User Panel
Gee, I wonder how much of that new technology was ours. Also these analysts have a way of overestimating Russian fighter abilities. The MIG25 was supposed to kick all our fighters at the time until we got a hold on one in Japan. The man inside the cockpit also makes a difference. The Russians and Chinese fly a few hours a month. They dont have the practice time to be as good as the guys that go the airshows. This also somewhat true of our guys. But, people dont realize the secondary benefit of Afghanistan and Iraq. All our pilots that rotated though will have flew a ton of hours. That only makes them better. It like a 25 yo driving in a race against a 16 yo that just got his license.
|
|
The quality of the plane is second to the quality of the pilot.
|
|
Calls for an improved Tomcat. The AMRAAM can't outmatch the AA-10 in range. The AIM-7 comes close, but only that AIM-54 can keep this new naval threat at bay.
These Kh-31s are spooking me. |
|
Correct for today… On paper things look ominous but it ain’t so. Chinese Su-27 and Su-30 while potentially threatening are not very effective at this time. The Chinese have had severe maintenance problems with aircraft they have purchased from Russia to the point 75% or more of the aircraft are not flyable at any one time. Chinese home built SU-27s have shown major problems to the point of the aircraft being useless due to poor production quality control. Add to this the abysmal training and quality of Chinese pilots and you have a paper force with little to no teeth. It will be at 5-10 years probably longer before China is able to exploit these aircraft to anywhere near their full potential. By that time with proper funding the F-22 should be in full service and F-35 well on the way to production. China is going to have to develop a real navy before she becomes a full blown world power and that is 20-40 years away. When that happen we will have our hands full.
No The AIM-54 is a dinosaur designed to shoot down large bombers and would be next to useless against first line modern fighters. |
||
|
Tell that to those American Corsair/P51/P80 pilots in Korea who went against MiG 15's. |
|
|
Yep. The Phoenix is too slow and not maneuverable enough to engage a high-performance aircraft. The AAMRAM is still our best A-to-A threat. |
|||
|
The USA will just have to open up with our big guns, and send in Lt. Pete 'Maverick' Mitchell, Lt. Tom 'Iceman' Kazanski, Cmdr. Mike 'Viper' Metcalf, Lt. Cmdr. Rick 'Jester' Heatherly, Lt. (j.g.) Ron 'Slider' Kerner, and Lt. (j.g.) Sam 'Merlin' Wells
Those guys should clean their clocks and knock'em dead. And why not? We got the Terminator as a Governor of kali-fornia. |
|
Too slow? It climbs to 80,000ft, flies to the target, and dives at Mach 5 or so.
That 'end game' performance allows it all the manuverability it needs, and at that speed, I don't think it's going to miss. Monstrous warhead, too. Just ask DPMMN. Don't take my word for it. |
|
Great.
So if Kerry get's elected we'll not only wind up praying to Allah, but will be praying to Allah in Chineese! |
|
The Phoenix & R-77 are both LONG RANGE weapons...
Neither can 'chase' a modern fighter for very long, but (A) they are both excellent in meeting engagements, and (B) both are very good anti-ship/cruiser missile killers... The problem that an R-77 equipped fighter poses is that our guys have to go defensive before they can even get a shot off... Even if the LRAAM misses, the target is at a severe disadvantage, having lost the initiative... If the F-22's 'stealth' can shorten the Chinese effective missile range, then the shoe changes feet... |
|
Speed doesnt mean anything. The AIM 54 is 60s tech. It was useful recently to shootdown cruisemissles that would attack a carrier group. I think they have more faith in the Aegis cruisers and their missle systems then the AIM 54.
|
|
And everyone on this board told me I had nothing to fear from the Chinese...
While we are losing good men to a third world sand pit, the Chinese have had decades to improve their equipment and their tactics. |
|
Speed is EVERYTHING. If you don't have the ability to put your aircraft back into the LAR quickly, or your missiles cannot catch up to a missile or fighter/bomber, then you loose. And at sea, when you loose, you loose big.
If the Kh31 can carry a nuclear warhead, then AEGIS don't mean much with your R2D2s in close. It may be old, but the newer models combined with the newer radar solve the problem ( AWG-9/AIM-54A = old. APG-71/IRST/AIM-54C = new ). As for this new export Flanker, is there a source that lists all the nations that bought them? |
|
My thought too! But it doesn't friggen matter. Bill & Hillary Klintoon gave the "Go ahead!" for missile giudance technology and W-88 MIRV warhead technology to be passed to the Chinese......and what happened? NOT A FUCKING THING! Enjoy it.........it's coming! |
|
|
Seriously...I would still rather be in a F15 anyday. Plus our pilots are the best in the world....period. The F22 will be in production and we will find the weaknesses of the Flanker. Don't let these people scare you like they did in the 70s with the Mig25.
|
|
Isn't the phoenix like $1 million a pop? And what's going to happen to the system when the Tomcat leaves service, are the going to find a way to fire it from the hornet?
|
|
That Phoenix missle is one big mutha. Thirteen feet long? Wow. I didn't know that.
