us and russia

[Ulysses]

The Russians did come over during the US civil war to buy military technology. I do recall they bought a license for Gatling guns and some revolvers (colts?).

[Yakov_Leskov]

Originally posted by Greg_P
The F-117 stealthier than the F-22? I don't think so. Go back to Physics 101.

So, what's better than the F-22?

Tell me, and make it a plane that is currently flying in service or in development for deployment TO service. I don't want to hear about the MiG 1.42/44. It is a prototype with many things that will compromise stealth and speed. The cockpit closure doesn't even have the required sawtooth closure for the skin. It is not in current buildup for deployment like the F-22 is and it has not had any public acknowledgement of any weapons firings or other new development. It looks like it did 10 years ago.

Our counter to the f-22 and f-35 is the PAK FA (in dev)

And the reason why the MiG-35 does not have a sawtooth closure (and other tradional stealth inovations) is becasue it uses plasma stealth, not versatile stealth.

[Yakov_Leskov]

Originally posted by ahem

Ha, ha, ha, what was it doing there then? Making a flight of friendship?

M4A1 is simply a shortened version of M16A2, which was a flawed design from the beginning. M4A1's range, accurracy, muzzle velocity is much less than those of M16A2. Because it is so short, the gas chamber was shortened, the rifle works harder, gets hot and jams quicker, it also does not last as lomg as M16A2 for the same reason. If you fire a full magazine on automatic fire from an M4A1 it would probably jam, and that would be a nuisance in battle. That's why US is buying German weapons. Currently Russia is the only country in the world that can produce all the military harware it needs.

No US does not have any space stations, never did. Maybe your "stuff" is better than ours, but certainly not satelites.

Do you mean that ugly, heavy, slow, unmonouverable piece of solid armour that goes by the name of M1A2? Maybe in Hollywood movies it is.

Yes the Moon is not the Moon at all, it's a "Death Star" that belongs to the USAF.

No, we did not sell you Alaska. After our Navy took part in your civil war, on behalf of the Yankies, it was decided, as an act of friendship, to lease you Alaska for one century, to help you overcome your economic dificulties. Currently USA occupies Russian territory illegaly. Who knew then that Americans are such ungratefull pigs? But don't worry, we will take it back.



P.S. To Yakov_Leskov: MiG-25 reaches speeds of mach 3.5, MiG-31 reaches at least mach 3.1.

[Edited by ahem on 22nd September 2003 at 14:36]

thanx for the info

[Voyager13b]

Originally posted by Yakov_Leskov

The M4A1 is not the best rifle in the world. The An-94 is much more effective.

Russia is going to be the first country to put a working space station on mars.

Russia's answer to the F-22 and JSF is the PAKFA

The F-16 is can not reach mach 2.5. I know the MiG-25 can, but i'm not sure about the MiG-31, wich is around that speed.

Yakov,

We do agree on one thing. The AN94 is probably the best assault rifle ever made, though it is not really a system yet. Given a little time, it can not only be the best basic assault rifle, but it could also be the best all around personal weapons system.

Voyager

[Voyager13b]

Originally posted by ahem
USMC_ReCoNSnIpeR, I answered your first post because I was bored and had 7 minutes to spare, but it seems I have to go on answering. You are around 13 years old aren't you?

The shot down F-117 flew bombing missions in Yugoslavia.

It is not a fact that USA sent man to the moon.

NASA never had any space stations, it tried to biuld one, "Skylab", but it fell down.

Russia landed several probes on Venus, though they stopped functioning just over one hour primarilly because of the pressure, and no they did not melt, they are still on the surface of Venus.

Do you really believe that M16A2 is the best assault rifle there is?

B-2 is not 10 years younger than F-117, and F-117 is more stealthier than B-2, it is probably more stealthier than F-22.

M-29, is a very stupid concept, and I doubt that somebody would be gullable enough to accept that monstrocity into service. MP-7 is a submachine gun and is German.


F-16 flying at mach 2.5? What does it suppose to mean, and F-16 can reach the top speed of mach 2.1 only at high altitude. American planes as military assets are not bad considering the interrelations with the rest of the US armed forces, but as aircraft they don't come even close to Russian planes.

The first squadron of F-22s is supposed to become active in 2005.

Phlegm,

I don't know if you really buy half of the sh!t you post, but is is entertaining to read. I love the part about the moon landings not really happening. You must know things that even the KGB and Russian space agency were not aware of, as they validated the landings through "independent" means. Is Oliver Stone your favorite intellectual?



Since you dismissed the US moon landings, you can then segue into bragging about the Russian space station effort (which was the fork in the road taken by the SU after the Politburo screwed up Russian plans to be first to the moon). You mentioned that Skylab fell down. Why did you fail to mention the fate of MIR?

Your nationalist twitching is laughable. The current space station is a cooperative effort. Did anyone mention to you that the cold war is over? That Russia and the US are partners in space exploration? That when there is a station built on Mars, or in orbit around Mars, it will most likely be a joint Russian/US effort?

How about aircraft. The SU built some fine aircraft, and Russia continues the trend. The East vs West comparison of fighters and bombers has been a favorite game to play over the past 50 years or so. Your remark about American aircraft not even coming close to Russian aircraft points to your blind nationalism, and is not shared by people with even a vague sense of reality. It is also NOT shared by Russian aircraft designers.

The truth is that Russian fighter aircraft are currently among the best in the world. They are not, however, as you describe them in your remark. Russian bombers are, well, Russia has only one real strategic bomber, and it took 40 years to get it in the air. There are only a handful flying at present, and one just fell out of the sky last week.

On the other hand, the SU did have a long string of firsts in space exploration. I don't need to make up stories that suggest that they never happened in order to make the effort of the US look better. I applaud the achievements of the SU and Russia in space. They were both remarkable and instrumental in setting the pace for the battle of ego that followed. It was one of the only battles fought during the cold war where everyone came out a winner, and human understanding was advanced as a result.

It's too bad that your nationalistic filter doesn't allow you to appreciate the efforts of anyone but Russians in the space/aeronautics game. You always have an excuse for why the US cannot take any credit for it's own achievements, yet you go overboard to make it seem that Russian developments are always so pure and perfect. Just because you think it, doesn't make it so.

Get over it.

Voyager

[Voyager13b]

Originally posted by eyeradi8
Uly, Ahem is likely referring to Russian war ships docking in NY and San Francisco ports. The revisionist theory is that they were there merely to serve as a deterent to foreign [read: British] attack on the US while it was in the midst of a civil war.

In reality, Russia at the time faced prospective warfare with the likes of Britain and France. Intending to not have their entire navy boxed in in Europe by the superior British navy, as well as to be able to inflict damage on enemy trade ships and colonies in Asia, Canada, and S. America in case of open warfare, Russia sent some of its naval fleet to US ports. There's a bit more to it, and yes, there was some friendship motivation involved as Russia and the US were very friendly at the time. But, for Ahem to say that Russia "got involved" in the American Civil War is a fukking joke.

8,

Phlegm has a world view built upon national ego, hate, and wishful thinking. He creates "fact based fiction", believes it, and then prints it with the authority of an eyeball witness.


Voyager

[USMC_ReCoNSnIpeR]

i think the overall best fighter meaning the winner against any other aircraft is F-22. also don't give me any bs about neal armstrong not being the first person to the moon. Also even if the F-22 squardron hasnt come out. there military is probably using it in the war just to see what it can do in the real thing just not telling the public. The OCSW and the OICW look like sick weapons look it up. plus ahem the us has the most powerfull army in the world s shut up. don't deny or i'll smack you. ok here's a vote thing. WHO DO U THINK IN ORDER THE TOP MOST MILITARLIY POWERFULL COUNTRIES?
(mine)
US- most efficent weapons. best technology. best trained.
Russia- power in numbers. nice airforce.
CHina-power in more numbers. thats it. weapons are from 70's and 60's old.
Israel-technology basically same as US. same weapons basically.
INdia- buy lots of other countries weapons. thats it (loser)

thats the offical results cause i(SAM) made them. Yes i just turned 15 but i know my sh*t. my dad fought in vietnam and granddad in WW2. im not stupid. im american. OH
The Desert Warrior System will rule the battlefield.