Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

RUSSIANS BUILD FAR-BETTER -WARBIRDS than the USA! Why it is so hard to understand, ?


  • Please log in to reply
593 replies to this topic

#101 American Guy

American Guy

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 26 April 2003 - 04:36 PM

PS, you suck
  • 0

#102 Atheris

Atheris

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

Posted 26 April 2003 - 05:43 PM

Anyone know the number of US shuttle flights compared to number of Russian flights?
  • 0

#103 Gunnett

Gunnett

    Registered User

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 26 April 2003 - 07:54 PM

Boy.. You got us good with that one! If your were Russian, I would remind you that you guys don't have a working shuttle and have never walked on the moon. Wasn't it 1969 when Neil Armstrong first took steps upon the moon surface and no other nation other than the USA has ever done it or was that 100 tons of flaming junk the Russian space staion called Mir?

Originally posted by Bulov
Did you mean -"100 tons of junk hurdling toward the earth in flames then crashing"?

Yes I saw it on our TV and the poor bastards inside of the US made junk,.

Was there a bloodsucker among them?


  • 0

#104 Guest_usgi_*

Guest_usgi_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 April 2003 - 11:27 PM

it has already come to the point that it doesn't matter how good the "enemy" (russian) planes are. the us armed forces had been continuously at war ever since i joined the service and most of us are experienced veterans trained in combined arms. we use combined arms to amplify the strength of each system and make up for the weaknesses of our weapons systems.:o
  • 0

#105 Guest_usgi_*

Guest_usgi_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 April 2003 - 01:39 AM

Coming soon...

UCAV - unmanned combat air vehicle. launchable from carriers, submarines and bombers. pure death and destruction from a g-force resistant package. will survive maneuvers that can puree a human pilot. what does the russians have again?
  • 0

#106 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 27 April 2003 - 03:13 AM

if we offered $100000 for any pilot from russia to land his plane at the nearest US base, how long would we have to wait?



I think not very long.....
  • 0

#107 Gunnett

Gunnett

    Registered User

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 03:42 AM

What are you talking about? Offering them money to land their plane at a US airfield, for what? We already know everything about the damn things. They exported a lot of their stuff to other countries, a little CIA money gots us a few. The real secret of air-to-air combat isn't the plane. its the missles and radar systems. Kill them before they see you is the name of the game. Hell, the Russians have to sell rides to American tourists for $10,000 just to get enough cash to buy jet fuel to get some training in. As much as the Russians hate to admit it, they new damn well that the United States was never going to attack them first.

It might surprise you but the idea of the F-117 came from the Soviets. The guy who came up with the idea of the reflecting panels was russian and his idea were published (unclassified) in the former CCCP by the military. They didn't think it would ever work....

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that many US companies don't already have many of the top soviet designers on their unoffical pay rolls.
  • 0

#108 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 27 April 2003 - 04:35 AM

I watched today a very interesting show on the Discovery Wings channel about how the US aquired a Yak23 and a Mig15 in the 50's for flight testing and evaluation.
  • 0

#109 Frunze

Frunze

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 08:52 AM

Captian Insane

"if we offered $100000 for any pilot from russia to land his plane at the nearest US base, how long would we have to wait?

I think not very long....."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


First of all I wondering who "we" is and second, wher ewopuld this money come from? USA is already bankrupt. Finally, if the Russians offered USA pilots $5 to land on Russian airfields, how long do you think they would have to wait?

Of course the same goes for China and now USA fascists have Germany to content with as well.

Porr fascists, I would almost feel sorry for them if....they were not wicked facists.
  • 0

#110 Guest_justicemoor_*

Guest_justicemoor_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 April 2003 - 10:15 AM

Originally posted by Brendon
Pole,

I hope the Russians make better planes than tractors....lol

I bought one in '93 when I had a Landscaping business. Solidly built thing it was. Diesel, 25 HP, rear spindle for a slasher. Cheap at $2,500.
.
.
.

Cost me $1500 in repairs before I got rid of it after 3 months.



I think Russia could make a good car. I once bought and loved a Yugo (is Yogoslavia a part of Russia?) which I thought was a magnicant car. It was very inexpensive and I managed to drive it for 100,000 miles.

I got many laughs out of the car. Someone drove their Yugo over a long bridge in Michigan and the car was blown off the bridge. When my boss said she was going to take a vacation that would require her to go over the bridge, I offered her the use of my Yugo.

Some Yugoslavian uprising destroyed the Yugo factory and I was not able to buy another one. Is this a case where a fight to dominate property destroyed what made the property worth dominating?
  • 0

#111 Pole

Pole

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 28 April 2003 - 02:10 AM

Mig 31??????????? a very fast very deadly BIRD

Mikoyan MiG-31MXI
.
"Type: Interceptor

Powerplants: MiG-31MXI - Two 182.3kN (41,000 lb) with afterburning Aviadvigatel (now Solovyev) D-40F6 turbofans.

Performance: MiG-31MXI - Max speed Mach 3.4 or 3600km/h (1944kt), max speed at sea level
1800km/h () max cruising speed at altitude Mach 2.82, economical cruising speed Mach 1.02.
Time to 32,800ft 5min 54sec. Service ceiling 87,600ft. Combat radius with four R-33 AAMs and max internal fuel at Mach 2.82 900 km (), radius with four R-33s and external fuel at Mach 1.02 1700 km). Ferry range with external fuel 4000 km
(). Endurance with external fuel 4hr 35mm.

Weights: MiG-31 - Empty 21,825kg (48,115lb), max takeoff 56,200kg ().

Dimensions: MiG-31 - Wing span 13.46m (44ft 2in), length 22.69m (74ft 5in), height 6.15m (20ft 2in). Wing area 61.6m2 (663.0sq ft).

Accommodation: Pilot and weapon systems operator in tandem.

Standard Armament: One GSh-6-23 23mm cannon. Six R-33 (M-9 'Amos') long range AAMs carried under the fuselage. Four underwing hard-points (two earlier) can carry two R-40T (AA-6 'Acrid') AAMs on inner pylons and four R-60 (AA-8 'Aphid') AAMs on outboard
pylons (carried two in tandem).

Stealth Systems: Plasma

Frame of this bird is made of Titanium Wolfram alloy, indestructible!





Find American bird with this performance, goood luck!
  • 0

#112 Miss Astrojet

Miss Astrojet

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 4456 posts

Posted 28 April 2003 - 04:46 AM

The Mig-25 is a flying bathtub. Our pilots as well as the British and Israeli's are the best in the world AWACs or no AWACs. They'll run circles around any fool dumb enough to confront them.:D
  • 0

#113 Miss Astrojet

Miss Astrojet

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 4456 posts

Posted 28 April 2003 - 04:48 AM

Pole do you even know what plasma is? Hint-it's not at a blood bank.
  • 0

#114 Gunnett

Gunnett

    Registered User

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 28 April 2003 - 12:02 PM

So what is it? I wondering, does it shield all those missiles the russian designed to hang on the outside of the aircraft? Lets assume for a second that the Russians decided to attack the USA. How many of these high $$$$$ planes do they have? I'm betting they wouldn't have a lot. Do the fuel tankers also have this system. Seems to me that a figherjet is worthless if its out of gas. Russian will never attack the United States because of the return firepower it will bring upon her and they same thing is true the other way. What's left, the US gets attacked by another nation flying these russian build planes. You have the same problems as above but the US doesn't have to worry about a nuclear reply. If it got to the point of war, the US would destroy all these planes while they were on the ground. If they did get off the ground they still need gas and a place to land. I'm betting the US has plans for the worlds best jet fighter locked away, but why should they build it since it already has the best airforce in the world. Just cause you can build something doesn't mean you should.... or will.

The problem with the Russians is they should be building some low cost Plasma big screen T.V's for export. :)

Originally posted by Miss Astrojet
Pole do you even know what plasma is? Hint-it's not at a blood bank.


  • 0

#115 Guns22

Guns22

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 28 April 2003 - 05:48 PM

You know The shuttle is not junk, The russian shuttle is better, but its not in operation, because you dont have the money.

Lets assume the mig35 is better.

We have 10000s of planes, we could send, f-15s, f-16s, f-18s, f-22s, harriers, f-14s at you all at once.

Not to mention we have more bombers then some countries have soldiers (lol lil countries)

My point is We are better, i dont give a flying **** if your plane is better, our air force IS BETTER.

oh and your soyuz capsules, have had 2 accidents during rentry, did you forget when the parachute didnt open? or how about when you lost cabin preasure? or oxygen or something.

Ethier way you have had 2 soyuz accidents, we have had 2 shuttle accidents.
  • 0

#116 publius

publius

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2914 posts

Posted 28 April 2003 - 06:00 PM

DIE, STUPID THREAD, DIE!!!
  • 0

#117 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 29 April 2003 - 02:10 AM

?
  • 0

#118 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 29 April 2003 - 02:15 AM

Hey Gun 22,
"WE"????? here you go again

"preasure"?
"Ethier"?

for a Yankee your English is atrocious!

hehehe
  • 0

#119 Guns22

Guns22

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 29 April 2003 - 03:31 AM

hell yeah my english sucks

lol
  • 0

#120 James_A

James_A

    Registered User

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 29 April 2003 - 03:49 AM

Type: Interceptor

These are the Specs provided by russian site,

http://www.aeronauti...vs/mig31-01.htm

>>
Powerplants: MiG-31 - Two 151 .9kN (34,170lb) with afterburning Aviadvigatel (now Solovyev) D-30F6 turbofans.

Performance: MiG-31 - Max speed Mach 2.83 or 3000km/h (1,620kt), max speed at sea level 1500km/h (810kt) max cruising speed at altitude Mach 2.35, economical cruising speed Mach 0.85. Time to 32,800ft 7mm 54sec. Service ceiling 67,600ft. Combat radius with four R-33 AAMs and max internal fuel at Mach 2.35 720km (388nm), radius with four R-33s and external fuel at Mach 0.85 1400km (755nm). Ferry range with external fuel 3300km (1780nm). Endurance with external fuel 3hr 35mm.

Weights: MiG-31 - Empty 21,825kg (48,115lb), max takeoff 46,200kg (101 ,850lb).

Dimensions: MiG-31 - Wing span 13.46m (44ft 2in), length 22.69m (74ft 5in), height 6.15m (20ft 2in). Wing area 61.6m2 (663.0sq ft).
>>


You will notice its max speed is Mach 2.83. The statistics pole has been providing is a lie.

This is actually rather slow, as the U.S. Blackbird was attaining speeds far above this in 1976.

The U.S. Blackbird set a speed record of Mach 3.3 in 1976, which still hasn't been broken by the Russians.

-A cruise speed of Mach 3.3 has never been achieved by a Russian airplane.

-The fastest rocket powered plane has been recorded as the U.S x-15 A-2, in 1967, at a speed of mach 6.72 .


Since then, the US classified Aurora has been developed. for the past 25 years the U.S. has been working on it. Speeds are rumored to be at least mach 5, but may be as high as mach 8.

The Mig 42 was developed to combat the F-22 which the Russian sicientists unanimously agree was far superior to the Mig 31.

The Mig 42 is still in development. The f-22 was finished many years ago. Its successor is now in the works.


Its also important to note that the stealth bomber, and the f-117 stealth fighter were both devloped by 1977. Just imagine what the US has 25 years later.......
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru