Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: 6*F-22 vs 6*Typhoon vs 6*Rafale in the UAE?!
giblets    11/16/2009 4:48:58 AM
According to both Flight Global, and Defence News, other than attending the Dubai airshow, the USAF, RAF, and FAF each sent 6 of their finest fighter aircraft to the desert Kingdom to take part in multinational exercises. Other than adding much fuel to the fire for forum members here! It raises many questions (such as why the USAF was unable to send 1 F-22 to Paris, and can now send 6 to the UAE, despite no drop in operational tempo). And will the F22 and Typhoon not be in the air at the same time again?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
MK       11/24/2009 5:34:17 PM

Yes I also notice he doesn't say which version of the APG-63 he had, what modes he was in (I'm sure LRS versus SS makes a difference), whether he was looking down into clutter or up at him, and what the range was.  Maybe you should write the Air Force and ask them to clarify what the Aussie meant, I'm sure they would be happy all of these details.

No reason to go semantic. They would certainly not, but these are questions to ask, if you like it or not. It's way to easy to bash the foreigners for talking BS, but if it comes to your own "super weapon" you guys get quite reluctant to even view the possiblity that not everything might work out exactly like the marketing brochures et all we have seen before. That's true for all sites, most are just to pride to admit it for their "own" site.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/24/2009 8:22:23 PM
Not needlessly risk pissing off an important ally by describing their weapons as crap comes to mind. 

huh?  there's no shortage of meetings I've been to where frank and robust engagement is engaged on what our allies do and what they think we do.  Thats just a silly thing to say.

so you're happy to be believe commentary from a RAF pilot on Rafale but don't want to believe commentary on the F-22.

methinks your own prejudices are taking hold here.

btw, I've never had an issue with the Rafale, I've had issues with some of the lame arse comments about what it can do when people rewrite and misunderstand technical issues.  There is a difference.
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       11/24/2009 9:28:21 PM
Bluewings12       11/23/2009 1:44:35 PM
I agree 100% with MK .

Iran is ~read my lips~ miles away to get anything close to an A or H bomb . So far , they are only capable to produce a less than 10% grade uranium when they need to reach 95% at least . Then , they don 't have the necessary "clocks" to precisely time the explosion . We just have to look at N. Korea , their tech is only good enough to get a poor "fizzle" .
 
I see. Well if it's all the same to you BW, I'll not put my faith in who is or is not capable of producing nuclear weapons or how soon they will be able to do so. No offense.
 
Saying that Iran is close to get nukes is BS , real BS .
 
And you would know this how?
 
I wish that B. Obama will tell Israel and Iran to shut up a bit and stop to act like warmongers . If the Israelis want to hit Iran , let them do it and alone .
 
Totally unrealistic nonsense BW. The fact of the matter is, we, being the USA has some 150k+ troops in the area, an entire fleet of warships within missile distance and loads of USAF jets in the area as well. So to simply sit around with our thumb up our backside telling Israel to do it alone might sound really cool to you, but we got men and women whose life will be in mortal danger if Israel does strike Iran and therefore we had better damn well take an active role in it to insure it's success if for no ther reason then to keep our own tropps and ships safe.
 
 If the Iranian regime wants to "eradicate" Israel , well , the Iranians are going to get smacked anyway .
 
I'd say thats about all you ever said that makes sense.
I can 't see why the West (or even NATO) would get involved in this BS in between these two .
 
Already told you ONE good reason above why it is in the best interest of the US to insure success. Not to mention Israel is our friend and I just think we should help then even if we did not have our own people in the area.
 
Israel ~or Iran~ can 't blackmail anyone , anymore .
What the West must continue is the fight against the international terrorism and try to destabilize the Iranian Gov by helping the Iranian people .
 
Uh yea... thats been working out real well for the last 30 years right?
***************************
Beazz :
""They cannot detect the F22 and certaintly cannot shoot it down. ""
 
You don 't know , as simple as that . The F-22 's stealth is completely unproven and I am not even talking yet about  "combat proven" . No bashing intended whatsoever but I demand to see ... And since the USAF completlely disaprove to use the F-22 in ANY excercise , even with friendly Nations ...
 
 
LOL.. I'll write my senator and tell him this French guy demands to see how the F22 works .. Gawwwwddd.. What a goofball you are. Give it up BW. The USAF ain't gonna do anything to make you or your type happy. Don't you get it yet? The USAF could care less what you or any other government thinks about what the F22 can or cannot do and are not about to showcase it just for the hell of it to make yall happy. You or France thinks the F22 is a worthless POS? Good deal.. happy for ya and could care less.
 
Have a nice life
 
 
Quote    Reply

jackjack       11/25/2009 1:44:38 AM

Thats a bit petulant isn't it?  what investment do RAF and RAAF pilots have in extolling the virtues of a platform that we knew we were never going to buy 4 years ago?
Not needlessly risk pissing off an important ally by describing their weapons as crap comes to mind. In one of the current threads a RAF pilot is praising the Rafale. "http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-65247.aspx" So maybe the Rafale really is all that?
Just considering the possibility of F22's fighting an enemy which somehow found a way to negate stealth to the point of "just" a 3 to 1 advantage for the F22 is well outside the comfort zone of a lot of posters here.

wow, thats a post even bw would be proud of posting
so you are saying a 3yr exchange pilot fully trained on the f-22 including the secret squirrel stuff, has the same credibility as a 1 1/2 hr joy ride in a rafale where he said
"I barely scratched the surface of its sensor and weapon capabilities."
 
it only gets funnier as more idiotic posts are made
 
Quote    Reply

giblets       11/25/2009 9:46:55 AM
Combat Aircraft Monthly does a fine demolition job of this review here:
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/25/2009 9:51:35 AM


Yes I also notice he doesn't say which version of the APG-63 he had, what modes he was in (I'm sure LRS versus SS makes a difference), whether he was looking down into clutter or up at him, and what the range was.  Maybe you should write the Air Force and ask them to clarify what the Aussie meant, I'm sure they would be happy all of these details.

No reason to go semantic. They would certainly not, but these are questions to ask, if you like it or not. It's way to easy to bash the foreigners for talking BS, but if it comes to your own "super weapon" you guys get quite reluctant to even view the possiblity that not everything might work out exactly like the marketing brochures et all we have seen before. That's true for all sites, most are just to pride to admit it for their "own" site.


Yeah dude wake me when a an aggressor pilot says it's frustrating going up against Rafales because it's not a fair fight.
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       11/25/2009 11:34:49 AM

Combat Aircraft Monthly does a fine demolition job of this review here:

 

 



Thanks, that was an interesting read.
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/25/2009 12:47:11 PM

Yeah dude wake me when a an aggressor pilot says it's frustrating going up against Rafales because it's not a fair fight.

You entirely missed my point, it's somewhat frustating, but I haven't expected anything else. Hint where have I spoke about the Rafale here?
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/25/2009 1:40:32 PM



Yeah dude wake me when a an aggressor pilot says it's frustrating going up against Rafales because it's not a fair fight.

You entirely missed my point, it's somewhat frustating, but I haven't expected anything else. Hint where have I spoke about the Rafale here?

Well you did say "the foreigners for talking BS" so...
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/25/2009 2:28:52 PM

Well you did say "the foreigners for talking BS" so...

True and where does I say french or Rafale? While I indeed aimed at the bashing of the french Rafale supporters here, I kept this statement general for a good reason. I wouldn't expect a different behaviour if a fan/supporter (or what ever you want to call these guys) of a MiG-29+ or Su-27/3X, a Gripen or any other non US made aircraft would argue his case on his fellow aircraft. My point is you guys are quick in "addressing" those claims you find not believeable from those, but you seem not address the opposite claims, which are often enough not less dubious. Hamilcars strong claims with ridiculous, not to say non existant "proofs" weren't addressed by anyone of you guys for example. Now it turns to your own beloved fighters and you are all rage about defending it and indicating that I would support the Rafale as you did with your claim. I speak out what fanboys tend to blank out, not swallowing every piece of marketing claims. What is wrong with raising doubts or asking questions if things are extremly unspecific or even irrational/unlogical. You guys were quick in pointing out exactly these things from the "Rafale rampant" article, but when it comes to not less unspecific/generalised claims besides the F-22 you suddenly feel attacked and come up with counters "Rafale bla bla here and that..."
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics