Does our air power have no rival?

Its not the planes that fly in the sky that are important,

Its the SAMs that bring em down..


S-300PMU3 / S-400 SA-20 Triumf.
(Most advanced and powerful SAM on this planet.)



The Triumf S-400 , also known as the S-300PMU3, is a new generation of air defense and theater anti-missile weapon developed by the Almaz Central Design Bureau as an evolution of the S-300PMU [SA-10] family. This new system is intended to detect and destroy airborne targets at a distance of up to 400 km (2- 2.5 times greater than the previous S-300PMU system). The main difference between the PMU-2 and the S-400 is greater engagement range of the latter, about 250 mi. against aircraft versus 125 mi., a larger number of targets it can track and improved electronic counter-countermeasures. The Triumf system includes radars capable of detecting low-signature targets. And the anti-missile capability of the system has been increased to the limits established by the ABM Treaty demarcation agreements -- it can intercept targets with velocities of up to 4.8 km/sec, corresponding to a ballistic missile range of 3,500 km.

Rest!

Originally posted by bushfriend
... there are probably close to 200 models of airplanes we don;t even know we have. We = non goverment people.

200 different types of aircraft that are both operational and unknown to the general public?

It's an interesting thought and would truly be cool... but I doubt that it has any validity.

Even black ops funding requires some form of oversight and there's simply not enough tactical functions to warrant so many different types of black aircraft.
Maybe there have been 200+ types of X-planes and black op variants in the history of US military aviation...

I once overheard a USAF general tell a defense industry executive that there were currently 3 operational aircraft types he wasn't permitted to talk about.
Probably a year later I saw a non-conspiracy theory web site that had an interview with a USAF colonel who also eluded that there were 3 different types of aircraft in US inventory that were not for public knowledge. I have not been able to find that site today but i'll continue to try to locate it for you...

I submit to you that should these USAF officers be correct, the 3 plane's functions are most likely reconaisance, strike coordination and attack... just a thought...

Maybe the Navy, NRO, CIA, etc... have some black op aircraft that these USAF guys don't know about - after all, that sort of stuff is special access and on a need to know basis...

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by intelgurl]

Originally posted by FULCRUM
Its not the planes that fly in the sky that are important...

FULCRUM,
Do you ever sleep?
I believe you're on this board 24/7

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by intelgurl]

Originally posted by intelgurl

FULCRUM,
Do you ever sleep?
I believe you're on this board 24/7

I have eyes..

Everywhere..



Seriously,

I do sleep..

And do many other thing also..

Maybe its my rhythm / time zone that makes you belive so..



*Edit*

But my comp is in fact powered 24/7 and browser usually open and in ATS..



[Edited on 6-1-2004 by FULCRUM]

SAMS ARE NOTHING, WHEN YOU ARE NOT DETECTED IN THE SKY

come close to the USAF or the air superiority of the USA.
It will be that way for a while until all of our technology is outsourced to China and then we will be eating dirt.

well.. if it wasent for the threat of sanctions that would have crippled my country ... im afraid we would have the best airforce around... god dam stupid pushing those stupid missles on us ... stupid primeminister bending over and taking it in the ass

should have never canceled the avro arrow DAMIT

would just like to thank the us government for that really apreciate being forced to cancel the most advanced fighter of its day and one that if it was still around could still compeet with all ur fancy smanchy raptor's and crap

Does the US hold "superiority"?....That is debatable, theory, and inconclusive conjecture. One can only hope.

In the current US political climate superiority is insufficent, only supremecy will do. That's not a matter of semantics. The US citizenry would have had a collective cow if we'd lost 25 fighters, a couple tankers, a transport or 4 and an AWACS on the opening night of Iraq. If those losses-even if sustainable-continued, they would call for the head of their leader-not that a lot aren't doing that anyway.

Supremacy is the key and without being four steps ahead of the MiG-31 and similar current production fighters we'll lose the ability to engage in major theater warfare with casulties in the hundreds rather than thousands. (MHO)

I Belive it is easy to say the U.S is not rivaled during peace time but one must first never underestimate an opponent and we will not truly know the power of an enemy until we are at war and using their technology. So we can sit here and say its the sam's or the aircraft and then we can make B/S storys about aircraft that dont exist but the reality is we will not know until it is used or outdated and then declassified

*Edit* And This Is For The Moron Who Said I have Problems.

This Is My opinion I Am Not Force Feeding you This If You Dont Like Me Dont Read My Posts. Who Ever Said Ignorance Is Bliss Needs To Be Shot

[Edited on 24-2-2004 by tealc]

I would agree that U.S. airpower has no real rival in the numbers and quality of their planes, however increaced dependence on stealth and higher plane costs risks undermining their advantage. Remeber that to counter stealth you need a radar upgrade which costs, waaay less then the stealth did in the first place. This isn't to say that it's easy, the research will take time, but I don't think stealth should be pushed forward at the expense of other important characteristics. For another view of routes that you could go with fighter development, look to the Russian 3d Thrust Vector Control system. The only way to counter manuverability is manuverability of your own.

just give britain some decent planes and we'll challange u
u just wait america u just wait in about 20 years we'll get the f22 while ur flying in your anti grav planes we'll still be flying f22's

US air supremacy at this point in time is unquestionable.

Technically, Britain, Australia, and some of our allies would be second, as we give them *most* of our tech.

In WW2, the Luftwaffe were pretty mean. Good thing we stole all their scientists!

Cold-war era Soviet tech was pretty good too. At any given time, it was a toss-up as to who had air superiority. Many of their designs were indeed top-notch. However, I would have to conclude that an overall lack of quality in the Soviet military program was their biggest weaknesses, IMHO. Still, as I said, many of their designs were extremely competetive!

