|
priznat posted:
I'm curious why they chose to use the Raptors there. Wasn't the F-22 only meant to defend US airspace because they can't really afford to lose any of them, lest the sensitive new technology fall into enemy hands?
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:55 |
|
|
Cippalippus posted:That's a pretty short list of old crap that pales in comparison to the more recent bullshit that the USA has pulled on the world. I'm sorry, I must've missed the history lesson where the teacher discussed how the United States brutally invaded, occupied and colonized a dozen independent states for half a century. My bad! quote:Anyway, and to the point, the countries you listed didn't have anything to do with Russia, but with the Soviet Union, which at the time was ruled by a Georgian. Putin got you covered on that and evened the score. I can't find an emoticon suitable enough for the level of  in this paragraph.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 10:37
|
|
|
Ardent Communist posted:Cuba, Philippines, Guatemala, Haiti, El Salvador, Japan, basically all of Southern America through the actions of the CIA....are just a few countries that the US either invaded or led a coup in the last century, with brutal damages incurred by the indigenous people. I could probably name more...so try to miss less history classes? Did the United States invade, occupy *and* colonize these states? The answer is of course "no".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
Mazz posted:While I won't disagree with the above, it's pretty annoying to talk to other people in their 20s who basically assume the Gulf war outcome is what we would've done to the USSR and how they wouldn't have stood a chance. It's not very fun trying to explain to them how much the Russians had to throw at us in a conventional conflict, or how some of their stuff was actually pretty great, like the flanker or the T-64 in its day. Yeah, a war with Russia would hardly be a "walk in the park", but NATO, or hell, even USA alone would still win. I can't imagine what a full blown war would look like, though. US seems to favour small small, rapid and efficient military operations like in the Middle-East or, but Russia seems to favour hybrid warfare like in Eastern Ukraine. priznat posted:That article has a good comment: I mean even considering you have a serious hard-on for  that comment is still naive and not based in any reality or fact to the point of absurdity. One PAK-FA can take out 3-5 Raptors? You need to have serious brain damage to even dream of something like that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Neither Iraq 2 nor Afghanistan were small, rapid, or efficient. What I mean is this: US can destroy the military forces of another country very quickly, they have superiority in every segment of modern warfare, from satellite reconnaissance down to the types of rifles infantry use. Unfortunately that is not all that waging (a successful) war consists of.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
jaegerx posted:The LA Ground Speed story as told by the guy that did it. This was glorious. I've been reading and watching videos about the SR-71 in the past week and what an amazing aircraft it is. I mean I would say without any hesitation that it is the greatest achievement in aviation, ever. When I first read the sentence "the standard procedure in case of a hostile missile launch was simply to accelerate and outfly the missile" I had literally this face on: An interesting question: could the SR-71 be modified to carry nuclear weapons for example? I mean that would terrify the gently caress out of everyone. You can see it, but there's nothing you can do to bring it down. You just follow it until it overflies you and drops a loving nuke on your head.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
Hexyflexy posted:ICBMs made that kinda thing redundant. There's no point, you can see those coming, but at Mach 10, good luck stopping the warheads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y1ya-yF35g I'll just leave that here for you guys.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:I like Oliver, but that segment was pretty dumb. In what sense? I think the cases that he cited were pretty dumb. Perhaps you meant this?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
So the Finnish are planning to replace their F/A-18 Hornets. The possible candidates are: F-35 JAS-39 Gripen PAK-FA SU-35 Rafaele And just looking at that list you know it's going to be the F-35, isn't it...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 12:59
|
|
|
Have there been any good documentaries about the latest generation of jet fighters that you would recommend?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
I've found a lot of sources - and I use this term loosely - on the internet that are desperately trying to convince everyone that the Su-35 and the PAK-FA are the greatest planes ever made and basically all the F-22s should be grounded and the United States should surrender right away because they have no chance against the military (air) power of the Motherland. I mean you have to be pretty delusional when you place all your bets on a jet that is 10 years behind the competition and HASN'T ACTUALLY BEEN BUILT YET.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
Fearless posted:People in Russia seem to be eating it up, though, which is worrisome. The levels of cognitive dissonance in Russia are hard to explain to someone who has never lived under the Soviet regime. This isn't anything new, but I guess the number of people actually believing the North-Korean levels of propaganda is actually more substantial than in the Soviet times.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:40 years ago this week, the first F-15As were delivered to their training squadron. What a beautiful aircraft.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:A good opinion piece on the eternal dumpster fire that is Canadian Procurement. Am I reading the wiki page right, and Canadian Air Force only has 77 older CF-18 fighters in active duty? That seems like a very small number if you consider that Canada's territory is huge and Finland for example has ~60 F-18s. Most of the small Scandinavian countries have around 50-60 modern fighters.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
priznat posted:Yes, add to that there are only 2 bases for the CF-18s too, one in northern Alberta and the other in Quebec. It's a lot of border to potentially cover from those two spots. What's the deal then? I mean it's not like Canada is a very poor, developing country. Might just as well have USAF bases in Canada and call it a day.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
Cippalippus posted:I'm not a swiss nationalist, you can say anything you want about the confederation. I'm a member of the green party, socialist and enviromentalist, and besides burning some american flags here and there we're just a bunch of vegetarian pacifists that campaigns to abolish the Swiss armed forces. Comrade Putin welcomes your efforts.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 12:59
|
|
|
Ruse posted:I am SO on board with this. They're so cheap too, it means I might be able to have one too! Realistically speaking, how would an F-5 fare against some of the possible (newer) adversaries? david_a posted:On topic: apparently Sweden leases Gripens to some countries like the Czech Republic. I don't really understand what "leasing" a fighter jet means. Do the Czechs fly them back to Sweden for maintenance or something? Interestingly, Sweden has around 50 Gripen As standing in a shed somewhere, and I proposed as a thought experiment to a friend of mine who is fairly high up in the defense ministry that perhaps NATO could persuade Sweden to "lease" them to the Baltic states for 0.00 EUR. Other major NATO countries could contribute in pilot training, but it seems the running costs would still probably be too high for the Baltic states to handle on their own. Gripens here would be a very good option considering the similar climate and also they have (supposedly) very good radars.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Very poorly. However, that doesn't stop the Marine OPFOR pilots with 20 years of flying under their belts in F-5s from occasionally straight punking young Captains flying F-18s or even the occasional Superbug or Viper. Haha, I would love to hear more stories like this, if anyone has to share. TheFluff posted:Gripen A/B isn't really NATO compatible. Instruments are graded in metric rather than in knots/feet, which is a major problem if you've got to talk to an air traffic controller of any kind that isn't using the same system - which is all of them. The datalink only lets you talk to other Gripen A/B's (and old school Swedish ground installations that aren't NATO compatible either and probably aren't in service anymore, as well as to any fighter Viggens you might run into Thanks for clearing that up, I think it is pretty clear that unless something dramatic happens those Gripens will be staying in the sheds.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 22:36
|
|
(spoilers: there are none flying AFAIK)). The navigation system is probably rather Sweden-centric as well, etc etc.
|
MrChips posted:I've never heard any reason why aviation should be converted to metric apart from the usual "olol you are so backward join this millennium" argument trotted out by eggheads That's a pretty good argument, to be fair. I just think a system with a grounding in reality, where all other units of measurements can quickly be converted against each other is the right and proper way. On the other hand, I like the sound of the word "knot", so there is that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 11:11
|
|
|
MrChips posted:That might very well be true, but it is still swapping one highly arbitrary set of units for one that, at least from the perspective of aviation, is equally arbitrary. I think that's the gist of it, yeah. quote:And beyond that, the most important unit in aviation is already sort of in metric; the buck. Usually needed in mega- or giga- sized quantities. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
Gonna defuse the situation with some pictures of (I guess Portuguese) F-16 fighters stationed in Lithuania. Link: http://www.postimees.ee/galerii/44349/fotod-nato-havitajad-tegid-leedus-tuvastuslende/
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:This video is making the rounds even though it's a-year-old. I apologize in advance if it is already been posted. I looked before I posted that it may have been a few pages back and I forgot. I joined pretty late in the thread, and yes, it has been posted before. Still pretty funny though. What's more funny is people who keep insisting that USA has lost air superiority to planes that don't exist yet, and more hilariously that Su-27 is the height of development in the current 4/4+ generation.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Also the French have proven to be unreliable suppliers with the Mistral affair. What do you mean exactly? You mean they are actually considering selling weapons to their enemy? I agree, that's complete bollocks and the French should be ashamed of themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
Does anyone else here get sexually excited about the thought of a SR-71 based fighter or bomber? I'm sorry if it's just me... carry on.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
gently caress some of those are literally two meters off the ground. In other, Cold War II related news, Putin's Russian Federation of Putinland successfully again tested the new ballistic nuclear missile Bulava. Also they play to open new army bases, radar stations and airfields in the Arctic.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
priznat posted:I don't really know much about economics so the whole thing is a puzzler to me. They're still a pretty large economy I guess. Should be smaller then California's. I don't know, strange.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:From way back in the thread somewhere:  There really isn't ANY room for mistakes at that (lack) of distance from the ground. That pilot had some balls.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
I'm a bit surprised that USAF has so few F-15s when compared to the Falcons. Well, "few" might not be the correct word here, but you get the point. For some reason I have a massive hardon for the phrase "air superiority".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
TL;DR: Use your common sense and don't be a prick. I know it sounds corny, but in aviation , both in civil and military it is important that all the sides work well together, from the pilots to mechanics to the cargo loaders to air traffic control. Everyone is important in ensuring that the aircraft and the payload get there and back again in one piece. I would like to think most pilots understand the importance of all the work that goes into making sure that they might have a smooth flight.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
Scut posted:I do sales and rentals at a small engine shop part time and this wisdom still applies. I can fix a lot of simple gremlins instead of piling it on the mechanics' workloads, and I'm probably gonna charge less because I'm doing it for the express purpose of being nice to a customer. Even still, I have to hold my tongue when an impatient meddler wants to stand over my shoulder as I go through troubleshooting his chainsaw or whatever. Most humans are clueless how these simple machines work, I can't imagine what hubris level you'd have to achieve to think butting into an aircraft mechanic's realm would help. I work in IT and if it's one thing that absolutely makes me want to sterilize the entire human race is when a total newb in computer asks for my help (as a favour, he doesn't intend to pay me or even offer me a favour in return) and then proceeds to question or contradict everything I tell him. Last time I just told a colleague, "you asked me for help, shut the gently caress up and take it". That shut him up for a few minutes at least.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Heh, I'm going to Estonia/Latvia/Lithuania in June, hopefully they'll still be independent states by then If the Baltic states aren't free when you plan to visit us in the summer then you should be worrying about the end of civilization as we know it because someone in Russia has completely lost their mind and nukes are about to fly.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Proximity between enemies and friendlies is the main reason to keep guns for CAS missions. I'm not a specialist in close air support, but isn't 180 rounds of ammo a laughable number? That's about 3 seconds worth.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:With all this F-35 chat, I figure this is relevant: As it happens, I'm just watching the Wings documentary about the F-16. Good stuff. Is it just me or have they tried to needlessly hypercharge documentaries in the last 10-15 years to grip the viewer? It's like we are all supposed to have ADHD. I haven't seen this yet, but supposedly it has been one of the best documentary series ever made: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069733/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt [not aviation related]
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
joat mon posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MFtl2XXnUc Hahaha I love Mitchell and Webb.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Because it was caused by a landslide that caused a giant lava/magma dome to explosively decompress, which served to open an eruption channel that lead to the massive eruption. Wow that guy really has a lot of confidence in his umbrella.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:This has bugger all to do with airpower, but if you're talking volcanos, this is the most amazing volcano related photo you'll see in a long time. Yep, that doesn't look like THE END OF THE WORLD at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Dietrich posted:Either way we should spend more money on aircraft carriers obviously. I know this will probably come back to bite me in the rear end, but was your remark meant to be sarcastic?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Actually I think they're going to start flailing when the nosedive starts gaining speed. That's true, but you also have to admit that the current situation is pretty unqiue. We've never had such a high level of globalization in the history of mankind before. You can't really compare the beginning of the 20th century with today.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Have they domestically cloned the S-400 yet then? A friend of mine from Russia keeps insisting that they have a de facto alliance now with China, but I'm not sure if thats just improper wording or what. It sure as gently caress doesnt seem true in the conventional meaning of "alliance" at least. Russia doesn't have any allies, none that matter anyway. Syria and Iran. North-Korea. Wait, isn't this the new Axis of Evil (tm)? In any case, what could China possibly gain from the situation by allying themselves with Russia instead of remaining neutral and having close business ties with the Western world?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:55 |
|
|
Question: any good recent analysis behind a paywall that you can recommend about the state of the Russian Air Force? I've heard that the training of pilots is seriously lacking when compared to top NATO countries, many of planes are grounded due to poor maintenance and lack of spares. I would like to read more about this.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 13:48
|
|