Military talks, 2010 + Options

[Kalga]

Oh look at the news here: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/08/20/no...jong-un-report/

[__CrUsHeR]

^Interesting article, brings a good idea of what is the NK's army.

[Oldschool22]

Just thought to put this out there, but who has a superior fighter?
United States: F-22 Raptor
United States: F-35 Lightning II
Russia: SU-47 Berkut
Russia: T-50 PAK-FA
China: J-31 Shenyang
China: J-20 Black Eagle
Japan: ATD-X Shinshin
India: HAL AMCA

[MARS]

Whichever one of these is 'superior' can only be proven once they actually go up against each other. Thing is, modern air warfare doesn't revolve so much around planes engaging other planes as it boils down to one side launching a decapitation strike against the opposing air force and trying to wipe it out while it is still in the ground. So - whoever gets the first/most shots in on the opposing airfields will end up superior, but probably not by pure virtue of having the better planes but using them to their fullest in conjunction with other arms.

[Serialkillerwhal...]

In a "Nearly today" fight the Raptor is the only one truly in major production, as opposed to the near-finished stages of the other planes. This gives it time to iron out it's kinks and of course makes production easier.

In the end, logistics trumps nearly everything else in war.

[Oldschool22]

true, all true, the raptor is the only one in production while the others are still being tested, but the raptor and its pilots are meant to fight against extreme overwhelming odds, like 1 flight of raptors ( 4 planes ) vs, say, a squadron of su-47 flankers ( 16+ planes), eventually, the raptors will run out of BVR missiles ( like the sparrow or the ammram) and have to get in close with heat seekers ( Aim-9's) and cannon, at VR combat, radar stealth no longer hides it, boiling it down to old fashion dog fighting where the best pilot in the best plane wins, that's my scenario for gen 5 vs gen 4 fighters

here's my scenario for gen 5 vs gen 5, fighters will eventually be fitted with low frequency radar which can detect stealth aircraft, they pick each other off at long range, then survivors go home, this is shorter because gen 5 aircraft are meticulous and expensive to build, which means there will be less of them, and because there will be less of them, if you lose one or two, you've lost a huge part of your air-dominance

we will have to wait and see which will be superior when they fight each other, either in training or in war

[Darky]

true, all true, the raptor is the only one in production while the others are still being tested, but the raptor and its pilots are meant to fight against extreme overwhelming odds, like 1 flight of raptors ( 4 planes ) vs, say, a squadron of su-47 flankers ( 16+ planes), eventually, the raptors will run out of BVR missiles ( like the sparrow or the ammram) and have to get in close with heat seekers ( Aim-9's) and cannon, at VR combat, radar stealth no longer hides it, boiling it down to old fashion dog fighting where the best pilot in the best plane wins, that's my scenario for gen 5 vs gen 4 fighters

here's my scenario for gen 5 vs gen 5, fighters will eventually be fitted with low frequency radar which can detect stealth aircraft, they pick each other off at long range, then survivors go home, this is shorter because gen 5 aircraft are meticulous and expensive to build, which means there will be less of them, and because there will be less of them, if you lose one or two, you've lost a huge part of your air-dominance

we will have to wait and see which will be superior when they fight each other, either in training or in war

Su-47 is never going to be mass produced unless there are some news I don't know about. They're also not Flankers.

That theory involves a lot of assumptions.

[Oldschool22]

oops, i meant su-27's, they both look almost exactly the same

[The General]

oops, i meant su-27's, they both look almost exactly the same

SU-27:





SU-47:

[__CrUsHeR]

Nowadays the biggest advantage of a fighter against another is software integration, for example the advanced link of a fighter with an AWACS. If a country does not have such mechanisms can have the best fighter in the market that will be neutralized before even detect anything on radar.

[Oldschool22]

i must be bad with names, SU-27




SU-37



This post has been edited by Oldschool22: 7 Sep 2014, 18:45

[Maxwell Sinclair]

I wanted to add something interesting to the military talks. Then I remembered I live in New Zealand, so instead I will add this.



The New Zealand airforce at its finest. Clearly we have the most superior planes. *sigh* Idk whats up with the pic...

This post has been edited by Maxwell Sinclair: 31 Oct 2014, 12:48

[{Lads}(Ivan)Spet...]

Nowadays the biggest advantage of a fighter against another is software integration, for example the advanced link of a fighter with an AWACS. If a country does not have such mechanisms can have the best fighter in the market that will be neutralized before even detect anything on radar.

Depends, Russia for example has their fighters fly in 'packs' in which one or two planes which are fighters have AWACS while the rest have hunter killer systems so they can be more autonomous as AWACS are usually easy targets with a volley of anti-radiation missiles. The best fighter will be the one with the best maneuverability and longest reach.

[{Lads}(Ivan)Spet...]

I found this very interesting article on Fox.

I am pretty late on this but that was the Stuxnet right? Kaspersky eliminated it within 2 weeks I believe, so that virus in the end was pretty quickly destroyed.

[{Lads}(Ivan)Spet...]

Whichever one of these is 'superior' can only be proven once they actually go up against each other. Thing is, modern air warfare doesn't revolve so much around planes engaging other planes as it boils down to one side launching a decapitation strike against the opposing air force and trying to wipe it out while it is still in the ground. So - whoever gets the first/most shots in on the opposing airfields will end up superior, but probably not by pure virtue of having the better planes but using them to their fullest in conjunction with other arms.

That has always been the case, WW2 is a classic example when the Germans wiped out the much larger and powerful Soviet airforce on the ground causing the commander of the Soviet VVS to commit suicide. Again in the 6 days war I believe were Israel destroyed all of Syria's and Egypt's airforce within the first 6 hours of the war on the ground. However when two modern militaries are fighting this problem is almost impossible to replicate. Take for example Russia or the US who both have such extensive early warning systems that sneaking up on one another is nigh impossible. In an actual air battle, dog fighting is still a reality as much as BVR combat is touted it simply isn't going to be the norm. Superior fighters go a very long way when two sides have parity in almost every other department. The major powers lacking these capabilities are China except for its seaboard and most Central European powers.

[Serialkillerwhal...]

I wanted to add something interesting to the military talks. Then I remembered I live in New Zealand, so instead I will add this.



The New Zealand airforce at its finest. Clearly we have the most superior planes. *sigh* Idk whats up with the pic...

Where did you bastards get prototype Canadian 5th-gen Fighters?

[__CrUsHeR]

Depends, Russia for example has their fighters fly in 'packs' in which one or two planes which are fighters have AWACS while the rest have hunter killer systems so they can be more autonomous as AWACS are usually easy targets with a volley of anti-radiation missiles. The best fighter will be the one with the best maneuverability and longest reach.

For more than a fighter has detection and control systems - all fighter has - just a dedicated aircraft like AWACS will provide a real advantage due to superior electronic capabilities.

Speaking specifically of a fighter there are several other factors to take into account how their autonomy, and maintenance - the latter depends on adequate logistics.

[Serialkillerwhal...]

The reason dedicated AWACS planes are better is literally because they're bigger, and have more room for AWACSy things and people in and on it than a regular plane.
While computers are getting smaller, it's still true that a bigger computer using the same tech is gonna have more power than a smaller one.

[__CrUsHeR]

An impressive video of close combat in Grozny-Checênia where apparently Chechen elite troops using AK-101 or AK-105 (or both) face terrorist insurgents in a building: Chechnya terror attack: Heavy fighting in Grozny, fierce shootout (EXCLUSIVE)

Anyone know tell me what is the rifle that appears to 1:50 of the video?

This post has been edited by __CrUsHeR: 4 Dec 2014, 13:40

[zourv]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VSS_Vintorez

[Mcbob]

Official Humvee replacement announced today: Oshkosh L-ATV

[__CrUsHeR]

^ Was reading about it right now, apparently will be able to withstand the blasts from IEDs, something that Hummvee currently can not; probably Oshkosh L-ATV increase the mobility of American troops.

[Mcbob]

Would be cool if we saw this modeled for generals, I'd say.

[__CrUsHeR]

For those who like the Russian aviation in action: MAKS-2015 Airshow (LIVE NOW)

[__CrUsHeR]

An incredible evolution for the USA UCAVs: X 47B Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle • 1st Inflight Refueling