[mengala]

The U.S. by the way have Russian mig 29's and Russian su 27's in their inventory.

[mengala]

List Of Military Aircraft Operated By The U.S Airforce
http://www.combataircraft.com/en/Mil...United-States/

[horsecs]

I don't know exactly why I love the F16s so much. Maybe they're the prettiest of all war planes.

[Bletch]

Originally Posted by mengala ↗

The U.S. by the way have Russian mig 29's and Russian su 27's in their inventory.

In the Agressor role I might add. Evaluation and such but not in active duty.

[William May]

Originally Posted by mengala ↗

The U.S. is using b-52 bombers that have been around for just as long. ( I think)

All bombers have to be upgraded for them to be in service for so long. These planes can be equipped with cruise missiles that can travel over a thousand miles away.

Keep in mind the f-16 has been around since the 1970's. And is still considered a good jet. Do you think there have been no upgrades?

According to the Air Force, the B-52's will be 96 years old before they are retired. By then they will be down to a small fleet of rebuilt machines, but still, they will be flying long after the men who engineered them and built them are all dead.

[William May]

Originally Posted by mengala ↗

Countries from all over the world eagerly line up to buy Russian fighter jets, tanks and missiles. There are video documentaries also of U.S. airman who have actually visited Russian airbases and have praised Russian jets.

You really think the su 30, su 34, su35, the legendary mig 29, the mig 35, and the Pak t50 fifth generation fighter jets are just Russian propaganda garbage?

Anyone who has been around Soviet aircraft (and I have, the Mig 15, and the Antonov AN2.) will tell you how well engineered they really are. I was VERY impressed with the sheet metal work I saw. And the systems are equally impressive. Every hydraulic line has a loop or curve in it, so it is easy to disconnect from the adjoining fitting. On U.S. aircraft, the lines are all straight, which means it is a real fight to get lines off of fittings without damaging the sealing area of the line.
Another thing U.S. aircraft have decals all over telling you "For servicing of this unit, consult the maintenance manual" for whatever thing you are looking at. (gear actuator, strut, hydraulic system, etc) On the Soviet aircraft, the decals give you specific information. Material used, limits, servicing procedures, how to tell if the unit is properly serviced, etc. You don't have to go look at a manual. If you are out in a field somewhere with no manuals accessible, you can still keep the aircraft flying with the information they provide.
(Of course, best case (and preferred) is that you ALWAYS use the approved manual. But with a U.Sl aircraft, with no manual, you are screwed, because no servicing point has actual information. (Except maybe fuel systems) (But nothing else)
But still, if a Russian aircraft and a U.S. aircraft are parked at a remote runway in Colorado, the Soviet plane is GOING TO FLY. The U.S. only MIGHT be able to fly, if everything is going ok. I've seen the machines, and as an aircraft mechanic, I can see the differences.
Also, this does NOT look like an engine explosion. It looks like an explosion in the fuselage, right at the trailing edge of the wing. You can see that the aircraft instantly has a wing collapse, and that is why it does a ground loop. It looks like the explosion took off the left wing, and then the aircraft rotated around the portion on the ground, because the right wing and the nose still had the gear under them.

[mengala]

Originally Posted by William May ↗

Anyone who has been around Soviet aircraft (and I have, the Mig 15, and the Antonov AN2.) will tell you how well engineered they really are. I was VERY impressed with the sheet metal work I saw. And the systems are equally impressive. Every hydraulic line has a loop or curve in it, so it is easy to disconnect from the adjoining fitting. On U.S. aircraft, the lines are all straight, which means it is a real fight to get lines off of fittings without damaging the sealing area of the line.
Another thing U.S. aircraft have decals all over telling you "For servicing of this unit, consult the maintenance manual" for whatever thing you are looking at. (gear actuator, strut, hydraulic system, etc) On the Soviet aircraft, the decals give you specific information. Material used, limits, servicing procedures, how to tell if the unit is properly serviced, etc. You don't have to go look at a manual. If you are out in a field somewhere with no manuals accessible, you can still keep the aircraft flying with the information they provide.
(Of course, best case (and preferred) is that you ALWAYS use the approved manual. But with a U.Sl aircraft, with no manual, you are screwed, because no servicing point has actual information. (Except maybe fuel systems) (But nothing else)
But still, if a Russian aircraft and a U.S. aircraft are parked at a remote runway in Colorado, the Soviet plane is GOING TO FLY. The U.S. only MIGHT be able to fly, if everything is going ok. I've seen the machines, and as an aircraft mechanic, I can see the differences.
Also, this does NOT look like an engine explosion. It looks like an explosion in the fuselage, right at the trailing edge of the wing. You can see that the aircraft instantly has a wing collapse, and that is why it does a ground loop. It looks like the explosion took off the left wing, and then the aircraft rotated around the portion on the ground, because the right wing and the nose still had the gear under them.

Very interesting thank you. The mig-21 is also still in service in Syria bombing terrorists. That thing is like what? 70 years old

So what do you think of the new PAK T50 fifth generation fighter jet coming out?

[Broadjumper]

Toys for Russian fanboys

[William May]

Originally Posted by mengala ↗

Very interesting thank you. The mig-21 is also still in service in Syria bombing terrorists. That thing is like what? 70 years old

So what do you think of the new PAK T50 fifth generation fighter jet coming out?

I think it will be a good aircraft. I have heard that there are development problems, but the Russians say those have been solved, and I understand it is going to be in service in the Russian Air Force within a few years. I understand they will also be building them in India. The descriptions of their systems sound very advanced. I have heard that they are very expensive, but when you get into this class of aircraft, they are ALL expensive. But high-tech systems always cost a lot. There is no way around it. The research that is required and the engineering is the biggest expense.

[dwizzy22]

Originally Posted by mengala ↗

Faster than Missiles: Russia Developing Space Age Fighter Jet © Sputnik/ Evgeny Biyatov
RUSSIA
17:31 24.01.2016(updated 17:39 24.01.2016) Get short URL
12138471004
MiG-41. This superfast interceptor is not yet off the drawing board at the Mikoyan military aircraft design bureau, but the final draft may be ready already within the next couple of years with mass production scheduled to begin before 2025, Zvezda television channel reported on Friday.


© FLICKR/ PAVEL VANKA
Adapt and Overcome: New Russian Interceptor to Replace MiG-31
There is not very much known about*the MiG-41 because everything about*this plane, just like*with all top modern military projects, remains classified.
All we know is that the Mikoyan bureau has been working on*the design of*a long-range interceptor, based on*their MiG-31, since*2013 as*part of*a plan to*replace the ageing fleet of*MiG-31 fighter jets whose active service life expires in*2028.

Even though the MiG-31 is the fastest military aircraft around, it will eventually have to*make way for*newer and more advanced types of*aircraft.

Like the MiG-41, which will be years and years ahead of*its predecessors and able to*intercept even the hypersonic drones now being developed in*the United States no existing missiles, except*Russia’s S-500 will theoretically be able to*shoot


Read more: http://sputniknews.com/russia/201601...#ixzz3yIZTUXkN

Not to mention their unmanned heavy calvolry, most underestimate the Russians however they have balls and have nothing to prove when there is a objective to achieve.