Russians get a bit nosey..

Zefan said:
Why do you guys all think that the western stuff is SO much more advanced than the Russian stuff?

One of the main reasons the F-22 hasn't been deployed yet is because it has been matched by Russian fighters therefore they'd waste money putting them into service. Sure it has advanced computer systems that handle all the jigerry pokery, but it's no match for a Su-30 in a dogfight. As for modern long range targeting systems being a western only thing... get real :p
Click to expand...

and we dont know whats capable of the berkut
img4.jpg
 
riddlermarc said:
Am I right in thinking that the Russian planes were/are built using technology such as valves etc to minimise the risk of damage from EMF measures? The thinking being that "old" technology would last better than a uber-spicy plane that was as risk of disabling?
Click to expand...

In some cases yes - this principal was used in a lot of there kit and it was a tactic russian designers learnt hard in WWII (though more with tanks - same principal), they could build highly advanced tanks like the germans, in the same reduced quantites, but when its -45 degrees outside and your groundcrew maintance staff may not be that highly skilled, probably run on vodka, and all you aim to gain by increasing the technology of military equipment is going to be a compromise between how much stuff it can kill, and how survivable it is. So they made there stuff simple and easy to repair upgrade and modify with proven technology. This means they dont need highly skilled maintenace staff - or as many, your more likely to fix what you've got and you can build huge numbers of the more simple stuff without expensive components.

So for example - a late russian coldwar tank may have been say 10% less effective in combat than the american equivilent. But it was less likely breakdown - if it did it was easy to fix, it took less to maintain them, cost less to build, a you could build twice as many of them!
 
Captain Planet said:
What, a big profit making machine for Lockheed?
Click to expand...

Very good point actually - American arms corps have huge profits, russian ones run much nearer the line for internal stuff, reducing costs and reducing the chance of corners being cut to I should imagine - as profits are not such an emphasis - effectiveness for price is.

Different mindsets I suppose.
 
Zefan said:
Why do you guys all think that the western stuff is SO much more advanced than the Russian stuff?

One of the main reasons the F-22 hasn't been deployed yet is because it has been matched by Russian fighters therefore they'd waste money putting them into service.
Click to expand...
You're wrong.

The F22 IS being used in service right now.
I was even talking to an American F117 pilot at fairford about it.


Zefan said:
Drooooooooooooool :D

Lovely aircraft, such extraordinary design.
Click to expand...
Much like the X-29 that the Yanks tested. Linky
 
Digital Punk said:
The F22 IS being used in service right now.
I was even talking to an American F117 pilot at fairford about it.
Click to expand...

Nowhere near the scale it should be though. It's been ready since the 90's and it's only around in small numbers.
 
AthlonTom said:
Just flicked through a bit more of the thread;

The Bear is actually a maritime patrol aircraft, not disimilar in function from our Maritime nimrods. Tehy can carry sonobouys, depthcharges, torpedoes etc etc, while you may look at it and assume its rubbish because its prop-driven. other than being a little slower than similar sized aircraft, its really no less vunerable - these planes all pack modern electronics and jammers etc. A nimrod verses a eurofighter would loose just as quickly as a bear once in visual range.
Click to expand...


Afaik the nimrod can carry sidewinders as a last resort. Bears can't. </GEEK>
 
Zefan said:
Nowhere near the scale it should be though. It's been ready since the 90's and it's only around in small numbers.
Click to expand...
It was being tested during the 90's.

New aircraft especially ones like the F22 take years of trials and testing.

The F117 squadrons are being replaced with the F22, just like the Typhoon's are slowly replacing Tornado's.

Its not as easy as just saying, "here's your new planes, enjoy!"
 
neil3k said:
Afaik the nimrod can carry sidewinders as a last resort. Bears can't. </GEEK>
Click to expand...

TBH - it really is a last resort - the pilot attacking a nimrod would have to be stupid to killed by an airframe twice the side and half the speed. And aggressor forces out at sea would have stand off weapons with a much greater range than that of the short range sidewinder.

Probably makes the crew feel better though!
 
AthlonTom said:
Very good point actually - American arms corps have huge profits, russian ones run much nearer the line for internal stuff, reducing costs and reducing the chance of corners being cut to I should imagine - as profits are not such an emphasis - effectiveness for price is.

Different mindsets I suppose.
Click to expand...


i guess it depends which you percieve to work and ultimately which provides the best and most robust ideas. In a similar way to the debate Capitalism vs Communism (ideology)

does competative nature provide better, more efficient, safer products? does it breed innovation?

when you consider that lockheed will have been competing economically against other designers to win the contract...
 
Wardie said:
Meh we've got new Destroyers and Subs on the way anyways :P
Click to expand...

What all 6 of them?

Contrary to what the government is trying to make people believe our navy is taking a step backwards in terms of firepower. Yes the new ships may be bigger and more powerful but they can't compare to the 12 ships they are replacing.

With all this talk about which plane is better you are all forgetting one thing. If a proper war kicked off I don't know if even the US could afford to produce planes like the F22 in large enough quantities to win a war. The russian way of producing half a dozen planes of slightly less quality for the same price as one F22 would almost certainly win. Look back to the second world war for some conformation of that.
 
Amp34 said:
What all 6 of them?

Contrary to what the government is trying to make people believe our navy is taking a step backwards in terms of firepower. Yes the new ships may be bigger and more powerful but they can't compare to the 12 ships they are replacing.
Click to expand...

Agreed... As for those new aircraft carriers - what a joke. Complimented by VTOL aircraft of limited range and armaments, no arrester gear or catapults, no dedicated fixed wing AWACS support, lack of armour, lack of a nuclear reactor, slow cruising speed, only two of them... Not to mention their potential silly names. More wasted money, methinks.

Amp34 said:
With all this talk about which plane is better you are all forgetting one thing. If a proper war kicked off I don't know if even the US could afford to produce planes like the F22 in large enough quantities to win a war. The russian way of producing half a dozen planes of slightly less quality for the same price as one F22 would almost certainly win. Look back to the second world war for some conformation of that.
Click to expand...

A squad of F-22s could eliminate a group of Russian fighters 4-5 times their size. They really are that good. You're also forgetting the vast waves of older generation aircraft that the air force and navy would likely field in support. Couple this with better training, procedures, weapons, AWACS, intelligence and aircraft maintenance. The US is pretty much invincible in terms of conventional warfare at the moment, I'm sorry to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom