Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues
Not to defend that typical bit of tripe but browsing around there I ran into this actually brilliant take on US foreign policy insanity https://nationalinterest.org/blog/skeptics/understanding-failure-us-foreign-policy-albright-doctrine-60477GarryB wrote:Which just goes to show there is not much on the national interest website worth reading.
Isos wrote:Would be nice if they upgrade one of the t-50 prototypes to naval variant. And test it in Crimea before Kuznetsov comes back anf then test from the carrier.
.As Americans, Moss and Vest sarcastically advised Moscow to continue pouring money Isos Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:00 pm
kumbor wrote:Isos wrote:Would be nice if they upgrade one of the t-50 prototypes to naval variant. And test it in Crimea before Kuznetsov comes back anf then test from the carrier.
Construction changes for naval aircraft are far more serious! They need different materials, rust proof from the influence of seawater and spray, much strenghtened undercarriage, etc.
GarryB wrote:The west continually blames Russian troll farms for various things.
This pretty much essentially guarantees that the west has been actively funding their own troll farms likely for the last decade or so, and this sort of thing is the result... all those people paid to post shit... means you have to expect more shit to be posted.
Their main problem is that there are westerners with some integrity and brains that post things complaining about the shit in the west... not because they are paid to do so, but because they are part of the west and they want to see it fixed and working properly... there is no point for the west to destroy Russia and China to then collapse itself when it has no more big power enemies to fight... what would american politicians complain about if they couldn't mention Russia or China... wow they would have to deal with their own problems... and people would see they are just as shit at dealing with those as they are with dealing with Russia and China who are both developing and getting stronger despite and sometimes because of western actions...
d_taddei2 wrote:Views on this article. Hmmmmm
"Chinese military experts praised the Russian Su-35, but said it was unsuitable for air combat"
http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2020/05/russian-su-35-lost-against-j-16-and-j.html?m=1
JohninMK wrote:d_taddei2 wrote:Views on this article. Hmmmmm
"Chinese military experts praised the Russian Su-35, but said it was unsuitable for air combat"
http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2020/05/russian-su-35-lost-against-j-16-and-j.html?m=1
Love it. The F-35 performs badly compared to our jets but if the price was right we'd buy some more.
d_taddei2 wrote:Views on this article. Hmmmmm
"Chinese military experts praised the Russian Su-35, but said it was unsuitable for air combat"
http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2020/05/russian-su-35-lost-against-j-16-and-j.html?m=1
Big_Gazza wrote:d_taddei2 wrote:Views on this article. Hmmmmm
"Chinese military experts praised the Russian Su-35, but said it was unsuitable for air combat"
http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2020/05/russian-su-35-lost-against-j-16-and-j.html?m=1
No sources in this "article", so no evidence that any of these claims are genuine, and one of the last places I would go to to find honest appraisal of the Su-35 would be some non-descript Indonesian website. Pfftt...
"However, the fighter has flaws, and its avionics system is not very developed, so it is completely devoid of perspectives."
Dafuq? Seriously?
Big_Gazza wrote:d_taddei2 wrote:Views on this article. Hmmmmm
"Chinese military experts praised the Russian Su-35, but said it was unsuitable for air combat"
http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2020/05/russian-su-35-lost-against-j-16-and-j.html?m=1
No sources in this "article", so no evidence that any of these claims are genuine, and one of the last places I would go to to find honest appraisal of the Su-35 would be some non-descript Indonesian website. Pfftt...
"However, the fighter has flaws, and its avionics system is not very developed, so it is completely devoid of perspectives."
Dafuq? Seriously?
I don't really think Russia would see any RED if the Finns buy Gripens.
They already have 55 F-18s. A country like Finland cannot realisticly counter Russia on its own. They buy weapons to form alliances. While Finland is not a member of NATO, they have not joined "officially" out of respect to Russia not wanting a NATO nation on its borders.
Finland joined Germany in attacking the USSR in WWII. There were clearly some difficult conditions negotiated that allowed Finland to not be occupied by Russia after WWII, including some significant reparitions.
The Finns I would say are an unofficial NATO member and have co-opertion agreements with NATO, but the red line is official membership. Finland cannot purchase any non-nuclear weapons that can actually counter Russia.
That is the reality, similar to Canada NZ and Oz. If these relatively advanced nations really wanted independant security, the only option would be nuclear weapons.
As for Gripen, I still say its very low cost to operate. "Only" $4700 per flight hour according to Janes. Also the Czechs are extending the lease when they are pretty broke.
Finland does not have 55 F-18s to counter Russia, they are for the alliance with USA. Maybe they will buy the SAAB-Boeing fighter based on the Tx...of F-18 Superhornets like Germany because alignment with Germany is also desirable.
With this reasoning no country with a smaller armed forces then Russia should spend any money on its defence.
The idea of Finland and Swedens defence during the cold war was to have such large defence that it would not be worth attacking them. A modern fighter a large part of that.
And yes why should Russia care about Finland buying Gripens from semi-neutral Sweden when they are flying US made F-18s today.
Views on this article. Hmmmmm
"Chinese military experts praised the Russian Su-35, but said it was unsuitable for air combat"
Sujoy wrote:U.S propaganda has ensured that several gullible leaders across Asia, Europe and Africa believe that US weapons are the very best available. Nothing could be further from the truth.
OTOH U.S government and it media spends billions to showcase Russian military H/W in poor light the world over.
Ergo, we can start a thread where we identify the technological issues with western military hardware. So that at least the people who visit this forum realizes that U.S military H/W is anything but invincible.
d_taddei2 wrote: And then the Western weapons come with a lot of red tape and restrictions and a massive ongoing cost along with political conditions.
It is easy to trash talk Russian jets, but they get the shit done.
Isos wrote:It is easy to trash talk Russian jets, but they get the shit done.
Not that easy. They have provided 0 proof till today.
Russia has provided images of a f-22 being intercepted, stories about su-35 harrassing f-18 in WVR "fight" in the east, cideo of the radar working at 400km. They use it in syria for about 5 years now and incident with the engines.
Where are chinese proofs that their shit is worth something ? They even buy su-35 for patroling the hotest zones (in terms of tension) where they face japan and US. Where are the j16 and j10 ? They use them to watch their own population. Their missiles use r-77 technology. J16 is a total copy of su-27UB using copies of russian missiles. They have nothing to be proud of.
J-10 exists thanks to israeli who sold them their own design of the Lavi. Their IR missile is just a copy of israeli missile which is a copy of US missile.
I could keep like that for all day long.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Isos