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.

 

Mig 29 better than F-16 ?

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:32 PM
link   
btw acepilots web page is an american source, but the point here is that you see an objetive study, even with overclaims (something that sometimes is not described), at 1953 there were 300 migs in the theatre, but at that time the operations were limited (mainly because the korean army advance to the neutral frontier), the analysis is the honcho period



[edit on 25-1-2005 by grunt2]




posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Can't we all just get along?





posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Look the USAF shot down 231 Chinese/Korean MiG 15's BUT, when Soviets got involed the out come was different till the very last day 1106 F-80-84-86's downed by MiG15 and ONLY 335 MiG 15's downed by USAF Wheather it was F-80-84's and 86's THAT'S IT!!



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 07:42 PM
link   

1953 was the golden period for the f86, when soviet activity was limited ,that study with others concluded


Yea, the problem is that Russian pilots were still there in 53. The Sabre activity was very limited before that. They had been limited the entire time. You haven't addressed the 300 Mig-15's lost by Russia. That is a fact, its stated by the Russians themselves.

You can talk about all the studies you want. You haven't provided any proof to back up your claims. That link didn't back up what you've been saying.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   
In your last post who are you refuring that to?



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Disturbed i dont know whats your problem man,



During the time that the "Honchos" (the nickname given by the Sabre pilots to excellent MiG pilots) were in Korea, between April 1951 and January 1952


if the ruskis were in1952-1953??? why not??, support people, training pilots,etc..., but im refering about active combat pilots, the ruskis were worried by the NU advance, whe the war was stabilized, the reds reduced the active intervensions, is most likely that those 300 planes is an missinterpretation about all planes lost in the war like said siberian tiger (mainly because the ruskies gave those planes),or also all the planes lost before the honchos (with korean-chinese),i put an specializated page, you have some info that is under interpretations, the f86, was in fact in the korean sky in december 1950, supporting b29s bombers, but obviusly youre an patriot so well keep dreaming


[edit on 26-1-2005 by grunt2]

[edit on 26-1-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Siberian Tiger was right, in the same web page in the f86 analysis it say



The numbers shown above, and used throughout, are claims, and are almost certainly in excess of the actual number of MiGs downed. During the war the USAF pilots claimed over 800 enemy planes. Postwar research revised that figure downward to 379, which closely matches the admitted Russian losses of 345. The Air Force has not disclosed, perhaps does not fully know, which pilot claims to revise, so the contemporary numbers stand, although, as in all claims for aerial victories, the claims exceed the other side's documented losses.


those 340 planes are all the comunist planes (but i dont know if is included tu-2, La, yaks, maybe not) downed by usaf pilots in the war

[edit on 27-1-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 06:24 PM
link   

the f86, was in fact in the korean sky in december 1950, supporting b29s bombers, but obviusly youre an patriot so well keep dreaming


We had a few dozen in Korea in the beginning.


those 340 planes are all the comunist planes (but i dont know if is included tu-2, La, yaks, maybe not) downed by usaf pilots in the war


It said RUSSIA's losses. Not communist forces. Not Chinese, not Korean. There were well over 500 Mig-15's lost by all the communist forces together. Those 300 are purely Russian.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   
dont be ridiculus, only in honchos period the comunism loses were 70 planes,
, the russian are counting the planes gave to the chinese and korean, what you think that the f86s only downed soviet migs15???
, specially when the aces period was in 1953??
, dont be idiot....



[edit on 29-1-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 01:37 PM
link   


We had a few dozen in Korea in the beginning.

the same to the comunists




During the time that the "Honchos" (the nickname given by the Sabre pilots to excellent MiG pilots) were in Korea, between April 1951 and January 1952, they shot down or damaged beyond repair 158 UN aircraft against 68 losses, an overall 2:1 kill ratio


disturbed, dont be idiot....

[edit on 29-1-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   

the same to the comunists


Mig-15's always outnumbered the number of Sabres in the war. It wasn't until in 53 that Sabres were in full number.


dont be ridiculus, only in honchos period the comunism loses were 70 planes,, the russian are counting the planes gave to the chinese and korean, what you think that the f86s only downed soviet migs15???, specially when the aces period was in 1953??, dont be idiot....


As I already said, over 500 Mig-15's were lost in the entire war by all estimates. American numbers are far higher. Those 300 were all Russian.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 01:58 PM
link   


disturbed, dont be idiot....


Enough of this type of posting. Warnings to follow.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 01:59 PM
link   
another, disturbed.....



As no Chinese archives have been opened up at this time, only USAF claims against Russian air forces have been reviewed. (In other words, the claims against Chinese air forces are counted here, without any challenge.)


you want more????



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Yea...What's the source for that?



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:07 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Look i don't won'a start this shet.
I am sorry , Iam yly sorry.
but i don't like that some seid that russian fight from egipet . and other. I
am realy sorry.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Thanks for giving me a source that disproves some of your earlier statements, like there were only 400 Mig-15's in the conflict:


By early 1951, the battle lines hardened and didn't change too much for the rest of the conflict. In April, MacArthur was sacked. Throughout the summer and early fall of 1951, the outnumbered Sabres (44 at one point) of the 4th FIW continued to seek battle with the 500+ MiGs near the Yalu. Jabara, Becker, and Gibson became the first Sabre aces. Following Col. Thyng's famous message to the Pentagon, the 51st FIW reinforced the beleaguered 4th in December 1951. For the next year and a half, the dual continued, in generally the same fashion. New, improved models of the F-86 appeared: the 'E' in early 1952 and the 'F', with its hard wing, in August. These later Sabres gave the UN pilots an increasing edge over the Communist MiG-15s.


Your claim was false, as well. They weren't saying that Chinese losses were counted within the 345 Russian losses. How would the Russians know exactly what the Chinese losses were?



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Look, some that realy thik that f-16 cooler that mig-29 ?



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   
500 chinese, korean migs, hell even if you give them f15s the kill rate would been negative, at the mid 1951 the russian had delivered 70-75 planes in the theatre



[edit on 29-1-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:22 PM
link   


the 'E' in early 1952 and the 'F', with its hard wing, in August. These later Sabres gave the UN pilots an increasing edge over the Communist MiG-15s.


at early 52, the russians had gone,man the kills made by the f86s were only 345 (confirmed by russian data), not 800, and was very very clear that in the 340 planes are counting chinese-korean machines, if you dont want to accept this, its your problem




top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join