Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
You are a very strange person TeeJay. I really don't see what your point is.
my air force is better than yours
- Thread starter s.norbury
- Start date
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Well I guess I do see it, but I think it's a completely stupid quibble.
How about if we replace 'many nations' with 'those nations who have reason to believe the US military may be planning on paying them a visit' in the quote above?
Does that take care of your concerns TeeJay?
How about if we replace 'many nations' with 'those nations who have reason to believe the US military may be planning on paying them a visit' in the quote above?
Does that take care of your concerns TeeJay?
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Meanwhile, on a perhaps more interesting note.
That paper by two PLA colonels I linked above is rather wider in scope than 'what do we do if the US comes to overthrow us'
It's talking in much broader terms about the changing nature of war, and the guerilla warfare case is just one of many that it discusses.
Having re-read it recently, I wonder if they wouldn't want to argue that the US has, by more or less unilaterally invading Iraq, thrown away what they seem to consider one of the US's most historically effective weapons, the ability to form and dominate international coalitions, and has in effect fallen back into the same sort of atavistic and historically increasingly redundant approach (which they characterise as hopelessly stupid blundering) which led Saddam to try to unilaterally annex Kuwait.
Or to put it another way, again in line with their thinking. The US has mistaken overwhelming purely military power, particularly air power, for something more powerful in real terms than it actually is, in comparison to exploiting international institutions, economics and so on in their national interests. That by behaving like Saddam, it's actually weakened its global position and to some extent at least, has undermined its basis for using much more effective techniques relying on coalitions, economic power and international institutions, by undermining those institutions, scaring the shit out of its allies, becoming increasingly toxic to ally with, getting its military machine bogged down and by going madly into debt to pay for their adventure in Iraq.
That paper by two PLA colonels I linked above is rather wider in scope than 'what do we do if the US comes to overthrow us'
It's talking in much broader terms about the changing nature of war, and the guerilla warfare case is just one of many that it discusses.
Having re-read it recently, I wonder if they wouldn't want to argue that the US has, by more or less unilaterally invading Iraq, thrown away what they seem to consider one of the US's most historically effective weapons, the ability to form and dominate international coalitions, and has in effect fallen back into the same sort of atavistic and historically increasingly redundant approach (which they characterise as hopelessly stupid blundering) which led Saddam to try to unilaterally annex Kuwait.
Or to put it another way, again in line with their thinking. The US has mistaken overwhelming purely military power, particularly air power, for something more powerful in real terms than it actually is, in comparison to exploiting international institutions, economics and so on in their national interests. That by behaving like Saddam, it's actually weakened its global position and to some extent at least, has undermined its basis for using much more effective techniques relying on coalitions, economic power and international institutions, by undermining those institutions, scaring the shit out of its allies, becoming increasingly toxic to ally with, getting its military machine bogged down and by going madly into debt to pay for their adventure in Iraq.
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
What I've seen of Hanson hasn't impressed me a bit. Seems like a witless neo-con cheerleader with a couple of fancy degrees.
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Here's a prime example.
http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson051106.html
Can you detect any awareness that the US is stuck in the middle of a horrible guerilla war that it has given absolutely no indication that it knows how to win or even extract itself from in one piece?
http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson051106.html
Can you detect any awareness that the US is stuck in the middle of a horrible guerilla war that it has given absolutely no indication that it knows how to win or even extract itself from in one piece?
G. Fieendish
Snark Hunter
Re:this thread
The Russian airforce is a "paper tiger" in that most of their fleet strength is now in "cold storage" awaiting either sale to a third party or scrapping....
The latest aircraft that they have access to, is the Mig-29K,
which at present is part of the Admiral Kuentsov's air wing...
Aircraft such as the Su-30 are now mainly aimed at the export market, such as Malaysia & India...
The U.S airforce, although far better trained than the Russian one, is now suffering from the decision made in the 80's to proceed with the F/A22-A Raptor, which at present costs some $380 Million per unit....
As a result, half of the existing B52-H strategic bomber force, & all of the F117A Nighthawk "stealth fighters" will have to be either scrapped or put into cold storage to pay for 2 Raptors....
The Russian airforce is a "paper tiger" in that most of their fleet strength is now in "cold storage" awaiting either sale to a third party or scrapping....
The latest aircraft that they have access to, is the Mig-29K,
which at present is part of the Admiral Kuentsov's air wing...
Aircraft such as the Su-30 are now mainly aimed at the export market, such as Malaysia & India...
The U.S airforce, although far better trained than the Russian one, is now suffering from the decision made in the 80's to proceed with the F/A22-A Raptor, which at present costs some $380 Million per unit....
As a result, half of the existing B52-H strategic bomber force, & all of the F117A Nighthawk "stealth fighters" will have to be either scrapped or put into cold storage to pay for 2 Raptors....
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Doesn't really matter how cheaply they can make the planes. If you haven't got the pilots to fly and fight in them then they're just a pile of spares.
The US is the only airforce at the moment that has a 'good' combination of a large number of very capable aircraft and a correspondingly large number of experienced pilots. The RAF specialises in particular roles, the French like to think that they have a 'world power' type airforce, but are actually on a similar footing to the RAF. The Chinese have numbers of aircraft and pilots, but the pilots aren't experienced and the aircraft aren't as capable. The Russians have plenty of aircraft, though generally in a poor state of readiness and they don't have the pilots available.
The US is the only airforce at the moment that has a 'good' combination of a large number of very capable aircraft and a correspondingly large number of experienced pilots. The RAF specialises in particular roles, the French like to think that they have a 'world power' type airforce, but are actually on a similar footing to the RAF. The Chinese have numbers of aircraft and pilots, but the pilots aren't experienced and the aircraft aren't as capable. The Russians have plenty of aircraft, though generally in a poor state of readiness and they don't have the pilots available.
likesfish
You can't park here sir
raf fast jet course is about 2 years could probably do it in 6 months but then you've basiclly got a cannon fodder pilot
plus add a few more years to get experiance and then you need to fly weekly so not cheap.
big stink when the yanks went to help with the tsunmami as the indonesians would'nt let them fy combat aircraft so the carrier went back into international waters.
if you have carrier based pilots they have to fly almost every day as landing a jet on a carrier at the best of times is a very dangerous thing to do
plus add a few more years to get experiance and then you need to fly weekly so not cheap.
big stink when the yanks went to help with the tsunmami as the indonesians would'nt let them fy combat aircraft so the carrier went back into international waters.
if you have carrier based pilots they have to fly almost every day as landing a jet on a carrier at the best of times is a very dangerous thing to do
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
Biggles pwnage
Jonti
what the dormouse said
OK, it's the USAF. Case closed.
Now let's look at this again, but from a different angle. Perhaps it doesn't matter. Ultimately you've got to control the ground. The poor man's airforce can help do that. So who's got the, uhh, best, so to speak?
Now let's look at this again, but from a different angle. Perhaps it doesn't matter. Ultimately you've got to control the ground. The poor man's airforce can help do that. So who's got the, uhh, best, so to speak?
Car bombs????
I reckon that if the US had the best airforce for the job it wished to perform, it would have been flying over Russian airspace long ago. As it happens the the Russians have prevented this and thus have the better force. This is based on the fact that the US seems to be interventionist in it's strategic desires whilst Russia has always been defensive (the afghanistan war was, imo, defensive)
I reckon that if the US had the best airforce for the job it wished to perform, it would have been flying over Russian airspace long ago. As it happens the the Russians have prevented this and thus have the better force. This is based on the fact that the US seems to be interventionist in it's strategic desires whilst Russia has always been defensive (the afghanistan war was, imo, defensive)
Dhimmi
Half Man Half HobNob
What's Chinese for "Tora! Tora! Tora!" ?
Xiaolong/FC-1
Jianjiji - J7, J8, J9, J10, J11, J12, J13- photo limit so can't show all.
Shenyang 93 - latest not-secret development.
They have a history of reverse engineering foreign planes, but also work with Russia, Pakistan and other unsavory nations. They sell to folk like Mugabe.
The more modern are typically all their own work, via Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, China Aviation Industry Corp I,and the 611 institute.
Johnny Canuck2 said:
Xiaolong/FC-1
Jianjiji - J7, J8, J9, J10, J11, J12, J13- photo limit so can't show all.
Shenyang 93 - latest not-secret development.
They have a history of reverse engineering foreign planes, but also work with Russia, Pakistan and other unsavory nations. They sell to folk like Mugabe.
The more modern are typically all their own work, via Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, China Aviation Industry Corp I,and the 611 institute.
Dhimmi
Half Man Half HobNob
Jessiedog said:
Try http://www.china-defense.com, although I'm not sure if that's what you're asking for.
Bigdavalad
New Member
Dhimmi said:
J-7 is a MiG-21.
J-9 doesn't actually exist at the moment (the Q-5 Fantan was called J-9 for a while) - the J-9 designation MAY be used for the FC-1 being developed at the moment, but it is heavily based on the MiG-33 (cancelled Russian design).
J-10 is based on the (again cancelled) IAI (Israel Aircraft Industries) Lavi fighter, and includes a lot of Israeli/Russian technology (basically an Israeli airframe with Russian engines).
J-11 is an Su-27.
J-12 isn't due to fly until 2012.
J-13 was abandoned in the early 1990s after the success of the J-10 project.
AnnO'Neemus
Is so vanilla
Dunno.Dhimmi said:
But Xiao long is little dragon xiao = little, long = dragon.
AnnO'Neemus
Is so vanilla
ooh, clever! like a crossword clue!snorbury said:
took me a minute to get that
i automatically thought of "drag on", a gay bar in beijing with woefully poor drag artist cabaret acts... wondered if you were hinting at that 
but then *ding* the light went on, and i got it! very good!
Similar threads