China doesn't even register, as far as I'm concerned. Their tech is so far behind ours that it doesn't even invite comparison. In 30 years or so, who knows? If they can close the tech gap, they certainly have the manpower!

You got your numbers wrong, heres a correction!
"United Kingdom Fixed-Wing Combat Aircraft Strength

Current:
RAF
Strike Aircraft
70 Tornado GR4

Offensive Support:
39 Harrier GR7
22 Jaguar GR3

Air Defense: (Excluding Falkland Islands)
64 Tornado F3

Airborne Early Warning:
6 Sentry AEW1

Reserves:
26 Tornado GR4
8 Jaguar GR3
20 Tornado F3
9 Harrier GR7

Total RAF Active Fixed-Wing Combat Aircraft: 248

Royal Navy
3 x Invincible�class aircraft carriers
75? Harrier FA2
Grand Total: approx. 325

Future (2015+)
RAF
137 Typhoon F1 active, 232 total
7 Squadrons: 4 Air Defense, 2 Multi-role, 1 Offensive Support
JSF, 70 Total 90
80 Tornado GR4 (replacement comes in 2017)
Total: 257 Active

Royal Navy
2 x 60 000 tonne aircraft carriers
60? JSF
Total: 60 Active

Grant total: 347 Active (462 active + reserve)

"USA Armed Forces (2015+)

F/A-22:
USAF: 276 (176 active, 100 reserve)

F-35 Procurements:
USAF: (700 active, 300 reserve)
USANG: 763 (500 active, 263 reserve)
US Navy: 480 (280 active, 200 reserve)
US Marine Corps: 480 (280 active, 200 reserve)

Grand total: approx 2,950 (including trainers, evaluation, reserve etc)"

"What abou tthe great canadian Air Forces?? I hear that they're powered by Labatts."

The F18 is serving Canada from a hanger. They should haave bought French Mirage.

"If man ever learns to harness the power of nature, then I will be seriously worried."

Man can control nature. You can do it through some klind of meditation, but its not strong enough to do anything noticeable. Electromagnetic waves can do some crazy stuff like make things invisible and change whether but its a not so good idea as it almost impossible to control.

"The US has bigger numbers and better technology.They won WWII because they outnumbered the germans who had better tanks and better equipment."

The US mostly fought Japan, it had a much smaller involvement in the war against Germany. It was mainly a weapons supplier, not heroic fighter in the war against Germany.

"I would have to say no! The US has the best combination of advanced technology and quality. That does Not by any means say we're perfect or invincible. Everything that is man made has a weakness. However, history has so far shown that since the end of Vietnam, noone has been able to find and exploit that weakness in our systems. That isn't to that it will always be this way."

The US has a major vulnerability, it will be the 3rd richest co8untry in the world soon! The EU (under the new constitution) and China will both be richer in the future!

"come close to the USAF or the air superiority of the USA.
It will be that way for a while until all of our technology is outsourced to China and then we will be eating dirt."

Britain lost most of its manufacturing to the east in the early 80's so were watching you relive our history! If you think problems are bad for the us now, they are soon to get a lot worse!

"Supremacy is the key and without being four steps ahead of the MiG-31 and similar current production fighters we'll lose the ability to engage in major theater warfare with casulties in the hundreds rather than thousands. (MHO)"

GOOD! This will make the US think more before declaring war!

"US air supremacy at this point in time is unquestionable.

Technically, Britain, Australia, and some of our allies would be second, as we give them *most* of our tech"

Australia = F18 and F111 (not exactly top US tech)
Canada = see Australia
Israel = Was in favour, now will be getting as little as possible.
Britain = Tornado F3 (superior to F15, but no input from USA), Tornado GR$ (best low level strike aircraft, not us input,), Harrier 2 (onlt V/STOL aircrtaft, jointly developed), Jaguar (possible cherapest multirole aircraft in the world, $12 million, joinly developed with france), Tornado IDS/EuroFighter (jointly developed with Germany, Italy, Spain), F35 (jointly developed, 2/3 USA, 1/3 Britain). American tech isnt present on any active British aircraft in significant percentage. British technology is involved in many areas of American aircraft though!

Very well, but in my opinion you can count whole Europe as one nation. If you attack Belgium, you have Brittish, Dutch, German, French, Swedish, etc. fighters hunting your ass down. Good luck.

"Very well, but in my opinion you can count whole Europe as one nation. If you attack Belgium, you have Brittish, Dutch, German, French, Swedish, etc. fighters hunting your (c) down. Good luck."

If your trying to say Europe would support Europe, I would agree, but with the exception of Britain which would place USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand ahead of mainland Europe.

depending on the circumstances of who the enemy is and how thiongs are going you could have help from eastern europe as well perhaps even Russia. This is largly dependent, on how realistic the future threat is from said aggrssor and the intelligence of the more eastern nations.

if the new war is fought from the skies - probably

but maybe urban training is more important

(sorry if this has been said before)

PP if i rem we invented vstol not the us
the us borowed it from us and we got nothing in return
u only helped improve some of the things but thats it

it's not the quantity that counts but the quality of how the USAF uses the strategic handling for operations by his aircraft.

aircraftcarriers are a 50%/50% risk because they are
so vunerable when detected.

Originally posted by devilwasp
PP if i rem we invented vstol not the us
the us borowed it from us and we got nothing in return
u only helped improve some of the things but thats it

What about the Harrier II?

You did not have the infrastructure to build it, but we did and shared it with you.

Also, we improved on your initial design. Ever hear of the LERXs?