Small pic in the OP's first link is not the same as your links. Your links show an aircraft very similar to the F-18 vs. the F-5 lookalike in the OPs's link.
Iran has been able to copy 90% of the F-14's spare parts (supposedly 100% now). The only thing they haven't been able to "clone" with a lot of success is the F-14's engine.
It is reported that the engines on a lot of the F-14s have been swapped with Russian engines.
I believe it was in 1999 (not sure of the date) that Iran flew around 12-16 F-16s in the air in a military exercise after the U.S said that none of their F-14s could fly.
Iran's strength is not their F-14s. Their strength is their Mig-29s which Russia has agreed to upgraded to the limit.
Babbles
Diamond Member
- Jan 4, 2001
- 8,253
- 14
- 81
I think you are attempting to make some argument that the plane is real when I never ever stated that it wasn't. My only observation being that I think some of those images your first posted were photoshopped.
The plane can be real but still have photoshopped images.
This isn't meant to be a deterrent to U.S. forces, but it seems like many of you have misconstrued it as such.
It's not a concern to us but it is to some of their neighbors.
It's not a concern to us but it is to some of their neighbors.
Yep.
F-22 > All.
There is no point anymore for countries that are enemies of the U.S to purchase advanced aircraft from Russia. The F-22 would simply knock them out of the sky.
A fair comparision would be:
Israel's F16s vs Iran's Mig-29s (upgraded to the latest models - Russian tech).
that's obviously photoshopped... maybe for promotional materials, fine but that is a falsified picture. First, it's identical to the previously linked picture. Angle, tilt, etc: idential. The contrast of the rear 'pipes' doesn't match up with the rest of the picture (the contrast overall doesn't match). It appears someone took too much off around the white line area/wheel on the right wing because it's missing sections, that right wing also isn't straight due to photochopping. The areas edited obviously show photoshop blurring effects (i could see it without zooming, but zooming makes it even more obvious), edges are blurred and a fake shadow is inserted just underneath the jet. Someone is trying to use an official FARS News image, poorly photoshop a jet into it, and upload onto imageshack. :Q
my apolgoizes.
It appearss someone did in fact photoshop that image and pulled a "Reuters".
Edit: The forum I got the images from are saying that FARS did not publish that particular photo.
wheresmybacon
Diamond Member
- Sep 10, 2004
- 3,899
- 0
- 76
SamurAchzar
Platinum Member
- Feb 15, 2006
- 2,422
- 3
- 76
That would probably come down to avionics and weapons, Israel is considered to be a top player in that. I'm quite sure the Mig-29 can show just as good performance as an F16 in a dogfight.
DanTMWTMP
Lifer
- Oct 7, 2001
- 15,906
- 13
- 81
Wow, don't say the jet sucks until it's been proven. The F-5 was proven to be a highly agile aircraft, and is more maneuverable than the F/A-18. I don't think any aircraft in the US arsenal is as maneuverable than the Russian aircraft or other foreign aircraft. US has the advantage of a global/space/electronics war machine and a top-notch situational awareness system thing. That's one hell of an advantage. Their aircraft is capable of hanging w/ most of the US inventory, just can't keep up w/ the logistics part.
My dad piloted the F-5 when he was in the Republic of Korea Air Force during the 70s. We just don't have them because, well, they're just old, and I think they're to small to carry as many munitions as the F-16. He said that people loved the aircraft because it was easy to fly, and very very manueverable.
If it weren't for stealth, and a host of other support aircraft/stealth that provide an incredible wealth of information at real time (something most nations do not have), then plane-per-plane, I think this new aircraft is capable performance and capability-wise in keeping up with the current F/A-18s and other aircraft. (article didn't mention if it was the newer superhornet).
The only aircraft that the US has that is superior to anything else is the F-22. Everything else, the world's aircraft can probably hang with.
Just that once you have maphack (lol, it always seems to me that US has maphack and a lot of other HAX
), it doesn't matter what you have. you'll own.
Anyways, LOL @ those who laugh @ the people who produced this aircraft. Are any of you aircraft engineers? You guys laugh at other engineers' creations? I'm an EE grad, and I respect all things created by engineers, no matter what their national origin. So you guys are "proud" of something that your own countrymen who are far smarter than you are create, and laugh at other engineers who are not of your kind? I've met many engineering students from all around the world (well, more notably India, hehe). These guys are smart and work very very hard. To belittle them while you guys have done nothing in creating our own nations aircraft is stupid. Never be proud of what engineers create on behalf of their own country. Get off your lazy ass, and be proud of yourself, and lucky that you live in the damn US.
Never underestimate other humans. You guys are pathetic. :roll:
(and I'm fairly a agnostic conservative...)
My dad piloted the F-5 when he was in the Republic of Korea Air Force during the 70s. We just don't have them because, well, they're just old, and I think they're to small to carry as many munitions as the F-16. He said that people loved the aircraft because it was easy to fly, and very very manueverable.
If it weren't for stealth, and a host of other support aircraft/stealth that provide an incredible wealth of information at real time (something most nations do not have), then plane-per-plane, I think this new aircraft is capable performance and capability-wise in keeping up with the current F/A-18s and other aircraft. (article didn't mention if it was the newer superhornet).
The only aircraft that the US has that is superior to anything else is the F-22. Everything else, the world's aircraft can probably hang with.
Just that once you have maphack (lol, it always seems to me that US has maphack and a lot of other HAX
), it doesn't matter what you have. you'll own. Anyways, LOL @ those who laugh @ the people who produced this aircraft. Are any of you aircraft engineers? You guys laugh at other engineers' creations? I'm an EE grad, and I respect all things created by engineers, no matter what their national origin. So you guys are "proud" of something that your own countrymen who are far smarter than you are create, and laugh at other engineers who are not of your kind? I've met many engineering students from all around the world (well, more notably India, hehe
). These guys are smart and work very very hard. To belittle them while you guys have done nothing in creating our own nations aircraft is stupid. Never be proud of what engineers create on behalf of their own country. Get off your lazy ass, and be proud of yourself, and lucky that you live in the damn US. Never underestimate other humans. You guys are pathetic. :roll:
(and I'm fairly a agnostic conservative...)
I see this come up a lot on here, but hardly anyone knows the terms of that event. India did not beat us in the war games. Read up on exactly what happened. It was never a dogfighting contest, it was an exercise where a small number of planes was jumped by a large number of planes. They did this to test tactics.
The rules of engagement also barred the advanced weapons systems that the few jets did have.
"The Cope India exercises consisted of air combat maneuvers in which pilots would practice their fighter tactics and fly against each other one-on-one, as well as simulated combat scenarios. It was during this simulated combat, which included both ?offensive counterair? and ?defensive counterair? scenarios, that the Indians proved the most formidable, according to the 3rd Wing officials. In the offensive counterair scenarios, a small number of F-15Cs would attempt to intercept an enemy strike aircraft en route to a target that was guarded by a larger number of Indian fighters. In the defensive counterair missions, the F-15s would attempt to defend a target against Indian fighters.
In these offensive and defensive missions, four F-15Cs were usually flying against 10 or 12 of the same model Indian fighter, according to Col. Greg Neubeck, deputy commander of operations for the wing?s 3rd Operations Group and exercise director for Cope India"
The test wasn't really to see who would win such an engagement, it was to see how much of influence the numerical advantage had if a small number of our fighters was surprised by a large number of technically inferior fighters.
The F-15 is a beyond visual range fighter, with a very powerful radar and long range missiles. In this exercise, that was not allowed. It was visual range only. What surprised the experts was how effective simple aircraft like the Mig-21 were in this type of engagement. The crap you read about "India beating us in war games" was pure hype with no thought behind it. If it was a real engagement, the F-15 would simply detect and shoot down the older fighters before they could detect us. But that was not the point of this exercise. We wouldn't learn anything in an exercise like that. In fact, the point was the opposite.
Seeing as how they just declared a cure for aids a short time ago, I would be reluctant to beleive much of what they say...
Yeah they claim to manufacture a jet fighter, but when one of their passenger planes crashes it's the USA's fault because we wouldn't sell them spare parts. :roll:
This is plainly incorrect. The F-5 is not more maneuverable than the F-18. The rest of your post is even more inaccurate.
And how can anyone claim that a direct copy of someone else's (nearly 50 year old) fighter is an impressive display of your own homegrown technology?
This is a direct copy with minor superficial tweaks, and they didn't even bother to upgrade the airframe with ideas which are common now. The F-5 still used the "area-rule" design that was popular in the 50's. Modern fighters do not use that design method.
The F-5 first flew in 1959. That's right, they managed to put dual tails on a 47 year old aircraft.
Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP
Wow, don't say the jet sucks until it's been proven. The F-5 was proven to be a highly agile aircraft, and is more maneuverable than the F/A-18. I don't think any aircraft in the US arsenal is as maneuverable than the Russian aircraft or other foreign aircraft. US has the advantage of a global/space/electronics war machine and a top-notch situational awareness system thing. That's one hell of an advantage. Their aircraft is capable of hanging w/ most of the US inventory, just can't keep up w/ the logistics part.
My dad piloted the F-5 when he was in the Republic of Korea Air Force during the 70s. We just don't have them because, well, they're just old, and I think they're to small to carry as many munitions as the F-16. He said that people loved the aircraft because it was easy to fly, and very very manueverable.
If it weren't for stealth, and a host of other support aircraft/stealth that provide an incredible wealth of information at real time (something most nations do not have), then plane-per-plane, I think this new aircraft is capable performance and capability-wise in keeping up with the current F/A-18s and other aircraft. (article didn't mention if it was the newer superhornet).
The only aircraft that the US has that is superior to anything else is the F-22. Everything else, the world's aircraft can probably hang with.
Just that once you have maphack (lol, it always seems to me that US has maphack and a lot of other HAX
Anyways, LOL @ those who laugh @ the people who produced this aircraft. Are any of you aircraft engineers? You guys laugh at other engineers' creations? I'm an EE grad, and I respect all things created by engineers, no matter what their national origin. So you guys are "proud" of something that your own countrymen who are far smarter than you are create, and laugh at other engineers who are not of your kind? I've met many engineering students from all around the world (well, more notably India, hehe
Never underestimate other humans. You guys are pathetic. :roll:
(and I'm fairly a agnostic conservative...)
calm down there. don't force us to pee on you.
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
You cannot compare fighters jets to passenger jets.
A lot of countries have developed fighter aircraft (including trainers).
Building a plane the size of 747 and having the reliability of a Boeing is pretty difficult. Not even Russia can come close, yet Russian fighter jets are one of the best.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 12K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter