F22/35/16 vs. MiG's SU's and other flying crap - Updated Plane Thread

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Smaug

Senior member
Jul 16, 2002
276
0
0
Actually Ilizium, despite what you say, Israel has a wonderful Air Force. The tactics they use are extremly excellent. If you remember the 6 day war, they imagined to destroy almost 95% of the Egyptian Air Force in an 8 minute time frame while they were on the ground. Yet you are right that's not Air superiority. Yet Israel does indeed have a better Air Force then russia say. For example, Russia's current jets are Mig-29's(they cannot afford Su-37's), and their training is poor(if they cant afford to go to international tournaments, how the hell can they afford maintinance, Jet fuel aint exactly cheap). Israel does actually hold exercizes with germany as well as the US. As for the military aid, ummmm yes, so? We protect Israel because if we didnt give them that funding, there would be a good chance they would dissapear off the face of the map. It would be quite literaly another holocaust(if you think the arabs wouldnt try to wipe out all the jews, you haven't read yer history).
Anyhoo its late, *yawn* night folks .
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
" how the hell can they afford maintinance, Jet fuel aint exactly cheap). "

JP8=Kerosene pretty much.



Originally posted by: AndrewR
Ok, do you even know what you're talking about? Mig-29 far superior to the F-22? HA! You've got to be kidding me. Also, I'm quite positive that the Mig-29 is on the same level as the F-15.

You were right on the first assertion but wrong on the second. MiG-29 is not a match for the F-15.

Unfortunately the F-4 is friggen huge next to a MIG.

Never seen a MiG-25 have you?

The F-14 is no "fighter" in my books. It's too big and lumbering to be maneuverable.

The Tomcat is an interceptor -- the only one still in the U.S. inventory. It's also STILL the premier carrier borne fighter aircraft, which is fairly amazing considering how long it's been around. It does have a great deal of capability though is showing its age a little around the edges.

Like I said, we need to get these two planes together and have a competition.

F-15s and F-16s go head-to-head all the time.

Oh, and one comment on a certain person in this thread, echoing a sentiment expressed above:
Lizium you are killing me here. You know NOTHING about what you are talking about!!!

The C-130 is used as a bomber on occassion, but rarely.

The primary carrier for weapons in the cargo plane category is the MC-130, not the standard C-130. There is a huge difference there between the Combat Talon and the Hercules.

Wasn't the name "Puff" given to the early C-47 gunships? And Spectre is the name given to the C-130 version. Or is "puff" the generic name for a gunship?

Yes, Puff is the name of the C-47s, while Spectre is given to the AC-130H. The newest version is the AC-130U Spooky.


Finally someone knows what they are talking about.

 

Pocatello

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,754
2
76
About the 1970 Russia/Egypt vs. Israel conflict... That was a loss for the Russian pilots yes, but if you read up on that you will find out that the whole thing was carefully set up, the Israeli pilots attacked, and Russians NEVER even got the command to shoot them down... Russians were also flying Modified Mig's, which Egypt provided, which were supposedly unfamiliar to them. Israelis went at it and just fired away, I don?t think Russians even fired back.
The Russians weren't up there for fun. They were chasing a couple of Mirage III. The Russians flew Mig-21J (the latest version) on that day, I don't think the Egyptians have the ability to modified such a high-tech jet at the time. In fact, all the maintenance crews and air controllers were all highly trained Russians, not Egyptians. What the Russians didn't know was the Mirages were back up by F-4E. When the F-4E launched Sparrow missiles, the Mig-21 broke formations and started evading maneuvers, no chance to fire back (you expect a fair fight perhaps?), the Mirages and Phantoms closed in with Sidewinder missiles and guns.

Like I said, I am sure there are many more articles on Israel Pilots being the greatest, etc... Here in US at least. I think that the Russians with their Su's 37 and Germans with their Eurofighters can go against any US or Israeli fighter force, and probably win... that?s just my opinion. I personally don?t like wars, and don?t view US or Israel as "fighter" countries; we tend to hide behind our technology.
Do you know how many Eurofighters the Germans have ready for combat or planned to purchase?
The Israeli are notorious for using cannons to make a kill, not until the 70s did the Israel air force started to put missiles and electronic countermeasure aboard their jets. Even with reliable missiles of the 80s, which you don't even have to get behind to get a shot off, the Israeli pilots still like to maneuver close behind an enemy and blast him out of the sky, such as the battle against the Syrian Migs over the Bekkah Valley.

I would believe you more lizium, it you can back up your claim of Germans and Russians superiority as fighter pilots.
 

RanDum72

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2001
4,330
0
76
The Mig-29 was built by the former Soviet Union in direct response to the F-15. HOw well they stack up against each other in a dogfight, nobody really knows. The Mig-29 may have a faster top speed and higher ceiling (Russian aircarft have always excelled in this area. The Mig-25 flies higher than the SR-71 and flies almost as fast) but the F-15 has always been the benchmark for climb rate and pulling the most G's. Only the F-16 can match the F-15 on the G's but if you put them against each other in a dogfight, the F-15 would win hands down. Its more powerful (two engines), climbs faster and just as agile. The beauty of the F-16 is that its got the most bang for the buck. Its cheap to make, yet you can adapt it to many roles. During the 80's, when Israel made a bombing run against a site in Iraq suspected of making nuclear stuff, F-16's made the bombing runs while F-15's hovered above to dogfight any possible enemy. The F-15 wasn't called an "air superiority" fighter for nothing

As for the planes, the most current Russian planes puts an emphasis on dogfighting capabilities. They are behind in avionics but if Russian and American planes are equally equiped with the latest gizmos and flown by equally trained pilots, who would win?
 

Pocatello

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,754
2
76
As for the planes, the most current Russian planes puts an emphasis on dogfighting capabilities. They are behind in avionics but if Russian and American planes are equally equiped with the latest gizmos and flown by equally trained pilots, who would win?

Everybody dies

Here is an interesting look at modern air to air combat

When Within Visual Range air to air combat occurs, today Short Range Air to Air Missiles is so deadly that you don't have to maneuver too much to get a shot at the enemy.
 

lizium

Senior member
Jul 17, 2002
285
0
0
Here read this Russian Pilots This doesnt have any recent info, but it containts some great historical facts.

This makes sense because MiG-15 is considered the better plane. Its just that Chinese and North Korean pilots were SO bad that the US could score a 13:1 kill ratio against them. Many US and Soviet pilots were veterans of World War II. Most of the Soviet pilots sent to Korea were veterans and aces, including Ivan Kozhedub, 3-time Hero of the Soviet Union with 62 German kills to his credit. So pilot quality was even (since USSR sent almost exclusively elite pilots, you could even say that man-for-man they were superior). In addition to their good scores against enemy fighters, the Soviet pilots were the primary reason the US stopped using B-29 bombers (US first switched from day to night bombing and, after 1951, hardly used them at all).
 

lizium

Senior member
Jul 17, 2002
285
0
0
Typhoon - points out that a target beyond 40km range "can feel free to maneuver without fear of engagement". This is echoed by Robert Shaw, former US Navy fighter pilot and author of Fighter Combat Tactics. "There is virtually no missile that you can't outmaneuver at maximum range."

Article: http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/idr/idr010529_1_n.shtml

- Interesting, since someone here claimed that most of the misssiles fired will hit the target, and its useless to outmaneuver them....
 

jlee

Lifer
Sep 12, 2001
48,517
223
106
Doh, brain fart... AC47 = Puff...sorry

The primary carrier for weapons in the cargo plane category is the MC-130, not the standard C-130. There is a huge difference there between the Combat Talon and the Hercules.

It is still based on the same airframe, however...that was my general point
 

lostatlantis

Senior member
Aug 27, 2000
684
0
71
Smaug, I agree with you that Israel has an excellent air force and that Russian air force lack funds and training.

As for the military aid, ummmm yes, so? We protect Israel because if we didnt give them that funding, there would be a good chance they would dissapear off the face of the map. It would be quite literaly another holocaust(if you think the arabs wouldnt try to wipe out all the jews, you haven't read yer history).

I agree we have to help the jews so they won't "dissapear off the face of the map". But I think in recent years we've gone a little bit too far. There are many groups of people on this earth that face persecution, no offense to jews in anyway but what makes Jews so special to qualify for the massive amount of support from US? The current situation in the middle east is seriously messed up, and really, Israel is the heart of it all. All unrest and stuffs like Bin Laden and al queda resulted from our over-zealous support for Israel. Come on, look at Sharone. Yeah, I am sure his true intent is to peace talk.


On the other hand, Jews have had it pretty rough throughout history. There was an interesting point we discovered in a discussion about this topic in one of my college classes, and it was that the western nations (US, England, etc) established Israel partly because they didn't want that many Jews in their nations. It's a different perspective, a realistical way to see that the intent to establish Israel wasn't purely humanitarian.

But, if one really look at history, the Palenstianian had it pretty bad when Isreal was established. Mainly they lost their land, their houses, practically everything they had. And, under the UN edict, Israel was suppose to give the Palenstianians right to claim their land or be offered a financial "rebate" for their lost. None of that happened. Imagine if you have no nation to back you up... you show your passport and basically you're a nobody with no true nation and at the mercy of other nations to take you on a humanitarian basis. I don't know about you, but somehow I don't think i would be too happy about it. It's ironic that Israel did this to them, since Jews have been treated the same way before. I guess they just wanted to keep the hate cycle going...

One more note, I remember Sharone made an official statement in front of Israel's equivalent of our Congress saying that "we have the Americans by their noses" and that they can do practically anything they wanted to regarding attacks on Palenstianians. It caused an uproar in the US and Bush had to make an countering statement basically saying you better watch your mouth. Sharone retracted his statement later, but this just goes to show you that maybe, just maybe, we might be "helping" Israel too much to the point that we are indeed the sucker of the deal. Don't forget our liberal media, including CNN to abcnews news. They always favor Israel in some form or the other. And like somebody here in the thread said before about Jewish bankers, Jews have a huge influence on our governmental decisions. I had to do a research about media bias and that's pretty much a given fact that all US media tend to be on the liberal side and pro-Jewish. It's all about portraying image. Honestly, how many of us have actually been over to the middle east to assess the situation for ourselves? So, if most of America watch CNN or the other major news networks, and these networks keep portraying an image where Jews are the victim, we will inevitably have this view set in our mind resulting in "blind" support for Jews. I am not saying we shouldn't help Israel, but if you pay attention to the way the news media portray Jews and Palenstianians, the subtle points can be seen.

oops sorry for the essay

 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,937
264
126
You should apologize for that erroneous garbage you call an essay. The Palestinians were not a free people before the state of Isreal was ratified. Your essay is way off the truth.
 

Desslok

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2001
3,780
11
81
Originally posted by: lizium
Wow a lot has happened, haven?t checked this thread in a while. Stop your nonsense flaming (you know who you are). I never claimed to be USAF expert. I do thank people who have expressed their opinions in orderly fashion. Let?s keep this going. Hard to believe, but yeah we are paying Israel Billions upon Billions every year... why? Well, fact is that Jews control large chunks of our banking system... This is not a racial/ethnic remark it?s a fact :Q Like I said, I am sure there are many more articles on Israel Pilots being the greatest, etc... Here in US at least. I think that the Russians with their Su's 37 and Germans with their Eurofighters can go against any US or Israeli fighter force, and probably win... that?s just my opinion. I personally don?t like wars, and don?t view US or Israel as "fighter" countries; we tend to hide behind our technology. About the 1970 Russia/Egypt vs. Israel conflict... That was a loss for the Russian pilots yes, but if you read up on that you will find out that the whole thing was carefully set up, the Israeli pilots attacked, and Russians NEVER even got the command to shoot them down... Russians were also flying Modified Mig's, which Egypt provided, which were supposedly unfamiliar to them. Israelis went at it and just fired away, I don?t think Russians even fired back.

This is sounding more and more like a Nazi rally. "The Jews control the banks" Oh come on, this isn't the 1930's

Lizium say what you will but you have no clue on what you are talking about. Isreal has had to fight for it's very life from day one. First the British then the other Arab countries trying to push them into the sea. The only reason why they are still around is that they fight. You don't want to give your enemy a fair fight. That is why Isreal is so good, they plan their attacks out tot he smallest detail and then execute to that plan. You knwo why the Soviet's never got the command? Because all their ground command stations were under attack at the same time as the air was going on. The Soviet's were flying modified Mig's? Most likely they were export versions and the pilots that were in Egypt were there to train other pilots on the aircraft so that excuse is as flimsy as all your others.

That wasn't even the first time that the Soviets sent pilots to fight. Look at Korea, during the early days of the Chinese invasion 90% of the mig pilots were not Chinese. That said look at the kill ratio in Korea once the F-86 was sent over. If I remember correct it was around 11-1. I am not knocking the Mig 15 since it was an amazing aircraft. It was just that the American pilots were better train and were allowed to roam and not be tied to ground controllers.

 

lizium

Senior member
Jul 17, 2002
285
0
0
Amen to that lostatlantis... your absolutely right.

I am honestly the most liberal person on this earth (well maybe not, but I am close), but what Jews are doing really angers me. I have a lot of friends all over the world, I often keep in touch with friends in Russia, Turkey, Romania, Europe etc... What Americans don?t realize is that there are 2 sides to every story. Fact is they Israel is all alone in this world, and we (US) are dumb enough to support them to the point of us (Israel + USA) vs. them (the whole world). When I speak with my friends who live outside of the USA, their shocked at what Americans tend to think. American media portrays Israel as the "good guys" and Americans are naive enough to believe everything they see on CNN/MSNBC/etc... Obviously not all Americans, but the vast majority. I was watching an Israel "based" channel the other day (RTN) and Jew's were calling in to give their comments. There comments were "Destroy all Arabs with LASER (hehe yes, he said laser) Weapons!" "We must all join to kill the Muslims" and my favorite, "Jews are the superior race, we are all brothers, Israel and America are one, we can defeat the Evil Arab world".

This is all true... I am not shocked, are you? :Q

I am done, flame me all you want if you dare, I am just speaking the truth. Back to planes maybe?
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: lizium
Amen to that lostatlantis... your absolutely right.

I am honestly the most liberal person on this earth (well maybe not, but I am close), but what Jews are doing really angers me. I have a lot of friends all over the world, I often keep in touch with friends in Russia, Turkey, Romania, Europe etc... What Americans don?t realize is that there are 2 sides to every story. Fact is they Israel is all alone in this world, and we (US) are dumb enough to support them to the point of us (Israel + USA) vs. them (the whole world). When I speak with my friends who live outside of the USA, their shocked at what Americans tend to think. American media portrays Israel as the "good guys" and Americans are naive enough to believe everything they see on CNN/MSNBC/etc... Obviously not all Americans, but the vast majority. I was watching an Israel "based" channel the other day (RTN) and Jew's were calling in to give their comments. There comments were "Destroy all Arabs with LASER (hehe yes, he said laser) Weapons!" "We must all join to kill the Muslims" and my favorite, "Jews are the superior race, we are all brothers, Israel and America are one, we can defeat the Evil Arab world".

This is all true... I am not shocked, are you? :Q

I am done, flame me all you want if you dare, I am just speaking the truth. Back to planes maybe?


You should watch Al Jazera *sp* sometime if you really want to be shocked. There is not going to peace in that part of the world until one side is completely obliterated. That is sad, but true.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: RanDum72
The Mig-29 was built by the former Soviet Union in direct response to the F-15. HOw well they stack up against each other in a dogfight, nobody really knows. The Mig-29 may have a faster top speed and higher ceiling (Russian aircarft have always excelled in this area. The Mig-25 flies higher than the SR-71 and flies almost as fast) but the F-15 has always been the benchmark for climb rate and pulling the most G's. Only the F-16 can match the F-15 on the G's but if you put them against each other in a dogfight, the F-15 would win hands down. Its more powerful (two engines), climbs faster and just as agile. The beauty of the F-16 is that its got the most bang for the buck. Its cheap to make, yet you can adapt it to many roles. During the 80's, when Israel made a bombing run against a site in Iraq suspected of making nuclear stuff, F-16's made the bombing runs while F-15's hovered above to dogfight any possible enemy. The F-15 wasn't called an "air superiority" fighter for nothing

As for the planes, the most current Russian planes puts an emphasis on dogfighting capabilities. They are behind in avionics but if Russian and American planes are equally equiped with the latest gizmos and flown by equally trained pilots, who would win?

NOthing flys as high as the SR-71 or as fast. The mig-25 was built to counter to the SR-71, but still is not were close to the ceiling of the SR-71. THe mig-25 is fast, but only for very short sprints. The SR-71 cruises at mach 3+.
 

lizium

Senior member
Jul 17, 2002
285
0
0
AMDTechGeek, read the article i posted ^^^ It has all the info on Russian pilots and planes during Korea war. As i recall it stated that Russians were seperior at that time, and they along with US has best kill/death ratios.
 

lizium

Senior member
Jul 17, 2002
285
0
0
Someone correct me if i am wrong... but if i remember correctly the Blackbird was developed in the 1970's... Its a reconisance plane, not a fighter. The MIG-25 is a miltipurpose fighter, not a reconisance plane, and it was finished in 1965.... They are 2 different planes, designed at different times for different missions.
 

