Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Poll closed Poll
Question: Should Australia Buy the US product?
*** This poll has now closed ***


yes    
  6 (46.2%)
no    
  7 (53.8%)




Total votes: 13
« Last Modified by: Emma on: Mar 4th, 2013 at 6:38pm »

Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 
Send Topic Print
Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?. (Read 74432 times)
Sir lastnail
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30338
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #750 - Feb 11th, 2014 at 8:19pm
 
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 6:42pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 6:18pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 5:55pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 5:33pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 4:38pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 1:12pm:
Fancy aerobatics is not the main characteristic of a fighter, killing other fighters is.




Killing the other fighters when they dont even know you are there is what the latest American planes can do.

The trials of the F22 vs F15-F16 show a huge leap in air superiority from the USA, a friend of mine is a former F16 pilot he took part in that and reckons the F22 could take them out when the F15-F16 could not even detect them.

Do the Russians even have any tried and proven air to air missiles with the same record as the AMRAAM in aerial combat?


The F4 Phantoms and their stinger and side-winder missiles were found to be ineffective during the Vietnam conflict meaning that once they had launched their artillery they became sitting ducks. Historically the yanks haven't always had air supremacy. And we are talking about a JSF-35 with its single engine. Not even double redundancy on the most important component Sad



Yeah, the stinger is a personal ground launched missile that entered service in 1981, 6 years after Viet Nam, but thanks for your well researched input. BTW you may want to know that the F4 greatest enemy were ground launched missles during their time VN, not so much air combat also they suffered from a lack of guns in the early models which was later rectified. Still, not a bad aircraft all things considered.

None of which is relevant in today's aircraft or this topic.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIM-92_Stinger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-4_Phantom_II




so i got  the name of one of them wrong. But you didn't correct me and say it was a sparrow missile. You fail.

Most of the missiles failed to hit their targets and because the F-4 wasn't really designed as a fighter it became a sitting duck after it launched all of its armaments. The point is the yanks haven't always had air supremacy.






So your argument is tha the F4 was a bad aircraft because when it expended all its munitions it was unable to defend itself?  Grin  Grin

Pity they never flew alone and when the did expend munitions they used those big engines of their a fvked off at mach 2+.




Look you obviously know bugger all about fighter aircraft, everything you say and believe is usually wrong and really cretinous.


So thanks for playing but I think your mum is calling you for dinner.





And your argument is that you are right and everyone else is wrong who disagrees with you and usually with an expletive at the end of it. Somehow you always believe that you win every argument because you say so. Cheesy LOL
Back to top
 

"All of the arab states have said we will have peace with Israel when there is a state of Palestine as a UN member state and properly constituted." - Jeffrey Sachs.
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 111598
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #751 - Feb 11th, 2014 at 8:39pm
 
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 6:42pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 6:18pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 5:55pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 5:33pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 4:38pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 1:12pm:
Fancy aerobatics is not the main characteristic of a fighter, killing other fighters is.




Killing the other fighters when they dont even know you are there is what the latest American planes can do.

The trials of the F22 vs F15-F16 show a huge leap in air superiority from the USA, a friend of mine is a former F16 pilot he took part in that and reckons the F22 could take them out when the F15-F16 could not even detect them.

Do the Russians even have any tried and proven air to air missiles with the same record as the AMRAAM in aerial combat?


The F4 Phantoms and their stinger and side-winder missiles were found to be ineffective during the Vietnam conflict meaning that once they had launched their artillery they became sitting ducks. Historically the yanks haven't always had air supremacy. And we are talking about a JSF-35 with its single engine. Not even double redundancy on the most important component Sad



Yeah, the stinger is a personal ground launched missile that entered service in 1981, 6 years after Viet Nam, but thanks for your well researched input. BTW you may want to know that the F4 greatest enemy were ground launched missles during their time VN, not so much air combat also they suffered from a lack of guns in the early models which was later rectified. Still, not a bad aircraft all things considered.

None of which is relevant in today's aircraft or this topic.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIM-92_Stinger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-4_Phantom_II




so i got  the name of one of them wrong. But you didn't correct me and say it was a sparrow missile. You fail.

Most of the missiles failed to hit their targets and because the F-4 wasn't really designed as a fighter it became a sitting duck after it launched all of its armaments. The point is the yanks haven't always had air supremacy.






So your argument is tha the F4 was a bad aircraft because when it expended all its munitions it was unable to defend itself?  Grin  Grin

Pity they never flew alone and when the did expend munitions they used those big engines of their a fvked off at mach 2+.

Look you obviously know bugger all about fighter aircraft, everything you say and believe is usually wrong and really cretinous.

So thanks for playing but I think your mum is calling you for dinner.



BigOl - what would you know?


Nail is right -
is it worthwhile me searching youtube for a video doco to prove it? -
I know they are on there.

or would you just shoot the messenger again?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sir lastnail
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30338
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #752 - Feb 11th, 2014 at 10:09pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 8:39pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 6:42pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 6:18pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 5:55pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 5:33pm:
Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 4:38pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 1:12pm:
Fancy aerobatics is not the main characteristic of a fighter, killing other fighters is.




Killing the other fighters when they dont even know you are there is what the latest American planes can do.

The trials of the F22 vs F15-F16 show a huge leap in air superiority from the USA, a friend of mine is a former F16 pilot he took part in that and reckons the F22 could take them out when the F15-F16 could not even detect them.

Do the Russians even have any tried and proven air to air missiles with the same record as the AMRAAM in aerial combat?


The F4 Phantoms and their stinger and side-winder missiles were found to be ineffective during the Vietnam conflict meaning that once they had launched their artillery they became sitting ducks. Historically the yanks haven't always had air supremacy. And we are talking about a JSF-35 with its single engine. Not even double redundancy on the most important component Sad



Yeah, the stinger is a personal ground launched missile that entered service in 1981, 6 years after Viet Nam, but thanks for your well researched input. BTW you may want to know that the F4 greatest enemy were ground launched missles during their time VN, not so much air combat also they suffered from a lack of guns in the early models which was later rectified. Still, not a bad aircraft all things considered.

None of which is relevant in today's aircraft or this topic.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIM-92_Stinger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-4_Phantom_II




so i got  the name of one of them wrong. But you didn't correct me and say it was a sparrow missile. You fail.

Most of the missiles failed to hit their targets and because the F-4 wasn't really designed as a fighter it became a sitting duck after it launched all of its armaments. The point is the yanks haven't always had air supremacy.






So your argument is tha the F4 was a bad aircraft because when it expended all its munitions it was unable to defend itself?  Grin  Grin

Pity they never flew alone and when the did expend munitions they used those big engines of their a fvked off at mach 2+.

Look you obviously know bugger all about fighter aircraft, everything you say and believe is usually wrong and really cretinous.

So thanks for playing but I think your mum is calling you for dinner.



BigOl - what would you know?


Nail is right -
is it worthwhile me searching youtube for a video doco to prove it? -
I know they are on there.

or would you just shoot the messenger again?


youtube is no good even if it is a credible doco. You have to take big holes word over youtube Cheesy LOL
Back to top
 

"All of the arab states have said we will have peace with Israel when there is a state of Palestine as a UN member state and properly constituted." - Jeffrey Sachs.
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 111598
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #753 - Feb 11th, 2014 at 11:16pm
 
Nail,
Quote:
youtube is no good even if it is a credible doco. You have to take big holes word over youtube  LOL


If it's on youtube it's not good enough for BigOl -

He knows far more.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #754 - Feb 12th, 2014 at 6:45am
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 11th, 2014 at 11:16pm:
Nail,
Quote:
youtube is no good even if it is a credible doco. You have to take big holes word over youtube  LOL


If it's on youtube it's not good enough for BigOl -

He knows far more.



Now obviously you have never undertaken any sort of tertiary education otherwise you wouldn't try argue that youtube is a valid information source.

As far as credible docos go, you are a fan of 4 corners and I have informed you when it come to even minor techical understanding of military aircraft those 'reporters' wouldn't know sh1t from clay.


Just let it rest, the pair of you, this is way beyond your understanding, your sole resource is videos posted on youtube, it'd be funny as bugger if it wasn't so sad.


Just rejoice in the fact that Australia's car industry is all but gone and you can be happy in the knowledge that it is unlikely that any foreign investors will step foot in victoria to set up a large business ever again.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 111598
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #755 - Feb 12th, 2014 at 9:58am
 
BigOl,
you arrogantly dismiss any information that doesn't conform
to your biased opinions.

You are forgiven

namaste
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #756 - Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:03am
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 9:58am:
BigOl,
you arrogantly dismiss any information that doesn't conform
to your biased opinions.

You are forgiven

namaste



Myself and every single educational institution in the world. But then you would have no idea about education now would you?  Grin


It cant be ferified or validated if some 14 yr old kid loaded it on to the internet, now can it?


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 111598
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #757 - Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:11am
 
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:03am:
Bobby. wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 9:58am:
BigOl,
you arrogantly dismiss any information that doesn't conform
to your biased opinions.

You are forgiven

namaste



Myself and every single educational institution in the world. But then you would have no idea about education now would you?  Grin


It cant be ferified or validated if some 14 yr old kid loaded it on to the internet, now can it?




Learn how to spell would you.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #758 - Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:20am
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:11am:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:03am:
Bobby. wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 9:58am:
BigOl,
you arrogantly dismiss any information that doesn't conform
to your biased opinions.

You are forgiven

namaste



Myself and every single educational institution in the world. But then you would have no idea about education now would you?  Grin


It cant be ferified or validated if some 14 yr old kid loaded it on to the internet, now can it?




Learn how to spell would you.



Learn the difference between not being able to spell and not giving a bugger about the odd typo when replying to fvkheads who don't know sh1t from clay.


And there is a difference, you should learn it.




Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 111598
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #759 - Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:24am
 
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:20am:
Bobby. wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:11am:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 11:03am:
Bobby. wrote on Feb 12th, 2014 at 9:58am:
BigOl,
you arrogantly dismiss any information that doesn't conform
to your biased opinions.

You are forgiven

namaste



Myself and every single educational institution in the world. But then you would have no idea about education now would you?  Grin


It cant be ferified or validated if some 14 yr old kid loaded it on to the internet, now can it?




Learn how to spell would you.



Learn the difference between not being able to spell and not giving a bugger about the odd typo when replying to fvkheads who don't know sh1t from clay.


And there is a difference, you should learn it.




One such as I will continue to show important videos
& other information & correct bad spelling
without your permission.

forgiven

namaste
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 111598
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #760 - Feb 26th, 2014 at 10:45am
 
Stealth capability a hoax for F35:




We have been duped by the Yanks.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sir lastnail
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30338
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #761 - Feb 26th, 2014 at 11:05am
 
"It's not good at anything - It's a turkey"

Back to top
 

"All of the arab states have said we will have peace with Israel when there is a state of Palestine as a UN member state and properly constituted." - Jeffrey Sachs.
 
IP Logged
 
Lord Herbert
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 34441
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #762 - Feb 26th, 2014 at 11:42am
 
adelcrow wrote on Feb 23rd, 2013 at 10:46am:
Why buy any planes?
They're just expensive toys that we cannot afford and that will never be used for the purpose they were built for.
Like 99% of our defence spending its a waste of taxpayers money.


Excellent observation.

Needless to say we should simply invite the US to set up defensive military bases all around Australia as insurance against attack.

It's that simple.

They get our bases rent-free... and we get their protection.

And meanwhile, their military personnel drop millions of dollars here each year as shoppers and tourists.

It's a no-brainer.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 111598
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #763 - Feb 26th, 2014 at 3:58pm
 
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 26th, 2014 at 11:05am:
"It's not good at anything - It's a turkey"




Hear hear Nail,
duped by the Yanks.
The evidence stacks up.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 19466
Gender: male
Re: Should Australia Buy These Fighter Jets?.
Reply #764 - Feb 27th, 2014 at 6:51pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 26th, 2014 at 3:58pm:
Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 26th, 2014 at 11:05am:
"It's not good at anything - It's a turkey"




Hear hear Nail,
duped by the Yanks.
The evidence stacks up.


More youtube vids from the clueless assclowns.

If stealth does not work why are the Russians and Chinese copying it, why would you copy something you claim does not work?

There has only been one stealth plane shot down a F117, the Serbs did it, the bomb bay doors would not close which allowed it to be detected.
Bats use sonar to fly and they cannot detect a F117, there have been many recorded cases of dead bats found under F117 parked in hangars.

If Russian radar is good how many planes did Iraq shoot down, why could Israel fly into Syria and blow up their nuclear reactor if Russian radar is so good?

If Russian radar locks onto an American plane the Americans get a good signal to target it with a missile, i give them about a minute before they get blown up.

Thousands of sorties flown by allies over Russian radar and how many planes could they shoot down?

You assclowns have no idea.


Back to top
 

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 
Send Topic Print