Putin boasts he has a better plane than the F22

[Zeno~SPARTA~]

ALL of the ww2 fighters were copyed from this design

 

Even Hughes only claimed the Zero was derived from his plane. Others have claimed the the P47 and the FW190 were derived from it.

 

Most WW2 european and some american designs were influenced by the schneider cup planes. They mostly used liquid cooled engines.

 

The H1 first flew in September 1935, The ME109 (the principal fighter of the Luftwaffe) first flew in May 1935. The Spitfire was an evolution of the Supermarine S6 (1931) and first flew in march 1936.

[Athlon64~SPARTA~]

Well we are bouth wrong, the first mono plane fighter was built in germany april 1915 the folker Eindecker. Used in ww1. and before that with willy measuremitt. peace airplane brothers.LOL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fokker_Eindecker

Edited June 19, 2010 by Athlon64~SPARTA~

[peter~SPARTA~]

You are both wrong. All copy from De la Croix, then was ..........., and he copy from Ikar, and he copied from birds.

So original designer was God

 

Athlon i can google all answers in couple minutes, but i doubt its a purpose of this quiz.

I don't get it why you take it personally, as you portrait yourself as someone who know all discussion is pointless.

[evilducky]

I saw this post this morning and then read MSN and found this.. Kinda though it was funny http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37793266/ns/politics-washington_post/ Its almost on topic of what you guys are talking about. =P

[Athlon64~SPARTA~]

What ever, We are not wrong that plane wasen't a fighter we were talking abut fighters, The first fighter. and googleing the answers is cheating.I don't think I know everything, nobody knows everything. Some people know more about some things than outhers, lets leave it at that. Have a good day.

 

Some of the soviet planes are just weard, like that flying battle ship. Crazy.

Edited June 20, 2010 by Athlon64~SPARTA~

[MedicSN6]

you are all wrong. Aliens have had planes for a long time before humans were even around.

 

That just happened.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmN9jQwtwHg

[GySgt~SPARTA~]

The F-22 is old news anyway. Let them build a Jet that only meets 1997 specs. Ya think this ( http://www.nasa.gov/...h/x43-main.html ) is being tested right now for any particular reason? Well do ya? Lets think about this as a new weapons platform? Mach 10 anyone? Old KGB boy Putin will be saying "were did who go?" (Top Gun)

 

 

yeah nothing like a little skin lose at mach 10 maji i bet that would be awsome...well not the skin lose lol.

[ragnarok92~SPARTA~]

My basic concept:

 

American tech is like a scalpel: razor sharp and extremely accurate, but requiring lots of loving care to keep running smoothly.

 

Russian tech is like an axe: blunt, bulky, and thrown together, but will outlast the person using it even in the worst conditions and has the power to get things done.

[Athlon64~SPARTA~]

Well here in the very soon all that fighter technoligy won't make a dam bitt of differance when this stuff hitts the battlefeild, when these unmanned fighters hitt the air, First off they are stealth, cant get a missle lock. Second they are small. Third they are unmanned so the can do 50g turns, something a manned fighter canot do. Forth they are supersonic they have advanced missles. DA commrad we are whiped!

Maybe we should leave american capitolest yankie dogs alone, DA?

Then comes hypersonic mach 6 or more

Might go something like this

Why do all of that when we can swarm them

Edited December 3, 2010 by Athlon64~SPARTA~

[GySgt~SPARTA~]

yeah i understand that Russia has the tech like in stealth already the all in one body bending materals in the new aircraft

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

Isnt the F22's biggest ace it stealth ability, which Putin doesnt mention.

 

As a lay observer, my impression is the US Air strategy is to engage at long range before being detected.

 

The Russians have focused on manoeuverability,

 

His claims may not be unreasonable, plus like Peter says, although the F22 was introduced in 2005 it first flew in 1990.

 

Nothing like competition to improve performance.

 

I repeat I am not an expert.

 

Zeno is right.

 

F22's greater stealth capability vs. manoeverability of the Russkies. If you're playing offense, take stealth, as new anti aircraft missles are even more advanced than these aircraft. F-15s and the like are rather useless against them.

 

The bad news is that having only 100 of them isn't enough.

 

Oh, and stealth is really expensive when boo boos happen:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZCp5h1gK2Q

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

And we'll see what China's answer to the F-22 is, a whole lot sooner than anyone expected: http://www.east-asia-intel.com/eai/index.asp

[Durka-Durka~SPARTA~]

And we'll see what China's answer to the F-22 is, a whole lot sooner than anyone expected: http://www.east-asia-intel.com/eai/index.asp

 

If history is a precedent, it's probably full of lead and will fall apart the day the warranty expires.

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

Both are paid for by your tax dollars. One the owner financed with unending payments, the other comes fully paid for.

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

Oh, by the way, they just rolled out the prototype. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/06/3107222.htm

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

And now the Russians have cranked out a second prototype of theirs.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQmdqVD9tX0&feature=player_embedded

 

Really nice that we've cut the F-22.

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

And now the Koreans may be buying it. No, not THOSE Koreans, but the ones with money:

 

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/07/russia-pitches-pak-fa-to-the-o.html

 

Of course a Cessna is better than an F-22 that never gets built.

 

 

[Steel~Sparta~]

OH NOES HE HAS A PROTOTYPE!!!!!!!!

 

so fuking what. we are still ahead. WAY ahead and we will still be ahead when the plane becomes operational in 2015!

 

The f22 is operational NOW!

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

You seem to be really upset.

 

You're right, the F22 is so advanced, not even the US can afford to make them. And last time I checked, no F22s were operational, all had been grounded for many weeks till they found out what was making pilots sick.

 

And the Russians aren't selling prototypes. Fully functional front line fighters. Will they be as good as an F-22 head to head? No. But they may never meet if we don't export the F22. The competition is in the arms market, and in the jobs these planes would have brought to St. Louis or Seattle.

 

Prophecy about the pitfalls of driving planes and maintaining an empire you can't afford:

 

 

Air Force separates F-22 facts from myths

Released: 4 Aug 1999

WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- As the fate of the F-22 Raptor continues to be debated on Capitol Hill and in the press, it's increasingly important to separate fact from myth. The following facts clarify America's need for the F-22 as the premier fighter of the 21st century Air Force:

 

Myth: Delaying initial F-22 procurement will not really impact the overall program.

 

Fact: The House vote withdrawing $1.8 billion in procurement funds for the F-22 in fiscal 2000 potentially sounds a death knell for the Raptor, the cornerstone of the nation's global air dominance in the 21st century. Even if the program survives this setback (which will be determined in a House-Senate conference committee in September), terminating current production will ultimately increase overall costs by $6.5 billion, causing the program to exceed congressionally mandated cost caps.

 

Myth: The Air Force doesn't really need the F-22 to maintain air superiority in the 21st century.

 

Fact: The F-22 is integral to the Air Force's tactical aircraft modernization program and the key to dominating the skies in 2010 and beyond. By the time the F-22 comes online, the F-15 (today's premier fighter) will be more than 25 years old. Without the F-22, the Air Force will steadily lose its edge in air superiority in the 21st century. By 2005, flying the F-15 into combat will be the equivalent of driving a 20-year-old car in the Indianapolis 500.

 

Myth: Other countries don't have the technology to compete with the F-15's defense and strike capability, so there is no reason to improve on it.

 

Fact: America's best fighter, the F-15, is on par with current Russian fighters, and behind Europe's and Russia's newest class of fighters set to roll off production lines by 2005. These include the French Rafale, Europe's Eurofighter and the Russian SU-35. The F-22's capabilities are critical to maintaining air superiority.

 

Myth: The F-22 doesn't bring anything to the fight the F-15 isn't already providing.

 

Fact: To maintain the levels of air superiority and dominance provided by the F-15 today, we will need the F-22's capabilities of speed, supercruise, maneuverability at supersonic speeds, stealth and integrated avionics to allow our pilots to identify and defeat threats. It also will give our air warriors a capability they've never before had: First look, first shot, first kill. Additionally, the F-15 does not provide any air-to-ground capability; the F-22 will provide first-day, near-precision, air-to-ground capability with the Joint Direct Attack Munition.

 

Myth: The F-15 will still be able to provide an adequate defense and effective strike force 15 years from now.

 

Fact: The F-15 is expected to provide an adequate defense and effective strike force for the next five to 10 years (when the F-22 is scheduled to become operational); but not 15. Without the F-22, we won't have the capability to counter the threat because we won't have the speed or stealth -- dramatically decreasing our chances of survival.

 

Myth: The Air Force's insistence on the F-22 is part of an obsolete, Cold War mentality because future conflicts will be low intensity and not require the same high-tech equipment we needed for the Cold War.

 

Fact: Low-intensity conflicts are not necessarily low technology. The threat includes not only advanced fighter aircraft, but also increasingly lethal surface-to-air missiles. The number of countries possessing the most advanced SAMs is expected to increase from 14 to 21 by 2005 -- an increase that will overwhelm our current fighter force's ability to gain air superiority.

 

Myth: The F-22 is cost-prohibitive and not worth the return on investment.

 

Fact: With an average aircraft "sticker price" (fly-away cost) of less that $85 million, the F-22 will cost less than 1 percent of the Department of Defense budget during its production period. In its most costly year, 2003, the F-22 will consume less than 5.6 percent of the Air Force budget; 1.7 percent of the defense budget and 0.25 percent of the total federal budget.

 

Myth: Air superiority is a "nice to have" that has to be weighed against budget constraints.

 

Fact: Owning the sky is worth the cost. For less than 1 percent of the DOD budget, the F-22 will enable all of America's air, land and sea forces to operate effectively and free from enemy air attack. Thanks to air superiority, no airman, soldier, sailor or Marine has lost his or her life to enemy aircraft in the last 40 years.

 

Myth: As a cost measure, rather than continue with development of the F-22, the Air Force can simply upgrade its current fighters.

 

Fact: The average F-15 will be 26 years old in 2005. Even with major upgrades, it will not match the capabilities of the newest foreign fighters. An improved F-15 would only provide one-third the effectiveness of the F-22 at nine-tenths the cost.

 

Myth: The Joint Strike Fighter is a respectable substitute for the F-22 at a much lower cost.

 

Fact: The Air Force's modernization strategy is to develop a mix of high-capability F-22s and lower-cost JSFs to achieve dominant capability and force readiness. The JSF is very effective as a low-cost, multi-mission aircraft optimized for attacking ground targets. It is not a substitute for the F-22. The JSF is primarily designed as an affordable replacement for the Air Force's aging F-16s and A-10s, and will depend on the F-22 for air superiority. Just as the F-15 and F-16 are a highly successful, synergistic team today, the F-22 and JSF will be the winning team of the future; however, neither can succeed on its own.

 

 

 

Toxic Air Grounds All F-22s

July 28, 2011: The U.S. Air Force is making some progress in finding out what is wrong with their F-22s. It appears that some toxins are somehow getting into the pilot's air supply. This has kept all 168 F-22s grounded for three months, so far. Despite the new findings, the air force still has not nailed down the exact cause of the problem, much less fixed it. The U.S. Navy had a similar problem with its F-18s (there were 64 incidents between 2002-9, resulting in two dead pilots). The navy found that the problem was carbon monoxide getting sucked into the aircraft air system (which the navy modified, eliminating the problem). The air force is looking into the navy experience with these similar problems, to see if there is anything similar going on with the F-22s. It all began when it appeared that the F-22 fighter might be having a problem with its OBOG (OnBoard Oxygen Generating) system, causing pilots to get drowsy, or even black out, from lack of oxygen. Now it is believed that it was not lack of oxygen, but toxins in the air supply. There were 14 reported incidents of pilots feeling drowsy, or even passing out, because of "bad air." Because of that, on May 3rd, all F-22s were grounded. But the U.S. Air Force is also checking the OBOGs in F-16, F-15E, A-10, F-35, B-1, B-2, CV-22 and T-6 aircraft as well. The problem may just be with the F-22 OBOG, or a general problem with all air force OBOGs. The air force also believed the F-22 problem might not just involve the OBOG, and this seems to be the case. Meanwhile, the grounding is still "indefinite" and will continue until the source of the breathing problem is found, and definitely fixed.

 

If it goes on too long, the air force may consider fitting some F-22s with the older air supplies, just so some of their newest combat aircraft will be available for combat. In the meantime, pilots and ground crews are using simulators and (for the ground crews) maintenance exercises on the grounded aircraft (in addition to checking a growing list of aircraft components in support of the search for the breathing problem) to retain their skills. But after 210 days on the ground, aircrew will have to undergo extensive retraining to regain combat flying status. This adds a little more urgency to fixing the problem quickly. The grounding also leaves a dozen F-22s stranded at a training base, where they were for live weapons exercises. At least six new F-22s cannot be delivered because of the grounding.

 

The chief culprit in all this, OBOGs, have been around for over half a century. It's only in the last two decades that OBOGs have become compact, cheap and reliable enough to replace the older compressed gases or LOX (liquid oxygen) as a source of breathable air for high flying aircrew. Each aircraft, especially the F-22 and F-35, gets an OBOG tweaked for space, weight or other conditions specific to that warplane design. It's this custom design that is being closely studied, to find out how the toxins got in.

 

Because aircraft have been staying in the air longer (because of in-flight refueling), carrying enough compressed oxygen has become untenable, and OBOG solves the problem. Since the 1990s, most American military aircraft have replaced older oxygen systems with OBOG. Most Western nations, and Russia, have followed, at least with their latest model aircraft. Most OBOG systems work by using a chemical reaction to remove nitrogen from the air taken in to the OBOG, and then sending out air with the proper amount of oxygen to the aircrew.

 

Even helicopter pilots sometimes need additional oxygen. The U.S. Army has encountered this in Afghanistan. That's because helicopter pilots there often operate at high (over 3,200 meters/10,000 feet) enough altitudes that they need oxygen to maintain alertness. Currently, crew members get the oxygen via tubes from 45 kg (hundred pound) tanks. This restricts mobility inside the helicopter. So the army has developed a portable (2.3 kilograms/5 pound) device that you can wear on your chest. A sensor gives you additional oxygen when it detects a need. The PHODS (Portable Helicopter Oxygen Delivery System) provides enough oxygen for 2-3 hours.

 

 

Edited July 29, 2011 by Elvis~SPARTA~

[Hunter~SPARTA~]

I don't really care to weigh in on either side of the fence on this one, but that was a good read Elvis. Thanks for sharing.

 

 

- JHunter

[Athlon64~SPARTA~]

The unmaned fighters will be out soon, like the x47 and the like, and will be able to shoot them all down.

Might be something like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT3Ugkzl-Nk&NR=1

Edited July 30, 2011 by Athlon64~SPARTA~

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

Yes, you're right. We'll continue to see proxy wars and wars on third world countries, but going head to head against any other major power will be costly, and a risk.

 

As for unmanned airplanes taking over, the opinion at :20 is as valid today as it ever has been:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMjm1Mu5lyU&feature=related

[Elvis~SPARTA~]

Oh, and now not only are the F-22s grounded, so are the F-35 prototypes.

 

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/08/entire-u-s-stealth-fighter-fleet-grounded/

 

So we now have as many advanced generation fighters as the Russians and Chinese. Oh, wait, their prototypes aren't grounded, they have more working ones than us.

 

To quote Kiefer Sutherland: We've lost the lead!

 

[EL_n00biachi]

That was only a matter of time,bigger economy,cheap labour,espionage....you cant stop the Chinese...you have to change them.

[Roach]