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.

 

Top 6 War Technology

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Airforce

1. USA (F-22, B-2 nuff said)

2. Russia

While I agree with this standing I don't think it's an easy take for the U.S. as many of the planes that has a Russian comtemporary the Russian one does more while costing less. Frogfoot vs. A-10, Su-27 vs. F-15, Mig-29 vs. F-16 and in helicopters the Russians are the ones who are a generation ahead Ka-52 vs. Longbow still has that "0.5" gap in capability. Those that Russia cannot compete with, B-2 and F-22 are both examples of extremely expensive aircraft which in full scale war does become a problem, the F-22 is worth the price though, the B-2..... not so much.
What I'd be curious to know is where Russian pilot training is right now and how far(or not) it has come since the collapse. If they exchange notes on training with India while selling them planes and offering technical support, it may help explain how they've come so far and prove a rude suprise for the U.S. should they do an exersize.
As for the Harrier as far as I know there's only the U.K. and "U.S." versions with little to no difference between them, they would no doubt update the plane for newer missiles as they came along.



RAB

posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
Can you give me a site with information on the 'Super Harrier', I've never found information on an upgraded version of the Harrier Jump Jet, being used by anyone before.

The Super Harrier is the standard GR9 used by the RAF and Royal Navy!

n the 28th February 2002, the Armed Forces Minster Adam Ingram announced that the Joint Harrier Force will become an all ground attack harrier force upgrading the Royal Air Force GR7s to GR9s and retiring the Royal Navy FA2s. This is to ‘ensure a credible expeditionary offensive capability is maintained until the aircraft leaves service. Supporting this decision the Ministry of Defence said:


"These days we don't fight the kind of wars where our ships need defending from enemy warplanes far out at sea. Aircraft Carriers are now mostly supporting shore operations by flying strike missions and it makes far better sense to spend our money on Harriers which can do that best. If necessary, we can rely on coalition forces to provide the outer air defence for surface ships."

www.royal-navy.mod.uk...

www.raf.mod.uk...



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Thank you, Rab.

Both those links made an interesting read, didn't know much about the Harrier before now.


RAB

posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
Thank you, Rab.

Both those links made an interesting read, didn't know much about the Harrier before now.


Your welcome I love the GR9, but one thing that allways mkes me wonder is the fact that the UK MOD never states range of there gear.

If you check this link out:

www.raf.mod.uk...

The storm shadow is a "long" range missile that only flys 250km? As I say interesting:-)



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
History has proven time and again, war/conflicts always comes down to a grunt with a rifle. Technology doesn't mean squat. A fighter jock can shoot down all the planes in the sky, but means nothing if there is an enemy soldier pointing a rifle at him when the gets out of the cockpit.

So the real question is: Which country has the best grunts. I'd have to put the US and UK at the top. There is NOTHING on this planer more deadly than 19 year old with an M-16 or SA-80.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   
As General Forrest said, "Tactics is getting there the firstest with the mostest." Does anyone have a source we could use to check out logistics capabilities? I think that's a lot more important than we give it credit for. Even a fairly weak nation can beat you if you can't get into the fight fast enough.

Then in terms of troop training I think an obvious contender was completely ignored (and there may be others). I've always been told that ROK Marines (South Korean) were exceptionally hard. Even their basic training is 4 times longer than USMC.

Another thing: A lot of America's stuff isn't 100% indigenous. We get the cannons for tanks and artillery from Rhinemetal and somebody over in Britain is making our Chobham armor. As mentioned earlier, FN is making many of our machine guns. On a more comical note, China is making many of our uniform articles, and not only would it be embarrassing to fight naked, but you could be executed if captured out of uniform.

Last but not least: It's going way too far to say that technology doesn't matter. The grunt with the rifle will never get to the airbase and never get to shoot the fighter jock if airpower destroys most of his units fuel and supply transport as they advance, allowing tanks to ride right over him en route to the enemy airbase, where the tanks will shoot the enemy fighter jock when he gets out of his plane.
It's called combined arms. People are equally indispensable, but technology is very very important.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by prelude
Army
1 US/Russia
3 Israel
4 UK
5 France
6 China/ India

The current french army is more capable than the current german army?
Why is russia above the US in air tech? THey have no stealth. They have no shuttle. They have no real spy planes no? Nor VSTOL and the like no?



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by prelude
Well a lot has been discussed about how many aircraft, military men, weapons etc a country has ...but lets forget about Quantity and think about quality and tell me which countries according to you has the best INDIGENOUS war technology

For me here lies the list
Air force
1 Russia
2 USA
3 UK
4 France
5 China
Does any other country has its own COMPETENT indigenous aircraft?

Navy
1 UK
2 US
3 Russia
4 France
5 China
6 India

Army
1 US/Russia
3 Israel
4 UK
5 France
6 China/ India

Missile
1 US/Russia
3 France
4 UK
5 Israel
6 China

Space force
1 US
2 Russia

Overall
1 USA
2 Russia
3 UK
4 France
5 Israel
6 China

Once again let me remind the criterion here is INDIGENOUS QUALITY and NOT quantity
also post any other broad Criterion(like army ,airforce, navy, missile) by which you would like to grade war technology....



[edit on 2-2-2005 by prelude]


Well you are from Russia, so I can see why you think Russia is #1 when it comes to Air Force. But why do you think the UK is #1 when it comes to Navy?



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 09:35 AM
link   
What about switzerland??
Although we never were in any war the swiss army is on a relatively high standard. The training is very good. Our radio communication system is one of the safest in the world. Not to forget our lovely rifle the sig550 (stgw90) which is the best standard military rifle that exists at the moment.

Here the rifle

here the sig551 and sig552 used by special forces




posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Russian Air force is No 1

Conventionally Russian(Soviet) aircrafts have fetched more grades than their US counterparts by most of the experts

most experts have rated Mig 29 over F16

Russians have Su 35 Su37 and Su 55 as an answer to F22
I personally think if u compare the F22 with Russian counterparts F22 succeeds only in stealth property where as in most of the other areas Russian toys have upper hand
now if you speak about stealth we have our Mig MFI underdevelopment ...which will be a generation ahead

No American aircraft can do the Pugachev's cobra

when we come to R n D
"Russia simultaneously develops six new generation fighter aircraft. This means that MAPO MIG and ANTK Sukhoi proceed with more development programmes than Europe (Rafale, Eurofighter and Gripen) and US (F-22 and JSF) together." all these in spite of the so called "lack of Funds"
some links :
aeroweb.lucia.it...
aeroweb.lucia.it...&Falcon.html

India considers buying F16s and placing them in place of her aging Mig 21s(that itself is a shame for F16s)
with Su 30 MKIs being their main fighters

British Navy
as this rank is about the QUALITY of Indigenous technology we are not considering about the Quantity (no one comes near to US as far as quantity is concerned)....to me UK technology seems to have more sense of the term INDIGENOUS than the US...which(i mean US) to me appears more an assembler of technology than being developer ...more over how can we call the Technology to be US indigenous when most of its researchers are hired Indian ,Chinese and Russian scientists?
well as u can understand that it is completely my own analysis and i cant provide u a link to support my point ....It just appears to me such........... please explain me why you think that I m wrong (if u do)

this makes me put UK ahead

Technology doesn’t play vital Role in War
my advise to such people who think like this ............PLEASE READ A BIT OF HISTORY


[edit on 19-3-2005 by prelude]



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by prelude
Russian Air force is No 1

Conventionally Russian(Soviet) aircrafts have fetched more grades than their US counterparts by most of the experts

most experts have rated Mig 29 over F16

Russians have Su 35 Su37 and Su 55 as an answer to F22
I personally think if u compare the F22 with Russian counterparts F22 succeeds only in stealth property where as in most of the other areas Russian toys have upper hand
now if you speak about stealth we have our Mig MFI underdevelopment ...which will be a generation ahead

No American aircraft can do the Pugachev's cobra

when we come to R n D
"Russia simultaneously develops six new generation fighter aircraft. This means that MAPO MIG and ANTK Sukhoi proceed with more development programmes than Europe (Rafale, Eurofighter and Gripen) and US (F-22 and JSF) together." all these in spite of the so called "lack of Funds"
some links :
aeroweb.lucia.it...
aeroweb.lucia.it...&Falcon.html

India considers buying F16s and placing them in place of her aging Mig 21s(that itself is a shame for F16s)
with Su 30 MKIs being their main fighters

British Navy
as this rank is about the QUALITY of Indigenous technology we are not considering about the Quantity (no one comes near to US as far as quantity is concerned)....to me UK technology seems to have more sense of the term INDIGENOUS than the US...which(i mean US) to me appears more an assembler of technology than being developer ...more over how can we call the Technology to be US indigenous when most of its researchers are hired Indian ,Chinese and Russian scientists?
well as u can understand that it is completely my own analysis and i cant provide u a link to support my point ....It just appears to me such........... please explain me why you think that I m wrong (if u do)

this makes me put UK ahead

Technology doesn’t play vital Role in War
my advise to such people who think like this ............PLEASE READ A BIT OF HISTORY


[edit on 19-3-2005 by prelude]


Yeah the Mig-29 is better then the F-16.... uh no let me ask you this how well did the Mig-29 stand up to the F-14 during Gulf war,"which Iraqi pilots were Trained by russian Pilots so that should tell you something" . #1? oh thats right it didnt stand up at all it sucked against the F-14 which the F-14 is almost 20 yrs older then the F-16 and the F-14 has almost three times the Radar range of the Mig29 and the mig29 came out 10 - 13 yrs after the F-14 did and the F-14 is old The US air superiority fighter F-15 has a a unbeaten record i dont know what the mig29 numbers are but i know they hold nothing to the F-15, and yes i know your going to say well you can have the best plane but its the pilot, well that true to a sense. Or your going to say well the mig can do a Tail slide, woopty freakin dooo If i see a mig on my radar and im in F-14 i want him to do a tail slide cuz he will loose to much energy and momentum to get away from my Aim 54 pheonix missile im going to shoot him down with.

Take a look in the in the Aircraft Projects forum in there is a Topic on the F22 take a minute and look at the Video The raptor can do the Cobra manuever and, in case you have never been to United States Of America Air Force Show..... The F-15 and F-16 can do this manuever as well.

And true The Su-35 ans Su-37 and Su-55 are the Russians answers to the F-22 But those plane havent been mass produced to be effective enough,

the US has over 480 Tomcats in its navy and over 1100 F-15 in its airforce,one thing we all need to realize is the Cold war is over Russian Pilots Dont have the Training to keep up with US pilots, and the Su-37 Doesnt even have the Guidance systems that our F-18 have and they dont even come close to having the weapons system that the F-18 super hornet has

Manueverability is good to have But why focus on stupid manuevers such as the Cobra

UK Airplane And tech better then US tech??? Yeah thats why UK Buys US Planes Until They recently Had a joint Developement to build the Eurofighter Which is a pretty awesome Aircraft if you ask me " i would like to see a Russian Mig take down a eurofighter" anyways back to the Conversation The US has Always had the Best Airforce in the World Thats why Countries With $$$$$$ want US Aircraft and US pilots to show them how to use it Because US is the Best, if they are poor countries and Cant Afford Top of the line Technology to Purchase 1 F-15 then they have to settle for 5 MIG-29s with not as good Weapons and Guidance systems, what can i say you get what you pay for.

And its funny how in Iraq after this 2nd time the US stuck there nose where it shouldnt be, troops are finding Russian su-37 burried under the ground which is where they were going to end up if they went up against an F-15

There is alot of Pride in the American Airforce US has Quality Aircraft And lots of em with lots of well trained pilots

And you might want to look up some Facts and Compare How many Hours of maintenance is required per hour of flight on the mig29 AND the Su-37 and compare them to the F-16 and F-15 then you will see who really has the QUALITY in there aircraft.

But as far as im concernd The Russian still make one badass attack heli

[edit on 19-3-2005 by zakattack]



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 11:09 PM
link   
And "most Expert Rated Mig-29 over F-16"????????????????????????

What experts? Who? Where are they? Have they ever flown F-16 then got inside Mig29 and said "yep this ones better"

If you ever read the International Military Aircraft Magazine "I wish i had a Scanner to scan in the artical and show you" But after the fall of the USSR and after the tension started to settle down between US and Russia, US and Russian Pilots actually Traded aircraft for part of a day The US flew pilots Flew the Mig29 and the Russian pilots flew the F-15 when all said and done the Russian pilots felt there was no way the mig29 could out do a F-15 in a dog fight with the LANTERN radar and Guidance system the F-15 has, However the US pilots did say the Mig29 Resonded to stalls and performed the Tail slide and cobra with ease but lacked in the radar and weapons system here are some more facts for you F-15 went into service in 1975 while the MIG-29 Didnt go into the Russian Airforce till mid 1980s

That just goes to show that the russians had 10 yrs or more to come up with a plane to outdo US aircraft which didnt happen, True Russia has advanced But so has the US

And here is somethign else i found Interesting while looking for info on stealth Technology, i didnt know this But Did anyone know that the Guy who had the Stealth Idea was Actually Russian From Sukhoi, he wanted to use this tech on russian planes but USSR felt that it was a bogus idea and that it would never work, so after the Fall of the USSR The US offered Some deal and long story short but that how we got the Stealth Tech

I wonder how they feel now



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Technology doesn’t play vital Role in War
my advise to such people who think like this ............PLEASE READ A BIT OF HISTORY


Technology is the be all and end all, and will save they day, and will win every future war...


My advice to people who think like this... PLEASE WATCH THE NEWS!!

Look at the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sure technology (GPS, JDAMS, etc.) has helped a great deal. No arguments there. But it still comes down to a grunt, with a rifle and 100lbs pack on his back. Think back to those pictures of the 101st airborne humping through the mountains of Afghanistan. It was just pure grit and soldier work, no fancy electronic gizmos (GPS maybe), no fancy fighter jets. Look at whats going on in Iraq right now. Again technology has helped, but it still comes down to grunts, on the ground with an M-16 and the desire and dedication to fight and win.

Even go back as far as Vietnam. The US was light years ahead in terms of technology, but we got our butts kicked by a force that had the training and the will to fight.

Technology is great, but I feel our dependence on technology will be our undoing. NOTHING will ever replace the basic instrument of war: A soldier, with a rifle.





[edit on 22-3-2005 by KyleChemist]



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by zakattack

If you ever read the International Military Aircraft Magazine "I wish i had a Scanner to scan in the artical and show you" But after the fall of the USSR and after the tension started to settle down between US and Russia, US and Russian Pilots actually Traded aircraft for part of a day The US flew pilots Flew the Mig29 and the Russian pilots flew the F-15 when all said and done the Russian pilots felt there was no way the mig29 could out do a F-15 in a dog fight with the LANTERN radar and Guidance system the F-15 has, However the US pilots did say the Mig29 Resonded to stalls and performed the Tail slide and cobra with ease but lacked in the radar and weapons system here are some more facts for you F-15 went into service in 1975 while the MIG-29 Didnt go into the Russian Airforce till mid 1980s


Only aircraft which have thrust vectoring technology can perform the Cobra - the MIG-29 doesn't have thrust vectoring, nor the F-16 or F-15.



And here is somethign else i found Interesting while looking for info on stealth Technology, i didnt know this But Did anyone know that the Guy who had the Stealth Idea was Actually Russian From Sukhoi, he wanted to use this tech on russian planes but USSR felt that it was a bogus idea and that it would never work, so after the Fall of the USSR The US offered Some deal and long story short but that how we got the Stealth Tech


American stealth technology was developed by Americans. The F-117 was being developed from the late 70's onwards, there was absolutely no Russian influence. If you think about what you just said it doesn't make any sense - the stealth fighter and bomber were in development long before this Russian supposedly gave the technology to the US after the fall of the USSR.



[edit on 22-3-2005 by rogue1]



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 11:25 AM
link   


And here is somethign else i found Interesting while looking for info on stealth Technology, i didnt know this But Did anyone know that the Guy who had the Stealth Idea was Actually Russian From Sukhoi, he wanted to use this tech on russian planes but USSR felt that it was a bogus idea and that it would never work, so after the Fall of the USSR The US offered Some deal and long story short but that how we got the Stealth Tech



I think you have misunderstood. It is true that the origins of US stealth are russian in that the scientific research into predicting the reflection of radar from surfaces was done by a russian. It was considered so unimportant that the russians cleared it to be published in a scientific technical paper. It was this paper that was seized upon by the tecchies at Lockheed to use in the software used for the initial stealth development. There was no direct russian influence and they certainly didnt give them the tech after the cold war collapsed.

[edit on 22-3-2005 by paperplane_uk]



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk


And here is somethign else i found Interesting while looking for info on stealth Technology, i didnt know this But Did anyone know that the Guy who had the Stealth Idea was Actually Russian From Sukhoi, he wanted to use this tech on russian planes but USSR felt that it was a bogus idea and that it would never work, so after the Fall of the USSR The US offered Some deal and long story short but that how we got the Stealth Tech



I think you have misunderstood. It is true that the origins of US stealth are russian in that the scientific research into predicting the reflection of radar from surfaces was done by a russian. It was considered so unimportant that the russians cleared it to be published in a scientific technical paper. It was this paper that was seized upon by the tecchies at Lockheed to use in the software used for the initial stealth development. There was no direct russian influence and they certainly didnt give them the tech after the cold war collapsed.

[edit on 22-3-2005 by paperplane_uk]


after a little more research i stand corrected i did not fully understand, but im pretty sure that i read somewhere that one of the Aircraft designer dudes left Sukhoi or some other Russian Plane developer and is now working for Lockheed



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join