Dueling

[ramsa329]

Craig L

Good at least you and your European partners managed to get together to do something.

Now if you could just work out your issues about money and your legacy of imperialism we'd really be cooking LOL

I fly planes from all over the world in my sim and I don't give a s**t who makes them.

Countries do not make planes aerospace companies do and it's for profit and it's done with designers and scientists from all over the world.

When you don't have the computing power you go to places that have the power and rent space and time in that country on their computers.

Composit structures are made in those countries that have the technology and you pay a fee to reproduce them. It's called a patent and it's worldwide.

No plane today is entirerly the product of any country or region except for Russia and the US and even that's not true anymore since technicians and aerospace designers from all over the world are employed by any company that's serious.

It is naive to think otherwise.

[igorski]

true, the x35 is a prime example, lockheed martin, working with bae systems, so even the US do get external help (our expertise from the harrier project in this case i believe) sometimes

[Mobius]

I think I actually agree with everyone here , I do hate to see actual combat and actual people dying.  If given the choice, I and I think just about everyone here would choose peace over war, but in my opinion, war is a necessary thing sometimes.  I am also proud of the United States and what we have done to "try" to help others around the world, even though it seems like the rest of the world hates us for it .  

I am not trying to be prejudice against any other nations and their aircraft, I don't care where the airplanes I fly come from.  My favorite sim to fly other than FS is Lock On, where you can fly 2 different American airplanes and 4 different russian airplanes and I would have to say that when I have the choice, I actually fly the MiG-29 and Su-35 more than I fly the A-10 and F-15.


Ramsa,
I don't think that this conversation has turned "nationalistic" and I don't think this proves we are more capable of hate than other generations.  I think this was a friendly discussion about the combat capabilities of fighters and as you can probably well assume, I and others here have not seen combat and probably never will , so we have to base our arguments about facts and information we know and find from credible sources.  I was enjoying this conversation because I am very interested in all different types of aircraft and there are not many people I can talk to who have the extensive knowledge that people on this forum do.  Therefore, I would like to have an opinion and be able to argue my point without being called "nationalistic" and more "capable of hate".  I am an adult and I do have my own personal point of views, I agree and disagree with people about those views, and I am ready and willing to defend my views in a friendly argument.  I don't know why this was called nationalist and I don't know why we have been told to "grow the hell up".  I don't want to see another person die because of war and I sure as hell don't want to see another million die just to see combat vehicles in action.  I think you took this argument the wrong way, if you have been following this debate all along, you would see that for the most part, we are sharing information about different fighter aircraft and just because they are fighters doesn't mean we are war-mongers, there's just no other aircraft in the world like them to argue about.  


Sorry for my ranting again, seems like I'm doing that quite often, maybe I should just shut-up, but I don't really want to.  Again, I am not trying to make a political argument, if you took it that way, I apologize.

[Woodlouse2002]

All I'm trying to do is to get you all to realise that the EE Lightning is the best jet fighter ever made and the fact that it was still practically top of it's tree when it was withdrawn from service in the 1980's just shows what a machine it was. And the fact that the only aircraft ever to beat it up to 30,000 feet was the Harrier certainly say's something. Especially when that Harrier took off vertically while the Lightning was taxiing to the runway.

Not only that but the fact that EE had developed a mach 2 fighter with supercruise 40 years ahead of every one else should not be ignored.

[ATI_7500]

Too subjective.....waaaaay too subjective...and nationalistic.  :P

[igorski]

This is gonna be one of those things where everyone will disagree.. how bout we all just go back to flying our FS lightings, eagles, etc.....

[Vic]

Well, just wanted to add in several things:
Im no defence anaylist, but it seems to me that the US and Russian armed forces are completely different. The US has an enormous fleet of Aircraft carriers and in their campaigns use mid range or short range strike aircraft. (The B-52's are pretty useless if you ask me, they wouldn't get close enough to fire their cruise missiles, they are only good for attacking third-world countries like Afghanistan and Iraq where they can see them, they can scream at them, but those AK-47 can't quite shoot em down )
We use Long Range strategic aviation (thats Tu-160, Tu-95) Russia has never had a fleet of carriers. As a matter of fact, we never had more than 10 active at one time! and in the last 40 years we have never had more than 4 active at one time! So Russian Naval Aviation is completely irrelevant. We only have one aircraft carrier (Admiral Kuznetsov - sometimes called 'Admiral of the Soviet Fleet Kuznetsov' which was recomissioned last year, the one we sold to India was the Admiral Gorshkov) It doesn't play a part in our strategy, unlike the U.S. Instead, we have the largest fleet in the world of Strategic Submarines (Nuclear Ballistic, and Attack Subs - I counted only active Subs, we have a large ammount mothballed, as does the US) So the strategies are completely different! We can't compare apples to oranges! Fact is - in a war (highly unlikely) between the RF and the US, you won't care who has the better AF or Navy, and you won't have a chance to analyse the data either - we have something like 2700 nuclear warheads and the US has a little more, it is unlikely that anyone will survive to care much about the outcome.
Vic
P.S. Read the original post and see what it has in common with what we are talking about now  ;D LOL - we really did drift off topic on this one!

[Nexus]

Ahh, this is just like the old, endless Boeing vs. Airbus discussions - but with guns!  ;D

Good luck guys....

[GunnerMan]

Yeah well said OBS but I came to look at screens not talk about whos better. I do have a  few words to say about russia but I will keep quiet