular SA-2 should have been noticed on RWR during the whole missile flight to the Hornet. I assume the crew survived so their testimony could probably help in sorting out what actually hit them. Does the book mention anything in this regard?

[GGTharos]

If we're talking about Spreichner's F-18, what happened went something like this:

 

The flight spotted the MiG-25 on the radar

The AWACS didn't, so they didn't authorize the F-18's to fire

MiG-25 was spoted visually via it's burner

Again, no authorization

MiG slipped behind the formation and launched a missile, presumably an R-40T (from what I hear) - IIRC someone saw the launch, but it's a really fast missile

Spreichner's F/A-18 disintegrates completely - he never gets to eject.

The MiG-25 runs away.

 

 

SA-2's would be fired ballistically, but probably not at night ... you can't see the target ;)

And IIRC no one mentioned an SA-2 search radar at that time.

[Pilotasso]

There seems to be a bit of a confusion here. I would like to hear from your sources. The Mig-25 incident is referred on my book to have hapenned to an F-14 and not to an F-18. Heres a quote:

 

"A single tomcat was lost in the conflight (1991 Gulf war): and F-14B of VF-103 was shot down during an escort mission on 21 january. There have been rumours that it fell to an AAM launched by an Iraqi MIg-25 Foxbat, but what both crewmen sighted was later identified as an old fashioned SA-2 Guideline coming up through the clouds. As they were operating at between 26000 and 30000ft, wich where the SA-2 is at its best, they had litle time to react"

 

Great book of modern warplanes, Edited by mike spick

 

page 124 of the F-14 Tomcat chapter wich also exists as a seperate book:

F-14 TOMCAT edited by mike spick.

[GGTharos]

ACIG, as well some discussion with pilots who wouldn't let too much on ... it was -definitely- an F/A-18, the name of the pilot is confirmed, and apparently it was a MiG-25. This remains a bit of a point of contention but is generally accepted as 'the truth' these days, AFAIK.

 

 

(Well, it could be worse. Some people like to claim that the F-117 in Serbia that was shot down was shot down by a MiG-21, with an R-60 )

[Force_Feedback]

There seems to be a bit of a confusion here. I would like to hear from your sources. The Mig-25 incident is referred on my book to have hapenned to an F-14 and not to an F-18. Heres a quote:

 

"A single tomcat was lost in the conflight (1991 Gulf war): and F-14B of VF-103 was shot down during an escort mission on 21 january. There have been rumours that it fell to an AAM launched by an Iraqi MIg-25 Foxbat, but what both crewmen sighted was later identified as an old fashioned SA-2 Guideline coming up through the clouds. As they were operating at between 26000 and 30000ft, wich where the SA-2 is at its best, they had litle time to react"

 

Great book of modern warplanes, Edited by mike spick

 

page 124 of the F-14 Tomcat chapter wich also exists as a seperate book:

F-14 TOMCAT edited by mike spick.

 

I only knew the S-125 shot down the Tomcat which diverted from its route in 1991, and was visually tracked by the sam station after a quick radar search, when in range, the fire control radar was turned on, and a missile was shot at the F-14, it exploded below the fuselage, and flew for a while in a descending way, smoking badly. The sam officers saw the crew eject and were captured a short while later.

[MonnieRock]

How about the Super bug...ok BYE!!!:ufo:

 

 

 

And to think I like the Super Bug :thumbup:

 

Got to check out a "F" up real close. Sexy plane

 

 

 

Dual Core Poll Please Vote

[nscode]

(Well, it could be worse. Some people like to claim that the F-117 in Serbia that was shot down was shot down by a MiG-21, with an R-60 )

 

:huh::lol:

[Dudikoff]

There seems to be a bit of a confusion here. I would like to hear from your sources. The Mig-25 incident is referred on my book to have hapenned to an F-14 and not to an F-18. Heres a quote:

 

These are obviously two separate incidents. The F/A-18 one is famous for being (if true) the only Iraqi A-A kill in the Gulf War.

[TucksonSonny]

Actually Greece is doing fine using aircraft that actually work, are 10 years ahead technologically of their russian-made counter-parts, and as always, Greece doesn't waste time drooling over aircraft which haven't even been fitted with combat avionics ... like the S-47. ;)

 

The next big thing will be the JSF, and it will out-do any Russian aircraft that's out there right now, purely due to first-look first-shot capability. The JSF is meant to be exported.

 

JSF export version has no chance against the super bug and will be massacred by the Su-30mkk/mki.

Even the F-16F or F-16A MLU would be a better choice.

Even the US-NAVY does not believe in this slow piece of crap and the US is trying to make export money from it.

 

BTW, the JSF export versions will NOT include the classified stealth technology futures which will make it completely useless (read F-22 stealth technology).

[Pilotasso]

JSF export version has no chance against the super bug and will be massacred by the Su-30mkk/mki.

Even the F-16F or F-16A MLU would be a better choice.

Even the US-NAVY does not believe in this slow piece of crap and the US is trying to make export money from it.

 

BTW, the JSF export versions will NOT include the classified stealth technology futures which will make it completely useless (read F-22 stealth technology).

 

OMFG:lookaround:

 

You sure you know what a JSF is?

Its 20% bigger than the F-16, has twice the thrust, it has AESA, internal weapon bays and an airframe built after stealth measures. Oh BTW, the naval variant is to be armed with the meteor, so howcome will a Su-30MKI massacre it with shorter range missiles and with a smaller RCS to detect? Im curious to see what improvised way you will suggest to detect as far as it would detect an f-16...

 

And FYI all export versions will be stealthy, just not to the same standard. And by saying this, by no strech of imagination can it be judged to have a similar RCS as an F-16.

[TucksonSonny]

OMFG:lookaround:

 

You sure you know what a JSF is?

Its 20% bigger than the F-16, has twice the thrust, it has AESA, internal weapon bays and an airframe built after stealth measures. Oh BTW, the naval variant is to be armed with the meteor, so howcome will a Su-30MKI massacre it with shorter range missiles and with a smaller RCS to detect? Im curious to see what improvised way you will suggest to detect as far as it would detect an f-16...

 

And FYI all export versions will be stealthy, just not to the same standard. And by saying this, by no strech of imagination can it be judged to have a similar RCS as an F-16.

 

Too old and too expensive The rip-off, however, goes even further. Critics of the programme maintain that the JSF suffers from illdefined design goals; that it has insufficient range to make a capable replacement for dedicated bombing aircraft; that its inability to ’supercruise’ limits it as an air defence platform; and that it is almost certain to suffer lengthy development delays and cost over-runs - meaning that interim types will have to be purchased to fill the gap between the end of useful life of existing fleets and the introduction of the JSF.

Further criticisms include the fact that next-generation strike fighters are expected to change radically, not needing a human pilot to fly and strike, while the JSF, if ever built, will have to carry a human commander. The ability of the JSF to lift off and land vertically and to hover above the ground, moreover, is something only US and British air forces need - and these are precisely the countries cutting down on their purchases. The US air force and navy have cut their planned purchases from 3,006 units to 2,240, thus boosting each plane’s estimated price tag by between $5 million and $10 million, analysts say, and rendering it almost noncompetitive.

’If it costs too much, it does not go,’ said Rear Admiral Steven Enewold, the US navy’s JSF program executive officer in September 2005. The predicted development delays and cost over-runs are already a reality, and the initial $33 billion budget rose to $41.5 billion in October 2005 ’primarily due to the [Defense Department’s] annual revision of inflation assumptions’, JSF programme officials said. All this has led some countries to reconsider their participation in the JSF project. Huge investments have already been made, though, and pulling out would result in the loss of enormous amounts of public money. Where has all the money gone?

Five years into the development phase of the JSF, it is revealing that the only country still enthusiastic about the whole endeavour is the US. You can’t blame them. They got the Europeans to pay a considerable part of the development costs and at the same time retained complete control over the process and kept the relevant software even from its main ally, the UK. The juiciest research and development contracts have gone to Lockheed and a host of secondary US defence contractors. A transfer of state-of-the-art technology did take place, but not in the direction expected, because it is European contractors who are transferring their technology to the US via the development of parts of the plane for which they won the contract. Meanwhile, the US has been able to boost its weak exports with the help of all those friendly European heads of state. And the ultimate bonus: the JSF undermined the independent European fighter project - the Eurofighter - thus averting an embarrassing situation whereby the European technological base for fighter planes would have out-manoeuvered that of the US.

The only clear winners in this game are the Bush administration and Lockheed Martin. For Europeans it’s been a doomed scenario from the start. Little return on investment; doubts about the eventual product; a lingering debate within the EU about loyalty... At the end of the day, the British, the Italians, Dutch, Norwegians and Danish have been betting on the wrong horse. But it’s not as if they were not forewarned. In all of those countries, strong opposition to the project pointed out all the dangers both before and during the political decision-making processes. Maybe it’s time to face our governments, and ask them where our tax money has gone. The answer they are not likely to give easily is that it went to the US military economy, and more specifically, into balancing the books of the world’s biggest arms producer: Lockheed Martin.

:megalol: