Poll. Germany or USA - Which country has the more advanced technology

Yeah, I was thinking it was the Mig-35, but maybe it was the 29.

The F-22's thrust vector nozzles work in tandem. The ones non the Mig-whatever move independently. I think they have a wider range of motion as well, because the Mig does not worry about stealth.

 

It's the MiG-29, a small, neat monster in dogfighting. The USSR did great work with this. You don't wanna engage with a couple of MiG-29s in visual range.

German Bundeswehr had 24 MiG-29s after the reunion but gave them away to Poland for 1 Euro

 

The F-22 or F-35 would still murder it in a fight, for a variety of reasons. But stealth is the main thing the mig cant counter.

I have seen video footage of the Mig's acrobatics and they are impressive. I wonder why the F-22 does not have independently moving vector nozzles...they must have had a reason.

 

The stealth thing is irrelevant once you have visual contact. That's why the F-22 isn't into dogfight, the creator just thought about BVR fight and hope it works

 

I disagree, because it will still make it more difficult for weapons to target, even if it doesnt prevent targeting completely at closer ranges. Stealth is never irrelevant if you are using any kind of homing weapon. It only becomes irrelevant once you are in range of their actual guns.

And frankly, the F-22 has it beat there anyway. Because it has supercruise...it has after burners that it can use all the time. It can simply run back out into BVR any time it wants. The Migs cant do that. Dogfighting is still done I am sure, but it is certainly rare nowadays. BVR is the norm from what I have seen.

And even though the F-22 does not have the best maneuverability, it is still superior to almost any other fighter out there...The F-22 still has thrust-vectoring engines. The F-22 is probably superior to the Typhoon and all Chinese fighters when it comes to maneuverability.

And he was right to do so. BVR is the present and the future.

 

Do you mean are we using them in Red Flag? Yes. He does not have a legitimate source.

You contradicted your assurance in this sentence. How about you try to explain your thought process to me.

Again, go ahead and further expand on this. Be a little bit more sure than just "I think."

Through Columbus' doors. Nah...

Oh how I wish you were in command of someone else's air force. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get visual on an F-22? No.

No, we choose not to engage in dogfights because they have been irrelevant for decades. There is no need. We are trained for them, but never have to employ them. That being said, the F-22 is a very capable dogfighter.

Do you even read about aircraft or do you just make assumptions? Does your knowledge begin and end with what you saw in Top Gun? Let me know so I do not discuss things a level or three above your current understanding.

 

I did that already in Posts #201, and #203.

Until someone on here can post actual 3rd party figures, every opinion is "I think". Including yours.

Top Gun was filmed in the pre-stealth era. It isnt very relevant anymore even assuming it was accurate for the time.

 

I think a pair of unsuspecting armchair Generals just walked into the lion's den.

 

Everyone on an anonymous forum is an armchair general. Credentials mean nothing here because you cant prove credentials on an anonymous forum.

 

She's provided photos, what more do you want?

Name, rank and serial number?

 

That does not really explain how you arrived at your assumption. The F-22 will not lose acceleration nor will it lose control in a tight turn. They are also not plagued by the drag associate with supersonic maneuvering (which the Typhoon would drop on its knees to)- drag which significantly reduces anyone else's combat effectiveness. By not having to decelerate when engaging in a dogfight, they have every bit of an advantage on most everyone else. They can out-roll, out-turn, and out-pace just about everyone else. This Russian plane you speak of is not even out of testing. Why are you speculating about something not on the market?

It is called OPSEC and you are not entitled to know anything about the F-22. You think your opinion is as educated as mine on this subject? Think again. Nothing against you, but I hate seeing people whose knowledge is derived from the Washington Post pretend like they know everything.

But in other words, you cannot be more sure than "I think." Noted, and I am glad you understand that.

Noted. What is the point of this reply?

 

It is not worth jeopardizing my position over. If this is what he has to do to smile through the day, then so be it.

 

I believe you, if no one else.

 

Thanks. I do not think people have a hard time believing it (not that I really care anyways), but they say whatever they can to defend their position. If it means deriding me or my service, by whatever means, make sure you win that forum discussion. You can make the case that I attack people, but I really attack their posts. If you say something stupid, I am going to mention that.

By the way, you and I can always go start an aviation discussion in an unsuspecting thread once this one gets too dense.

 

Because I have seen actual footage of it.

How does that change anything I just said?

You are not an expert on an anonymous forum merely because you arrive here and claim to be one. On here, everyone's opinion is equal. You are not special.

If you have actual 3rd party evidence that everyone on here would be able to access, please, feel free to post it. Until then, please climb down from your ivory tower.

I would need evidence of your education in order to determine that. It is not possible for me to obtain that on an anonymous forum.

That you cant base the capabilities of modern fighters based on a movie from the early 80s. I thought that was obvious.

 

There is nothing she can provide on an anonymous forum that would be sufficient proof. Name, rank and serial number would not be proof anyway...it could be someone else's name, rank and serial number.

On forums like this you will need to provide evidence beyond "Oh, I am an expert, just take my word for it". Because not everyone is going to agree. Frankly, it is kinda weird that anyone would come on to a forum like this expecting that.

If you want your credentials to matter, you should go to a forum that is not anonymous, where identities can be verified and everyone uses their real names. I am sure they exist. On an anonymous forum, opinions alone are not sufficient to establish something as a fact.

 

You have seen actual performance video and/or exercise footage from its HUD? What is it like to have a security clearance in Russia? By the way, if you just saw a video of the Russians displaying it, that does not really tell you much about its combat effectiveness.

I have actually provided plenty of evidence, but whatever you have to do to suck your own dick. You know more about aviation than two pilots just because you say so. You are also a little bit smarter than I gave you credit for because you know we cannot post anything that violates OPSEC, so I cannot cite the -1. Clever. Or if you did not know that, you are just that stupid.

You must like to see your own text because I was not talking to you and it was a joke on StealthDefender's "knowledge" about aerial combat. Take a Midol, kiddo.

 

Holy paranoia.

No, I do not expect that. Hence why I grant the knowledge that I can without breaking any security rules and provide insight that only a pilot can give. I asked you why you did not think the F-22 was the best dogfighter and you cannot back that up. Now you spin this into a whole conspiracy theory. I think it is weird that anyone gets this defensive, but then again, I am new to the internet forum thing. Maybe you are all this crazy and it does not work like a normal discussion.

I do not care if you know my credentials. I do not care to count any medals or ribbons I have been awarded and use that as evidence. Like I mentioned earlier, I provide pilot-specific input into these discussions. You write off my opinion simply because you want to be right. That is fine. I will know better than to give you respect with my experience.

 

I have seen external footage from an air show.

I didnt need clearance to see the footage.

Opinion noted.

LOL umad bro?

Heh

I am sorry you feel your expertise has not been validated on this forum. Maybe you should try a military forum instead.

I never asked you to, nor would I expect it. Your assumption that I should simply defer to your opinion on anything military related is retarded. I dont know you, I've never met you...all I know about you is what you post on this forum. People lie and exaggerate on political forums so often it is practically the norm.

Are you really a pilot? Of course it is possible. It is also possible you are just really good at faking it. For that reason I like to see evidence beyond mere opinion or unsupported claims. I would ask this from anyone on here. It isnt just you. Try not to take it personally.

 

Former pilot...

I don't know Jack about the Raptor.

Not my airframe, no need to know...so I don't know.

Some read a few articles on it and claim expertise...much of it's capabilities
are classified.

 

So in other words, you do not know its combat capabilities. Join the club. Only a select few in the Pentagon and Intelligence community can appropriately judge that.

Here is a good article on the POS FA, I mean PAK FA.

It is a year old, but things run slow in countries that had to succumb to 20 years of communism. Also, the Russians cannot match the electric wizardry that makes the F-22 what it is.

No, why would I be mad?

I have posted on a military forum alongside some former squadron mates, but I could only take so much of the pro-Viper talk. I came here to get a delicate balance of civilian input and military input.

Yes you did when you asked for "third party sources." Not much about the F-22 is available online, so what you are indirectly asking for is me to quote the -1.

I am not saying anything military, I am saying my specific input on military aviation. There are people on this forum that do serve/have served and I know because I have talked to them in depth. Just like we generally respect the views of civilians because they provide a different perspective, you should do the same. I am not saying you should adopt our PoV, but you should be willing to hear us out.

