American F-351 vs Russian S300

[Swampman]

Anything I state is fact.  Your opinons may vary, but I don't care about your opinions.  When you have first hand experience as do I come back and I'll listen.

[billy_56081]

The Mossy can do one thing the remington can't.

Back to the subjet Isael will do just as they did in Syria. No body saw em come or go.

[Catus Magnus]

The Mossy can do one thing the remington can't.

What special unique capability does it have? I've shot a 500, but don't recollect anything... special. Fill me in.

[Swampman]

Pawn for less than $50.00?

[Catus Magnus]

Pawn for less than $50.00?

[billy_56081]

I'm sure someone here has the knowledge besides me.

[MGMorden]

I'm sure someone here has the knowledge besides me.

Meet Military specifications?

3,000 round torture test with buckshot loads the Mossberg 500 was the only pump to function flawlessly for every round. 

While I personally use a Remington 870 as my hunting shotgun, I've shot several Mossberg 500's in the past and they are a good gun.  I'm wanting to upgrade to a semi-auto (for the second time - darned CZ-712 is a jam-o-matic that I'll be selling shortly), and I'm strongly considering the Mossberg 930. 

[mcwoodduck]

The Mossy can do one thing the remington can't.

What special unique capability does it have? I've shot a 500, but don't recollect anything... special. Fill me in.

I thought it was also the double action trigger the Marines requested.

[no guns here]

Ahhh heck... some folks don't want to realize that the F22 and F35 are designed to fly different yet in some areas overlapping missions.  The F15 and F16 were intended to do the same.  Just because an F22 can put warheads on foreheads doesn't mean it should be used primarily as an earth-mover.  Just because the F35 can be used as an air to air platform doesn't mean that is should be primarily an air superiority fighter.  Two different planes two different mission sets.  Overlapping but different.  Sort of like an F150 and a Mustang GT... both will run over 100 mph and you can carry stuff in both.  Doesn't mean that the Mustang should be used to haul lumber or that the F150 should be used to carve canyon roads.

B52 should be dumped?  Not until we have something that can replace it...  Big payload, great range and loiter time, carries just about anything and everything in the inventory.  Still isn't anything in the inventory that can match its capabilities.

B2  - game changer.  Can see it electronically unless you KNOW it's there and you are looking for it very hard.  Of course it's hard to look for it when your radar just got crushed by the B52's missiles.  When it absolutely, positively must be blown to heck overnight... or we'll do it again for free.

B1 - Fast, good range, good loiter time, great payload, carries just about the whole inventory.  Heck you can make mud huts fall down with a high speed, low level pass.  That thing is crazy capable and fast.

What we REALLY need is a new fleet of refueling planes...  We are flying to bolts out of them and congress can't just say "screw it" and buy Boeing and to heck with Airbus.

I agree we should keep the F16 flying... actually I think we should by more of them.  Great aircraft, very mature, highly capable and cheap.  There is something about MASS.  I think a good mix would be about 200 F22's.  This gives you top of the line capability.  Then another 250 F35's.  Stealthy, fast, capable... what's not to like.  The F16 fleet should be bigger and more robust.  These are used for standard patrols and combat after the stealth planes make it a bit safer.  The A10 definitely should be kept in the inventory.  When you have to go low and slow in a mountain valley and you know that every dude with a rifle is going to be shooting you up... high mounted engines, twin stabilizers, a titanium bathtub and mechanical controls would seem to be comforting... as well as that big, honking gun...  with the payload of that plane, couldn't we mount 20mm under each wing and turn it into the ultimate modern P47 for strafing? 


rambling... sorry,


NGH

[mcwoodduck]

When you say a bigger F-16 do you mean being able to hold two or do you want a larger over all plane.
if you want a larger plane then you want a new plane.  F-17?
I would like us to go back to a prop plane for an A-10 replace ment like the old B25 and arm it with a lot of cool stuff.  to take on guys with rifles and RPGs rather than soviet tanks.  But arn't the hellicopters already doing that mission.
The attack helicopter was built to escort the troop birds and has mutated into a slowish ground attack fighter thant can ambush rather than straif.

[scootrd]

Ahhh heck... some folks don't want to realize that the F22 and F35 are designed to fly different yet in some areas overlapping missions.  The F15 and F16 were intended to do the same.  Just because an F22 can put warheads on foreheads doesn't mean it should be used primarily as an earth-mover.  Just because the F35 can be used as an air to air platform doesn't mean that is should be primarily an air superiority fighter.  Two different planes two different mission sets.  Overlapping but different.  Sort of like an F150 and a Mustang GT... both will run over 100 mph and you can carry stuff in both.  Doesn't mean that the Mustang should be used to haul lumber or that the F150 should be used to carve canyon roads.

B52 should be dumped?  Not until we have something that can replace it...  Big payload, great range and loiter time, carries just about anything and everything in the inventory.  Still isn't anything in the inventory that can match its capabilities.

B2  - game changer.  Can see it electronically unless you KNOW it's there and you are looking for it very hard.  Of course it's hard to look for it when your radar just got crushed by the B52's missiles.  When it absolutely, positively must be blown to heck overnight... or we'll do it again for free.

B1 - Fast, good range, good loiter time, great payload, carries just about the whole inventory.  Heck you can make mud huts fall down with a high speed, low level pass.  That thing is crazy capable and fast.

What we REALLY need is a new fleet of refueling planes...  We are flying to bolts out of them and congress can't just say "screw it" and buy Boeing and to heck with Airbus.

I agree we should keep the F16 flying... actually I think we should by more of them.  Great aircraft, very mature, highly capable and cheap.  There is something about MASS.  I think a good mix would be about 200 F22's.  This gives you top of the line capability.  Then another 250 F35's.  Stealthy, fast, capable... what's not to like.  The F16 fleet should be bigger and more robust.  These are used for standard patrols and combat after the stealth planes make it a bit safer.  The A10 definitely should be kept in the inventory.  When you have to go low and slow in a mountain valley and you know that every dude with a rifle is going to be shooting you up... high mounted engines, twin stabilizers, a titanium bathtub and mechanical controls would seem to be comforting... as well as that big, honking gun...  with the payload of that plane, couldn't we mount 20mm under each wing and turn it into the ultimate modern P47 for strafing? 


rambling... sorry,


NGH

I appreciated the ramble .. this was an interesting Read. 

[Swampman]

Not very informed but interesting.  We have the Osprey to do most of the things mentioned.  Cold War bombers are usless in modern warfare.

[scootrd]

Anything I state is fact.  Your opinons may vary, but I don't care about your opinions.  When you have first hand experience as do I come back and I'll listen.

I may have missed in the thread .. what first hand experience ? Are you part of the F35 Contract? If so do you know if it will equate to more U.S. Jobs?

[yellowtail3]

...  with the payload of that plane, couldn't we mount 20mm under each wing and turn it into the ultimate modern P47 for strafing? 

there's an example of a plane put to a mission it wasn't designed for - the supercharged, high-altitude specialist P-47 doing air-to-ground work.

[powderman]

OK guys, I'm gonna show my ignorance here. I understand the prefix F means fighter, and B is bomber. I am familiar with the P47 and P51 mustang, but what did the P designate??? POWDERMAN. 

[MGMorden]

OK guys, I'm gonna show my ignorance here. I understand the prefix F means fighter, and B is bomber. I am familiar with the P47 and P51 mustang, but what did the P designate??? POWDERMAN.  

Back then the P was for Pursuit.  It was the equivalent of what we now call Fighters.


If I'm not mistaken, the P-51 eventually was redesignated the F-51 as it was used well into the Korean war.

[powderman]

MCMORDEN. Thank you Sir. War planes have always intrigued me. We saw several on the Yorktown at Patriots Point just outside of Charleston SC. I always  admired the corsair and the P 38 lightning. My Dad told of a P 38 coming out of nowhere during WW11 and saving a bunch of lives by shooting down a jap zero strafing the beach. POWDERMAN. 

[Swampman]

Anything I state is fact.  Your opinons may vary, but I don't care about your opinions.  When you have first hand experience as do I come back and I'll listen.

I may have missed in the thread .. what first hand experience ? Are you part of the F35 Contract? If so do you know if it will equate to more U.S. Jobs?

It will create American jobs.  The reason the F-22 was shut down is that it could not be sold to other countries.  About a dozen will be buying F-35s.  The more you build the cheaper they get.  With cost over runs the F-35 is creeping up on the F-22.  We'll end up with the econo model for the same money.

[Swampman]

You can't shoot either one of them down unless you get very very lucky.  The F-22 is a hundred times the plane that the F-35 is.  Israel will make big inprovements and provide free combat testing as they have in the past.  Hey a Yugo is better than no car at all.

[MGMorden]

MCMORDEN. Thank you Sir. War planes have always intrigued me. We saw several on the Yorktown at Patriots Point just outside of Charleston SC. I always  admired the corsair and the P 38 lightning. My Dad told of a P 38 coming out of nowhere during WW11 and saving a bunch of lives by shooting down a jap zero strafing the beach. POWDERMAN.  

I've always been a fan of them too.  I considered actually trying to go the fighter pilot route, but ended up opting against it.  They did inspire me to get my private pilot's license though.  It's fun to make machine-gun noises while putting around in the Cessna .

BTW, I live just outside of Mt Pleasant,SC about 20 minutes from Patriots Point.  Always a fun trip (I try to go at least once every year or two).  

[no guns here]

Swampy...

Don't accuse me of being uninformed and then in the same breath... say that the V22 Osprey is designed to replace any of the planes I mentioned.  The V22 was NOT designed to replace the B52, B1, B2, F15 or F16.  In fact the V22 was designed to replace HELICOPTERS.  Hence the Verticle Take Off and Landing capabilities.  Hence the cargo bay and lack of hard points for armaments.  The first  versions were unarmed.  Then they put a .50 cal on the ramp, then some have a chin gun.  Ultimately they want a 360 degree capability but it's not there yet.  Even so it will only be for self defense and for suppression around an LZ.  The V22 is a troop carrier for Marines and a Special Ops bird for the AF.  It's not a bomber, fighter, or refueling plane.  The V22 has no strategic value or ability to carry heavy ordnance.

Anyone that would state that cold war bombers are useless in modern warfare obviously isn't studying any of the lessons learned from Desert Storm I or II or OEF or OIF.  "Cold War" bombers have been some of the most used, and most effective platforms in the inventory in all of these conflicts.  To state otherwise would be to refute cold hard facts.  What do you think flies patrols over Afghanistan today and is on-call to drop bombs as needed...  It sure isn't the Osprey.  It moves Marines.  The B-1 loiters overhead and puts bombs on target when called.

You may have experience working on the engines but you obviously haven't studied modern air warfare in a while.  Even suggesting the Osprey is in the same class as any of the other planes mentioned illustrates that point.


YellowTail3,
True, it was designed for one mission, but it also excelled in ground attack if I remember correctly.  Sort of like the F-15E model.  A strategid air superiority fighter turned into a superlative earth-mover.



later,
NGH

[billy_56081]

The B52s broke the will of a lot of the Iraqi front line troops in GW1. Many just wandered out and surrendered with this empty look in their eyes. The others stayed in the trenches and were buried alive. Was a good time.

[Swampman]

Swampy...

Don't accuse me of being uninformed and then in the same breath... say that the V22 Osprey is designed to replace any of the planes I mentioned.  The V22 was NOT designed to replace the B52, B1, B2, F15 or F16.  In fact the V22 was designed to replace HELICOPTERS.  Hence the Verticle Take Off and Landing capabilities.  Hence the cargo bay and lack of hard points for armaments.  The first  versions were unarmed.  Then they put a .50 cal on the ramp, then some have a chin gun.  Ultimately they want a 360 degree capability but it's not there yet.  Even so it will only be for self defense and for suppression around an LZ.  The V22 is a troop carrier for Marines and a Special Ops bird for the AF.  It's not a bomber, fighter, or refueling plane.  The V22 has no strategic value or ability to carry heavy ordnance.

Anyone that would state that cold war bombers are useless in modern warfare obviously isn't studying any of the lessons learned from Desert Storm I or II or OEF or OIF.  "Cold War" bombers have been some of the most used, and most effective platforms in the inventory in all of these conflicts.  To state otherwise would be to refute cold hard facts.  What do you think flies patrols over Afghanistan today and is on-call to drop bombs as needed...  It sure isn't the Osprey.  It moves Marines.  The B-1 loiters overhead and puts bombs on target when called.

You may have experience working on the engines but you obviously haven't studied modern air warfare in a while.  Even suggesting the Osprey is in the same class as any of the other planes mentioned illustrates that point.


YellowTail3,
True, it was designed for one mission, but it also excelled in ground attack if I remember correctly.  Sort of like the F-15E model.  A strategid air superiority fighter turned into a superlative earth-mover.



later,
NGH

More disinformation.

[no guns here]

http://www.boeing.com/rotorcraft/military/v22/
http://www.navair.navy.mil/v22/
http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/uswpns/air/rotary/v22osprey.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22.htm
http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/aircraft/military/bellV-22.cfm


Hmmm... let's see, it's not supersonic, stealthy, only carries 20,000 pounds, doesn't do air-to-air, doesn't do air-to-ground and is consistently described by manufacturers and users alike as a medium lift, multi-mission, vertical take off capable aircraft.  But that's all disinformation since Swampy knows that it really was intended as a single airframe capable of fulfilling the role of transcontinental bomber, air-superiority fighter, ground support and point air defense.  Maybe you should be at the Pentagon helping to plan those missions... I'm sure they would love your expertise concerning the misutilization of the airframe.


NGH

[Swampman]

It's funny that every post I make, all kinds of thing are read into it aren't there.  You just can't learn this stuff by reading books and watching the news.  While "cool" and "pretty" are nice they have nothing to do with the way we currently fight wars.  The B-1 & B-2 will be scrapped and should have already been scrapped already.  We need one fighter and that's the F-22.  Dogfighting doesn't and isn't going to happen.  I'm not sure we we will even have heliocopters.  In the near future unmanned drones will do the vast majority of our fighting.  Everything else will become obsolete.

[mcwoodduck]

It's funny that every post I make, all kinds of thing are read into it aren't there.  You just can't learn this stuff by reading books and watching the news.  While "cool" and "pretty" are nice they have nothing to do with the way we currently fight wars.  The B-1 & B-2 will be scrapped and should have already been scrapped already.  We need one fighter and that's the F-22.  Dogfighting doesn't and isn't going to happen.  I'm not sure we we will even have heliocopters.  In the near future unmanned drones will do the vast majority of our fighting.  Everything else will become obsolete.

At work we call this a Morganism.
They all start with "let me see if I get this right"
You likethe idea of having the F-15 and F-16?
The F-15 is a more expensive and capable than the F-16.
The F 16 will do 90% of what the F-15 will do at 2/3 the price tag.
You like the F-22.
You do not like the F-35, as it is cheaper by more than 1/2 and can do 90% of what the F-22 can do.
The F-35 can do everything the F-15 and F-16 can do and more.
So from what you wrote it is OK to have a two over lapping fighers and want to keep both of the current outdated fighters rather than take a new fighter that you think is substandard to the one you like?
Should I do one for the bombers?
And no matter what Dale Brown wrote in his book "Hammerheads" the osprey is not going to be an offensive weapon.

[no guns here]

Ahhh... It's probably just big enough to drop some kind of "daisy-cutter" out of...  Now if you just wanted to BLIND someone... you could just hover two or three over an area and nobody would see crap... If you've ever seen the dust cloud of one in hover, you would understand.  Pilots had to learn brown-out landings for just everyday landings on dirt.


NGH

[yellowtail3]

YellowTail3,
True, it was designed for one mission, but it also excelled in ground attack if I remember correctly.  Sort of like the F-15E model.  A strategid air superiority fighter turned into a superlative earth-mover.



later,
NGH

More disinformation.

Naw... NGH is right about that. The F-15 team liked to say, not a pound for air-to-ground... but that is what the -15E does, right? Bomb things?