GoldenDragonOriginally posted by SabreAce
However, there are some posters from you know where, who have the habit of posting under fake chinese names for obvious unenviable reasons.
Including possibly the person who started this thread.
Come on, he has 18 posts and is apologizing for a non-related thread on ANOTHER forum HERE???
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Vympel
Good to see Nationalist **** Waving (TM) is still in effect by the less intelligent folks. We have some of those here, so don’t feel the need to apologize. 😎
I agree.
When a 102 – 0 record of the F-15 over Russian aircraft stares you in the face, you just have to admit that Russian aircraft is practically worthless even though your nationality (in my case, Chinese) bought a whole bunch of these cruddy planes.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Arthur
You mean how the absolute monkey’ed MiG-21PFV shot down full-pull USAF F-4Es and such?
That’s right, 4 decades ago, before the vacuum tube was replaced by the solid state transistor, was the last time a Russian airplane came close to a western one.
Since the F-14’s entry marked the modern era, Russian planes had one role and one role only.
That role is kill victim.
GoldenDragonActually, I love Russian equipment 😀
I love reading and modeling them. In fact, I model stuff of Russian origin more than American ones.
But the record shows Russian equipment suck pretty badly. You can’t deny that, outside of perhaps the AK-47, every Russian piece of hardware is distinctly inferior to its Western counterpart.
When planes like the F-15 and F-16 have flawless records and even the F-4 (the Phantom II made 282 kills, almost all of them Russian made) have overwhelming kill ratios then as much as I like the look and aesthetics of Russian weapons I can’t come to any conclusion except that they suck.
BTW, I’m the only one putting up numbers and quotes. Vympie does nothing but gives me his “opinions” and calls me hurtful names 🙁
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Arthur
Besides, the US did it’s share of monkey-ing it’s aircraft too. Venezuela and Indonesia just barely escaped the F-16/79, the P-3F was not allowed to be as advanced as the P-3C, and don’t think that the F-15S is anywhere near as well-equipped as the F-15E or even F-15I. It has to be said that the US plays the game both ways though – Taiwan ‘only’ got F-16As and E-2Bs if you look at the actual airframes delivered. But when you look at what’s inside those airframes, you’ll find that these are monkey-de-luxe variants.
Oh, I never did say that Monkeyizing was confined to the Russians. What I said was that monkeyizing already inferior products brings us to something like the R-27 which can’t even knock down a plane in Africa in the year 2000 (yes, yes, the Sparrow had a similar record 4 decades ago).
Let’s just say that in a fight between 10 American monkeys and 30 Russian monkeys. the Russian monkeys would all die horribly quickly while leaving an American monkey with a broken big toe.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Arthur
India’s MiG-21 crashes have very little to do with the outdated radar in the MiG-21FL, so please make a bit more credible suggestions next time. Also, for quotations of Spick these remarks make very, very little sense. The MiG-21PFS was not a ‘monkey version’ for example, it flew with the VVS just as well.
Apologies on the confusion on the crash remark, Arthur. It was mine, not Spick’s which was why it was in parens.
It was an attempt at derisive humor, which I grossly mangled 😀
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Vympel
There’s a big difference between made and designed.
What has that got to do with reliability? Russian stuff simply aren’t sold in the US market because one, they suck and, two, they suck because they’re unreliable.
Maybe you should check guns.
More Chinese than Russian ones until the ban on assault weapons. Still think there are more Norinco weapons in the US than Russia ones. Need to check.
For some reason I highly doubt that “which expalins in part the endless crashes” is something he wrote instead of something that you wrote.
No, it is something I wrote. That’s why it was in parenthesis.
ridiculous assertion that “monkey model”=”crashes”.
Nope, my assertion is that there are “monkey” versions. The quip (in parens) about crashes is just a flippant remark on my part, not my assertion, numbnuts.
Go take a dip in the gene pool, you’re hemorraging brain cells.
Touchy, touchy, numbnuts. I suggest you drink a little more vodka and mellow out 😀
The fact is, you fight like you train if you train like you fight- human factors have beaten technical factors repeatedly; and none of your ‘examples’ are worth sh1t.
Training is another piece of the whole crappy bundle.
The Arabs were trained by Russians (possibly even had Russian aviators) in the planes that the Russian supplied.
They fought under Russian doctrines too. And they were slaughtered by massively outnumbered American-trained and equipped forces (not Americans themselves).
The records are there for all to see, numbnuts.
If we have two equally trained sets of pilots, one in Russian planes and doctrines, another one in a Western craft and tactics, the Russian trained and equipped ones would die.
As the record shows repeatedly in a horrendously lopsided manner.
You can’t change reality with excuses. You are going to blame a 0-102 record against F-15s all on the pilots that the Russians had ill-trained to begin with?
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Vympel
Or, American flashlight manufacturers have their own market cornered.
Unlikely, go to Walmart and one could see that most of the flashlights are made in China or Mexico.
I can’t find a single Russian product in the US except vodka.
Maybe the cannon fodder are the pilots sitting in the planes, instead of the planes themselves.
More likely inferior Russian planes coupled with inferior Russian tactics.
Let’s see, according to Mike Spick in the Illustrated Directory of Fighters (illustrated because I like pictures :D), F-15s are credited with at 102.5 kills, only 36 of which are American, and no losses.
Again from from Spick, the Viper had 44 Israeli kills for no losses, 16 from the Pakistanis for no losses and 2 from the Dutch for no losses. All were Migs and Sukhois. Aha! They were not flown by a SuperPower against a sh1thole third world countries, Vympie. Though the 3rd world countries were furthur held back by sh1tty degraded Russian equipment.
And not only are they distinctly inferior, they are downgraded or “monkeyized” for even worse performance and reliablity!
More assertion. Do you have anything concrete to bring to the table, or just unproven assertions without evidence.
Come on, Vympie, there are ample evidence (including the godawful combat record) that Russian equipment not only suck horribly to begin with but are made to suck even MORE by degrading.
If you insist on a source repeating a well known trait of Russian aircraft exports, let me quote from Spick’s book again, from the Mig-21 entry:
“A downgraded Mig-21PF, known as a ‘monkey variant,’ was produced for export. this was mig-21FL. it had the inferior R-2L radar . . . The FL was also licensed produced in India by HAL (which explains in part the endless crashes). Other ‘monkey’ variants, were exported, including the Mig-21PFS.”
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by PRC4eva
I don’t see why the PLAN wants the Su-30MK2 since it already have fighter bomber made for maritime strike (FBC-1). Only thing good about it is that it is cheap and made fast, but Russian things is unreliable and China already caught up to Russian technology, the FBC-1 is good enough.
PRC4eva, Vympel is right. Everything you said was wrong except for this remark:
“Russian things is unreliable.”
A succinct observation. This is why you cannot even buy a Russian flashlight in America. Simply unreliable.
Russia does make better cannon fodder for Western aircraft than any other third world country, though.
For example, almost all of the F-16’s and F-15’s 300-0 record is recorded against unreliable Russian aircraft and equally unreliable Russian weapons.
And not only are they distinctly inferior, they are downgraded or “monkeyized” for even worse performance and reliablity!
GoldenDragonUAVs
GoldenDragonrubbing alcohol.
Drink Boru, the Irish Vodka for the good stuff that won’t leave you blind.
GoldenDragonTheir economy doesn’t work either.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Vympel
Why would they need an escort at all 🙂 ? A Blackjack would nuke 12 strategic targets from 3,000km away with it’s 12 Kh-55SM ALCMs, no need to even enter enemy airspace in most cases; especially if the neighbor was on the border.
Only if a Russian missile actually works.
http://www.citizenonline.net/citizen/archive/articleAECF1EAE6EF04C0DBFD8DE4956D83531.asp
MOSCOW (AP) — A Russian ballistic missile self-destructed moments after taking off from a submarine Wednesday, the second failed test launch in two days of maneuvers meant to display the country’s military might.
GoldenDragonFrom the Taiwanese independence radical’s standpoint, it is entirely rational to use this American guarantee to achieve his objective.
You’re given the most powerful military in the world to achieve your goal.
The South Vietnamese government depended on the US to fight their war and, in fact, trusted the US military more than their own.
Taiwan is not too far from that. Taiwan’s military had always been the main support of unification (though under the KMT not the CCP.)
Chen had repeatedly questioned the leaders of his own military. The recent purges might have changed this but it also weakened the morale of the military. There are currently thousands of former ROC’s soldiers living in China and collecting pensions from Taiwan. And their numbers are growing.
GoldenDragonThe DPP under the current Taiwanese president Chen does have an opportunity to upset the apple cart because of the choices provided to him.
Namely, he feels that he holds the US military in his hand. He could actually dictate when and where the United States would fight on his behalf. It won’t be what the majority of his people wants but the opportunity is there and it is an enticing power.
There was a reason why Bush the younger, who is certainly not pro-China, decided to warn Chen on the referendum.
Bush actually took a beating from many on the right in Congress for “kowtowing” to China. But it was important enough for the US administration to not let a foreign government, allied or not, dictate American engagement and American lives.
We oppose any unilateral decision, by either China or Taiwan, to change the status quo,” said Mr. Bush, who had earlier nudged Mr. Wen to do more to promote human rights in his country. “The comments and actions made by the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may be willing to make decisions unilaterally that change the status quo, which we oppose.”
Sign In
