dark light

Multirole

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 761 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: J-8F/H Finback #2277543
    Multirole
    Participant

    I too would agree with that general opinion. Older aircraft have a set of characteristics that sets them apart from most of today’s aircraft. The J-8, despite being late for its generation, is still filled with all of the qualities that make aircraft such as the F-4 Phantom, MiG-23 Flogger, Su-15 Flagon, JA-37 Viggen and others of the time such classics in their own ways.

    Seems a shame the Finback II didn’t get wings like the JF-17 for greater versatility when it was introduced in the late 80s.

    Speaking of the Phantom, how does it compare to the J-8II? Can we do a quick side by side comparison for speed, acceleration, climb, rate of turn, ceiling, range etc?

    in reply to: LRS-B will be manned at the start #2280355
    Multirole
    Participant

    DoD will get this thing because unlike almost everything else it has done over the last decade it is actually relevant to the long-term strategic interests of the United States.

    Manned or unmanned makes little difference at such aircraft sizes and certainly no difference to threat perception. The analogy to Star Wars makes no sense — LRS-B is a relatively conservative extension of existing technology and capabilities and presents no new threat to China, Russia, or anyone else for that matter.

    Everything we’ve heard about this bomber seem too conservative. A dream bomber should be capable of supercruise and have better range than the B-2. Its hard to believe a bomber just as sluggish as the B-2 could surive by stealth alone in two decades time.

    I expect an unmanned recon and maybe airborne laser variant to be built since those missions benefit from long endurance and rearming is not needed.

    The budget proposed though is absurd.

    in reply to: Tools of a Chinese Way of War #2298320
    Multirole
    Participant

    I didn’t compare China to WW2 Japan. Replying to me as if I did is absurd.

    You jumped into a conversation I had with Obligatory where he DID compare China’s oil dependance to Japan. I don’t know why you’re complaining about me being on topic.

    Blowing up a pipeline in Manchuria is going to stop Russian oil shipment to China? Are you serious? They couldn’t even stop oil delivery to North Vietnam, or arms into South Vietnam. Interdicting supplies overland is very different than on sea.

    Could China scale coal liquidfication in a few months? Probably not. Is there going to be a blockade of China in a few months? Probably not. Would a naval blockade of China tomorrow cause it to surrender in a few months? Probably not.

    In any case, your argument that it’s uneconomical in wartime is not based on facts. The industry has long consider doing just that every time oil prices peaked. It’s only uneconomical when your export contracts are based on razor thin profit margins.

    You also completely ignored the role of shale gas and other alternative energies that would make countries with like China and the United States independent of overseas imports in the near future.

    I’m not really surprised at your response. Someone was going to make the bizarre claim that China is going to import the same amount of oil in a war with the US as it does now when it’s using most of it to make things for the US and it’s allies. You just happen to be that guy.

    in reply to: Tools of a Chinese Way of War #2298514
    Multirole
    Participant

    “Peace time” is the operating word in your calculations. But we’re talking about wartime. China buys oil from the Middle East because its cheaper, and cost is the deciding factor in their export led economy. In wartime exports and economic growth are presumably no longer priorities. You have to look at how much oil do they need to import to run a war industry.

    And where do you get your info that China doesn’t have coal liquidfication and that they couldn’t scale fast enough? They have the reserves, the technology, and the ability to scale.

    As for pipeline vulnerability, first you’re talking about expanding the war into Russia and Kazahkstan, second the reason they use pipelines is again due to cost. War time imports could be taken up by rail and trucks. If they even need foreign supplies to begin with.

    Comparing China to WWII Japan is obsurd. Japan had zero domestic fuel sources and was entirely dependent on maritime import for a WARTIME economy.

    in reply to: Tools of a Chinese Way of War #2298584
    Multirole
    Participant

    China’s problem is the same as Japan had,
    they can’t get oil once an easily done blockade is in place

    Wow you couldn’t be more wrong. China gets much of its oil from Russia and Central Asia, how you’re going to blockade that?

    China also has its own oil resources and plenty of coal, which can be liquidfied in time of war. Its also the Saudi Arabia of shale gas, so once they figure out fracking, a naval blockade isnt going to bite at all as far as energy needs go.

    Multirole
    Participant

    There’s a lot of talk about Saddam’s best chance lie in going on the offensive, perhaps because the defensive game ended so badly for him. It’s interesting that in this pre-war analysis by the LA Times, the prevailing belief was exactly the opposite. The Iraqi forces are regarded as too incompetent to carry out a successful offensive, but quite formidable dug in.

    http://articles.latimes.com/1990-08-13/news/mn-465_1_iraqi-army

    Multirole
    Participant

    I just dont buy into the idea that despotic paranoid regimes can’t have highly professional military organization. The Third Reich seem to manage just fine. The Luftwaffe and the SS were both highly politicized outfits. In any case the air force posed less of a political risk to Saddam than the army. His problem was he didn’t appreciate the fact that a professional air force (and surface to air forces) were essential to regime survival. Iraqi forces evolved out of the need for propping up Saddam and fighting Iran. They were only as good as they needed to be.

    in reply to: Avro Vulcan vs. B-58 Hustler vs. Tu-22B Blinder #2316029
    Multirole
    Participant

    Apologies in advance for this resurrection. I didn’t want to start a new thread.

    How useful would the Vulcan B.3 be had it been built even without Skybolt? To summarize, this was a stretch fuselage Avro Vulcan with bigger wings and four afterburning turbojets at 30,000 lbs thrust each. All six crews facing forward on ejection seats.

    In terms of performance would it be something in between a B-52 and a B-1B?

    in reply to: What If Scenario: Iraq AF 1991 was up to Israeli standards #2325081
    Multirole
    Participant

    Why didn’t they just bury their planes like they did in 2003?

    in reply to: MiG-29 Fulcrum #2245276
    Multirole
    Participant

    What’s the reason the Fulcrum was never license produced abroad? You would think Iran, India would love to build them domestically.

    in reply to: F-35A for Japan #2295180
    Multirole
    Participant

    Again, you miss the point.

    The Nazi flag was a symbol of an ideology. It was the flag of a political movement, which was then imposed as a national flag. It represents nazism, not Germany.

    The Japanese flags (the national flag, & the two different versions of the rising sun used by the army & navy) are long-standing traditional emblems, pre-dating the use of them by a regime & army which committed atrocities. They represent Japan, not the 1930s-WW2 regime.

    I’m missing the point? Listen I’m just explaining to you how it is since you asked for it. The Japanese War Flag represents Japanese militarism to East Asians (shocking isnt it?). Whatever it means to you or others is beside the point.

    in reply to: F-35A for Japan #2295274
    Multirole
    Participant

    do not mind Multirole.. he’s probably one of those Chinese who’s still fuming at Japan over WW2, but probably has no background on Japan beyond the war.

    Please I’ve lived in Japan, trained in a Japanese martial arts dojo, performed in a Japanese koto band, etc, etc.

    Yes I realize they have been using the flag for a while, but that flag represents very different things to Asians than Americans. It looks virtually identical to the war flag of the Imperial Japanese Army.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/IJA_troops_in_Manchuria.jpg

    that’s the difference between the psyche of winners and losers in a war

    It’s no different than East Asians who think its alright to wear Nazi costumes because they don’t share the emotional trauma of the Europeans.

    http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2010/8/2/1280761040788/Mongolian-neo-Nazi-group--006.jpg

    Any way, this is going off topic. I wanted to talk about the F-35.

    in reply to: PLAAF Thread 15 #2295305
    Multirole
    Participant

    I am not the one making the laughable claims based on an RC model. 😮

    People laugh for all sorts of reasons. Since you aren’t disputing any claims at all, your laughter rings hollow, and may be mistaken as something else entirely. 😀

    in reply to: F-35A for Japan #2295308
    Multirole
    Participant

    It would cost nearly twice as much to build at home based on the history with the F-2.

    Would it? The F-2 was to the F-16 what the Super Hornet is to the original. AFAIK Japan is not looking to do that with the F-35.

    in reply to: F-35A for Japan #2295311
    Multirole
    Participant

    Given the number of islands they have worry about, its seems insane to me Japan should pass up the F-35B, even if they develop something like the F-3. Any defense planner with a modicum of sense would build the F-35 at home and then design something bigger if the budgets allow. Otherwise they would be putting all their chips into one high risk gamble, which even if it pays off, wont have a STOVL capability.

Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 761 total)