All chinese aircrafts are pathetic copies

IAF,

Charles Lindbergh was the poster boy for the isolationist movement and the Nazis made a lot of it. It was also a significant movement that caused FDR many headaches, it died only on Dec 7 1941.

In Britain Sir Oswald Mosely was the leader of the "Nazi" party and he wound up in prison.

Britain went broke in 1940 paying for its single-handed prosecution of the war. Its entire gold reserves were used up to buy food, ammunition, fuel and equipment as its industry was being bombed. What industry in the US was attacked from the air?

You continue to display an incredible lack of knowledge of history, reminding me of myself at the age of 13 when I beleived the Brits had "betrayed" the ANZACS at Gallipoli and again at Singapore and in Greece. Then I did some actual research and learned the actual truth, instead of listening to journalists repeat hackneyed old sayings.

Try reading from a multi-part history of WW2, preferably something from Purnells, the type of series with contributions from the Brits, French, Belgians, Dutch, Poles, Germans, Russians, Japanese, Americans, Canadians, Italians, Indians, Kiwis and Aussies.

Blitzkreig was practiced and perfected for the first time in Poland. The only thing the Condor Legion tried out in Spain was at Guernica.

The BEF was practically the entire British standing army, it even included most of the Territorials. In 1939 the US had one of the world's smallest standing armies and 12 tanks. Had they been sent to France they would have hindered allied efforts. Rumania had a larger army.
The first defeat of the Germans in battle on land was at Tobruk, the Aussies defeated Rommel. At El Alamein a wholly Commonwealth army defeated Rommel in battle and the Afrika Corps went into unchecked retreat. The US had not even landed in Africa yet (operation Torch).
The first defeat the Japanese suffered was at Milne Bay in PNG. The Aussies (again!) drove off an amphibious landing after it had landed. This was as the 39th Battalion, a group of mostly untrained Militia, fought the Japanese South Seas Detachment in a retreat across the worst terrain on Earth before holding them at Imita Ridge and then turning them around. The Japanese were combat veterans before they went to PNG.
Guadalcanal began after the Kokoda (PNG) campaign and then ran parralel with it.
What major actions in the Atlantic or Med did the USN take part in?

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
Why waste your time making a plane like that when we can make a copy of it at 5 million a piece?

Because you can't make a copy of it at $5 million a piece.

First you need the plans. How much will they cost from a traitor?

Then you need the factory, the personnel, the tooling, the materials, the expertise and the test program to make sure your copy doesn't fall out of the sky when your Microsoft fly-by-wire system gets the blue-screen-of-death.

F5 Freedom Fighters you can probably make copies of for $5 million a piece.

I was joking about the 5 million a piece thing.

Ok,suppose you buy the plans for...say 500 million,then you make a copy of the F-22 without stealth for 30 million,it would still be better than buying the F-22 from lockheed-martin for 100-200 million a piece.

Careful,

If you leave off the stealth someone will start using words like "pathetic" and "copies" in adjacent positions within the same sentence!

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
IAF,

Charles Lindbergh was the poster boy for the isolationist movement and the Nazis made a lot of it. It was also a significant movement that caused FDR many headaches, it died only on Dec 7 1941.

Blah, blah ....... tell me something i don't know!

What industry in the US was attacked from the air?

Can you actually read , did I ever say that american industry was attacked from the air ?
Try reading next time you write!

Then I did some actual research and learned the actual truth, instead of listening to journalists repeat hackneyed old sayings.

I never repeated any thing about british betrayal, i merely said they didn't put up a decent fight before the battle of britan.Well it would see you have a lot more of reaserch to do and try learnin to read also!

Blitzkreig was practiced and perfected for the first time in Poland. The only thing the Condor Legion tried out in Spain was at Guernica.

I admit that the blitzkreig in its actual form was not tried out in spain but they did show similar tactics and also blitzkreig was the name given by an english newspaper.
it was actually a type of combat strategy the germans had used fro a long time. The Poland invasion was the throughly mastered version with all the latest tech employed at that time.So reserch my friend , reserch.....

The BEF was practically the entire British standing army, it even included most of the Territorials.

I can understand the british saying this but not someone else.The BEF was only 12 divisions of the actuall total 50 full and part time divisions of the british and territorial army.Here's a link our british friends forgot to learn at kindergarten.www.schoolshistory.org.uk...

The first defeat the Japanese suffered was at Milne Bay in PNG. The Aussies (again!) drove off an amphibious landing after it had landed.
What major actions in the Atlantic or Med did the USN take part in?

Agian balh, blah...... that i already know.
So you are saying that the aussies would have taken over japan if we had only given them time. THe us war effort in the pacific was insubstatial according to you...
Well I think you have much much more reaserch to do, so times a wasting!

Oh and about that USN in the atlantic , have you heard about a book called History of United States Naval Operations in World War II: The Battle of the Atlantic. Go read that or buy it for just $10 on ebay and then we'll talk.
Go and try to read my friend and you will remember the time you were 13 when you could actually read!.....

Chinese might be good at working in Mc Donalds and Starbucks but making the F-22 is not like coping a sukoi or mig.
If they made it without the stealth what is the point?
You couldn't do that even if you tried , you could at best make a mock up of hte original.
Can your engineers actually design the avionics, emp radar, guidence and vectored propulsin to drive your mock -up
I think like every thing else you make you could only copy design if you tried hard, not all the specs that actually make it truly wonderfull.
I think India is going the righ tway about developing aircraft, even though their LCA looks lousy I have heard that they actually built everthing from scratch with the exception of avionoics and are now building their own engine for the plane.
The down side about this procedure is it takes a lot of time to do this( about 15 years in the Indians case)and by the time you complete this you would have created an outdated machine, but the experience you gain and the professionsal skill and manufactureing methods would be beyond value.

Originally posted by IAF101

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

What industry in the US was attacked from the air?

Can you actually read , did I ever say that american industry was attacked from the air ?
Try reading next time you write!

That's some good advice, look at what preceded the sentence you quoted. We're talking economies here and how (and why) the US made money fighting WW2.

Then I did some actual research and learned the actual truth, instead of listening to journalists repeat hackneyed old sayings.

I never repeated any thing about british betrayal, i merely said they didn't put up a decent fight before the battle of britan.Well it would see you have a lot more of reaserch to do and try learnin to read also!

Again, good advice. I wasn't talking about a British betrayal, I was talking about what I thought...Oh, never mind.

Blitzkreig was practiced and perfected for the first time in Poland. The only thing the Condor Legion tried out in Spain was at Guernica.

I admit that the blitzkreig in its actual form was not tried out in spain but they did show similar tactics and also blitzkreig was the name given by an english newspaper.
it was actually a type of combat strategy the germans had used fro a long time. The Poland invasion was the throughly mastered version with all the latest tech employed at that time.So reserch my friend , reserch.....

That's right, research. The Germans hadn't been using it for a long time at all and they showed no similar tactics in Spain. The lessons that came from Spain were completely contradictory except for one thing. Everyone agreed tanks were no good there because the terrain didn't suit them. Blitzkrieg requires open spaces, not mountains and ridges. Good for the desert and the low countries, not much good in Spain or Italy.

The BEF was practically the entire British standing army, it even included most of the Territorials.

I can understand the british saying this but not someone else.The BEF was only 12 divisions of the actuall total 50 full and part time divisions of the british and territorial army.Here's a link our british friends forgot to learn at kindergarten.

www.schoolshistory.org.uk...

Apparently you forgot to read the links in the bibliography. What does it have to say about the BEF?

The first defeat the Japanese suffered was at Milne Bay in PNG. The Aussies (again!) drove off an amphibious landing after it had landed.
What major actions in the Atlantic or Med did the USN take part in?

Agian balh, blah...... that i already know.
So you are saying that the aussies would have taken over japan if we had only given them time. THe us war effort in the pacific was insubstatial according to you...
Well I think you have much much more reaserch to do, so times a wasting!

No, just pointing out that you had allies, and they were there before you and acheived victories before you. Aparrently the US is not all-powerful, all-conquering after all.

Oh and about that USN in the atlantic , have you heard about a book called History of United States Naval Operations in World War II: The Battle of the Atlantic. Go read that or buy it for just $10 on ebay and then we'll talk.
Go and try to read my friend and you will remember the time you were 13 when you could actually read!.....

So, how many actions were you involved in? Sank the Bismark, did you? Routed the Italian fleet, did you? Stole the Enigma, did you? Remember where Norway is, do you? Know what Cape Matapan is, do you? Or Cape Spada? Visit Taranto Harbour, did you?
All your big fleet actions were in the Pacific. Against the IJN.

Originally posted by IAF101
Chinese might be good at working in Mc Donalds and Starbucks but making the F-22 is not like coping a sukoi or mig.
If they made it without the stealth what is the point?
You couldn't do that even if you tried , you could at best make a mock up of hte original.
Can your engineers actually design the avionics, emp radar, guidence and vectored propulsin to drive your mock -up
I think like every thing else you make you could only copy design if you tried hard, not all the specs that actually make it truly wonderfull.
I think India is going the righ tway about developing aircraft, even though their LCA looks lousy I have heard that they actually built everthing from scratch with the exception of avionoics and are now building their own engine for the plane.
The down side about this procedure is it takes a lot of time to do this( about 15 years in the Indians case)and by the time you complete this you would have created an outdated machine, but the experience you gain and the professionsal skill and manufactureing methods would be beyond value.

It just failed a test in Russia recently,don't even mention the LCA.Why build a F-22 without stealth?I don't know,ask the people who design the J-13,it looks a lot like a F-22,and i heard it has everything the F-22 has (forget stealth)

My good friend hawkssss on India and China's airforce

In terms of airforce, both are comparable in technology while we have a huge numerical advantage and we produced huge numbers of planes such as upgraded J7s, J8 etc and the new J-10 is under mass production and is exporting the FC-1 while india doesn't make ANY, ANY aircrafts and their air force is called "flying coffin". Please don't even mention LCA, which has failed a test in Russia just recently and they crashed 3 Mirage 2000 last month along. (yes, I can provide all the source you need on these)

www.wforum.com...
www.wforum.com...
www.sinodefence.com...
www.wforum.com...
www.wforum.com...

We have our own trainer FTC-2000 while indian airforce's training is so bad that they are called the flying coffin and they had to buy some british trainer recently. See again, they can't make crap.
www.wforum.com...

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
My good friend hawkssss on India and China's airforce

In terms of airforce, both are comparable in technology while we have a huge numerical advantage and we produced huge numbers of planes such as upgraded J7s, J8 etc and the new J-10 is under mass production and is exporting the FC-1 while india doesn't make ANY, ANY aircrafts and their air force is called "flying coffin". Please don't even mention LCA, which has failed a test in Russia just recently and they crashed 3 Mirage 2000 last month along. (yes, I can provide all the source you need on these)

www.wforum.com...
www.wforum.com...
www.sinodefence.com...
www.wforum.com...
www.wforum.com...

We have our own trainer FTC-2000 while indian airforce's training is so bad that they are called the flying coffin and they had to buy some british trainer recently. See again, they can't make crap.
www.wforum.com...

Of all the people on ATS to quote you choose HIM?!?!?

India does indeed produce aircraft. Go find out about a certain twin-turboprop pusher that recently took to the skies.

Why not mention the LCA, so it failed a test. So did F18, so, I'm sure, did J10. The problem is that the Chinese won't put out the full story. The V22 Osprey has suffered failures. Should we write off the entire US air fleet?

Ok,how about any working jet fighters besides the LCA?None,while Us,the "ignorant" chicoms "copied"(dare i say made?) the J-7,J-8,J-10,Q-5,H-5,H-6,list goes on.

ok chinas airforce sucks they dont know how to make there own aircraft they need other peoples technology to make theres better but pretty soon they will be the world power in the world cause there economy is growing fast and that so yeah

Why not mention the LCA, so it failed a test. So did F18, so, I'm sure, did J10. The problem is that the Chinese won't put out the full story. The V22 Osprey has suffered failures. Should we write off the entire US air fleet?

I think thats a good point, if it fails a test it means the indians are testing extensively . Obviously the chinese would not need testing as all the spadework has already been done by the russians you " copied " the designs and specs from.
YOu say that you can actually make an F-22 without the stealth. I can make a wood carving that looks like an F-22 but will it be an F-22 without the stealth- NO WAY!
YOu would now what the capabilities of an F-22 are if you managed to researched it. No one knows exactly all the capabilities of an F-22 so how do you presume to be able to recreate it completely without stealth.
Just because you can launch a man into space doesn't mean you can make an F-22. Trust me its way harder, you don't have the technical skill and the manufacturing ability to undertake a project such as an F-22.
[ you guys can make a BMW or VW pretty easily but making planes like the F-22 is another ball game all together!]
On that note even the F-22 failed to in a test filght (remember YF-22 Vs YF-23) and after years of modifications we were able to make what it is today.

Also the amount of Data the Indians collected with their project would be invaluable and thats makes them more competent to develope new air craft that meet their requirements than the chinese. If you guys we so good how come you try to steal the plans for a neutron bomb from us?

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
We have our own trainer FTC-2000 while indian airforce's training is so bad that they are called the flying coffin and they had to buy some british trainer recently. See again, they can't make crap.

Firstly, I would really like to see china do an air-exercise with the Indians and secondly that would make you less conceited.
They have better pilots than you guys have--No doubt about that.
Thier accident rate is very high and understanably so because their pilots make a transition from sub sonic trainers to a super sonic aircraft, i would like to see your airmen do that and find out how many of them make it!
Also do you remember your guys actually crashed into an american recon "buzz" if that signifies your engagement strategies then your pilots need better combat training. BTW even if your pilots crashed they wouldn't publish it would they? being authoritarian state and all.
You guys have a numerical advantage but so did the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Briton , numerical advantage doesn't means air-supremacy!
They problem with comparing PLAA with any other major air force is that we don't exactly know the scope and power of airforce so all comprisions are nothing but speculative.

Actually IAF you never said that Britain did put up a decent fight at the Battle of Brtain. What you said was that Britain ''sat and begged for help when Germany attacked' while America 'fought them and won'. This is how you got yourself embroiled in this whole argument.

Also,

Obviously you do,thats why you responded and in doing so you have once again proven your callowness and the scope and depth of your meger imbecile intellectual

Please stop using big words that you cannot spell (meagre) and don't understand, that sentence is so littered with errors it actually makes no sense whatsoever. What, for example does 'meger imbecile intellectual' actually mean, could it be that you meant 'meagre imbecillic intellect'? Which is what you seem to possess.

I suggest that you make your point in plain English rather than trying to look falsely intelligent

You should have asked them about how they saw through british complacency and used it to their advantage in running amucke across europe

Are you really unaware how unprepared Britain was for war in 1938? Or how the widely despised 'Appeasement' in fact bought us an invaluable 12 months to build up our forces? A single example which helps to illustrate this is the fact that during this period the first Spitfires came into service.

Your views of Britain are also very warped. America didn't invent free speech you know. In fact that is where arguments like this always seem to originate, usually Americans 'giving it the big I am' about how great they are and how America is either better than anywhere else or did everything first or best. I'm sure you know how this pushes peoples buttons and is in fact why you post such idiotic ramblings.

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Blitzkreig was practiced and perfected for the first time in Poland. The only thing the Condor Legion tried out in Spain was at Guernica.

Thats were you were wrong , the BlitzKreig was a style of german warfare long before WW2.Here a link -read upwww.bbc.co.uk...
Don't tell me that the reportby the BBc is inconclusive!. At the bottom of the page it says that it Blitzkreig was "influenced by the fighting methods German soldiers had used since the 1870s. The so-called blitzkrieg of 1940 was really the German doctrine of 1914 with technology bolted on."
Thats the BBc talking, so they wouldn't undermine their own would they?

Apparently you forgot to read the links in the bibliography. What does it have to say about the BEF?

I did and the British had many resources they could have employed but didn't . I will quote from that page "And it had an important source of additional strength in the forces of the empire and the dominions. The Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and South African Armies would each send several divisions into the field, while the Indian Army stood ready at the beginning of the war to deploy nearly 200,000 men. "
Now what about that 200,000 men only fom INdia and plus the canadians,australians and so on and they only got their BEF out.
I thought you said that they had their awesome empire at londons beck and call, what happened? No service!

So, how many actions were you involved in? Sank the Bismark, did you? Routed the Italian fleet, did you? Stole the Enigma, did you? Remember where Norway is, do you? Know what Cape Matapan is, do you? Or Cape Spada? Visit Taranto Harbour, did you?
All your big fleet actions were in the Pacific. Against the IJN.

I'll say this again read the book and then talk to me about it. I can't lecture on and on about that! So go ahead read and then I'll entertain your curiosity!

I don't get what point you're making with that BBC article? Other than its existance explodes another myth you posted about the blinkered British view of the war. Why defeat your own arguments? What was the point of that link, it contains well known facts?

