Star Four One

Not just Poland - the World.

I never said otherwise RKSL Rock, I know the history of the Raptor. I've followed it since the ATF. I was responding to the ludacris PR that Walker trampled in with suggesting Tranche 2 Eurofighters obliderated the 'undertrained' American raptors. Besides his, also ludacris sources, he throws in the "stealth no longer works". I'd like to think theres nothing more to be said.

Walker, thats what you call Eurofighter PR, plenty of it, considering the mess it has made throughout development. Tranche 2 a/c in 06.. Who are you kidding Walker? :rolleyes: ---------- Post added at 06:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:45 PM ---------- Nicholas, your completely right. They are running on "older" technology. However in the aircraft industry it's not so easy to just snap in a Ipad with the right configs. It seems each year we get a glimpse at another cool toy. :)

Your completely Clueless DM, (keep trolling, your good at it) Theres only so many times you can shoot down F-X before it becomes a waste of JP8. Here's a snippet from Dozer22 on Fencecheck about the Raptor "kill"... "The Hornet "snap" shot - good story. Happened here at Langley. It was a stock, combat configured F-22 flying a BFM (dogfighting) sortie against an airshow configured, i.e. squeeky clean, not combat configured or loaded, Super Hornet (not at all representative of how it performs with 8 pylons, an EA pod and 4-6 or missiles hanging off the rails and probably a fuel tank or two or their out of gas real quick...). It started from a 9000 foot line abreast 300 knot setup (which AF pilots never fly) where they turned into each other at the "fights on" call. It's not a scenario we fly because we never find ourselves in those parameters, we try to set up realistic parameters we expect to see in combat - otherwise the lessons learned aren't applicable and while it might be fun it's not a good use of scarce training time (I don't know if that's a setup the Navy flies or it might just have been a quick attempt to get a last engagement in if they were low on gas - I don't have that info). The Hornet pilot gave up everything he had to point at the Raptor and take a snap shot - it was NOT a tracking shot (stabilized and enough bullets to cause a kill), it was about 2 or 3 frames (many more required to cause a kill - OK - for you skeptics there's always the golden BB but let me finish first...). The AF pilot honored the training rules we're all supposed to abide by, they've been written in blood because pilots have been killed in these scenarios so our training rules look to prevent those scenarios by causing guys to quit manuevering for the shot to prevent a mid-air collision. With greater than a 135 aspect angle and inside of 9000 feet we're supposed to avoid pure or lead pursuit to avoid that head on collision, inside that range at our tactical speeds there's not enough time to react to prevent a collision once you realize it's going to happen. The Navy pilot completely blew off that rule, the AF pilot honored it, the Navy pilot pulled lead pursuit all the way into the high aspect (greater than the 135 degree gun shot rule) snap shot, the AF pilot lagged off to prevent the mid-air collision potential, the Navy pilot was still on the trigger inside the 1000 foot rule (we're supposed to avoid getting inside of 1000 feet from each other to also help prevent mid-air collisions), attempting to get the snap shot, he's inside the 1000 foot range with the trigger on, flies within about 200 feet of the Raptor (remember who's backed off to honor the training rules), and dang near kills himself and the Raptor pilot and causing what would have been one of the worst fighter to fighter disasters in recorded history. I've had that happen twice to me when I was flying the Eagle as a weapons officer (close enough to hear very loud engine noise and I figured I was dead both times, but God wasn't ready to take me yet), and both times I knocked off the fight, made the guy fly home, busted him on the ride and he had to explain to me and the boss why he was being stupid. That is the ONLY gun shot video I have ever heard of or seen from ANY Hornet engagement, ever. And it was a hugely B.S. and completely boneheaded act as you can see from the actual circumstances. In the real world - the Hornet never saw the Raptor and he was dead w/o ever knowing what hit him - that's the cold hard truth, like it or not - sorry if you're a Hornet fan but that's how all of our engagements with Hornets, Tomcats, Eagles, Vipers, etc. have gone. You would be amused if I had time to tell you how the hundreds of engagements went I've had with aircraft of all types, the biggest problem we have now is getting anyone to fly with us because they get no training, they never see us and they just die. Unless we promise to do some within visual range manuevering with them where we start and can see each other at the start, no one (Navy or AF) wants to fly vs. the Raptor anymore - that alone ought to tell you what the truth is." ---------- Post added at 04:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:48 PM ---------- Didn't realize it opened up jobs, paved the way for new technology, kept bases and companies alive, keeping pilots alive... I can go on and on.. Mission rates are always climbing.. These aren't the last wars we will see, and as history has shown time and time again, we will see another one. ---------- Post added at 04:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:53 PM ---------- If you note the intercept pics, Raptors run with bags for that particular reason. ---------- Post added at 04:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:54 PM ---------- You can make all the hypothetical scenarios you want. But as a superpower, one would want to have field the best combat systems available to them.

Love the Armchair generals on these forums. DM, from your experience and expertise , what happened?

First thing I noticed. Would've been great to see some real puffy clouds..

If I can get my scanner working I'd post some screencaps. Check out a book called Viper's in the storm by Kieth Rosenkranz. There are uses of 3rd, 4th, and referencing 117's as 5th generation a/c. Keep in mind this is a Viper pilot that flew throughout Desert Storm using this terminology and was a EL and FL on numerous occassions; denoting he was no punk being sent oversea's. Of course I cant argue that the term "5th Generation" is being milked for every drop. Hell, half the people on these boards use it without even knowing what it signifies. ;)

That wasn't a question deserving of a direct answer. ;) Most engine blocks can't sustain supercruise. The PW 119 was designed with supercruise in mind. I'm sure we dont have to beat a dead horse over that one. ;) ROE's in restricted DACT scenario's. The Hornet you saw that gunned the Raptor did so after the terminate call. The T-38 was in the same postion. You don't send a Raptor into a training exercise with full fangs out. Thats a waste of training time and money. We already know the end results. Every bit of speed is essential in a combat enviroment. Could mean you have to delay a missile launch because your not in weapon parameters.

You know nothing about what you preach. Just like Baff. Cold war relic is a term used against design principles. Ever wonder why the Raptor isn't deployed to Iraq or Afganistan?

Hi Max, I see what he is saying, and I see what you are saying. Cool. Generation classification has been around since WW2. If you think it wasn't used during the 70's-80's with the LWF flyoff or the new air superiority fighter program (Eagle), you are greatly mistaken. Sure the Russkies may not view generation's within the same timeline, but both airforces have always classified their design ideologies. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread124336/pg1 ---------- Post added at 10:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 AM ---------- Massive scam? Please... :j:

Jesse Ventura wasn't a SEAL - he was part of UDT, which later became the SEALs'.

I'm sure they didn't call 'all in' when they decided to send the UAV in country.

If you were informed, you wouldn't make posts like these. When the Viper came to fruitation the same exact "marketing buzz" was used, as with previous airframes that were technologically superior to it's predecessors. The Raptor isn't JUST another a/c. It's the next generation of lessons learnt in a technological and ever changing dynamic battlefield.

Sure they are.. missions can be very dynamic (In Real life) and with the size and scale of ArmA2 I think they have a very real place without scaling them back. Do you think every flight is over a hour to ingress into target?

Whatever your smoking, I might start. Stealth will always be a card that will be played upon - the Raptor and F-35 are just another building block for the next Generation of a/c. Saddam operated one of the most heavily defended SAM networks on the earth, he had one of the largest active militaries, and he had a airforce - a big one. Funny, on Zero hour it was assumed allied air losses would be 40%. Which reminds me, I should get back to that other thread with your delightful response. Right after I finish my walkaround, and briefing. S41