Gotta love those M-61’s.

good thing this doesn’t happen with A-10’s, I hear the training rounds are more dangrous than the actual high explosive rounds(nevermind the DU). The HE rounds bury themselves deep in befor ethey go off, throwing dirt, the Training rounds are stacked metal washers, which get thrown all over like shrapnel… do some damage.

I see the F-35 as an impediment to the F-22, an aircraft that we honestly
NEED. The F-15C replacement is more urgent than the A-10 or F-18 or
F-16 replacement. F-15s are getting very old, and their competition is
better than they are.

Without air superiority, F-35’s or not, we’ll be in a less than ideal situation.

If there’s one aspect of Air Combat you want to overspend on- iot’s air
superiority. UNDERESTIMATE the enemy, and underspend on air
superiority, and your ground attack aircraft, Awacs, bombers, transports,
fuelers and ground troops are under threat of attack.

Don’t get me wrong, I like the F-35. I hope it gets made, and I hope
overruns ar ekept to a minimum(I said hope, not expect). the marines and
the Anvy really can use it, the airforce kinda’d like to have it, and the
British pretty much need something to replace the harriers.

From a neutral, US centric, point of view, I feel the JSF program was a
waste. It should have been scrapped, and more money spent on the
F-22. In addition, UCAV research and development should have been
increased. I firmly believe the US would have been better off with more
F-22’s and sooner implementation of UCAVs.

From a biased, fighter-jet-fan-since-childhood prespecitve, I’m willing to
see my taxes go to the F-35, just so we have another cool stealth fighter,
that can transform and hover… and shoot laser beams…

Of course, if we could have a robotic stealth aircraft that could hover or
shoot laser beams, that would be better.

The F-22, provides better performance than th eF-15, decreases its
detectability form enemy radar and IR – Sams inculded, and more
important, I might add. Sams have shot down several US aircraft, while
only one was lost recently to an enemy aircraft.

IF we have to attack “Derkaderkastan”, and the Derkaderkastanis have
purchased new Russian Sams, we could stand to lose some aircraft, even
if all they have for an airforce are two-stroke migs.

F22’s will be more survivable than any other fighter, in any environmnet,
EXCEPT a close range, daytime dogfight. In a dogfight, odds are
determined by pilot skill, and little else.

The F-22 isn’t made to tangle with third world airforces, it’s made to beat
anything on the horizion. It’s a worst case scenario insurance. As was the
F-15. Designed to kill the best any present and future enemy can offer,
should the need arise. We have the ability, and the need, to plan for such
circumstances. Iti s not only an option, but a deterrant. WW3 would
have probably occurred if it hadn’t been for ICBM’s. Maybe the f-22’s
presence will prevent someone from trying to get away with an invasion or
takeover.

Interestingly, at the langley AFB air show last month, the F-“18”
superhornet did what was basically a cobra. It was going fast, popped up
to near verticle, slowed down to what looked like zero airspeed, and then
flopped down and accelerated. Didn’t make a big deal of it, just
demonstrating the low speed handling of it, important for carrier landings,
I guess…

I have admittedly paid little atention to the unification of Europe, well, in
details anyway.

I see a few problems arising from it. With the US, the intent was to have
acentral governemnt to protect the people – it was to regulate trade and
the army. It soon became clear that somethign more united was needed.

With Europe, do they really NEED to be united? War is not too much of
an issue, and trade has been regulated for centuries. Is the Euro thing a
matter of convienience? If so, I’d be apprehensive.

As a non-european, I think the Euro will make travel much more simple –
I’ll admit that. However, the total loss of the other currencies is a bit of a
detraction from the experience. It’s part of the fun of traveling, I think.

I’ve seen beurocracy at the local level – and it’s bad. Statewide, it’s worse,
nationally, it’s simply inexcusable, and would be criminal if the beurocrats
themselves were not determining what was criminal or not. If you think
you’ve got beurocracy now, just wait till you get a central government, like
we have! The Vogons will be envious.

Well, there’s only so much you can train for when going against BVR
missles – how to out turn them, an dhow to know you’re being
targeted/tracked by a BVR missle – neither of which a mock air-fight will
help train for. So, you go for tactics, not strategy.

Throw a bunch of your planes in with X number of the other guys, and see
how their trainign has prepared them to react to the other guys tactics.

Flying 4 F-15’s in a wall formation isn’t very complicated, it provides the
Indians with no surprises. It’s as if the USAF wants to see how an enemy
would deal with an open, up front attack. The Indians were most likely
concerned with how their strike package would have defended against a
group of fighters. This provides both sides with what they want. One on
one pilot training isn’t what they were looking for, neither was a test of
strategies, surprises, etc.

Those 4 Eagles really attract – and DEMAND – attention. Any enemy
aircraft will not ignore such a threat. If they do, they will die. As such, the
F-15 will work incredibly well with the F-22 in any future operations.
When confronted by a group of F-15’s, the enemy will not have the luxury
of wondering where the F-22’s are or are not — the f-15’s are THERE.
By studying how others react to a threat (F-15’s, for example), the USAF
can have a better understanding of what strategies will work in the future.
Let’s say a flight of 4 F-15’s is closing in on a strike
package/AWACs,/Etc.of enemy aircraft, or a target. Fighters will be sent
to attempt to stop the F-15’s. Less eaisly detected F-22’s can be
vectored in at an angle. Since the F-15’s will show up on radar sooner, the
raptors will get closer – their speed will enable them to be even further
away, increasing the amount of time before they are detected. By the time
the enemy fighters are within range of the F-15’s, they’ve already been
fired upon from a different angle by the F-22’s, forcing them to react.
Even if the 22’s turn away, the enemy fighters are are disadvantaged, since
they’ve been forced to manuver, have lost energy, and close to the F-15’s
firing from an advantageous position.

It should not be a surprise that the Indians came out on top. It was 4 vs..
12, plain and simple. If you take good pilots, and thow them in with
similar planes and such different odds, AND give the smaller number of
planes the more difficult task, is there any surprise?

In this case, the US pilots admit they underestimated the Indians. Some of
them MAY have even thought they were so much better, they’d win
regardless of the odds.

You try to train with people better than you. I guess th eUSAF feels
they’re the best, so it’s good to train with unfavorable conditions. Any 1
vs. 1 or 2 vs. 2 becomes a pi$$ing contest – and is of little real value.

In high school, my football coach had us scrimmage against the big city
schools. They were the biggest, fastest, strongest athletes in the area. We
played East Side every year in a practice game(If you’ve ever seen “Lean
on Me”, about principal Joe Clark, in Paterson, NJ, – that’s them, the East
Side Ghosts – Big, Bad ,boys, I tell you). They’d beat the hell out of us,
every game. They outran us every time, they were stronger than us, every
time. Yet we always beat them in the end. We ran our plays better, had
better coaching, and never gave up.

I guess India had a reason to want favorable odds. It seems strange, but
I’m sure they had something they were looking for in it. Maybe even an
ego boost?