So Colonel Bellini is lying is he Flogger?

Read his 2004 account. I see that you were very selective with the information contained there!

http://www.seatejectcolor.com/seat/stories/iraq91/eject.htm

His target was approx 20km northwest of Kuwait City. The Tornado IDS, serial MM7074, was shot down in Kuwait as they ran in with their bombs to target.

In Floggerland Colonel Bellini must be lying.

Flogger do some research. You can contact Colonel Bellini through the Italian Ministry of Defence.

http://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/dfu/StatoMaggiore/Capo_SM.asp

Colonel Cocciolone was based in Afghanistan during 2005:

http://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/SitoAM/Default.asp?idnot=14037&idsez=578&idarg=&idente=1398

Use the Italian Ministry of Defence to contact the aicrew of MM7074 Flogger. You believe that they were shot down by an Iraqi MiG. Do some positive research and contact them. Flogger will the aircrew still be lying to you in 2006 because their accounts don’t match your precious Russian webpage info? Up to you Flogger. You are the one trying to prove that MM7074 was shot down in southern Iraq by a MiG!

Flogger wrote:

If i am not wrong Chaffando means use chaff flare counter measures so why you need that for AAA? of course it is for the radar but seems more for a missile”

Flogger you make being wrong into an art! Chaffando means that the Tornado was employing chaff. If MM7074 was being locked up by an ZSU-23-4 or a Roland then the aircrew would be employing chaff. Only you in Floggerland can turn it into flares against an AAM!

Read please what i have said in fact i have already give the link to Bellini`s remarks which first claims they to have landed in the Iraqi desert -“Il Tornado viene colpito dalla contraerea, e i due membri dell’equipaggio si lanciano con i loro sedili
Martin Baker MK-10A
atterrando nella piena oscurità del deserto Iracheno “-

Later they claim to have been shot down in Kuwait
Il punto di impatto del velivolo e quindi presumibilmente anche il punto di atterraggio dei due paracadute, era a circa 20 Km Nord—Ovest di Kuwait City. Il luogo era alla periferia del complesso di Caserme Irachene che costituiva l’altro Target.

and to have been capture 20km from Kuwait city , in the mean time when Maurizio cocciolone was interviewed by Iraqi TV they claimed to have their targets in Southern Iraq.
Check the webTarget was in southern Iraq said Maurizio Cocciolone to iraqi Tv page

Chaffando means using chaff flares but can either mean a Missile as a radar

There are some question that have to be answered
Cociolone said that the Target was in Southern Iraq but Bellini says they were shot down in Kuwait when they were attacking a target why both said different targets?

The account claims they were capture in the Iraqi desert and at 20 km from Kuwait city but there is a question what desert is in Kuwait, up to my knowledge the main desert is in the Arabic penisula is the arabian desert that consists of three smaller deserts, i say this because the Iraqi desert to mean Kuwaiti Desert you have to prove that the kuwaiti desert is an extension of the Iraqi desert and that Iraqi desert does not mean only the national Iraqi desert and that this includes the desert in Kuwait.

This is quit important because by Iraqi desert we understand the desert within the Iraqi national border and not in Kuwait because bascly the closest desert to my knowledge to Kuwait is the An Nafud since close to Basra there are Marshes and Iraq has mostly desert in it`s south west and West close to the Syrian desert and the Najd desert from Saudi Arabia

Desert of Middle east

Yes the point being made that the Soviets were prepared to accept 95% losses and still win. Who else can prepare for such an onslaught?

You’re saying Tom Copper dosent know what hes talking about??? :rolleyes:

As for later posts regarding uncounted NATO assets, airbase survivability and NATO air superiority, heres another lengthy but ohh so juicy quote. 🙂

According to Russian sources the MiG-23BN was capable enough to destroy 80 tanks and almost destroy two batallions of infantry along side some Su-22Mnevertheless the Syrian lost 14 MiG-23BN, not bad for 80 Israeli tanks destroyed and two infantry batallions anihilated

From

80 Israeli tanks destroyed and 14 Syrian MiG-23BN shot down
БОЕВОЕ ПРИМЕНЕНИЕ. В период боев в южном Ливане летом 1982 года самолеты МиГ-23БН сирийских ВВС нанесли несколько мощных бомбовых ударов по целям в глубине израильских боевых порядков. Всего истребители бомбардировщики МиГ-23БН и Су-22М выполнили 40 боевых вылетов, уничтожив, по сирийским данным, 80 танков и около двух батальонов пехоты. В то же время армейским средствам ПВО и авиацией Израиля было сбито 14 МиГ-23БН. Зимой 1982-1983 гг. сирийские МиГ-23БН, получившие из СССР новое вооружение (в частности, авиационные бомбы увеличенной мощности и более совершенные кассетные боеприпасы), участвовали в нанесении ударов по кораблям американского флота, развернутых у побережья Ливана.
В 1999 году самолеты МиГ-27 индийских ВВС применялись в боевых действиях в Кашмире (один самолет был сбит огнем с земли).

The point of the thread is a WHAT IF in 1987!!! A wing of 30 odd invisible (to radar) attack aircraft fitted with PGM’s that were operational at the time (The 31st production aircraft crashed in Oct 1987). All of those aircraft on the first night attack 30 odd targets successfully which a pair of 2000lb LGB’s and drop most of the major rail and road bridges in East Germany and Poland. That I would call that a major effect on any Warsaw pact operations. Or an attack on known air defence C3I installations or a number of other important targets. Four years later the Iraqi’s integrated Air defence system was ripped to bits in one night using similar tactics. The whole point of the F-117 is that it was going to be able to do damage out of proportion to the numbers of aircraft available

IC well any way by 1987 fifty F-117 would create some damage but i doubt the F-117 were going to be a decisive weapon, undoutedly the hardest strike aircraft to shot down, but by no means unvulnerable and considering the Soviet Union was much more powerful than Serbia it does not seem that the F-117 would be a weapons system so efficient because according to recent statemenst by Russia’s air force commander-in-chief, General of the Army Vladimir Mikhaylov, which state that the F-117 is detectable:

-“The attempts to equip the F-117 with air-to-air missiles soon was stopped in view of the total impracticality of the airplane for aerial combat. Moreover, it became clear rather soon that the aircraft, hard to detect for radars of the K- and X-bands, is detected in some flight modes by some old Soviet radars (for example, the P-40), which allowed the Yugoslav anti-aircraft gunner to shoot down one such airplane with S-125 “Kub” complex missiles and to damage two more at the minimum. “-

Taken fromRussian aviation news

So in 1987 very likely the F-117 if war would to break does not seem, it would had had an impact as to neutralize the Warsaw Pact, because the large amounts of MiGs, Sukhois and SAMs would had made a real mess to the F-117 air wing to achieve their targets and return safe

The answer is rather simple, if WarPAc achieves total surprise (like in the numbers given) they will win. the longer NATO has to prepare the better their chances become.

I do not agree in such statement.

First the aircraft deployed by both sides can be sorted out by generation, the Soviet Union as well as the US almost always had resposes to each weapon systems deployed by the other side, both sides had technological breakthroughs, we can say that basicly they knew if war broke the nuclear option was the big equalizer.

From my personal opinion both the WP and NATO were very well matched and their aircraft always had some degree of similarities and capabilities examples the MiG-29 and the F-16.

Let`s give some other examples

MiG-15 and Sabre both aircraft were more less in the same class both enjoyed advantages and disadvanges with respect each other.

The Il-28 and the Caberra, were in the same league.
The Tu-16 and the Victor, Valliant and Vulcan had almost the same degree of refinements.

Fighters like the MiG-21, Mirage III, F-104, SAAB J-35, Su-9 were very well matched.

Fighters like the MiG-23, Su-15, Mirage F1, SAAB JA-37, F-4E were in the same league.

Strike aircraft like the Jaguar, MiG-27, Su-17 were in the same league.

Attack aircraft like the A-10 and Su-25 were in the same league.

Bombers like the Mirage IV, Tu-22 and B-58 belonged to the same generation.

Bombers in the class of the B-52 and Tu-95 were more less comparable.

Bombers like the Tu-160 or B-1B are also in the same class

The MiG-31 and F-14 are also in the same class

The MiG-29, Su-27, Mirage 2000, F-15C, F-18, F-16 are in the same class.

Fighters like the Su-30MKI and Eurofighters Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen are in the same class.

The F-111, Panavia Tornado and Su-24 are in the same class.

Helicopter like the Ka-50, Mi-28, Eurocopter Tiger and Apache are in the same class.

The C-5 and An-124 are in the same class, the Il-76 and C-141 were in the same class

The E-3 and the A-50 are in the same class

Some weapons systems were unique such as the AV-8B because the Yak-38 was much less capable, another example like that were the Tu-22M which basicly has no equivalent in the West and the MiG-25 that basicly is more comparable to the YF-12 that never entered production, the F-117 is another aircraft that had no counter part but basicly it was more a post cold war weapon.

Some weapons systems even despite that almost had similar capabilities, did indeed have some features making them more complex than their counterparts, one such example is the Mi-24 versus AH-1 Cobra, because the Mi-24 also double as a transport aircraft and was slightly better armed.

Of course not each and every aircraft had a counterpart because many simply were prototypes or had short service carriers

Examples from other wars do not show how good either side was because the real numbers applied or the enemies fought do not represent a Warsaw Pact versus NATO war because the scale of such war is in a more complex and bigger degree.

For example in the Vietnam war, Vietnam never used all the weapons the Soviet Union had and the amounts used were in much much smaller scale.

Vietnam never had MiG-25s, Su-15, Tu-128, or Tu-22M.

Iraq or Yuguslavia never had 300 Su-27s or 300 MiG-31s; the Arab Israeli wars were much less intense and sophisticated ones and were politically settled to some degree by the Super powers

Nobody lived in the American Southwest but a few Spanish priests and nomadic indian tribes, and only several hundred of those by 1819. After Mexican independence in 1821, the Mexicans claimed the entire land mass of the western North American continent, so of course they aren’t to be taken seriously, since nobody in Mexico would move north of Tampico and the settlers who came under the land grants were mostly German, French, and American. Then, Santa Anna got the idea he was the Napoleon Of The West and decided to confiscate what the settlers built up, now that it had some value, and invaded. Of course he got his ass handed to him in Texas, and later handed to him again in 1848, over what became the Gadsen Purchase. Nobody stole anything from Mexico.

As far as the Su-27’s are concerned, the hopelessly corrupt and disorganized government of Mexico can spend their money as they see fit.

In 1821 all spanish colonies except Cuba to the north of Guatemala became Mexico, Mexico is basicly an Indian Spanish nation so basicly any body living in what you called the American south West were Mexican

The US stole that land through a war and by illegal imigration what yiou are trying to justify is the intrinsic fear of many americans that the Mexican Indian based culture will destroy your White society, you are affraid of the law of Karma what ever you do wrong you will pay sooner or later, in few words the US stole northern Mexico to the the then Mexican Government, you won because simply you had better technology You won because you had a more advanced technically and military society but your real fear is one day you will have to pay your unjustices, you took over northern Mexico simply because you had a better army not because you were not invading a foreign nation

And you will keep that order while you have less advanced neighbourghs and a better military; Mexico`s purchase of Su-27s is little scary because they are buying from a former rival and a potential future enemy

Well, let me put it in laymans terms. :rolleyes: Let’s say you are a car salesman. Your neighbor next door has lost his job! You feel sorry for him and get him a job at your work! Further, he has no money for food and no car to get to work! So, besides the job. You provide transportation and food. (i.e. for his family) Then sometime later he gets back on his feet. He needs a new car and he buys one from a competitor down the street! 😮 I don’t know about you. But, if I was the Saleman. I mite take alittle offense by that! Surely, he has the right! On the otherhand the salesman will never offer to help the man again! 😡

If some one comes to your house and says this is no more your house, kicks you out of your land, later offers you to work in your own land and pays you little because he says his wife might get the idea you are stealing their children`s inheritance because you are working the land that feeds his children and even if he tells his wife about the job you are doing she might get angry so you need to hide from her and says he can not tell to his wife about it, but still pays you little money not enought even to buy food because he says if his wife notice about the money she will get angry with him besides he has a shot gun, what can you do if another guy says hey i will sell you a knife to defend your shack and the guy who stole part of your land, complaigns and says to you, that you are a thief because his wife complaigns and says to you that you are stealing the inheritance of their children who do not even want to work in their land and he still complaigns to you because you have a small knife when he has a shot gun, you might think that guy is really a bully and a liar:D

My point was the American Public not the Goverment may take offense to Mexico Purchasing Hundreds of Millions if not Billions of Dollars in Russian Equipment. As long as the orders are small and stay out of the public eye. I don’t see it as a problem. Yet, larger orders could very well upset the American taxpayer………..This would be “very” bad for Mexico. 😮

First why a nation which basicly has the largest military budget and is a nuclear power will get upset by only 8-10 Su-27s? second why it is going to be very bad for Mexico? first Mexico as a Nation should buy from who ever they think it is better, the US does that when it comes to Chinese products versus Mexican products even with NAFTA signed.

If the Russians are capitalist and have more cost effective products and are willing to give them at good price why Mexico should not buy them?

Germany had MiG-29s, Poland still has MiG-29s a US ally can have Russian weapons.

Saying the US Tax payer has something with the Mexican government, then all the Mexican illegal workers should be granted automatic citizenship since they are from the same country?

Venezuela, Brazil, Mexico or any Latin American country have the right to buy from who ever they want because they are not property of the US taxpayer

The one i like the most is the Yak-130