The Glory Might of the XM29.

[Spartan198]

Originally Posted by Ace Oliveira

MT2008. It's nice to train and arm up against both conventional threats AND unconventional ones, but a lot of those contracts like the Future Soldier and the F-22 and XM29 are just shit. We have a good military that can kick conventional ass. I'm sure we could win a war with North Korea. Of course, there would be Millions dead and Seoul would be in shambles there would be shit loads of refugees crossing the border into the South and China.

I agree on Future Force Warrior and such, but aircraft are getting ever more advanced as time goes by, especially Russian designs like the Su-37. And with the rapidly-deteriorating relationship between the US and Russia, they're more than likely going to be willing to sell to our enemies and possibly even do the flying for them. We will eventually find ourselves in a conventional war where air superiority is key. And an aircraft like the Sukhoi that can snap its nose back in mid-air to take a potshot at a trailing fighter is going to be a severe threat to our "adequate" F15s and F18s that can't even hope to match that kind of maneuverability. I'm not saying technology trumps all, but it definitely plays a big part. An aircraft like the F22 that can match the aerodynamic capabilities of the most advanced of OpFor aircraft is only going to make the fight easier and a bit safer for our guys.

[Ace Oliveira]

Well, i do like the F-22 a little. But the F-35 is just way better. What we need is to make the AC-130 the standard issue Ground Attack plane and buy hundreds of them. Those things could win wars.

And Spartan, The US-Russian Relations are deteriorating as fast as you think.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Ace Oliveira

Su-37s. Really? Did you forget what Matt said? We aren't going to fight fighter jets in a long time.

I have my opinion like everyone else, and Spartan198 is free to disagree with me. What Matt says is not gospel turth.

I also didn't say we don't need fighter jets for a long time; I simply question whether we really need the F-22 in particular. If you really don't think we need fighter jets, PERIOD, then go vote for Cynthia McKinney or something.

[Ace Oliveira]

Matt's word is law, dammit.

Also, the F-INSAS like the rest of the Future soldier shit, looks horrible. However, since it's India that is doing it, don't they have better places to invest their money? Like education to fix the 61 percent of Indians that are illiterate. How about, fixing the overpopulation? Seriously, India doesn't need this shit. Actually, no country needs this shit.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Spartan198

Not that I'm either agreeing or disagreeing with you, but considering the F35 was designed from the outset as a strike fighter (much like the F16 and F/A-18), asking it to do the job of an F15 or F22 is only going to result in the US losing a lot of planes (and possibly pilots) when Su-37s start showing up.

First of all, I do agree with you that the F-35 cannot perform the same role for which the F-22 was designed. They are two very different types of fighters with different capabilities.

As for the Su-37 (which was the main argument in Congress used to argue for more F-22s), there are a whole bunch of issues I have with this:

(1.) The Su-37 is an updated version of the Su-27 Flanker, an airframe which is now 30+ years old, just like the F-15. It's considered a 4.5 Generation fighter, instead of a 5th Generation fighter like the F-22. Both the Su-27 and F-15 are 4th generation fighters. What Russia has yet to develop (at least efficiently) is a 5th Generation fighter. And the Chinese aren't any closer.

(2.) Although particular circumstance vary, most analysts agree that generally speaking, an American fighter of the same (or even a slightly older) generation as a Russian fighter is still superior. The Su-37 integrates technology into the Su-27 (namely, fly-by-wire) that the U.S. has been perfecting since the FIRST incarnation of the F-15. Even though engineers might debate performance aspects of the two aircraft (i.e. the thrust-to-weight ratio of a Sukhoi's engines versus an F-15), at the end of the day, the F-15 pilot still has battlefield capabilities that a Sukhoi pilot doesn't. Russia is WAY behind us in everything from HUD design to countermeasures.

(3.) Comparing individual fighter aircraft to each other is probably the single WORST way to argue that one air force is better-equipped than any of the others. Fighters are the smallest part of the big picture. Let me put it this way: It doesn't matter if the USAF ever tries to bomb Venezuela and Hugo Chavez sends his new Su-37s out to deny us air superiority. Even against our F-15s, he doesn't stand a chance in hell. His fighters might be half a generation ahead of ours on paper. But his AF doesn't have our satellites, our AWACS, our training and experience, and our industrial capabilities.

Or, if you want a historical (as opposed to theoretical) example, think of Iran's air force after the Islamic Revolution. Iran has F-14s that we sold the Shah back in the 1970s. But the pilots that we trained back in those days have long since retired, while the U.S. has hit Iran's military with an embargo on spare parts. Without well-trained pilots and American industrial support, the F-14s have basically been collecting rust in the hangers since the Iran-Iraq War ended (and even in that war, Iran's F-14s didn't exactly do an outstanding job against Iraq's older-model MiGs and Sukhois).

So, the point is, a country that buys the Su-37 from the Russians today would be the same situation. And that's why they will NEVER stand a chance against the USAF, no matter what fighters they have. And it's also why I think even our aging F-15s, as long as they are flown by American pilots and supported by American defense contractors, will wipe the floor with even Su-37s, just about any day of the week.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Spartan198

And with the rapidly-deteriorating relationship between the US and Russia, they're more than likely going to be willing to sell to our enemies and possibly even do the flying for them. We will eventually find ourselves in a conventional war where air superiority is key. And an aircraft like the Sukhoi that can snap its nose back in mid-air to take a potshot at a trailing fighter is going to be a severe threat to our "adequate" F15s and F18s that can't even hope to match that kind of maneuverability.

Another point worth mentioning...while Russian pilots may be training to perform this maneuver, can you seriously even begin to imagine Venezuelan or Iranian pilots being that good?

I remember how it used to be that everyone was afraid of the MiG-29 because of an exercise conducted between the USAF and Luftwaffe where an ex-East German MiG-29 managed to shoot down an F-16C in close combat. There were some analysts who wondered if the same thing would happen during ops against the Serbian AF during Operation Allied Force in 1999 (since the Serbs had working MiG-29s to deploy back then). As it turned out, of course, USAF and Dutch F-16s shot down several of the Serbs' MiGs. Why? Because German and Russian pilots are a million times better than Serb pilots, and because the Serb MiGs had been plagued by a lack of spare parts since the Soviet Union fell.

[Ace Oliveira]

Would the Brazilian Air Force be a match for the Venezuelan Air Force?

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Ace Oliveira

Would the Brazilian Air Force be a match for the Venezuelan Air Force?

Once the F-X2 program selects its choice for the new fighter (and most analysts agree it'll probably be the Dassault Rafael), I'd say yes. Brazil already has defense infrastructure and resources vastly superior to that of Venezuela. But a new fighter is a lot more important for Brazil than it is for us (though the Mirage 2000s currently in service are quite capable in their own right).

Also, my understanding is that Brazilian modernization plans are mostly emphasizing naval expansion right now. There are also issues with outdated equipment and lack of funding in the Army (something like half of the armored vehicles in their inventory are not serviceable).

There's another thing to consider about Venezuela, too - most of Chavez' military (who started their careers when Venezuela was still run by pro-Western governments) hates his ass and might mutiny. The whole reason he's buying so much Russian hardware is that he's trying to build up a separate military to the one that existed before he took power (in the same way that Khomeini had to form the Revolutionary Guard to counter-balance the Shah's military). Coups remain a huge concern for Chavez.

[Gunmaster45]

I was impressed with the F22 after watching Transformers, but it does seem like an overkilling superior design we don't need right now. And the M61A2 Gatling gun it is armed with has a rather small amount of ammo.

I figured I'd include some info on guns again, because this gun based thread is going fighter jet and politics on us.

[Vangelis]

If you're going for stupid rifle designs, the OICW really isn't even in the same league as some of the ridiculous projects that preceded it, particularly SPIW / SALVO, which managed a wonderful combination of impossible initial goals and ridiculous demands of the prototypes, which ended up being some truly bizarre weapons. What can you really say about a flechette-firing rifle with internally discarded sabots, a grenade launcher with a 25-pound trigger pull, a demand that an over-under weapon loaded with 60 5.6mm flechettes and 3 40mm grenades come in under ten pounds, and the realisation, years into the project, that the flechette rounds would actually deflect off raindrops?

As for stupidest tank engine, the turbine might not make sense in today's world, but the US trumped it many years ago with a tank that wouldn't make sense in this world or any other. The T-95 or T-28 had four sets of treads, 12 inches of frontal armour, a 105mm main gun and weighed 95 tons. And what was it powered by? Um...One Sherman engine, with an almighty 5.2 hp / ton.