We need the F-22. We also need our older F-14s and F-15s, too. Too bad there isn't a need for the F-4 Phantom anymore, though. |
|
Wild Weasals... |
|
|
I've actually flown once against the Sukhoi Su-30MK2. I was not impressed at all. I beat it all times except for this one time the bogie got on my six.
But I hit pause and had to take a call from my Mom...so I stopped the game. |
|
And too bad CARTER ordered the destruction of the F14 tooling. Thats why its so damned expensive to maintain the things. If we want them in any numbers, we need to reverse engineer one. And forget about the hornet. even if u could strap a phoenix to it, its range would be even more reduced. From, take off, climb to,......oops bingo on fuel, return to base..... to taxi, pushing engines to takeoff and they stall cause the plane is outta gas. |
|
|
Nope. The F-4 is now relegated to permanent desert status. That is, aside from the ones used as target practice. |
||
|
I too am not worried.
They left out three major portions of the combat picture: 1. Pilots - Arn't grown over night 2. Weapon Systems - let's see those claims in real life. 3. Tactics - An important missing part too. |
|
Were you using cheats? |
|
|
The Sukhoi and late models of the MiG-29 family are exceptional aircraft. The German MiGs regularly tear up our Navy F/a-18s during Red Flag training ops in Germany...and the Luftwaffe pilots are restricted in what they can do. IF they were allowed to go all out to use the full capabilities of the dogfight missile and the helmet mounted sight, plus the onboard jamming system...I've heard that our young trainees might never win. That said, there is MUCH more to a successful engagement than just have the best flying vehicle.
It is because the Russian jets are so capable that we need the F-22. That said, I would hope that our pilots would still knock the hell out of any enemy air force. Training and skills are still the number one requirement of a great fighter pilot. The Phoenix was never designed to engage anti-ship missiles. It is not suited for that role and would not be wasted in that type of engagement. Once fired, anti-ship missiles are always the responsibility of the AAW ships, first in the area defense role and finally in the self defense role. Phoenix was designed to shoot the "archer", the Bear, Badger, or Backfire bombers that put the Fleet carriers at risk. The '70s and '80s AAW scenarios called for us to set up a layered AAW defensive "grid" with Tomcats and Hawkeyes far out along the threat axis to meet the enemy bombers early on and thin them out. Ready CAP would be launched to further attack the inbound bombers but once the enemy launched his missiles...then it was up to us surface shooters, the cruisers and destroyers, to try and shoot down the incoming missiles. If the threat was say...a Sovremenny destroyer firing SS-N-22 Moskit (NATO name: Sunburn. ) missiles, then it was incumbant upon us to locate and kill that ship before he could ripple fire all eight of his very nasty missiles at our ships. Once launched, the problem grows by several orders of magnitude. Again...Phoenix would not be a player. The ships would have to defend themselves...or die. The Kh 31, also known as the AS-17 Krypton, is a very effective missile. It is the little brother of the Moskit. The US purchased several from Russia seveal years ago and turned them into targets. They fly fast, low and they maneuver. I have seen videos of the Krypton hitting test target ships. Very impressive. They pose a very real threat to any ship. Good thing we're now pals with the Russkies, huh? |
|
uummm...
ROFL. They're basing actual technology comparisons on un-scientific combat excersizes from two countries with very little actual combat experience. Chineese pilots? Indian pilots? Americans and Russians would both whoop their respective asses any day of the week; even with a hang-over. This is why I totally disregard whatever was written by the author. On another note, it's a variant for the chineese. Not even the newest SU-37, but an export SU-27 from the previous generation of aviation. Now, if this was Russians in SU-27 vs Americans in F-15 or Rus. in SU-37 and US in F22; in an organized RedFlag event; THAT would be something to write home about. For now, it's more or less two groups of (relatively speaking) newbs testing out some 'new' toys. |
|
blah blah blah. Talk is cheap. Tactics are everything. On paper even communism looked good, and lets see, I dont think it works in practice. I am not worried in the least.
|
|
end of lesson! |
|
|
And lets not forget, we were worried about the russian stuff too. Until we got ahold of it and realized it was like the chrysler sebring. A beautiful piece of automobile, but mechanical shit.
Do you expect their missles to be any better? TXL |
|
Let's not forget that the Russkies don't exactly warm up to the chinese, and given the state of the Soviet's ability to fight a war right now I don't think they are going to give the Chinese the Full Monty versions of the SU30. No matter how desparate they are for money.
Dave |
|
|
|
|
why are they comparing it against a 30 yr old aircraft design like the f15. They are talking Air to air combat shouldn't it be compared with the F16? i was under the impression that the f16 was supposed to be the air superiority fighter and the f15 was a multi role fighter?
How does it compare with the f22 or JSF? granted those are not fully around yet but they are on the table. mike |
|
I wouldn't be so sure about that. Well, maybe Sukhoi Inc. wouldn't; but greasy politicians have been shipping arms etc. into Chechnya for a long time. BTW, SU30 isn't even much of a new jet. It's a modified/export version of the Su-27. It's still almost like buying an F-14 nowadays. |
|
|
I like the Aim-54 but its getting long in the tooth...
IMHO A good way to move them out of the inventory would be to modify them for free drop launch instead of rail launch and then load up a b-52 with about 80 of them and the electonics to support it. Granted it wouldn't kill every target, but it would drastically change the aerial situation. Kind of like a Strategic air "Do over" when you don't like how the enemy is deploying thier helicopter support, WACS and transports... and it'll thin out the older fighters too. |
|
That's an interesting concept, but I'd imagine a B-52 of all planes would be long gone before it could do such a thing. Possibly if it was only helos and support planes it was up against, but I don't know of any nations with that but not fighters. Maybe with a B2 modified for flying at even higher altitude, getting all its targeting info streamed from an AWACS(ETA: is that even possible?)? |
|
|
1: The F-14 is the only fighter in our inventory that is equipped to carry the Phoenix, and the F-14 is in its waning days in active service. This is a serious oversight on Congress' part.
2: Based on RECENT performances of Chinese pilots vs. U.S. aircraft (Lockheed P-3), I don't think we'd have much to worry about if the Chinese were flying F-22s with Phoenix missiles! THIS is too much for Chinese pilots to even avoid RUNNING INTO. The greatest danger that Chinese pilots pose is a COLLISION HAZARD!!! CJ |
|
I wouldn't consider it a TOTAL oversight by Congress. Duke Cunningham DID express total support for the mfg.ing of new F-14Ds.
It is Cheney that fucked up the program. That is one reason I don't like em'. I have my doubts that the F-35 will be able to hold it's own, either. Don't look like it can hold much fuel. |
|
You've got it backwards. F15 for air superiority and F16 for multirole. Unti the F15E, loaded out ground-attack F15s didn't happen. The F16 complemented the A10 role when speed was more important than payload or loiter time. |
|
|
You mean "Too bad Dick Cheney ordered the destruction of the F-14 tooling and jigs" don't ya.
|
|
|
Thats what I was thinking. The Phoenix is effectively worthless. |
|
|
Well, it's not really worthless, but one thing is certain: If there's no carrier battle group near you that has Tomcats on it (and some carriers have no Tomcats at all these days) then you can be certain that the AIM-54 Phoenix missile will NOT be anything you have to worry about.
But I have to wonder what we might have in the inventory that's new, secret, and does a comparable job that we can deploy as needed should it be deemed necesary? We have never shown all our cards at once, and hopefully never will. Very few people doubt the existence of the so-called "Aurora" project, even though it's never been formally acknolwedged. And back in the late 60's, I watched SR-71s take off and land at Kadena AFB, Okinawa, some years before the Air Force acknowledged their existence. They were no secret to those who were within hearing range of them on takeoff, which was practically the whole island! I think our armed services are dramatically underequipped and their numbers are too small, but I also think we have aces up our sleeve that do much to compensate. Trivia: The Israelis have greatly updated the venerable F-4 Phantom, and the latest version of it carries the most powerful and capable airborne search radar in the sky. I couldn't relocate the exact reference in a brief Google search, but I do remember reading about it. CJ |
|
I don't recall the exact date when they stopped making the Phoenix, but it's been quite a while. I wouldn't be suprised to see degraded reliabilitiy due to extended storage time. That was a million $ a pop back in the '70s...figure alot more now. |
|
|
How about a B-1? Not quite sure how (if?) the mechanics of that would work, but it's an interesting idea. |
|
|
It probably uses Google to search the sky |
|
|
Let's face it, in a real conflict with the Chinese, it's not likely many of their jets would even make it off the ground in the first place.
|
|
i think the main point here is that while we're bickering amongst ourselves here at the homefront, our enemies of the future are churning out quality weaponry that rivals if not exceeds our own.
|
|
Also important is the fact that air-to-air combat American-style relies on a system of system approach. Only the US has worldwide deployable airborne warning and control platforms i.e. the E-3 AWACS and E-2C Hawkeye. These underrated asssets provide a secure data-linked radar picture to the fighters, allowing them to not radiate search radars. The bogeys have two choices: radiate and be more easily detected or fly blind. The Chinese still depend on GCI (ground controlled intercept) stations to direct engagements. Not the greatest tactic as engagements can occur outside coverage areas, their radars jammed, or the stations can be hard-killed. Information provides tremendous advantages in modern warfare and nobody gathers, processes, and shares it better than US forces. |
|
|
You can think want but the AIM-54 will not be effective against newer fighters. The AIM-54 was designed to shoot down bombers at long range… at launch it zooms to high altitude and the engine then burns out and the missile coasts for most of its flight arc with out any power. Against a highly maneuverable small fighter target that would have plenty of warning of its approach the AIM-54 would miss by a wide margin the vast majority of the time. This is the US Navy’s option not just mine alone. The AIM-54 is an obsolete weapon. |
|
|
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.