whats this?

[Abhi 3]

well ,

one thing i dont understand is why the superhornet and f-35 are always criticized,the f-35 is even not functional yet.

 

still the most surprising element is experts even from US allies state that sukhois are better.

[+ST0RM 145]

The main issues with the F-35 is that its two years BEHIND schedule and the price tag is increasing. In today's shrinking defense budgets, this is unacceptable. Many countries and militaries have "placed all of their eggs in one basket" when they signed on for the F-35. The USMC has nothing to replace it's Harriers and has no other option but to sticking it out and wait. The USAF thinks it can replace the A-10 and F-16. The RAF is now rethinking it's numbers and types they will buy to replace the Harriers and Tornado GR4. Stealth is great, but if you can only bring two bombs to the fight, then what real benefit is the aircraft? I could go on, but I'll leave it open for others.

 

As for the SH. It's great for the Navy as a replacement for the Legacy Hornet. It has slightly longer range and can bring back a heavier bomb load to the ship, instead of jetisoning them prior. However it does have some compromises that some people can't get past.

 

Time will tell for the F-35. Personally, I'm not a fan.

 

-S

[+Typhoid 231]

the issues also are that the F-35 is a step down from capabilities from the F-22. But of course, less cost so we can afford them.

 

But to open the whole capability vs cost vs numbers and the F-22/F-35 debate would take a long, long time.

 

The SuperHornet still comes into critisism based on range vs payload. We have, over the years, replaced aircraft capabilities with fabulous smart weapons technology so the reduced payload at range is made up for by having really awesome weapons.

 

some of us, however, opine that if we had the kind of range/payload combinations we used to be able to field (think F-14 and A-6) combined with those same super awesome smart weapons, we could REALLY go downtown and turn infrastructure into rubble.

 

that's why some people still grumble. I am one of them.

[Abhi 3]

F-35 IS DERIEVED FROM F-22,SO when us will sell it to allied countries i'am sure that some tech will be secretly passed to countries like russia and china,ultimately compromising f-22s hardpoints.

[Silverbolt 104]

F-35 IS DERIEVED FROM F-22,SO when us will sell it to allied countries i'am sure that some tech will be secretly passed to countries like russia and china,ultimately compromising f-22s hardpoints.

 

 

I really doubt, mainly because F-35 will employ local technology, or those who won't get own technology on it will probably get downgraded technology from US.

 

btw, i've never heard such critics about the super Hornet.

[+Typhoid 231]

"btw, i've never heard such critics about the super Hornet."

 

quite a lot within US Naval Aviation. Most of us who are critical now have "Retired" after our ranks...........

[Silverbolt 104]

"btw, i've never heard such critics about the super Hornet."

 

quite a lot within US Naval Aviation. Most of us who are critical now have "Retired" after our ranks...........

 

ah, i was one of those too, but the time passes and people grow...i've ever heard about ''SH is the easiest plane to take off and landing on a carrier so far''.

[Abhi 3]

SH is considered inferior to present generation sukhois despite its advanced avionics and ecm suite,while sukhois still have PESA radars.

[Silverbolt 104]

SH is considered inferior to present generation sukhois despite its advanced avionics and ecm suite,while sukhois still have PESA radars.

 

 

the main question is ''by who ?'' and ''which aspects ?''...Sukhoi family hasn't got a drastic airframe change like the first generation of hornets to the last of Super Hornets.

 

if you want to compare those almost useless stunts that flanker family does, you should compare Sukhoi's RCS with SH's, certainly the SH is a way discreet compared with flanker.

 

 

oh, and lets not forget, in a exercice the Growler , wich is a part of SH's family did shot down an Raptor.

 

also SH have a lot of smart and advanced weapons if you compare with Flanker family wich remains with ex-soviet stuff, mostly updated offcourse, but still with old lines.

[Abhi 3]

WELL THIS WAS a analysis done by RAAF ex chief and air power Australia.personally i think in future fights will be bvr only and in that case SH is good.

 

oh, and lets not forget, in a exercice the Growler , wich is a part of SH's family did shot down an Raptor./quote]

 

 

please tell me how it got a lock on raptor.

[Silverbolt 104]

WELL THIS WAS a analysis done by RAAF ex chief and air power Australia.personally i think in future fights will be bvr only and in that case SH is good.

 

wel, i'd say don't take carlo Kropp to much serious he wanted to make lobby to Australia get the Raptor and not the F-35.

 

please tell me how it got a lock on raptor.

 

Well, i'm not american, nor work to USAF or even was in the exercice, so it will be quite hard to me get how it was done .

but that's not the first time an Super Hornet shots down a raptor in a exercice, first was about two years ago, and HUD caption with the raptor on reticle, and the second was an Growler that appeared with an F-22 killmark.

 

 

Link

[+Typhoid 231]

SH is considered inferior to present generation sukhois despite its advanced avionics and ecm suite,while sukhois still have PESA radars.

 

I had a nice chat with some of the Hornet and SH types out at Lemoore a few years ago, including some of the SFWS graduates and instructors. I asked them those pointed questions about how well they'd do against modern Flankers, given equal pilot skills and level of tactical proficiency (key caveat). After the first round of mandatory kick-@$$ blustering was over, they admitted that things could get kind of dicey......

 

 

 

the issue of which would do better in a fight is all woven into the operational scenario, tactical situation and profesional level of training and tactics of the opposing forces. Now with that enormous caveat out of the way - it boils down to which update mods and weapons have been installed in the opposition aircraft. These platforms and weapons capabilities have been see-sawing back and forth for years. Some of the stuff on the Super Flankers have come out first or caught up, and some of the stuff on the Super Hornet have come out first or caught up.

 

and remember that the super weapons with brilliant seekers integrated into the aircraft and cockpit and helmets is a major, major part of any such equation.

 

overall - tough call between them. I've heard some of our best fighter pilots and generals say, referring to exercises, that our pilots in our planes beat their pilots in their pilots but that our pilots in their planes beat our pilots in our planes. And then our guys went and played with the Indian AF and got their @$$ handed to them........

 

(lots of exercise artificialities at play - which goes back to my first point on scenarios, etc.)

 

So who the heck knows? We'll find out when someone with SH's goes up against SF's. I'll go with the SH, but then I'm kind of biased.....

 

[+Typhoid 231]

"please tell me how it got a lock on raptor.

 

 

Well, i'm not american, nor work to USAF or even was in the exercice, so it will be quite hard to me get how it was done ."

 

the raptor pilot got careless and broke tactics, and the hornet pilot that the raptor pilot didn't see got a visual. No, I'm not kidding.

[Silverbolt 104]

happen in best families

[Abhi 3]

first of all IAF pilots were srewed up coz they were not authorized to use their radar and ecm equipment .second they were rookies pitted against aces.third we are not going to confront the US in future its Russia and China..fourth the US Military establishment lives in a state which psychologists term as "denial". i.e they think that they are the best,to an extent this is true but not completely.

Edited December 4, 2009 by satish

[+Typhoid 231]

first of all IAF pilots were srewed up coz they were not authorized to use their radar and ecm equipment .second they were rookies pitted against aces.third we are not going to confront the US in future its Russia and China..fourth the US Military establishment lives in a state which psychologists term as "denial". i.e they think that they are the best,to an extent this is true but not completely.

 

EVERY fighter pilot who straps on a jet and heads "downtown", no matter what plane or uniform he's wearing or country he flies for - had better think he's the best!! or he's dead before he ever manned up.

 

 

the cold, calulated planning and tactics development with full knowledge of realities also has to be approached in the ready rooms, AOC planning cells, and tactics development schools. it takes both.

 

the feedback I got, back when I was still on an ops staff, was that the Indian AF was the most professional and tactically sound force our guys had flown against in exercises. and yes, both sides kept back their best tools for the exercises.

[FastCargo 412]

satish,

 

You really don't know the average fighter pilot...from your forces or ours.

 

See, having flown with and instructed IAF (including a Su-30MKI pilot), USN, and USAF pilots, let me tell you a few things:

 

1) Fighter pilots are some of the most self critical guys I know. Don't let the swagger fool you. They take all threats VERY seriously, and will promptly hand you your ass in the debrief if you aren't on your "A" game during the fight. Combat aircraft pilots don't treat this as a flying club...but as deadly serious business. They spend HOURS in the vault, studying threats, tactics, strategies...they'll make up crap that's never been tried to win. Denial? Hardly.

 

2) Why do you insist on selling your pilots short? Having flown with "Bops" and "Sandy", 2 IAF pilots currently on separate T-38 exchange tours (yes, they are instructing pilots in the USAF on how to fly the T-38), I can tell you that both were professional. Were they godlike? No. Did they suck? No. Pretty much middle of the road...with maybe a slight handicap learning how we do things in the USAF. I wouldn't have expected any different from your Su-30MKI deployed unit.

 

3) The best professional aviators always train harder than they expect to fight. The idea is that if training is so hard, actual combat will be like clubbing baby seals. So, yes, you won't get to use all your toys during training...the idea is to make it harder on yourself.

 

4) Finally, one last thing as far as intel goes. There are several civilian and US government owned Su-27s and MiG-29s. Heck, we get to play against them on a semi regular basis. Even have a couple of MiG-29s in the USAF Muesum. Now, I'll be the first to admit I could be wrong...I've just never heard of such a thing as a F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 or F-35 in a Russian or Chinese museum.

 

FC

Edited December 5, 2009 by FastCargo

[Silverbolt 104]

4) ...I've just never heard of such a thing as a F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 or F-35 in a Russian or Chinese museum.

 

FC

 

 

Betcha, Britishs Have a Typhoon and Frenchs a Rafale

Edited December 4, 2009 by Silverbolt

[Gr.Viper 131]

I've just never heard of such a thing as a F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 or F-35 in a Russian or Chinese museum.

The state of Russian air museums is nothing fancy even as far as out own planes are concerned. Not to mention the lack of aviation promotion. IIRC, we're facing a shortage of all kinds of civilian pilots including those trained for ailiners. Even the military are under cuts - the Kubinka airbase is handed over to friggin buisiness jets for administration convenience. I don't know if "intelligence" is even a word they know.

 

Another reason for low trophy count might be SAM efficiency. We just can't put the plane back together after we hit it. http://i.flamber.ru/files/st2/1211922554/1246295020_f.jpg

[Silverbolt 104]

Another reason for low trophy count might be SAM efficiency. We just can't put the plane back together after we hit it. http://i.flamber.ru/...246295020_f.jpg

 

 

oh damn, this cuts my heart, a david star...you could be a little bit dramatic with that NightHawk but hatever

[Gr.Viper 131]

Can't remember if we have Nighthawk in a museum. That F-4 piece dates back to 1970.

[Silverbolt 104]

Can't remember if we have Nighthawk in a museum. That F-4 piece dates back to 1970.

 

well, i'm not sure, but i know the wreackage of the F-117 was sent to Russia for study and remained there in some museum with the pilot gear.

[Abhi 3]

I've just never heard of such a thing as a F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 or F-35 in a Russian or Chinese museum./quote]

 

and even if they have ,will they show it.

 

remember the nuclear bomb was made by Russia after leaking of info from US.

 

Now tell me what your "intelligence agencies" were doing at that time,the patriot is another example.

 

US originated technology ultimately gets passed to enemy nations.

for example before 2001 indo-US relations were not very warm but we still got AESA radars from israel.

 

another one,Pakistan stole nuke material like uranium enrichment tech from European countries,then the gave it to china and finally to north Korea.

its not me who is skeptical about all this,few days back a US agency warned the govt of cyber attacks from hostile countries in order to get secret military information.

[FastCargo 412]

Well, no kidding there sherlock...not like we don't get those briefings either. Do you really think we don't think about this stuff? Seriously?

 

Having the information and being able to do something useful about it are two different things.

 

FC

[Silverbolt 104]

i wouldn't complain with this