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…
Putin is a criminal for stealing from his country. google putins gazprom billions. he changes the constitution to suit him. the one rule he cant change is you can only be president for 8 years in a row. so when hes 8 years run out, he transfers majority of power to the prime ministers office, then runs for prime minister. independant voting agencies question the validity of all elections hes been involved in.
and what damage has bush done to us? secured our place as one of the USA’s most important allies? stood up and lead the free world like the US should?
India Vs China
they have had skirmishs before, the two most populous nations fighting over resources.
quite interesting side tangents…. would pakistan join for China?
Would Taiwan take advantage and open a second front?
Would the US be involved?would china push DPRK to start korean war to keep USAF/JASDF busy?
Would RAAF join for taiwan?
Bush is the #1 terrorist in the world as far as people are concerned then. :rolleyes:
How do you figure. to reverse it on you…one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter!
Even in neutral environment. Ruaf would have advantage over any NATO opponent. MIG-31/Su-27 simply have longer legs with longer weopons in operations both for AAM & AtoG. Same is true for high power A-50. which can see further than NATO AWACS. Most of bomber force is Supersonic so can deliver more tonnage per day basis vs B-52/B-2. Russians give raw power of sensors, speed and longer range of aircraft the most importance. So future fleet of MIG-31BM/Su-34/PAK-FA/Su-27SM2 will have distinct advantage over NATO aircraft like JSF/F-22/EF/Rafale/F-18E. And also land based aircraft are more suitable for antiship/ASW role along with fleet defence.
NATO forces assume that they will always have access to friendly airbases and airspace along with tanker/AWACS support to make up of shorter leg aircraft but Russian assumes that there economic/military power along with space based survellence will prempt that possibility fo sudden attack and neutralize the friendly enviornment.Western pilots are no more proficient on per capita basis just like Olympic athletes. And Russians are using advance simulators to make for certain skills.
u dont need to produce exact number of flying hours to produce the same result.
wow. never seen anyone lap up russian propaganda like this. when have we seen russian fighter/awacs combinations work in combat oh thats right we havent.NATO have always enjoyed more sophisticated aircraft then russia….. USAF Vs RuAF would lead to terrible losses on the russian side…. Having putin in power is not like having Robin Olds in every russian aircraft like you suggest of the RuAF abilities.
Meanwhile, NATO, USAF& RAF have combat proven awacs/fighter combos, expeditionary warfare, round the world strategic bombing capabilities and air refueling… USAF has more tanking capabily in one wing then the whole RuAF!!!
I cannot quite believe that you have said that magic word.. TO DEFEND.. Can you please point out at when exactly Grenada, Afghanistan, Iraq, Serbia or Panama attacked your country so that you had to defend? 🙂
we had not to defend ourselves but the general rights of people
Grenada-cuban backed revolution attempt. americans held hostage.peace restored
Afghanistan-assisted in the biggest attack on the western way of life…..using innocents
Serbia, what are we meant to go back to just ignoring ethnic cleansing happen unabated?
Panama- well if you think leaving a resource like the panama canal in the hands of Gen. Noriega is the right thing to do
And Iraq…. well if you think we should have left that war criminal Saddam Hussein to live…… Jesus
Iran… oh haven’t ticked that off the list yet;)
I personally think that yes, you were making fun of the russian practice of painting names.. You probably think that making fun of something Russian makes you look very cool, at least in the eyes of a local Raptor club..
I cannot provide an answer regarding Russian PR because I never cared..
sorry to hear thats what you thinkconsidering painting names on the side of aircraft is a thing all air forces do…… Memphis belle, POW*MIA, Thunderpig…..
and I have no doubt the russian people are very nice, but no matter what you cannot call it democracy while Putin the criminal is in charge. But do you honestly think that if someone living near Engels-2 airbase made a noise complaint it would be investigated?
lets look at a few of the side possiblities….
Australia Vs Indonesia… over independence for west papua
DPRK Vs RoKAF/USAF/RoCAF….. incited by china to draw away defences from taiwan and make it easier
USAF?Israel Vs Iran/Syria……al this talk of exterminating Israel is not going to end pretty
USAF Vs RuAF……..over Russia’s re-emergence as an enemy….starting point likely central asia
The enemies of the US in the last decades had an airforce? That is some real news.. :rolleyes:
Grenada air force
Panama air force
Iraq air force (Mk1)
Serbian air force
Afghanistan air force
Iraq air force (Mk2)A truly impressive list of opponents.. I am pretty confident that even our tiny Slovak air force with a handful of fully combat capable Fulcrums would be able to crush most of those (with the exception of Iraqi Mk1 which at least had many functioning aircraft in inventory)
Wow, if only NATo had left serbia for the Slovak air force:rolleyes: would have saved us alot of time and money….. as demonstrated in sri lanka one doesn’t need the latest in weaponry to pose a air to ground threat…… but i’d sure as hell want the best to defend against any potential enemy.
I think the bias is going too far here. We could start a large argument here about what is more stupid – to write a big name on the side of a Tu-160 or to paint an ugly hoghead on the fin of an F-111G. Or the ‘vark with *Ipswich celebrates* written on it, oh, how stupid! :confused:
The fact is that if someone really wants to dis something, he will find whatever brainless argument to do so and you are a bright example of that. I suggest you simply let Russians paint their stuff they way they like it while doing the same with your hogs. Everyone will be happy and satisifed.. Comprende?
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……..
as invisible as is now possible?;)
include a couple of F-22s so equipped with strike packages and it would still be formidable
No. To be in a usefull mode, the F-35B is limited to a STO and VL, but the related forces in mind a “dusty” enviroment has to be avoided. See the Harrier about that. 😉
wow how short sighted of JSF considering current combat ops would suggest the need for F-35B to operate out of FOB in the middle east
Another thought…… How many brimstones could F-22 carry in the bomb bay…… would make a nice invisible ground attack platform
Rafale opens many options for brazil………… the air force model and the naval version for the navy and the possible purchase of CVFs…. would bring the cost of the units down(savings to be spent on CTOL equipment)????
The intended hi-lo mix of the Iran were F-14As and F-16As. But after 1979 the F-16As went to Israel. 😉
thank god the islamic revolution happened when it did……..a few more years and they would have had F-16s….. not good
is there anything to say that F-35B is going to be roughfield capable? what are the differences and can they be incorporated into other models?