Search results

Wrong the Atlas V on that video uses the RD-180, and yes, Soviet engines were Russian, they don’t need to claim anything, it’s a fact.

Newer breakthroughs in software and metallurgy mean newer Russian engines are light years better then the Soviet stock. Even if I was to take your comments seriously why do Americans still buy and send their most sophisticated payloads using Russian engines? Why would Super sophisticated...

The Soviet Union and Russia created and still creates some of the most powerful, reliable and sophisticated engines ever. It had nothing to do with economics, the US recently purchased more Russian engines after supposedly sanctioning them years ago. They still trust the RD-180s more then any...

No you don’t know what you are talking about that list includes US rockets with Russian engines, you should also search the Energia it creates 6.5 million lbs thrust and had an LEO of 220,000 lbs :lol: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energia The Russians created one of the most powerful...

The US could not make an equivalent of the RD-180, in efficiency, thrust and safely. The engines are also not cheap, the US recently purchased more of the engines for the Atlas V after the engines were “banned”. Space X engines are also weak, they have to use like 4 to get the equivalent...

The US continues to purchase low quality Russian rocket engines in which if failed for decades to make an equivalent. They (Lockheed) then purchased Russian components for US made satellites and then hired Russian engineers from the Yak-141 to help with F-35 development. The US now purchased...

The upgrades are not that extensive and at 45 million per aircraft as well as France demanding 15 million annually for maintenance the deal is moronic. Any country, Israel, Russia, South Africa, etc would do a similar upgrade hands over fist while doing cartwheels at that outrageous price...

There is no Russian “kill switch”. If that was the case Georgia would not be able to use Russian SAMs to shoot down 3 SU-25 ground attack aircraft as well as probably an SU-24 in 2006. Ukraine just got a taste of Russian jamming and hacking in a reformed post modernized and more professional...

That is a ridiculous assumption. The Pakistanis has the intention of shooting down Indian aircraft on the 27th otherwise they would have not carried out the operation. The Pakistanis had more then enough aircraft to protect their awacs and those aircraft were at a far enough distance. The...

And if those PL-15 were so great why did Pakistan not fire them on the 27th? Their range is nowhere near as advertised and the JF-17 radar pretty much sucks, if the JF-17s were able to I’m sure they would have fired off missiles; they didn’t, therefore the JF-17 and the PL-15 or whatever crap it...

Those AWACS can’t be airborne 24 hours a day 365 days a year and India would attack when Pakistan is most vulnerable and unprepared. The mountains in the area won’t allow Pakistan to see anything above a certain altitude. Like I said the Americans penetrated 200kms inside Pakistan and started...

Russia used electronic warfare and Pantsirs to disrupt the attack. Some of those drones got blown into little bits, running out of gas won’t cause that.

What are you talking about? Russia has repelled dozens of swarm drone attacks on its bases and Pantsirs have reportedly even shot down improvised mortars. It’s not the S-400s job to engage drone swarms, that is the Pantsirs job and electric warfare units job. The S-400 is meant to protect...

No just stating a fact that the Mirage 2000 is used offensively by India to exploit terrain masking and Pakistani inability to detect and respond in a timely manner. In other words it’s role appears to be an offensive platform meant to catch the Pakistanis off guard and unprepared where they...

It doesn’t always work like that in real life especially with incompetent Pakistan. Besides it’s SU-30s and Rafales that will mostly target Pakistani aircraft from BVR. If Mirage use terrain masking or just fly low enough to confuse Pakistani radars into disregarding the Mirage as ground clutter...

Israelis didn’t “decimate” any Pantsirs, they destroyed two empty and abandoned Pantsirs with swarm attacks. The Israeli mostly hit a few old S-200s and even then one shot down an Israeli F-16. Syria does not have enough Pantsirs or networking to be effective enough to stop every swarm attack...

I forgot to cover your other point. Yes AMRAAMS can be integrated to Mirages, India got Israelis to integrate R-73 onto their Mirages but the US would probably never allow it and if India did it without permission the US might use punitive action against India. The question becomes why? India...

Double post. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pakistanis fires those AMRAAMS became they had an altitude advantage and AWACS. The lower the altitude the less range a missile has-hence the SU-30s not firing. If the roles were reversed and India had 4 or 8 SU-30s versus 2 F-16s, those SU-30s had an altitude advantage and India had AWACS, not...

True, the Mica has much less range then the AMRAAM 120c5 but it’s a very advanced missile with high hit probability; admittedly though the Mirages radar also has far less range, less then half the range of the F-16s APG if my memory is correct. But radar range doesn’t matter as much as missile...