Desslok

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2001
3,780
11
81
The Mig-25 was developed to counter the XB-70. The AF cancled the XB-70 program but the Soviets kept the 25. The brass was scared sh$tless by it till a Soviet pilot defected to Japan with it and when it was inspected they actually found rust on the place. The Soviets used iron if I am not mistaken on parts of th wings.

 

RanDum72

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2001
4,330
0
76
NOthing flys as high as the SR-71 or as fast. The mig-25 was built to counter to the SR-71, but still is not were close to the ceiling of the SR-71. THe mig-25 is fast, but only for very short sprints. The SR-71 cruises at mach 3+.

The older Mig-25's had a top speed of Mach 2.83, one was actually clocked at Mach 3.2 over Israel during the early 70's ( but the engines burned out). But there are newer versions since then, like the Mig-31 (based on the 25) and some reconnaissance versions can run at Mach 3.0 for extended periods (although not as extended as the SR-71 as they don't have the equivalent fuel capacity or efficiency). A Mig-25 set the altitude record back in Aug. 31, 1977 at almost 124,000 feet. SR-71's usually max out at between 100,000 - 115,000 feet.

The Mig-25 was made as an interceptor to the XB-70 "Valkyrie" bomber (scrapped) and the SR-71 spy plane. The SR-71 was developed in the early 60's, same period as the Mig-25.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: RanDum72
NOthing flys as high as the SR-71 or as fast. The mig-25 was built to counter to the SR-71, but still is not were close to the ceiling of the SR-71. THe mig-25 is fast, but only for very short sprints. The SR-71 cruises at mach 3+.

The older Mig-25's had a top speed of Mach 2.83, one was actually clocked at Mach 3.2 over Israel during the early 70's ( but the engines burned out). But there are newer versions since then, like the Mig-31 (based on the 25) and some reconnaissance versions can run at Mach 3.0 for extended periods (although not as extended as the SR-71 as they don't have the equivalent fuel capacity or efficiency). A Mig-25 set the altitude record back in Aug. 31, 1977 at almost 124,000 feet. SR-71's usually max out at between 100,000 - 115,000 feet.

The Mig-25 was made as an interceptor to the XB-70 "Valkyrie" bomber (scrapped) and the SR-71 spy plane. The SR-71 was developed in the early 60's, same period as the Mig-25.




ceiling over 85000 feet for sr-71

Ceiling of ~75,000 feet for mig-25

Both of these are high flying aircraft, but the sr-71 in the end will have the highest ceiling for the longer period of time.
What good is flying at 115000 feet if you have immediatly descend because you are out of fuel?

 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: lizium
Someone correct me if i am wrong... but if i remember correctly the Blackbird was developed in the 1970's... Its a reconisance plane, not a fighter. The MIG-25 is a miltipurpose fighter, not a reconisance plane, and it was finished in 1965.... They are 2 different planes, designed at different times for different missions.

Actually the Air Force tried to make the SR-71 into an intercepter. Take a look at the YF-71 sometime.
 

Desslok

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2001
3,780
11
81
WOW the YF-71. Forgot about that experiment. Didn't they try and stick a drone on the back of it also so they could confuse the Soviets radar?

 

RanDum72

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2001
4,330
0
76
Both of these are high flying aircraft, but the sr-71 in the end will have the highest ceiling for the longer period of time.

I'm not talking about how long an aircraft can stay that high. All I said is that the Mig-25 can fly higher and is almost as fast as the SR-71. I also mentioned that although the newer Mig-25's can can fly higher and faster longer than the older versions, they don't have the equivalent fuel capacity and efficiency of the SR-71 (read my previous post again) so therefore their range would be more limited.

As for the ceiling, the 'official' ceiling of the Mig-25 is 75,000 but a lot of people know it can fly much higher than that.
Link.
The Mig-25 was at 123,523 ft. If it could fly that high, if only for brief periods, it sure can fly for extended periods at 85,000.
It also set the altitude record with 2000kg payload at almost 122,000 ft.
Here's another link, with different sides being presented.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |