It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Best of the Best....Air superiority Fighters

page: 18
2
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:08 PM
link   
You gotta be kidding me. Saying that a 98 Mercedes is better than an 06 Ford is like saying that the F-15 is better than the B-52. If you're gonna compare ANYTHING let's at least compare SIMILAR things here.
And don't give me the "They're both cars" bit. You're comparing a luxury car (IE VIP airplane) with a FUNCTIONAL car (IE fighter). There's nothing similar in there except they both have engines and four wheels.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by Zaphod58]




posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
You gotta be kidding me. Saying that a 98 Mercedes is better than an 06 Ford is like saying that the F-15 is better than the B-52. If you're gonna compare ANYTHING let's at least compare SIMILAR things here.
And don't give me the "They're both cars" bit. You're comparing a luxury car (IE VIP airplane) with a FUNCTIONAL car (IE fighter). There's nothing similar in there except they both have engines and four wheels.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by Zaphod58]



OK, A 1998 C-230 Kompressor (lowest class mercedes) to the FORD 2006 Fusion.

no way is the C-230 a luxurious car . I own both C-230 kompressor super charged and an E-300 turbo diesel. I understood id had said S-500 than u came out yellin about Luxury. But of course u wouldnt know would u????
HAHAHAHAHa

LOL wouldnt call a FORD FUSION a Fighter... more like a single engine cesna.

[edit on 11-6-2006 by GhosTBR55]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Ah, and there it is. Go ahead and keep the personal attacks coming.

Mercedes has a reputation for luxury cars. So what if THAT MODEL isn't. You're still comparing apples and oranges.

The F-15 is old, and there are lots of new planes out there that can and have beaten them. The SU-30 beat them, a Typhoon beat two F-15Es over England, etc.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Ah, and there it is. Go ahead and keep the personal attacks coming.

Mercedes has a reputation for luxury cars. So what if THAT MODEL isn't. You're still comparing apples and oranges.

The F-15 is old, and there are lots of new planes out there that can and have beaten them. The SU-30 beat them, a Typhoon beat two F-15Es over England, etc.



Post the website and ill agree because from what i know that F-15 has never been downed by another airplane EVER.


jra

posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:38 PM
link   
The Su-27 was in compitition with the F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, and F/A-18 Hornet and not just the F-14 alone. Or so says wikipedia.

The modernized Su-27, known as the Su-30 is also in direct competition with the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, F-15E Strike Eagle and the EF-2000 Typhoon. There are many variants of the Su-30. The best being the Su-30MKI I believe. It's radar (the N011M) has a scanning range of 350km, a maximum 200km tracking range and 60km in the rear. It can also equip R-77 missiles.


I dont belieave the F-15c and the SU-27 and MIG-29 are on the same page.


It all depends on which versions you are comparing. There are many versions of the Su-27/30 as well as the MiG-29. The latest being, although not into full production yet, is the MiG-29OTV (and will be known as the MiG-35). It has thrust vectoring, fly-by-wire, an increased range of 1,329 miles, and a bunch of system upgrades as well.


-AND omg WHERE the HELL did i say spped has to do with MANU??? i SAID the f-15 doesnt sacrfice it speed for MANUVerin.

Do u know how to read???


With writing like yours, you sure make it a challenge to comprehend what you are trying to say. Take the time to proof read and spellcheck. I'd also stop the ALL-CAPS crap and the over amount of exclamation points. It makes your posts look like they've been writen by a 13 year old.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The F-15 is old, and there are lots of new planes out there that can and have beaten them. The SU-30 beat them...


Umm... Zap, those Su-30 "beatings" that took place were not done under realistic conditions nor did they beat the F-15C that I’m referring to. Taking an early version of the F-15C, limiting its capabilities then placing it against the latest version of the Flanker series and claiming the F-15 sucks because it performed badly under those conditions is simply ridicules. As for the Typhoon, no argument here, even though they were F-15E’s the Typhoon IMO is overall better than the F-15 in the A2A role.

----------
jra, where did you get those figures from? They seem a little high to me.


[edit on 11-6-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Westpoint, whether the conditions were real or not, that doesn't change the fact that the USAF pilots were very impressed with the SU-30, or that they were beaten. And here's an interesting new tactic that Boeing and the USAF have done in simulators that would give an SU-30 pilot a perfect shot at an F-15 and almost guarnatee a shoot down. They can become "invisible" to the pulse doppler on the F-15, and get behind them and frame them against the sky with nothing to distract an IR missile and nail them from behind.


It also doesn't change the fact that the F-16s in Cope India 05 got their clocks cleaned by the Indian pilots. They were much less handicapped (still handicapped but not as bad as in 04), and they got nailed.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Zap, I’m not saying that the Su-30 is not an impressive aircraft, I’m mealy saying that it has yet to face an upgraded F-15 Eagle using it systems to their full capability. The non AESA F-15’s are indeed vulnerable and less capable in the A2A role than some would have you believe but the same cannot be said for the upgraded Eagles.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Source

www.csmonitor.com...

-America didnt truly lose anything since the teams were mixed with US and Indian particpants.

-But from what they say INDIA won, but i dont see any descriptive encounters. I wanna know how they won, what were the conditions and distinct encounters.

-Quote "Yet, while the Indian Air Force designed the exercises to India's advantage - forcing pilots to fight "within visual range" rather than using America's highly advanced "beyond visual range" sensing equipment - both observers and participants admit that Indian aircraft and personnel performed much better than expected."

-so im not going to say they got their clocks cleaned.

-I truly dont no what the EXCERISES consist of, BUT if i were to put the INDIANS SU-30 MKI against MSIP F-15C with 8 AIM-120D and the AESA in a ALL out AIR DOMINACE WAR id put my money on the AMERICANS. (only if it were F-15 fighting).

-But i think the Beyond Visual Range of the F-16 couldve blown the INDIANS out of their pants.

-These fights were more of a DOGFIGHT where i think the SU-30MKI (since been upgraded numerous times) had the advantage.

- Every country has Elite Fighter piliots, its just that AMERICA has more. soooo put 50 USA pilots against 50 Indian/Russia/English/Canadian or W/E u choose and USA will win.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 10:42 PM
link   
The F-15 is a great plane. With the upgrades it will be even better, but to say that its better than the Berkut or the Typhoon is pretty bad. Yeah it will do some damage, but the A2A capabilities of newer planes is amazing compared to the F-15C. The only way an F-15 could truely stand up to the newer ones is in the upgraded F-15S. New stealth, canards, thrust vectoring, that thing is truely a beast.

My list:
1. F-22
2. SU-30MKI
3. Typhoon
4. Rafale
5. F-35(could be higher but no one really knows a2a capabilities yet)



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:05 AM
link   
Some of you might consider this off-topic but I go to say this anyway.
First I thought this Ghost guy was a kid (8-10 years old). Then he wrote he has 2 Benzes, meaning he's at least 16 and has a driver's license.
Now the USA should fear no threat from Russia, India, China, aliens etc.
What the USA should fear is the increasing ignorance of ot's citizens. I mean a grown up man thinking and arguing like this. If there are more like him in the USA, this is the real thret to USA national security.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pazo
Some of you might consider this off-topic but I go to say this anyway.
First I thought this Ghost guy was a kid (8-10 years old). Then he wrote he has 2 Benzes, meaning he's at least 16 and has a driver's license.
Now the USA should fear no threat from Russia, India, China, aliens etc.
What the USA should fear is the increasing ignorance of ot's citizens. I mean a grown up man thinking and arguing like this. If there are more like him in the USA, this is the real thret to USA national security.


Pazo i think the problem is people like you. Always fearing other peoples technological advances. Its people like YOU that force us to make 2.2 billion dollar Bombers and almost 400 million dollar SUPERFIGHTERS. When did we lose the passion of truly fighting war? Where your heart and skills were the main gun? I rather the USA make a new f-15. We should add all of our break throughs in avionics into a new fighter that would cost less (than a F22) and perform better than the old F-15 and new Typhoon.

What do u think the RUSSIANS do? I mean who are the EUROPEANS to have something as good as us? or the Russians? Did these countries not face the biggest lose in money and casualities in all previous world wars and yet they have the Typhoon and the SU-47.

Ive seen USA make a prototype for every single damm design for every plane possible, but yet other countries are the ones mastering it. Look at every foreign plane and ull see a copy of our X planes with THEIR twists. How come we make these X planes and make no NEW super fighters from there? Why has STEALTH become our main objective? is it because we are scared of real fights?

So when we lose STEALTH, than what? Back to the drawing boards.

Now we make UNMANED vehicles, are u kiddin me. A person from a computer fighting a real piliot is no match.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by GhosTBR55]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 06:45 AM
link   
And there we have it folks, I think that tells us all we need to know.


Look at every foreign plane and ull see a copy of our X planes


please point out to me the X planes from which was copied;

BAC Lightning

BAC Canberra

Concorde

Harrier

Caravelle

VC-10

A300

Do 31

Alpha Jet

BAE Hawk

Rafale

Typhoon

Gripen

A400M

An 225

Beriev Be 40

Tu-95

MiG 25

Tu-22


I'll stop now so you can post your own vaguely similar but unrelated prototypes


[edit on 12-6-2006 by waynos]

[edit on 12-6-2006 by waynos]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Nice shot waynos LOL.

I was waiting for the "Everyone copies our stuff" comment to come out, it was bound to happen, this guy does nothing but argue hastily. And out of all his posts, I've only seen one source from what I've READ, he could have posted sources earlier on, but not from what I've seen.

Westpoint, to go against your eariler post, the reason I included the Su-37 was because the Su-35(basically an Su-37 with no thrust vectoring) has been cancelled and the Su-37 does have the designation "Su" which would suggest production despite it being a Test Demonstrator. Currently it is an active aircraft, but not production wise, who knows, maybe it WILL become production, because the Su-30MKI isn't an Su-37, so maybe some countries might want it imported.

I don't believe who ever this "Ghost" kid is knows any real information about FLIGHT and aerodynamics, what I do know he does know is how to read off of a encyclopedia that's over 10 years old. There's a difference, doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about, because if he did know about aerodynamics, he would know WHY all the aircraft we're talking about is superior to the F-15.

I'll give him a hint, most of them are inherently unstable and require FBW to fly. Especially the Su-47.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhosTBR55
Pazo i think the problem is people like you. Always fearing other peoples technological advances. Its people like YOU that force us to make 2.2 billion dollar Bombers and almost 400 million dollar SUPERFIGHTERS. When did we lose the passion of truly fighting war? Where your heart and skills were the main gun? I rather the USA make a new f-15. We should add all of our break throughs in avionics into a new fighter that would cost less (than a F22) and perform better than the old F-15 and new Typhoon.


so your saying the us shouldnt make expensive new high performance fighters they should constantly upgrade their current fighters? what happens in 2050 when the planes are 78 years old. should they still be upgrading them then. when is the cut off point for when they stop upgrading and start afresh. i agree that upgrading is a nessecery and constant buisness and that it is time the f-15c's should be upgraded but we have to buuild new improved designs as well. i asume that the $2.2 billion you are reffering to is the b-2. if we sill only used the b-52 what would happen if an airstrike is needed on a facility guarded by the latest and most advanced sam's. it would be murder to send a b-52 whereas a b-2 could do it leaving only holes in the ground to show it was there.


I mean who are the EUROPEANS to have something as good as us? or the Russians? Did these countries not face the biggest lose in money and casualities in all previous world wars and yet they have the Typhoon and the SU-47.


you've reffered to the su-47 several times now like its a real aircraft. last time i looked it was only a technology demonstator(if it has become something else please tell me).

why is having a world war fought over our territory 61 years ago a good reason for us not to have good fighters. Remember that the eurofighter was develouped by england, italy, spain and germany whereas the f-22 was developed only by one nation.


So when we lose STEALTH, than what? Back to the drawing boards.

i beg your pardon. the first part of this post was complainign about building the f-22(which doesnt cost $400 million btw) and now you are talking about the us loosing its stealth advantage. are you confused?


Now we make UNMANED vehicles, are u kiddin me. A person from a computer fighting a real piliot is no match.




true a guy at a computer is no mathc for a real plane at the moment but that is because most UAV's at the moment are reconnaissance with maybe a couple of missiles attached such as the predator. how ever in the future ucavs will offer significant benifits such as being able to pull 20g's instead of only 10. they will be smaller and therefore stealthier, they will be far cheaper and simpler due to the removal of pilot support and interface systems. maybe most importantly they wont have any pilots aboard and so will be able to be sent on suicide missions without killing a human. if/when uavs control themselves they will offer even more benifits such as being able to think and therefore manouver quicker than a human.

justin



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Justin, the changing of the S-37 designation to Su-47 suggest that it is now production.

Whether or not it is being mass produced is a totally different story, but as of recently Su-47 is indeed a production aircraft.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Shatter, Sukhoi changed the designation of the S-37 to the Su-47 in order to promote its aircraft to the Russian AF and to international buyers, this was done back in 2002. Sukhoi may be promoting it as production ready aircraft but its been fours years and it has still to be built as such. Most likely it never will, it will probably continue to remain a largely tech demonstrator. IMO the Su-47 shouldn't be considered for this discussion.

And on a side note, the Su-35 series has effectively stopped in terms of production due to several factors, currently only about a dozen prototypes/fighters are in service with the Russian AF. The Su-37 an improvement of the Su-35 has not been ordered by the Russian AF and is not in production, currently there are only 2 Su-37 prototypes.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Well there's only 1, cause from what I understand it, the other one crashed, or was there 3 and 1 crashed?

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Never said we should UPGRADE the F-15, i said we should make a new one from the old one... Obviously i dont want the same airplane for 100 YEARS. Id rather have the Typhoon then F/A-22. It may not be better but its cheaper and highly capable.

I mean seriously who would win?

1000 Typhoons vs 250 F/A 22

"Quantity is its own Quality"

Imagine a F-15 with all the NEW breakthroughs in Avionics = F-? (rather than the F/A-22 Raptor).



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhosTBR55
Never said we should UPGRADE the F-15, i said we should make a new one from the old one... Obviously i dont want the same airplane for 100 YEARS. Id rather have the Typhoon then F/A-22. It may not be better but its cheaper and highly capable.

I mean seriously who would win?

1000 Typhoons vs 250 F/A 22

"Quantity is its own Quality"

Imagine a F-15 with all the NEW breakthroughs in Avionics = F-? (rather than the F/A-22 Raptor).

Those are not realistic numbers, and the odds are tipped heavily towards the Typhoons, there are only so many missiles the F-22 can carry. I doubt there would be those many Typhoons and F-22s put into production.

And, if we're not upgraded the F-15, then how can we make a new from the old? That's upgrading it.

Changing the plane by carrying some features over would make an entirely different plane.

Shattered OUT...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join