Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Putin boasts new jet fighter better than U.S. plane

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi I wonder as the amount of activity on UCAVs by the west suggests to me that the next type of aircraft to be fielded will be unmanned and that opens up a new set of possibilities.

Regards


An interesting idea to be sure.
Something half way between a fighter and a missile ?

I suppose it depends on what your enemy is fielding.
Top gun school was founded on the basis of air/air close quarter combat.
But is that a realistic doctrine for the future battle field with more and more star wars weaponry ?

The new age of energy beam and magnetic pulse weapons, and rail guns, could make the high performance fighter jock a highly trained and very vulnerable target.




posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


as usual more american propaganda from you . firstly , how about you go and fix your economy and then talk about military supremacy , because facts are facts and go beg China for an economic bailout





although I do have information that says the F4 shot down 154 to a loss of 41 in air to air and a staggering 477 to ground fire the MIG 21 shot down 85 to a loss of 95. The significant majority of US losses were to ground fire. Happy to debate this in another thread.


vietnamese records disagree with the official american propaganda stats




The significant majority of US losses were to ground fire. Happy to debate this in another thread.


so still the 'obsolete' communist weapons managed to shoot down large amounts of super duper american flying junk





In the last 30-40 years Soviet / Russian kit has been found inferior to equivalent western kit.


equivalent??? where did you get this BS from ?? your military hasn't faced equivalent russian kit since the late 80's

and yep , i can see the condition of the american military that it has to purchase russian choppers for afghanistan and this is very telling of the 'american military supreme' nonsense

[edit on 20-6-2010 by sadchild01]

[edit on 20-6-2010 by sadchild01]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 04:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Silver Shadow
 


Russians already have narrowband HPM weapons in magnitude of megawatt/gigawatts to bring down fighter aircrafts and there are rumours that there are terawatt/petawatt hpm weapon s russia has developed to negate a american nuke strike



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by sadchild01
 


Whether true or not, loads of countries are doing this electromagnetic weapons thing. Its one of the most important weapons you can make, as it also involves mind control, which is very important in todays world, as your enemy may have it, and they will use it.

The techs and uses for these energy weapons, can do all sorts of things, and its only your imagination that will decide how far they go with it.

I always think the countries play these overt games with each other, while knowing there is far more advanced stuff behind the scenes.



[edit on 6/20/2010 by andy1033]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Well Russians are equal if not more than US. The reason the guys seem quiet and peaceful outside is the same like Chinese. Maybe waiting for an opportunity or something. Both US and Russia have reverse engineered each other's stuff. Its a fact. I'm not a Russian or American.

I believe that Russians must be equal in overall technology advancement. Russians too like US got some ufo stuff going on. Since its very hard to get the information there, they have more secrecy before as a Soviet union and even now.

It should also be noted US is interested in World Police job and so they need more fighters and they do have a good number . A very good number compared to other powers. Whereas Russians have good missile systems, anti - aircraft stuff. Its enough i'd say when you are minding your own business and just want to kick ass of people who want to enter your territory. This is all what we know as from MSM.

Imagine the technology these two should have really inside blackops. I think US has more. But i doubt they will use it in combat. I mean the very high tech transport stuff. Its all for the shadow government of the world to decide. What we see , what we wont.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by chaosinorder
 


Of course, but i also think that russia has enough to keep usa at bay. I think the big things are the electromagnetic weapons, and these weapons although called silent weapons, are lethel, and they can cause alot of potential damage in all sorts of ways.

I reckon the americans can look through anyones eyes on earth, so how is that for spying. You cannot get a better spying technique than that, and you do not have to pay anyone, as the people are just the people, and they will not know.

No one knows what really is behind the scenes, but one thing is for sure is must be at least 100 years more advanced than we know, and i reckon alot further.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 06:20 AM
link   
It looks like an impressive aircraft.

A few comments:

A previous poster mentioned that the F-35 is the F-22 replacement. It is not. The f-35 is not really a fighter, its more ground attack focused. Its a replacement for AV-8B, Jaguar, and F-16/F-18.

This should provide the impetus for the USA to invest in a real F-22 replacement. Also i'd imagine the US Navy will be thinking about how well they will fare against developments of this. Time for a 21st century Tomcat? I would think so.

Europe should be worried. Decades of putting industry needs above capability needs may be coming home to roost. This thing will make all the F-16/F-18/Gripen/Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft look like yesterdays news.

All sides have black projects. The USA probably more than most. However, there is a world of difference between development aircraft and real usable weapons. They may be sexy but would lack. (logistic support, worked up tactics, inter-operability). Not to mention most of these types of aircraft are intended to prove a specific thing and corners are cut in other areas. You don't install more than you need to achieve the test objectives. I suspect that in most cases what you see is whats ready to fight. Black projects are the coming attractions, not a parallel super force. Its not GI Joe.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Personally i think History should be left out this time. The jets and the technology we see to day will create a new history, and cant be compared to the 1940s and 70s.

What we should learn from History is that the US now relay on total air supremacy to control the battlefield. If you notice what the Russians have been focusing on, you should see 2 main aspects of countering the US air supremacy.

1. The S-300, S-400 and soon to come the S-500. If these missiles are as efficient as the Pentagon thinks, The Russians must have some very good radar technology.

2. Upgraded SUs, Upgraded MIGs and a new 5th generation air supremacy fighter, The PAK FA. All these fighter each can match the US air force inventory of jets.

3. Than you also have the Russian air to air reach in missiles, that surpass anything the US has in production to day. But the AA missiles depend much on radar, OLS and other signal technology for the Russians. But i wouldn't bet my money on that these missiles are useless in any way.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by justwokeup
 


Surely like tesla said, a electromagnetic weapon should be able to bring down any plane, no matter how good your pilots are, or planes are equipped to deal with it.

I would suspect the russians had a defence against the stealth bomber, before those things where officially announced, and its probably em weapons.

All this stuff about aircraft is i think a cover, for all the dodgy stuff behind the scenes. They keep the public focused on what is essentially old techs, and while they are really doing far more.

Like i said i think america can look through anyones eyes on earth, and as long as they have your frequency, you cannot do anything about it, and your a free spy.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Just curious to the people that say Russia's equipment was inferior to Westerns equipment.

Now I know my memory can be vague sometimes but for the life of me I cant remember a USA vs Russian conflict. I thought the equipment that America had faced off against was only watered down stuff sold to other countries.

So if this inferior equipment can still achieve decent results, what would happen when faced with the 100% real deal, or does America fight with their own watered down units they sell to other countries



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


I dont know about other stuff. That may or may not be true. I really doubt it. If the USA had all these wonder abilities I think they would be making a better fist of global politics than they are. The same goes for russia.

However, back to aircraft...

EM Weapons and Laser weapons will arrive in the air to air domain. Whats holding it back is power and packaging. This will be overcome.

Most modern military aircraft have a degree of EM hardening anyway so they don't suffer malfunctions in the vicinity of search radars etc. Its just a matter of doing a lot more.

When the shift to energy weapons occurs it will change the shape of air combat vehicles I think. If you are fighting with laser turrets manoeuvrability is less of a concern than the ability to get off the first shot and the ability to take damage. You cant out turn a light beam. It'll also be the end of the visible pilot.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Trigger82
Just curious to the people that say Russia's equipment was inferior to Westerns equipment.

Now I know my memory can be vague sometimes but for the life of me I cant remember a USA vs Russian conflict. I thought the equipment that America had faced off against was only watered down stuff sold to other countries.

So if this inferior equipment can still achieve decent results, what would happen when faced with the 100% real deal, or does America fight with their own watered down units they sell to other countries


If you read about the complaints within the US army in Afghanistan. You will learn that they complain about poor equipment and logistics.

The American soldier is not trained for a battle like this. It has taken the American solder nearly 10 years now to adjust to the Afghan way of fighting. And they still haven't caught on or figured it out. They are to busy accusing the Afghans of fighting cowardly.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SLAYER69
 

Aye!

Airplanes don't kill airplanes. Pilots kill airplanes...
All things being sorta equal.



Do you realy think the top of the range fighters have humans in them anymore when humans pass out at high G', need to be kept warm, get tired and need air to breath plus suffer from information overload.

Don't tell the pilots but they are fast becoming redundant and to some degree are nothing more than dead weight when it comes to state of the art warfair that you won't find marketed on U-Tube.

The military is anywhere between 20 and 40 years ahead of where we think it is today and if that sounds far fetched then consider what happened to bomb yields between 1940 and 46 or 46 to the first 'A' Bomb.

Stealth was on the drawing bords in the 1960's and it took to the 1990's before it went public and i would guess half the UFO siteing we get today are infact made of this earth.

Machines are very good in small conflicts but it will be bio-weapons possibly being spread by nano-tech devices that will determine the outcome of a major conflict but that does not make for any good hollywood block busters however it much greener and is the prefured weapon of the zionist controled NWO who won't want us to leave the world full of any nuclear radiation would they now.

So long as China/Russia/USA never join sides then the world has balance but should they ever become united then attention will turn towards population reduction, it's only logical that this would happen and the introduction of amero should be a wakeup call for everyone.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


"If you read about the complaints within the US army in Afghanistan. You will learn that they complain about poor equipment and logistics"

If read about the complaints of any army from the dawn of time I think you will learn they complain about poor equipment and logistics. Compared to anybody else the US Army has plenty of everything.

Its not the equipment. Its what we are trying to do is fundamentally about as hard is it can be. We're fighting a war to bring 'peace and stability' to a place that known nothing but war for multiple generations.....

Cant we sub contract this to the chinese, the've got the manpower for it. We could do them a good deal on the mineral deposits :-)



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by justwokeup
 


Yes , what the US is trying to accomplish in Afghanistan is also a big part of the problem. As i said, the US army is not trained or suited to accomplish this task. And one of their main problems, is their own attitude.

You actually have to go there and observe it to believe how fundamentally wrong the American attitude is. The have a kick ass and kill mentality.

This war is not about man power, its about having the right attitude to win the mind and hart of the Afghan people to convince them that what your doing is the right thing for them. The US have to set a good and kind example, not display a power of threat.





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:50 AM
link   
perhaps Holland should drop the JSF and buy the russia version instead...moore value for less money...



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ressiv
perhaps Holland should drop the JSF and buy the russia version instead...moore value for less money...


I just read the other day that the US might scrap the JSF program do to cost. Norway is buying the same JSF.

The JSF alone would be useless against the Russian air force.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 

Agree the ......JSF is an real moneypit to become....got also a feeling we are luuted by the american aircraft developers...always needs moore money..
and that for an crappy version of it we will become once at the end...
and nobody can denied that the russian fichter planes are solid as an rock...



[edit on 20-6-2010 by ressiv]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Interesting discussion this, although we're off on a tangent from the new Sukhoi :-)

I'm surprised there aren't more Afghanistan threads given we are at war....

An 'Afghanistan - What should we be doing differently?' thread would be good.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ressiv
reply to post by spy66
 

Agree the ......JSF is an real moneypit to become....got also a feeling we are luuted by the american aircraft developers...always needs moore money..
and that for an crappy version of it we will become once at the end...
and nobody can denied that the russian fichter planes are solid as an rock...



[edit on 20-6-2010 by ressiv]


Just a question. Did Holland also get the news that the US might scrap the JSF. It made new in Norway two days ago i think.

I also agree, the JSF is to expensive and to vulnerable against the new upgraded SUs and MIGs hitting the Russian inventory.

The JSF or F-35 is designed to work in a environment protected by Air supremacy. Its not designed to create air supremacy. That is the F-22s role.






top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join