Comanche Project Canceled...

[Craig.]

yes we won. Its not that hard when 75% of saddams army ran away. If you have seen some of the weapons they had, and had those been used even the US army admit it wouldnt have been so simple. They had thousands of tanks that would give the american tanks a run for their money.

[Craig.]

lol:)
side note i wasnt against the war, infact i caught alot of flack for being a supporter of it.
secondly. you gotta love how well this has gone off topic

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

I was referring to the Enola Gay in WWII and its "presents" which prompty ended the war, and made this argument about the Zeros useless, although yes Desert Storm and Conflict Iraqi freedom are more modern examples.

[Woodlouse2002]

Do not knock Russian military equipment. Their tanks, planes and guns pretty much match anything the west has.

Russian tanks have always been the best. In fact, as far as tank design goes the west is only starting to think along the lines the Russians were thinking along in the 1940's.

Russian aircraft are top notch, look at the Mig29 and the Mig37. Not to mention the Su27.

And Russian guns, you can bury an Ak47 leave it for a year then come back and dig it up and it will still work. Unlike the SA80 which jams if you take it within 100 yards of a sand pit and if the temperature varies more than 4 degrees from room temp. Bring back the SLR!!!

Basically Russian equipment is cheap, tough and lasts.


Ah yes, and on the original subject, I think the Commanche was an ugly bird. The Apache still works well. Can take damage and I don't think it's any less vulnerable than any other helicopter.

The Typhoon, I have mixed feelings for this. I don't really like the plane its self. But I realise that we need to replace the Tornado's. And well, the Typhoon seems to be able to do the jobs of both the GR1 and the F3 so why not use it?

I think the JSF is a complete waste of money. Give BAe a few million quid and the Harrier and it will be as good as the JSF ever will be.

I too believe the day of the dogfight is over. I mean honestly tell me, when was the last time two opposing aircraft had a fight? It has to be the first Gulf war at least.

Craig, a plane might look good on paper but in reality things can be far different. Comparing the Typhoon to the Rafale just on stats will not solve anything.

[Craig.]

LOL first of all your SA80 comment was funny:)
As for compairing the two on paper, its just as good as any of the other ways people try compairing them. My intentions were to clear up a few misconceptions people have about the both of them. Size speed and so on, not really compair. Personally i dont think anyone here including myself has a real clue what either are capable of, we arnt pilots of them, we arnt designers or testers. While whats on paper may look impressive and these fancy tricks we see at airshows look amazing. Its not what the plane will do in day to day service.
compairing any plane with another is extremely difficult if you have never flown both.

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

Yes the commanche is ugly but the Longbows are nearing the top of just how far you can push them and upgrade them.  Additionaly, they have a tail rotor and 4-blade rotor, not the nice quiet tail fan and 5-blade composite rotor.  Their radar signature of the Apaches, if it gets high enough off the ground for something to paint it, sucks as well.

[Woodlouse2002]

Don't matter what the radar signature is. And RPG that's going to be fired at it isn't going to be radar guided. Either that or its going to be a Stinger Missile. Now I doubt whether even a Commanche could win an argument with one of those.

[Craig.]

well if they have nothing better to do with them they can now test it out:)

[Woodlouse2002]

Well, its not like they're needed any more is it. It could be pay per view...

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

I think the JSF is a complete waste of money. Give BAe a few million quid and the Harrier and it will be as good as the JSF ever will be.

What!?!?! Are you competly nuts Woodlouse!?!?  The JSF will waste the Harrier. Few million? Try billion.  You would need to make a whole new airframe to accomadate the center fan; nozzles don't cut it anymore, The need for added lift due to heavier weapon loads would necessitate longer wing as well as a different wing chord and sweep to allow for supersonic airflows,  avionics nearly built from scratch for new weapon systems...... at that point it becomes more cost effective to build a new aircraft.

Yes we know you are proud of your Britt enginering and that you don't want to have to see more US built aircraft in your armed forces (I feel the same way when I see the US Coast Guard Aerospatial Dauphin's), but the enginering of the Harrier is drawing to a close.

[Woodlouse2002]

[quote]
What!?!?! Are you competly nuts Woodlouse!?!?

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

1:

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

Come to think of it as well, you're the only fool that is wanting to hang on to the dumb BAE's.