Greatest Military Hardware

helpimcrap · 14 Dec 2007 at 18:40

Gonzo0 said:
I agree with the other post about the F 22.

It would slaughter any other plane including the not so mighty Eurofighter. With thrust vectoring the F 22 is very agile and is also very hard to spot by radar plus it has supercruise ability.

Im glad britain has purchased the F 23 (Joint Strike Fighter), we need cutting edge fighter hardware

agreed. the Eurofighter is a 70s design which was 15 years too late.

Britain wants to cut defence down, but you need kit to do that.

helpimcrap · 14 Dec 2007 at 18:43

Feek said:
I'm not, I'm saying its specific design is flawed in a certain well known way.

a bit like saying mohamed ali wasn't great as his flaw was he got knocked down regardless of how many he put down.

Amp34 · 14 Dec 2007 at 19:41

Nope, the exception is the howitzer carried by the AC-130 gunship.

Now that simply amazes me, the fact they can stick a 105mm Howitzer in an aircraft. Just think of the shock on the airframe for one! :eek:

helpimcrap said:
agreed. the Eurofighter is a 70s design which was 15 years too late.

Britain wants to cut defence down, but you need kit to do that.

It may be a 70's design, but it's still rated as possibly the second best fighter after the f22 (and only just).

The Running Man · 14 Dec 2007 at 20:29

taking the context of the time id have to say;

helpimcrap · 14 Dec 2007 at 21:17

Amp34 said:
It may be a 70's design, but it's still rated as possibly the second best fighter after the f22 (and only just).

for how much we invested in it after other parties dropped out its a bit of a white elephant. we should have teamed up with america on this. they may not be able to fly a damn but they build the best kit!

Vulcan · 14 Dec 2007 at 22:54

Nickg said:
taking the context of the time id have to say;

Odd choice, what makes you think that is the great military hardware?

Amp34 · 14 Dec 2007 at 23:06

helpimcrap said:
for how much we invested in it after other parties dropped out its a bit of a white elephant. we should have teamed up with america on this. they may not be able to fly a damn but they build the best kit!

Did I mention that the F22 is about 5 times more expensive than the Typhoon too...

KennyBhoy · 14 Dec 2007 at 23:17

Frightening the manoeuvres the Su-27 "Flanker" can pull off :eek:

Deleted member 651465 · 14 Dec 2007 at 23:28

Gentlemen.

Lest we forget..

Gonzo0 · 15 Dec 2007 at 00:00

Amp34 said:
Did I mention that the F22 is about 5 times more expensive than the Typhoon too...

But when the time comes that we need decent fighters i would want to be safe in the knowledge that we spent the money for top notch defense.

Im shocked that we also dont have a single stealth fighter/bomber. We have to rely on the Americans for that

Tefal · 15 Dec 2007 at 00:12

Gonzo0 said:
But when the time comes that we need decent fighters i would want to be safe in the knowledge that we spent the money for top notch defense.

Im shocked that we also dont have a single stealth fighter/bomber. We have to rely on the Americans for that

Are you shocked that Serbians managed to shoot down a 122 million dollar stealth fighter with anti air missiles from the 60's and that by adjusting their radar's they could bypass the stealth technology?

No matter how good the technology, a good commander will always find away around it.

Gonzo0 · 15 Dec 2007 at 00:30

But its proved useful in many occasions such as conflict desert storm. Stealth bombers were the first wave to knock out iraq defences, not a single fighter was spotted.

Tefal · 15 Dec 2007 at 00:39

Gonzo0 said:
But its proved useful in many occasions such as conflict desert storm. Stealth bombers were the first wave to knock out iraq defences, not a single fighter was spotted.

From this experiment we have learnt Iraqis are not as smart as Serbians

And yes there where good against the first civilian targets, (80 % hit rate) how ever during the war they only successfully hit (40 %) of their targets.

Indy500 · 15 Dec 2007 at 00:43

Tefal said:
Are you shocked that Serbians managed to shoot down a 122 million dollar stealth fighter with anti air missiles from the 60's and that by adjusting their radar's they could bypass the stealth technology?

No matter how good the technology, a good commander will always find away around it.

Yup, they also shot down an F-16. Their other ~670 shots missed because they were fired unguided.

Tefal · 15 Dec 2007 at 00:49

sr4470 said:
Yup, they also shot down an F-16. Their other ~670 shots missed because they were fired unguided.

Still cost less than the planes

And if we ever get involved in a war where stealth planes are actually necessary, you can bet the enemy won't be using such old weapons.

They got an f-15 with those missiles too.

wonder how these planes would fare against something from the last 2 decades.

And they weren't unguided

where did you get that 670 figure from and is it from the whole war, not just what what was fired in the operation to take down one plane?

Indy500 · 15 Dec 2007 at 00:54

Tefal said:
Still cost less than the planes

And if we ever get involved in a war where stealth planes are actually necessary, you can bet the enemy won't be using such old weapons.

They got an f-15 with those missiles too.

wonder how these planes would fare against something from the last 2 decades.

Big radar signature, thats why.

Tefal said:
And they weren't unguided

where did you get that 670 figure from and is it from the whole war, not just what what was fired in the operation to take down one plane?

Whole war. By unguided, I mean they were aimed using the human eye. Presumably their radars got destroyed early on? The figure was a coalition estimate, IIRC, and obviously has a margin of error.

Tefal · 15 Dec 2007 at 01:02

sr4470 said:
Big radar signature, thats why.

Whole war. By unguided, I mean they were aimed using the human eye. Presumably their radars got destroyed early on? The figure was a coalition estimate, IIRC, and obviously has a margin of error.

No they used mobile radars, on old scud launchers along with mobile sams. along with camera modifications.

Indy500 · 15 Dec 2007 at 01:04

Tefal said:
No they used mobile radars, on old scud launchers along with mobile sams. along with camera modifications.

I'm not disputing that the Serbians had good equipment, but something must have been hindering their effectiveness if out of hundreds of craft overflying, only a few were destroyed.

Amp34 · 15 Dec 2007 at 01:06

Gonzo0 said:
But when the time comes that we need decent fighters i would want to be safe in the knowledge that we spent the money for top notch defense.

Im shocked that we also dont have a single stealth fighter/bomber. We have to rely on the Americans for that

But as I pointed out in my previous post it is almost as good as the F22, infact less than a lot of people like to admit.

So you have the choice 50 F22's or 250 Typhoons for your money. I know which one I would choose...

Gonzo0 · 15 Dec 2007 at 01:09

Amp34 said:
But as I pointed out in my previous post it is almost as good as the F22, infact less than a lot of people like to admit.

So you have the choice 50 F22's or 250 Typhoons for your money. I know which one I would choose...

I dunno coz the F 22 would last for much longer whereas the typhhon is already getting outdated so would need replacing as time goes on.

Greatest Military Hardware

Deleted member 651465

Deleted member 651465