Modern fighting planes.

[unmerged(592)]

lol.

As we are at it, do you really think Russian companies find enough customers to keep their traditional fighter programs? Russia is not really rich, especially the military and most satelites are going to buy their way into nato with investing in western equipment series.

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by SoleSurvivor
As we are at it, do you really think Russian companies find enough customers to keep their traditional fighter programs?

Yes. The USA and the west is far from universally loved, and the ex-Soviet aircraft industry has a deservedly good reputation for its' aircraft...................which will, in all probability, be cheaper than comparable western models.

Not to mention Russia is desperate for hard currency and exports, so the aircraft industry will have all the support the government can give it.

 

[unmerged(6116)]

There wasn't till present time a real opportunity to see which plane or country has the best plane or model.
Since WW2 there wasn't a conflict that could prove that a specific model is better than the other.

Well at Falklands war, the Harriers, Lightnings, and other british fighting planes proved to be better than the argentinian Mirage and others, but was it the model or the pilots?

And as the russian models like the Mig-21, 23, 25, 29 and SU-22, SU-27 where used by countries that hadn't the necessary training to match US flyers, and not the other way arond, as the models being the main reason for loosing some aereal battles.

If you say which's best between the Spitfire, or Me 109 or P-51 D Mustang, well it's a bit hard , but at least there isn't that much superiority as US planes have nowadays.
In my opinion the Spitfire late model was superior to any Bf-109, because either pilots from UK and Germany were well trained.

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by Falcão
Well at Falklands war, the Harriers, Lightnings, and other british fighting planes proved to be better than the argentinian Mirage and others, but was it the model or the pilots?

What Lightnings.............................

Still, that's an excellent point about the superiority of training. The USA goes to great lengths to ensure that its' pilots are the best (or at least, as good as they can be.)

 

[Sir James]

What Lightnings.............................

And what ‘other fighting planes…’ – harriers only.

It did help that the Argentine aircraft were right at the limit of their range, so could not manoeuvre or dogfight, but the AFAIK 100% air-to-air record was impressive. However, with only sidewinders, the harriers would have been in trouble against an opponent with decent radar guided missiles.

 

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by Sir James
And what ‘other fighting planes…’ – harriers only.

We mustn't forget the Vulcans, the last of the V-bombers, making bombing runs. They could be what he's thinking of.

Two Harrier variants as well, navy and army.

 

[unmerged(469)]

Originally posted by Sir James


And what ‘other fighting planes…’ – harriers only.

It did help that the Argentine aircraft were right at the limit of their range, so could not manoeuvre or dogfight, but the AFAIK 100% air-to-air record was impressive. However, with only sidewinders, the harriers would have been in trouble against an opponent with decent radar guided missiles.

I don't think this is giving enough credit to the Argentine pilots or planes. From what I've read, they were sitting ducks, at least the A-4s that only had iron bombs on the racks. As you mentioned, at the outermost limit of their flight range, A-4s don't mount air-to-air missiles AFAIK, and no fighter cover unless I'm mistaken.

 

[unmerged(592)]

I did not mean that states like , say, poland would like to spend more for western equipment, I meant it could be like western states create some pressure on poland.

 

[Emperor of Europe]

Didn't the Bundeswehr and the Luftwaffe keep some Soviet equipment after the reunification of Germany?

I seem to remember that I read somewhere, that Luftwaffe decided to keep the MiG-29's (or Su-27's?). Does anyone have any info on that?

Regards,

EoE

 

[unmerged(598)]

Originally posted by Emperor of Europe
Didn't the Bundeswehr and the Luftwaffe keep some Soviet equipment after the reunification of Germany?

I seem to remember that I read somewhere, that Luftwaffe decided to keep the MiG-29's (or Su-27's?). Does anyone have any info on that?

I don't know about the aircraft, but on the day of reunification they took possession of the military bases. A former colleague of mine was an officer in the Bundeswehr. They stayed the night before in East Germany, dressed in their uniforms and left the following morning to some very strange looks.

Said they used the tanks for target practice later.

Unless the Russians bought, or asked back for the aircraft I would imagine they too were absorbed.

 

[Emperor of Europe]

Originally posted by sean9898

Unless the Russians bought, or asked back for the aircraft I would imagine they too were absorbed.

I just checked at www.luftwaffe.de - they got 24 MiG-29's when with the reunification. They are all in service with JG 73 and will be replaced by the Eurofighter in 2002.

Regards,

EoE

 

[v. Berlichingen]

Originally posted by Emperor of Europe


I just checked at www.luftwaffe.de - they got 24 MiG-29's when with the reunification. They are all in service with JG 73 and will be replaced by the Eurofighter in 2002.

Regards,

EoE

Yep. And that squadron saw quite a lot of 'action', as just about every NATO country wanted to exercise against it. The electronics package of the original model had been slightly upgraded, IIRC, and quite a lot of the exercises seemed to have gone rather favourably for the MiGs.

 

[unmerged(2082)]

For a good page about the Euro fighter try http://www.eurofighter.com/
It even answer the question we are discussing, and conclude that only the F-22 is equal to the Euro fighter.

 

[unmerged(881)]

Here is a link for a study on the F-22, likely opponents, and possible alternatives.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/98-111.htm

 

[unmerged(234)]

Originally posted by mweisner
Here is a link for a study on the F-22, likely opponents, and possible alternatives.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/98-111.htm

An interesting page, and it clearly says that the only aircrafts belonging to the new generation of aircrafts in wich F-22 is planed to be the best is F-22, Eurofighter, Rafael and Gripen

 

[unmerged(5639)]

Gripen

Gripen is the best for the future its good and cheap
cheap compare to eurofighter and F22.
Gripen will suite Poland,Hungery and Tjeckoslovalia well.

 

[dudmont]

Your're underestimating the value of the F-14a+. Tis the best fighter in the world, until the F-22 goes into squadron service. The new GE F110s give the 14 the power to weight ratio to compete with all comers. With it's weapons fit, power, endurance, extra set of eyes, and it's variable sweep program, the 14 is the best.
I'm a big fan of the Grippen, tis a beaut. If it were a girl....

 

[unmerged(234)]

Re: Gripen

Originally posted by Jorgen
Gripen is the best for the future its good and cheap
cheap compare to eurofighter and F22.
Gripen will suite Poland,Hungery and Tjeckoslovalia well.

Yes it may very well give most value for the money, but will not be able to stand up to Eurofighter or F-22 in a one to one comparison so its lucky you can get more Grippen for the same money.

 

[Stonewall]

One of the most important aspects of the F-22 that nobody has mentioned yet is its supersonic cruising ability. The F-22 will be able to move at speeds most other planes require afterburner to achieve. The ability to cruise at speeds 300 to 400 miles per hour faster than any other aircraft in existence while retaining optumim fuel efficiency gives the F-22 a tremendous advantage in terms of speed and range. Combine that with its ultramodern avionics... i.e. the thrust vecroring which provides angles of attack unheard of in any other aircraft...and electronics suite, its stealth features and the most highly trained fighter pilots in the world and you have an unbeatable opponent. The only way this plane is ever going down is due to pilot error. In their air-supremacy role, nothing will be able to hit these things.

With all due respect to the Eurofighter, Rafale, Su-27, and Gripen, none of them deserves to be mentioned in the same book as the F-22, much less the same sentence. All of this, of course, is completely dependant on the F-22 entering service in at least squadron strength, which as far as I have been able to tell, is an 'iffy' proposition at best.

As for best planes currently in service, the F-15E for land based aircraft is superior to any other plane in the world in most respects...with a few exceptions...but these small deficiencies are made up for by superior pilots. The amazing thing is that the design of these planes is over 30 years old!

Naval-based has to be the F-18F/G Super Hornet which in my opinion is superior to the F-15 in every respect except for range. Its only disadvantage is it can't carry 8 Phoenix missles like the F-14 can.

jbs

 

[unmerged(5639)]

Originally posted by dudmont
Your're underestimating the value of the F-14a+. Tis the best fighter in the world, until the F-22 goes into squadron service. The new GE F110s give the 14 the power to weight ratio to compete with all comers. With it's weapons fit, power, endurance, extra set of eyes, and it's variable sweep program, the 14 is the best.
I'm a big fan of the Grippen, tis a beaut. If it were a girl....

Wasnt F14 sold to Iran and they later sold them on the open market so that the multitarget secret were blown?
I like that girl to