 |
| |
|
|
Keygen
|
|
Athens, Hellas
Jan 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
US/Western planes had (still have) better electronics while USSR/Russian planes had (still have) better aerodynamics. No Western warplane can perform the "Super Cobra" maneuver." Russians also have some kickarse missiles such as the AA-11 (R-73) Archer So it is very difficult to say that which side is better.
|
I think on 70s and 80s Western aircafts were better on aerodynamics as well.
Now if we talk on late 80s and 90s then I will agree with you.
Sukhoy's aircrafts prototyped in the early 90s might have been of the same level or even better than the Western aircrafts. However with Eurofighter and F-22 and the awful Russian economy Russina aircrafts possibly will not have a chance to compete as equals.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
Each side went to great lengths to spy on one another. A good example is the Glomar Explorer expedition. The CIA, in cooperation with H. Hughes, built a huge ship called the Glomar Explorer, with a massive claw attached to it, and sent it out into the Pacific, allegedly to mine the Sea floor. What they were really after was a 1950s Soviet missle submarine that had sunk... and the CIA knew where it was because one of our subs heard it go down. They actually did recover part of the sub, but lost most of it when the claw broke about 1/3 of the way up (the sub was a couple of miles down, IIRC). They held a military burial service for a few Soviet seamen whose bodies they recovered. No info on the wreckage... whether or not they got anything useful. This is hardly top secret, since I saw it on the History Channel.
I wonder how many billions of dollars that cost - so we could get our hands on a Soviet nuclear sub. Clearly, if the KGB knew the whereabouts of a missing US sub, and thought they could recover it, they would have tried too. Such was the nature of the Cold War. They stole from us, we stole from them.
But none of this really has anything to do with the issue of the most dominating aircraft ever, does it?
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris 62
|
 |
But I'm feeling MUCH better now
Jan 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Serb
There is nothing strange in this. I've type my post when I'm on my job mostly and often from different computers, sometimes there is no 'Word' on those computers to put red lines below uncorrect words, in other cases I type my post in 'Word' then edit all mistakes in it and only after that copy it in answer's window. |
I'm sure.
quote:
So, you are continuing to think that East Germany, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary etc. were the Soviet republics?
I should remind you why all this were started by you. You've said that I do know nothing about history because I've said that SU felt in 1991. You've pumped in your chest and screamed that I am an idiot, because everyone knows that SU felt in 1989. Now, I'm saying that it is you are who shows the ignorance in history, because the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact are absolutely different things. The Soviet Union was the country while Warsaw
Pact was the military alliance. |
The Soviets were an Empire built on dehumanizing and slavery.
They fell in 89, the break=up of the bastardization known as the Soviet Union was in 91 for seperate Republics forced into it by military means, in other words, your playing semantics, I'm not.
Soviets were finished in 89, that's what I said, that's what I meant.
quote:
Buy new glasses for yourself. Where did you get that I'm from Serbia. Do you know the difference between Serbia and Siberia? |
Big who cares for where your from, they are equally useless.quote:
As for my nickname, it was created for Counter-Strike battles long time ago; it is a combination of first 3 letters from my real name (Sergei) and the first letter (B) of my family name. I don't see any reasons to change my nick because of you. |
I wouldn't care if you did, however, your wacky flag waving for Serbian Migs led to the logical conclusion that you are from Serbia, but your attitude has Soviet written all over it.
quote:
Yes, I love my country and my country is great country. So what? |
Russia is a sink hole that has long been a blot on human freedom, but hey, that's only my opinion.
quote:
Call me a boy again and I'll (huy s nim s Mingapulco) retaliate to you at the same manner "Old guy". I'm almost out of patience, my self-control far from Ming's. I've tried to be chill, but you continue to insult me, does it again and I'll answer to you with the same. |
I call you what you act like.
You tried to turn a discussion about airpower into a Russian love fest.
Sorry, for all of Russia's many aviation accomplishments, they don't have the best aircraft now, nor have they ever.
This was proved time and agin in operation.
You can waste your time denying it if you like, but it changes nothing.
quote:
Funny, when I translate our conversation to my buddies everyone laugh about your claims. |
Are they not all like you?
quote:
And you still do not understand why I did this, yet another proof that you refuse to think logicaly. |
I always think logically, and never comment on what I don't know about.
I wish we could say the same for others. 
quote:
Which one Russian fighter? Do you deny that all modern fighters have familiar design because the shape of a fighter dictates by aerodynamic laws? |
The designs of a fighter are dictated by it's designer, and in the case of Soviet designs, they bare a striking resemblance to US designs of the 70s and 80s.
quote:
Saddam don't by anything since long time. The last contract on sum of 1.5 billion $ was signed few weeks ago between China's government and Sukhoy corporation. You think the China is poor country? |
What are the odds the US would allow China to buy US air designs? 
quote:
I've already started it many post ago. The type was Il-2. |
This alone invalidates much of what you say.
The Stumovik was designed and used for ground attack, not strategic operations.
This aircrft is a Two seat design that was phased out of production in 1944, not even finishing WWII!
36,163 examples of this plane in various marks were produced, not a single one of them made a strategic bombing attack, ever. I don't know why you have it in your head they did, but they did not.
The intial production version carried 400kg of bombs (882 pds), a very light load even for a ground attack aircraft.
It did not have long range, less then 500 miles round trip.
http://www.ophetweb.nl/ww2w/ww2htmls/ilyuil2.html
It was the most produced aircraft yes, but not the most dominating, but it would rate in the top ten in WWII, I never said otherwise, you are the one insisting it's strategic, not I.
quote:
The topic of this thread is - The most dominating aircraft, I've gave a quote from Janes, just notice, not quote from our experts, but a qoute from yours (western) experts who said that Il-2 was the most produced aircraft in history. |
Numbers does not equate to domination, that is patently obvious.
quote:
First, it was in August of 1941 our bombers flight 1000 km in one way, dropped bombs on Berlin and then flight another 1000Km to return on base, USA was not even in war then. |
You made a very common laymen's mistake, the IL-2 Sturovik didn't attack Berlin, the IL-4 did!
http://avia.russian.ee/air/russia/il-4.html
Yet another example of how your comments are flawed young man, and why it's hard to take you seriuosly.
quote:
Second, Georing promised that not single bomb will felt on capital of third Reich, and Germans NOT didn't know they had been bombed! They didn't know WHO bombed them, because Germans believed that their Air forces will shoot down any Brit's bomber if Brits will try to bomb Berlin. Germans were absolutely shocked after those bombings, because they thought that it is impossible for Russians to cover such distance and bomb their capital. They refused to belief in this and Brits papers even posted a rejection after this and said that it was not a Brits bombers who bombed Berlin. |
Goering's comments had already been proven false by the RAF in 1940, germany he said would never be bombed, not just Berlin.
quote:
Third, you are still don't give any examples of familiar operations done by USAF. I'll gave two examples how Russian bombers cover 1000Km, make bombing and return to base. Without examples your claims that American bombers were better and have greater operational range are empty words. |
Your just making a fool of yourself, but since you persist:
Ploesti, round trip, 2,400 miles, or 3862.43 Kilometers , or 1431 KM each way, against the heaviestly defended target in the Riech.
Want more?
http://orbat.com/site/data/historic...ntidalwave.html
How about the US B-29, a plane that could and did carry 2,000pds or 907.185 Kilograms of bombs for 4,000! miles, or 6437.38 Kilometers
http://www.worldwar2database.com/html/japanbom.htm
I didn't even include strikes from England to Poland carried out by US warplanes, so now you begin to understand why we are incredulous at your outragious claims about Russia's aitpower, so far you have committed three glaring historical errors.
quote:
little land???
Look at map. |
Little, as in politcally insignificant.
quote:
And you'll pay for this someday.
Come and get us suckers, will teach you how to fight.
*Raise one of my fingers out of my fist* |
We don't need to.
There is nothing wrong with being Russian, being a Soviet is to be of questionable moral fibre in reguards to human rights.
Last edited by Chris 62 on 27-03-2002 at 00:37
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris 62
It's bullsh1t and you know better.
If you can't see the difference between freedom and Soviet Communism, and a lot of dumb-ass people can't your beyound hope Paiktis.
Your pictures made you look pretty damn ilithios, and I am quite angry with you.
You know the boy is wrong, massaging him and insulting me isn't the way to go, you know damn well the cry of freedom that went up when those bastard's grip on eastern and central europe was broken.
You want to make an enemy of me, so be it. |
I don't.
What I ask is a bit of respect for countries like Russia or Serbia. I can tell the difference between freedom and non freedom and I have done so over and over again. I have my ideas but I respect everyone (except when trolling but then it is obvious). I've never attacked anyone who didn't attack first.
I agree that I shouldn't have posted the photographs but I was pretty angry too. I didn't see any post where Serb insulted the US.
And since Serb is a kid as you say(actually just 2 years younger than me) why be so hard to him?
Despite your attacks, he didn't insult in kind, he was actually more mature about the whole thing.
I've never contradicted you before and you KNOW I respect you but my conscience does not permit me to stand idle when insults are thrown against people and nations so freely. If it was anyone else but you or a small handful of others I would have teared him to shreds (or at least I would have tried).
All I ask is for respect especially when it is 1 against 100.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris 62
|
|
But I'm feeling MUCH better now
Jan 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paiktis22
I didn't see any post where Serb insulted the US. |
I'm sure.quote:
Despite your attacks, he didn't insult in kind, he was actually more mature about the whole thing. |
"Maybe you interviewed Cadets"
"When were you ever iN Russia"
Calling me a liar is an insult, and I wasn't saying anything about Russia, but about Soviets.
Big difference.
Not only that, by saying I can't tell a cadet from an active duty officer is akin to calling me a moron.
Little boy got what he gave, same as always.
quote:
I've never contradicted you before and you KNOW I respect you but my conscience does not permit me to stand idle when insults are thrown against people and nations so freely. If it was anyone else but you or a small handful of others I would have teared him to shreds (or at least I would have tried).
All I ask is for respect especially when it is 1 against 100. |
When he's factual, I'll be the first to supposrt him, for instance, I posted about the Mig 15's superiority and the Red Air force's dominence in 43-45 on the Eastern front, but don't dare try to tell me that Russian designs have been smoking western ones for the last 50 years, it simply isn't so.
Russia acchieved many fantastic advances, like first sattelite, first Venus probe, first man in space, many fine acchievments.
It only cheapens them by this boy making up ones, especialy when it comes on the blood of my countrymen.
I will not have it.
And for the record, the date we conducted interviews was december of 1991, and most of the pilots were quite forthright, as are all military personel when dealing with other military personel, no matter what uniform they wear.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
steelehc
|
 |
Alaska
Dec 2001
time: 20:18
|
|
Chris: You're being a little harsh on the poor boy. He made up bunch of stuff, or had inaccurate sources, but didn't insult you (unless I'm missing something).
Serb: You are wrong on many counts. You have made a few valid points, however, your bullsh1t is making that look very unimpressive.
My votes for most dominant plane go to the F-105 Thunderchief and the B-29 Superfortress. The Thud had the highest straight-line speed of its time, and could carry more missiles and bombs then most other "fighters." The Superfort had the highest speed, longest range, best protection, and largest bomb load of any aircraft ever, until being exceeded by the B-36 Peacemaker. However, by the time the Peacemaker was available in large numbers, the Russian Tu-95 Bear was being produced, evening out the field.
Steele
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Serb
F-22 is no less a tech demonstrator then Su-47. With only differnce that SU-47 have far superior desine. The wings you are failed to do.
The Mig-25 was build in 1966 and it is not manufactured anymore, since 1985. But it is still the fastest fighter in the world capable to flight at Speed -3000 km/h. None fighter in the world beats its speed record.
|
Maybe in your world the F-22 is a demonstrator but in my world the F-22 will be in production 2004-5. Front line duty in 2008/10.
There is a book call "International Air Power Review" Pub by Airtime Publishing in England. They can be e-mail at airpower@airtimepublishing.com.
If you can get this book try it. You might find out just how good or bad some of your planes are. It is pub 4 time each year.
Now about the Mig-25. Have you ever heard of the A-12/F-12/SR-71? The International Air people said this is the fastest Airplane to fly. They went just fast enought to beat the Mig-25. And during the Cold War several Mig-25 try to shoot one down, however the SR-71 just outran it. The US Air Force will only said the plane will fly above 80,000 feet and fly at Mach 3.2.
The F-117 in Serbia was seen by Serbs on the ground and they shot several missile at it and one missile got lucky and hit the plane.
Have you heard of the X-29? It was a forward swept wing. Our X-29 has been flying since 1986.
Chris, I was going to write a summary like you did, however after reading your there would be no way to improved it so thank you. I found no errors.
To our Russian friend I will be 58 years on Thursday. And I'am a military buff.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:18
|
|
steelehc, wasn't the 105 a great plane except for all the unscheduled very hard umm, landings?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GP
Anything left at MINSY? Heard they closed it. Probably revenge for sinking my ship... |
As of yesterday Monday March 25 Mare Island is now part of Vallejo City prop. Gray Davis signed the paper work last Friday.
I was working on the 65 until April 30, 69. We had a RIF that day and my Supervisor was being broken back and so he transfer me to the 77 on Friday so he would have my place on Monday. And 17/19 days later guess what. I did not work on the 65 again until it came in for its overhaul some 4 or 5 years later.
I know how it happen but was never interview.
All those years they told us that a Carrier could not make it, however they lied. A Hornet type Carrier was tied up to Berth 12/13 for at lease 3 years and is now out in Suisun. Also there is a LPH there now. Might be the Iwo Jima.
I was one of the Shop 11 Test guys. We did the Tank Coordinator part also, closing and testing the tanks. Depending what year you were there, we make have spoken to each other.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris 62
|
|
But I'm feeling MUCH better now
Jan 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by steelehc
Chris: You're being a little harsh on the poor boy. He made up bunch of stuff, or had inaccurate sources, but didn't insult you (unless I'm missing something).
|
Calling me a liar is insulting, as is telling me I was "fooled" into thinking cadets were were officers, which would be interesting, as the average age of the men there was early 30s late 20s, very old for cadets.
quote:
Originally posted by joseph1944
Chris, I was going to write a summary like you did, however after reading your there would be no way to improved it so thank you. I found no errors. |
Thanks for the kind words, I would have extended it into the 60s and on, but somehow became ...distracted. 
If memory serves, Blackbirds were clocked at mach 3.2 at 80,000 feet, damn fast, in fact, the fatest military aircraft ever.
The Mig-25 is the fastest interceptor of all time, but it became understood that flat out speed wasn't everything.
http://www.sr-71.org/
quote:
Designed in 1958-62, the MiG-25 was to be used to intercept mainly the American supersonic XB-70 Valkyrie bomber, and other high-altitude fast-flying aircraft. Though it is large, heavy, and not at all technologically advanced, the MiG-25 is the fastest interceptor aircraft of its time. Armed with a powerful long-range radar and large AAMs, the 'Foxbat' has virtually no capability for close combat due to its bulky, unmaneuverable airframe.
Although the B-70 was eventually cancelled, production of the MiG-25 went ahead, and took to the air as the Ye-155R-1 recce prototype on March 6, 1964. A Ye-155P-1 interceptor prototype followed on September 9th of the same year. |
http://home.achilles.net/~rjl/aircraft_html/mig25.html
The F-15 Eagle was the first plane in history to ever have a thurst to weight ratio of 1:1, making near vertical climb possible.
Unlike it's predessor, the Phamtom II, it was designed from the ground up as an air superiority fighter, not multi-role, that came much later.
This remarkable machine is still as effective as when it first rolled out of the MacDonald Douglas factory.
http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/F_15_Eagle.html
It's a tribute to it's designers that nearly 30 years later it still flies as first line equipment.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by steelehc
Chris: I did not see him call you a liar, however, I have not read this entire thread. If he did, then I take back what I said. Go ahead and nail him.
I did not know that the SR-71 was clocked over Mach 3. Thanks for the link.
I think the Convair XFY-1 Pogo and the Lockheed XVF-1 Salmon were roughly 1:1, and they were built in the early 1950s.
Ming: Are you a pilot?
Steele |
Remember the SR-71 went just fast enough to beat the Mig-25 record. The Air Force even today will not say how fast she really is.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris 62
The Soviets were an Empire built on dehumanizing and slavery.
They fell in 89, the break=up of the bastardization known as the Soviet Union was in 91 for seperate Republics forced into it by military means, in other words, your playing semantics, I'm not.
Soviets were finished in 89, that's what I said, that's what I meant. |
bastardization ???? forced into it by military means????
 Btw, in summer of 1991 in SU was an national referendum (a poll, a vote) with only one question- "do you whant to live in one, solid country?". The absolutely majority of population answered- yes. The local political elite of republic desroyed SU, not poulation.
quote:
Big who cares for where your from, they are equally useless. |
Useless for whom?
quote:
Russia is a sink hole that has long been a blot on human freedom, but hey, that's only my opinion. |
the same I could same about USA now, look at Paiktis pictures to learn what the rest of the world think about USA.
quote:
You tried to turn a discussion about airpower into a Russian love fest. |
Because you and your buddies (them mostly) turned this disscusion into USA love fest.
quote:
Sorry, for all of Russia's many aviation accomplishments, they don't have the best aircraft now, nor have they ever. |
At least, this much close to truth. We don't have/had the best aircraft as well as you are. Both American and Soviet/Russian planes have its advantages and disadvantages. There never was an ideal plane and as I see it never will be.
quote:
Are they not all like you? |
Sorry, they are. No one is amirer of F-15 here.
quote:
The designs of a fighter are dictated by it's designer, |
Who works with aero dynamic laws to find the optimal shape of the plane and because those laws are constant everywhere on this planet, the optimal shape is const to. That's why shape of planes are familiar.
quote:
This alone invalidates much of what you say.
The Stumovik was designed and used for ground attack, [i]not strategic operations. I don't know why you have it in your head they did, but they did not.
It was the most produced aircraft yes, but not the most dominating, but it would rate in the top ten in WWII, I never said otherwise, you are the one insisting it's strategic, not I. |
 WTF??????????
What are you talking about? I've never, NEVER said that IL-2 was a bomber, even a child in my country know that it was Shturmovik not bomber. And I've never said that Il-2 was engaged in bombing of Berlin in 1941.
quote:
Numbers does not equate to domination, that is patently obvious. |
Ok, If IL-2 was a crap then yes, it is no matter how many of them were produced. But it was very good plane, with exelent fire power, Nazi ground troops called him a "Black Death" and exelent armour, Nazi fighers called him a "Concrete fighter".
So, I'm still think that there was no a absolutely dominating aircraft. All this thread is spam mostly, but if you whant to continue this, parameters must be establish to determnate the dominance, otherwise this spam will continue. You've said a quantity it is not a parameter to derminate the dominance, then
name the traits the most dominating aircraft should have.
quote:
Your just making a fool of yourself, but since you persist:
Ploesti, round trip, 2,400 miles, or 3862.43 Kilometers , or 1431 KM each way, against the heaviestly defended target in the Riech.
Want more? |
Thanks for the links.
quote:
Little, as in politcally insignificant. |
Like Nepal or Bangladesh, right?
quote:
There is nothing wrong with being Russian, being a Soviet is to be of questionable moral fibre in reguards to human rights. |
Thanks for explanation that there is nothing wrong to being a Russian. In other words you giving me a right to live? 
It means that your powerfull army will not invade my little and useless country in near future? 
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-03-2002 20:05
|