All of you third world countries can pretend to be world power by buying the latest weapon systems, but lets face it. I wouldn’t be afraid of any Indian pilots, unless I’m near an Indian airforce base, where you have a greater chance of plane crashing into your living room.

And that goes for all you other jokers out there. All of your military forces are joke and laughing stock.

How come the refueling probe is external? cost or afterthought?

I think UK is Great, even thought “Great Britain” is a geographical term.

And they continue to make contribution to the world even thought they don’t have to and their resources are stretched to the limits. They don’t shirk from doing their part to keep the world safe.
Their military personnel are world class professionals, even though political rat *******s continue to embarrass them. (i.e. equipment and supplies)

They protect the nations in crisis when called up by the UN. Unlike certain other nations that is synonymous with Surrender Monkeys.

And just because the world has changed and you’re not the great force that you were in the past, does that mean you should shy away from making a difference in the world? What kind of defeatist attitude is that?

Originally posted by Vympel
The B-1B isn’t that agile- it’s a myth that’s arisen simply because it uses a flight stick.

Well its bigger than B-52 and can fly pretty much like F-111, so I say that’s pretty agile. You seen a video of one of these things? Low level flying, weaving in and out through the valleys doing test bombing runs. If that isn’t agile for plane this size. I don’t know what is.

Speaking of video found this CLIP on PlanesTV.com (it’s not a link to their webpage)

If there ever was a plane that was just cool. Its the Vulcan.

Imagine the possibility of Vulcan going through the modernization that the Nimrod is going through (without the headaches. since this is pure fantasy)

Rebuild it into all-glass cockpit, 4 man crew. (one less crew), same type of electronics as B-1B, carrying up to 40 Pavway IV in the bomb-bay and maybe 4 Storm-Shadow on each wing. Maybe 6 Storm Shadow in the bay and 4 on the wing. Most of the surface made from composite material, so it will have longer range and greater payload.
4 New BR700 engine, producing up to 23,000 LB of thrust each. (much cleaner and fuel efficient than 20,000 LB thrust Olympus 301.) And it certainly has enough room for electronics in that big nose.

B-1B bomber or Avro Vulcan.

Because big planes like these have no right to be so agile. Yet they are.

Originally posted by flex297
I.P., not that all your your arguments were wrong but the way you present them is simply terrible.. I suggest you stick one US flag in your ass and another one in your mouth… This will be of advantage for you and for us..

1. You look better.. Like a pathetic selfish nationalistic brainwashed moron, just the way you are..

2. We get rid of your bull****.. That alone is worth the effort..

3. The world is a nicer place to live…

Thanks

Flex

I’m just jerking this guy around. That is all, I could use less rhetoric but where is the fun in that?

And you seem to think that I am this “Ultra Patriotic American” sorry to disappoint you but I m not waving any US flags here, so go stick your head up your ass.

Originally posted by glitter
You spoke of “that much better” ?

What the Fu*k are you talking about?
If you are going to quote me, do it correctly:

“Obviously, Rafale wasn’t that much better than F-15K’s capability otherwise it wouldn’t even be question here.”

What does this sentence mean, I’ll expand on it since you have comprehension problem:

The ability of Rafale versus F-15K wasn’t that significant, if Rafale’s performance was exponentially greater than F-15K’s, there wouldn’t be any question of which plane to pick. But since the difference wasn’t that significant it wasn’t a deciding factor.

See how long that sentence became, just to explain it to you specifically. But you probably still don’t know what I am saying to you anyway.

You said that Range/payload was very important for SK so, you acn easily imagine that on all other caracteristics, the rafale was much better than the F-15.

No I did not say that, so if you are going to use an that as an argument, find out who said it, before opening your mouth and try to use it against someone.
Also I already said Rafale was a better plane so you are either stupid or you’re confused on what I’ve been saying. Plus that argument is pointless, since Korean Peninsula is small, so range isn’t much of a deciding factor.

HAve you got difficulties with english ?

That is funny line coming from you!!! We know you’ve got difficulties, since you have difficulty reading and understanding I suggest you stop posting, until your reading and writing skills get better. I don’t know French so you won’t see me posting in French. So do everyone a favor quit posting nonsense.
(By the way that was such a pitiful attempt at a comeback, it doesn’t work)

Sure, France wanted to sell a plane without weapons.

Yeah, that is what I said, sure you go with that. :rolleyes:
If that is the best you can do, go right ahead and use that argument. I don’t know if I would be really satisfied with that kind of lame answer, but hey I’m not lame ass like you.

Yep great weapons.
The F-15 need that to gain some conpensation vs the Rafale 😀

Again you are being delusional.
ROKAF have a plane that will deliver it’s weapons VS imaginary plane that even it’s own government refuses to purchase unless Dassult makes improvement. C-O-M-P-E-N-S-A-T-I-O-N not needed since it works fine without those weapons. give me some AMRAAM, They’ll knock those NKorean tin cans out of the sky before they know what hit them.

Yep, the french military industry can’t guarantee the price of american missiles.

Again, you have no real answer. Well that is my fault for not dumbing it is down for you. I should have been more explicit in my wording, I was careless. So I will re-write it for you tards.

If the Americans are going to use them, the cost per missiles/bomb goes down. So it will be cheaper to buy them. The french military industry can’t possibly match prices with American industry.

Ok easier for you to understand, so you have no excuse.

Depend if the USA screw the program by themselves or not but it’s right that french missiles for example are often more expensive than american or russian equivalent.

To summerize, the plane is cheaper, the radar is WAYYYYYYYY cheaper but missiles are too expensive ?

Planes and the RADAR they carry can be used over and over again. But the missiles and smart bombs they carry are one time use ONLY and unless they are just for show, they will need to replace them if they decides to use them, so yeah cost of weapon does matter. Am I going slow enough for you to understand?
And they can acquire them for their other plane, which are compatible with American weapons. How many time do you have to be told this.
HELLO ARE YOU EMPTY UP THERE IN YOUR HEAD!!!

The us navy use F-15 ?
Yes, you’ve got problem with english, the problem was the couple, not the weapons.

NO, NAVY uses SLAM-ER, which is the weapon you raised the question about.
Boeing already tested SLAM-ER on F-15E. Do some research!

So, you’re a F*UCKING idiot, because you don’t know what you are talking about. Sorry but I have to say it. Nothing personal but put two and two together or do I have to spell it out for you?

Nothings wrong with my English you dimwit, something’s wrong with your head.
Besides, I’m not the retard that just wrote “the problem was the couple, not the weapons”
Care to explain what you are trying to say? Because that statement makes no sense whatsoever. And only problem with my English is that your are reading it and butchering it.

The question is “what was the french equivalent for Korea ?”
The AASM.

Yeah and the whole question comes back to acquisition. Buying one type of weapon just to use it on few Rafael is very uneconomical. Buy JDAM and use it on all of your plane, Don’t know about you, but that seems to make more sense.

BTW it seems that you don’t understand (like most american posters) waht proven mean.

BTW, what weapons used during Clinton eara missed 48 targets out of 49 in Iraq ?

Hey I am going to nitpick on you, the spelling is “What” not “waht” and “eara” should be “era.”
“Weapons” which one(s) are you referring to? Did you mean to say “What weapon, used during Clinton era, missed 48 targets out of 49 in Iraq?”
I don’t know why don’t you enlighten us with your “brilliant” analysis. I would like to ask the Iraqis that got bombed to say a few word but they are dead.

Oh By the way,(dude, use the whole f-ing words, would it have killed you to type “By the way” what are you teenage girl using AOL?), Which billion franc airplane has yet to make an export sale order? Even after bribing and spending millions on marketing?

The AASM should be in that range IIRC

But since it can’t be used on other planes without testing it, it’s not a solution for ROKAF. There will be additional cost of integration and testing if the Koreans wanted to do that, so no it will not be at same cost.

But it’s a weapons made for the ameriican doctrine, don’t forget it.

And, North Koreans are using Soviet weapons and technology, tactics and doctrine, so it seems killing them with these weapon fit quite nicely, it’s like there is a synergy here :p
And who cares what “doctrine” is being used, you are trying to blow up stuff with it, not discussing the reasons for killing them.

The subject was F-15 and Rafale.

Wrong, The subject was F-15K and its weapon system, you and your Rafale fan-boy cohorts were the ones who brought it back into this thread.

In fact, it’s the last F-15 user who will get rape (just like every last user of a product), but why do you choose to ignore this ?

Wrong because, the product has been tested, proven and works very well, and will continue to do the job. And not only has this not been ignored, it’s been already thought of and proven in the real world that opposite is true. In real world they have beta testing and pre-releases, current version Rafale is a pre-release. And the production version is the 1st release. And we all know that 1st releases are full of bugs and kinks that need to be worked out.
I hate to be that sucker that gets the 1st Rafale, god know how many years of additional work that will needed to be done on it and who know what bugs that will pop up in the software. I mean what retard wants to buy the first version of anything. In fact even the French government is reluctant to purchase them unless Dassault improve the plane.
And I already said it wasn’t the plane, it’s the whole package. Meaning Koreans are getting the Tools to develop their own planes and technology as well.
As the Sea Harrier has proven over and over and over again, if you match the right electronics with the weapon system on a plane, it will overcome any aerodynamic advantage the North Korean might (in this they don’t) have. US and its allies have the best BVR air to air missile, so any slight advantage that you might have is negated.

Of course that ‘s very important.
But I can’t see why the french offer was so much behind american one.
BTW “F-15” and “minimum cost” put together in the same sentence ?

What were the French offering, tell me? I don’t know. (not including the bribe :p sorry couldn’t help myself with that one)
But I do know what American industry can and will offer. Once the planes are tested, built and transfered, it’s a done deal. So forget the planes, we are talking about associated cost and cost of operating a plane that can use the ordnance that they already have and have access to in the future.
If I own a fleet of trucks, and they all run on gasoline. I’m not going to buy a diesel truck just because its cheaper. Unless the dealer is willing to retrofit my whole fleet of trucks into running diesel.

1) My nationalistic feelings are well, don’t worry about them.
2) Yes, obviously it was a cheat
3) “merit of the plane ?” But your wholepost about the merit of ammunitions. Isn’t it a bit inconsistent ?

1. I do worry about them because you are being an assh01e and nuisance with your blabbering crap. I’d get over it already if I were you. I’m not Korean, and I don’t have have involvement in Boeing, so I don’t have issues with it. But you’ve still got problem with it. Get help, my frog loving friend.

2. Yeah it was a cheat, if you decide to overlook the details and let your nationalistic pride or Rafale fanaticism cloud your judgment.

3. You see this is where your misunderstanding of the language comes into problem. While you keep harping about how Rafale won the competition. I’ve been trying to tell you it was more than just the plane, it was the package deal. I already said, Rafale is a better plane, but additional benefits that comes with the deal tip the deal in favor of Boeing and US. Dassault and French couldn’t match it. You just don’t seem to understand this.