What do you think is the baddest ass piece of military hardware?

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Joseph
One year they said 267 million, but can't remember which year it was. And remember the illegal almost never fill out the form or send them in to be counted, because they feel the INS would used the form to find them. We now have between 10 to 20 million illegal. I was watching Lou Dobb on CNN 2 week ago when he was hitting the Illegal very hard.

How would you conscript illegals? Perhaps like the Brittish navy in the 17th century - Go to a bar and pick up the guys who are to drunk to stay awake. Next morning they wake up on a ship at sea, and have no choice.

[lightblue]

I always thought the AC130 was an interesting concept... There's something about sticking a 105mm cannon out of the side of a remodelled Herc that appeals to me.

[el freako]

Originally posted by Joseph
One year they said 267 million, but can't remember which year it was.

That was 1995 (266.8m), 4 years after the fall of the USSR.


Methinks you are clutching at straws, indeed this argument:

Originally posted by Joseph
I trust the America census first, and screw the UN.

Shows that you are unwilling to accept any data that does not support your view - what you mean is that you have made up your mind and the facts mean nothing to you.

By the way the US census said 250.2m in 1990 - so using that you were even furthur behind the USSR

[MrBaggins]

Just out of curiousity, how many of you guys play(ed) Harpoon 2?

[Saras]

I played Janes Fleet Command. IS Harp4 out already? Looks neat.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Saras
I played Janes Fleet Command. IS Harp4 out already? Looks neat.

Last I heard (27 Nov 2003) it had been cancelled.

I was GUTTED... but at least Harpoon 3 Multiplayer is in alpha testing..

[MrBaggins]

Sadly, Harpoon 4 was cancelled in late November

A note from Larry Bond:
Larry Bond and Chris Carlson, the originators of the Harpoon4 wargame, and Don Gilman of Adanced Gaming Systems Inc., also a participant in the Harpoon4 project, are disappointed by Ubisoft's decision to cancel Harpoon4, but respect Ubisoft's judgment, their desire to sell quality games, and their need to make a profit while they do so.

The just-ended project has been underway since 1997, when we signed an agreement with Strategic Simulations International to create a computer adaptation of the Harpoon4 miniatures wargame. Unfortunately, the development effort became hampered by a series of corporate buyouts, each one causing delays and simultaneously reducing the size of the development budget. While each successive publisher has made their best effort, each buyout (and there were four) reduced the chance of a successful product reaching the store shelf.

Our intention is to start a new development effort that will produce a computerized version of Harpoon4 at the earliest opportunity. Ubisoft has graciously offered to transfer the partially-completed code to a third party for further development. We will examine the code to see if that is feasible, and if appropriate, will transfer of the code to a third party. Since the code contains copyrighted material, that third party would have to enter into a contract with the rights holders, just as SSI did six years ago.

And that is only one approach to producing a new Harpoon4 game. Other options include starting development fresh with a new publisher, or upgrading existing programs to H4 standard.

None of these will produce a game quickly, and even choosing which option to follow will take several months.

It is important to acknowledge not only the patience and support of the computer Harpoon community, but also the efforts of the many developers who have worked on the commercial product, and the beta testers who did their best to make it a quality game. They all made substantial contributions to Harpoon, and we will work hard to make sure that they have not labored in vain.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Vince278


I'm not sure about an F-21 but I know there was an F-23. It was the prototype of a plane from another company competing against the F-22 during the bidding process.

Yes Northrop builded the F-23, I have model of it. It looks somewhat like the F-22. It's aft wing is also the tail fin.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Crimson Sunrise
Australia still uses the F-111, y'know. Apparently it's still relevant after almost forty years.

The Air Force wants the F-22, so they are cutting or retiring anything they can so the money can be used on the F-22 and F-35.
Yes the F-111 and the F-4 are today still top aircraft.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Joseph
Yes Northrop builded the F-23, I have model of it. It looks somewhat like the F-22. It's aft wing is also the tail fin.

IIRC, McDonnell Douglas built the YF-23 "Black Widow"

[Joseph]

Originally posted by el freako


That was 1995 (266.8m), 4 years after the fall of the USSR.


Methinks you are clutching at straws, indeed this argument:



Shows that you are unwilling to accept any data that does not support your view - what you mean is that you have made up your mind and the facts mean nothing to you.

By the way the US census said 250.2m in 1990 - so using that you were even furthur behind the USSR

I do not trust the UN at all anymore. At one time I did like the UN but not for the last 20 or so years.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Lonestar


IIRC, McDonnell Douglas built the YF-23 "Black Widow"

Lonestar, Boeing brought out McDonnell Douglas about 5 years ago.
There was two teams.
Teams 1 was Lockheed Martin, Boeing and General Dynamics, F-22

Team 2 was at the time McDonnell Douglas, Northrop, F-23.

