Page 3 – Key Publishing

SS-26

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 72 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →

Author

Posts
August 2, 2009 at 5:17 am in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2026985

SS-26
Participant

Jonesy Jonesy what evidence do you have that the Russians don’t have the means to find a U.S. CBG?????

Even the U.S.N. has NEVER stated that!!!!!

August 2, 2009 at 5:05 am in reply to: SM-3 racks up another kill. . . #1814473

SS-26
Participant

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

July 30, 2009 at 11:23 pm in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2027108

SS-26
Participant

Did any of you read the link I posted, it de-bunks any theory about “Russian Naval weakness, and U.S. naval superiority”

July 30, 2009 at 7:27 am in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2027213

SS-26
Participant

Scroll down a little and read the article titled “Is the U.S. Navy OverRated?” your going to read U.S. Navy “Documents” on just how many times the U.S.N. got beat by Russian type ships in the like 50 years.

http://www.transasianaxis.com/vb/showthread.php?t=304

July 30, 2009 at 6:21 am in reply to: Air Force tests missile in launch from Calif coast #1814566

SS-26
Participant

I’m confused U.S.A./Rus say its takes thier nukes 15 minutes to reach each other at 24K MPH (just over Mach 30) it seems as if it would be 1 hour before the missiles reach unless they go 96,000 mph (15 minutes)????

June 24, 2009 at 8:11 pm in reply to: F-22 can Super Cruise for only 100 Nautical Miles #2440306

SS-26
Participant

type o

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

June 24, 2009 at 8:04 pm in reply to: F-22 can Super Cruise for only 100 Nautical Miles #2440307

SS-26
Participant

What size force is it going up against, to require >1000 to be effective? Does an Air Force have to have >1000 Typhoons, Rafales, Gripens, Flankers, Fulcrums, F-15s, etc… to be effective? Define effective.

The F-22 was /is still built to fight Russia not for terrorists in caves or 3/4 Gen warplanes from the mid-east, or China Russia is the only nation who could fight U.S.A. thats why the 22 is needed.

June 24, 2009 at 7:59 pm in reply to: F-22 can Super Cruise for only 100 Nautical Miles #2440314

SS-26
Participant

The Mig 31 was a specialized aircraft though. The Raptor has a lot more roles than merely high altititude interceptor, and there’d be too many compromises in the other areas it excels at, were it to try to compete with the Foxhound. The Foxhound doesn’t have nearly the flexibility or survivability of the Raptor. I’m trying hard to understand the attitude you’re projecting, with your posts.

Whats so difficult about making the 22 do mach 1.6/7 for 420/500 miles?????

June 23, 2009 at 5:38 pm in reply to: F-22 can Super Cruise for only 100 Nautical Miles #2440823

SS-26
Participant

The Mig 31 was a specialized aircraft though. The Raptor has a lot more roles than merely high altititude interceptor, and there’d be too many compromises in the other areas it excels at, were it to try to compete with the Foxhound. The Foxhound doesn’t have nearly the flexibility or survivability of the Raptor. I’m trying hard to understand the attitude you’re projecting, with your posts.

The F-22 unless bought in numbers of 1000 or more will not be affective.

June 23, 2009 at 5:23 pm in reply to: F-22 can Super Cruise for only 100 Nautical Miles #2440832

SS-26
Participant

It was never meant to equal the (larger-hence more fuel capacity) MiG-31 in terms of range OR speed, so what relevance does that have on anything.

A 5th Gen airplane is to be better in “ALL ASPECTS” from previous Gen warplanes thats why, ESPECIALLY if your asking for $100+Mill for each one, (and on top of that your only getting 187 of ’em!!) HAHAHA

June 23, 2009 at 5:08 pm in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-3 #1815537

SS-26
Participant

Please, enlighten us, what failed programs were actually cover-ups to confuse the USA? And maybe you can even give an actual answer this time, without resorting to a manipulation of one piece of data or a descent into petty name-calling.

Oh yeah, that last bit, you can consider that a warning.

Well from the data almost all of it seems like, Russia has more ABM defenses than we do, the “official” docs on how many warheads they have left can’t be the truth, (scince there’s no independent 3rd party that witnessed Rus between 92-08 dismantling thier nukes.)

The U.S. Government gives 2 “Official” Reports on it’s and Russia’s military might,

1. The first is what it tells the public threw the media, which trickels down to Time/NewsWeek and all the other “trusted” Mags.

2. The 2nd “Official” reports are what the Gov/Military discuss among themselves and from what I’ve the 2nd “Official” reports almost always contradicted the 1st “Official” reports.

June 22, 2009 at 1:47 am in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-3 #1815563

SS-26
Participant

Yeah, like the N-1. There’s really a Soviet lunar colony on the Moon right now. Tu-95MS and Tu-160 bombers also actually carry the Meteorit cruise missile and not the Kh-55. Of course, they are secondary to the T-4 and T-54 units that represent the real front-line bomber force.

Bafoons like YOU will only learn after WW3, keep thinking I don’t know what I’m talking little boy, you’ll be the crying like a woman when your “MIGHTY” U.S. military is no more.

June 21, 2009 at 8:32 pm in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-3 #1815586

SS-26
Participant

Beauty , Thanks Otaku.

The success of Borei program will depend to a great extent on the success of Bulava SLBM and this year it will be make or break for it , I think to a great extent the reputation of MITT and Yuri Solmonov is at stake as well. Well Good Luck to them

If you study Rus Mill R&D you’ll see most of the time they always go to far lengths to make thier developments seem like it’s a failure this is If believe the U.S. can’t win a war against them.

June 21, 2009 at 8:23 pm in reply to: F-22 can Super Cruise for only 100 Nautical Miles #2441527

SS-26
Participant

[QUOTE=SOC;1425072]It states “Combat Radius (NM) Mission 1 (Sub+Super)”, giving figures projected and demonstrated. 310+100 is the radius figure for subsonic and supersonic. The total mission radius is 410NM. Meaning the total RANGE is over 800NM in that mission. Range is double radius, plus a bit more. So if the supersonic RADIUS is 100NM, the supersonic RANGE would be over 200NM. Claiming that it can only go 100NM is therefore totally false and only indicative of an inability to comprehend 1×2.

So, YOU are wrong, your own source gives a performance of over 100NM at supersonic speed!

Once again, since you are using RANGE and not RADIUS, your own link shows a figure of 200NM, which is more than your 100NM claim. 1×2 again.

Apart from that, read what people have already posted in this thread. The Lockheed link only gives figures for “Mission 1”,

Where’s L.M. saying the 22 can super cruise at mach 1.6/7 for 200NM?
all I’m trying to say is 187 planes at $100+ Mill and it can’t out the MiG-31

June 21, 2009 at 8:00 pm in reply to: Gripen NG beats SU-35 in a2a #2441531

SS-26
Participant

[QUOTE=talltower;1425122]

It is merely a marketing ploy to help generate exports to air forces of countries hostile to Western interests.

Rosoboronexport is a well-oiled machine.

If that’s the case (which it’s not) then the U.S. is biggest “marketing ployer” with all these out of context exaggerated stories of U.S. fighter planes being 10:1 / 3:1 victories over Rusian planes starting from the Korean War (which btw the U.S. did NOT win) down to the immoral / illegal Kosavo bombing.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 72 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →