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.

 

U.S. combat aircraft equivalents

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2004 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Today, however, the U.S. Air Force bombers are 200 times superior to the Russian Air Force. For one thing, the Tu-22 and Tu-95s are not even in service any longer. They have Badgers and Backfires, but they have trouble maintaining them. They don't carry the weapons they once used to. They only have a handful of Blackjacks. And they have no stealth bombers.





ah, more BS, this is getting funny, badgers? you confused russia with the chinese, backfires? whats so bad about Tu-22M3?, stealth is overrated crap,
and actually they carry even newer weapons with 4000+ km and new missile is developed with 5000 kmr ange for the bombers,


Number of bombers not listing Su-24 or Tu-22M3 (but russia has more then 100 tu-22m3)

34 Tu-95MS6 (Bear H6)(upgraded strategic missile carriers)

30 Tu-95MS16 (Bear H16)(upgraded strategic missile carriers)

14 Tu-160 (Blackjack) (and building more)

Total more then 78 which can launch more then 1000 strategic nuclear cruise missiles






[Edited on 2-5-2004 by Flanker]




posted on May, 2 2004 @ 12:43 PM
link   
During the cold war Russians needed lot of strategic bombers because of their geographical position. The Us had their bases right on Warsaw pact borders, but Russians were far away form US borders (except Alaska).



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flanker

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Today, however, the U.S. Air Force bombers are 200 times superior to the Russian Air Force. For one thing, the Tu-22 and Tu-95s are not even in service any longer. They have Badgers and Backfires, but they have trouble maintaining them. They don't carry the weapons they once used to. They only have a handful of Blackjacks. And they have no stealth bombers.





ah, more BS, this is getting funny, badgers? you confused russia with the chinese, backfires? whats so bad about Tu-22M3?, stealth is overrated crap,
and actually they carry even newer weapons with 4000+ km and new missile is developed with 5000 kmr ange for the bombers,


Number of bombers not listing Su-24 or Tu-22M3 (but russia has more then 100 tu-22m3)

34 Tu-95MS6 (Bear H6)(upgraded strategic missile carriers)

30 Tu-95MS16 (Bear H16)(upgraded strategic missile carriers)

14 Tu-160 (Blackjack) (and building more)

Total more then 78 which can launch more then 1000 strategic nuclear cruise missiles






[Edited on 2-5-2004 by Flanker]


Stealth is not "overrated crap" stealth is and will be the essential thing ESPECIALLY for the strategic bombers. Current B1 and Tu-22 and Tu-160 are flying coffins. The only one thing that could help them will be some kind of laser defense system capable of shooting down incoming AA , or SA missiles.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow

Originally posted by Flanker

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Today, however, the U.S. Air Force bombers are 200 times superior to the Russian Air Force. For one thing, the Tu-22 and Tu-95s are not even in service any longer. They have Badgers and Backfires, but they have trouble maintaining them. They don't carry the weapons they once used to. They only have a handful of Blackjacks. And they have no stealth bombers.





ah, more BS, this is getting funny, badgers? you confused russia with the chinese, backfires? whats so bad about Tu-22M3?, stealth is overrated crap,
and actually they carry even newer weapons with 4000+ km and new missile is developed with 5000 kmr ange for the bombers,


Number of bombers not listing Su-24 or Tu-22M3 (but russia has more then 100 tu-22m3)

34 Tu-95MS6 (Bear H6)(upgraded strategic missile carriers)

30 Tu-95MS16 (Bear H16)(upgraded strategic missile carriers)

14 Tu-160 (Blackjack) (and building more)

Total more then 78 which can launch more then 1000 strategic nuclear cruise missiles






[Edited on 2-5-2004 by Flanker]


Stealth is not "overrated crap" stealth is and will be the essential thing ESPECIALLY for the strategic bombers. Current B1 and Tu-22 and Tu-160 are flying coffins. The only one thing that could help them will be some kind of laser defense system capable of shooting down incoming AA , or SA missiles.






f117 is a flyingcoffin and so are b2, chinese EWR detected your crappy f117, and also those numbers above dont list navy bombers which can also deliver nuclear weapons, new radars can detect stealth aircraft at long ranges..



