Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 02/04/2009 8:38:43 AM PST by pobeda1945
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: pobeda1945

I remember the ‘think tanks’ that claimed for fifteen years the M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank was ‘inferior’ to the T-72’s. They said effective kill ranges were less than 1,500 yards, yada yada yada.

Then we saw what took place in the first Gulf War, and afterwards duly noted 1)We had tank kills up to approaching 4,000 yards and 2) It was tougher at the training center against the Op For.

I don’t take this seriously as a result.


2 posted on 02/04/2009 8:42:16 AM PST by Badeye (There are no 'great moments' in Moderate Political History. Only losses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

as long as all the good secrets are hidden from the whitehouse, we’ll be OK


3 posted on 02/04/2009 8:43:48 AM PST by chuck_the_tv_out
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Head in sand BUMP


4 posted on 02/04/2009 8:44:33 AM PST by uncommonsense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Well yeah, just look at the awesome performance of the Russian air defense system in Syria. When the American jets from Israel tried to take out the nuclear weapons production facility, the Russian air defense system well, uh. . .

wait, um, never mind.


5 posted on 02/04/2009 8:44:44 AM PST by lonestar67 (Its time to withdraw from the War on Bush-- your side is hopelessly lost in a quagmire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Well, the budget for 700 F-22’s now looks cheap compared to Obama’s bailout bill. But at best it would buy us a decade, then these Russian/Chinese systems would evolve far enough to beat the F-22, also. Manned fighters are as dead as the battleship in 1941 - it’s just going to take a tragic battle outcome to prove it to a certain caste of knuckleheads. The future is UAVs, satellites, and cyberwars conducted from bunkers deep beneath Nevads and Colorado.


6 posted on 02/04/2009 8:45:28 AM PST by Mr. Jeeves ("One man's 'magic' is another man's engineering. 'Supernatural' is a null word." -- Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Weapons systems and countermeasures are in a neverending game of leap-frog. Always have been and always will.


7 posted on 02/04/2009 8:46:52 AM PST by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945
Seems to me that any time Russian air defenses have been required to react to ACTUAL events they've failed in a major way.

Didn't the Syrians employ these systems when the Israelis flew clear across their country and took out TWO strategic assets.

I repeat--the Israelis flew clear across their country

8 posted on 02/04/2009 8:49:45 AM PST by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

These folks need to google the term “disinformation”.

Colonel, USAFR


11 posted on 02/04/2009 8:53:35 AM PST by jagusafr ("Bugs, Mr. Rico! Zillions of 'em!" - Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945
Even the most advanced weapons systems are just so much scrap metal without skilled operators.

Nobody in the world can approach the combined skill of the US military in terms of using their weapons to their full potential. Nobody else trains like we train; they can't afford it.

14 posted on 02/04/2009 8:57:14 AM PST by TChris (So many useful idiots...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945
"Where does this leave us Europeans? "
you mean the same europeans that have put down, criticized, degraded, demeaned and demoralized America and Americans in general? You mean the same europeans that offered jack sh*t when Katrina hit? I will tell you where it leaves you..Right where you wanted to be, without United States help.....europe can bite the big one as far as I am concerned...
16 posted on 02/04/2009 9:08:19 AM PST by joe fonebone (The libtard votes in every election, regardless of the candidate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945
"We have....depended on the Americans to provide the fighter top cover, the SAM suppression and the standoff radar jamming none of us were prepared to fund."

Hmmm, Euro-weenies should have thought of that when they were splurging on their economy-busting social programs while snubbing their noses at us.
Ironic, huh?

17 posted on 02/04/2009 9:11:43 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

This think tank report states that an F-35 can’t get through the Russian Integrated Air defense. Uhm - the F-35 can carry internal stores JUST like the F-22, at which point it is likely stealthy enough to do the job just FINE thank you very much. They start carrying on external hard points ONLY after we have Air supremacy.

Look at the campaign during Gulf War I - F-117’s went downtown, but other systems were used to blow holes in the “integrated” air defenses of Iraq before the rest of the air armada (and that name really fit in this case) came through to do their jobs. There were Apaches that came in and did Nap of the earth to take out Radar sites, and Cruise missles with similar missions. Then finally you had wild-weasel missions for anyone that chose to lite up their radar. They didn’t live long.

Gulf War 1 was 99% conventional aircraft! This report is just hot air.


21 posted on 02/04/2009 9:35:00 AM PST by fremont_steve (Milpitas - a great place to be FROM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

22 posted on 02/04/2009 9:38:23 AM PST by NowApproachingMidnight (Sell the left short this cycle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945
The thing that kills me about these kinds of analysis is that it is always one side of the equation. Yes, the Russian IAD is probably pretty good and with more investment will be state of the art. However, if we attacked it we would not use just manned fighters! UAVs would get the radar frequencies being used and pass them on to our jamming aircraft, Tomahawks would take out several sections, then HARMs and ARMs, special forces, etc., and by that time a good sized operating corridor would have opened up for whatever strike package needs to go in.
23 posted on 02/04/2009 9:40:54 AM PST by aegiscg47
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Kremlin must decide on sales of S-300 to Iran - Rosoboronexport

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2178255/posts


24 posted on 02/04/2009 9:42:40 AM PST by pobeda1945
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Manned aircraft are a flexible weapons system. Once the attacker has command of the air, they can do other things — like supporting ground troops. SAM systems are counter-weapons. They are designed for certain pre-imagined scenarios. At times they can be very good. Good enough to blunt an attack. More often, counter-weapons are defeated by improvised tactics. Then it is back to the drawing boards for the designers.

All that being said, I think that manned tactical aircraft are nearing the end of their days. It may take a serious bloody nose for the USAF to come to that conclusion, however.


25 posted on 02/04/2009 10:15:07 AM PST by Tallguy ("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945
APA’s Dr. Carlo Kopp, who completed his PhD in radar engineering, simulated the radar signature of the F-35 and showed exactly how vulnerable it will be to the Russian radar systems and missiles that have emerged since the specification for the JSF was drafted over a decade ago. Lockheed-Martin has not publicly disputed Kopp’s findings yet.

I doubt there will be any public dispute that would reveal the american version of the plane's capabilities.

26 posted on 02/04/2009 10:15:25 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Obama has talked about taking the current F-22’s out of service as not to “Destabilize” the current world situation.


35 posted on 02/04/2009 5:27:03 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pobeda1945

Perhaps I’m wrong.

But I suspect anything you read in AW&ST or Janes, if you read something about American tech, it’s already like two generations behind the curve.

That’s the stuff they use to train the rookies.


42 posted on 02/16/2009 5:47:43 AM PST by djf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: AdmSmith; Berosus; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; george76; ...
Note: this topic is from February 2009.
the US fleet of F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18s, as well as the planned Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), are not capable of surviving against these systems and unless the Americans build another four hundred-plus F-22s, they will lose the strategic advantage they have held since the end of the Cold War.
...of course, it's irrelevant, because some Russian touch-hole just said the US will collapse by 2010. :') Apparently, no one involved in this "report" takes UAVs into account, or pays close attention to little irrelevancies such as the Israeli destruction of that Syrian nuke site.
43 posted on 03/17/2009 7:20:41 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson