Thrawn's Revenge
Off Topic => The Lounge => Topic started by: Raptor on August 10, 2007, 03:43:23 PM
-
Well,
Locheed Martin, F-22, F-35, F-117, F-16, SR-71...
-
They're all so good, I think, with so many different aircraft. Northrop. It had the original idea for a flying wing bomber.
-
Flying wing was invented in Germany, just before the end of WWII. And why is there only 3 American corporation? And all of them make planes.
-
Use propper grammar and i should understand you.
-
Well where are all the german and russian arms manufacturers. and there are many more in many different country. 3 american corporations and none of those has done any good weapon/tank/aircraft or anything that has something to do with military. They all suck!
-
Well,
Locheed Martin, F-22, F-35, F-117, F-16, SR-71...
-
None of those is good in my opinion. kinda weird to make a poll where is things to vote are companies you like.
-
It has been edited.
-
From those I have to say Mikoyan-Gurevich. They make good planes. But the best weapons manufacter there is either Izhevsk Mechanical Works or Valmet.
-
F-22 is todays superior air-to-air combat plane.
-
but they are not numerious. Hell ME-262 was the best fighter in WWII but that din't help the germans, did it. And Tiger and Panther were the best tanks but it didn't help them.
-
The ME-262 was not agile enough.
-
it was well armed and faster than any plane allies could send against it. I would have won every dogfight had it been 1:1.
-
P-51 all the way.
-
agile yes. but not so well armed.
-
agile and fast.best plane of WW2.
-
It also lost for german Focke-Wulf 190. 190 had better armament and agility.
-
The U.S. pilots were superior and thats why we won.
-
No allied pilot, not american, british, russian, ever got over 100 kills. the best pilots were germans/austrians. The best got 352 and second best got 301 kills. and then there is big list of those who got over 200 and even bigger list of those who got over 100. And even the best finnish pilot beated all allies with 94 kills. So how can you be the best?
-
There was an American pilot with 600 kills.
-
And what was his name, I wonder.
The best alliedpilot was a RUSSIAN, Ivan Kozhedub with 62 kills.
The best western allied pilot was Marmaduke 'Pat' Pattle, south african, with 51+ kills
Richard I. Bong was the best american pilot with 40 kills.
Hell there are even romanians who have more kills. and 6 finnish pilots.
-
U.S. pilots stink so bad why did we win the war?
Never do that again.-Arbiter
-
I don't say they stink I just say that they didn't because they were the best. they won because the had fuel for planes, and most importantly they had planes.
And did you write that Arbiter took away? Did you I was a Nazi? c'mon sent it to me in PM.
-
It was about 6 pages worth of :P s
-
I would have wanted to read it. I want to know what raptor says so that I can counter mock him.
-
He didn't actually write anything, as I said, it was just a load of:
:P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P
That.
-
I find it hard to believe you. :-\ :-\
-
I don't say they stink I just say that they didn't because they were the best. they won because the had fuel for planes, and most importantly they had planes.
And did you write that Arbiter took away? Did you I was a Nazi? c'mon sent it to me in PM.
I did not say you were a Nazi.
-
it was just a guess that I got after I read arbiters reaction.
-
Who else voted Lockheed Martin?
-
I didnt vote because once again you forget to put an 'other' option
-
yep. it isn't there very often. but can't you post the name of the company you favour?
-
well i like mitsubishi they do cool helicopter gunships
-
id say either heckler and koch or colt
-
H&Ks MP-5 is good. But the best is RK-62.
-
G-36 is the gun of the future
-
you mean for Germany?
-
isn't G-36 the main assault rifle of german army?
-
Yes, and alot of other militarys use it
-
yes. But I still prefer RK-62
-
RK-26? Never heard of it
-
RK-62 is finnish made assault rifle that took model from AK-47. And after that Israel took model from RK-62 and designed their own weapon. RK-62 is the main assault rifle of Finnish Army.
-
Oh, but im glad you brought up Israel, they make amazing guns
-
And they make good planes and other stuff. My favorite gun they made is ht uzie.
-
i like the desert egale sweet gun
-
Games make too big a deal out of the desert eagle, its not really as amazing as games make it
-
i dont like it because of the games, i like it because of the idea of fifty cal pistol :P
-
crap cant remember who makes the Su-47 bekerut the best fighter in the world suppioror to even our f-22 so once again raptors wrong
-
the f22 is almost invisible to radar, is that other one?
-
The Russian su-47 isnt invisible to radar, and neithr is it superior to the f-22, there is only a single su-47 in the entire world, only one ever produced
-
Pitiful! The US obviously has an even better fighter in "Area 51". The SU-47 is no where near the full capabilities of the F-22. We dont even know them!
-
crap cant remember who makes the Su-47 bekerut the best fighter in the world suppioror to even our f-22 so once again raptors wrong
looks likes like they/re on my side. and the F-22 is superior to the SU-47. So once again long name is wrong.
-
Jesus, u two have issues with each other
-
I think you can't say which one is better before they have fought against each other.
-
Thats the problem nowadays
-
yep. Raptor may seem better but who knows what wopuld happen it if met SU-47 in battle.
-
exactly
-
If i had to say though, id say Raptor
-
well it also depends on a pilot.
-
I guess, so lets not try then
-
lets say they are equal so we don't hurt anyone.
-
Okay, or each has its strengths and weaknesses
-
that sounds nice. something that a politicians would say.
-
Sweet, im working my way up to president already, see you at the top
-
good luck on that one.
-
I just need to be a movie star, be governer of California, and then be somebody everybody likes, hell ill be just like Reagan and Arnold
-
time will show what happens.
-
well it also depends on a pilot.
A monkey could beat a SU-47 in an F-22!
-
No, a monkey wouldn't stand a chance
-
SU-47 after combat with F-22:
(http://www.adapage.com/magazzino/Immagini%20Esplosioni/nuclear_explosion%2006.jpg)
-
wow, you guys are just too thick-skulled
-
are you an anti american?
-
Indeed, its not thick headedness its just patriotism and the realization that there is no more powerful country than the USA.
-
Im with you. Even if a country is more advanced you never believeit.
-
Why would the SU-47 have a nuclear exploson after it's destruction? And how do you measure the most powerful country?
-
And you two (not meyer) think not only is US the most powerful, which isnt neccessarily wrong, you also think everything the US has is better than anything else, which just isnt true
-
i american and i still thik the same thing and u should reall not under extimate the abilitys of russian planes for a long time migs were a lot better than our planes our pilots were just better trained
-
I dont know that Migs were the better planes
-
They were, in the fifties and in the early part of Vietnam, but do you see any MIGs nowdays?
-
Yeah, in Russia
-
Do they still make them??
-
they are the main fighters of russian. And I say they are good fighters.
-
basically every plane Russia makes is a mig
migs are okay, they're on the downhill though
-
I believe they can defend russia quite adequately, and that is a bad thing.
-
I watched somethin on CNN or something like that about Russias airforce now, its in real bad shape, their pilots hardly get their paychecks and they only average an hour a month of flight time or something like that
-
yep russia is in decay, for now. But they will rise again and I hope they don't rise in my lifetime. Because if USA isn't down by then we will have new cold war.
-
USA isnt goin down anytime soon, and Russia may get that started again without even getting back on its feet, they're makin a big deal about our missle defences in Europe
-
yep. but history shows that all nations will fall someday.
And that missile defense thing is bad in my opinion. it has heated the relationships of countries.
-
Id rather have a defence than a better relationship myself
-
easy for you to say. Russia isthe richest country in the world when measures in natural resurcis. And Finland and many other european country depends on russian improted gas and whateverelse comesfrom there.
-
So, they dont like us defending ourselves, they can get over it
-
russia also makes su-47 a differnt companythan the migs
-
They dont make it, they made it, theres only one
-
by that i mean the su line 47 35 ect 27
-
??? ??? ???
-
what's there to wonder about.
-
Isnt it the same thing?
-
what is the same thing?
-
no each plane is different and has diffret traits and designs as well as roles
Su-37 flanker
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z293/phoenixsawyerr/Su-35_Flanker.jpg)
Su-27
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x126/ScotRanger/SukhoiSu-27-1.jpg)
and my favorite the bekarut
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a112/pnkboarder13/acecombat.jpg)
This is a mig 31
(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e176/tdeblasio/mig-31_pic2.jpg)
mig 29
(http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m135/anrfknm/800px-MiG-29_fuselage.jpg)
see the difference
-
That's a commie plane.
-
which one are you referring to? I mean they all are commie planes. and they are good I'm affraid.
-
russia is no longer comunist so they are no longer commie planes
-
Yes they are. They were made by the Soviet Union and are used by commies today.
-
Meyer you are right, im sad to say those are good and commie planes, but when put in comparison to:
F-22
(http://www.australianflyingcorps.org/files/afc/2/f22.jpg)
F-18
(http://www.lemoore.navy.mil/files/photos/F-18%20Pictures/F18plane.jpg)
F-16
(http://www.rjktech.com/assets/images/F-16.jpg)
F-15
(http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/imgs/f15.jpg)
F-14
(http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-14-HP_VF31_bankright.jpg)
SR-71
(http://www.asminternational.org/images2/cof/a0503_4b.jpg)
A-10
(http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/a-10/images/a10_2.jpg)
B-52
(http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_B-52_Ordnance_Display_lg.jpg)
B-2
(http://lynx.uio.no/jon/gif/aircraft/B-2.jpg)
and F-117
(http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-117_02-front.jpg)
they were nothing.
-
Can i point out that the SR-71 didnt have any weapons and doesnt really count?
-
and I would like to point out that those russian planes are adequate enough to destroy USA. or any other country.
-
Im not saying Russian planes are bad, i mean they are solid warplanes, but i still think that American fighters are the better of the 2
-
I can't say as they have never fought against each other. and there are flaws in american planes too. they are not as invincible as you might want to think.
-
I know they arent invincible, but they're pretty damn good
-
so where german planes and tanks but that didn't help them did it?
-
Cause there werent enough of them, and you are talking about American planes, if they had to the us could turn them out in the hundreds
-
true. but remeber that at the start of the war german Luftwaffe was the best trained and one of the largest air forces in the war. but it changed. During peace those planes and their numbers seem to be enough but when the war comes you realize you need much than you.
-
When a war starts you always need more of everything, Germany just couldnt keep up
-
and that was good for us all.
-
Yeah, especially you, i always wondered that if Hitler had taken all of Europe and such, that he could have taken the US
-
very propably he would have conguered the whole world
-
I just dont know how he would have been able to pull off a successful invasion across the Atlantic
-
why across atlantic? Had he destroyed russian army he could have brought his forces from siberia to alaska. and he could have asked help from japan.
-
Moving an entire army through siberia, waiting till the right time of year to be able to cross to Alaska? He might have tried it but i doubt it would have worked
-
but he would have had the time. but now I think we should return to the topic. we are quite far from it right now.
-
Right, General Electric is a cool company, they make the modern miniguns
-
Do you mean sub machinegun?
-
No, i mean minigun
(http://www.code-matrix.net/guns/gem134.jpg)
You know, like that
-
How bout Gatling gun.
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/3/33/300px-GAU-8_avenger.jpg)
Thats whats on the A-10.
-
ah finally i know what a gatling gun is.
but hell gimme some targets a silenced sniper and ammo and im happy
-
give me a piano wire and I'll be very happy. ;D ;D
-
Why use a sniper rifle when you could unleash over 10,000 rounds per minute of lead fury?
-
M82 Barrett. I would take that rrather than a gatling gun. GG is very heave and it ain't so easy to hide.
-
(http://www.xcalibertactical.com/images/Howitzer.jpg)
you could handle it
-
now that's a minigun, not a gatling gun. and How do you know it's real?
the fastest gatling gun RPM is 9000-10000. made in russia, caliber 23mm. That could be nice.
-
I know its real, its made by general electric
and if you want fast, check out the metal storm guns
they can hit 45,000 rounds per minute
-
yep. but they are not in very great use at the moment, are they?
-
they are still being fully developed, but why does that matter? it works
-
It sound cool.
-
ill stick to the classic thes pistol are actually mine no joke
(http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u226/All_Wheel_Driven/WaltherP38.jpg)(http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w313/lecavo/WaltherP38K.jpg)
-
they are still being fully developed, but why does that matter? it works
yes it works. but I wouldn't get one of those. they must be expensive.
-
Most all modern military weapons are expensive
-
but not all. nearly everyone can afford to buy an AK-47 Kalashnikov. the best assault rifle in the world.
-
I'd have to go with Lock-Mart, the F-18 has always been one of my favorite plane and the F-22 is really ahead of its time.
there was an exercise recently that pitted 4 F-15s against a single F-22 in a mock dogfight.
the F-22 won hands down
some of the F-15 pilot's comments were interesting. they were frustrated that while they could see the raptor right in front of them they couldn't get a lock, and when they tried closing to gun range it simply out turned them.
-
but not all. nearly everyone can afford to buy an AK-47 Kalashnikov. the best assault rifle in the world.
if its the best rifle in the world why dousnt the british,american or other country's military use them
-
well if the F-22 is the best fighter in the world, as some in he reclaim, why doesn't anyone else use it but USA? and it too in small numbers.
Get it?
-
but the ak47 isnt anywhere near as expensive as f22 ak27 arnt expensive guns
-
and that is why they are good. cheap, easy to produce and maintain and effective.
And what has the fact that F-22 is costly to do with this?
-
the F-22 is still to new to be exported, you won't see too many being sold until we have an upgraded version or something better to replace it.
-
but the ak isnt the best rifle the brits dont use it the americans dont im not sure the russians do but i do know is that it is the most popular rifle
-
yeah, f-22 isnt used because the US has hardly started using it
And the ak is probably the most popular, but easily not the best
-
scarecrow23 you are sane unlike meyer who cannot admit the ak isnt the best gun
-
well it is the most used and popular. and why would so many people use a gun that isn't good? I don't see many terrorist using american or british assault rifles. and they are also cheap and easy to get. And I admit that AK-47 isn't the best ASSAULT RIFLE in the world if you can give me a reason why some other is better. and note we are talking ASSAULT RIFLES, not all guns. who would claim that AK-47 is better than a jet fighter?
Took you guite long time too see that I'm insane, Kratas.
-
So many use it because its cheap and really easy to get, other guns its not, remember Russia during the cold war and even now is like a military surplus megastore
And severaly guns are better, like the G-36
-
I ain't so sure about that. it does have a smaller caliber than AK-47, doesn't it? I rather have more power, not some toy gun that can't even shoot through a leaf coverage.
-
No, the G-36 round is thinner but longer, and gives more penetration
And the muzzle velocity of the G-36 is much higher, as well as its range
-
yes. it has better MV and ROF but it's a bit longer which makes it harder to use in small spaces and it has a weaker caliber which is little compesated with is MV. would be nice to know their PPU.
-
no, i was saying the bullet was longer but thinner, at ranges of less than 200 meters, the g-36 round penetrates alot more than the ak-47. As well the Ak can only effectively hit up to 300 meters, while the g-36 can hit 800 effectively, so the ak round is only the harder hit at ranges of about 200-300 meters
the g-36 gun itself is shorter and lighter than the ak
-
it's shorter without the barrel but without it it is useless. and the fact that it is longer, yeah some 2mm. not so much and how does the fact that it is thinner help it having more penetration?
-
it's shorter without the barrel but without it it is useless. and the fact that it is longer, yeah some 2mm. not so much and how does the fact that it is thinner help it having more penetration?
Shotrter without the barrel? i didnt say without the barrel, barrel included its shorter than the ak
And a bullet with less width has more penetration, its just physics
-
AK-47 length: 870
G-36 length: 999
And of course it depends on model.
And know scarecrow says something that totally negates everything I have written, I admit I was wrong saying AK-47 is the best assault rifle when it is not anymore (but the best still comes from russia) and then we return to topic which is about companies, not assault rifles. and everybody is happy.
-
well the ak-47 has a manufacturing company and is still on topic
-
yep but we were not talking about the company but the gun itself.
-
Favourite military manufacturing company.. i would have to say BAE Systems. But for military technology it would be QinetiQ.
-
what have they done?
-
BAE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems
QinetiQ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QinetiQ
-
Scramjets, thats cool stuff
-
i like sukhio because i dont belive my countrys propaganda abut we have the best equip ment and bblah blah blha
-
propaganda?
-
well that it is. They give the impression that USA has the best equipment. that is possible but then again not necessarily the truth. propaganda.
-
No, they dont really do that, besides, it mostly is the best ;D
I did hear on the news about some new Russian bomb thats the most powerful non-nuclear weapon out there, anyone else know what im talking about?
-
trust me that is propaganda. at least if it comes from russian sources. And I'm sure USA also uses propaganda when boasting it's military vehicles and planes.
-
Theres no need for propaganda, why would the US need it?
And the bomb things real, US and China inspectors are checking it out or something like that
-
Every government needs propaganda. trust me. it is unavoidable.
-
Not really, its not like US citizens are gonna riot cause we dont have the best military, hell i doubt they'd care much if we didnt even have one
-
but do you think that all info that is told to you about Iraq is true? but maybe you are right. it ain't propaganda anymore. it is controlling what is told and what isn't told to people.
-
What info told to me about Iraq?
And with all the reporters and the internet, its really hard to control anything from getting out.
But that Russian bomb is supposedly 4 times more powerful than the US MOAB
-
and MOAB is big so count on that. wouldn't want to get one of those on my neck.
Why doesn't USA bomb every town in Iraq if they attack against USA and it's allied forces? that should stop the rebels. no more recruits, no more bomb attacks.
-
Yeah, and no more Iraq either, thats just retarded
-
true. we should forget Iraq. but we can't with all those fucking refugees coming here. why can't they just stay home? OK no it's past.
I watched news just now and there was little info about that russian bomb.
-
go to cnn.com its under world news
-
nice video. great looking bomber.
-
Its okay, like the us b-1b lancer
-
except bigger. which explains why there is only couple of them made. two if I remember right.
-
Its better than what we use for the moab, we use a c-130, boring
-
isn't c-130 hercules a propeller plane? why not use b-52 or b-2?
-
Im not sure, when they drop the MOAB though, they let a parachute drag it out of the back, maybe the b-52 and such arent designed to hold that big a bomb above the bomb doors, it was just easier to use the c-130 for now
-
propably. but it is a quite slow plane isn't it?
-
I just looked it up, they use the c-130 cause of its size and weight, it is 30ft long and 21000 pounds
Its not that slow, sure it is compared to a fighter, but its already used as a close support gunship
-
C-130's rock.
(http://www.efluids.com/efluids/gallery/gallery_images/C-130_Hercules_a.jpg)
-
Flares? come on, this is why they rock
(http://vietnam.cncguild.net/images/wallpaper/ac130_wallpaper1024x768.jpg)
-
Those flares are good to distract missiles but not AA-gun ammos. I would rather be in that russian bomber.
-
And speaking of military hardware:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6990690.stm which is referring to http://www.dsei.co.uk/
-
It be much more fun in an ac-130
-
It would. Nice pic by the way, I like the quote.
-
Imagine if you were the one they were shooting at
-
I hope I would a few Stingers with me.
-
oh russia has mad A Foab father of all bombs stronger than the moab kind like a fuel air bomb and moab combined
-
No, the Moab and Foab are two different types of bomb, Foab doesnt combine anything Moab
-
its Just like a Op Moab And it acts like a fule air bomb and its lighter than the moab
-
But the only thing the Foab has that the Moab does is the same name (sorta)
-
id belive same typeof detinator
-
Actually no, since they're two different types of bombs, they use two different detonator mechanisms
-
but doesn't they both operate on same principle? I mean they're both thermobaric weapons. one of the main difference between them is that FOAB has a blast radius twice as large as MOAB.
-
No, they're not both thermobaric
Thermobric is airburst
The MOAB is just like a normal bomb, it simply blows up when detonated, except it just is bigger and uses a more powerful explosive
The Foab is the thermobaric one, it bursts in the air, spreading fine particles to mix with oxygen and is then detonated
-
Still it a convitinakl explosive and it is not only air burst it both regulsar bomb and air burst find the video on youtube
-
Its still not the same, trust me, they use different detonation techniques
-
jut look at the way it blows it looks like a souped up moqab
-
What dont you get? they arent the same
maybe if i say it in simpler terms you'll get it
The moab is like a firecracker, you lite the fuse and it blows up
The foab is like you blew a whole bunch of gunpowder in the air and then lit it on fire
-
more like The moab is throwin a grenade the foab is openig up a can of whoop ass
:laugh:
topic
-
I would say Valmet if it was on the list.
-
Of course, a Finnish company
-
well they manufacture most of our infantry guns and artillery. of course they are my favourite. And don't forget that Finland has produced quite a few weapons that have been used as models for other weapons for other countries.
-
Like what?
-
Suomi-machine gun was used as a model for russian PPSH-41. And RK-62 was used as a model for Israel produced Galil.
-
The Gilel was modeled after the AK-47, not the RK-26
-
The IDF developed the Galil assault rifle on basis of Rk 62. straight from wikipedia.
But it could be siad to be based on AK-47, as RK-62 is said to the best AK-47 variant in the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rk-62
-
I don't see where it says the Galil was based off of it
And the rk 62 was based on the AK, so maybe you're confusing the 2
-
look on the versions subtitle, second paragraph. the last sentence. but as it's wikipedia it could be false info. but there it is.
-
Well, i know it was mainly based on the AK, but it might have gotta something from the 26
And speaking of the Galil, Israel makes amazing guns, like my personal favorite, the uzi
-
and Desert Eagle.
-
I don't really count that one, Magnum made it first and then had them improve it
But the Tar-21 is all Israel, very nice assault rifle
-
i want a RK-62 Nice gun indeed
-
Its okay, im more a fan of sub-machine guns myself
-
my fav sup mg is probaly the Mp-5 Or the Good ol Tommy gun
-
Not gonna lie, tommy gun is sweet
Gotta go with the p-90 though
-
Assault Rifle. invented by germans and now used by every modern army.
-
gun, invented by Chinese, now used by everyone
-
Actually I'm not sure if chinese invented guns if you man like pistols and such. they invented black powder and artillery.
-
you get my point though
-
yep.
-
we are a remarkable spices alway new ways to kill each other
-
like you and your brilliant ww3 idea
-
but he is right. humans have never laked ways of how to kill other humans.
-
Which will eventually be our downfall...
-
or will it?
-
If we keep killing one another and developing more "efficient" ways of killing, eventually we might end up deliberately/accidentally wiping ourselves out..
-
It'll probably happen eventually, and not neccesarily with weapons, maybe disease or something
-
Like the T virus
-
something makes me doubt a zombie plague, but who knows
-
zombies=not possible get it through your head
-
well maybe a virus that turns people brain dead.
-
if they were brain dead they couldn't move
-
well let's say they keep some of their moving ability.
-
The only thing they retain is motor skills?
-
Then they would also need brain power to want to actually do something besides breathe
-
yep. but I'm no expert in these sort of things. What company would produce these bio-weapons?
-
secret ones we dont know about
-
of course And we Dont know About Area-51
-
Area 51 isnt a company, its an airfield, and its not really what all its cracked up to be
-
yeah. I mean why would us government keep it as a secret if there were ufos? wouldn't it help them if they tell it to everyone and ask from congress money to research those ufos?
-
No, cause then everyone would freak out, i mean think what everyone would do if suddenly they knew there were aliens and the government didn't tell them
And all area 51 is an airfield where they test new planes, they dont do anything much there besides that
-
I don't think people would freak out if it would be revealed that there is other life in this galaxy. 1950s maybe people would have been scared but I don't think that it would be such a shock. people would more likely be excited to hear more.
-
I dont think so. Its just another avenue to attack Bush. (although he it wouldn't have been his fault.
-
although if there were aliens, what did we get from the technology?
-
There is the possibility that we made the technology (in secret) to find another race and they are no more or less advanced than us.
-
Now that's something no one believes. but maybe there is a company that is trying to build a very advanged space ship.
-
Advanced or not, the physics to travel fast enough for the spaceship to be worth anything arent favorable
-
at this moment. but who knows what the future brings.
-
It would be really cool to travel anywhere near the speed of light
-
why not the speed of light itself?
-
I dunno. Maybe speed of light is too easy.
-
well speed of light would be amazing, but anywhere close would still be cool
-
true. maybe I should try and invent that kind of an machine.
-
suomi is finland in finnish if im correct?
-
yep. may I ask why did you want to know that?
-
was just asking
thats all
-
TOPIC!
Vadereclipse, if you have any other linguistic questions for Meyer, could you PM him instead please?
-
I would take my vote out as this is quite stupid poll. there's six choices and 4 of those are american companies. I why not just as the favourite american military manuefacturing company?
-
You have to remember Raptor made this poll
-
yep. it is pretty clear
-
He doesnt know any other military companies. Besides, who would vote for any other than an American company other than you and M-t-I?
-
I might, depending on the category, unlike most people Im not completely biased
-
and it is quite stupid to make a poll that's name suggests that there are companies from many countries, not only for usa. if the name had been "your favourite american company" then it would be fine. and quite frankly, most american weapons aren't even so good.
-
A lot of people might not vote for an American company, there are a range of nationalities present on this forum, and everyone has their own opinions and beliefs.
-
yep. here are canadians, british, finn and even a russian here.
-
whos the Russian?
-
i assume its sukhoi by the name
-
M-T-I. at least he has russian relatives so he is at least a part russian.
-
I wouldn't consider him Russian
-
well I do
-
are there any remaining english military manufacturing companies?
or is that part of englands imndustrial decline?
-
I think there are some. but I can't remember any names.
-
cool
UK is dead industrially
all financial now
-
BAE systems, they just build alot of stuff and bought alot of the companies
They were a big part of the Harrier II and the Challenger II, among others
-
i quite liked the harrier
-
it's nice. but it's not so new so I think it will be replaced sometime near future.
-
the sea harrier has stopped production
-
Its gonna be replaced by the F-35 Lightning II if i remember right
-
but isn't the F-35 Lightning II an american plane?
-
will this lightning become somewhat of an apache, or is it released
(by apache i mean will spend yers being perfected)
-
but isn't the F-35 Lightning II an american plane?
yes, its American, but we signed a contract with Britain for them to buy some, along with alot of other countries
will this lightning become somewhat of an apache, or is it released
(by apache i mean will spend yers being perfected)
They have working production models and its gonna start replacing American planes in 2011, im not sure if that means the other countries get it then too or not
And its designed to be second only to the f-22 Raptor in air to air combat
-
what is designed isn't always achieved.
-
Im sure they did fine this time
-
I still dont understand why its designed not to be the best. Why? Why can't we use the F-22? This just shows how wimpy our country is becoming.
-
We're still gonna use the F-22, the F-22 will be the primary air superiority fighter
But the F-35 is designed for use by the Marines and Navy because, unlike the F-22, it has the ability to take off and land vertically
So we'll use both, i mean what airforce in the world uses a single airplane design?
-
none. yet. maybe someday some country, propably usa, russia or china will develop a fighter that is good at combat, cheap to manufacture and easy to repair.
-
what is china's military like other than huge?
-
well it's propably one of the strongets in the world. and large and adcvanced enough that usa and russia fear it.
-
really? its the single largest in the world, but i disdnt know how advanced it was
-
advancent enough to destroy usa. and FYI china isn't the largest country in the world russia is. china has the most population, about 4 times the population of usa. so don't say that they aren't a threat to usa because americans fear iran is a threat to them. and iran is no where near as large threat to usa as china or russia. in the words of Homer J. Simpson: "suck it up!"
-
i know china isnt the largest country in the world
chinas 3rd or 4th (depending on source)
but china has the highest populstion
-
didn't I mjust mention it?
-
oh yeah
overlooked it
FYI, russia has roughly a 12th the population of China
and yeah
bush's paranoia about Iran is ridiculous
Iran support no problem
even if they get 1 nuke bush has hundreds
and to make a point, bush is a huge hypocrite
-
It is your opinion. But how could China beat USA in a war? There main income comes from USA. And on the degree of technology, it can't hope to beat USA. How can you say " USA and Russia fear it"? It doesn't take much to scare either one today. You don't have to try to scare Russia. They are a good ally but they'd be toast.
-
meyer said it, not me
britain are better trained than USA, but uSA would win out of number
-
so you say that usa would beat china in a war? Tell me how do you win in a nuclear war? everybody loses. both countries (china and usa) have enough nuclear weapons to pulverize each other in a war. and if you don't use nukes china has great advance in manpower. and chinas main income doesn't come usa. it comes from rich corporations all over the world. and russia too can destroy usa if they wish. of course usa would retaliate but it would only result in total destruction off both countries. And the reason why usa has failed in last few major scale wars, meaning Korea and Vietnam, is that they underestimated their enemy and their technology. And you're doing it again. China has as good technology as usa.
-
so you say that usa would beat china in a war? Tell me how do you win in a nuclear war? everybody loses. both countries (china and usa) have enough nuclear weapons to pulverize each other in a war. and if you don't use nukes china has great advance in manpower. and chinas main income doesn't come usa. it comes from rich corporations all over the world. and russia too can destroy usa if they wish. of course usa would retaliate but it would only result in total destruction off both countries. And the reason why usa has failed in last few major scale wars, meaning Korea and Vietnam, is that they underestimated their enemy and their technology. And you're doing it again. China has as good technology as usa.
China doesn't have as good as technology as the US, but its close enough that a doesn't make a huge difference
And the US military didn't fail in Korea and Vietnam, In Korea the last few months they were simply holding their line, which they did and is still there
In Vietnam the US won almost every single if not every military encounter worth noting against the North, the problem was the stupid hippies wanting everyone to go home
And sure china has alot of manpower, but i doubt they have the logistics to move them and supply them in a full scale invasion across an ocean
-
this isn't the topic for this conversation.
and you're once again assuming something you don't know for sure. do you know the logistic capabilities of china? I doubt it. why? because china doesn't reveal that kind of info to anyone. You only assume that what you have been told in your school is the right thing and evertything else is wrong. like the idea that usa isn't as strong as it wants everyone to believe and that china and russia are much bigger threat to usa than is revealed. And only the result in war counts. in SW Empire won most important battles against rebellion before Endor but still rebels won the war. And I know that that wasn't the best example. because in history books it says that usa lost the war. and korean war. country with so big technological superiority was beaten by china armed with russian made weapons. you had beaten north korean army but when china came in you coulnd't beat them.
and we really should soon get back to topic.
-
Taught in school? my school doesn't teach me anything about wars or anything actually worth learning
And we could have beaten China, the president didnt want to invade though afraid that it would spark a nuclear war
-
but why didn't you then just drive the chinese forces out of Korea? because you couldn't. because russian weapon manufacturers, MIG and Izhevsk Mechanical Works, made better weapons than american factories. just face it.
and if you want to continue please a different topic for that.
-
and didn't the chinese finish off sk? because they couldn't
and the Russian weps had nothing to do with it, there were just too many chinese, the russian stuff wasnt any better
-
no they couldn'
-
how did it show to be better? by not winning? and you've given one thing, the ak, and yet you call all russian equipment better
-
not to mention MIG-fighters and T-34 tanks for example.
-
they were no better, us planes had the better kill ratios
-
yeah. but you also had fewer planes and your pilots had better training back then. and not even a good plane can compensate training.
-
so the US planes were outnumbered and still did better?
hmmm, why is it that migs are better again?
-
why did german pilots got most kills in WWII while allies had better planes and germans were outnumbered? answer that and you answer your own question.
-
weren't you just saying German planes werre better?
-
yes I said. but most yanks in here have made it quite clear that they think usa had the best planes in WWII. I don't believe it but let's assume I do.
-
still doesnt tell me y migs were better
-
well they were if they were able to compete your planes even a decade later in Vietnam. Or do you claim that your plains were the same caliber in both wars?
-
what does that have to do with korea? if you're gonna say something is better back it up with some facts
-
Meyer has always talked out of his butt. The Korean War was not a full out invasion and that was 50 years ago. Viet Nam War once again not a full out invasion, and there was hippie propaganda. By the way, the MiGs were always copying the US planes. And if no one knows the names of those companies and no one bothers to care, why do you say they are the best?
-
Why do you say no one knows the names of those companies? and where do you get the idea that MIG planes were copies of american ones? And are you trying to say that you can't count the Vietnam War as a loss as it was a result of hippies (who everybody hate, even me) and their anti-war opinion? And that anti-war opinion doesn't have great effect on your war crimes in Iraq right now. Your democracy doesn't work well on there. and you just should have suppressed the hippes with force instead now decades later putting all blame on them and whine that we would have won without them. And why I say they are the best? I'm not saying that. I say they build equal to yours. (in today)
-
russian weapon manufacturers, MIG and Izhevsk Mechanical Works, made better weapons than american factories. just face it.
looks like you did say they were better
And we got out of Vietnam because of the stupid hippies, we were winning, we were never losing
And you say we have war crimes in Iraq and thats bad and then the next sentence you say we should have suppressed our own people with force
-
do you see that I used a past form "made" not make or do. I think that they still do good weapons but you do equally good. and that war in vietnam, do you really think those hippies had that much influence. maybe they did, but I believe they were used as an excuse so you can pull back. why pull back? whatfor where you there fighting and losing men? Killing innocent civilians is a crime and you are responsible for all the deaths in Iraq that happen daily because of suicide bombers. and they are not american and not under your rule or at least they shouldn't be. Every nation can kill it's own citizen without anyone caring about it. Hitler did it in Germany before WWII, Stalin throughout his regime. And no one said anything about it. maybe little discontent was shown but nothing else.
-
Its not our fault the people over in Iraq are killing themselves, they were already doing it before we got there
And it was the hippies that made the American people turn against the war in Vietnam, and therefore was suicide for the government to stay in Vietnam, we were winning
-
only the end matters, not what happened before it. and before usa attack on iraq there weren't daily news about suicide bombers blowing themselves up. and you're the ones who attacked and killed, what was it, 9 or more civilians when hunting "terrorists".
and how do we always end up talking iraq and usa and it's foreign politics?