Originally posted by Vympel
You’re such a chickhensh1t Goldendragon, what’s the point of even talking to you? You edit what I say out of your own replies (all the more easy to lie about what your opponent is saying), and just repeat your blanket, mind-numbingly stupid general statements again and again. I think it’s quite clear whos came out to be the idiot. I need not right up another lengthy reply which you’ll simply ignore.

F%ck it.

Sorry, Vympie. You’ve simply no solid knowledge of anything, economics, politics and especially military. Using bluster to get false premises across is garbage, my man.

And making all sorts of contortions while being forced into a corner and admitting that one, Russian weapons are inferior and two (after you brought it into the discussion) that Russian training is also inferior is not highly regarded in debates. Neither is creating endless side debates from WWII (which I undoubtedly know more of since you couldn’t even grasp the concept of logistics). Now if you want to go debate WWII, I could do with you so in the Historic aviation forum.

Just repeatedly claiming that other people are stupid and spilling venom doesn’t making you any smarter, numbnuts.

Come on, Vympie, you had an inability to argue without resorting to insults when I started here as BearCat.

And you’ve the same debating handicap today. I still like you though, numbnuts 😀

Otherwise I’d ignore you like the bizarre and irrelevant indiot who thinks it’s “cute” bringing hamburgers into every Chinese discussion (but who gets upset and reports you to the webmaster when his feelings are hurt after you say his stupid crap isn’t funny).

Re: The paranoid Irish Air Corp

Originally posted by ForkTailedDevil
Strange bunch those Irish military types.Makes the North koreans appear open.

It is probably run by SOC.

Originally posted by SSPzGr
that you are, you are an ultra nationalist that has been brain washed by western propaganda.

If I’m brainwashed by western propaganda, I wouldn’t be a Chinese ultranationalist. I’d be a western ultranationalist.

Say something that makes sense. I’m moderate Chinese nationalist who sees through the crap.

sorry dude, that’s like saying “the chinese use human wave to win battles”.

Correct, when the Chinese were forced to rely on Russian weapons along static military fronts we are forced to use basically human wave tactics like in the last year of the Korean War.

When the Chinese army was in a fluid situation of maneuver warfare like its initial entry during the Korean War, where its doctrines of small company infiltration negated the inferiority in weapons by pushing smaller units through lines, it nearly annihilated the US Army and took from the US hundred of miles of territory which constitute today’s North Korea.

But when the lines became static at today’s 38th Parellel, the inferiority of Russian weapons became clear and Chinese died by the hundreds of thousands. Nearly all of the PVA’s casualties came at the end of the war.

not western standards, we are heading in our own independent way trying to incorporating both the best of east and west, you should know that.

Bullcrappy. It is western standards for the most part. Only a blind person would say otherwise.

Incorporating the best of both east and west? “East” in China means Taiwan, Hong Kong and Japan, not Russia. And Taiwan, HK and Japan is pretty much westernized.

Tell me one thing in China that is Russian beyond the PLA and maybe a nuclear plant or two because of politics and the need to keep Russia as an “ally.” (Chernobyl plants in China what a phreaking nightmare scenario :rolleyes: ).

Only in the backward military which had been denied access to western sources since 1989 have “east” meant Russia.

Originally posted by Vympel
“Not as good as western” and “worhtless crap” is not the same thing, nor does it apply across the board in all cases.

When facing Western stuff, it is just as good as crap. I’ve already said that against other nations using similar (non-western, mostly Russian) crap, then Russian weapons are valid when used in larger numbers.

Against N Korea, against Vietnam, against anything from the Dark Continent or subcontinent, the MKKs would have be a valid sytem. Against the US and the western armed states of Taiwan, Japan or S Korea, China’s Russian weaponry is crap.

Only by shear numbers could China hope to win with such crappy weapons (Vietnam for example gave up 2 million men for 50,000 Americans using Russia weapons.)

It doesn’t matter how many ways you want to spin this but 102-0 is 102-0. It is hard proof of extreme inferiority. The score sheet can’t be changed. Messing around with variables until you can excuse every crappy performance is a dumb way to argue.

They’ve never been used in the manner they should be used on the battlefield

:rolleyes:

The only way Russian weapons can effectively on the battlefield is to make up for inferiority with numbers. The Arabs got slaughtered and gave up. The Vietnamese didn’t give up and paid for it in lives. The same with China in the Korean War.

The Russians themselves are the best practitioners of these maxim. 20 million dead against a Germany already fighting the US and Great Britain is no mark of good equipment.

Good equipment is suppose to give you an advantage.

and when they have been in training (you fight as you train and you train as ytou fight), by competent pilots, they’re a formidable (MiG-29s in Luftwaffe service schooling NATO).

Just about the only place where the Mig-29 or any Russian plane could show any worth is in an exercise 😀

It sure as hell won’t in the actual battle records.

I heard the Su-30 scored a 4-1 “kill ratio” in the latest exercise. S Korea must be signing its death warrant by going for the F-15K 🙂

Besides, when USAF officials themsleves are saying about Flankers “our pilots in their planes beat our pilots in our planes every time”, I think the matter is quite clear.

The US military also puts up a report on the Chinese military as the greatest long term threat and strategic “peer competitor” to the US.

Now how is that propaganda any different?

Actually, read some F-15 drivers account on the Flanker “beating” them every time. They said in so many words, they’re exxagerations.

This isn’t mathematics, it’s air combat. Victory in air combat (rather than air war) goes to the better pilots.

Sorry numbnuts. Combat whether in the air or on the surface is numbers. Local superiority is a maxim. You have aviation fanboy blinders on, man. Zipping around in the sky doesn’t change the laws governing combat.

Numbers always count and in fluid situations like air combat or cavalry (horse or armor) actions where equipment are equal then the larger force will always inflict disproportional casualties. If you are fighting the person in front of you and someone strikes you from behind, you will die before you can inflict damage.

There are only two ways to actually change this tyranny of numbers in combat. One is in a defensive position where a smaller number with its rear and flanks protected. The other is inferiority in equipment and training. The two usually go hand-in-hand.

In the Mideast, the Arabs lost more men even though they had much larger numbers.

As far as victory in air combat going to the better pilots? Only if two pilots see each other at the same time.

Air combat isn’t a joust, numbnuts.

The majority of kills throughout history is surprise, or “out of the sun” or being caught at the wrong altitude with the wrong kind of plane.

If your Russian radar sucks worse than the Western one (and invariably it would) and if you can’t see out of the idiot Mig-designed cockpit (and invariably the Western cockpit would be better) then the chances of you being surprised and killed before you could ever put your “skills” into use is far greater.

The Israelis were better than the Arabs. They had better planes, better tactics, better training, and better equipment. This does not allow a blanket judgement to be made about Russian aircraft that have never fought.

What are you arguing about then?! Even you are admitting that the Arabs’ Russian planes were crappier, that their Russian instructors taught their crappier tricks for their crappy aircraft and they died in inordinate numbers.

Uh huh. It’s very interesting how you like to clandestinely delete parts of my reply in your posts that you can’t respond to.

Nope. I openly ignored idiotic assumptions and repetition on your part such as Russia being richer than the British Empire in 1941. Are you kidding me? Anyways, I can’t write novels with my poor command of English, dear numbnuts.

The key points you already agreed to. Russian equipment is inferior, Russian training and doctrines are inferior and the Russian economy is inferior (though according to you, it’s irrelevant).

You sell China short and you do Russia a disservice born of complete ignorance of many historical points about the effectiveness of Russian weapons.

Most rational Chinese know China is on the short-end militarily in comparision to her main opponents (US, Japan, Taiwan) and using Russian weapons is firmly indicative of the fact. The only things that work right in China is the westernizing portions.

Historical effectiveness? Historical effectiveness of Russian weapons is proportional to the amount of blood you are willing to shed.

If the Arabs were willing to sacrifice two million men, like the Vietnamese, to take back Palestine, Israel would not be here today.

Originally posted by SSPzGr
give me a break, goldendragon, to put it in the chinese way, you have been brainwashed by western media.

Western media? Vympel thinks I’m a Chinese nationalist 😀

certainly, there are weak points and defects in russian weaponry, but most of them are effective, if not world leading.

They are most defintely not world leading and are effective only when used in larger numbers against other third world nations using the same crappy weaponry.

if you read any chinese military magazines at all, chinese military analysts all agree, russian equipments, although sometimes not as precise and advanced as their western counterparts, are still effective and have uniques that others can’t match.

If you read Chinese journals, you would see Chinese pushing towards Western standards in everything. Look at the FC-1 articles. Over and over again, they point out the youth and “market ideal” of the project and people involved in the projects. One article (archived in my landmark FC-1 thread :D) even went so far as to compare the FC-1 design team to an American Silicon Valley company.

so who are you to criticize equipments that we can’t produce. why don’t you criticize our own defense industry instead? instead of provide with advanced weaponry, it forces us to pay billions to purchase some “junk weapons that are outdated and no good”. unless one day that the russians need to import our weapon, then you can start bashing russian equipments.

I am criticizing the Chinese defense industry. It is currently in such a state that it can’t even match crappy Russian stuff. China is third world, no doubt about it.

The only things effective about China today are the parts of it that are westernizing. An example is the shipbuilding industry is approaching world standard. Aviation, especially Shenyang which assembles the J-11, is currently crap. Chengdu, though, is showing signs of a break from the past and again the FC-1 articles show that.

OTOH, I posted an article on the SAC and the J-8II (look it up). The maker is as moribound and crappy as the product. According to the article, the J-11 project is actually screwing SAC over financially and structurally because it delays changes.

Not bashing Russian equipment just because China has them is simply nationalistic bullsh1t. China is buying crap that will die as easily against Western equipment as the ones that the Arabs used.

The Chinese military has better realize this (and most likely they do because all they talk about is “asymetric” warfare) or else they’ll never advance. China right now is in a state of extreme weakness vis-a-vis the US and US-equipped allies.

China has to learn from its business sectors, like the shipmaking industry, to make truly competitive items.

This fairy tale idea that you can have “first-rate” weapons in a crappy dysfunctional economy is just a pipedream.

Good technology, methods and doctrines percolates throughout a competitive society. Bad technology, methods and doctrines percolates throughout a noncompetitive one.

The idea that “oh my economy sucks, but my weapons are somehow very good” is complete and utter stupidity.

Thank you!

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

Thank you, Huitong!

Originally posted by SSPzGr
saying russian equipments sucks while china has been importing billions of russian weaponry is bit contradicting don’t you think?

Russian equipment does suck. Just because China has imported this garbage doesn’t necessarily means its good. Only nationalist would insists that just because your nation has it, it must be good.

China buys Russian only because of the embargo and it has no choice. The record shows beyond a question of a doubt that Russian equipment is inferior to Western and because China is facing Western arms, it is stuck at an inferior state.

The problem with Russian equipment is that is part and parcel of Russian doctrine and training. The Middle East record shows precisely what would happen between a Western equipped and trained air force and a Russian trained and equipped one.

The results weren’t even close. It was a rout. The dynamics are so horrendously one-sided that there is no question Russian systems, training and doctrines are inferior.

We know from the Cold War that economics is invariably linked to a nation’s ability to produce quality materiel, whether military or civilian. The USSR’s economy was a disaster and so was the combat record of its military systems. The two go hand and hand.