Russia Loses the Quantity War

Kruska · 05-30-2008, 07:58 AM

Hello Henk,

The SA Atlas Cheetah and the Israeli Kfir are indeed very good examples of refitted upgraded aircrafts. Both originate from 60’s Mirage III’s, and were well capable to fight of any new Russian 70’s, 80’s or 90’s fighter. Due to the F-15/F-16 “present” it was off course far cheaper for Israel to abandon the Kfir project rather than continuing the upgrade on their own costs.

Regards
Kruska

Henk · 05-30-2008, 08:49 AM

Yes, even today the aircraft whole spec's is top secret.

The Cheetah entered service in the 80's, but the SAAF did great with the Mirage aircraft in the Bush war in Angola. Gave those Cubans and communist scum everything they had and more. Very brave pilots.

YouTube - Mirage Jet Fighters - Part 3 of 3
Great read this mate.
IPMS South Africa - DENEL Aviation Cheetah

Kruska · 05-30-2008, 09:53 AM

Hello Henk,

Wow, thanks a lot for that fantastic link.

Do you have any good info on the Impala's, I always liked this kind of a/c - simple - rugged - performing on the job.

Even amazing that most of the Impalas were flown by retired or civil reservists who kicked Cuban buts. If someone wouldn't have stashed his pockets, the Cheetah would still be the runner up instead of Saab.

On the public forum I wouldn't be able to tell you much but maybe you want to refer to: http://www.aero-microwave.com/Files/...asurements.pdf

Fritzel and Steiner I know quite well, for more info try EADS and then search for RaSigma, but it will be very difficult/impossible to find details. If you put RaSigma5 and a Cheetah together you would easily have the worlds best fighter/fighterbomber - forget the F-22 just good looks and a lot of propaganda - it wouldn't stand a chance.

The US, Russia and China are exteeeemly interested in this.

Regards
Kruska

The Basket · 05-31-2008, 04:34 AM

It was the SAM missile threat that did the IAF during the Yom Kippor war.

HoHo...underestimating the Russian people and their technology...why didn't NATO invade? We could be in Moscow by teatime?

I'm sure a few people tried and got that wrong.

F-15 pilots were told both in Iraq and Serbia...do not dogfight with a Mig-29...

Luftwaffe pilots themselves said that with the Fulcrums power, Archers, guns and helmet mighted sight would own anything within visual range. Although they were rubbish in any other engagement.

The South African pilots are as good as anything...so are the Isrealis...if you read what the pilots say...especially during the 70s...they would put it down to pilot training. The Fishbed and the Mirage III were very similar in performance and it was the man that made the difference.

Kruska · 05-31-2008, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Basket

It was the SAM missile threat that did the IAF during the Yom Kippor war.

Yes, and by simply showing the cold side of the aircraft, or underflying the Radar the "dreadfull" SAM's were put out of action.

F-15 pilots were told both in Iraq and Serbia...do not dogfight with a Mig-29...

Maybe in Pilot fantasy magazines, the avarage distance for MiG 29 kills was tracking ident 67km, Dot plotting intercept 57km, Radar clouding 55km, 2nd reasure ident 37km, missile launch 28km, who needs a dogfight nowadays?

Regards
Kruska

The Basket · 05-31-2008, 07:34 AM

Er...How many aircraft did the Isrealis lose...to useless SAMs...

F-15s did tangle with Fulcrums within visual range during Desert Storm.

The rules of engagement needed confirmation of enemy in case you brought down a friendly. Therefore you have to get an eyeball on the jet. And a dogfight begins...

If you're comparing modern day then you're missing the point. A war between America and Russia is unlikely and an Iraqi MiG-29 cannot be compared to a Soviet or Russian MiG-29.

It is how Warsaw Pact would take on NATO...

Henk · 05-31-2008, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kruska

Hello Henk,

Wow, thanks a lot for that fantastic link.

Do you have any good info on the Impala's, I always liked this kind of a/c - simple - rugged - performing on the job.

Even amazing that most of the Impalas were flown by retired or civil reservists who kicked Cuban buts. If someone wouldn't have stashed his pockets, the Cheetah would still be the runner up instead of Saab.

On the public forum I wouldn't be able to tell you much but maybe you want to refer to: http://www.aero-microwave.com/Files/...asurements.pdf

Fritzel and Steiner I know quite well, for more info try EADS and then search for RaSigma, but it will be very difficult/impossible to find details. If you put RaSigma5 and a Cheetah together you would easily have the worlds best fighter/fighterbomber - forget the F-22 just good looks and a lot of propaganda - it wouldn't stand a chance.

The US, Russia and China are exteeeemly interested in this.

Regards
Kruska

No problem mate.

Here is a link for the Impala.

IPMS South Africa - Impala Mk1 & Mk2 - Classic Italian design.

Yes the Cheetah is a great aircraft and it was retired way before it's time, but the ANC government wants it that way so who are the rest to complain.

Kruska · 06-01-2008, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Basket

The rules of engagement needed confirmation of enemy in case you brought down a friendly. Therefore you have to get an eyeball on the jet. And a dogfight begins...

Who's rules? the USAF? For this ID problem you have a "window" system - not PC windows

you can also call it a "time, air space sectional" system.

There is absolutly no need nowadays to ID an a/c by visual confirmation - it is however done in peacetimes to ensure the savety for "irregular" civilian a/c - not in a war.

Regards
Kruska

Kruska · 06-01-2008, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henk

No problem mate.

Here is a link for the Impala.

IPMS South Africa - Impala Mk1 & Mk2 - Classic Italian design.

Yes the Cheetah is a great aircraft and it was retired way before it's time, but the ANC government wants it that way so who are the rest to complain.

Thanks Henk,

will do some reading on the Impalas and Cheetah

Regards
Kruska

The Basket · 06-01-2008, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kruska

Who's rules? the USAF? For this ID problem you have a "window" system - not PC windows

you can also call it a "time, air space sectional" system.

There is absolutly no need nowadays to ID an a/c by visual confirmation - it is however done in peacetimes to ensure the savety for "irregular" civilian a/c - not in a war.

Regards
Kruska

I said it happened in the Gulf War...which was a war. The MiG-29 did show up as a friendly so they couldn't fire until the eyeball.

Kruska · 06-01-2008, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Basket

I said it happened in the Gulf War...which was a war. The MiG-29 did show up as a friendly so they couldn't fire until the eyeball.

Yes, I do know how to read, and I wrote that:

There is absolutly no need nowadays to ID an a/c by visual confirmation - it is however done in peacetimes to ensure the savety for "irregular" civilian a/c - not in a war.

Why should - or how should a MiG29 ID or IDF or show up as friendly???, since no friendly operated a MiG29 in the Iraq.

Regards
Kruska

The Basket · 06-01-2008, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kruska

Yes, I do know how to read, and I wrote that:

There is absolutly no need nowadays to ID an a/c by visual confirmation - it is however done in peacetimes to ensure the savety for "irregular" civilian a/c - not in a war.

Why should - or how should a MiG29 ID or IDF or show up as friendly???, since no friendly operated a MiG29 in the Iraq.

Regards
Kruska

Ask the USAF.

Kruska · 06-01-2008, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Basket

Ask the USAF.

I do not think that you correspond with the USAF directly

if so please let me know since I do not.

I asume that you retrive your knowledge from publications and as such you might have missinterpreted some statement or you ignore the simple fact that the USAF does not trust to much in its electronical capabilities and especially airspace-disciplin in regards to warfare.

Regards
Kruska

The Basket · 06-01-2008, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kruska

I do not think that you correspond with the USAF directly

if so please let me know since I do not.

I asume that you retrive your knowledge from publications and as such you might have missinterpreted some statement or you ignore the simple fact that the USAF does not trust to much in its electronical capabilities and especially airspace-disciplin in regards to warfare.

Regards
Kruska

Assume? Ignore?

Do you assume that I ignore?

You tell me that I can't read in my own language?

Well ain't that something.

Kruska · 06-01-2008, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Basket

Assume? Ignore?

You tell me that I can't read in my own language?

Missinterpret doesn't equal to not being able to read one's own language. So why do you bring that up?

If you believe that the Russian equipment on one to one was ever superior, or that you need visual ID before engaging in air-combat, or that a MiG29 in Iraq could show up as a friendly, or that F-15's were told not to air combat Mig29's well you are free to believe whatever. And I feel free to put forward my opinion.

And if you base all your believes on according to USAF - what ever that means -, well go ahead

Just as an example, American military stats. and blah, blah already reported the Vietcong as extinct in 1969 - according to US Army.

Regards
Kruska