Raptor vs Eagle

Martin Hotze wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:02:47 GMT, Neil Gould wrote:

and China has no need to attack the US. China only has to wait, time is on
their side. they will (and already are) outnumber the US.


The issue is Taiwan. In principle it's similar to East and West Germany
in that everyone would like reunification but on somewhat opposite
terms. The Taiwanese would prefer to wait for the Communists to
liberalize more, while the Communists see it as a matter of national
sovereignty.

The key here is time. If the PLA can land large numbers of troops on
Taiwan, they win. If they can't, the mainland government will go up in
flames. So an invasion needs to be a pretty sure thing which requires
high force superiority. The longer it takes to get across, the more US
reinforcements arrive and the harder the job gets.

Every F-22 we have forces the Chinese to buy/build 5-10 more
conventional fighters, which takes time and money. The longer it takes
for the PLA to achieve sufficient superiority, the more time everyone
has to find a political solution.

I can understan where resentment of the US comes from and it's not
entirely misplaced. But anyone who thinks a world where the current
Chinese leadership will produce a net increase in human rights is in
for a real nasty surprise.

-cwk.

Every F-22 we have forces the Chinese to buy/build 5-10 more
conventional fighters, which takes time and money. The longer it takes
for the PLA to achieve sufficient superiority, the more time everyone
has to find a political solution.

.... and the weaker one side gets w.r.t the other. So it's not about
finding a (political) solution, it's politics to enourage one solution
over another.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Icebound wrote:
"W P Dixon" wrote in message
news
Hmmmm,
...
As for the Raptor it is a kick butt aircraft,


We had one once sigh: (search google for "avro arrow").

But somebody told us to quit the program and cut up the six that existed,
for scrap. Probably because it was 20 years ahead of anything *they* had at
the time. So our aerospace program died overnight, and most of the
aerospace jobs and the aerospace brains moved someplace else, guess where.

The nominal reason for the program shutdown was cost, but not too many
believe it.

So don't let that happen to you, otherwise Canada might get a chance to
start a military-aircraft program back up....with your people and your
technology. Or maybe China will ;-).


Yes that was a sad end for a great aircraft!

But he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express

Please. If you're going to start using bad language like that, I'm
leaving...

;-)

("Holiday Inn Express" is the perfect example of marketing prowess
overcoming awful, over-priced accommodations...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

But he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express

Jay Honeck wrote:
Please. If you're going to start using bad language like that, I'm
leaving...
;-)
("Holiday Inn Express" is the perfect example of marketing prowess
overcoming awful, over-priced accommodations...)

Isn't that how you got into the hotel business?

"Hey, let's get out of the newspaper business and buy a hotel!"

"Have you ever operated a hotel before?"

"No, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night!"

REALLY BIG :-))))

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:12:19 +0000, Viperdoc wrote:

I suspect the "superiority" is largely a function of better radar- the

Known as "stealth radar". Sounds wierd, but one of the new technologies
that came out of the F-22 project is the ability to actively track targets
via radar from a stealthy plane, while remaining "hidden" to enemy radar.
So yes, it is largely a function of a better radar system.

It is only known that "stealth radar" exists and is on the F-22. Exactly
what that means or how it works is not something they are openly sharing.

ability to track more targets at the same time or from a greater distance.
Most of these shots were probably beyond visual range AMRAAM launches, not
1v1 dogfighting.

This is true. Having said that, with the shoot down of a 117, enemies
have been able to get a boost in stealth technologies from the scavenged
parts. Russia is known to have their own steath program in the works, to
which parts of the downed 117 is known have have gone. Countries in
Europe are also known to have their own stealth programs underway.
Countries such as France and Russia are both known to contribute
significant technologies to rogue nations; where Iraq is a classic
example. Long story short, in a decade or two, is is possible rogue
nations will have the technology to present a real 1v1 threat. After all,
if neither side can be see on radar at range, that greatly decreases
contact range. In turn, it greatly incrases the odds where 1v1 dog
fighting becomes critical.


On the other hand, if they merged, it might be a lot different fight.

I'm not sure what that means.

Greg

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 13:03:45 +0200, Martin Hotze wrote:

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:52:39 -0500, "JJS" jschneider@remove socks
cebridge.net wrote:

The most amazing thing was watching the raptor fire missiles while the
airplane was rolling very fast. I've never seen a jet do that. The
ability to super cruise and the vectored thrust would make this the best
fighter in the world without all of the electronic wizardry and stealth
capability.

and what are you (the USA) going to do with it? you already can have
world domination with the military arsenal you currently have. There is
no logic reason for even more military power.

#m

That's actually not true. Technologically, our primary fighters are on
par with what is readily available around the world. And, let's not
forget that the F16, F14, and others, are available on the world market.
Let's not forget that Russia has their top technolgies on the market;
which are on par with current US offerings. Heck, even European
countries have some top notch technologies on the market. For now, the
line of deliniation is a small gap is US technology, mostly by means of
support infrastruture, and a large gap provided by superior training. Any
nation is capable of closing the training/pilot gap; especially with
Russia so willing to provide those services.

The F-22 is designed to address tomorrow's world today, not the other way
around. Do you know what the world holds in a decade from now? How about
two? China is looking to upset the world both militarily and economically
within the next decade. What will the world look like in two? China is
not exactly the nicest guys on the block.

People who say the world has no need for the F-22 need to stop looking
down at their feet and try to look over the horizon. With the BEST of
luck, the F-22 will be a huge waste of money. Remember, weapons systems
serve two roles. One, lethality. Two, deterence. If the F-22 serves
only a deterence role, it's paid back its investiment.

From a technology perspective, China is growing rapidly. In less than a
decade, China is now able to design and build their own CPUs which are on
par with Intel's Pentium; much of which was reaped from technology
publically available from places like the US and Europe. They are rapidly
closing the technology gap to build something on par with the Pentium II.
Their DSP (Digital Signal Processor) capabilities are rapidly growing as
well. In case you don't know, DSPs are used for everything from basic
radio to complex radar/sonar systems and even complex digitial encryption
communication infrastruture.

With available technology of Pentium II-class processors, China will
finally be able to create super computers in mass which are on par with
what the US had in the 70s, 80s, and even into the early 90s.
Remember, the F117 was built using 1960s technology, most of which was
done on a slide rule; thus the very odd shape. This opens the doors for
all sorts of new technolgies; radar/sonar, stealth, high energy physics,
new classes of encryption, new classes of decryption, new manufacturing
technologies, higher quality military equipment, more powerful explosives,
silent subs, etc....the list is practically endless...and they have no
shortage of labor to build on what is already available in the market
place (skills and both hard and soft technology).

Lastly, let's take a look at some numbers. Ford spent a BILLION dollars
to develop the Ford Tarus. In turn, they were able to spread their
investment over many, many, many units (I don't recall the sales figures).
The Tarus was developed in what, the early 90s? I don't know what this is
in today's inflated dollar, but I do know that's a lot of bucks on
something that is simple and VERY well understood. After all, the ICE and
automobile are fairly well understood, even in the 90s. On the other
hand, almost everthing in the F-22 is brand new, leading edge technology.
The number of units on which they can spread their development cost is
very low; in the hundreds.

The technology that comes out of the F-22 program will in turn, go into
new plane development. As a US citizen, I understand these are expensive.
It does upset me that the project seems to be growing without bounds.
Having said that, I do understand that the resulting technology will feed
into other programs for decades to come. I also understand that their
technology is helping to keep the entire world safe.


Greg

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:i%wOe.2147$k92.1847@trndny05...
gregg wrote:

That 8 to one ratio was not against planes of equal capability. You
cannot
count on the bad guys having planes only as capable as the F-15/F-16.

Well, at the present time, you can count on them flying something inferior
to
the F-15/F-16. Given the economic situation in Russia, it doesn't look
like
Sukhoi or MiG is going to be changing that anytime soon.

Really? When has the economic situation in Russia/USSR ever mattered much in
the past? (And, NO, 1991 is only an example that lasted barely ten years).

"john smith" wrote in message
. ..
Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
"john smith" wrote in message
...

George Patterson wrote:

gregg wrote:


That 8 to one ratio was not against planes of equal capability. You
cannot count on the bad guys having planes only as capable as the
F-15/F-16.


Well, at the present time, you can count on them flying something
inferior to the F-15/F-16. Given the economic situation in Russia, it
doesn't look like Sukhoi or MiG is going to be changing that anytime
soon.

So where can I find out how F-15/F-16/F-18 do against MiG-29, Su-31,
Mirage, Eurofighter, Griffon?



Well in the Desert Shield/Storm F-15s kicked the crap out of Iraqi
Mig-29s.
Including one kill where a 15C literally maneuvered the -29 into the
ground.

That doesn't count!!!
I mean against a pilot from a real country, one that has been trained to
think for themselves.

That'd be England...sorta.

Jay Honeck wrote:

Please. If you're going to start using bad language like that, I'm
leaving...

Promises, promises ...... :-)

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.