Author Topic: iran fighter (Read 2547 times)

Eagler · « **Reply #75 on:** September 07, 2006, 12:43:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by babek-
Thanks ghi for proving that not only Ahmadinedjad is a religious fanatic.

he is the only one stating the holocaust didn't happen and that Israel & the west needs to be destroyed - yes, I think he is the one to watch out for

Masherbrum · « **Reply #76 on:** September 07, 2006, 01:39:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by babek-
Yes - maybe you are right.

Ironicly most of the young iranians (and 70% of the iranians are 25 or younger) dont see the USA as an enemy. This will change after the US attack. Then we will have again a generation of fanatics and to wait 15 years for the next attempt.

So Iran is the schoolyard bully, who runs his mouth, and then when trounced for his mouth, he gets offended.

They can shove their stupid Jihad where the sun doesn't shine. I would LOVE to see a few countries just flat out nuked.

Boroda · « **Reply #77 on:** September 07, 2006, 01:58:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
Bosnias modern air defence system that was easily defeated by NATO.

Bosnia's?

NATO had to "shoot down" their own MiG-29 in Bosnia 1999, to show how "aggressive" Serbs were.

NATO failed to completely supress Yugoslavian air defense in 99, it's a fact. Whole NATO block fighting a country starved by 10 years of sanctions - and an utter failure.

Viking · « **Reply #78 on:** September 07, 2006, 02:03:06 PM »

Yes Boroda that pretty much sums it up. The Serbs even shot down a US stealth fighter, and after the conflict ended their army was still intact.

Sundowner · « **Reply #79 on:** September 07, 2006, 03:44:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Edbert1
IIRC (I'm sure many here know the exact details)...

A pair of F22s went up against a group (12?) of F15s in a mock combat. Final score was 12 to 0. That was against some of the USAF's finest, no doubt whatsoever more capable than the best Iranian pilots, who, if they were trained by the US would have to be over 55 years old today.

Iranian Air Force's best bet with their new fighter should a conflict arise between them and the USAF/USN would be to run to Syria, kind of like Sadaam did with his air force in 1991, assuming they could get that far without flying over Iraq.

Ed,
I think I remember reading some comments from one of the F-15 agressor pilots.

He said (paraphrasing) "My day consists of an early morning launch, fly to the range, die a couple times, hit the tanker, return to range,die a couple more times, rtb. Afternoon sortie, more of the same."

The F-22 has a data link to the awacs. He can run a radar intercept without ever emmiting a single wave. The enemy never knows he's there till the doors open and the radar missile goes active. By that time the enemy is in such poor tactical position that evading the missile is impossible as the PK approachs 1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBUmRd4hKlg
USAF vs IRAF = shooting fish in a barrel

Regards
Sun

Squire · « **Reply #80 on:** September 07, 2006, 04:58:36 PM »

F-22? getting a bit ahead of ourselves arent we? Its not going to be fought with F-22s.

It would be an F-15/F-16/F-18/Harrier contest vs whatever they had...

And the tactic of doing an approach without going radar active and using AWACS is standard NATO doctrine, you dont need F-22s for that either. You just need AWACS, tankers, fighters and jamming a/c (ECR Tornado, EA-6).

Squire · « **Reply #81 on:** September 07, 2006, 05:05:22 PM »

Boroda.

NATO flew over Serbia AT WILL, and their losses were miniscule. The Serbs did ever worse than Iraq in 1991. The one time they did launch some fighters they were smoked by F-16s.

As to the politics of it, I will leave that for another time.

Viking · « **Reply #82 on:** September 07, 2006, 05:09:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
NATO flew over Serbia AT WILL, and their losses were miniscule.

Yes but they failed to destroy the Serb army occupying Kosovo. Simply because the Serbs refused to engage NATO except for ambushes and taking pot-shots.

Viking · « **Reply #83 on:** September 07, 2006, 05:47:50 PM »

The NATO air campaign against Serbia was mainly fought over Kosovo. The few airstrikes over Belgrade weren't even contested by the serbs. They prefered to conserve their strenght by hiding their forces, awaiting a ground invasion.

NATO failed miserably in Serbia/Kosovo. Allowing the Serb army to retreat intact (after they've done what they set out to do), and allowing Melosovic to remain in office as the President of Serbia.

Squire · « **Reply #84 on:** September 07, 2006, 05:58:50 PM »

Im talking about the NATO air campaign against Serbia, specifically Belgrade, and the relative ineffectiveness of their air defenses, despite having both modern systems and well trained crews. Once again "static" air defenses proved themsleves weak and innefectual.

NATO losses were 3 helicopters and 5 fixed wing a/c in the 1999 bombing campaign. 3rd rate Iraqi conscripts did better than that firing blind into the sky.

And I will ammend my post above, there were two occasions in 1999 that the Serbs were involved in air combat, losing both times. They also shot down their own a/c at least once.

"NATO had to "shoot down" their own MiG-29 in Bosnia 1999"

Really? well since only the Luftwaffe flew MiG-29s, and never deployed any in the campaign, how exactly did they manage to do that? Like all your posts you just blather on about ex-pat Soviet wannabe conspiracies to make yourselves feel better.

http://www.ospreypublishing.com/tit...e=S2903~ser=COM

Viking · « **Reply #85 on:** September 07, 2006, 06:03:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
NATO losses were 3 helicopters and 5 fixed wing a/c in the 1999 bombing campaign. 3rd rate Iraqi conscripts did better than that firing blind into the sky.

Yes, including an F-117 (which the Iraqis didn't manage to shoot down), and still NATO failed its main objectives. In fact they failed ALL of them.

Squire · « **Reply #86 on:** September 07, 2006, 06:20:36 PM »

Wow, they downed a single F-117, well holy s***, I guess that spells the end for the USAF huh? Your too funny.

And the vaunted Serbia? they lost Kosovo, which is a UN protectorate, they recently lost Macedonia too, who doesnt want anything to do with them either (they voted independance) and are in power nowhere else in the region except Serbia proper.

And Slobodan Milosovich? (your hero I guess) right, where is he?, oh thats right he died in the Hague awaiting war crimes after being overthrown.

Tough break huh

?

Viking · « **Reply #87 on:** September 07, 2006, 06:55:18 PM »

None of which is the credit of the NATO air campaign. Kosovo was already lost before NATO got involved. The Serbs were just evacuating its people and doing some "clean up" (read: ethnic cleansing). They finished their objectives despite the NATO air campaign and withdrew to Serbia in good order and with minimal losses.

Macedonia left peacefully, and has nothing to do with the NATO campaign.

Milosevic got caught trying to fix the 2000 elections (two years after the NATO air campaign). After a civil uprising he chose to step down. Later the new Serbian government turned him over to Den Haag for crimes he allegedly committed during the Bosnian civil war (not Kosovo).

What did the NATO air campaign actually accomplish? I mean, besides bombing a refugee column (red tractor looks like an APC?

), fire missiles into neighboring countries, destroy bridges in Belgrade, and spectacularly bomb the Chinese embassy?

Nothing.

Oh yes the NATO losses were minimal, and that is the only good thing about that whole sordid mess. Luckily none of our planes got shot down, but they might as well have been for all the good they did.

Boroda · « **Reply #88 on:** September 08, 2006, 11:43:35 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
NATO losses were 3 helicopters and 5 fixed wing a/c in the 1999 bombing campaign. 3rd rate Iraqi conscripts did better than that firing blind into the sky.

3 choppers and 5 fixed wing - LOL in 1999 they had to admit only one loss - F-117. Maybe later we'll know real numbers? When Serbs showed an engine that was shot off the A-10 - NATO said that the plane "made a safe landing in Italy".

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
And I will ammend my post above, there were two occasions in 1999 that the Serbs were involved in air combat, losing both times. They also shot down their own a/c at least once.

I have read interviews with Serbian pilots - they flew several missions in the first day of aggression, and noone of them landed. In fact they understood it from the very beginning that fighting in such conditions meant no landing. I don't know about shooting their own AC.

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
"NATO had to "shoot down" their own MiG-29 in Bosnia 1999"

Really? well since only the Luftwaffe flew MiG-29s, and never deployed any in the campaign, how exactly did they manage to do that? Like all your posts you just blather on about ex-pat Soviet wannabe conspiracies to make yourselves feel better.

http://www.ospreypublishing.com/tit...e=S2903~ser=COM

I posted links to this sad propaganda ****up in warbirds.general at ICI news server in 1999. NATO reported that 2 Yugoslavian MiG-29s violated Bosnian airspace and were shot down, one felt in Bosnia and pilot escaped. What they showed was indeed a crashed 29, but painted in non-Yugoslavian colours, with painted signs in Latinic letters like "annual inspection 1998" etc, while Russians and Serbs use Cyrillic. The plane didn't catch fire and a cockpit canopy was in place, undamaged. A clumsy propaganda attempt, wasn't it?

JFYI, US bought over 30 MiG-29s from Moldavia in the 90s, now they have former defence minister jailed for that bargain

Boroda · « **Reply #89 on:** September 08, 2006, 12:26:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
Wow, they downed a single F-117, well holy s***, I guess that spells the end for the USAF huh? Your too funny.

Serbs used Soviet ambush tactics and acheved some good results there. They claim several dozen "democratisators" shot down, and I'd better believe them then Western lies. After Korea there is no trust in Western loss reports, sorry. It's like any AC shot down and falling into the sea counted as "non-combat loss".

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
And the vaunted Serbia? they lost Kosovo, which is a UN protectorate, they recently lost Macedonia too, who doesnt want anything to do with them either (they voted independance) and are in power nowhere else in the region except Serbia proper.

Macedonia?! Macedonia separated from Yugoslavia in 1991 IIRC, without any military conflict, peacefully, maybe because Macedonians are not Catholic or Moslim?...

Maybe you mean Crna Gora? Black Mountain?

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
And Slobodan Milosovich? (your hero I guess) right, where is he?, oh thats right he died in the Hague awaiting war crimes after being overthrown.

You mean - who was murdered in Hague? Overthrown? You mean - won the election and then resigned to avoid bloodshed?

What happened to Yugoslavia is one huge crime against humanity committed by Western powers, combined with Miloshevich's inability to be more flexible and criminal noninterference by Russian regime.