https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMw 0QenPIKk >PAK FA is n

>Reverse wings
kek

What's the point of this shit?

File: 23434.jpg (8KB, 450x257px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 450x257px

>>34632712
Trainer

>>34632736
Why not just buy Chinese?

File: flanker vs physics.webm (1MB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 854x480px

Slavs were right in going for superior maneuverability. One can always get new avionics, or even buy them for that matter, but if your plane is a fat turd, it'll stay a fat turd even if you cram it with high-tech sensors and electronics.

>>34632755

it all seems like circus tricks if you ask me

>>34632736
Also, it ia an aerodynamics testbed for next-gen UCAV. As the details on the exposition stand states. Sort of like EDI from the movie.

>>34632744
Maybe because all, chinks were able to present, was a mock-up copy of US "Predator"? Lol.

>>34632761
It is like 70-80 percent of those "tricks" are used to aquire target rapidly. Who locks on first - fires first. Who fires first - got most chances to win. And like he
>>34632755
says, you can allways upgrade engines, avionics, etc. But you can`t radically upgrade aerodynamics.

>>34632790
>who will lock on quicker

>F-35 data-linked to 7 other F-35s, with AWACS support, and a connection to 8 other allied ships in the area all providing target information, traveling at mach 0.9 at 35,000 ft
>the slavshit junkpile doing cool circus tricks at 100 knots at 12,000 ft with drunk ivan behind the stick

File: 236.jpg (86KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1280x720px

>>34632808
8 allied ships are burning from shitton ashms
AWACS got BTFO'd by mig31 from stratosphere
wat to do? there's only 1 way

>>34632926
>from shitton ashms
that's a strange term for every aircraft in the russian military

>BTFO'd by mig31 from stratosphere
and moscow got BTFO'd by MIRV from thermosphere

>>34632941
>and moscow got BTFO'd by MIRV from thermosphere
just like whole NATOcucklandia in that case

File: main-qimg-42482be468d2adb7d620970b8c23ff85.png (151KB, 602x803px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 602x803px

>>34632808
So F-35 constantly needs a bunch of wheelchairs around, a set of perfect preconditions because it can't last a millisecond in contested airspace on its own. Gotcha. What happens when Mig-31 shoves a Vympel up AWACS' ass? When the enemy SAM's, EWAR and jamming come into play? What happens when Sukhoi with bigger loadout and better speed gets one on one against F-35? Assuming transgender in the pilot seat hasn't been strangled by his helmet or broke his neck trying to eject.

>>34633022
> Assuming transgender in the pilot seat hasn't been strangled by his helmet

her, you bigot
unless it's a ftm tranny

anyway, first tranny combat pilot when, of a jet, who cares of helos

>>34633022
>What happens when Mig-31 shoves a Vympel up AWACS' ass? When the enemy SAM's, EWAR and jamming come into play? What happens when Sukhoi with bigger loadout and better speed gets one on one against F-35? Assuming transgender in the pilot seat hasn't been strangled by his helmet or broke his neck trying to eject.
It would never happen because the only purpose for f35 is chasing sandniggers

>>34633022
>3rd gen interceptors
>getting close to an AWACS
>when they have a larger RCS than the AWACS

I guess it's worth a jej

>>34633022
>PESA
Why are russians so inferior?

>>34632790
All those tricks do is to bleed off energy and make you a fat useless target.
While the vatnik is busy making his plane spin on its ass, any NATO pilot would just head into the sky and use his superior kinematics to send a missile into the Su(ck)-35 while the Su-35 can't respond on account of trying to build up useful speed again.

>>34633121
>doing any sort of maneuver bleeds energy
>fugg, let's fly only in the direct lines :DDDD

just how retarded are you

>>34633129
I honestly can't tell the difference between legit vatniks and shitposting anymore

>>34633129
Airshow pony tricks have ZERO utility in combat whereas speed is one of the most important factors, along with stealth and sensor sophistication.
Russians knowing that they are hopelessly behind the west opts for fancy air show tricks at the cost of actually being relevant in war. This is because fancy tricks is useful to trick the retarded natives of russia into forgetting that they live in squalor in a failed has-been state.

>>34632986

The new NATO super fuses make a first strike scenario winnable for NATO. The russian boomers are noisy as fuck and easily tracked.

>>34633285
First strike scenarios have been winnable for a long time since the advent of DT shots and even without them, the US has had nuclear superiority bordering on supremacy since the mid 90s when Russian OTH and satellite detection began to fail

>>34633285
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>>34633022
Don't fret, the Mig-31 has high altitude and enormous speed (fastest flying jet today), a powerful phased array radar, EMP jamming and long range armament options speaking for it, it can hit target 280km away. It's primarily designed for running down bombers over Siberia, and yes, plucking AWACS planes out of the sky.

>>34633490 ---> >>34633069

>>34633490
The thing is, the MiG-31 flies high and has a RCS of a steel barn.
It has no chance whatsoever to get close to a high value targets before getting detected and intercepted.

>>34632755
Maneuverability is really important...If you're fighitng in post WW2

since BVR missiles and radars were improved, there's really no need for this airshow tricks

>>34633592
Are you reading impared? She don`t need to get ~close~. AWACS is nearly stationary, radar-emiting target. With a missile, aquiring firing solution from ~280 km, you simply can`t do anything to the attacking plane before shot is fired. And AWACS is hardly capable of any evasive maneuvers. Without AWACS, F-35 are nearly blind and have to switch for active radar to find anything that is running in passive mode. The moment you switch to active radar - your stealth capabilities became a meme. And there we go "5th gen" - F-35 which have inferior radar, inferior maneuverability, inferior payload, inferior spead, almost zero redundancy, against gen 4++ Su-30. And I don`t even throw T-50 and A-10 in this equation...

>>34633702
>drinking this much kreml kool-aid
280km is spitting distance for the E-3, it will detect a MiG-31 at twice that distance. The MiG-31 on the other hand will be blind to the threat that F-22 and F-35 poses with their AESA radars and active missiles. All the MiG-35 will see is an AWACS at the edge of its detection range before it is transformed into a burning wreck by US stealth fighters.
Then we have the fact that russia still uses inferior PESA radars compared to the much superior AESA radar in US fighters.
The F-35 alone has over twice the detection rqnge when faced with any russian plane and sensors a full generation ahead. A lone US F-35 can on it's own get into range, fire and down any russian plane with the russian only knowing he's been targeted when the missile goes active.
Russia only has the old decrepit A-50 for AWACS by the way, you only ever managed to get the T-100 into first flight less than a year ago.

>>34633702

An E3 can detect a MiG-31 size target at high altitude at more than double that range, even closing at 1200 km/h that gives more than a quarter of an hour for the E3 to turn around lengthening intercept time further, and the CAPs between the Mig-31 and E3 to intervene. Oh, and even if a F-35 or F-22 does need to use their own radar, the combination of LPI AESA and sharing of information through MADL makes assertions of a Russian first shot doubtful. Besides, the USA has more F-22 than Russian has; Su-30, Su-35, and T-50 put together. The idea Russia would overwhelm American air-power seems even more unlikely

File: 139754_tmb_65873757_MIG-31 GROUP.jpg (53KB, 396x466px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 396x466px

>>34633793
>280km is spitting distance for the E-3, it will detect a MiG-31 at twice that distance
The MIG-31 is a mini-AWACS itself and is designed to share radar info with other aircraft and ground stations.
In a formation of 4 MiG-31BM's only one will have it's radar (which is extremely) long range to search for targets while the other 3 stay further back in and have the search info passed on via data link to them by the lead. Once a target is tracked and then locked the other 3 can fire their missiles which are again very long range one's. This method allows the 3 MiG's to not theoretically "reveal" themselves to enemy aircraft, and it has been around since the early 1980s, long before "information superiority" and "sensor fusion" were marketed by Lockheed as some futuristic novelty.
>The MiG-31 on the other hand will be blind to the threat that F-22 and F-35 poses with their AESA radars and active missiles
At the speed of Mach 3? Mig will be done with AWACS and leave the scene before you realize what had transpired, leaving F's blind and naked to every radar in the region. That won't bode too well for F-35, plane not particularly good at speed, maneuvering, or anything at all for that matter.

And of course, shooting AWACS and air tankers would be a big wrench in US aerial tactics on the theatre.

>>34633702
Where dies this Su-35-has-good-radar meme come from.
It has a fukken PESA, obsolete tech compared to contemporary western fighter radars.
With AESA you can do actual LPIR, western fighters can sneak up on russias jets with radar while the PESA is stuck on a single frequency per duty cycle thus lighting up like a Christmas tree on any modern RWR.

File: 1374816026794.jpg (322KB, 1600x998px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1600x998px

>>34633022
I cannot tell if this is bait that is trying too hard or an underage vatnik that got super triggered.

File: mig31 vs f35.jpg (161KB, 1273x644px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1273x644px

>>34633490
>>34633702
>>34634049

>>34633322
>when Russian OTH and satellite detection began to fail
This, combined with the stupid-low readiness and deployment rates for the SSBN fleet (which is also mostly Deltas), have made it winnable by effectively removing Russia's second-strike capability. However Russia doesn't justify a war.

File: 1488662495471.jpg (128KB, 831x639px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 831x639px

>>34633022

I like your style Ivan.

You know how to get the Shartniks riled up.

Carry on lad.

File: image.jpg (165KB, 400x438px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 400x438px

>>34633490

File: f-22_APG-77-radar.gif (75KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 800x600px

>>34634049
>The MIG-31 is a mini-AWACS itself and is designed to share radar info with other aircraft and ground stations.
The MiG can share all data it wants, they will be detected at close to 700km, radiating or no.
When that happens, F-22s will intercept them and there is no russian fighter is even remotely capable of retaliate.

There will always be F-22s and F-35s between the AWACS and the front, any MiG that dares to take of will be brutally shot down long before they get close to firing distance.

Even without AWACS, the LPIR of US fighters can maintain information superiority over russia and even if russia can pick up the radar signals, they cannot fire upon the US fighters from range due to stealth or even turn on their inferior non LPIR PESAs on account of being detected by every in the area.

>>34632776
LOL U DUMB FAG, THAT SHIT'S ALREADY FLYING.

You realize it's up to moscow on what CAN be displayed, right? Fuck you're stupid.

>>34632503
I love how a bunch of neckbeards are arguing over the capabilities and limitations of the f35, a plane whos caps and lims are top secret

>>34634155
>S-stop laughing at me! I have you all riled up!!!

>>34633022
# S A V A G E

>>34634413
Mite b savage but what's outright cruel is that even effeminate fagots flying Gripen E will #rekt the snot out of a Su-35.

>>34634049
>This method allows the 3 MiG's to not theoretically "reveal" themselves to enemy aircraft

You can't be stealthy with a MiG-31, its a stainless steel box that reflects radar like nothing else can.

>>34634477
>like nothing else can.
How about 4 of them?

>>34634527
That would be even worse, you're now trying to hide four when one is bad enough. That and unlike most other aircraft you can't really use the terrain to hide it because of how poorly the aircraft performs at low altitude.

>>34634560
It was a joke ffs.
>what looks most like a parrot?
>another parrot.
>what reflects radar better than a MiG 31?
>4 of them

>>34634594
Honestly at this point the lines between joke and discourse are pretty blurred.

>>34634609
Yep, pretty sad what's become of it thanks to all the ebin troles, vatniks/50centers and shitposters.

SU stands for Soviet Ultimate
F stands for faggot

>>34635213
Su=Sucks
MiG=Mostly inferior Garbage
F=Fantastic

>>34632503
>PAK FA is not 5th gen
Not with those ugly ass engines at least.

Correct the pak-fa is not 5th gen.

>Yet another Slavshit vs Yankexpensive speculation thread

How about both of you just wait until there is an actual real-life engagement between Yank planes and slavshit and then see who comes out on top?

Right now you're just coming across as a bunch of bootyblasted armchair experts.

>>34633069
>3rd gen interceptor
MiG-25? It's out of service. He's talking about MiG-31 that is a 4th gen interceptor.

>>34636380
3rd or 4th gen, the MiG 31 has no chance whatsoever to sneak up on an AWACS. 230 km is a long range shot but nowhere near close enough to get through the escort F-22s.

>>34635802
Eh, it's fun putting the boots to the russians now when they are down. Their planes are lagging behind and it's always a pleasure reminding them of this.

File: mig-31bsm with r-37 (4).jpg (225KB, 1280x973px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1280x973px

>>34636897
Well, good that it's not 80s anymore and MiG-31BM armed with 400 km range R-37 is a thing.

>>34635802
>real-life engagement between Yank planes and slavshit
It happened all the time during the Cold War and US/NATO planes came out superior every time.

>>34637350
Well good luck getting into range of those AEW planes. It's hardly stealthy.

>>34637020
Not that we care. Show me another country that rolled out a 5th gen fighter 20 years after its complete and utter collapse.
>>34637351
Last time I checked the only two instances of aerial engagements between Russian and American fighters were in the end of WWII when Americans got their shit pushed in by Kozhedub after confusing him for attacking enemy, and in Korea, where the score was 1:1 despite Russians flying MiG-15 that was pretty much a bomber killer at that time.

>>34637506
and Vietnam
and the various wars in NA/ME
and wars involving Israel
>MiG-15 that was pretty much a bomber killer at that time.
No, it was a fighter, and what happened was the North Koreans got smoked, then the Chinese, then the Russians.
Also, Desert Storm
and the allied intervention in Yugoslavia

>>34637581
Nice pile of bullshit, since of all those only Israel saw engagement with Russian fighters in that one ambush incident, when Soviets went way too cocky and disregarded reconnaissance.
>and what happened was
...that you ate too much rancid McCarthyist propaganda to stomach, therefore you are spewing it back in the form of shitposting.

>>34637647
>Soviet pilots never got their shit pushed in
>THOSE DON'T COUNT!!!

Even Korea wasn't a 1-1.

>>34636380
>adding a look down radar to a MiG-25 magically makes it a 4th gen fighter

I mean.i see the hook, but where's the bait?

>>34637506
>Show me another country that rolled out a 5th gen fighter 20 years after its complete and utter collapse
Well, certainly not russia, the PAK-FA is more of a Eurofighter equivalent.
China did not exactly collapse, other than the US, only the chinks has a 5th gen.

>>34634383

>Being this weak

>>34637647
I don't understand... US and Russian built fighters faced off all the time during the 40 odd years the Cold War was running and history has shown the Russian planes were markedly inferior. In fact, the first Mig-29s that the US got to see was somewhat of a let down, as the USSR had trumped up these planes as better than anything the US had, when it reality the only thing the had was the helmet mounted display for their heat seekers and IRST (which y German and Russian pilot's admission, were ok at best).

