Tell me how Many F-18s has Australia? How many Mirage 2000 has Brazil?
How many F-14 Iran has? how many MiG-29s Syria has?

The reality is an air force like the US, China or Russia have several hundreds of fourth generation fighters and the vast majority of air forces in the world have less than 50 fourth generation aircraft.

Russia, the US and China can easily replace losses in a war with a minor air force.

to put it in few words an air force like those of Colombia or Argentina have no fourth generation aircraft and less than 50 air superiorirty fighters tell me how an air force like that can combat the USAF or Russia?

Australia only have less than 30 F-18Es, China can replace the J-10 losses in months after launching an attack, Australia will lost all its aircraft in few days but the chinese will replace 30 J-10s in 3 or 4 months in a war economy

By the way the US had built around 800 F-14s 2000 F-18s, 1400 F-15s and 4500 F-16s in 30 years calculate how many aircraft a month? see we are not counting the A-10 production niether the harrier production or other types of aircraft

Ok, just to clarify something about how many F-18’s Australia have…

We have i believe about 70 of them, mostly A’s and few B’s

In regards to us having less than 30 F-18E’s as per your above statement, you are dead wrong…. We don’t have any and most likely wont have any.

If you were refering to the ones we have bought / ordered, again we did not buy any F-18E’s, but yes we bought less than 30 F-18F’s – 24 off them.

Well also airshow performers… it is still civilian uses…

Here, F1 from MAKS, last year:)

How do you figure. to reverse it on you…one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter!

Well, that is one way of looking at, but how do you figure out that Puting is criminal then?
What has he done to you?
Or what bad has he done to Aus?
Bush has done much more damage to us here than Putin, think about it…

unfortunately you seem to think I was making fun of the russian practice of painting names, iwas just illustrating how far one has too reach to find simularities between the Tu-95 and the Tu-160…….but seeing as you brought it up the hog symbol refers to the time when the F-111 changed to low altitude tactics, the indigenous people thought it lood like a wild pig with its nose to the ground…….anjd anything to do with Ipswich is airforce public relations good will……amberley, which is in close proximity, is fast becoming australia’s ‘super base’ I doubt russia has to deal with public relations problems to the same extent as a democracy……..

I’m an Aussie too, but went to Russia to see the Airshow MAKS 2007, i stayed for few days, i was rather pleasantly surprised by what i saw, or how it was organized etc.

If you haven’t been there or met some of their people or see what their “democracy” is like, it is a bit unfair to doubt it, or think it is any worse than here, i do not think it is what it may have been years ago, as for PR problems etc…. i do not think it is any better or or worse for that matter than here or anywhere….
And, at the end of day it is all business same as here or anywhere….. advertising all over the place etc, especially about the airshow signs, LCD’s, you name it, and there at the show, many people made it a family event and were having time of their life and enjoying themselves with food and drinks etc…. oh boy so much food and so beautiful!!!! I loved it there, can’t wait for next year’s one.

Initially i was scared thinking they are so cold or i’ll get robbed or there’s crime everywhere etc…. no problem at all, the people are so friendly and helpful and they’do everything for you, you ask them anything you like about their life or whatever they’ll tell you and i didn’t think anyone gave a **** about politics or whatever…..

The only criminals i met were the Taxi drivers:)

I almost had a punch up with one, police had to interfere and told us to “**** off!” 🙂

Sorry a bit off topic, i just thought i’ll try to say how i saw it, some people may just be pleasantly surprised if they go there

Well you can claim what ever you wish, but the manual says the speeds it can fly and at what altitudes it can achieve Mach 2.8 and Mach 2.35 and you are not in accordance with that, and probably you are not in accordance with aerodynamics since the only reason the MiG-25 will achieve Mach 2.8 at 18km and above as the manual says it is simply because the atmosphere has diferent densities at different altitudes, so what an aircraft can do at 10km of altitude is different to what it will do at 17km.

In few words i do not believe you are a pilot simply because your claims have no susbtance, a MiG-25 that flies at Mach 2.3 at 10km when the manual says its max speeds is Mach 1.5.

Also the Manual stablishes that at 21km of altitude its speed is limited to 2.3 due to the bombs it carries.
By the way why i need to read other sources if i can read the manual? and the manual contradicts you

MIG, i know i said i’m not interested in debating with you anymore and that i wont reply, but yes i was curious and since you provided a link to the manual it doesn’t hurt to download it, so thankyou for that although honestly i do not really need it – but who knows….

Anyway, i do not know Russian but i do understand few words…. from what i understand at the start on page 90 as you suggested, even in my limited Russian knowledge i understood the words: uchebnoi…. mirnoe vremje… or there abouts….. i do not know what you make of it but i’m under the impression they refer to: during piece time and training flights etc, and during the rest of it (like i said i’m very limited with Russian words) i did not get the impression that the aircraft can not do this or that, they just tell you what to do and at what height and what speed etc, it is basically a manual and tells you how to do something properly. Also they mention the bombs it carries etc and the operation and speeds etc while doing so.

It is all based on a safe operation of the aircraft etc – it doesn’t mean it is the limit.

Now remember what i said that i do not care about what the manual said? that is the reason for it…

The manual tells you how to use something… and it is obviously normal operation during peace time and training flights etc…. during war or in a fight no-one cares what the manual says…. they push the aircraft to the limit or beyond, and that’s why pehaps the Iraqi pilot said : the situation i was in…
and also he said, he never carried bombs…

I must admit i find it strange that he said used RB as an interceptor, which by all accounts it is not, it is reconossance / bomber as such useless as interceptor – except to ram into the other aircraft (not a good idea:))

I’m wondering whether somehow PD is mixed with RB, since P in Russian is R or something like that….. maybe we need more details

Thanks for the link for that manual, one day if i have nothing bettter to do i may ask my GF who knows a bit of Russian ( a lot more than me anyway) to help me translate the interesting parts.

@all:
please don’t let this topic turn into another “MiG-25 hooray” thread, discussing what and what not can kill the “superior interceptor of all times” that “handles like a spacecraft”.

Why not? I mean it does handle like a spacecraft, it is fast and non-maneuverable – just like a spacecraft:)

Sorry mate, it was just funny…

But well, i have a soft spot for both, the Tomcat, beautiful and yes very capable aircraft and the MIG-25 too, a broote awesome power and attractive in its own way

At sea-level and 15°C standard conditions Mach 1 is 661 kts or 1224,2 km/h.
Rise temperature and kts will rise too.
What you claim is 573 kts at 36090 feet and temperature below -50°C.
When you are not shure about that, why do you not take a look at Google before posting such nonsense? 😮
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound 😉

Hi Sens,

Yes i know i already checked as you can see later in the posts, (as i indicated at that time i wasn’t sure if it was 1062), it has been many years since i was into that stuff, later i checked and i indicated it is 1224, which brings it @ Mach 0.98 @ sea level… still the point is it comes close @ sea level, the point was there’s no way in the world can not go supersonic @ 10000 meters.

My issue with him was that he claimed that mig-25 can not go supersonic @ 10000 meters altitude and the manual told him so…. he later edited his original post, but you can see the quote in someone elses post:)

I tried to explain to him i do not need to read manuals to realise that the fastest fighter / interceptor in the world can go supersonic @ 10000 meters it is just logics and common sense (or even possibly mach 2)