Originally posted by waynos
Actually IAF you never said that Britain did put up a decent fight at the Battle of Brtain. What you said was that Britain ''sat and begged for help when Germany attacked' while America 'fought them and won'. This is how you got yourself embroiled in this whole argument.

well I never said that it didn't did I? So again your Presumptuous and I still feel that you escalated the problem by inaction and british languor!

Obviously you do,thats why you responded and in doing so you have once again proven your callowness and the scope and depth of your meger imbecile intellectual

What, for example does 'meger imbecile intellectual' actually mean, could it be that you meant 'meagre imbecillic intellect'? Which is what you seem to possess.

I didn't know you would be so finicky but If it makes you feel better then I would again recast it as "meagre imbecillic intellect" [happy!![now you have a "meagre imbecilic intellect" not a "meger imbecile intellectual" sorry to have insulted you by calling you an "intellectual"]]BTW some nerve you have your spelling is wrong in the first place its "meager" not "meagre" and their is only one 'l' in "imbecilic"-crazy british spelling!

I do have an excuse though--I was bombarded by all those posts that i was typing as fast as i could to support my argument.(Not that i care what you think!.)

Your views of Britain are also very warped. America didn't invent free speech you know. In fact that is where arguments like this always seem to originate, usually Americans 'giving it the big I am' about how great they are and how America is either better than anywhere else or did everything first or best. I'm sure you know how this pushes peoples buttons and is in fact why you post such idiotic ramblings.

Quit your pathetic sniveling you sissy. Your just jealous and can't accept the fact that a nation so young could steal your thunder and cast your empire into ignominy!


[edit on 20-11-2004 by IAF101]

[edit on 20-11-2004 by IAF101]

Originally posted by waynos
I don't get what point you're making with that BBC article? Other than its existance explodes another myth you posted about the blinkered British view of the war. Why defeat your own arguments? What was the point of that link, it contains well known facts?

What do you mean you don't get it? If its well-known fact then why don't you believe that Blitzkrieg was developed from German tactics before WW2 and you guys couldn't recognize it for what it was!
Where do I defeat my own arguments? I have been arguing all this time about the same thing, Blitzkrieg tactics were employed before WW2 and you guys were dumb not to catch on in France.
What I can't understand is why you cannot, for the life of you ,comprehend what I post? Do you speak another language over there? OR are you mentally deficient in some way?[I wouldn't be suprised!......]

My point, as you were too dim to see it, is that if you are going to try and bamboozle people with long intellectual sentences then it only works if you do it properly. Otherwise you are as transparent as a glass yank. I was not upset by your failure, I was amused as you showed yourself up, likewise your reply.

BTW How exactly did America steal our thunder and cast our Empire into ignominy? Thats a new one.

Originally posted by IAF101

Originally posted by waynos
I don't get what point you're making with that BBC article? Other than its existance explodes another myth you posted about the blinkered British view of the war. Why defeat your own arguments? What was the point of that link, it contains well known facts?

What do you mean you don't get it? If its well-known fact then why don't you believe that Blitzkrieg was developed from German tactics before WW2 and you guys couldn't recognize it for what it was!
Where do I defeat my own arguments? I have been arguing all this time about the same thing, Blitzkrieg tactics were employed before WW2 and you guys were dumb not to catch on in France.
What I can't understand is why you cannot, for the life of you ,comprehend what I post? Do you speak another language over there? OR are you mentally deficient in some way?[I wouldn't be suprised!......

]

If we didn't recognize it for what it was then how come a British newspaper coined the term 'Blitzkrieg'? Smartarse.

Its not as if we could go "Oh, they're using that Blitzkrieg thing again, right oh" and just stop it.

They overwhwelmed us and if it wasn't for the existence of the channel they wouldn't have stopped at France. Why do you think we don't know this, are you retarded?

What you claimed, if you can remember that far back, was that the Spanish civil war was a rehearsal for Blitzkreig. It clearly was not. It isn't big or clever to change the argument to suit yourself when you realise you have lost.

I am perfectly aware of the failings of the British and French forces in 1939. It was you who started the whole row off by saying that there was no real fight put up against the Germans before America entered the war. Several people have pointed out to you Allied victories before America came along but you also fail to realise that 'losing' isn't the same as 'not trying'.

Not only that but you claim that America allied itself to Europe in both world wars. Where do you imagine Germany is, Africa?