Team 1 wins.

McDonnell sells to Boeing within 1 year of losing the F-23.

So now the F-23 is consider a Northrop Aircraft.

In fact there are now only 3 companys left.
Boeing, Lockheed, and Northrop. Can't remember but I believe General Dynamics aircraft is now owned by one of the 3.

[Lonestar]

Is the F-23 in a Boeing warehouse or a Northrup warehouse?

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Lonestar
Is the F-23 in a Boeing warehouse or a Northrup warehouse?

It may still be at Edwards flight testing for furture aircraft.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Joseph
It may still be at Edwards flight testing for furture aircraft.

It is at Edwards, but not flying at the moment.
At first I typed Northrop F-23 and got a good information sheet and then typed McDonnell Douglas and got a difference page and it said the plane is at Edwards.

[Serb]

Originally posted by PLATO


But ours will actually hit the target!!


(Don't really know anything about it, but I couldn't resist the dig!)

In 1986 the “Smerch” MRLS was developed which ensured the hostile targets engagement at the ranges of 20 to 70 km from the firing position.For the first time in the world a rocket projectile equipped with an angular stabilization and range correction system was developed for this type of armament. This ensured more than 2-fold increase in the fire accuracy and precision if compared to the unguided rocket projectile.
The “Smerch” MRLS incorporates some types of the rocket projectiles fitted with cluster fragmentation warhead, blast-fragmentation warhead, sensor-fuzzed submunitions warhead, AT mines warhead, shaped-charge fragmentation submunitions warhead, fuel-air explosive warhead.

So, you're trying to say that your M270 MLRS's unguided rockets are more accurate than ours Smerch's guided rockets?
Yeah, right, and I have a bridge to sell.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Serb


In 1986 the “Smerch” MRLS was developed which ensured the hostile targets engagement at the ranges of 20 to 70 km from the firing position.For the first time in the world a rocket projectile equipped with an angular stabilization and range correction system was developed for this type of armament. This ensured more than 2-fold increase in the fire accuracy and precision if compared to the unguided rocket projectile.
The “Smerch” MRLS incorporates some types of the rocket projectiles fitted with cluster fragmentation warhead, blast-fragmentation warhead, sensor-fuzzed submunitions warhead, AT mines warhead, shaped-charge fragmentation submunitions warhead, fuel-air explosive warhead.

So, you're trying to say that your M270 MLRS's unguided rockets are more accurate than ours Smerch's guided rockets?
Yeah, right, and I have a bridge to sell.

You may have bridges but we have the Golden Gate.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Joseph
Yes the F-111 and the F-4 are today still top aircraft.

One of my favorite memories of an F4 is how loud they were, especially when flying 50 feet over my tent. I think I hit it with a rock on the following pass.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
So, you're trying to say that your M270 MLRS's unguided rockets are more accurate than ours Smerch's guided rockets?
Yeah, right, and I have a bridge to sell.

You would think that with all of that great crap Russia would have taken over the world by now.

Its not what you got but what you do with it.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Vince278


You would think that with all of that great, superior, unmatched equipment Russia would have taken over the world by now.

Don't worry, we will.


p.s. there was a little mistake in your post. I've edit it.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Joseph
Remember the Marine's at Kuwait Airport with our old M60A3s. They kill a small number of T80s

I've my doubts about it. I never heard a single T-80 was sold to Iraq. Can you give me a link about this story? No offence, but during last war in Iraq your media, sometimes was no better than Baghdad's Bob. I mean it reported that Basrah and Um-Quasar (sp?) were captured several times, when in fact they weren't. It reported that Iraqis 15th (iirc) division surrendered, when in fact it didn't. And the same crap.

Information here is a lot easier to come by than in the old Soviet Republic of Russia

You didn't answer the question. What is the source of your information?

No, it was a new airplane. I laugh when I read that.

Good. Iwas trying to joking.

SU-27 A new plane. SU-30 the Naval version, SU-34/32 a strike version and they are coming out with the SU-37 version.

Su-30 isn't a naval version, it's multi-purpose fighter.
Su-33 is naval version (aircarrier based).
Su-34 it's fighter-bomber.
Su-32FN it's a naval modification (to destroy naval targets) of Su-34.
Su-37 it's modification of Su-35 (Super Flanker) multi-purpose fighter.
Su-39 it's something that we Russians call "Shturmovik" (support bomber?)
Su-47 it's fighter of fifth generation with forward-swept wings.

Question: When the Kurks went down, how long was it before the Russian people knew about it. Here, we knew about it on the second day or third day after it when down.

We knew it after few hours.

When I worked at my old job, I knew about almost all Soviet Subs after they sank. Serb, it pisses me off that your navy did not let us help. We would have found it a lot faster and just maybe, we could have save one or more of those sailors. Some of those guys may have lived at lease 3 to 4 days after sinking. The old Soviet Navy mentality came into play, and that is because they lost a boat, they should died for mother Russian and that is bullsh!t. Here we would have done everything possible to save them.

How? Even if you had an equipment needed to save sailors from submarine:
1) It was in USA, thousands miles away. Preparations would take several days anyway.
2) If you can save trapped sailors from American subs, it doesn't mean you can save sailors from Russian subs, because our subs have different construction.

Have you seen K-19 movie? The movie is very real and it did happen.

Yes, I saw it. This movie is the best of everything what Hollywood made about Russians. Sure it was inaccurate and sometimes silly, but I like it anyway.

Serb, here before 9/11 if there was an airshow at Travis AFB, I could take you and no one would ask you any question about you. No ID was required. Since 9/11 Travis has not had an airshow. However some bases are having airshows. We are very open here, and that is why OBL could strike here and get away with it. Now airports are getting tighter on security and checking people getting on planes to fly anywhere.

It's not surprising. I heard now any foreigner should make a finger tip scan when he arrives in USA.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb

Don't worry, we will.


p.s. there was a little mistake in your post. I've edit it.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
How? Even if you had an equipment needed to save sailors from submarine:
1) It was in USA, thousands miles away. Preparations would take several days anyway.
2) If you can save trapped sailors from American subs, it doesn't mean you can save sailors from Russian subs, because our subs have different construction.

The Russians always seemed to have a disturbing lack of concern for human life, even with their own people. If there was even a remote chance to save one sailor they should have gone for it, nationalism be damned.

[Saras]

There were iirc norwegian rescue teams ready to go in immediately, but nooo, Norway is NATO, nyet nyet nyet.

[Vince278]

The Russians seemed to lack the capability to do it themselves. So much for "all of that great, superior, unmatched equipment". I'm sure the sailors on the Kursk would have appreciated anybody's help (probably knowing how much would be coming from the motherland).

[Mordoch]

The Python 4 Missile.


Its an IR guided short ranged air to air missile as nasty as it looks!

Israel's Rafael is now producing the Python 5, an even more advanced missile. Its exterior will be virtually identical to the Python 4, and I couldn't find as good a picture of it, so I decided to stick with showing the Python 4.

[Vince278]

It sure does look nasty! I think I already mentioned earlier my sister helps produce the AMRAAM.

[Serb]

Originally posted by MrBaggins
Of course, Russia won't be in any position, any time soon to be spending 10 billion on an improved sub platform.

Wrong.
First Severodvinsk-class multipurpose nuclear-powered submarine of the new (fourth) generation was commisioned last year. It's at least as stealthy as Seawolf (more probably more stealthy).
During last year also was commisioned SSBN "Yuri Dolgoruky" - the first sub of Borey class (btw, first sub of 5th generation in the world).

"According to experts, a cruiser of the Borey family lag somewhat behind Russian nuclear-powered submarines of the preceding generation of the Typhoon class (btw, the largest subs in the world), but surpass them considerably in the power of its missile armaments. Regarding its combat capabilities, the Yuri Dolgoruky surpasses existing vessels of its class twice or thrice over, and even some promising submarines, because of its low noise level and other parameters that make it difficult to detect in the waters of the world's oceans, even from space. Strategic missile-carrying nuclear-powered submarines of the Borey family will be the mainstay of the Russian navy in the 21st century together with the multipurpose strike nuclear-powered submarines of the newest series, the main vessel of which is the Gepard nuclear-powered submarine that joined the navy in December of 2001. "

[Serb]

Originally posted by Cruddy


LIES!!!

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6290/testbed.htm

WHAT LIES?
I've said our first VTOF was created almost 20 years before Harrier. Is it not true?

First flight 1953, admittedly teathered. The question here is not who had the first operational aircraft - the question is WHO CAME UP WITH THE FIRST DESIGN AND WHO COPIED IT????

IF WE COPIED YOUR DESIGN, THEN HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT WE CREATED FIRST OPERATIONAL VTOF AND PUT IT IN MASS-PRODUCTION MUCH EARLIER THAN YOU DID?

Just look at this photo. What so similar between it and your Harrier? Do you still insit we stole your design?

[Serb]

And this is Harrier:

Damn Russkies.
It's obvious they stole this design from Brits.