• Canada may not buy F-35 afterall
    50 replies, posted
So the whole fucking election because of the contempt of parliament which in fact made our country even shittier for 4 years was over something that might not have happened at all in the first place? Or is this not the cause of the election we had that signed our life away for 4 years? :P
[QUOTE=Whitefox08;38570844]All in all the best of multi-role fighter is the Su-35, Su-27, and Su-33 due to there maneuverability and multiple variants even though the 27 and 33 suffer from poor avionics and are old. On top of that there sexy too. [/QUOTE] You literally said they were great than listed their flaws.
[QUOTE=Tuskin;38571196]Before we got the Globemasters we were leasing Russian planes to move equipment over seas. Don't see why we wouldn't buy any fighters.[/QUOTE] Canada leased a bunch of Mi-17's for Afghanistan as well. [IMG]http://photoshare.shaw.ca/image/7/3/a/165453/cfhip-0.jpg[/IMG] [editline]23rd November 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Zambies!;38571209]You literally said they were great than listed their flaws.[/QUOTE] They are great, the Su-27 is the first generation flanker and the su-33 is the navalized version of that. They had great systems for their time, but like every other jet they have to be upgraded every now and then. Thus why he didn't mention the Su-35 in the outdated avionics category.
I wish McDonnell-Douglas would retool and build new F-15 airframes. I love the F-15.
[QUOTE=Tuskin;38571196]Before we got the Globemasters we were leasing Russian planes to move equipment over seas. Don't see why we wouldn't buy any fighters.[/QUOTE] Even the US still charters An-124s to shuttle helicopters overseas.
[QUOTE=Coppermoss;38571681]I wish McDonnell-Douglas would retool and build new F-15 airframes. I love the F-15.[/QUOTE] In its Prime the F-15C was fantastic is BVR(Beyond Visual Range) systems and radar were A+ but its downside was it turned like a rock compared to Russian fighters.
[QUOTE=Whitefox08;38572052]In its Prime the F-15C was fantastic is BVR(Beyone Visual Range) systems and radar were A+ but its downside was it turned like a rock compared to Russian fighters.[/QUOTE] I dunno, the F-15 has gone head to head with Russian fighters for forty years now and has yet to be shot down. Meanwhile it has successfully achieved over one hundred air to air kills vs enemy fighter aircraft. Clearly its setup works in actual combat.
[QUOTE=GunFox;38572624]I dunno, the F-15 has gone head to head with Russian fighters for forty years now and has yet to be shot down. Meanwhile it has successfully achieved over one hundred air to air kills vs enemy fighter aircraft. Clearly its setup works in actual combat.[/QUOTE] Why do people always compare outdated export model Mig-29 with a hardly trained middle eastern pilot against American fully maintained and updated F-15 or F-16. Thats the most retarded comparison ever. Knock downs with untrained pilots isn't a fair comparison. Its like people saying T-72 sucks because Iraqi army was shit and had knock down T-72's.
[QUOTE=laserguided;38572722]Why do people always compare outdated export model Mig-29 with a hardly trained middle eastern pilot against American fully maintained and updated F-15 or F-16. Thats the most retarded comparison ever. Knock downs with untrained pilots isn't a fair comparison. Its like people saying T-72 sucks because Iraqi army was shit and had knock down T-72's.[/QUOTE] They may have had poor training, but they probably had some amount of experience.
[QUOTE=Apache249;38572747]They may have had poor training, but they probably had some amount of experience.[/QUOTE] Who the Iraqi's? They got completely dominated, there is film of Iraqi infantry surrendering to Apaches, they were demoralized as fuck and most of their airplanes got bombed on the ground before they even took off.
[QUOTE=laserguided;38572722]Why do people always compare outdated export model Mig-29 with a hardly trained middle eastern pilot against American fully maintained and updated F-15 or F-16. Thats the most retarded comparison ever. Knock downs with untrained pilots isn't a fair comparison. Its like people saying T-72 sucks because Iraqi army was shit and had knock down T-72's.[/QUOTE] That includes all operators of the F-15 in all variants. Half of the Air to Air kills are Israel alone.
[QUOTE=GunFox;38572782]That includes all operators of the F-15 in all variants. Half of the Air to Air kills are Israel alone.[/QUOTE] Well yeah, IAF are one of the best trained air forces on Earth. Its crazy how good they've done in pretty much every war they were involved in. I'm just saying you can't take away Mig-29's pride just because they were flown by untrained pilots, outnumbered with export craft. Plus probably not very good military running them in the first place. Iraq couldn't even use their radars because they didn't have spare parts, so I heard. Most of them weren't even Mig-29's to start with.
[QUOTE=laserguided;38572817]Well yeah, IAF are one of the best trained air forces on Earth. Its crazy how good they've done in pretty much every war they were involved in. I'm just saying you can't take away Mig-29's pride just because they were flown by untrained pilots, outnumbered with export craft. Plus probably not very good military running them in the first place. Iraq couldn't even use their radars because they didn't have spare parts, so I heard.[/QUOTE] The Mig-29 was trounced in every theater by every operator of the F-15 in every armament configuration despite the Mig-29 entering service almost a decade after the F-15 and being [I]designed to defeat the F-15[/I]. The '29 has had thirty years to shoot down ONE F-15 and has failed to do so.
[QUOTE=GunFox;38572836]The Mig-29 was trounced in every theater by every operator of the F-15 in every armament configuration despite the Mig-29 entering service almost a decade after the F-15 and being [I]designed to defeat the F-15[/I].[/QUOTE] Whats your point? How many of those Mig-29's were flown by well organized, well equipped, well maintained and upgraded armies? You don't get the point do you, its a unfair comparison. Unless you're trying to say it isn't/just reiterating what you said before.
[QUOTE=laserguided;38572841]Whats your point? How many of those Mig-29's were flown by well organized, well equipped, well maintained and upgraded armies?[/QUOTE] Iraq during the first Gulf War for starters. The aircraft had only recently been sold to Iraq at that point.
[QUOTE=GunFox;38572883]Iraq during the first Gulf War for starters. The aircraft had only recently been sold to Iraq at that point.[/QUOTE] As export models, and how exactly were they a well trained army? They were out gunned, out numbered and pretty much out-everything'd in the gulf war. The answer to my question was NONE. Your argument, has no point at all. Unless you're trying to say Mig-29E with Arab pilot is inferior to up to date F-15 with USAF in the cockpit. Here is a good read on the Mig-29's capabilities compared to the F-15C based on Germany's joint exercises with USAF in 93ish. Its cited. [url]http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/airdef/mig-29.htm[/url]
I get your point laserguided. I think you may be missing it gunfox. one plane has been well maintained and been staffed by very well trained pilots. The Mig has never had that same experience. Even when well maintained, it's not well piloted.
[QUOTE=laserguided;38572898]As export models, and how exactly were they a well trained army? They were out gunned, out numbered and pretty much out-everything'd in the gulf war. The answer to my question was NONE. Your argument, has no point at all. Unless you're trying to say Mig-29E with Arab pilot is inferior to up to date F-15 with USAF in the cockpit.[/QUOTE] Or maybe the Mig-29 is a bargain bin fighter used only by nations that can't afford better ones: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mikoyan_MiG-29_operators#Operators[/url] The list doesn't exactly instill confidence. [editline]24th November 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=laserguided;38572898] Here is a good read on the Mig-29's capabilities compared to the F-15C based on Germany's joint exercises with USAF in 93ish. Its cited. [url]http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/airdef/mig-29.htm[/url][/QUOTE] The article freely admits that, at range, the American F-15C has the advantage. How many times do we have to have the discussion about how American air supremacy aircraft work? You are almost universally dead long before you reach dogfight range. Frankly you are probably dead long before you reach visual range.
[QUOTE=GunFox;38572925]Or maybe the Mig-29 is a bargain bin fighter used only by nations that can't afford better ones: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mikoyan_MiG-29_operators#Operators[/url] The list doesn't exactly instill confidence.[/QUOTE] The list contains post-soviet countries, who historically had Mig-29's before the collaspe. Everyone else took loans from Russia to buy them, alot of them had their loans written off. [editline]24th November 2012[/editline] I'm not even going to bother, your argument is just beyond missing everything. You can't accept that anything is capable of being just as good or surpassing US anything and you'll use whatever bullshit argument you can conjure up against it whilst ignoring everything I've said. Besides, Mig-29 is supposed to be fighting the F-16 as a frontline fighter. The Su-27 is the F-15's direct inequivalent in class.
[QUOTE=GunFox;38572883]Iraq during the first Gulf War for starters. The aircraft had only recently been sold to Iraq at that point.[/QUOTE] Everything that was sold to Iraq was export version crap I'd say an actual RUSSIAN 29 flown by a RUSSIAN pilot could have a fair fight with one. The Isreali argument counts because the IAF is basically very well trained, the Iraqi army only had experience with shooting down Iranian jets, when the Americans went in they found themselves grossly underteched and underpowered
Hey canada buy Gripen! My code may or may not be flying in that plane... wait... maybe don't buy it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.