User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:17:36 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
None of the century series was worth a shit. Jack Bourghton and Chuck Yeager would disagree, especially on the 106 and 104 respectively. We just didn't have a war where either were utilized. No fleets of Tu-95s flying over rubble strewn cities that Soviet ICBMs created? The -106 and -104 were little more than manned strategic SAMs, fielded in an area where the strategic SAM was pretty useless. Negative. Both were actually extremely agile. Of course I have no first hand experience, but everything I've read from the experts says so. I watched the 106 fly at William Tell and several of the 15 pilots remarked how manueverale they were. Sure they bled a lot of speed off from the delta wing, but they were fast for a single engine, only eclipsed by the English lightning. As a great fighter pilot once told me "I've got one turn, don't make me use it!" I've never heard a -104 referred to as "agile." Fast, and they could accelerate on the deck like a MiG-23, but not a turner. What was the -106 pilot going to shoot with...a Falcon? Blarf. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:17:40 PM EDT
[#2]
In the real world, Typhoon would die 30 miles before the merge.
Study of the results of ACEVAL/AIMVAL of the mid-1970s opened some eyes at the Pentagon. The key finding was everybody dies in a furball. The key to victory was to kill the Soviet fighters before the merge. So the Pentagon began an R&D spending spree. Radar technology was improved to add electronic scanning, allowing vast volumes to be searched quickly. And non-cooperative identification allowed aircraft to be identified at beyond visual ranges. (APG-77 and APG-79) Electronic support measures were developed to identify Soviet emitters and pinpoint their locations passively. (ALR-94) Purpose-built stealth jets were built to keep the Soviets from detecting our jets. (Have Blue and Tacit Blue resulting in F-117, B-2 and F-22) Long range missiles with active terminal guidance allowed beyond visual range kills.(AIM-120) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:18:35 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Quoted:
You need to see the armor battalion in a can at knox. Ground combat is not air combat the variables are too much and you simply can't replicate it by computer (CoD doesn't count) Sorry, I don't buy it. Modern naval combat is all the elements of air combat, plus the multiple manuvering elements of ground combat, combined with exo-atmospheric and sub-surface elements. Modern naval combat can be replicated. The Army can do simulation. It just refuses to properly, and thus gets a shitty result. I agree. The Navy is nothing more than a copy of the Army and the AF adapted for water sports. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:19:00 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
In the real world, Typhoon would die 30 miles before the merge. Study of the results of ACEVAL/AIMVAL of the mid-1970s opened some eyes at the Pentagon. The key finding was everybody dies in a furball. The key to victory was to kill the Soviet fighters before the merge. So the Pentagon began an R&D spending spree. Radar technology was improved to add electronic scanning, allowing vast volumes to be searched quickly. And non-cooperative identification allowed aircraft to be identified at beyond visual ranges. (APG-77 and APG-79) Electronic support measures were developed to identify Soviet emitters and pinpoint their locations passively. (ALR-94) Purpose-built stealth jets were built to keep the Soviets from detecting our jets. (Have Blue and Tacit Blue resulting in F-117, B-2 and F-22) Long range missiles with active terminal guidance allowed beyond visual range kills.(AIM-120) I wish they would have field the stealthy -120 follow-on that was referred to in the press. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:19:03 PM EDT
[#5]
SJ, that is a great line. The Hornet guys I was drinking with the other night used that to describe the Mirages/Kfir/any other delta fighters they played with.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:19:17 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
yep we need more Army air assets. 
And in my experience fast mover doesn't fix the problem, it simply makes the problem hide for alittle while. Korengal is a great example. off to soccer. I will return! Fucking soccer....now I know I can't trust you!
Well if it makes the problem hide, long enough to keep them from shooting our guys, until the Apaches show up...I'm good with that! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:20:41 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
SJ, that is a great line. The Hornet guys I was drinking with the other night used that to describe the Mirages/Kfir/any other delta fighters they played with. Some silverback F-15C guy turned airline pilot said it, not me. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:20:54 PM EDT
[#8]
Hey now RV, I can shoot shit too. And I wont break on crank like our Apaches
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:21:18 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
I have a buddy who is a Navy Hornet pilot who has a HUD shot of him killing an F-22. He said it was misleading as the F-22 was forced into the fight. He said most of the time the F-22 stayed at their high altitude perch and only engaged when it was in the F-22s favor. He said the F-22 won every time until they put restrictions on the F-22 to come down and play not on thier terms. In other words when you force an aircraft to play on equal terms sometimes the other aircraft will win as in the case with my buddy. Ryan Yup I believe it was the Chileans who stomped our F-14's in mock combat... Once you looked at the ROE you realized how they were stacked in the F-5's favor. I like the Typhoon and the Rafale, they ooze sex appeal and are great fighters... But they are scrap metal waiting to meet terra ferma when the F-22 is allowed to use it's full capability as intended. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:23:23 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Hey now RV, I can shoot shit too. And I wont break on crank like our Apaches
Sorry bro! Didn't mean to leave you out CFII. Personally, I would love to have gotten a ride in one of those...never got the opportunity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:23:55 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Quoted:
pfft!!! What does that matter? F-22 isn't going to let you get in close enough for a gun fight. He's going to take you out well before he's in your visual range or visible on your radar.  as soon as the F-22 turns on its radar to target its AMRAAMs, it becomes visible for the whole world to see. IIRC can't one F-22 serve as the radar feed for squadron mates, and can't the AMRAAMs receive their targeting data from an AWACs? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:27:44 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
As a great fighter pilot once told me "I've got one turn, don't make me use it!" I've never heard a -104 referred to as "agile." Fast, and they could accelerate on the deck like a MiG-23, but not a turner. What was the -106 pilot going to shoot with...a Falcon? Blarf. Both were high altitude air to air interceptors. The weapons they had were the weapons they had. Mig 23 came along 10 years after both of those aircraft, Im not sure why you are making the comparison? The 106 was known to be a highly manuverable aircraft that was more than a match for the F4 at altitude, it wasn't in service until 1988 for nothing. How about Air-2 Genie just for fun?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:31:21 PM EDT
[#13]
The comparison is like taking some Delta Force guys and some illiterate terrorists and making them fight. Then make them throw down their rifles, body armor, night vision and similar, hop in a boxing ring and duke it out with fists.
The Eurofighter will put up a good fight in WVR, but it will have to get there first. In the age of AESA, advanced BVR missiles, low RCS, the high speed of the F-22, data links and similar will determine who is the victor in air to air combat. Obviously there will be dogfights and F-22s can be shot down, but the article implies the F-22 is a worthless turd because another plane can win it in mock dogfights.
And they assume the F-22 is an un-maneuverable POS. This video says otherwise: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csj8_GOy1os |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:31:30 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
The 106 was known to be a highly manuverable aircraft that was more than a match for the F4 at altitude, it wasn't in service until 1988 for nothing. The F-4 made it to 1996! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:32:26 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
The 106 was known to be a highly manuverable aircraft that was more than a match for the F4 at altitude, it wasn't in service until 1988 for nothing. The F-4 made it to 1996! another great bird! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:33:43 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: The comparison is like taking some Delta Force guys and some illiterate terrorists and making them fight. Then make them throw down their rifles, body armor, night vision and similar, hop in a boxing ring and duke it out with fists. The Eurofighter will put up a good fight in WVR, but it will have to get there first. In the age of AESA, advanced BVR missiles, low RCS, the high speed of the F-22, data links and similar will determine who is the victor in air to air combat. Obviously there will be dogfights and F-22s can be shot down, but the article implies the F-22 is a worthless turd because another plane can win it in mock dogfights. And they assume the F-22 is an un-maneuverable POS. This video says otherwise: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csj8_GOy1os Yeah mock gun fights mean absolute fucking dick. I know a guy who worked on F-15s and watched them do mocked dog fights alot and would even say that the F-15 wouldn't always perform so hot. But it was mostly because of the parameters for the mock dog fights and such. Yet the F-15 never lost in a REAL dog fight even against "superior" MiGs |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:35:08 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
The comparison is like taking some Delta Force guys and some illiterate terrorists and making them fight. Then make them throw down their rifles, body armor, night vision and similar, hop in a boxing ring and duke it out with fists.
The Eurofighter will put up a good fight in WVR, but it will have to get there first. In the age of AESA, advanced BVR missiles, low RCS, the high speed of the F-22, data links and similar will determine who is the victor in air to air combat. Obviously there will be dogfights and F-22s can be shot down, but the article implies the F-22 is a worthless turd because another plane can win it in mock dogfights.
And they assume the F-22 is an un-maneuverable POS. This video says otherwise: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csj8_GOy1os Yeah mock gun fights mean absolute fucking dick. I know a guy who worked on F-15s and watched them do mocked dog fights alot and would even say that the F-15 wouldn't always perform so hot. But it was mostly because of the parameters for the mock dog fights and such. Yet the F-15 never lost in a REAL dog fight even against "superior" MiGs Pretty much. That being said, the Eurofighter is actually very impressive. But this mock dogfight is essentially worthless. Throw an F-5 upgraded with an AIM-9X and I'm sure it will be shooting downing down Eurofightres and F-22s just fine in WVR. And to be fair, the F-15 never fought a comparable fighter in combat. The closest thing it came against were stripped down base model MIG-29A/UBs of the Iraqi air force with terrible pilots. Had they been the MIG-29 (internal ECM, more flares, and the R-77 [AIM-120 like)] with proper pilots then it might have been something worth mentioning. Even then, the F-15's direct Soviet/Russian counter part is the Flanker series. Regardless, the upgraded F-15Cs with an AESA radar and AIM-9Xs can fight just about any other fighter interceptor and come out on top. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:37:50 PM EDT
[#18]
so when both planes are heading to the meetup area how many minutes ahead of time did the raptor have a clear shot with a long range air to air missile while the typhoon pilot was looking around the glass waiting to see the raptor since it wasn't on radar?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:42:09 PM EDT
[#19]
Back to the 22 vs Typhoon:
Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted.
This is the truth of the matter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:44:55 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
so when both planes are heading to the meetup area how many minutes ahead of time did the raptor have a clear shot with a long range air to air missile while the typhoon pilot was looking around the glass waiting to see the raptor since it wasn't on radar? I don't know, but the F-22 isn't invisible. It can be picked up on radar. Don't know how far out though; this would also depend on the specific radar in question. The Eurofighters have quality radars themselves. Though I am not sure if they can see F-22s from 30 miles out, or 10 miles out, more, or less. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:45:34 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
the af does just fine with what you have. it sucks for the army. and pardon me the JTAC stories. I really couldn't give a fuck about the AF fellating itself on how awesome its CAS is. I agree the A-10 is an over-rated out of date POS. ask your JTACs if they would rather have an F16 or an apache (or an AC) If you needed AF fast movers to save your ass in Afghanistan, you fucked up by the numbers in the first place. Oh, I agree...the Apaches are a much better platform. They were awesome to watch too! But unfortunately, in all my cases the Apaches were either tied up doing something else or were still on the way by the time we showed up and took care of the issue. In my experience it's faster to wait for Apaches to fly the 30 minutes to an hour to get to use than it was to wait 45 minutes to an hour and a half to get the bomb truck orbiting above to drop a bomb. That was only 90% of the time though. Oddly enough getting them to do "shows of force" which accomplished the same thing hearing their engines from 20,000 feet only took a minute. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:47:32 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Quoted:
As a great fighter pilot once told me "I've got one turn, don't make me use it!" I've never heard a -104 referred to as "agile." Fast, and they could accelerate on the deck like a MiG-23, but not a turner. What was the -106 pilot going to shoot with...a Falcon? Blarf. Both were high altitude air to air interceptors. The weapons they had were the weapons they had. Mig 23 came along 10 years after both of those aircraft, Im not sure why you are making the comparison? The 106 was known to be a highly manuverable aircraft that was more than a match for the F4 at altitude, it wasn't in service until 1988 for nothing. How about Air-2 Genie just for fun? MiG23s are scooters on the deck. So was the -104, but the two people I spoke with who flew them (one Pak and one USAF) both said you didn't use the turning fight in a 104, and the literature sustains that assertion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:50:36 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
None of the century series was worth a shit. Jack Bourghton and Chuck Yeager would disagree, especially on the 106 and 104 respectively. We just didn't have a war where either were utilized. The F104 killed more germans than the P-51. Well, don't turn an interceptor into a low alt overloaded bomber... It helps not killing your pilots |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:51:54 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the af does just fine with what you have. it sucks for the army. and pardon me the JTAC stories. I really couldn't give a fuck about the AF fellating itself on how awesome its CAS is. I agree the A-10 is an over-rated out of date POS. ask your JTACs if they would rather have an F16 or an apache (or an AC) If you needed AF fast movers to save your ass in Afghanistan, you fucked up by the numbers in the first place. Oh, I agree...the Apaches are a much better platform. They were awesome to watch too! But unfortunately, in all my cases the Apaches were either tied up doing something else or were still on the way by the time we showed up and took care of the issue. yep. we need more Army air assets.
And in my experience fast mover doesn't fix the problem, it simply makes the problem hide for alittle while. Korengal is a great example. off to soccer. I will return! Not going to lie....the AF bombs made much better videos than most Apache gun runs, the effectiveness of a bomb hitting where the enemy was 45 minutes earlier is debatable however. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:52:05 PM EDT
[#25]
*yawn*
Add in the rest of our anti-air resources and we'd buttrape the eurofighter. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:52:20 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
None of the century series was worth a shit. Jack Bourghton and Chuck Yeager would disagree, especially on the 106 and 104 respectively. We just didn't have a war where either were utilized. The F104 killed more germans than the P-51. I did say it was a great aircraft didn't I? For what its worth, the 104 was acknowledged as an experts aircraft. The Italians came through Spangdahlem back in 96 with theirs. Nothing sounds like a 104, seriously. In person the sound is unworldly.
 http://youtu.be/u6K4iSxET6g
http://youtu.be/KIvv1PAmesMEvery Italian pilot I know LOVED their "centoquattro" ;) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 6:54:07 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Back to the 22 vs Typhoon: Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted. This is the truth of the matter. Yeah, but it still sucks! [/Targettarget]  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:01:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Back to the 22 vs Typhoon: Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted.
This is the truth of the matter. Yeah, but it still sucks! [/Targettarget]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:06:16 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
Back to the 22 vs Typhoon: Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted.
This is the truth of the matter. Knowing how risk-averse the Air Force is, how long will we allow BVR engagements after the first friendly aircraft is shot down; will the policymakers be able hold out when the media is blasting pictures of some airliner's wreckage 24/7? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:12:07 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Back to the 22 vs Typhoon: Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted.
This is the truth of the matter. Knowing how risk-averse the Air Force is, how long will we allow BVR engagements after the first friendly aircraft is shot down; will the policymakers be able hold out when the media is blasting pictures of some airliner's wreckage 24/7? If there's one thing I know about the military, they'd rather lose 1000 men to enemy fire than 1 guy to safety/friendly fire incidents. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:12:18 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Quoted: Back to the 22 vs Typhoon: Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted. This is the truth of the matter. Yeah, but it still sucks! [/Targettarget] I never said it sucks; all I said is that it was a dog when you start adding in all of the problems and cost factor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:15:27 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Only global hegemony and total dominance of the battlefield that our tiny-dicked neighbors to the north couldn't dream of.... you're right, it doesnt get us much. Classy. Hey, why doesn't the largest debtor nation in the world pay tribute to the country where all of the development money came from for your super fighter and rename it the Jung Shin III.....or something? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:15:33 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Back to the 22 vs Typhoon: Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted.
This is the truth of the matter. Knowing how risk-averse the Air Force is, how long will we allow BVR engagements after the first friendly aircraft is shot down; will the policymakers be able hold out when the media is blasting pictures of some airliner's wreckage 24/7? like Iran flight 655? We over came that just fine, I'm not worried about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:56:39 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:Gulf War I and II kinda showed what an armored corps can do in a matter of hours.
Sure makes it a lot easier, when you don't have not worry of attack from the air. I can have that with Tactical ADA and tomahawk deep strike. Don't forget Magical Unicorn ISR! Airfields can be spotted fairly easily. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 7:56:56 PM EDT
[#35]
I worked on the F22 for years and took plenty of trips to watch them dogfight. The only times they ever got killed was when the scenario called for them to not engage until a certian distance, it's called holding back, because if they don't they wouldn't be able to pratice/test certian situations. So yes, I can tell you FACT not ASSUMPTION that they do hold back when playing war games. The F22 is a rifle, every other fighter on earth is a handgun. At handgun range sure they may be equal or a slight edge to the handgun. But it's the guy with the rifles job to not let the guy with the handgun get in range. This. We have done this with other jets in our arsenal in the not to distant past. CallIng the F22 a dog? Really TT? As for all the posters from other countries who are turning this into a internet dick measuring contest... Looking at your dick in your boyfriend's (magnifing) cosmetic mirror may make you feel better, but you are still a lesser man. All jokes aside... Since when is one article the Gospel? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:01:03 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Only global hegemony and total dominance of the battlefield that our tiny-dicked neighbors to the north couldn't dream of.... you're right, it doesnt get us much. Classy. Hey, why doesn't the largest debtor nation in the world pay tribute to the country where all of the development money came from for your super fighter and rename it the Jung Shin III.....or something? Ironic that you comment on class but please carry on in your forum battles. I agree with what our U.K. friend said earlier about trying to find the problems and addressing them which is the point of these exercises along with training with allies and learning from them while giving pilots some experience against other jets. And it might have a weakness in this instance, but it has plenty of strengths too that should make sure no one is close enough to exploit this weakness. Doesn't mean it won't happen in a large war and that it shouldn't be addressed, but it's not exactly the scenario it was pictured to be in. Putting them in these scenarios is great for learning and preparing for something that might be unexpected otherwise. It's a SCENARIO that the jet was intentionally put into to see the results and it doesn't exactly negate all of its strengths. To ignore all of its strengths to just focus on the weakness while using these "facts" just to piss people off makes no sense but some people get a kick out of annoying others I guess. People have been talking about this logically yet it's all black or white with some people. It either sucks or is Jesus in machine form instead of actually discussing the topic at hand. You want to focus on the negative to get under people's skin, then don't think you're any classier than anyone else here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:02:24 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
yep we need more Army air assets.
And in my experience fast mover doesn't fix the problem, it simply makes the problem hide for alittle while. Korengal is a great example. off to soccer. I will return! Fucking soccer....now I know I can't trust you!
Well if it makes the problem hide, long enough to keep them from shooting our guys, until the Apaches show up...I'm good with that! My 8 year old's soccer. I'm a swimmer and broken rugby player. 10 years in AFghanistan and we are farther from success then we ever have been. we dedicated more fixed wing air sorties to the korengal valley than any other place and we withdrew leaving it to the taliban. we tried supersonic jets in Vietnam. they failed then. they always fail in coin when used in isolation. don't even get me started on bomber CAS. 1 million a sortie. If the air force was serious about supporting the army, we would have 100 ACs. Now the solution is RORO and still for spec ops only. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:03:53 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
The comparison is like taking some Delta Force guys and some illiterate terrorists and making them fight. Then make them throw down their rifles, body armor, night vision and similar, hop in a boxing ring and duke it out with fists.
The Eurofighter will put up a good fight in WVR, but it will have to get there first. In the age of AESA, advanced BVR missiles, low RCS, the high speed of the F-22, data links and similar will determine who is the victor in air to air combat. Obviously there will be dogfights and F-22s can be shot down, but the article implies the F-22 is a worthless turd because another plane can win it in mock dogfights.
And they assume the F-22 is an un-maneuverable POS. This video says otherwise: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csj8_GOy1os illiterate terrorists killed a platoon of ST6. not because they were better, but because we were stupid. there is a lesson in that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:05:10 PM EDT
[#39]
I only know what I've seen on TV, but there are some knowledgeable folks in here who will correct me if I'm wrong. I thought the overall deal with these sorts of jets was certain strengths would cause inherent weaknesses. No matter what every aircraft will have something it is less good at than others. Even if the F-22 was forced into a fight it normally wouldn't engage in a weakness under those circumstances is now known. Meaning new tactics and formations will be implemented to help deal with those weaknesses. Sort of like, if shit goes sideways and you end up in this kind of situation you should do X-Y-Z to cover your ass and get out of trouble. Granted it may be a long shot that a F-22 ends up in that situation at all.
I thought that was a normal thing and the point of these exercises? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:05:21 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The comparison is like taking some Delta Force guys and some illiterate terrorists and making them fight. Then make them throw down their rifles, body armor, night vision and similar, hop in a boxing ring and duke it out with fists.
The Eurofighter will put up a good fight in WVR, but it will have to get there first. In the age of AESA, advanced BVR missiles, low RCS, the high speed of the F-22, data links and similar will determine who is the victor in air to air combat. Obviously there will be dogfights and F-22s can be shot down, but the article implies the F-22 is a worthless turd because another plane can win it in mock dogfights.
And they assume the F-22 is an un-maneuverable POS. This video says otherwise: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csj8_GOy1os Yeah mock gun fights mean absolute fucking dick. I know a guy who worked on F-15s and watched them do mocked dog fights alot and would even say that the F-15 wouldn't always perform so hot. But it was mostly because of the parameters for the mock dog fights and such. Yet the F-15 never lost in a REAL dog fight even against "superior" MiGs Pretty much. That being said, the Eurofighter is actually very impressive. But this mock dogfight is essentially worthless. Throw an F-5 upgraded with an AIM-9X and I'm sure it will be shooting downing down Eurofightres and F-22s just fine in WVR. And to be fair, the F-15 never fought a comparable fighter in combat. The closest thing it came against were stripped down base model MIG-29A/UBs of the Iraqi air force with terrible pilots. Had they been the MIG-29 (internal ECM, more flares, and the R-77 [AIM-120 like)] with proper pilots then it might have been something worth mentioning. Even then, the F-15's direct Soviet/Russian counter part is the Flanker series. Regardless, the upgraded F-15Cs with an AESA radar and AIM-9Xs can fight just about any other fighter interceptor and come out on top. LIES!!!!! The F15C is an outdated dinosaur incapable of fighting anything and anyone wishing to use them in combat might as well just personally execute the pilots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:07:13 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the af does just fine with what you have. it sucks for the army. and pardon me the JTAC stories. I really couldn't give a fuck about the AF fellating itself on how awesome its CAS is. I agree the A-10 is an over-rated out of date POS. ask your JTACs if they would rather have an F16 or an apache (or an AC) If you needed AF fast movers to save your ass in Afghanistan, you fucked up by the numbers in the first place. Oh, I agree...the Apaches are a much better platform. They were awesome to watch too! But unfortunately, in all my cases the Apaches were either tied up doing something else or were still on the way by the time we showed up and took care of the issue. In my experience it's faster to wait for Apaches to fly the 30 minutes to an hour to get to use than it was to wait 45 minutes to an hour and a half to get the bomb truck orbiting above to drop a bomb. That was only 90% of the time though. Oddly enough getting them to do "shows of force" which accomplished the same thing hearing their engines from 20,000 feet only took a minute. Fact. shows of force are the biggest jokes in the world and are nothing but a display of impotence. B1 did one once, AWESOME. Worthless, but AWESOME! I could get a fast mover over head in 15 minutes. and an hour later it would leave having done nothing but eat up comms and burn 50 dollar a gallon gas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:07:40 PM EDT
[#42]
Great trick, until the Raptor is released to fly up at 60K' again, and the typhoon is left at 40K wishing it could get there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:07:42 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not to downplay the accomplishment, but won't the Eurofighter need to find the f22 first? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Yep. Tactic mentioned is common sense. Any bets on how fast we develop a counter-strategy? I am pretty sure these mock dogfights start at a common rendezvous point. That's not how a real shooting war works. +1 These dogfights are not representative of how we maintain air superiority, and it starts by not fighting fair. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:10:56 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
LIES!!!!! The F15C is an outdated dinosaur incapable of fighting anything and anyone wishing to use them in combat might as well just personally execute the pilots. I wish we would buy some of the latest updated F-15's simply because they're a lot cheaper and they undoubtedly WORK. Sure, we need to keep advancing technology in case of a major war and all that, but that shouldn't have stopped us from keeping F-15's rolling out in good condition with all the latest upgrades because it's still a great plane and would work in every condition we find ourselves in today. We can have quality in the F-22, but quantity in F-15's is great too so I hope they attempt to keep them in good shape for quite a long time too. The F-35 is a waste to me, especially for the Air Force so that still pisses me off when we pay a shitload for something that's not necessarily filling a void for the Air Force. Just because the Navy and Marines want some doesn't mean the Air Force has have some too. Didn't one model get cancelled for now anyway? Memory loss is a bitch so I can't remember when or where I read that. Quoted:
Great trick, until the Raptor is released to fly up at 60K' again, and the typhoon is left at 40K wishing it could get there. Space shuttles with lasers will take care of that!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:11:44 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: I worked on the F22 for years and took plenty of trips to watch them dogfight. The only times they ever got killed was when the scenario called for them to not engage until a certian distance, it's called holding back, because if they don't they wouldn't be able to pratice/test certian situations. So yes, I can tell you FACT not ASSUMPTION that they do hold back when playing war games. The F22 is a rifle, every other fighter on earth is a handgun. At handgun range sure they may be equal or a slight edge to the handgun. But it's the guy with the rifles job to not let the guy with the handgun get in range. CallIng the F22 a dog? Really TT? Well, the internet would be a boring place if we all just agreed with each other. Nothing more than "+1's" and "what that guy said" would get posted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:13:34 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Only global hegemony and total dominance of the battlefield that our tiny-dicked neighbors to the north couldn't dream of.... you're right, it doesnt get us much. Classy. Hey, why doesn't the largest debtor nation in the world pay tribute to the country where all of the development money came from for your super fighter and rename it the Jung Shin III.....or something? Ironic that you comment on class but please carry on in your forum battles. I agree with what our U.K. friend said earlier about trying to find the problems and addressing them which is the point of these exercises along with training with allies and learning from them while giving pilots some experience against other jets. And it might have a weakness in this instance, but it has plenty of strengths too that should make sure no one is close enough to exploit this weakness. Doesn't mean it won't happen in a large war and that it shouldn't be addressed, but it's not exactly the scenario it was pictured to be in. Putting them in these scenarios is great for learning and preparing for something that might be unexpected otherwise. It's a SCENARIO that the jet was intentionally put into to see the results and it doesn't exactly negate all of its strengths. To ignore all of its strengths to just focus on the weakness while using these "facts" just to piss people off makes no sense but some people get a kick out of annoying others I guess. People have been talking about this logically yet it's all black or white with some people. It either sucks or is Jesus in machine form instead of actually discussing the topic at hand. You want to focus on the negative to get under people's skin, then don't think you're any classier than anyone else here. I'm not focusing on the negative to get under anyone's skin. The F-22 isn't a Jesus machine, contrary to what some here believe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:17:46 PM EDT
[#47]
Well, the internet would be a boring place if we all just agreed with each other. Nothing more than "+1's" and "what that guy said" would get posted. True, but that doesn't validate your argument that the F22 is a dog. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:18:54 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I worked on the F22 for years and took plenty of trips to watch them dogfight. The only times they ever got killed was when the scenario called for them to not engage until a certian distance, it's called holding back, because if they don't they wouldn't be able to pratice/test certian situations. So yes, I can tell you FACT not ASSUMPTION that they do hold back when playing war games. The F22 is a rifle, every other fighter on earth is a handgun. At handgun range sure they may be equal or a slight edge to the handgun. But it's the guy with the rifles job to not let the guy with the handgun get in range. CallIng the F22 a dog? Really TT? Well, the internet would be a boring place if we all just agreed with each other. Nothing more than "+1's" and "what that guy said" would get posted. So... fuck it. Let's post dumb shit and see what happens. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:19:02 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
Well, the internet would be a boring place if we all just agreed with each other. Nothing more than "+1's" and "what that guy said" would get posted. True, but that doesn't validate your argument that the F22 is a dog. He's just justifying his troll behavior after getting his dick slapped. Wash, rinse, and repeat... it's the TT way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2012 8:25:38 PM EDT
[#50]
dbl tap
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
