Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
9/16/2019 10:09:13 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 6/2/2004 12:37:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 12:48:44 PM EDT by KA3B]
New Chinese Jets Superior, Eagle Loses to Flanker

Charles R. Smith

Wednesday, May 26, 2004



China is about to receive 24 advanced Sukhoi Su-30MK2 Flanker fighters from Russia. The new fighter jets are reported to be the naval versions of the Sukhoi Su-30MKK fighter.
The new Chinese fighters are reportedly equipped with enhanced anti-ship strike capabilities including the Kh-31 Krypton supersonic anti-ship missile.

China has already purchased 78 Su-27SK/UBK fighters and 76 Su-30MKK fighters from Russia, and is building 200 more Flanker jets under license from Sukhoi. The PLA Naval Air Corps will deploy the latest batch of Su-30MK2 fighters.

The disturbing news from Beijing adds to recent bad news for the U.S. Air Force. According to an unreleased U.S.A.F. report, the F-15 Eagle - the most advanced U.S. fighter in service - is inferior to the latest versions of the Sukhoi Su-30 Flanker.

The report covers a series of air-combat training engagements earlier this year between Indian air force Su-30MKs and F-15Cs from Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. The U.S. F-15s were equipped with the U.S. latest long-range, high-definition radar systems.

During the air combat exercises the Su-30MKs and F-15 pilots were seeing each other at the same time with their radars, but the Indian pilots were getting off the simulated first shot with their AA-10 Alamo missiles and often winning the long-range engagements.

Flanker Beats Eagle

According to a Richard Fisher, a defense analyst and noted expert on the Chinese military, the Chinese Flanker fighters can beat the U.S. top jet fighters including the F-15 Eagle.

"Since 1992 the Pentagon has known that in a close-in dogfight the Su-27 would smear the F-15. That year Russian Sukhois came to Langley AFB and showed us their stuff. What we appear to be learning from the recent exercise with India is that Russian radar, weapons and more importantly, tactics, have all reached a level in which the F-15 is on the verge of being outclassed in the long-range engagement as well," stated Fisher.

According to a recent report by Fisher for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, the Chinese Flanker fighters are a real threat to Taiwan and the U.S. Fisher's report raised early alarm bells about the Chinese purchase of large number of the more advanced Flanker - the Su-30 multi-role strike fighter.

"With the purchase of the Sukhoi Su-30MKK (Mnogafunctunali Kommercial Kitayski-Multifunctional Commercial for China) the PLAAF demonstrated that it had made a clear doctrinal commitment to acquiring multi-role attack fighters capable of "joint" warfighting. The Su-30MKK is the first PLAAF attack fighter capable of delivering precision-guided munitions in all weather conditions, and to use modern air-to-air weapons like the self-guiding Vympel R-77 (AA-12 ADDER) AAM," noted Fisher's report.

"This upgrade program has the potential to rapidly increase the number of multi-role fighters in the PLAAF, conceivably adding up to 78 Su-27SK/UBKs and 200+ J-11s to the 100+ Su-30MKK/MKK2 multi role fighters. The prospect of the later was formidable enough. But the near-term prospect of nearly 400 Sukhoi fighters with ability to launch active-guided R-77s and anti-ship missiles like the Kh-31A on a single mission creates great pressure for a U.S. defensive response. Such a force poses a serious challenge to Taiwan's ability to maintain control over its own airspace as well as complicating U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy plans to come to Taiwan's defense if needed," states Fisher's report.

New Chinese Missile Superior to U.S.

Worse still is the fact that China is now developing an air-to-air missile considered to be superior to the U.S. AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. The self-guided AMRAAM is the main long-range armament for all U.S. fighter jets.

The new Chinese Project 129 or PL-12 missile is a Sino-Russian collaboration drawn from the Russian AA-12 Adder and equipped with an indigenous Chinese high-power rocket motor. Unlike the Russian AA-12, the PL-12 will have better performance than early models of the U.S. AMRAAM missile. The PL-12 reportedly has a maximum head-on engagement range of 50 miles and a maximum speed of four times the speed of sound.

The PL-12 is now in the final stages of development, with test firings against target drones scheduled for this year. Pakistan is seen as the first export customer for the PL-12. The PL-12 has alarmed U.S. defense sources who now consider it as the primary radar-guided air-to-air missile threat against American and allied aircraft.

The new PL-12 missile, once married to the advanced Su-30 Flanker jets in the PLAAF, can dominate the skies over Taiwan and eventually Asia. The U.S. F-15 Eagle, first flown in the mid-1970s, is rapidly becoming vulnerable to these fifth generation weapons.

F-22 Politics

The U.S. Air Force answer to the new threat is the F-22 Raptor. The new stealth jet fighter is capable of dealing with both the Su-30 and the PL-12 missile because of its superior speed, agility, and its ability to hide from conventional radars such as those on the Su-30. The U.S.A.F. wants to buy up to 400 of the advanced stealth fighters over the next decade.

"China's Sukhois are somewhat different from those sold to India in that they lack the latter's new BARS phased array radar and thrust vectored engines. But that's only slight cause for comfort, as China is in the midst of upgrading its Sukhoi fleet to enable carriage of the R-77 BVR AAM and attack munitions. Most co-produced Su-27SK/J-11 fighters are so upgraded. This means that very soon the U.S. air forces in Asia could be facing 200-300 multi-role BVR AAM capable Sukhois in the PLA Air Force," stated Rick Fisher.

"This trend was apparent several years ago and the tragedy is that the Pentagon did not start sounding the alarm back then. As a consequence an important chance to bolster political support for the F/A-22 has been lost. Today there is still an unjustified reluctance to publicly link China's growing Sukhoi fleet to a now urgent need to produce the F/A- 22," noted Fisher.

The F-22 Raptor has become a political issue with the current Democrat candidate opposing the stealth fighter. Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry voted against funding the F-22 at least five times, in 1995 and 1996.

Additionally, in 1995 Kerry supported a deep cut in the F-22 Raptor by signing onto S. 151 "to reduce Federal spending by restructuring the Air Force's F-22 program to achieve initial operating capability in 2010 and a total inventory of no more than 42 aircraft in 2015."

In June 1998, John Kerry voted for the Bumpers amendment to the U.S. defense funding for 1999 to drastically cut the F-22 program. In 1998 Senator Bumpers (D. Ark.) repeatedly voiced his opposition to the F-22 and offered legislation to cut the aircraft permanently.

"We are buying all these fighters in spite of the fact that the intelligence community and everybody who knows anything about an airplane knows that there isn't a plane in the world - in France, in Russia, in China - that is even remotely comparable to our F-15 and our F-18 and there won't be, the CIA says, for 15 to 20 years. So what is the rush to judgment?" stated Bumpers in 1998.

The vote by Bumpers and Kerry failed, and the funding continued for the F-22. The words of Senator Bumpers convinced others like Senator Kerry and Senator Kennedy to consider the threat to our pilots and our national defense would not develop for 20 years.

Six years later the threat is already flying.


Deterrence or War

"The vicious circle of development delays, cost overruns, politically inspired number reductions and then reduced requirements are symptomatic of a crisis of leadership that will make war on the Taiwan Strait more possible, as America has lost a chance to put needed deterrent forces in place," stated Richard Fisher.

"The U.S. needed the F/A-22 in the Pacific theater five years ago, so that by today it would be reasonably integrated into our total forces. America will need far more than the 277 F/A-22s our leaders our currently willing to buy, and they are long overdue in the force. They are indeed expensive, but their cost is puny compared to the price America will pay if it either has to fight a war on the Taiwan Strait, or should it even lose that war," concluded Fisher.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/26/154053.shtml
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 12:45:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 12:49:10 PM EDT by macman37]
Looks like someone is looking for some funnndinnnnggg!
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 12:47:03 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 12:48:15 PM EDT
The quality of the plane is second to the quality of the pilot.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 12:51:29 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:00:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 1:02:41 PM EDT by Max_Mike]

This worries me not.


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.


but only that AIM-54 can keep this new naval threat at bay.


