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.
Originally posted by Alex Dude
So whatever Russia sells to other countries will ALWAYS be less efficient than the product that is used in Russia itself.
The same goes for America and other countries.
Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Originally posted by Alex Dude
So whatever Russia sells to other countries will ALWAYS be less efficient than the product that is used in Russia itself.
The same goes for America and other countries.
With Russia, 110% yes. America, no. The U.S. always sells the complete product, sometimes even superior versions. The F-15K Slam Eagle is currently the best version of the F-15E Strike Eagle, yet its used only by the Republic of Korea Air Force. Then there was the famous sale of the F-14A Persian Cat. Some say the product was sabotaged in some way, but there is no evidence saying so and its incredible combat performance also says otherwise.
Originally posted by danwild6
To bad even if Putin pushes the button most of them (if not all) wouldn't get 10 ft of the ground.
US Nuclear Primacy
Originally posted by StellarX
Well that article is not really dealing with reality as far as i can tell
Originally posted by StellarX
and i would be very interested to know why you believe that the USSR are deploying NEW mobile ICBMs but had no money to service the older one's.
Originally posted by StellarX
Should we not be more suspicious of the US arsenal where the newest ICBMs were actually taken out of service? I think the destruction of the 'Peacekeepers' is quite revealing as to the general intent of the American government.
Originally posted by Cruizer
All the Sovs ever did was sell its last generation hardware to its satellites. They got the old MiG 15s when the MiG 21 was new and so on.
The MiG 25 that Viktor Belenko delivered to us was front line, cutting edge Sov-tech that was totally underwhelming.
Apart from a few innovative applications and old-fashioned tech taken a bit farther than thought possible the plane was a paper tiger.
US manufacturers had abandoned most all of the technology found on the MiG 25 long ago. This goes for every other weapon system they had.
Know how our last-generation equipment and hardware goes to the National Guard and Naval Resreve? That's about how far behind the curve the Sovs were versus the US all the time, but we didn't know it or believe it.
They like us would not equip a vehicle with the latest technology for sale to another nation. As example a less sophticated radar or fire control system might replace the one in the US version.
But over all the performance of things like the MiG 29 or F-16 is same same. The export model doesn't have a wider turning circle or less responsive throttle. The export T-72s had the same engine as the home model etc.
Originally posted by StellarX
The MiG 25 that Viktor Belenko delivered to us was front line, cutting edge Sov-tech that was totally underwhelming.
Underwhelming if compared to the design CHOICES made by the Russians at the time. The Russians could have done the whole solid state electronic thing but how many planes could they have built and at what cost to the country? If something is not efficient in a strategic military sense why consider it?
Apart from a few innovative applications and old-fashioned tech taken a bit farther than thought possible the plane was a paper tiger.
It would have been able to fight in a EMP environment and it's powerful radar could burn trough ECM operated at the time. It could be repaired even in remote areas and little infrastructure as would have been the likely situations after a nuclear exchange. I would LOVE to see how you think 1100 odd high performance planes that could outrun anything that could fight back are 'paper tigers'. Even when operated by Iraqi' pilots they managed to fly circle's around American pilots and missiles on at least a few occasions.
Originally posted by rogue1
Erm they could of, since when. The Russians didn't possess solid state electronics back then, let alone be able to equip a fighter with with them.
Originally posted by danwild6
Gee Stellar I didn't know you were so far up in the Kremlin I mean what information are you privy too.
Well the USSR isn't because it doesn't exist anymore.
If you mean Russia then the article states that over 80% of Russia's ICBMs are past their fire by date.
And it would have probably been more costly to refit them rather than to develop new systems.
After all Russia's new found economic prosperity has only happened in what the last 2-3yrs. Russia's financial position meant she had to neglected her weapons systems for over 10yrs leaving them pretty much useless.
Not nearly as much as we should be suspicious of Russia's. The US has been constantly upgrading and testing its weapons capability.
Originally posted by rogue1
Erm they could of, since when. The Russians didn't possess solid state electronics back then, let alone be able to equip a fighter with with them.
LOL once again a complete misunderstanding. For a start the MIG-25's radar had an extremely narrow search radius and was completely useless without a ground radar station directing it.
Also if it's engine were run anywhere near maximum power they required an extensive overhaul after landing, which incidentally requires alot of infrastructure
I would like to see at least a little back up that these MIG-25's flew rings around the US in the Gulf War " at last on a few occassions " ( which is a contradictoey statement n itself ).
Originally posted by StellarX
Originally posted by rogue1
Erm they could of, since when. The Russians didn't possess solid state electronics back then, let alone be able to equip a fighter with with them.
Which is completely irrelevent as solid state electronics simply do not function in a nuclear war environment. The US military is designed to terrorize the third world while the USSR designed it's forces to win a global nuclear conflict.
LOL once again a complete misunderstanding. For a start the MIG-25's radar had an extremely narrow search radius and was completely useless without a ground radar station directing it.
It was not 'completely useless' by any stretch of the imagination and since it would be directed by ground control it hardly needed the best radar anyways. The Soviets did what they could with what they had and in a nuclear war environment American planes would have been dropping from the sky like stones making the perceived weakness of Russian planes largely irrelevent with no one left for them to fight.
Also if it's engine were run anywhere near maximum power they required an extensive overhaul after landing, which incidentally requires alot of infrastructure
The original engines were intended for a mach 2+ drone recon platform and they were adapted as best they could to the new plane. If one looks at the original specifications what they managed with the '25 is nothing less than extraordinary. They could be flown at Mach 2.5 and were redlined at 2.8' to prevent severe wear and tear which higher speeds would lead to.
Mig-25's over Iraq certainly managed higher speeds than American F-15's and if that is not a clear advantage i'm not sure what is.
Nothing contradictory in saying that the few times Foxbats met American's planes there were some upsets. The only air to air kill the Iraqi's managed was also due to one of these encounters....
Originally posted by Cruizer
The Iranians are Persians in name by choice but they don't have a better system of training that USA by any stretch of the imagination.
Remember they were in a deadlock war for 8 years with Iraq and couldn't beat them and we went through Iraq like poop through a goose
Originally posted by Cruizer
"Fight like you train and train like you fight." That says it all for any of these tinhorn wanna-be countries with lots of toys they don't know how to play with.
It's not the equipment and weapons, it's the soldier. And these guys ain't got it.
All you have to do is look at Iraq and note that not one Allied aircraft was defeated when engaged by enemy pilots.
Every time Israel has been attacked it's been by superior arab forces in number and even equipment they have defeated them.
The obvious conclusion is that arabs can't fight so they turn to blowing themselves up.
How long does the US armed forces retain the average conscript soldier and how long does a certain officer get to know his specific command or station?
the fact that it's going as badly as we know it is seems to indicate that the Iraqi's still have fight left after all that.
Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
The US doesn't conscript soldiers.
Unfortunately Stellar, many people believe...like you, that it is the Iraqis who are fighting the US. When in reality, the US is in the middle of a war between Shiites, Sunnis, pro-Saddam people, pro-Iranian, etc.
They are all clamouring for control of the government and Iraq itself.
That is why you hear about all the Iraqi civilian deaths in Iraq by car bombs, shooting in mosques, civilian torture, etc.
I guarantee you, people getting taken off buses and being shot because they are Sunni is not the Iraqi people fighting for "independence" from the US.
But believe if you want it is the Iraqi people who have a fight left in them
But in reality, they want peace, and have NO fight left in them.
Originally posted by danwild6
And promptly turned into scrap metal. Lets hope Iran recycles.
Sorry to be so blunt(oh that sounds good)but in GW1 and Kosovo everyone said America was going to get its ass kicked by incredibly sophisticated and wonderously cheap Russian weaponry. And it all turned out to be crap.
Originally posted by StellarX
Well who said that and how well informed were they? I expected the US to sustain more casualties in the initial invasion of Iraq but it turns out the Iraqi defense plans were compromised by the Germans ( Don't remember how they got it) probably saving a good many American lives. With 'friends' like German intelligence who needs enemies...
Originally posted by StellarX
The NATO air force ( American air force) was almost completely ineffective against Serbian ground forces and if you do not know that i can understand why you think what you do. Have you looked at what really happened or are you telling me what CNN said? Truth of the matter is NATO forces were largely ineffective even thought they were not even fighting modern Russian weaponry...