Herkdriver is a former field grade airlift pilot, kronik is a former Army helo pilot, ReallyPeople is current mx, a777pilot is a former F-111 pilot, and I am a current fighter pilot, ect. We know aviation and can provide some insight in that regard. Then you have IgnoranceIsBliss, Krunkskimo, Mushroom, Eighty Deuce, GramCleric, KSigMason, and some others I cannot remember that can provide insight from their specialties.

Do bears (*)(*)(*)(*) in the woods? Faking it is a federal offense that falls under the Stolen Valor Act. You have to be pretty (*)(*)(*)(*)ing stupid to pretend to be in the military. I understand why people would be suspicious, but lying about service is a huge problem. Also, it does not do anyone any good. Why would I lie about it? If I were simply an aero-engineer, maintainer, or civilian aviation enthusiast, I would own up to it. I do not take things personally because in the end it does not matter. Although I do not like people questioning my integrity just because I post on an internet message board.

I have to get some paperwork done before someone pisses in my lunch. That gives you time to think about whether or not you want to continue the discussion about the F-22 or not and it will give you some time to read up more.

 

Whether you are former or current should not affect your input. I am sure you have had to bank hard in the C-130 and you know how easily you can lose control. The F-22 takes over for you with its "I got this, dumbass" attitude.

 

I tried to keep the turn bank angles to no steeper than 30 degrees.

Coffee spills and all that to worry about...

I kid, I kid...

I prefer the TLAR method.

"that look's about right"

 

Petty insults are typically a sign of anger on here.

I know as much as anyone else in this thread so far. I never claimed to be an expert on it though.

Good. That is evidence.

My original comments were in reference to the Mig 29/35 though, not the prototype stealth fighter. I have never seen footage of the PakFA. Everything I know about it comes from wikipedia.

I agree.

The Russians are not stupid though. They are still way ahead of Europe and China. Their main weakness is their (*)(*)(*)(*)ty economy.

You will have to grow a thicker skin on here.

Then it seems kind of irrational to mock "civilians" or brush their opinion aside every time they make one. If the only opinions you want to hear are military opinions, a public military forum might work better for you than an anonymous political forum.

So what?

If you are making a claim about the F-22 that is not personal opinion, you will be expected to back it up. Saying "oh, just take my word for it, I'm an expert" is NOT proof of anything. Thats the same thing as an opinion.

Thats great for you. I (and most other users here) have NOT had in-depth discussions with them on their credentials. So we are NOT comfortable simply deferring to their claims without evidence.

Of course I am. But if you make a claim that something is fact, you will be expected to provide evidence for it. Thats true of everyone on here.

Have you actually confirmed any of that somewhere other than this forum?

LOL, so what? Lots of people have lied about serving in the military on political forums before.

There are lots of stupid people on political forums. How would you ever prove it anyway? Its an ANONYMOUS forum. You dont need to provide any ID at all to create an account on here. All you need is a webmail address. And maybe not even that.

To get people to accept your viewpoint without you having to provide actual evidence. I thought that was obvious.

How would I know what you would own up to? I've never met you. I dont know you. I only know the alias you use on this site and what you write under that alias.

Then you are going to have an unpleasant time on this forum. I am probably not the last person who will do it.

I will probably be continuing the discussion regardless of what you do. I did not enter this thread just to discuss it with you personally. If I had wanted to do that, I would have just used private mail.

 

Whether any of us are who we claim to be, is secondary to keeping in mind
any operational security issues by posting on an open channel like this.

Playing dumb is the best option. Certainly regarding on-going operations
and/or details about specific equipment.

As an example of what NOT to do...

OSI studied F-22 pilot’s online postings

By Michael Hoffman - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Mar 14, 2008 22:30:46 EDT

If you Google “Dozerf22” — the screen name Lt. Col. Michael Shower used on a popular online aviation forum — you’ll find more than 600 links to Internet sites around the world that published his answers to detailed questions about sensitive — but unclassified — F-22 Raptor information

Source: http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/03/airforce_f22_opsec_031408w/

Let the armchair pilots, generals, soldiers and Marines or whatever...have their
"expertise"...

Just play dumb.

In the words of "Sgt. Schultz" from Hogan's Heroes.

"I know nothing...I see nothing"

I'd advise Capt. Up on the Governor to do the same if she really is a fighter jock...

even if it's established un-classified information she might disclose; play it safe...
play dumb and mute.

Anyone and everyone can read what we post here.
Good guys, bad buys and everything in between.

Loose lips, sink ships.

That is all.