No

The AIM-54 is a dinosaur designed to shoot down large bombers and would be next to useless against first line modern fighters.

Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:02:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Stove_Pipe:
The quality of the plane is second to the quality of the pilot.



Tell that to those American Corsair/P51/P80 pilots in Korea who went against MiG 15's.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:07:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

This worries me not.


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.


but only that AIM-54 can keep this new naval threat at bay.


No

The AIM-54 is a dinosaur designed to shoot down large bombers and would be next to useless against first line modern fighters.




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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:24:14 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:29:58 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:36:42 PM EDT
Great.

So if Kerry get's elected we'll not only wind up praying to Allah, but will be praying to Allah in Chineese!
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:39:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 1:41:31 PM EDT by Dave_A]
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...
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:42:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Blackjack272:
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.



I was just thinking along the same line. The Phoenix missile is still far superior.



Primary Function Long-range air-launched air intercept missile
Contractor Hughes Aircraft Co. and Raytheon Co.
Unit Cost $477,131
Power Plant Solid propellant rocket motor built by Hercules
Length 13 feet (3.9 meters)
Weight 1000 pounds - AIM-54A
1040 pounds - AIM-54C [various, 1020-1040 pounds]
1023 pounds - AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed Missile
Diameter 15 inches (38.1 cm)
Wing Span 3 feet (.9 meters)
Range In excess of 100 nautical miles (115 statute miles, 184 km)
Speed In excess of 3,000 mph (4,800 kmph)
Guidance System Semi-active and active radar homing
Warheads Proximity fuse, high explosive
Warhead Weight 135 pounds (60.75 kg)
Date Deployed 1974









Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:43:01 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:45:43 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:46:49 PM EDT
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?
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:57:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDOC:
I wonder how much of that new technology was ours.



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!
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 1:59:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 2:00:39 PM EDT by uns69]
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:04:59 PM EDT
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?
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:06:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 2:07:13 PM EDT by Wobblin-Goblin]
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:07:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
Too bad there isn't a need for the F-4 Phantom anymore, though.



Wild Weasals...
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:09:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 2:10:24 PM EDT by mayday]
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:09:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
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.



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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:12:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By John91498:

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
Too bad there isn't a need for the F-4 Phantom anymore, though.


Wild Weasals...


Nope. The F-4 is now relegated to permanent desert status. That is, aside from the ones used as target practice.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:16:18 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:19:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mayday:
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.



Were you using cheats?
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:21:34 PM EDT
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?
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:32:17 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:36:11 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:41:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Stove_Pipe:
The quality of the plane is second to the quality of the pilot.



end of lesson!

Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:43:12 PM EDT
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
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 2:47:07 PM EDT
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
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 3:20:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mayday:
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.



Link Posted: 6/2/2004 3:37:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 3:38:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 3:39:02 PM EDT by Andreuha]

Originally Posted By TheOtherDave:
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



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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 3:56:43 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 4:00:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 4:00:35 PM EDT by Andreuha]

Originally Posted By Katana16j:
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?)?
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 4:09:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 4:18:17 PM EDT
It is only to lure them into a false sense of security....
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 4:18:49 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 4:53:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
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



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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 5:33:57 PM EDT
You mean "Too bad Dick Cheney ordered the destruction of the F-14 tooling and jigs" don't ya.



Originally Posted By Belfry_Express:
And too bad CARTER ordered the destruction of the F14 tooling. Thats why its so damned expensive to maintain the things.

Link Posted: 6/2/2004 5:41:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
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.




Thats what I was thinking. The Phoenix is effectively worthless.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 6:57:49 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 7:39:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tac45:
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?



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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 7:45:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Katana16j:
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.



How about a B-1? Not quite sure how (if?) the mechanics of that would work, but it's an interesting idea.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 7:47:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:

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.



It probably uses Google to search the sky
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 7:58:32 PM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 8:01:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/2/2004 8:01:35 PM EDT by Sierra_Hombre]
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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 8:06:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDOC:
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.



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.
Link Posted: 6/2/2004 8:07:03 PM EDT

I was just thinking along the same line. The Phoenix missile is still far superior.


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.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top