KapedaniAlbanian AB-205
J-7s stored inside tunnel
Mi-4s today
2 J-7s in storage at Rinas
J-6 gateguard
An old historical one, J-6 being loaded with bombs
KapedaniAircraft came from numerous airfields and didn’t necessarily land back where they took off from. The airspace and airports of just about every neighboring country were used.
Ah!! And which airport were these damaged US aircraft langing in? Apparently some local airport which is far away from any civilian area or any local military activity…such as??
Lonevolk,
You are aware the every single F-117, bar obviously 82-806, deployed to Europe for Allied Force was noted flying back to the US.
Every single airframe, apart from 82-806, accounted for and no others that took part noted written off.It puts to bed the Colonel’s claim that a damaged F-117 never flew again.
Again its the repition of the same source.
What serial number did this F-117 that “never flew again” have? Oh well :rolleyes:
Oh and who is this Serbian SAM operator on the ground that even CLAIMS to have hit another F-117?
Kapedani‘Now for the sake of argument, it’s more than likely that some of the damaged aircraft did crash on the way back to base.’
Again how are the aircraft losses being covered up? Can you not see that you enter the conspiracy world with such claims? Aircraft A is lost in combat.
Explain how that loss is announced and covered up? In 78 days of combat no NATO personnel were killed in combat. A fact highlighted on TV by both Clinton and Blair. How long would such a cover up of combat deaths last under the likes of Clinton and Blair?
Its very sad that today, more than 10 years afterward, these same old incredibly silly arguments have to be heard over and over and over…the torch of Veink-ness picked up over and over by a new generation of “believers”.
Its quite sad…that such things need to even be said.
But alas regardless of what you say TJ, you’re not going to change any minds.
KapedaniMore Albanian stuff
Mi-4 gateguard
H-5 as gate guard
J-6 as gateguard
J-5 gateguard
AB-205 on board of Dutch ship during recent excercise
5 BO-105s in Army service
Used by Police
Last flight was in 2001
KapedaniAlbanian Alouette III used by Ministry of Health
These are to be replaced by these BO-105s
BO-105s also being used by Police
And Army
New A-109
Mi-8
Albanian An-2 returned to service after many years in storage (4 in total)
All the helicopter types in service with the Army (AB-206, AB-205, BO-105 and A-109)
Single H-5 bomber on its last flight in 1997
Old photo of Il-14. These are all scrapped now
KapedaniCan you read what I’ve written so far?
Or do I have to repeat myself ad infinitum?
How many sources do you need to see?
Ok once more…there is only one source for the “second” F-117…and thats a AFM. The rest are repeats of the same story.
And as it appears…if it happened…it was a bird strike. Thats why there has been NOBODY to come forward…either from the west or from the Serb side…claiming to have HIT another F-117. This is 10 years later…There’s loads of info available about the one and only F-117 hit…a lot from the Serb side. People have interviewd the guy who did it many many times. Strangely…nobody ELSE in Serbia has come forward to say “hey wait a minute I hit another F-117 myself too!” Strange…
Why is this so hard to swallow?
KapedaniBird strike, not from enemy fire. The affair was revealed by an aviation magazine reporter – you know how many reporters (,foreign spies,) and aviation buffs were watching the runways, right? I had a friend that told me that it hit one on the way out and had to return. The russkies like to prop up their little brothers in Serbia because they use their equipment.
Well then this verifies once more what I said…there was no second F-117 damaged by enemy fire.
Thats why there has been no evidence to suggest anything of the sort has happened…since 10 years.
If it was a bird strike…then thats entirely a different issue (unless it was a trained Serbian pigeon…which given Venik’s imagination…could have been).
A bird cut half of one vertical stabiliser?
Where did you get that half the vertical stabiliser was gone?
KapedaniThe original source for the second F-117 is the one that really matters….the commander and crew of the SAM unit that did the shooting.
There’s no second F-117 :rolleyes: Regardless how much you repeat it.
KapedaniSame story for the Internet, theres a lot of useful information out there, but much is repeated verbatim from other websites – its a little hard to gauge the truthfulness without knowing the source. The web or an article is a secondary source – they are written from other sources. The actual source (media or press briefing) is the primary source.
For example Jon Lake writes article (without referencing the RAF retiring the Jaguar!) for Air Forces Monthly on the Eurofighter. He gives the new weight of the Tranche 2 fighter. He is journalist and knows he cannot make stuff up. AFM, like many magazines, doesn’t have room for listing every source. The magazine editor has to trust the journalists. Jon Lake was good enough to reply on the source of the Tranche 2 weight – a Eurofighter briefing (primary source).
The ‘Australian report’ (what do us Australians know about air warfare? Carlo Kopp has ruined us!) lists no sources.
The Airpower article: http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a…2/lambeth.html
lists the source as “David A. Fulghum, “Kosovo Report to Boost New JSF Jamming Role,” Aviation Week and Space Technology, 30 August 1999, 22 (PG: page 22?)”I lack access to the AWS&T, so thats as far as I can go with validating, but I did search through World Air Power Journal Volume 38 Autumn/Fall 1999, page 22, ‘Operation Allied Force. The First 30 days’ by Robert Hewson: “Friday 2 April: Croatian and Yugoslavian sources allege that a damaged F-117 had to make an emergency landing in Zagreb, Croatia after operations on the night of 9/10 April.”
Make what you will of the statement.
1) Am I telling the truth?
2) Is the article telling the truth?
3) Are the article sources truthful?Its a well written article as he gives sources for most of his statements, he even points out where Western sources, with hindsight, were incorrect.
Yes no argument here except that the ORIGINAL ORIGINAL source was AFM in July 1999…and their source was LOCAL news outlets (meaning local Balkan outlets…Serb or Croatian…yeah solid sources there!)
Since then…this claim has had ZERO confirmation in any part from ANY source in ANY manner…except the repition of the same AFM single line over and over in several different outlets.
Therefore…having a “source” doesn’t mean that the information is correct or real in any way…when consideringg the “source” of this is some Serbo-Croatian newspaper :rolleyes: and when there is zero information of any degree to back it up.
Considering the mountain of infromation that has come out from both sides in the past 10 years…particularlly on the F-117 and F-16 shoot downs, you’d think something would have come up about some second F-117 hit in the clonfict. One would think. But what do I know…I’m a dipstick it seems lol
KapedaniBAE Typhoon project test pilot Mark Bowman
Yep…very convincing 😉 Sukhoi’s test pilot meanwhile stands at a corner giving the other two the finger “mine is bigger!”
Yes Mr.Sukhoi but as BAE’s test pilot says…”It’s the balance of how you use it, rather than what it is” 😉
Yeah ok this is silly to take quotes from company representatives or even air force commanders. Realistically no one is going to say the Typhoon is “90%” of the F-22. But can it be used like the F-22?
Typhoon wins hands down in the price game though
Yes but Sopwith Camel wins hands down against that in price 😉
Making something cheaper is only a side issue in fighter terms. Its about how many a particular air force can afford. The USAF can afford a heck of a lot more than anyone else. But the main issue is…making something to kill the other guy…99% of the time. And for that, the Typhoon is a second to the F-22 (not counting F-35), but a very distant second.
Besides…the point here is that the Typhoon is NOT the F-22s COMPETITOR or future adversary. The USAF isn’t going to make decissions based on how many Typhoons the British or Germans have. Its not even a comercial competitor.
——————-
The original reason the Typhoon came up is because I asked if any air force the US is concerend about in the foreseeable future would field any sort of fighter force comparable both in numbers and in technology to the F-22 fleet. The answer is clearly…no.
So what is the justification for a pressing need for more F-22s?
I would agree very much with J Boyle who says that perhaps 200 would be better to take into account attrition etc. But in the end, I don’t think the F-22 will have a very long career to begin with. F-35 represents a more addaptable platform…and with UCAVs looming in the distance that would make F-22s uneccesary in the ground-attack role…F-22 was the right plane at the wrong time. Yet it still represents a level of performance that no one else will match for another 20 years…so there’s nothing for the USAF to worry about.
Every single Eurofighter fan will tell you their Sopwith Camel had 90% of the F-22s capabilities in 1918. After all…its British. …
Don’t be silly. That’s what Americans do.
They learned it from you 😀
KapedaniI would not wipe the floor with other aircraft capabilties andreal performances the way you do.
Every single Eurofighter Consortium Partner PR would tell you they have 90% of F-22 capabilities today and that’s not 20 years in terms of technology it’s about a couple of cycles at best, ten years if they stay at the level of T1and their not.
Every single Eurofighter fan will tell you their Sopwith Camel had 90% of the F-22s capabilities in 1918. After all…its British.
Brochure advertisements and internet fan-boy discussions aren’t all that relevant.
Mock combat excercises have shown the superiority in capabilities of the F-22 over F-15 and other existing platforms. Those are the ones I was talking about.
Eurofighters for that matter aren’t the competitor or the potential adversary of the F-22 now or anytime in the future. So any debate as to which is better or closer (which is no debate at all), is totally not relevant to the issue of how many F-22s the USAF should have. I’m pretty sure they’re not measuring the number of F-22s they need based on projected Eurofighters there will be around.
KapedaniWhat F-15 pilot ejected? Source please.
The pilot that supposedly ejected and Syrian fishermen found the lifejacket later. Of course…
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter G
The F-117 damage – what are the US sources for that?One is actually Australian
Kosovo and the Continuing SEAD Challenge
Dr. Benjamin S. LambethQuote:
Despite that expenditure of assets, enemy fire downed only two NATO aircraft- the F-117 mentioned above and, later, an F-16- although another F-117 sustained light damage from a nearby SA-3 detonation and two A-10s were hit by enemy AAA fire but not downed.http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m…6/ai_90529723/
Revisiting the Lessons of Operation Allied Force
by Martin Andrew, BA(hons), MA, PhD, RAAF(Retd)Quote:
A total of 815 SAMs were fired at NATO aircraft, of which 665 were radar guided SA-3 and SA-6 rounds. One F-16C and one F-117A were killed by SAM shots, and one F-117A suffered light damage from a near misshttp://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.html
And it was also mentioned in a AFM issue at the time
Quote:
An F-117A of the 49th FW was damaged during strike mission by a nearby explosion of an SA-3 SAM, “…causing loss of part of the tail section, but the aircraft was able to return to Spangdahlem air base, Germany.” (source: Air Force Monthly, July 1999, p. 75)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens
What F-15 pilot ejected? Source please.The one we’ve been talking about…
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho…8&postcount=32
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEEJ
Lonevolk,
Do some research on Diego Zampini. The source of the loss of Tornado GR1, serial ZA467, comes from Zampini as does the other claims in his participation with Aviacija i Vremja magazine.No it doesn’t.
It’s an official claim by the Iraqi AF…..to this day!
The pilot of the Mig-29 was later shot down himself, with the USAF claiming 2 x Mig-29s when in fact he was the only one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapedani
Venik…He’s in the UShere’s a date for you…2/23/1991. Here’s a name for you “Abdullah Al-Sayeed”. Here’s a place for you “Baghdad”. Thats right…I’v got a date, a name (that I just made up…as are most of those “Iraqi” pilots), and a place.
Kapedani, why don’t you go back to the sand pit and play with the rest of the kids….I haven’t got time for dipsticks
How’s this for dipsticks.
The original claim here was AFM in 1999. The claim was later discredited as false…Nothing more to add to this. They wrote what they heard in the media…but there was never any confirmation or any detail or anything to indicate such an event ever happened.
It was a false claim…that was retracted.
But in the meantime every internet warrior read it on Venik’s website that fine day in July 1999…and spread it around like wildfire…and now it truns out as “an Australian claim” :rolleyes: False rumors have a way of taking on a life of their own…and being repeated like a telephone game more than 10 years later as still “facts”.
So to repeat, no second F-117 was hit. All those other “sources” are just repeats of the one and only original source…one line in AFM in 1999…which in itself has been discredited as false long ago.
How’s that for a dipstick? But maybe you weren’t around 10 years ago to remember all the “fun” with Venik 😉 Thats why you come back 10 years later and repeat the same old thing.
At the very least do us a favor…and try not to be insulting 😉 We might just know something you don’t.
KapedaniUSA would be much better served with a 80% F-22 fighter ‘only’ capable to do let’s say M1.4 in SC, having RCS comparable to F-35, costing ca $170-180mil program cost per unit and serving in 450+ numbers.
Russians now have a chance to do a design like that in PAK-FA. But they, too, suffer from the same superiority complex as the Americans, let us see whether they can avoid a fiasco.
Comparing them to the Russian’s brochure paper airplane isn’t fair. Even if the PAK-FA cost 100 mil (which it won’t even approach)…nobody could afford it (from its traditional pool of customers). Yes you can always make a program cheaper by reducing features. Do you think that it translates directly in the same way between F-22 development and the mythical paper-airplane development? There’s a learning curve thats not very forgiving in these things…and if you’ve never build anything of the sort (nevermind had a fully functioning aviation industry for the past 20 years)…you’re not going to be able to acheive the same technological level at the same price. Far from it.
Thats not really the point of it…in the air nobody cares how much your plane costs compared to mine.
But again I don’t think any of you are making a very convincing case here for the NEED for more F-22s. If the purpose of the F-22 was to replace the F-15C in the air superiority role…then its doing so on a 1-2 basis. For an aircraft offering a 10 fold improvement in capability, I don’t see this as such an unreasonable rate of replacement. And cosndiering it has a good 20 year lead an any other similar aircraft that might pop up…the urgency isn’t there. Not when its part of a combined arms team made up of F-35s, UCAVs and lots else.
KapedaniThis 187 F-22 scenario is from your wildest, private fantasies? Like a nice, terrain-less pow-pow between the USAF and RuAF where all their aircraft are in the air all at once?
Cute. But you didn’t understand what I said. I said specifically…in what sort of a scenario are 187 F-22s NOT enough? What senario were they thinking about? All out warfare with the USSR?
Dream on. The F-35 is to replace the F-16 (& a number of other aircraft in many services) and we will be lucky if we get enough of them quickly enough to do that much less replace the F-15C that the F-22 is for.
An aircraft so far superior in capability to any of the platforms it is replacing, doesn’t need to replace them on a 1-1 basis. Why would you want to replace F-16s on a 1-1 basis with F-35s?
Could someone actually make the CASE for not more F-22s? The USAF has already made the case for needing AT LEAST 381 F-22s (plus 186 “Golden Eagle” F-15Cs that are supposed to somehow last beyond 2025).
They could have said that…they obviously would have said that. But its not a very strong case to say that they need MORE F-22s then there are F-15Cs in total today in service (well ok if you add the Ds, As and Bs you get a little more than that).
The F-22 representing a leap ahead of the F-15, certainly does not need to replace the F-15s on a one-to-one basis. As such, 187 (or 176 or whatever it is), is more than a good enough replacement. Thats a 1-2 replacement with an aircraft that offers a 10-1 imporvement over the F-15. (a replacement process that probably will drag on about 10 more years).
So again, can someone please make the case for replacing F-15s on a 1-1 basis with the F-22s…instead of a 1-2 basis? Thats not such a shocker to me…
The F-22 was not created for TODAY’S threat, it was created to replace the F-15C & to ensure US air dominance for decades to come
Yes. And a decade or two from now…what threats will be out there that a force of 170+ F-22s and 1500 F-35s and UCAVs…aren’t a complete overkill for? Most run of the mill tin-pot dictators ala-Chavez/Ahmedinejad will at best afford a dozen or two Flankers on steroids for the next 10-20 years. Will China develop 5-th generation aircraft and field them in any sort of numbers…even in 20 years? I doub that very much. Will Russia manage to turn its brochure paper airplanes into any meaningful production numbers for itself or export them…in 20 years time? I doubt that very much (by the time the mythical PAK-FA enters production in any numbers…F-22s will already be a generation behind in the USAF…that is if the PAK-FA even approaches the F-22 in anything).
So where is this pressing need for more fighters?
And another thing to consider is that, the F-22 is caught at a bad time when aviation technology is turning a corner with UCAVs. It is hard to justify building several hunderd more such aircrcraft when we are on the verge of something so new that could overshadow it.
KapedaniThe F-117 damage – what are the US sources for that?
Venik…He’s in the US 😉
The ones I posted are credible claims with dates, names and place…..they don’t sound like wild exagerations to me.
Except that they are.
here’s a date for you…2/23/1991. Here’s a name for you “Abdullah Al-Sayeed”. Here’s a place for you “Baghdad”. Thats right…I’v got a date, a name (that I just made up…as are most of those “Iraqi” pilots), and a place.
So what?
Do you understand who your sources are…whether or not they can be verified in the slightest bit…and why no one has actually managed to verify any such incidents at all? Clearly if there are so many “western” websites publishing such information (one 15 year old kid gets it from another 15 year old kid who read it on Venik’s website who read it on Diego’s website)…it should’nt be too much trouble.
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_272.shtml
Do you see they actually support indirectly the Russian claims of F-15s shot down by MiG-23MLs in 1983, by the way Israel also lost an F-4 in January1984
The ACIG people put those claims in white…as in…unverified CLAIMS. There are a lot of claims they put in there, and I’d bet a good 98% of them are completely unfounded in anything…but they put them in there because there is someone out there claiming them.
Here’s a good example…3 Albanian AF J-7s shot down on June 10 1999 by Serbian MiG-21s. Its about as stupid and fantastical as it can get…yet they are in there in white for “unsupported claims”. But there’s no truth to most of those claims.
Sign In
