China will Decimate the US Naval Fleet

This talk is a little repetitive, war between the two countries directly is out of the question for the time being because it will ignite a world war.

Can anyone say Proxy Wars, or War by Proxy? Because that is already happening.

reply to post by Trajan


If I believe the entire premise of your post is flawed, there's little use in addressing the rest. You can safely assume that if I find the premise flawed, I will feel the same about everything based off of that premise.

But, for the sake of discussion, here we go:

China does censor its media but so does the West.

Indeed, Europe and Australia do engage in censorship, and the US does bleep out bad words and certain body parts on basic cable. This is an incredibly far cry from the Chinese government censoring information across all forms of media. The two aren't even comparable.

All the mainstream media stations misinform the public to drum up support for whatever reason. The only time the media does start to unravel something there is suddenly a huge news break that overshadows it and it gets swept away.

You're comparing government sanctioned censorship in China to private company twisting the truth in the US. Do you not see the problem with this? Apples and oranges, my friend. Also, Americans have access to global news stories, not just their own. Information is freely available, unlike in China where it takes a lot more of an effort.

Corruption isn't limited to China, every nation on Earth has corrupted officials and governments. It's much easier to find a crooked official than it is to find a clean, straight one. That can be said the world over.

Never said it was limited to China, but it is far more institutionalized than it is in the Western world. They're not Somalia, for sure, but they have quite a bit of work to do as an up and coming power.

Also, the US DOES need a war with China to boost its ailing economy.

This doesn't make any sense. Going to war with China would absolutely devastate the US economy. There is zero economical benefit to going to war with China. Going to war with China would plummet the value of the US dollar. Your Roman Empire example is so far removed from the situation that we're talking about that the comparison doesn't work at all. While the US economy has certainly seen better days, it's also seen far, far worse and it didn't require a war to recover then and it still doesn't now. As I said, your claim has absolutely zero historical precedence.

And before you say WWII got the US out of the Great Depression, that's not correct. The recovery from the great depression started a full decade before we entered the war. A war, I should note, that we didn't even start.

Originally posted by beerbaron2002
This talk is a little repetitive, war between the two countries directly is out of the question for the time being because it will ignite a world war.

Can anyone say Proxy Wars, or War by Proxy? Because that is already happening.

Agreed. Even when China was a weaker country, we didn't fight them directly, we fought them by proxy in Korea. Why people think we're suddenly going to directly attack them when they actually have some power is beyond me.

At the very worst, we're in for Cold War II. And even that's a bit of a stretch.

reply to post by Speakeasy1981


I never said you started WW1 -_-

The US does need a war. Maybe not China but a war would jump start their economy. Look at how they expanded during WW1 and WW2. Also, it does have historical precedence.
Rome collapsed because it couldn't counter the rising power of the tribes fast enough and its economy couldn't handle any increase in militarization.
The USA, which is where the Rome-Barbarian example comes in, needs to counter China's growing power and with its economy going down it simply can't afford to produce air craft, tanks and weapons the same way China can. The US' saving grace is being innovative but even then China will simply copy the design and either rob the software or hire Russian's to do it.
The US is slowly collapsing, the economy might not be as dire as it once was but China and India weren't at the level they were now. Give it 5 or 10 years and the Indo-Sino dominance will begin to show through any Western attempts at economic dominance.

So, although the US isn't as bad as it has been before, the competition is tougher and all the corporations/businesses are moving East.

I am not saying the USA needs a war with China right now but it will in the future. Either directly or by using Taiwan and other regional allies to thwart China's power.


Let me clarify, the US' MNCs are moving which creates unemployment in the US. That unemployment causes the economy to slow down. The greater the unemployment levels the worse the economy comes out. Now, given the amount of businesses outsourcing or moving shop it won't be long until the USA's economy has slowed right down if not going completely stagnant. If the economy falls then there won't be money to pay soldiers salaries or pay for oil and gas to move those multi-billion dollar ships around. If you can't pay soldiers salaries then you will have a mass exodus from the military-industrial complex leaving both pillars of the USA's dominance (The Military and Economy) shattered.
Add to that the fact China is constantly growing and, although they are playing catch up, will soon be a Superpower capable of power projecting and flexing their real muscles.

With the USA declining, and China growing (With its massive reserves of oil in the South China Sea) there is going to be more confidence in China when they go to the negotiation table. When they, and they will, start their outward expansion into Asia, Africa, South America and Europe it will just lead to the US growing weaker and weaker while the Chinese grow ever stronger.

You can use the 'the US economy will pick up, it is in a bad state but it has been in worse' and that would be fine... If China was at the same relative level when the US economy was at its worse but it isn't so the distance between these two powers are closing. Rapidly.

Originally posted by TrajanI never said you started WW1 -_-

I know, I apologize if I implied I thought you did. You were using WW1 and WW2 of examples of the US economy profiting form war as precedence to the US needing a war to help its economy. I was merely pointing out that those wars weren't started by the US, so they're not really related to what your suggesting.

The US does need a war. Maybe not China but a war would jump start their economy.

Here we go again. You are aware that the US was engaged in two wars when its economy went belly up, right? So how does "starting a war to help the economy" make any sense, whatsoever? Especially starting a war with someone who's economy is delicately intertwined with our own? I'll help you out: it makes no sense. No sense at all. If anything, our military expenditures in Iraq and Afghanistan did nothing but contribute to our national debt. We are economically worse off because of them.

Look at how they expanded during WW1 and WW2.

The USA didn't expand a whole lot during WW1. In fact, we realistically didn't gain or lose much from WW1. Our economic expansion after the great depression started in 1933, years and years before we even started manufacturing for the lend lease program. We didn't expand during WW2 because the war helped our economy, we expanded because the war destroyed everyone else's economy. I'd also like to add that during WWII, the USA's debt to GDP ratio was the highest its been in the nations entire history, far higher than it is today.

Also, it does have historical precedence.
Rome collapsed because it couldn't counter the rising power of the tribes fast enough and its economy couldn't handle any increase in militarization.

There are countless reasons why Rome collapsed.

The USA, which is where the Rome-Barbarian example comes in, needs to counter China's growing power and with its economy going down it simply can't afford to produce air craft, tanks and weapons the same way China can.

Huh? The USA's yearly military expenditure is nearly five times that of China. This isn't going to drastically change any time soon, even when China's economy is larger than the US's. There's no need to.

The US' saving grace is being innovative but even then China will simply copy the design and either rob the software or hire Russian's to do it.
The US is slowly collapsing, the economy might not be as dire as it once was but China and India weren't at the level they were now. Give it 5 or 10 years and the Indo-Sino dominance will begin to show through any Western attempts at economic dominance.

That's pretty unfair. If you're going to combine China and India together for this, then we might as well combine USA and the EU, USA & EU together have a larger combined economy than a potential China & India. Bam, Western world is still dominant.

And the US isn't slowly collapsing, there's no evidence of this. People have been predicting the collapse of the USA since it started 200+ years ago, and yet we're magically still here somehow.

cont

Note, I feel kind of strange typing all this, because I'm not the biggest fan of the USA these past few decades. I'm hardly a flag waving patriot. But, if you look at things realistically, the world isn't nearly as exciting and "on the verge of change" is people wish it were.

So, although the US isn't as bad as it has been before, the competition is tougher and all the corporations/businesses are moving East.

I am not saying the USA needs a war with China right now but it will in the future. Either directly or by using Taiwan and other regional allies to thwart China's power.

Here's something we can agree on, perhaps. I'm not ruling out that the USA and China engage in proxy battles. I am ruling out direct conflict, though.

Let me clarify, the US' MNCs are moving which creates unemployment in the US. That unemployment causes the economy to slow down. The greater the unemployment levels the worse the economy comes out. Now, given the amount of businesses outsourcing or moving shop it won't be long until the USA's economy has slowed right down if not going completely stagnant. If the economy falls then there won't be money to pay soldiers salaries or pay for oil and gas to move those multi-billion dollar ships around. If you can't pay soldiers salaries then you will have a mass exodus from the military-industrial complex leaving both pillars of the USA's dominance (The Military and Economy) shattered.

The USA is over the worst of it. Barring any drastic, unexpected changes (which are certainly possible), the main problem the USA faces is not whether it will recover or not, but how fast it will recover. And can you show me evidence that enough multinational corporations are picking up and moving that it will have any notable impact on the USA, at least to the degree that it will harm the US economy to the degree you mention above?

Add to that the fact China is constantly growing and, although they are playing catch up, will soon be a Superpower capable of power projecting and flexing their real muscles.

China is not immune to economic problems, you know.

China is currently sitting on an unsustainable bubble, no too dissimilar to where the USA and Europe were. There banks have also issued many bad loans, inflation is rising, unemployment among the middle class is increasing, and their real estate market is as questionable as the USA's was before the collapse.

Even the Chinese Premiere describes the Chinese economy as "unbalanced, uncoordinated and unsustainable." Not exactly confidence inspiring, is it?

You know how you mentioned earlier how media in the west often twists stories? Perhaps maybe they're twisting China into the next great Boogeyman, when in reality is a bit different?

I've got to run, but I'll be back to comment within the next few days. Take care.

reply to post by Speakeasy1981


I agree, China is spending piles of money building huge modern buildings that have no tenants who can afford to live there.It's goods are constantly showing up as faulty,poisonous or even some compromised electronics.Sure manufacturing is cheap when you don't have to pay employees a decent wage or insurance.Don't even get me started on our trade imbalance with them.They are seeing a surge from Hong Kong cash that will eventually fade.

Originally posted by Trajan
reply to post by SplitInfinity

 

Asking that question(s) does not prove your age. It just proves you have A. Been taught about the Vietnam war in school or (more likely) B. Can use Wikipedia.

If you were truly an adult you wouldn't feel the need to degrade yourself in an attempt to prove your age to some people you don't know. Keep trying though, kiddo. Maybe someone will believe you or give two flying ducks. (Not my usual choice of words but we have to be careful around minors don't we.)

So if you really want to prove your age you have exactly 3 minutes and 47 seconds from when this reply has been posted. (As per; your logic) GO!

Sorry I logged off before seeing this early this morning. I am finding this conversation to be very amusing as there are a few...not many...but a few people that come on this board to say hello to me on occasion that would be Laughing their Asses Off! If they had the chance to read these last few posts! LOL! ME? A TEEN!? MAN I WISH! LOL!

As for who and what I am....I don't need to lie because the whole purpose of my even being on this board was to relieve stress...so you ARE RIGHT when you said that wasting energy on some idiot who thinks I am a Teen...is stupid and does not do anything good.

As for your statements about the J-20...it IS a DOG and it may have to either be completely re-designed or a lot of money will have to be spent to match up several New Designed Engines as nothing currently available is really the proper fit or use. Even if the J-20 was to receive foreign engines...an F-22 would have no problem BLOWING IT OUT OF THE SKY. You have to understand that Lobbyists as well as the Air Force...blow up the size of potential threats in order for appropriations. I remember back in the day when the first Russian BMP-2 came out with that cannon and the cry was...the Soviets have a weaponized Troop Carrier that the Soviets had placed a 30MM Cannon on top and had slots for troops to fire through. It was small inside and the Soviets...just as they have done with other Tanks such as the T-70 and other self propelled cannons...had a size criteria of how large a Soviet Soldier could be to be able to fit in any of these Soviet DEATH TRAPS as they were poorly designed with Fuel storage in tanks of the BMP-2 were very easy to penetrate as they were both internal and external. The external ones as a rule were filed with sand as it became apparent in the Afghanistan War that the rear doors that served as Fuel Tanks could be easily penetrated even with small arms fire. The Internal Tanks were also not given proper armor protection and in the U.S./IRAQ conflict...BMP-2's were abandoned by Iraqi Soldiers at the first sign of any American Armored Vehicles or even a 50 Cal. atop a Humvee.

Any ways....I am VERY FAMILIAR with Military Equipment and other countries Military Tactics because I have been trained to know these things. I am not Military but rather I am "CIVILIAN" in the manner that the quotes dictate. I have been going on JOBS....overseas since the early 80's and I am very good at what I do. The people who know a bit about me...if they come on this board...I will direct them to what they will find as Funny as LAUGH IN....oops! Sorry! Young people would not know about that show...or that RICHARD NIXON was a guest on the show....as the Show begins....Flower Power Psychedelic Colored Mini-Doors would open as Celebrities such as Ruth Buzzi and Arte Johnson along with ROWAN AND MARTIN...after opening the door would make a short joke...NIXON came on and said in a questioning voice...SOCK IT to ME!? As at the time the saying Sock it to me Baby...was in.

I have to admit...I find this FUNNY AS HELL as never have I EVER been mistaken for a TEEN! LOL! Wish I still was though. Oh...and the answers to my questions were CAMBODIA AND LAOS....and LINEBACKER I and LINEBACKER II. Anyone regardless of Country that has ANY ABILITY TO TALK ABOUT MILITARY ASPECTS ....would know this. And if you do not know about the BMP-2's which were also AMPHIBIOUS and were RADIATION PROOF...were a very real threat to Europe and the U.K. TEEN! LOL! Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Walter, do you ever give it a rest?

Nobody believes your BS, it is obvious you are a fantasist.

If you HAD ever left the US you would know that nobody gives a toss about Vietnam and that outside of America (and possibly Aus) nobody learns or cares about it, so why my lack of knowledge about a regional war not involving anything to do with me directly is an issue I am at a loss to explain.
All we learn about is the 'domino effect' and how America mistakenly thought it had to step in to stop it. We are also told about all the war atrocities that happened during it. But that is it.

But then I do not understand why people such as yourself tell lies on the internet to make themselves feel important.
I do pity you that your life is so pathetic that you have to make these stories up.

reply to post by DevilJonah


I understand the advances we have seen in China's military I also understand their laughable concept of quality control.

When I was in NYC I saw this 15 year old kid playing drums on the bottom of a couple of 5 gallon buckets. He was amazing, and had quite the crowd around him. 5 full lanes away, across the street, was a senile homeless person with a couple of sticks, beating an uneven, random set of concussions onto the bottom of a broken metal smokers pail. The kid was on a well lit corner, and the money was flowing to him in reward of his talent. The senile old man was on a dark alley corner, and I may have been the only person in the world at that moment to notice him.

There is a stark contrast in execution between two disparate talents.

Besides, our real weapons are still held back. When we DO decide to roll new technology out of R and D, it amazes the whole world. If a WWIII scenario were to happen, you could expect the full leveraging of our Skunk operations against any enemies Horrors not even imagined await any nation stupid enough to push it that far. No force in the history of Earth has been as efficient (and flashy) in killing human beings as the United States DoD.

reply to post by biggilo

First of all...who the Hell is WALTER?

Secondly...you say no one cares about Vietnam in Europe...I think the French Might since they were fighting there for so long.

I hate to be this rude but you really are completely IGNORANT of many facts. Your ignorance is to such an extreme that I don't really have to counter your STUPIDITY anymore as you are displaying it so freely. If I were you...I would quit before you embarrass yourself any further.

Split Infinity

China should be considered an ally they are not the enemies nor do their elite see us as the enemies the two countries are dependent upon each other. China is the regional power in the far eastern mainland and ideally would become increasingly subordinate to the United States. Long story short china is involved in the global world order and they will become a slave state to the IMF and the new world reserve currency but at the same time they will have what they desire a key global position and be a dominant regional power in the far eastern mainland and a major power player in a future world order. Anyhow despite all of that being said china's navy would get destroyed! in a war against the United States navy let alone with all of NATO involved.

Originally posted by Trajan
reply to post by Speakeasy1981

 

I never said you started WW1 -_-

The US does need a war. Maybe not China but a war would jump start their economy. Look at how they expanded during WW1 and WW2. Also, it does have historical precedence.
Rome collapsed because it couldn't counter the rising power of the tribes fast enough and its economy couldn't handle any increase in militarization.
The USA, which is where the Rome-Barbarian example comes in, needs to counter China's growing power and with its economy going down it simply can't afford to produce air craft, tanks and weapons the same way China can. The US' saving grace is being innovative but even then China will simply copy the design and either rob the software or hire Russian's to do it.
The US is slowly collapsing, the economy might not be as dire as it once was but China and India weren't at the level they were now. Give it 5 or 10 years and the Indo-Sino dominance will begin to show through any Western attempts at economic dominance.

So, although the US isn't as bad as it has been before, the competition is tougher and all the corporations/businesses are moving East.

I am not saying the USA needs a war with China right now but it will in the future. Either directly or by using Taiwan and other regional allies to thwart China's power.


Let me clarify, the US' MNCs are moving which creates unemployment in the US. That unemployment causes the economy to slow down. The greater the unemployment levels the worse the economy comes out. Now, given the amount of businesses outsourcing or moving shop it won't be long until the USA's economy has slowed right down if not going completely stagnant. If the economy falls then there won't be money to pay soldiers salaries or pay for oil and gas to move those multi-billion dollar ships around. If you can't pay soldiers salaries then you will have a mass exodus from the military-industrial complex leaving both pillars of the USA's dominance (The Military and Economy) shattered.
Add to that the fact China is constantly growing and, although they are playing catch up, will soon be a Superpower capable of power projecting and flexing their real muscles.

With the USA declining, and China growing (With its massive reserves of oil in the South China Sea) there is going to be more confidence in China when they go to the negotiation table. When they, and they will, start their outward expansion into Asia, Africa, South America and Europe it will just lead to the US growing weaker and weaker while the Chinese grow ever stronger.

You can use the 'the US economy will pick up, it is in a bad state but it has been in worse' and that would be fine... If China was at the same relative level when the US economy was at its worse but it isn't so the distance between these two powers are closing. Rapidly.

You dont know what you are talking about and half of what you said is not true

As china becomes more integrated into the world it will be less able and inclined to exploit its regional primacy in a obtuse or that of a politically obtuse fashion such as taking and obtuse control of other nation states. China has emerged as a regionally dominant power but it is not likely to anytime soon become a global power as it still lacks in military, cultural and control and can only compete on one of the several major components that is needed to be a global power and they can only compete economically. Furthermore china's rise is not to be seen as a threat but rather a good thing in the long run and with the pushing for the one world currency it is safe to say that only the chinese elite will benefit and that in the future their nation will be the regional power that promotes prosperity and peace to a degree and keeps down potential rival states. In short china can hopefully become what the EU is to America. An anchor in the far eastern mainland that is dependent on America and Europe for its place in the global world order and is dependent on those alliances in order to maintain its regional dominance at the same time Japan will act as the subordinate anchor that is is to the hegemonic american dominance and power in the far east. However control of the eastern asian mainland and a degree of US influence is hard to ever succeed without successful inclusion of the chinese state. China should consider the US an ally as the US has brought them into the global world and is the main reason their economy is a success and the cause for their development and their ties between Europe. It is the United States that is the great arbiter of Eurasian landscape and only with and through the US and Japan will China have relations that are friendly with Europe and with Europe can than in a way have relations that are pleasant with the middle east. Furthermore without a viable strategic consensus from America china would not have or likely have and be able to keep the massive foreign investment that is necessary to their economic growth. For the united states China as a regional power should be embraced and co-opted into a wider framework and for that of international cooperation can be a vitally important strategic asset and location for the US. American chinese strategic dialogue regarding the areas that both countries wish to see free of domination by other aspiring hegemons is therefore imperative. But to make progress the dialogue should be sustained and serious. Any anti american hegemonic actions by china would only hurt china and isolate them and cut them off From Japan and that of Europe the middle east and that of North America and to a degree South America. Chinas capacity to attract foreign investment would greatly be hindered if it were not for the United States. Furthermore China's own aspirations to be a regional power and to have a position as a key global player would greatly be victimized should they ever take an anti western approach and ultimantley it would only lead to their quick isolation and slow but sure destruction from outside and quick destruction from within.

THIS 1000%

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by DevilJonah

 

I understand the advances we have seen in China's military I also understand their laughable concept of quality control.

When I was in NYC I saw this 15 year old kid playing drums on the bottom of a couple of 5 gallon buckets. He was amazing, and had quite the crowd around him. 5 full lanes away, across the street, was a senile homeless person with a couple of sticks, beating an uneven, random set of concussions onto the bottom of a broken metal smokers pail. The kid was on a well lit corner, and the money was flowing to him in reward of his talent. The senile old man was on a dark alley corner, and I may have been the only person in the world at that moment to notice him.

There is a stark contrast in execution between two disparate talents.

Besides, our real weapons are still held back. When we DO decide to roll new technology out of R and D, it amazes the whole world. If a WWIII scenario were to happen, you could expect the full leveraging of our Skunk operations against any enemies Horrors not even imagined await any nation stupid enough to push it that far. No force in the history of Earth has been as efficient (and flashy) in killing human beings as the United States DoD.

Originally posted by Matt1951

 

"Pulling a bit of a bait and switch aren't you? Speaking of nonsense, what happened to your claim of China's superior space program? Or the J20 program becoming operational before the F-35?"

Bait and switch? You are the one who is baitin.
US with the end of the space shuttle is not putting men in space, China is. I chose not to discuss space issues only because I wanted to focus on military.

I have no reason or need to bait you in this conversation. Facts stand on their own and you are thus far doing a perfectly fine job undermining your own commentary without my help.

You are the one who brought space into the conversation. Your assertions that China's space program being somehow superior to NASA's efforts were easily proven to be false. Even with the demise of the shuttle the U.S. still has more astronauts scheduled for launch via proxy to the ISS than China.

China is just now preparing their first manned flight in half a decade and only their 4th manned launch ever.

At least have the character to admit when you are wrong.

Originally posted by Matt1951

 

JSF is not "operational". Not anywhere close. J20 will be combat ready before JSF. There is no longer any promised date by Lockheed as to when JSF will be combat ready.

Again, your opinion is grossly misinformed..

The 33d Fighter Wing (33 FW) is a United States Air Force unit assigned to the Air Education and Training Command's Nineteenth Air Force. It is stationed at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida where it is a tenant unit.

The 33 FW is an AETC training unit. Its main mission is to train U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy pilots and maintainers on the F-35 Lightning II.

The wing will reach full strength in 2014, with more than 2,000 military personnel and 260 contractors. Annual capacity is planned for 2,150 pilot and maintenance students.A minimum of 59 F-35A, F-35B, and F-35C aircraft supporting Air Force training in the F-35A, Marine training in the F-35B, and Navy and Marine training in the F-35C, as well as international partner training in the various versions of the aircraft.
33d Fighter Wing

No matter what uniform they wear, service members of the 33rd Fighter Wing know the launch of the first F-35 Lightning II flight on March 6 is a small step into the next half century of air dominance.

Eglin launches first F-35 sortie

The first two Lockheed Martin production model F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft were delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps today. The two jets are now assigned to the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's Marine Fighter/Attack Training Squadron 501 residing with the host 33d Fighter Wing at Eglin AFB, Fla.

First two USMC F-35s arrive at Eglin

When military aviators of the future look back at the beginnings of the F-35 program, they may see the names of two Florida National Guard pilots listed among the first to fly the Air Force's fifth-generation fighter jet.
Guard’s first F-35 pilots ready to take flight

BK-01, the United Kingdom's first Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II production aircraft, flew its inaugural flight April 13, 2012.

UK's first F-35 makes inaugural flight

etc. etc. etc...

Maybe you will have an easier time with graphics?








These are all production, combat aircraft. The F-35 fleet has J20 beat 4 to 1 in this factory photo alone.

Would you further care to elaborate on your conclusion that the F-35 "isn't even close" to operational and how the 2 J20 prototypes will blossom into a mature, combat ready design before the F-35?

Originally posted by Matt1951

 

10 million lines of on board software code, 24 million lines total, when will JSF be ready? F22 uses 1 million lines of code, and that seems to be too much for Lockheed.

You should trouble yourself with reading the information I have already posted...

For the Mission Systems software, 8.1M of 9.3M Software Source Lines of Code (87%) flying today. Conducting Radar, Electronic Warfare, Electro Optical sensor employment. 95% of airborne software now operating in flight and ground labs

Signature testing on open air test range has been conducted on F-35A and F-35C with results meeting all Key Performance Parameters.
How well is F-35 testing going?

Originally posted by Matt1951

 

You must work for Lockheed. You blather on about supercruise. The link I provided to the J-20 in Wikipedia says the J-20 can supercruise, the JSF cannot. And you waste a lot of bandwidth arguing about it.

I made an effort to educate you, obviously it was a waste of bandwidth.

Once more, supercruise is defined by the U.S. DOD as sustained speed

reply to post by biggilo

The vehicular discriptions are accurate.I have seen the vehicle described and the garbage Russia exported to Iraq. The T72s are penetrable by a 25mm bushmaster cannon using the poisonous DU rounds.I wasn't issued these during Desert Storm.Every other vehicle was killed with standard 25mm I witnessed this with my own eyes.J20s exhaust nozzels are non articulated.The wings aren't high lift and the tiny tails are not conducive to strong maneuverability.That means it may be fast I don't know how stealthy it is,probably based on the F117 coating so not very,that makes it obsolete before it is fielded.
An F16 would be able to win in a dogfight against that aircraft.

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
reply to post by biggilo

 

The vehicular discriptions are accurate.I have seen the vehicle described and the garbage Russia exported to Iraq. The T72s are penetrable by a 25mm bushmaster cannon using the poisonous DU rounds.I wasn't issued these during Desert Storm.Every other vehicle was killed with standard 25mm I witnessed this with my own eyes.J20s exhaust nozzels are non articulated.The wings aren't high lift and the tiny tails are not conducive to strong maneuverability.That means it may be fast I don't know how stealthy it is,probably based on the F117 coating so not very,that makes it obsolete before it is fielded.
An F16 would be able to win in a dogfight against that aircraft.

THANK YOU! And if mistyped and posted T-70 instead of T-72. The BMP-2's were so blown out of proportion as a threat as the Soviet Troop Carrier that BILLIONS were invested in a system to destroy something that was so poorly built...a 50 Cal Sniper Bullet could set one ablaze. I have a friend I went to school with who just retired as a Lt. Colonel. He wanted to become a full Bird Colonel but his wife wanted him out. He was originally a M1A1 Tank commander and was in both Iraq Wars and was in Afghanistan. He told me some serious stories and how the Iraqis were using trench warfare tactics and had dug miles long trenches that were filled with Iraqi troops. The M1A1's would come at night with their Earth Moving Attachments and just plow down these trenches from one end to the other. They buried thousands of Iraqi troops but what he really wanted was to confront republican Guard Divisions. He got his chance during the second Iraq War and the upgraded Abrams Tank has a Jet Engine to propel it. The Abrams would close rapidly on T-72's in conjunction with Bradly's which had a more advanced Target Acquisition system. The Abrams could either take out a T-72 from great distance or if the Russian made Iraqi run tanks were over a dune...they would rush in and close so fast as the Abrams crew fired on the move...the T-72's did not have the time to target the Abrams before they were blown away. As far as the BMP-2's...crews ran away from these as soon as U.S. Armor was sighted. The T-72...has a Hand Cranked Turret so it had no chance against U.S. Armor. As far as the J-20...absolute JUNK! A Fighter is designed around it's engines...not the other way around! The J-20 will NEVER have the proper engines needed and even if an engine is developed...it is NO MATCH FOR A RAPTOR OR EVEN AN F-15! Split Infinity

reply to post by Drunkenparrot


I won't waste bandwidth line by line responding to your total nonsense, I will hit a few key points. China is not only putting men in space, you say the US is doing so by 'proxy'. The US can no longer send men into space. India discovered water on the moon with an unmanned mission Chandrayaan, for around $180 million total. The US is not the only game in space anymore. China has an aggressive plan to put man back on the moon. To ignore China's achievements is either racist or ignorance.

From Dec 13, 2011 Aviation Week
JSF - What's Really Happening
www.aviationweek.com...:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUse rId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%253a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%253abcb29d8f-6a85-40c5-8f1d-c84d20afe997&plckScr ipt=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

"When the Joint Strike Fighter team told Guy Norris about the jet's first run to its Mach 1.6 design speed, a couple of minor facts slipped their minds. Nobody remembered that the jet had landed (from either that sortie or another run to Mach 1.6) with "peeling and bubbling" of coatings on the horizontal tails and damage to engine thermal panels. Or that the entire test force was subsequently limited to Mach 1.0. "

"Since flight testing started to pick up speed in June 2010, 725 engineering change requests have been initiated, of which 148 are ready to incorporate. On average, it takes 18-24 months between the identification of a change and its implementation in production. JSF production orders started three to four years earlier than other fighters, and even under the current plan, close to 200 aircraft will be on order by the halfway point in flight testing."

Many of the issues described by the QLR have been reported, but not in detail. Others have been played down by the program. The following are four of the "big five" issues that have already surfaced. (The fifth is classified, but dollars to doughnuts it has something to do with stealth.)

We knew that the helmet-mounted display was in trouble. A simpler alternate HMD was ordered from BAE Systems in September, but it does not meet the requirement for "through the airplane" zero-light visibility provided by the electro-optical distributed aperture system. (Yes, that EO-DAS, that makes maneuvering irrelevant.)

Today, the killer problem with EO-DAS is latency: the image in the helmet lags 130 milliseconds behind sightline movement where the spec is under 40 ms. (So the video is where the pilot's head was pointed an eighth of a second ago.) That can't be fixed without changing the JSF's integrated core processor - the jet's central brain - and the EO-DAS sensors. Even the backup helmet faces buffet and latency issues, simply for symbology.

The underwing fuel dump system on the JSF doesn't get fuel clear of the aircraft surfaces, so that fuel accumulates in the flaperon and may get into the integrated power package (IPP) exhaust. That creates a fire hazard, particularly on a ship deck after landing. Fuel dumping has been banned except in an emergency. Two unsuccessful modifications have been tried on the F-35B.

The IPP - the cause of a grounding this summer, after a "catastrophic failure" caused IPP parts to puncture a fuel tank - is turning out to be unreliable. It's supposed to last 2,200 hours, but so far in the flight test program, 16 IPPs have been removed and replaced - a process that takes two days of 24-hour work.

The arrester hook issue has been reported. In the first round of tests, the hook failed to catch the wire once. The QLR notes that tests of a minimal modification - a reprofiled hook with different damper settings - set for April "represent only the initial stages leading into full carrier suitability demonstrations."

Studies are already underway of changing the hook's location - the basic problem is that the designers put the hook closer behind the main landing gear than that of any current or recent Navy aircraft, even the tailless X-47B - but that will have "major, direct primary and secondary structural impacts".

The QLR report predicts more problems, based on experience so far, historical data, and the collapse of the "test is validation" orthodoxy.

F-35 flight tests have not gone beyond 20 degrees angle of attack, and higher-than-predicted buffet loads have been experienced. So far, severity has been similar to current aircraft but it is experienced over a large part of the envelope. Exploration of the high-AoA envelope does not start until the fall of 2012 and full results will not be available until 2014. Excess buffet can accelerate airframe fatigue, and induces jitter in in the HMD. "

reply to post by Drunkenparrot


JSF - What really is going on - continued
"One editorial observation, not from the report: aerodynamic issues are a challenge on a stealth aircraft because some of the standard fixes - fences, strakes and vortex trippers, for instance - can't be used.

Other risks are individually less severe but cumulatively could result in substantial modifications. They include thermal issues - like the current speed restriction - and an untested lightning protection system, which at least until late 2012 means that the aircraft is not allowed within 25 nm of predicted lightning. (That is expected to cancel 25-50% of training events at Eglin AFB.) Weight margins for all versions are paper-thin."

The JSF is no where close to being ready for combat use. The program has been delayed so often Lockheed no longer gives a date as to when it will be combat ready. Of the JSFs delivered to date - they can't fly near lightening, they are restricted to Mach 1.


By the way, I never said you were baiting. I said you were baitin', and you still are.