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Su-22 probably exceeds f-117's preformance by a wide margin


Stealth doesnt work, triangulate its position with cell phones then kill with SA-1. Or use passive radar. Or use new gen Nebo radar.

[Edited on 17-10-1983 by bisonn]



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flanker
f117 is a flyingcoffin and so are b2, chinese EWR detected your crappy f117, and also those numbers above dont list navy bombers which can also deliver nuclear weapons, new radars can detect stealth aircraft at long ranges..


Of course stelath aircrafts can be shot down. But the stealth is evolving. B2 and F22 are much more advanced than F117. The stealth aircrafts are not invulnerable but in current battlefield they are much more surviveable than non stealth.
P.S. there is a difference between detect and track.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
But the stealth is evolving. B2 and F22 are much more advanced than F117.




radar technology always "evolved" faster, if amers cant detect/track it with their own radars it doesnt mean others cant.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flanker
stealth is overrated crap,

stealth is an essential ingredient in a stealth plane's mission, bu othe factor like tactics, training, and operational awareness come into play that make stealth an unstoppaable force. Radars might be able to makeout an f-117, but it is 30 YEARS OLD!!!! When the F-117 was shot down over bosnia, there was no jamming plane in the area, the route was flown often the same way, and an AAA battery was there. If even one lucky shot hit, the Rcs would spike up so much that a missile could hit it. Look at Operation Iraqi freedom as proof that stealth is still viable and necessary, would the decapitation attempt or Strike and Awe be possible without massivee casualties?



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by roniii259
Look at Operation Iraqi freedom
yeah right

oh wai, you are right!
iraq had advanced AWACS and CNC technology all over the nation along with s300 and many other technologicaly advanced systems to counter Air-superiorety[/sarcasm]


as proof
proof against 3rd world #holes



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by bisonnStealth doesnt work, triangulate its position with cell phones then kill with SA-1. Or use passive radar. Or use new gen Nebo radar.


Oh Saddam would definintely agree with you


The cell phone detection wont be exported outside the US because the Pentagon has set up a program to preven the export of any stealth or tech threatening stealth.
the Lpi radar vaies its frequency randomly ever tenth of a second, so a passive radar would only get a brief pulse that would be sorted out as static. The F-117 doesnt even use an active radar so a passive one wouldnt matter
What is a Nebo radar?



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   
The czechs export passive radar, and the serbs got it. Including cell phone things.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Multi-billion pound stealth bombers could be rendered obsolete by a British invention that uses existing mobile telephone masts to detect and track aircraft that were previously invisible to radar.

Stealth fighters and bombers such as the F117, B1 and B2 played key roles in the Gulf and Kosovan wars as they are almost impossible to detect using conventional radar. However, the ease with which the mobile telephone mast system developed at Roke Manor Research at Romsey in Hampshire can be used to detect the aircraft has greatly concerned the military.




The Roke Manor scientists discovered that telephone calls sent between mobile phone masts detected the precise position of stealth aircraft with great ease.


stealth detection

in five or ten years time, it may be possible to detect stealth craft entirely
from satellites and/or light and mobile surface-based installations, making it very hard indeed for
the forces possessing stealth technology to keep their stealth craft stealthy any more

In other words, it may not be possible, by the year 2005 or thereabouts, or at the latest by the year 2010,
for any military force to take advantage of military stealth technology!!



stealth technology can be entirely nullified by the detecting radar and/
or infrared sensors searching, not for the stealthy craft itself, but for the background behind the
stealthy craft!

This is much like the way one can pinpoint with extreme accuracy the location of the moon
during a solar eclipse, and track its movement with great precision, even though during a solar
eclipse one cant observe the moon itself.

any observed eclipsing of the back-
ground would indicate that a stealth craft must be located in front of that part of the background
which is being eclipsed. Such an eclipsing would show up on the detecting screen or output device
in the shape of a black or blank silhouette of the stealth craft.







THEREFORE, IN CONCLUSION STEALTH IS ONLY USEFUL FOR DETECTION OF BREAST CANCER!

www.uts.edu.au...


According to military sources, a rough version of a similar system might have been used in Serbia to shoot down an American F117 stealth fighter 40 miles west of Belgrade during the Kosovo campaign.

[Edited on 2-5-2004 by Flanker]



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Okay, F-117 is 1st generation stealth, F-22 is 5th generation as i recall. Also, this thing vs the F-117!!!!!!!





Also,


"Stealth


Successfully reflects a radar signature approximately the size of a bumblebee, thereby avoiding detection by the most sophisticated enemy air defense systems


Virtually eliminates emissions of sound, turbulence, and heat that can aid detection


Requires no direct assistance from electronic support aircraft that may be more easily detected


Includes plan form alignment of the wing and tail edges, radar- absorbing sawtoothed surfaces, an engine face that is concealed by a serpentine inlet duct, "stealthy" coating cockpit design to minimize the usually substantial radar return of pilots helmet


Eliminates multiple surface features that could be detected by enemy radar, through internal weapons placement"


F-22 can get bye the "best" S400, think again


[Edited on 2-5-2004 by Laxpla]



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Yes but light, satellite and infared are CLEAR DAY sensors, which is why radar is used because its all weather, and the cellular phone tech only works on the f-117 that was designed to reduce the front rcs and not the b-2 that simply reduces rcs all around to form holes in a protective system. Besides any of the superpower countries that could come up with such a system are not the US's enemy, rogue countries like Iran and N. Korea are the threatening countries and tend to recieve technology after about ten+ years of service cause they threaten their suppliers as well as the US



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   
The only problem with stealth is their cost. To say stealth will dominate U.S. air wars is an ambitious statement.

Other than that, it's highly difficult to detect stealth, unless the pilot makes a mistake.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Stealth itself isnt expensive, but the systems surrounding it are. Sensor placement, radar, engines are all systems that needed to be changed, causing massive price influx because a stelath plane has to reinvent every component of a plane developed in the past 50 years. Initial development is expensive, but once the plane is being produced at large amounts the price dropps dramatically, a fact lost on congress and the F-22. Once the tech is adopted, other programs only need to refine it, and that is the reason that the JSF costs so less than the f-22.



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
It's always fascinating to find equivalents of U.S. aircraft with those of Russia (since Russia dominates RotW aircraft). This is the way I see it, including which fighter is superior:

A-10 Warthog - Su-25BM "Frogfoot" (A-10)
AH-64A "Apache" - Mi-28N "Havoc" (Equal)
B-1B Lancer - Tu-160 "Blackjack" (Tu-160)
F-5E Tiger II - MiG-21 "Fishbed" (MiG-21)
F-14A Tomcat - Su-27K "Flanker-D" (F-14A)
F-15C Eagle - Su-27 "Flanker-B" (Su-27)
F-15E Strike Eagle - Su-34 "Platypus" (F-15E)
F-16C/D/G Fighting Falcon - MiG-29C "Fulcrum-A" (F-16)
F/A-18C Hornet - MiG-29K "Fulcrum-D" (F/A-18C)
F/A-22A Rapier - MiG Object 1.42 (Undecided)

Any thoughts?



In order to make a more compact reply, I will group the comparison of the mentioned aircraft : fighters, attackers, bombers, helicopters


A) the attackers (A-10, Su-25)


1) maximum speed

Su-25 "Frogfoot" 950 km/h
A-10A Thunderbolt II 805 km/h


2) climb rate

Su-25 "Frogfoot" 3480 m/min
A-10A Thunderbolt II 1800 m/min


3) ceiling

A-10A Thunderbolt II 13700 m
Su-25 "Frogfoot" 10000 m


4) engine thrust

Su-25 "Frogfoot" 88.36 kN
A-10A Thunderbolt II 80.64 kN


5A) weapons payload

A-10A Thunderbolt II 7260 kg
Su-25 "Frogfoot" 4400 kg


5B) cannon rounds

A-10A Thunderbolt II 1350 (30 mm)
Su-25 "Frogfoot" 250 (30 mm)


6) maximum range

A-10A Thunderbolt II 4150 km
Su-25 "Frogfoot" 2500 km


7) production

Su-25 "Frogfoot" 1024
A-10 Thuderbolt II 716


B) attack helicopters (AH-64, Mi-28)


1) maximum speed

Mi-28N "Havoc" 324 km/h
AH-64 Apache 295 km/h


2) climb rate

Mi-28N "Havoc" 816 m/min
AH-64 Apache 762 m/min


3) ceiling

AH-64 Apache 6400 m
Mi-28N "Havoc" 5750 m


4) engine power

Mi-28N "Havoc" 3280 kW
AH-64 Apache 3000 kW


5A) weapons (anti-tank missiles)

AH-64 Apache 16
Mi-28 "Havoc" 16


5B) weapons (cannon rounds)

AH-64 Apache 1200 (30 mm)
Mi-28 "Havoc" 300 (30 mm)


6) maximum range

AH-64 Apache 1900 km
Mi-28N "Havoc" 1105 km


7) production

AH-64 Apache 1174
Mi-28 "Havoc" 24


C) bombers (B-1, Tu-160)

1) maximum speed

B-1A Excalibur 2333 km/h
Tu-160 "Blackjack" 2220 km/h
B-1B Lancer 1330 km/h


2) climb rate

Tu-160 "Blackjack" 4200 m/min
B-1B Lancer 3600 m/min


3) ceiling

B-1A Excalibur 18000 m
B-1B Lancer 18000 m
Tu-160 "Blackjack" 16000 m


4) engine thrust

Tu-160 "Blackjack" 980 kN
B-1B Lancer 547.69 kN
B-1A Excalibur 535.44 kN


5) weapons payload

B-1B Lancer 56700 kg
B-1A Excalibur 52050 kg
Tu-160 "Blackjack" 40000 kg


6) maximum range

Tu-160 "Blackjack" 12300 km
B-1B Lancer 11998 km
B-1A Excalibur 9810 km


7) production

B-1B Lancer 100
Tu-160 "Blackjack" 35
B-1A Excalibur 4



D) fighters (F-5, F-14, F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-22, MiG-21, MiG-29, MiG 1.44 MFI, Su-27, Su-33, Su-34)


1) maximum speed

F-15C Eagle 2698 km/h
F-15E Strike Eagle 2698 km/h
F-14D Tomcat 2548 km/h
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 2480 km/h
MiG MFI "Flatpack" 2450 km/h
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 2445 km/h
F-22 Raptor 2410 km/h
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 2300 km/h
F-16C Fighting Falcon 2175 km/h
MiG-21 "Fishbed" 2175 km/h
F/A-18C Hornet 1915 km/h
F/A-18E Super Hornet 1915 km/h
Su-34 "Fullback" 1900 km/h
F-5E Tiger II 1743 km/h


2) climb rate

MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 19825 m/min
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 19500 m/min
Su-27P "Flanker-B" 18312 m/min
F-15C Eagle 17500 m/min
F-15E Strike Eagle 16000 m/min
F-16C Fighting Falcon 15250 m/min
F/A-18E Super Hornet 15000 m/min
F-14D Tomcat 14630 m/min
MiG-21bis "Fishbed-N" 13800 m/min
F/A-18C Hornet 13725 m/min
F-5E Tiger II 10455 m/min



3) ceiling

F-15C Eagle 20000 m
F-22 Raptor 19812 m
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 18500 m
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 18500 m
F-15E Strike Eagle 18200 m
F-16C Fighting Falcon 18000 m
MiG-21bis "Fishbed-N" 17800 m
F-14D Tomcat 17070 m
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 17000 m
MiG MFI "Flatpack" 17000 m
F-5 Tiger II 15790 m
F/A-18C Hornet 15250 m
F/A-18E Super Hornet 15250 m
Su-34 "Fullback" 15000 m


4) engine thrust

MiG MFI "Flatpack" 352 kN
F-22 Raptor 312 kN
F-15C Eagle 258 kN
F-15E Strike Eagle 258 kN
F-14D Tomcat 249.4 kN
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 245.6 kN
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 245.2 kN
Su-34 "Fullback" 245.2 kN
F/A-18E Super Hornet 195.72 kN
MiG-29M "Fulcrum-E" 184.44 kN
MiG-29 "Fulcrum-A" 162.8 kN
F/A-18C Hornet 158.4 kN
F-16E Fighting Falcon 144 kN
F-16I Fighting Falcon 129.6 kN
F-16C Fighting Falcon 127 kN
MiG-21bis "Fishbed-N" 69.62 kN
F-5E Tiger II 44.48 kN


5A) weapons payload

F-15E Strike Eagle 11000 kg
F/A-18E Super Hornet 8050 kg
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 8000 kg
Su-34 "Fullback" 8000 kg
F-16C Fighting Falcon 7700 kg
F-15C Eagle 7300 kg
F/A-18C Hornet 7031 kg
F-14D Tomcat 6600 kg
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 6500 kg
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 3500 kg
F-5E Tiger II 3175 kg
MiG-21 "Fishbed" 1500 kg


5B) cannon rounds

F-15C Eagle 940 (20 mm)
F-15E Strike Eagle 940 (20 mm)
F-14D Tomcat 675 (20 mm)
F/A-18C Hornet 578 (20 mm)
F/A-18E Super Hornet 578 (20 mm)
F-5E Tiger II 560 (20 mm)
F-16C Fighting Falcon 515 (20 mm)
F-22A Raptor 480 (20 mm)
MiG MFI "Flatpack" 250 (30 mm)
MiG-21bis "Fishbed-N" 200 (23 mm)
Su-34 "Fullback" 180 (30 mm)
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 150 (30 mm)
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 150 (30 mm)
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 150 (30 mm)


6) maximum range

F-15C Eagle 5745 km
F-22 Raptor 5000 km
F-16XL Fighting Falcon 4580 km
F-16C Fighting Falcon 4220 km
Su-34 "Fullback" 4000 km
MiG MFI "Flatpack" 4000 km
F-15E Strike Eagle 3900 km
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 3720 km
F-5E Tiger II 3700 km
F/A-18C Hornet 3300 km
F/A-18E Super Hornet 3300 km
F-14D Tomcat 3200 km
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 3000 km
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 2900 km
MiG-21 "Fishbed" 1800 km


7) price

F-22 Raptor 150 mil USD
F-15K Strike Eagle 100 mil USD
MiG MFI "Flatpack" 70 mil USD
F-16I Fighting Falcon 70 mil USD
F/A-18E Super Hornet 57 mil USD
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 50 mil USD
F-14D Tomcat 38 mil USD
Su-34 "Fullback" 36 mil USD
F/A-18C Hornet 35 mil USD
F-15E Strike Eagle 31.1 mil USD
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 30 mil USD
F-15C Eagle 29.9 mil USD
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 29 mil USD
F-16E Fighting Falcon 26.9 mil USD
F-16C Fighting Falcon 18.8 mil USD


8) production

MiG-21 "Fishbed" / Chengdu J-7 13896
F-16 Fighting Falcon 4450
F-5 Freedom Fighter / Tiger II 2246
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 1600
F/A-18 Hornet 1480
F-15 Eagle 1198
F-14 Tomcat 712
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 680
F/A-18 Super Hornet 400
F-15 Strike Eagle 334
F-22 Raptor 166
Su-33 "Flanker-D" 34
Su-34 "Fullback" 16
MiG MFI "Flatpack" 2




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join