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.

 

China Release New Fighter. The J-10.

page: 15
0
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2003 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
oh on! russian pilots.
run for the hills! you make me laugh.

im not saying of what good that would do but im just saying how russia could get more mig 1.44...




posted on Jul, 20 2003 @ 11:35 PM
link   
I do not think the Mig-35 with cost 35 million. In the long run it will probaly cost alot more than 35 million, if the new fighter comes out at all.



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 12:58 AM
link   
i dont think russia will have enough new migs to make much of a difference



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Excuse me? Russian factories can spit out migs faster than TV spits out advertising.



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by necro99
Excuse me? Russian factories can spit out migs faster than TV spits out advertising.



I think its a matter of available funds necessary to "pump out" those Migs. Is it economically feasiable for those factories to do so? Besides the US, the Russians are becoming the largest exports of weapons and weapon platforms in the world. Lack of "funds" is a main motivator for the Russians doing this? Your selling top-of-the-line military platforms, that are part of your own (Russia) arsenal.....dangerous maybe? Hell, I read an article the other day that the Russians are even selling their "famed" plasma stealth generators and terming it as "bolt on stealth."

regards
seekerof

[Edited on 22-7-2003 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by necro99
Excuse me? Russian factories can spit out migs faster than TV spits out advertising.

without available funds...wut r the factories gonna spit out...cardboard migs?



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bob88
consider awacs[Edited on 11-1-2003 by Bob88]


considered ... forgotten ... gone ... in the case of a Sino US war there would not be a single AWAC's venturing within 450km off the coast of China ... that puts them on their operational fringe.
Do you have any idea what an Ft-2000 is. They are about the size of a petroleum tanker and are designed specifically to take out AWAC's.
And since China has the second most advanced fighter aircraft in service in the world (after India) they would be able to control their own skies. And I'm not talking about the J-10.
On that notion of no carriers ... they have 2 and have already demonstrated them in naval exercises. They are not combat ready but are capable of launching planes.

China is not Iraq ... they are a huge regional power and the US military would not stand a chance in a protracted war in East Asia if they had to fight the Chinese military.

Consider this instead:
US internationally deployable force = 250,000
Chinese regional deployable force = 2,500,000
Chinese reserves for internal defence = 4,000,000

Main battle tank match up
M1A2 vs. T90 series
-Abrams cannot use targetting systems against T90's
-T90's outrange Abrams
-T90's cheaper & more numerable

Carrier Air to Air match up
F14\F18 vs. Su27MKK
-Su27 outranges F14 & F18
-Su27 has longer combat range
-Su27 has better countermeasures & maneouverability
-Su27 nuclear & ground attack capable
-Su27 larger payload

Infantry match up
M16 vs. T86
-T86 has more ammunition
-T86 higher velocity (eg. longer ranged) but lower recoil
-T86 lighter and more reliable
-T86 cheaper

Regional support match up
USA vs. China
-Sth Koreans consider USA greater threat then Nth Korea
-Japan is unable to operate outside its borders
-Taiwan not recognised as a country and in fact inside China
-Russia enjoys good relations with China and poor relations with USA
-Vietnam (hahahahaha)
-India (same as Vietnam)
-North Korea (very little capacity)

In short the USA would be entering a hostile region where their allies would be inneffective. They would be outnumber 10 to 1 and 2 to 1 by troops with better or equal equipment.
And they would be placing their entire carrier fleet in the most dangerous waters in the world. Within range of Chinese artillery capable of destroying up to 30 aircraft carriers (rather then 6).



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by hiiii

Originally posted by necro99
Excuse me? Russian factories can spit out migs faster than TV spits out advertising.

without available funds...wut r the factories gonna spit out...cardboard migs?


In WW2 Russia spat out 55,000 T34's without any funds.
Economic stability is only necessary in peace time. This is because people are much more willing to accept less luxuries as they hear of their country men dying.
What you need is resources and man power ... which Russia has plenty of. Their industrial 'potential' is what made them a super power. The ability to churn out 10x as many tanks as the USA currently field in their military in less then 5 years is not a feat to go unnoticed. And industry has come a long way in 50 years.
And don't forget that Russia still has 20 million reserves eg. trained personnel to throw in new tanks.
economy has little to do with might in large scale warfare.



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 11:34 PM
link   
What kind of half crooked info is that crap Freebie.....
Tell you what.....you believe what you want and I can believe what I want but most of your info is half 'skewed' and diffently incomplete and biased to the point of favoring the Chinese heavily.

I think the Chinese are a diffent adversary, if adversary is the correct wordage, but to quote out incomplete and partial info. in favor of your view is a bit much ain't it?

Your point is what after all? The US ain't squat? The Chinese are the "real" world superpower?
Yeah....ok.....
Post that info on a "real" forum where they live and breath that information and you might be in for a rude awakening......

regards
seekerof



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by freebie

Originally posted by hiiii

Originally posted by necro99
Excuse me? Russian factories can spit out migs faster than TV spits out advertising.

without available funds...wut r the factories gonna spit out...cardboard migs?


In WW2 Russia spat out 55,000 T34's without any funds.
Economic stability is only necessary in peace time. This is because people are much more willing to accept less luxuries as they hear of their country men dying.
What you need is resources and man power ... which Russia has plenty of. Their industrial 'potential' is what made them a super power. The ability to churn out 10x as many tanks as the USA currently field in their military in less then 5 years is not a feat to go unnoticed. And industry has come a long way in 50 years.
And don't forget that Russia still has 20 million reserves eg. trained personnel to throw in new tanks.
economy has little to do with might in large scale warfare.


Yeah.....all hail the mighty and "true" superpowers.....Russia and China!


regards
seekerof



posted on Jul, 22 2003 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by freebie

Originally posted by hiiii

Originally posted by necro99
Excuse me? Russian factories can spit out migs faster than TV spits out advertising.

without available funds...wut r the factories gonna spit out...cardboard migs?


In WW2 Russia spat out 55,000 T34's without any funds.
Economic stability is only necessary in peace time. This is because people are much more willing to accept less luxuries as they hear of their country men dying.
What you need is resources and man power ... which Russia has plenty of. Their industrial 'potential' is what made them a super power. The ability to churn out 10x as many tanks as the USA currently field in their military in less then 5 years is not a feat to go unnoticed. And industry has come a long way in 50 years.
And don't forget that Russia still has 20 million reserves eg. trained personnel to throw in new tanks.
economy has little to do with might in large scale warfare.

in WW2...the Soviets put their entire economy towards military production...and at that time...the country was at war with Germany...which would require a lot more military production. Now...Russia is a democracy that is short of money, low on population, economy is a mess and is not at war.



posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 12:05 AM
link   
I never once called Russia or China super powers. I don't believe they could even mount a noticeable assault on US soil. The USA still has the advantage of being the world's remaining super-power ... able to interfere in the affairs of mid-sized powers and totally exterminate the armed forced of small powers (see Iraq). But ignoring nuclear weapons they are not capable of launching a successful assault on China. This is not just a view I hold but one that you might find George Bushes advisors whispering.

And in regards to Russia ... economically before WW2 the USSR was nothing ... they had been devastated by WW1 and by civil war with the USA, British & Australian backed Tsarist's. They didn't focus their economy (eg. $) into building tanks but rather manpower and machine tools of which they have many more now. Fortunately however they do not have the money to produce TV's, refrigerators and tanks at the same time. Meaning that they have to choose between making their people happy and keeping their people alive.
If they were at war their priorities would change dramatically.



posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by freebie
I never once called Russia or China super powers. I don't believe they could even mount a noticeable assault on US soil. The USA still has the advantage of being the world's remaining super-power ... able to interfere in the affairs of mid-sized powers and totally exterminate the armed forced of small powers (see Iraq). But ignoring nuclear weapons they are not capable of launching a successful assault on China. This is not just a view I hold but one that you might find George Bushes advisors whispering.

And in regards to Russia ... economically before WW2 the USSR was nothing ... they had been devastated by WW1 and by civil war with the USA, British & Australian backed Tsarist's. They didn't focus their economy (eg. $) into building tanks but rather manpower and machine tools of which they have many more now. Fortunately however they do not have the money to produce TV's, refrigerators and tanks at the same time. Meaning that they have to choose between making their people happy and keeping their people alive.
If they were at war their priorities would change dramatically.



Please, Freebie, don't misunderstand what I am implying. I "know" that the Chinese are a power to be reckoned with. They have the technology and what they lack in that, they are making up for. Granted with alot of Russian help. The Russians are not to be dismissed. They are feilding some very viable military platforms...but so is India....so is Europe....etc.

You make some crediable arguments but I don't think they take "everything" into account. I will apologize for the somewhat verbal tones I used. I hope you will accept this. I just think the whole thread was being thrown out of context, as it has been for sometime......
I saw what you posted and I can understand if you felt the need to respond counter to those patriotic "thumpers"....it was all bravado I think anyhoo.

I love some of the stuff I see coming out of Russia and with regards to China....I'm still assimulating info. on them. Bravado is cool and such but when it comes to throwing half factual info around, I have a hard time with it. And, if I have done such, I do sincerely apologize and would correct it or try to back it with links or info. if I could.

Peace Freebie....and good luck with your Ph.D

regards
seekerof

[Edited on 23-7-2003 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 01:22 AM
link   
do u ppl kno if china is turning the ex-varyag aircraft carrier into a PLAN carrier or an amusement park?



posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Main battle tank match up
M1A2 vs. T90 series
-Abrams cannot use targetting systems against T90's
-T90's outrange Abrams
-T90's cheaper & more numerable


Main battle tank match up
M1A2 vs. T90 series
-Abrams cannot use targetting systems against T90's
-T90's outrange Abrams
-T90's cheaper & more numerable
-T90 has Active and passive Antimissile Systems
-T90 has great HEAT protection



posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 01:34 PM
link   
t80 also kicks some ass



posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by necro99

Main battle tank match up
M1A2 vs. T90 series
-Abrams cannot use targetting systems against T90's
-T90's outrange Abrams
-T90's cheaper & more numerable


Main battle tank match up
M1A2 vs. T90 series
-Abrams cannot use targetting systems against T90's
-T90's outrange Abrams
-T90's cheaper & more numerable
-T90 has Active and passive Antimissile Systems
-T90 has great HEAT protection


So in short no single Abrams can ever hope to take out a T90 even with a vastly superior crew simply on the strength of the automatic defence systems the T90 series uses. Unless of course the Abrams gunner manages a periscope shot (and M1 periscopes don't have sights on them ... the tank is entirely reliant on its targetting system).

BTW does anyone have any idea how the IR \ laser blinder works???

and also ... what sort of anti missile protection does the Abrams have??? or rather how many AT-11 shots would it take to disable.



posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Here is an interesting fact about the Adrams. During Gulf War 1 when Iraqi tanks fired tunstand penatration rounds at the M-1 the rounds would stick in the armour like arrows.

Also here is an interestign true story. During the first gulf war, one Adrams tank got stuck in the mud. when the other tanks could not get that tank out they left it, and the crew to wait for a recovery vehicle. Once the other M-1s left the one stuck M-1 was ambushed by three Iraqi tanks. They fired DU and HEAT rounds at the M-1 and they did not penatrate. The M-1 started to fired back and took out two of the tanks with one shot each. The third tank drove behind a dirt derm for protection. It did not help. Teh M-1 useds it heat site to see the tank through the berm and it fired at the tank. The round went through the berm and hit the Iraqi tank taking it out in one shot. After, when the recovery vehicles came they could not get the tank out. So they got a couple M-1s to fires at the tank to disable it so the Iraqis could not get it. When the M-1s fired at the stuck M-1 the rounds did not destroy the M-1 until a lucky shot penertated. The round did not destroy the tank, because of the fire control systems and saftey features in the tank. So after a while the tank was towed out and all that had to be replaced to get the tank running was a new turret. This is just one example why the M-1 is one the best tanks even concieved.

[Edited on 24-7-2003 by jetsetter]



posted on Jul, 24 2003 @ 12:45 AM
link   
Shhhhh, jetsetter.....they are enjoying their game called "illusions of granduer"......

Perhaps it won't be long before they add to that T-90 list that it also comes with a buy one get one free clause and a "bolt-on plasma generator" to boot, eh?!


regards
seekerof



[Edited on 24-7-2003 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 24 2003 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Shhhhh, jetsetter.....they are enjoying their game called "illusions of granduer"......

Perhaps it won't be long before they add to that T-90 list that it also comes with a buy one get one free clause and a "bolt-on plasma generator" to boot, eh?!


regards
seekerof



[Edited on 24-7-2003 by Seekerof]



usa got only 66? m1a2 and russia got 5000 t80!




top topics



 
0
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join