>therefore you are spewing it back in the form of shitposting
Telling of what happened in Mig alley is shitposting? OK, guy.
Tell me, what happens if the bases at contain the Mig-31s getting bombed? Then tankers and AEW aircraft can start their patrols again and the Russians are again put in a bad spot considering the quality of the aircraft they have.

>>34637350
>R-37
>400 km
More serious analysts put it at 200 km but whatever.
http://www.military-today.com/missiles/r37.htm

>>34637670
Where did I say that one ambush didn't count?
>Korea wasn't a 1-1
Yes it was, unless you are a proud brainwashed rancid McCarthyist propaganda consumer.
>>34637683
>Shitposting is an art
Not really, you are just throwing shit at your monitor expecting me to take it seriously.
>>34637685
Low quality bait, try harder.

>>34637739
I'm sorry, but a look down radar does not a 4th gen make.

File: mig-31dz (5).jpg (293KB, 1500x1013px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1500x1013px

>>34637699
>US and Russian built fighters
What does it have to do with engagements between Americans and Russians?
>Telling of what happened in Mig alley
the thing it that's not what you are doing. Instead you are spewing out rancid decades old propaganda.
>Tell me, what happens if the bases at contain the Mig-31s getting bombed?
What happens is that you wake up realising you just dreamed about "bombing" an air base located in the country with best air defence and interceptor force on the planet.
>>34637729
>More serious analysts
>Article by The Tiger
Sure, whatever makes you sleep at night.

>>34637794
I'm sorry, but simply throwing more shit in your monitor won't make you look any less of a retard than you've already made of yourself.

>>34637739
>Low quality bait, try harder
It's not bait if it's true.
The PAK-FA omits the by far most important factor of 5th gen; VLO characteristics. Even russians themselves put the PAK-FA at 0.3-0.5 m^2 RCS, at the same level or slightly higher than current Euro triangles.
Other than that it does nothing a current 4.5 gen such as Gripen E or Eurofighter T3 already do.

>>34637810
Well if you're not even going to make an argument against it, let alone ever try to justify your initial assertion, then I accept your concession.

>>34637802
Americans never fought against the country that can shoot their toys down except Vietnam.

>>34637802
>What does it have to do with engagements between Americans and Russians?
Nothing really, as my original point was how Western jets were and continue to be superior to Russian ones.
>Instead you are spewing out rancid decades old propaganda
If you believe that, then the onus is on you to prove that it is. Burden of proof anon.
>best air defence and interceptor force on the planet.
Iraq thought the same thing
http://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-ODS-EW.html
What happens when those interceptors get close enough to fighters? What happens if one bomber gets through a chink in the IADS armor and knocks out an airfield for 8 hours? What about aircraft carriers? What about tomahawks?

also, this >>34637729

>>34637891
>Western jets were and continue to be superior to Russian ones.
Just no
it isn't 90s anymore
>best air defence and interceptor force on the planet.
>Iraq thought the same thing
>iraq thought

>>34637802
>Sure, whatever makes you sleep at night
The most optimistic propaganda blurbs from russia claims 300km, a head on shot.
If the target is not cooperative, that range decreases rapidly.
Besides, other than a "soon™", little has been shown in regards of russia actually fielding them.

>>34637926
>it isn't 90s anymore

Correct, the gap has grown.

>>34637926
>it isn't 90s anymore
True, russia continue to slip even further behind.
With the introduction of Gripen E, even the smallest of fighter producing nation has surpassed russia.

>>34637926
>Just no
>it isn't 90s anymore
Then please explain to everybody in this thread how russian ones are on par or superior to US ones despite the fact that they're trying to replicate what the US is doing (sensor fusion, active radar missiles, standoff weapons, LO, AESA radars).

You should take the time to read what I posted.

>>34637851
And russia has never fought an enemy equipped with fighters at all. This did not prevent them from losing a strategic bomber.

>>34637952
>>34637965
>>34637984
>>34637996
butthurt fatniks

Russian avionics and engines are near shit tier. They have failed to develop and improve since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

File: 1498152932088.png (115KB, 534x548px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 534x548px

>>34638035

>>34638035
So you can't substantiate your claims then?

Yanks, why are you all this easily baited? Or is it simply because there are so many of you on this board that even your autists number in the hundreds?

Anyway, instead of taking Russian shit seriously how about you just step back and laugh at them and their shit economy? Its what we do

>>34637824
Too bad it is the opposite of truth.
>>34637832
Well, if you're going to simply proceed throwing shit at your monitor it will become very dirty and smelly.
>>34637891
>Western jets were and continue to be superior to Russian ones
Too bad in real life it's just the western pilots who continue to be better trained than the sandnigger ones. Which was always an obvious thing anyway, so why would you make a point about it, really?
>the onus is on you to prove that it is
The fact that you are spewing out rancid decades old propaganda can be seen from the content of your posts.
>Iraq thought the same thing
Iraq had late 50s and early 60s scrapmetal instead of air defence.
>What happens when those interceptors get close enough to fighters?
Why would they get close to the burning remains of American fighters shot down by Russians?
>What happens if one bomber gets through a chink in the IADS armor and knocks out an airfield for 8 hours?
What happens is that this one bomber gets shot down hundreds kilometres away, the missiles it released that you are probably referring to get shot down as well and the few that get through hit the airfield that subsequently gets repaired as Russian fighters from other airfields continue to reap American airframes accompanied with the air defence as Americans' homeland blazes brighter than the centre of the Sun.
>What about aircraft carriers?
The ones that are not going down to the bottom of the ocean to feed fish after being hit by 750-1000 kg HE warheads? They stay in port while American taxpayers are overthrowing the government for sending thousands of people to certain death and losing billions dollar worth warships.
>What about tomahawks?
Those subsonic 80s relics with RCS of a railway carriage? They get shot down.
>More serious analysts
>Article by The Tiger
Sure, whatever makes you sleep at night.

File: 1497261915250.jpg (51KB, 599x539px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 599x539px

>>34638124
Because russians don't care in the slightest if they live in abject poverty, abused by criminal oligarchs, as long as they can say muh military.
The only way to get vatniks really riled up is to knock out that last pillar that they rest their frail ego on, the myth of the strong russian army.
It's like kicking an ant hill, you don't do because ants trigger you, it's just to see them run about in mindless chaos.

>>34637996
>lose strategic bomber to your own made AA
>wipe ot this AA

>>34638190
But thats the thing, here in Germany we understand just how gigantic a chip Russians have on their shoulder and how easy it makes it to trigger them and laugh at them for being a third world shithole. If you want to BTFO slavs, just remind them that they're the only Europeans living in subsahara tier nations, instead of sperging out and posting novel after novel of evidence arguing for the superiority of American technology.

>>34638134
Oh boy, there it is
>western pilots who continue to be better trained than the sandnigger ones.
And russian
>rancid decades old propaganda can be seen from the content of your posts.
prove that this is decades old prop, and i'll concede this point
>50s and early 60s scrapmetal
Actually they modernized during and after the Iran-Iraq war. Also, that won't stop your from turning around and screaming about the F-117 that got shot down in Yugoslavia by 50s scrapmetal
>American fighters shot down by Russians?
Not likely as the most numerous Russia air superiority fighter is still legacy when compared to the latest F-15 (and F-16)
>Americans' homeland blazes brighter than the centre of the Sun.
So in a war America gets totes wrecked while only minimal damage happens to Russia. Sweet. totally based in reality.
>Those subsonic 80s relics with RCS of a railway carriage? They get shot down.
Didn't happen in Syria, or any other place else they've been used.
>The ones that are not going down to the bottom of the ocean to feed fish after being hit by 750-1000 kg HE warheads?
Certianly not sunk by the Russian Navy. It's in a sorry state.
I almost forgot, our trump card, are SSNs, which are a full generation and a half ahead of anything Russia has.
>American taxpayers are overthrowing the government
You mean the thing that has happened twice in one hundreds years in Russia?

File: PAK-FA-Front2.jpg (75KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1000x667px

>>34638134
>Too bad it is the opposite of truth
>n-no! Lies!
The PAK-FA is not stealth and it does not do anything a western fighter already do better.
Try it, line up features of the PAK-FA and you'll find that there are several opponents that already do the same but better.

Pic related, the lack of russian stealth.

>>34638233
Germany is worse than Russia

>>34638259
I couldn't hear you over the sound of my GDP and HDI

>>34638266
kek

File: Coach.gif (1MB, 300x188px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x188px

>>34638259
>Germany is worse than Russia

>>34638233
>Here in Germany where we have less tanks than one Russian armoured division and 8 flyable 4+ gen fighters we prefer to shitpost on 4chan instead of having balls and driving Americans out of our country, like the French did in theirs
Thanks, I was starting to forget how pathetic germs can be having a neighbour that is not that jubilant about sucking Frau Merkel's cock.

>>34638305
>WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH MUH MILITARY IS BIG STOP LAUGHING AT ME

I love the sound of Russian shitskin anger and outrage. A country so subhuman its full of people who still wonder why their immediate neighbours ran to NATO the very moment they could.

>>34638233
Again, russia doesn't care about being africa tier in wealth and standard of living. All they care about is looking strong. Expose russia as a weak has-been, overtaken by china as the Second Power and you'll see vatnik shit flying in rage.

>>34638204
>lose strategic bomber to air defenses only a fraction of what Iraq had, not a single theatre level missile
gg ez, russia

>>34638134
>50s and early 60s scrapmetal
Iraq had the real deal MiG-29s and they got ass raped by superior western fighters from the same era.

>>34638305
>Here in Russia we have may be a divison+ worth of modern equipment spread out in the largest country on Earth.
At least German belongs to a huge military alliance (which is rearming thanks to dumb Russian decisions)

>>34638365
>Iraq had BUK level missiles
only in their dreams

>>34638245
>And russian
Indeed, the Russian pilots also continue to be better trained than the sandnigger ones.
>prove that this is decades old prop
It has been repeated for decades, which is why it is decades old.
>Actually they modernized during and after the Iran-Iraq war
Actually, they had 50s and early 60s scrapmetal instead of air defence.
>F-117 that got shot down in Yugoslavia by 50s scrapmetal
The thing is bombing 50s scrapmetal is not impressive, but shooting down stealth aircraft with this 50s scrapmetal is.
>most numerous Russia air superiority fighter is still legacy when compared to the latest F-15
The same F-15C that pilots were complaining about how stone-age it is? Whatever makes you sleep at night, sweetie.
>(and F-16)
The ones that are not falling apart? Yeah, I think there are some MiG-21's left rotting in some field to which F-16 are a bit more modern.
>So in a war America gets totes wrecked
This is pretty much the case. Good thing is that your military generals are not brainless brainwashed retards (well, mostly) incapable to grasp on this simple fact.
>Didn't happen in Syria
Must be because Syria doesn't have IADS.
>Certianly not sunk by the Russian Navy.
Certainly more like by Russian missiles, indeed.
>SSNs
The downsized 1989 relics you call SSNs? 971s and 885s will make short work of them.
>You mean the thing that has happened twice in one hundreds years in Russia?
Yes, pretty much the same thing.
>>34638254
>The PAK-FA is not stealth
Only that it is, so you will have to try harder.

File: 1454105509068.png (4KB, 203x231px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 203x231px

>>34632503
I want to FUCK that Havok.

>>34638410
>Buk
>medium range SAM
Back in 90-91 even russia used SA-2s and Iraq had more advanced ones than russia due to France supplying and upgrading with superior western tech. Had russia tried to invade Iraq back then, russians would have been slaughtered by the tens of thousands.

>>34638330
So how does it feel being a proud German with balls smaller than any French was ever cursed with?
>>34638388
>Iraq had the real deal MiG-29s
If by "real deal MiG-29s" you mean a dozen of poorly maintained 9.12B airframes devoid of all advanced electronics, then yeah, sure. They also had MiG-25s, one of which shot down an F-18.
>>34638389
>At least Germany belongs to American cannon fodder alliance
Well I guess if you put it like this.

>>34638507
>what if
kys nigger
If USA invaded Georgia in 2008 there would be 10 years civil war with millions of victims instead of 5 days conflict

File: IMG_0140.jpg (1MB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1280px

>>34638452
>Only that it is, so you will have to try harder
>presented with irrefutable evidence that the PAK-FA lacks stealth
>still tries to PROOFS his way out
Here's more, one could fit a quarter in those gaps in the weapons bay.
Not stealthy at all.
Even Gripen E would win against that rust bucket, look at those disgusting exposed engines.

>>34638330
>why their immediate neighbours ran to NATO the very moment they could.

The best part is that slavaboos always avoid answering this very question every time it comes up.

File: image.png (234KB, 516x1599px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 516x1599px

What stage are we at now?

>>34638507
>S-75 Operational range 45 km
>S-125 Operational range 35 km
>Buk-M1 Operational range 35 km
>Buk-M1-2 Operational range 50 km
Imbecile amerishit, please.

>>34638513
As a German, It feels great not living in a third world quasi-dictatorship full of faggots who define themselves by their militarism.

>>34638259
And how are we worse?

>>34638513
>MiG-29s
MiG-29Bs that russians promised would kill tons of F-15s.
Turns out that same era western fighters where magnitudes better than russian garbage.

>>34638452
>Indeed, the Russian pilots also continue to be better trained than the sandnigger ones.
But significantly inferior to NATO pilots.
>It has been repeated for decades, which is why it is decades old.
So you can't back up your claims, even though the burden of proof lies with you AND i'm willing to concede defeat if you any thing that corroborates this.
>50s and early 60s scrapmetal instead of air defence
Ok, dude.
>but shooting down stealth aircraft with this 50s scrapmetal is.
Same thing can be said about Georgia and their IADS.
>F-15C that pilots were complaining about how stone-age it is?
Nope, they never complained (why would you when it's the best plane flying?). They did however just start upgrading them with the latest gen AESA radars, which is something the Su-35 doesn't even have.
>The ones that are not falling apart?
Nope, wrong again, man.
The F-16s the US use started deliveries in the mid 90s (when Russia had no new R and D for planes) and continued into the early 2000s, then they underwent upgrades. That's to say nothing of the newest ones flown by our NATO allies.
>This is pretty much the case.
I'd like you to expand on this. give me a realistic timeline of how everything happens and how NATO gets so blunted in the early part of a conflict (include ground and sea forces too please)
>The downsized 1989 relics you call SSNs
Yes, the Improved Los Angeles classes, the Virginia classes (mid 2000s), and the Seawolf (mid-late 90s). Not to mention the P-8s that will be hunting your boats (of which you really don't have many so be prepared to be outnumber 3-1 in SSNs).
>Must be because Syria doesn't have IADS.
You're right, they have a russian one that showed how ineffective it was.
>Certainly more like by Russian missiles, indeed.
From what platforms? And do you have enough of them (both missiles and platforms)?
>Only that it is, so you will have to try harder.
No it isn't, it has low observability features, but isn't a true stealth aircraft.

>>34638553
>Not stealthy at all.
Too bad it is in real life, so you still have to try harder.
>>34638586
The "mom, commies are denying my safe space again" stage.

>>34638586
>number 3

HOLY FUCKING SHIT NUMBER 3. Why the fuck do Russian shitheads on the internet always do that? In every argument, in every webspace wherever there are Russians arguing. there's always that tactic of deflecting from the criticism by pointing to some othe entirely irrelevant issue elsewhere. Do Russians not know what a Tu quoque fallacy is?

>>34638595
>third world quasi-dictatorship full of faggots who define themselves by their militarism
I don't watch TV, is that how Frau Mercel paints the French now?
>>34638612
>MiG-29Bs
Poorly maintained 9.12B airframes devoid of all advanced electronics and loaded with sandnigger pilots.

>>34638628
Whataboutism is a tried and true Slav tactic as a means of getting their own populace to think they have it good.

>>34638513
>Germany belongs to American cannon fodder alliance
That they willingly chose to enter and that they could willngly choose to leave if they want. Unlike Russia (see: Ukraine circa 2014)

>>34638594
>cherrypicking late Buks vs early Sa-2s
The SA-2 has almost twice the altitude in any case vatnigger.

>>34638642
>I don't watch TV

That's because Russians can't afford one

>>34638642
What's your obsession with French people?

>>34638642
>Poorly maintained 9.12B airframes devoid of all advanced electronics and loaded with sandnigger pilots.
The ones flown from Russian factories straight to Iraq then trained by Russian pilots? You're not making a case here anon.

>Too bad it is in real life, so you still have to try harder.
Please, specifically state why it deserves the title of a 5th Gen. What features does it have?

>>34638642
>9.12B airframes devoid of all advanced electronics and loaded with sandnigger pilots
Same MiG-29Bs that the rest of russias slave states got. Also, operation Rimon 20 shows us that russias best is no better than your average sandnigger.

>>34638647
>there's a wikipedia article on this very phenomenon

Thanks for that.

>>34638624
>Too bad it is in real life, so you still have to try harder.

Having a Super Hornet's RCS is not stealthy.

File: AIR_PAK-FA_MAKS-2011_Sukhoi_lg.jpg (90KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1024x682px

>>34638624
>Too bad it is in real life, so you still have to try harder
Look at this real life photo of this real unstealthy PAK-FAilure.
Those shining engines reflect more than visible light, vatnik.

>>34638714
You should also look up "and you are lynching negroes!"

>>34638623
>But significantly inferior to NATO pilots.
Yes, sandnigger pilots are significantly inferior to NATO pilots. Which was always an obvious thing anyway, so why would you make a point about it, really?
>So you can't back up your claims
I just did.
>Same thing can be said about Georgia and their IADS.
Not really, since neither did Georgia have IADS, nor are Buks 50s scrapmetal.
>why would you when it's the best plane flying?
Probably because no one would allow them to fly the best plane flying nowadays - Su-35S.
>Nope, wrong again, man.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/texas/2017/06/21/pilot-ejects-burning-f-16-carrying-ammunition-crash-houston-airport
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/05/politics/fighter-jet-crash-maryland/index.html
But then again, F-18 is about as crappy, rusty and falling apart as F-16, so what's the difference really.
>give me a realistic timeline
There you go: Russia launches missiles, missiles set the US alight. That's pretty much it, the essential stuff. Sure even an American can comprehend 8 words long sentence. Or do I have to put it in American measuring system in order not to confuse you? That's about a length of a usual JWBush speech in congress.
>Not to mention the P-8s that will be
...in a better place, same as aircraft carriers that tried to approach Russia. That is at the bottom of the ocean, feeding fish.
>You're right, they have a russian one
If by a "Russian one" you mean point defence Pantsirs that were not even at the area, then yeah, they have some of those.
>From what platforms?
From submarines, cruisers and supersonic bombers, obviously.
>No it isn't
Nah, it pretty much is. Try a bit harder next time.

>>34638671
underrated

>>34638668
>used from 1979
>late Buks
>S-75 Flight altitude 25 km
>S-125 Flight altitude 18 km
>Buk-M1 Flight altitude 22 km
>Buk-M1-2 Flight altitude 25 km
Imbecile amerishit, please.

File: 247be785ee2426cde40885a51d1561ba21de2f3f_hq.gif (3MB, 445x247px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 445x247px

>>34638797
>Su-35S
>good

Take your shitty PESA, van sized RCS, inferior missiles, poor engines and leave Boris, you're drunk.

>>34638841
Buk-M2 was in use 98, vatnigger.

File: t-50-9 (5).jpg (122KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1280x853px

>>34638658
>and that they could willngly choose to leave if they want
They sure could if the had balls. Like the French.
>>34638671
Indeed, that's too much brainwashing for a human to afford to stomach. Amerishits though are animals and can digest even the amounts of bullshit amerishit TV feeds them with.
>>34638673
None, I just wonder how does that germ feel about the French having larger balls than his nation will ever have in the foreseeable future.
>>34638712
Yeah, indeed the same 9.12B airframes devoid of all advanced electronics, only also loaded with sandnigger pilots.
>>34638726
Good that it doesn't have Super Hornet's RCS then.
>>34638738
>Look at this real life photo
Indeed, do.

>>34638909
>Indeed, that's too much brainwashing for a human to afford to stomach. Amerishits though are animals and can digest even the amounts of bullshit amerishit TV feeds them with.
We weren't talking about Yanks, we were talking about why Germany is leaps and bounds ahead of Russia in every metric of social health and national development. Stop deflecting and tell us all why you live in a Africa-tier country.

>>34638870
>Amerishit
>Good
Take you underdeveloped shitty resolution AESA, crumbling RAM, non-existent subsonic petards and pain in the ass to maintain engines and invade Papua New Guinea. That's about as much as you can do not shitting your pants.

>>34638797
>Yes, sandnigger pilots are significantly inferior to NATO pilots.
Stop moving the goalposts. I'm saying that Russian pilots are inferior to NATO pilots in training, experience AND aircraft.
>I just did.
No you didn't do you know how burden of proof works? I made a claim, you made a counterclaim: It's on you to prove that my claim is false, especially after calling me out.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a440095.pdf
>Su-35S.
The one with no Active radar missile and a PESA radar? That one? The plane where only maybe 25 are in service?
>Not really, since neither did Georgia have IADS
But they did, anon. Including a strat bomber, how embarrassing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War#Equipment_losses_and_cost
>But then again, F-18 is about as crappy,
I can do that too anon,
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a24155/kuznetsov-second-crash-in-three-weeks/
from today even!: https://theaviationist.com/2017/07/23/what-these-pictures-of-two-russian-yak-130-jets-that-crash-landed-almost-simultaneously-in-russia-say-about-the-causes-of-the-mishaps/
>missiles set the US alight.
So then both nations destory each other. With the US causing more damage because of new fuzed warheads on our subs.
>American measuring system in order not to confuse you?
That's rich considering the Russian air forces is actually converting units of measurements to imperial.
>That is at the bottom of the ocean, feeding fish.
Not when they're flying out over the Greenland and Norwegian Sea hunting subs out of range of Russian aircraft. Sorry anon, wrong again.
>From submarines, cruisers and supersonic bombers, obviously.
What happens when they get sunk, shot down or their bases bombed. Not to mention they can't focus all of their firepower in one area, which means they'll be outmatched.
>Nah, it pretty much is. Try a bit harder next time.
How so, see the last part of this >>34638703

>>34638909
>Yeah, indeed the same 9.12B airframes devoid of all advanced electronics, only also loaded with sandnigger pilots
So, same tech as russians but better pilots. Got it.

>>34638939
>all of this post
Lol

Are you trolling

>>34638909
>Indeed, do.
I see a pair of very unstealthy nozzels that bear witness to the fact that the PAK-FA is powered by old soviet junk.

>>34638909
>They sure could if the had balls. Like the French.
France left because in a strange twist of 2003 fate, we didn't get involved with their wars in Africa and wanted them to give up their colonial possessions.
>Indeed, that's too much brainwashing for a human to afford to stomach. Amerishits though are animals and can digest even the amounts of bullshit amerishit TV feeds them with.
Did RT tell you that, man?
>>34638939
Try invading Georgia while taking light losses then, oh wait....
How about this, try fighting ISIS with boots on the ground without losing planes or territory, oh wait
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36368346

>>34638908
>Buk in service since 1979
>Buk-M1 in service since 1983
>Buk-M1-2 in service since 1998
>Buk-M2 in service since 1988
Imbecile amerishit, please.

>>34638939
>Take you underdeveloped shitty resolution PESA, non existant RAM, non-existent ducted RAMjet missiles and worthless engines and invade Georgia. That's probably far more than you can manage.
Ftfy Ivan, this is you we're talking about.

>>34639024
>cherrypicking late model BUK stats and comparing to early model Sa-2
Vatnigger plz

>>34638939
Like like how you're talking about AESA, RAM and highly advanced but complex engines (cause advanced) and how they're somehow a bad thing when you're nation is attempting and failing at making just that.

File: 1440186395387.gif (997KB, 500x310px) Image search: [Google]

997KB, 500x310px

>Vatniks reeeeing
>Chinks reeeeing

Damn it feels good to be a burger.

>>34632736

You know the trainer is a dead end if the Russians are trying to sell it to you without wanting to operate it themselves

>>34634049

Lockheedfags BTFO

File: Network supporting F-35s.png (126KB, 640x335px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 640x335px

>>34639217
Now it's the russians who got BTFO.
What now mr vatnik man?

File: 1407545351316.png (75KB, 458x284px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 458x284px

>>34639086

Canadian here.

Looks to me like the usual scenario: one or two Eurpofags stirring this vile nest of bottom-feeding Amerisharts into a wooping, screeching frenzy.

https://youtu.be/a7XuXi3mqYM?t=2m9s

File: rtn_205417.jpg (640KB, 3008x1960px) Image search: [Google]

640KB, 3008x1960px

>>34639273
Night shift yuro here, I just pretend to be yank to trigger the vatniks.
Pic related these babies trigger the fuck out of vatniks.

File: mars-exploration-family-portrait-version3.jpg (67KB, 984x191px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 984x191px

>>34638930
>in every metric of social health and national development
Except for having balls.
>>34638943
>Russian pilots are inferior to NATO pilots
Which is not the case.
>No you didn't
Yes I did.
>I made a claim
What you made is the brainless repeating of decades old rancid McCarthyist propaganda.
>That one?
Yes, that one, armed with ARH missiles and the best operational fighter radar in the world.
>But they did, anon
No, they don't. What they have is a handful of Buks bought from Ukraine.
>I can do that too anon
Crashing aircraft? Knowing how shit and crumbling american air forces are, I'm sure you can do it even better.
>With the US causing more damage
To itself, by letting the retarded generals in power instead of all non-retarded ones and attacking Russia.
>That's rich considering the Russian air forces is actually converting units of measurements to imperial.
No, more like that's rich coming from amerishits who can't.
>Hunting submarines over Greenland
Also try hunting some over Mongolia, I heard their navy is pretty strong.
>What happens when they get sunk
You wake up, realising you just dreamed about sinking ships and bombing bases of the country with best air defence and interceptor force on the planet.
>How so
Just like that.
>>34638959
No, more like so worse than the Russian ones both tech and pilot wise.
>>34638965
>All of this bait
Lol, are you shitposting?
>>34638979
The fact that you are hallucinating is rather sad. They going easier on moonshine.
>>34639004
France left because it was the only way to cleanse their country from amerishit military.
>Did RT tell you that, man?
Local amerishits give me that impression.
>Try invading Georgia
Why? I think they got the message the last time our military rekt them in 5 days for shelling peacekeepers.
>How about this, try fighting ISIS
Who controls Aleppo? Say the line, amerishit.

File: yanswers1.jpg (58KB, 620x620px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 620x620px

>>34639038
>Ftfy
Yeah, that indeed sounds a bit closer to the sad state of amerishit military. Even the Georgia part to some extent.

>>34639307
>tech and pilot wise
Tech maybe but pilots, russians are factually proven to be worse.

>>34639062
>in service since 1983
>late model BUK
Imbecile amerishit, please.

>>34639322
Except last time I checked the only two instances of aerial engagements between Russian and American fighters were in the end of WWII when Americans got their shit pushed in by Kozhedub and in Korea where the score was 1:1.

>>34639322
wut
is there an international pilot competition where it's proven or what

i mean you can suggest that they are likely worse trained because russia has less money for their combat training blah blah blah (iirc i saw a vid from 90s, a female fighter pilot was interviewed and at the end of her interview she was asked what she would want to ask the government for and she smiled and asked "give us kerosene", guess it's better but they probably still have fuel shortages) but to claim that it's proven is silly

File: mig-31bm line (1).jpg (279KB, 1280x849px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1280x849px

We will proceed tomorrow, amerishits. Hope none of your flying coffins crashes killing a pilot as I sleep.

>>34639273
Oh shit, it's the Canadian that wishes he was British and hates Americans.

>>34639307
>hallucinating
Don't worry everyone except you are in on the secret the PAK-FA is a PAK-FAilure.

www businessinsider com/ russias-newest-fighter-jet-is-fifth-generation-in-name-only-2016-2

>>34639321
Sorry that russian schooling is so bad that you can't find your neighbours on a map. Maybe the failings of russian schooling is why you can't develop functioning jets and gets beaten by Sweden at fighters.

>>34639367
Korea ended 2:1 in favor of the US, vatnik.

>>34639367
>no Vietnam
>no desert storm
>no desert storm 2 electric boogaloo
>no gulf of sidra 1 and 2

>>34639409
Where is this museum?

>>34639504
>1,106 enemy airplanes were officially downed by the Soviet pilots, 52 of whom got ace status. The Soviet system of confirming air kills erred on the conservative side; the pilot's words had to be corroborated and enemy aircraft falling into the sea were not counted, the number might exceed 1,106
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War#Aerial_warfare

considering that they lost ~330 migs it's 3:1 in favor of the soviets

the rest were north korean planes

>>34639386
>is there an international pilot competition where it's proven or what
>arab-israeli war
>shitskins complain to russians that they get BTFO in the air, say russian jets suck
>"cyka shitskins you of not using glorious russia jets correct!"
>russia covertly sends crack pilots to show shitskins how it's done
>"u fucked now cyka kikes"
>russians get raped unusually hard, way worse than shitskins
>"blyat!"
>shitskins feel no small ammount of schadenfreude, makes it known to whole world how terrible russian pilots are

Operation Rimon 20, all planes from the same era.
Things are probably even worse today as russians only get a fraction of the flight hours a western pilot gets.

>>34639344
>1983 Buk
>max altitude 14000 m
Vatnigger plz

>>34639563
the only aerial win of jews over soviet pilots who downed a few jew planes in that war

jews are still proud

>>34639541
>1,106 enemy airplanes were officially downed by the Soviet pilots
>officially
>Soviets
Better slash those numbers by a factor of ten.

>>34639589
And russians are still bootyblasted. Jews came out ahead in any case.

>>34639307
>What you made is the brainless repeating of decades old rancid McCarthyist propaganda.
Prove it's McCarthyist propaganda then.
>Which is not the case.
lol, yeah it is.
>Yes I did.
Then post a source or something saying i'm wrong.
>best operational fighter radar in the world.
The PESA?
>ARH missiles
The one that's not even in widespread service yet?
>No, they don't. What they have is a handful of Buks bought from Ukraine.
Which they used to shoot down a bnch of your planes.
>Crashing aircraft? Knowing how shit and crumbling american air forces are, I'm sure you can do it even better.
If you're air force is better, why is there only a handful of planes in Syria. Me thinks that you can't support them.
>To itself, by letting the retarded generals in power instead of all non-retarded ones and attacking Russia.
No one wants to attack Russia, there's literally nothing of value there.
>No, more like that's rich coming from amerishits who can't.
How many Mars rovers do you have? How many Flags on the Moon do you have then?
>Just like that.
Explain the 5th gen features on the PAK-FA then.
>Also try hunting some over Mongolia, I heard their navy is pretty strong.
Come one anon, the Greenland Sea. That's assuming your Navy can even sortie at the range without being tracked and destroyed.
>France left because it was the only way to cleanse their country from amerishit military.
Is that why they're introducing an AR clone that is from Germany that the Germans are producing under license?
>Who controls Aleppo? Say the line, amerishit.
You do, it only took you one years to capture a single town, good work. Did you learn that in Grozny.
>realising you just dreamed about sinking ships and bombing bases
really man, so the nation with the 2 largest air forces in the world and the world biggest Navy will be combat ineffective.

>Kozhedub
No, he never shot down an American plane.
>Korea where the score was 1:1.
Post source then.

>>34639541
Come one man, post the sentence before that: >After the war, and to the present day, the USAF reports an F-86 Sabre kill ratio in excess of 10:1, with 792 MiG-15s and 108 other aircraft shot down by Sabres, and 78 Sabres lost to enemy fire.

>>34639589
They actually didn't shoot down any, they wanted to stay out of the war and the battle that was the result of Rimon was the Soviets wanting to prove that their pilots were good, which was not the case.

>>34639593
they are already slashed by a factor of maybe 1.5, did you miss that they err on the conservative side with independent proofs and stuff and the actual number is likely higher

considering the amount of planes burgers lost in korea the numbers are pretty plausible too

>>34639604
i don't see any bootyblasted russians around but i see one funny jewaboo

>>34639307
> best operational fighter radar in the world.
Doesn't it have like 6 or 12 frequencies?
What is it the best at? Finding DRFMs?

>>34639645
From the same link you quote;
>After the war, and to the present day, the USAF reports an F-86 Sabre kill ratio in excess of 10:1, with 792 MiG-15s and 108 other aircraft shot down by Sabres, and 78 Sabres lost to enemy fire.[297][298]

10:1 to the US, not bad.

>>34639409
>BM

Sounds about right.

>>34639643
>They actually didn't shoot down any, they wanted to stay out of the war and the battle that was the result of Rimon was the Soviets wanting to prove that their pilots were good, which was not the case.

well, if you read the wiki about the war of attrition it's not true, firstly there was a "counter ambush" with downing two jews and then jews lost a number of other planes

>July 30, 1970: A large-scale dogfight occurs between Israeli and Soviet aircraft, codenamed Rimon 20, involving twelve to twenty-four Soviet MiG-21s (besides the initial twelve, other MiGs are "scrambled", but it is unclear if they reach the battle in time), and twelve Israeli Dassault Mirage IIIs and four F-4 Phantom II jets. The engagement takes place west of the Suez Canal. After luring their opponents into an ambush, the Israelis shoot down four of the Soviet-piloted MiGs. A fifth is possibly hit and later crashes en route back to base. Four Soviet pilots are killed, while the IAF suffers no losses except a damaged Mirage.[52] The Soviets respond by luring Israeli fighter jets into a counter-ambush, downing two,[58] and deploying more aircraft to Egypt. Following the Soviets' direct intervention, known as "Operation Kavkaz",[52] Washington fears an escalation and redoubles efforts toward a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

>Early August, 1970: Despite their losses, the Soviets and Egyptians manage to press the air defenses closer to the canal, shooting down a number of Israeli aircraft. The SAM batteries allow the Egyptians to move in artillery which in turn threatens the Bar Lev Line.

>>34639645
>bootyblasted russians
Being eternally booty blasted is the nature of russians.
Operation rimon 20 is just a useful example that proves russians worse at air war than both kikes and mudslimes.

>>34639307
You know what anon, I'm >>34638943
>>34638623
>>34638245
>>34637891
>>34639643
>>34639616
Let's stop dick measuring and get back onto the topic at hand: Mig-31s are not able to make a significant impact on how an war between the US and NATO would go. You can't fight and hope to win a war solely with interceptors. What happens if they get bounced? What happens if a F-16, 18, 15 or worse yet, a 22 gets within dogfighting range (as unlikely as that sounds)? They're not stealth, which means they can be detected at longer ranges, doubly so if they're going active with their radars (per the inverse square law). They might get some victories in (planes are still plane, and missiles are still missiles not matter how outdated), but eventually NATO would figure out heir tactics and adjust accordingly (or even use them against he Migs and ambush them). Not to mention the striking of IADS and airfields that house SAM sites and aircraft. You simply don't have enough planes and forces to turn it into a victory unless you want to start stripping away forces from other theaters (which will also be under attack).

>>34639694
Then we have the Lebanon war.
>During the course of combat operations, the Israeli Air Force conducted successful ground attack missions against Syrian and PLO targets, with Israeli attack helicopters inflicting heavy losses on Syrian armor. Israeli jets shot down between 82[75] and 86 Syrian aircraft in aerial combat, without losses.[76][77] A single Israeli A-4 Skyhawk and two helicopters were shot down by anti-aircraft fire and SAM missiles.[75][76][77] This was the largest aerial combat battle of the jet age with over 150 fighters from both sides engaged. Syrian claims of aerial victories were met with skepticism even from their Soviet allies.[78] The Soviets were so shaken by the staggering losses sustained by their allies that they dispatched the deputy head of their air defense force to Syria to examine how the Israelis had been so dominant.[79]

The kikes rekt russian tech so hard that they shat their pants at the mere thought of what a proper NATO air force would do to them.

>>34639666
considering that soviets lost only about 330 migs those numbers are pretty questionable

especially considering that there is a source that
>However, one source claims that the U.S. Air Force has more recently cited 224 losses (c.100 to air combat) out of 674 F-86s deployed to Korea.

anyway the most of shot down burgers weren't sabers, they had a number of different aircraft there

>>34639760
sorry but that's syrian pilots

i mean the whole discussion is a huge wankery but the switch from burgers to jews and now from russians to syrians is a too much strawman even for wankery

>>34639616
>Explain the 5th gen features on the PAK-FA then
There is few to none.
>PESA
Is inferior in every single way to AESA.
That is why russia tries so hard(and fails) at making their own AESA.

>>34634049
>Sensor fusion
>Novelty
Good god man.

Also good luck hiding three 90 thousand pound steel bricks from a radar.

>>34639786
>syrian pilots
Rimon 20 shows that arab pilots are better than russians. That's the long and short of it, no way around.

>>34639760
This is the one thing that vatniks always seem to forget. They will scream to high heaven that Israeli fighters got hit hard (true) during the wars with the various Arab states but then be completely silent when people remind them that eventually the Israelis smartened up and destroyed the IADS (which was very sophisticated at the time), which led to them winning the war after nearly capturing Damascus and Cairo.

>>34639764
>considering that soviets lost only about 330 migs those numbers are pretty questionable
That's more than just Soviet Aircraft, it's Korean and Chinese. The USSR didn't want to stretch themselves to far and potentially escalate the situation.

File: I came here to propel bitches.jpg (121KB, 1280x576px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1280x576px

>>34638939
Which is why American/British engines are chosen for every application outside of the Russian Federation and China, because they're hard to maintain and oh so inferior to Russian engines.
Post the Russian equivalent to this.

>>34640165
Reminder that even a tiny island used as a prototype for America has a better aviation industry than Russia does.

>>34639889
the first thing it's rather about the general change in tactics, when sams lost a large part of their power they had held since the vietnam war

as for the numbers, you know, i met a guy recently on the internet, on the ru warthunder forum, lol, he was a historian who some years ago wanted to write a book about the korean war with a honest attempt to evaluate the aircraft losses for the both sides (i guess he didn't even attempt to get an access to the chinese archives though), he said he got an access to the russian archives but couldn't get an access to the american ones so it all eventually didn't fruit

the numbers differ wildly and people usually pick w/e they like, it's like that for the most of the battles/wars, till maybe very recent times

anyway this whole discussion is silly, the pilots who are now dead or very old have nothing to do with "proving" anything about the modern air force even if there was some data (which doesn't really look as the case) that they indeed were better, it's just a pure wankery; you can't prove such a thing, you can suspect/suggest/estimate it by the other factors like current combat experience, training and the preferred tactics. anyway i don't think the personal skill matters that much nowadays when it's all up to the tactics and technical advantage

>>34639826
you really praise one ambush and destroying of 5 planes to the high havens. anyway i already posted the brief chronicle of what was then (russians deployed more planes, shot down some jews)

>>34638330
You seem rather flustered yourself, sunshine. You do know it's a weapons board?

File: image.jpg (60KB, 694x749px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 694x749px

>>34632503
Planes are stupid.

>>34638939
Ivan isn't even trying today

sad!

>>34642215
planes are adorable -_-
they are among the best creations of humanity

>>34640392
>russians deployed more planes, shot down some jews
Russia managed to down Skyhawks in a trap with false SAM sites.
When it was fighters vs fighters, the Jews and Arabs where superior to russians.

>>34642335
w/e makes you sleep better

>>34642358
>sleep better
A cup of Rooibos makes me sleep better. The fact that russians can't do war is just something that uppity vatniks needs reminding of.

File: image.jpg (93KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 500x500px

>>34642335

File: 1478985437584.jpg (430KB, 1000x664px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 1000x664px

>>34632755
>flanker just manipulates itself in the air like it's hovering in place
The fact that this is real and possible makes me think we're either in the future or fantasy is slowly becoming real

>>34642648
The whole "soviet revenge" is dubious as fuck to begin with, no evidence other than a book which if you read the book referenced in the wiki there is just a mention an "ambush". From the looks of it, Israel lost no further planes to air action in 1970 after Rimon 20.
Could it be another case of butthurt vatniks editing Wikipedia to cover russias failures?
It would not be the first time.

File: 3343.jpg (36KB, 258x568px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 258x568px

>>34642913
>when it was fighters vs fighters
>rimon 20

>>34642917
>MiG-21
>Mirage III
>F-4
All fighters.

>>34642335
>>34642358

The Russia Internet Defence Force have trouble identifying types of aircraft and missions, this is why they still believe a Ukrainian Su-25 shot down MH-17.

>>34638259
>Germany is filled with sandniggers shooting people up
>still 20 times lower murder rates than Russia

Even Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq were safer before the wars. So even if the refugees completely replaced the German population, it still wouldn't be as bad as Russia.

>>34638628
kek

What really makes me laugh though is how you point out how shitty it is to live in Russia, and they try to point fingers to the USA or the west. Like Pyotr, you live in your own shit, I don't. Do something about it rather than pretending it's normal to live in your own shit.

>>34632808
>Ivan is so drunk out of any semblance of reason, it takes 8 F-35s, an AWACS and additional 8 allied ships all interconnected to even confirm that American pilots are not hallucinating what they're seeing on the radar

Sounds about right.

>>34634049
>klikni za veću

paluba.info I presume?

>>34632503
Maybe when more than 3 are built we can start talking.
Atleast it doesn't have front wings(to tires to remember what they are called.
Planes are dumb anyway, helis are better.

Holy fuck the cringe ITT. Read some fucking books, all of you.

>>34643106
This is /k/ where Wikipedia is king.
What was most cringeworthy in your opinion and why don't you refute it with your book learning?

>>34634109
>I used a video game made by Americans to simulate data which is secret, to show American superiority.

I wonder how they plot in the actual data of the F-35 or indeed any new equipment which is secret.

(They make it up)

>>34643106
Only books that agree with you right?

>>34639742
That`s more or less correct for the spherical engagement in the vacuum. To make it somewhat more realistic, add the following rules into equation:
US side have Patriots and whatever AA missiles it can pack on their ships (google the range) and have to strike targets inside the russian territory. Russians, on the other hand, have S-300,S-400 and S-500 (remove the last ones, if we are talking about immediate conflict, but they will be there in a few years), plus those AA sites, are additionaly protected by med to short range AA systems (Tor`s, BUKs, Pantsir`s, etc.) That means, that invading force just can`t guarantee the absence of AA missiles, without glassing the whole territory (which makes airstrike stupid overkill, at best).

>>34643160
Chinkniks tend to use the same game to prove that chinas single carrier can defeat two US CBGs at the same time, horribly gimping the US to get a Chinese victory.
The "The scenario still stands" meme is from one of these chinks using video games.

>>34643694
Is this your way of saying you know the argument is god damn stupid? Or are you saying that people here talking about the capabilities are Chinese or what?

>>34643868
>Is this your way of saying you know the argument is god damn stupid
Treating CMANO as anything else than a game is stupid, yes.

>>34643600
>(remove the last ones, if we are talking about immediate conflict, but they will be there in a few years),
S-400 is in service and the S-500 is an ABM system.
>That means, that invading force just can`t guarantee the absence of AA missiles, without glassing the whole territory
That's what SEAD IS, man. Not to mention that an IADS has never stopped any aerial force from being able to operate. Russian ground forces are at a huge disadvantage.

>>34644149
Alright good, thought I had you misunderstood there anon.

>>34639519
Funniest comeback ITT desu