OUUCH! http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000976.html The rest of the story discusses some of the implications and offers some reasons for the final outcome, but I don't think there is any way to positively spin this.
And stupid leftists want to cancell the F-22 and F-35 fighter programs, saying that the F-15 is "good enough!" But yet we have Hilary claiming that she needs more of our dollars to do the "common good." God, when will these people ever learn? Gwanyeco, I hate to correct you, but the Sukhois and the Mirages they have are as good as our F-15's and F-16's- in fact- they are in many ways more advanced than either. Here are some facts on the new Indian Sukhois and tell me if they are "primitive." That means they can substantially outmanuver our own fighters with ease and since we don't have all-aspect close-range missiles (the Sidewinder is aging rapidly and can not be used off-boresight), we'd be at a severe disadvantage. Guess who also operates these aircraft, our "friends" the Chicoms! link So keep whining liberals that we on the right are making up "bogeymen" to justify weapons expenditures. It makes you look more ostrich-like with every passing day. link
The Su-30 looks formidable. This MiG-21 Bison is just ancient… Imagine if we had to take on a modern Russian jet like the Su-37...
"Now, granted, the Indians had the Americans outnumbered: usually 10 or 12 to 4, during the Cope India air combat exercise held last February around the Gwalior Air Force Station." I'm curious what realistic scenario has us down more than 2 or 3 to 1 in air superiority? Last I checked we weren't planning on invading the PRC or India.
That is basically what the Indians (and Chinese) are flying. The Su-37 has just a few detail changes and in fact, may not be as comprehensively equipped as the export Su-30's. We will have to fight the PRC over Taiwan. Trust me on that one. And frankly, I'd rather that not be a fair fight.
We don't have thousands of F-15's in our air force, but only a few hundred. And with only a wing or two (around 48 or so aircraft) deployed to a theater at the most, we'd be heavily outnumbered, especially right off the bat. So it is a very realistic scenario.
No one's killing the F-22 or the JSF _______________ Just keep paying your fair share of the nations bills and we'll get everything necessary for our security.
bama...for the record...how do you expect us to pay for the new aircraft? Just a general plan. Might it involve the government taking money away from us...money we EARNED...as if it's theirs to do with as they see fit?
Naw, he wants to do what his hero Dubya does... Put it on the Federal Government credit card and have our grandchildren pay for it!
What? The only scenario you've pointed to is Taiwan. Not only is that unlikely to break out anytime soon (like the next 20 years), but our air capabilities would be greatly augmented by Taiwan's Air Force, not to mention the fact we could further augment quickly from Japan, Korea, or the US mainland if not other carrier battlegroups.
More cheap shots, but they are to be expected from the likes of you. Our govt's primary and (should be only) purpose is to provide a common defense for our life, liberty AND property. I know property rights are not a popular things with you liberals, but the protection of property rights (which Hildabeast is not a fan of) is essential to a functioning republic. We have politicians saying that is okay for them to be manipulated by votes to transfer monies from the producers to the non-producers because "they don't need all of that money anyhow." And none of you have a problem with that? Amazing.
I hate to traffic in "what-if's," but say our basing rights there were threatened by the Chicoms saying to Japan "allow the Americans to use your airbases and we will blockade your island." Don't think for a minute they can't do it, because they are building their forces into one capable of taking control of the seas in a littoral environment, especially around Taiwan. And besides, you want your forces based as close to the theater as possible (less tanker sorties, less pilot fatigue, quicker turnaround on the ground back into the air) and Korea and Japan aren't it. And with the steadily increasing Chicom capabilities to serious threaten our CVBGs with supersonic, hard-to-kill anti-ship "carrier killer" missiles carried by the Soveremnny boats they bought from the Russkies, the Navy's not going to want to drive a couple of carriers that close into harm's way. Besides, they now lack the long-range interception capabilities of the greatest american fighter ever, the F-14D Tomcat, a bird that will be retired by 2009..... The F-18E is not even close to the same bird the Tomcat was. No Phoenix missiles, shorter ranged radar, etc.
Damn straight,...and if the expenditure with irresponsible big useless government is negated, there would be the money to pay for this without having chicks for free and money for nothing which is so enticing for the hedonistic liberals...
I don't think either Japan nor China believes they could blockade Japan. That's pure fantasy. The PRC does not have the capability to control the seas around either Taiwan nor Japan. Yes, they are modernizing, but no one claims they could engage the US now. They can't even engage Taiwan right now. Any boats they put in the Straits would be sunk long before they got close to the shore. Most predictions, even from RAND (for example) estimate another 15 years minimum. And you've ignored my point about Taiwan's air force, which includes more than 150 f-15s and about 60 mirage's. Compare that to PRCs (assuming they pulled EVERY available fighter from every region in the PRC for the conflict) and the threat really isn't that substantial.
...the greatest american fighter ever, the F-14D Tomcat, a bird that will be retired by 2009..... __________________________ "She was a good bird"
