>Americans have 3000 combat aircraft (USAF, USN, USMC)
>Russians have 1500 combat aircraft
>Chinese have 1700 combat aircraft (but 500 are J-7's)
>Brits have 350 combat aircraft
>French have 220 combat aircraft
>Germans have 180 combat aircraft (and recently there was that talk about how most aren't serviceable)
So my question is, why are people pretending like French or British are great powers in military sense?
USA is a superpower, and Russia and China are great powers.
Rest don't even come close.
>before Brits rush in, I said MILITARY power
Also, Turks have 280 combat aircraft. Turkey strong. Greeks also aren't lagging far behind (230 combat aircraft)
By the way, I'm not sure about USA.
I've seen numbers of about 5000 combat aircraft. On that list of active equipment on Wikipedia, I counted 3000.
Because its not just about numbers?
Is this a serious question?
>>28346868
I suppose if you dug out stuff in the boneyard you could get 5k combat aircraft. Though the question is does it only count fixed wing or do helos also count?
>>28346916
>it's not just about numbers
True, it's about quality.
But British or French equipment is in no way superior to Russian equipment.
>>28346924
I only counted fixed wings. Maybe 5000 number is with choppers.
>>28346961
Thats not true in the least, but you're still missing the point.
>>28346816
Outdated aircraft that probably can't even fly.
Would a 1000 air fleet of Super Tucanos make Brazil a superpower?
>>28346972
I'm afraid I am. What's your point?
>>28346816
It has more to do with aircraft quality, sustainability and readiness rates.
>>28346988
That military engagements are rarely if ever decided by the quality of things that low level.
Its also largely about logistical and strategic capability. The UK for example is nowhere near the level it was during the times of the Empire, obviously. But the things they haven't cut like a lot of places are elements like strategic airlift, or the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. They've maintained the ability to put the smaller numbers of forces they do have wherever they want them in strength.
>>28346980
I suggest you take a look at Russian and Chinese equipment. Remove J-7's and J-8's from China and they still have more combat aircraft than UK, France and Germany combined.
>>28347035
I thought you'll make that point.
And no, UK and France aren't superior to Russia in that aspect either. Russians have impressive strategic airlift capacity, second only to American.
Americans are superior, but not UK and France.
>>28347044
I remember reading about similar stories in the Israeli Wars.
Guess who always ended up winning?
Russia has never had that great equipment. Even in WW2, they only won with unit spams. Same with China. They would get absoltely destroyed in the air against anyone they can't outnumber 10:1.
>>28347021
>aircraft quality
As I said, it's not lagging behind. I won't turn this into ''X could wreck Y'' autism.
>sustainability
?
>readiness rates
As I said, it's pretty low in Western states. Less than half of German Tornado fleet is serviceable.
>>28347077
>muh airlift
absurdly expensive way of shipping things compared to boats or rail or truck
>>28347103
Israeli wars were won because the arabs are fucking incompetent retards
not because of equipment
US equipment actually wasn't really superior at all to the russians.
>Implying anyone knows the real number of aircraft, including drones, any nation has.
The smaller nations may have accurate numbers, but the US was ordering Drones as fast as they could be produced back in 2008.
>>28347103
You're drawing some weird analogies.
You're comparing Arabs using second-rate models with classic Arab proficiency in 60's and 70's to Russian 21st century air force.
>Russia has never had that great equipment.
Explain me how Su-35S is inferior to Eurofighter or Rafale, for example.
>They would get absoltely destroyed in the air against anyone they can't outnumber 10:1.
And it's clear you don't know shit about what you're talking about, you're just shitposting.
>>28347147
>using "nation" as a synonym to country
stop this
>>28347158
>Literally the synonym of country.
>>28347103
>people still believe Russian/Chinese still fight like they did 50 years ago despite all the conflicts that have been demonstrating otherwise
>>28347158
UK pls go.
>>28347147
You are aware how procurement works?
You can't just shadily buy 1000 aircraft.
>>28347176
B-but muh UK is several countries
>>28347190
It's even worse, people (who usually don't know shit about warfare besides memes) believe Winter War and '41-'42 edition of Red Army are standard.
They never read about Kursk or Bagration, they just hear ''10 Soviets for 1 German'' and repeat it like parrots.
>>28347176
a nation is a people
>>28346816
Have you considered about fighter aircraft per square km, anon?
>>28347197
>autistic spasm.
Does anyone have any accurate link to the United States full arsenal? I'd like to see it. Please include all maned and unmanned aircraft 500 lbs and over please.
>>28347205
b-but the english dictionary.
>>28347225
Your fight is with the english language, sir, not me.
>>28347233
My fight is with modern liberal shits who think they can pervert the meaning of words
America/Americans is not a "nation"
A "nation" is not a synonym for country
>>28347233
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft
>>28347254
I am not a fucking liberal you uneducated spastic piece of Sanders mudpie.
>Nation - Synonyms: Country, Sovereign State, State, Land, Realm, Kingdom.
>>28347255
Because the military is sure to update is fucking Wikipedia page? Come on guys, you're gonna need to try harder.
>>28347190
God damn the Russians in Afghanistan looked so badass
>>28347283
>last updated today
>>28347283
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation
>Nation (from Latin: natio, "people, tribe, kin, genus, class, flock")
Of course they cite stalin on paragraph 2 so it's obviously a little fucking biased.
Using nation as a synonym for country is like using the term "diverse" to mean no white people.
>>28347297
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft
>http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/education/2010/march/The-Top-10-Reasons-Students-Cannot-Cite-or-Rely-on-Wikipedia.html
>>28347318
You're best source is wikipedia.
Mine is the Oxford Dictionary
>http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/nation?q=Nation
>mfw when you fail at arguing pointless semantics.
>mfw you're a projecting commie liberal jew
>mfw you can't win
>>28347360
Using nation & country interchangably is literally a post ww2 marxist invention
Maybe you are too brainwashed and ignorant to recognize that.
To the internationalists, there can be no "nations" or peoples.
>>28347388
>ThisMotherFucker.jpg
The United States is a congregation of States.
The Federal government draws legitimacy from those states.
It is not a sovereign unit on its own.
Therefore, what do we conclude about the >>United >>States.
Are you literally fucking retarded?
>>28347442
IT IS NOT A NATION
CHINA IS NOT A NATION
RUSSIA IS NOT A NATION
Do not refer to COUNTRIES as "nations"
thanks
Really?
>>28347453
IT IS LITERALLY THE ENGLISH DEFINITION OF NATION.
Russia is not a nation, China is not a nation, England is a nation, The UNITED STATES is nation. WE LITERALLY FOUGHT TWO WARS DECLARING OURSELVES AS A NATION.
>>28347442
>>28347453
In colloquial, everyday speech, country and nation are used to mean the same thing. Only when you get into actual political theory are the terms used differently.
>>28347479
No
This is a recent progressive agenda
They would say America is a "nation" or "one nation", so to mean that America is a united people. It was never true.
The sheer amount of autism in this thread is astounding. In 40 posts, with only 13 posters, I believe you may have accumulated the entire autism quotient of all the boards on 4Chan on a normal day.
Gentlemen. Go the fuck outside. It's time to stop posting and leave the basement for an hour.
>>28346816
>Russians have 1500 combat aircraft
If you count tractors as aircrafts....
>>28347507
>>28347453
Some of you people can vote and that scares me.
The existence of the Federal government establishment acting on behalf of 50 states makes us nation. The fact that 50 states surrenders sovereignty to that unitary government solidifies that point. The revolutionary war where we fought as independent states shows us how we obtained our sovereignty, and the civil war outcome shows our solidarity as a nation.
You're parents both having spastic, autism, down syndrome fueled, hate induced, abominable sex and birthing you not only proves that miracles do happen, but you are, in fact, incapable of making coherent rational thought, you fucking retard.
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Get fucked stormfags or whatever you are.
>>28347616
>>28347573
This is called "civic nationalism"
And it's the liberal shit i'm talking about.
Also the founding fathers were literally all northern european, which is part of what makes them a "nation"
They weren't including the negros, mexicans, asians, or indians.
>>28347650
The "liberal shit" meaning the principles the United States was founded upon. Yeah, please fuck off.
>>28347668
Yes, the liberal shit that has inevitably lead to modern liberalism which is currently killing the country/the west.
The liberal shit which lead to all the communist atrocities around the world.
>>28347650
>>28347678
I do so love it when pleas to emotion and the basest human instinct are window dressed in the trappings of high intellect and shilled as first rate political theory.
This is the sort of demagoguery upon which the foundations of tyranny are built, and it only heightens the irony that this idiot wrapping himself in the founding fathers' flag actually believes the horseshit he drops everywhere he goes.
Pathetic.
>this thread
>>28347764
Whether or not the USA is a nation(which it isn't, despite claims by lofty intellectuals to the contrary) has nothing to do with the error you made in using the word nation as a synonym for country.
>>28346816
Anyone know how many aircraft we had at the height of ww2?
Other countries figures welcome too.
>>28346816
Is no one going to point out that the vast majority of these Russian aircraft were built before the 1990's, and even most of the "modern" ones represent "modernized" old airframes? Does no one realize that the Russian military is not flying a SINGLE serial production aircraft which is not a Soviet design or based heavily on a Soviet design? If there's anyone on this board that thinks the 1500 Russian aircraft would perform on average in combat at a 1 to 1 efficiency rating with their western counterparts, they seriously need to have their heads checked.
We're talking about a combined 500 Su-24 and Su-25, for fucks sake. 252 MiG-29s, only 50 of which can even remotely be considered "modernized". This is ridiculous.
>>28347141
yes equipment had nothing to do with how israel won outnumbered 5:1 or some shit. im sure you are an authority on the subject
what is current best airplane in terms of fighter jets or dog fighters
the su fighter is pretty awesome looking btw
>>28347815
No no no no no
Don't try to divert this thread ,this thread belongs to autistic anon who literally can't grasp the concept of synonyms and the other autistic anon who can't grasp the concept of letting autists sperg out and not adding fuel to the spastic fire
>>28347846
In and of itself, the F-22. That's not even a question.
>>28347801
Never used the word nation in this thread, sport. Just dropped by to point out what a massive cunt you are, in addition to being an intellectual midget. Let us know when you move beyond parroting the mad musings of whichever modern prophet to which you're currently playing mental catamite.
>>28347846
Not even Russians or Chinese would dispute the fact that the F-22 is the world's best air superiority fighter currently in service.
>>28347815
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_aircraft_production
Here. Go nuts.
This is just wartime production, and the US produced almost half of all aircraft made during WWII. Roughly 300,000, or double what the next country produced.
>>28347507
One Nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all
Get fucked cryptonazi
>>28347925
>formally adopted by Congress as the pledge in 1942
In the FDR era, during a war to promote communism.
>>28347970
Wow. You really are an 11 on the skullfucked scale.
When you're home alone, masturbating in your feces to pictures of Himmler, do you ever just pause and say, "Man. I'm really fucked up."
>>28347851
>>28347895
Oh my bad.
I just wanted to imagine a world where the US had like 200k 5th generation fighters and 100k strategic bombers, probably to bomb some alien invasion or some shit.
I just wanted my brand of autism, I didn't mean to get in the way of other people's autism fights too, sorry ;_;
>>28347925
>The Pledge of Allegiance, as it exists in its current form, was originally composed in August 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855–1931), who was a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist,[9][10] and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy (1850–1898).
socialist progressive shit
>>28347987
Do the declarations of authority figures constitute reality to you?
>>28347987
>When you're home alone, masturbating in your feces to pictures of Himmler, do you ever just pause and say, "Man. I'm really fucked up."
Are you saying that you don't masturbate in your feces to pictures of Himmler? Jesus christ what the fuck is wrong with you?
>>28347989
You might be shocked to learn how much more expensive modern aircraft are across the board compared to old aircraft, even accounting for inflation.
Here's an example:
>DC-3: 1.4 million in 2015 dollars
>777: 262-320 million, depending on variant
That's a cost increase multiple of almost 229.
>>28347856
You know it's funny. My dad makes micro balloons for the stealth tech on the F-22. He gets contracts from lochheed. Pretty cool shit.
>>28348006
Do the ramblings of whatever passes for stormfag intelligentsia constitute yours?
>>28348040
>20 times the weight of the DC-3
>20 times the passengers
>5 times the range
>twice as fast
hurr why it cost more :)
>>28348091
>20 times the capacity
>229 times the cost
Anon. I was simply pointing out that what a fighter cost in 1942 for a top of the line bleeding edge machine is a drop in the bucket compared to what they cost today, even accounting for inflation.
Try to keep up.
>>28348040
No I know it was a silly fantasy thanks to mean things like logistics or cost.
But my inner rts grand strategy nerd likes amassing near godly amounts of forces. Too much command and conquer as a kid I suppose.
>>28347453
If you are actually serious though, perhaps you need to go back to school.
>>28348111
I wonder why someone isnt building replicia warplanes with moddern techniques surely theres a market.
>>28348527
>P-51 made from lightweight composites and a modern engine
I never realized I wanted this before.
>Come to thread to talk/lurk about air power.
>bunch of faggots arguing about the word "nation"
No thanks
>>28348527
I've been meaning to make a thread asking if someone with enough money could factory or custom make his own P-47 or P-51. With little no original parts.
>>28349064
Probably not. Planes are designed and built with weight of materials and structure in mind, as well as flight envelopes to fit. Making an aircraft out of lighter materials seems like a good idea, until you realize it's going to throw off weighting, shifting center of mass and gravity. Without drastically altering the form of the aircraft, you would have to add dead weight to make up for the changes, thus removing the weight saving advantage. It might be nice for less corrosive materials, but at that point, you're not making the same plane anymore- just one that vaguely looks like the original.
>>28346816
Who says Russia has 1500 combat aircraft? I don't even think they have over 800.
>>28348527
I'm pretty sure the actual plans for the p-51 were either destroyed or forgotten in a place that is now unknown.
>>28348040
US GDP when the DC-3 production run ended in 1942 was 166 billion.
US GDP in 2014 was 17,348.
So US GDP has increased over 100 times.
This is important because it means that more expensive and capable systems are affordable now.
>>28348111
Yes.. except the initial cost isn't the full story. A fleet of 100 DC-3 to try and keep up with a 777 (need to cover the capacity for the full length of the runs a 777 can make) would cost less to buy..
But you'd need 100 times as many pilots, 100 times as many ground crews, 5 times as many runways, 20 times the high octane gasoline (costing 5 times as much as jet fuel) and you'd need to build them in a labor market like the 1940s US, something that no longer exist. You can't build a AC-10 for 20 million anymore either.
Your overall cost would be an order of magnitude higher.
>>28346961
>But British or French equipment is in no way superior to Russian equipment.
Are you of serious?
>>28347190
>can't even achieve air superiority over georgia 2008
>>28351717
>Shoot their own plane over Georgia 2008
>>28349064
this happens, in fact you can buy a P-51 kit over the internet.
>>28346961
This is objectively incorrect.
>NATO forces even smaller countries' exersizes and military training so frequently and at a higher quality than Russians
>NATO training equipment and their simulators allow their pilots to train much more flying hours than their Chinese or Russian counterpart.
>Massive air force yearly (or more) exersizes such as Red Flag and Anatolian Eagle are simply decades ahead of Russia
>US and West simply have decades worth of advencement ahead of Russia in terms of technology
Just to give an example, current Sukhoi flight simulator has been developed by Finmeccanica (Italy) and Alenia Aeronautica (USA) as Russia simply couldn't develop a state of the art simulator design while hell, even Turkey developed their own F-16 simulators and anti AA operation simulators while Russia needs US and Italian (NATO) nations to develop their own simulators.
This is the difference between NATO countries and Russia
Quantity doesn't mean much when the majority of the planes are ass old. Doesn't mean that China and Russia have a shitty airforce though. Other than that, Europeans don't seem to care much for hard power.
>>28346972
>>28351990
>>28351579
Fuck off chavs. You can't even design your own planes anymore and have to bum them off America. The only thing you bongs are good at making is missiles, but you don't produce them in any significant numbers to matter.
>>28347103
>Guess who always ended up winning?
Egypt? They got back the Sinai and took control of the Suez Canal, which was the whole reason they started the war in the first place. Kikes got their shit pushed in hard.
>>28347141
>absurdly expensive way of shipping things compared to boats or rail or truck
Your point? That doesn't stop a fuck ton of the mail from being transported via air. The fact that they can afford to do it in the first place proves they are superior. Poorfags gonna poor.
>>28354696
>Kikes got their shit pushed in hard.
But they didn't...?
>>28354144
>can't spell the word "exercise" correctly
Opinion discarded,
>>28354779
>But they didn't...?
Oh so Kissinger rushing tons of aid to Israel to prevent it from falling and forcing Egypt to agree to a cease fire so the USA could negotiate an end to the war was all my imagination? Funny.
>>28347360
>>28347388
>/pol/niggers referring to others as brainwashed.
Holy mother of fucking keks.
![6k6lb_4VB2I[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/U9c57rA.jpg "6k6lb_4VB2I[1].jpg")
>>28346816
>So my question is, why are people pretending like French or British are great powers in military sense?
Funboys and rasists, obvious.
>>28347815
Here you go.
>1/2 Army Air Force
>>28354991
>2/2 Navy
>>28346816
>having 3000 combat planes means your planes can reach around the world with no refueling, maintenance, or support.
Is it winter break or are people really so narrow minded to think so tunnel visioned?
>>28354782
>Forget that exercise is one of the exception to British -ise and American -ize
>Some military illiterate thinks he can disregard my arguments
Russia is not a developed nations when even shit tier, newly developing nations like Turkroachs can out tech them in some state of art equipments.
>>28354696
>>28354797
Oh we have a revisionist over here, how nice.
>They got back the Sinai and took control of the Suez Canal
Only through giving up their war against Israel and signing a peace agreement with them. It was a huge deal and at the time Egypt was shunned in the Arab world for a decade.
Sadat was assassinated for signing peace with Israel and giving up his demands for Israel to free the Palestinians.
>Kikes got their shit pushed in hard.
There were significant losses on both sides, albeit not comparable. The Egyptians lost a lot more. By the end of the war the Egyptian 3rd army which crossed the canal was encircled by Israeli forces, stuck in the desert, depending on Israeli supply of food and water.
Here is a quote from the Egyptian Chief of staff in the 1973 war:
>The rest, as they say, is history. Sadat, who had rejected the advice of the Soviet Union on October 12 to seek a ceasefire, and who continued to reject that advice until, too late, he accepted it on October 19, now found himself begging for Soviet help.
>25 Oct 1100 hours: A meeting of the Armed Forces Supreme Council, the first since the outbreak of war. ...The main topic was, of course, how to open the road to Third Army. But though everyone spoke with passion, nobody could come up with a realistic plan.
>To stay alive the Third Army needed rather over 150 tons of supplies a day. The vast column of soft-skinned vehicles needed to carry such quantitiies would simply be an added burden on the tank crews of 4th Division as they fought their way down the road.
>>28354696
>>28354797
cont.
>And after. On October 30, when the plight of Third Army was desperate, the Egyptian newspapers appeared with banner headlines: "Our forces are in complete control of the West Bank of the Canal between Deversoir and Suez Town" and: "The Third Army is Receiving Supplies in the Normal Fashion." The whole world was being told of the encirclement of Third Army except the wives, mothers, sisters and sweethearts of the men suffering out there. Of course, rumors began to circulate. It was a catastrophe too big to hide.
>I had lost almost 11 pounds in six weeks. But how could I relax while the 45,000 officers and men of Third Army were cut off?
The Crossing of the Suez
-Saad el-Shazly Chief of staff of the Egyptian armed forces in the 1973 war.
>>28354797
Furthermore, Kisinger forced Israel to agree to a cease fire, not the other way around. That's after the Egyptians went begging to the USSR to stop Israel from destroying their army.
As we have already establish at this point the 3rd Egyptian army, 45,000 men were cut off without food and water in thr desert, dependent on the Israelis. What we also know that the 2cond Egyptian army was also in the process of being surrounded as the Israeli forces west of the Canal were advancing north.
There was hardly any Egyptian military left standing between the IDF and Cairo.
The Egyptian SAM batteries which earlier inflicted heavy losses to the Israeli air force were destroyed or captured on the ground. Which allowed the IAF to pound on the Egyptians uncontested, enabling the rapid ground advance west of the canal.
>Oh so Kissinger rushing tons of aid to Israel to prevent it from falling
Israel has received about 1/3 of the military aid Syria and Egypt received from the USSR during the war. You "forget" to mention both sides were supplied.
Moreover, the US has delayed aid to Israel for over a week, while the USSR supply started streaming in immediately as the war began.
The US aid was so much delayed that no tank sent to Israel from the US made it in time to participate in the war, meanwhile Syria received and deployed battalions worth of new tanks.
The US supply to Israel began only after the Israel forces have already threw back the Syrians i the Golan and were marching into Syria, and after the Israeli forces broke through in the Sinai and crossed the channel.
>>28354679
>>Russia is great! Russia ruling the world!
Yeah... Whatever.
>>28355220
>>I had lost almost 11 pounds in six weeks.
What a fucking faggot. Bitching about 10 fucking pounds in a month and a half while his men starved.
Also, am i fucking reading this thread right? Do dumb motherfuckers think that the Israelis lost the Yom Kippur war?
We should have more fighters, bring it up to a nice 5 or 6 thousand
>>28347035
>strategic airlift
>France or Germany
There's a reason they have to beg the US to fly them around in C17's, friend. They have ZERO strategic airlift. Unlike the US, China, and Russia.
>b-but my 11 C130's from the 60's!
Those are both not strategic airlift, nor are they even the equivalent of pissing in the ocean, since they couldn't, combined, move even a single company's worth of vehicles.
>>28346816
And out of those 1500 Russian aircraft, how many still work? How many have any form of radar? How many were manufactured after 1970?
Same for China. Having a large pile of shit does not make it anything other than shit.
>no I'm not arguing that they are somewhow worse off than England or France, just that having a ton of outdated equipment that doesn't work isn't a good thing in any way.
>>28347141
>absurdly expensive way of shipping things
But fast. Which is kinda the whole point.
>oh jesus the chinks just invaded California!
>I know, let's throw all our armor from the east coast on boats and send them on a 5 week trip through the Panama canal, it's the cheapest!
>never mind the fact they need armor there NOW, not 5 weeks from now, and sticking the same shit on a dozen C5's would have them there in 7 hours!
>>28356169
Iraq had several thousand tanks and was one of the nations with the most armored vehicles before the 2nd gulf war.
>>28347155
Different guy here.
>Explain me how Su-35S is inferior to Eurofighter or Rafale, for example.
There are more than 20 working Rafale's or Eurofighters. That's how.
Russia has some cool, cutting-edge shit. But they have meager handfuls of them backed up by hundreds or thousands of vehicles from the 70's.
>>28347158
But it is a synonym for country.
Now go back to school, the adults are talking.
>>28347190
>demonstrating otherwise
Getting BTFO the Crimea by civilians with shovels
Not able to achieve air superiority over Georgia despite outnumbering the Georgian airforce 300 to 1.
Getting BTFO Afghanistan
Suffering humongous losses in Chechnya and barely scraping out a pyrrhic victory.
No anon, they literally still fight like it's 1940. IE, retarded.
>>28347225
No, literally by definition a nation is an autonomous government
>>28347205
And several nations in a political alliance. Since, y'know, autonomous governments and all.
>>28356207
>There are more than 20 working Rafale's or Eurofighters
There are 40 Su-35S in use in Russia.
>>28356320
oooh, 40!
Yeah, that'll make a humongous dent against the 140 Rafale's the French have and the 440 Eurofighters spread between the various EU countries.
Or vs. the 200 F22's and 700ish Super Hornets the US has.
I suppose while we're at it might as well make the claim that the 7 operational T14 Armata's Russia has will totally win against the 6500 Abrams' too.
>>28356320
Woaaav dude, more than 40?
That's some Supa powa shit right theere!!! Who else would be able to have more than 40 planes. Just woaav!
>>28347155
>>28356320
>>Explain me how Su-35S is inferior to Eurofighter or Rafale, for example.
Explain me how Su-35sis superior to Eurofighter or Rafale.
Also, it's great to have a fuckton number of plane, but if you don't have enough pilot, and you also can't pay their training or make them fly engouh to gain experience, it's useless to have so many.
>>28356201
Exactly. They had several thousand shit-tier tanks that were 50+ years old and only a handful of semi-modern tanks (which were also completely gutted versions of already-monkey-model tanks).
And look how that turned out.
Large piles of shit are not any more useful than small piles of shit.
>serve in Iraq
>see the Mosul Tank Graveyard
>ooh a fucking Republican Guard T72! Gotta look inside this one!
>steel folding chair welded to side of turret for commander. No seat for gunner. All optics removed (not ripped out, as the holes for them had steel plates welded over them)
>ammo racks removed, woven reed baskets in their place
>someone had glued a fucking ashtray to the breech of the main gun, the fuckers were smoking inside the tank
The T72M's might not have been all that good compared to a real T72, but jesus the Iraqis fucked them up even worse once they already had them.
>>28347155
Russia did indeed provide pilots for Egypt and Syria, however, with reports of "russian speaking pilots" being leveraged by Israel to secure more purchases of modern equipment from the US. An entire Soviet air defense division, including the 135th MiG-21MF air regiment (MF designating M = modernized, F = uprated engine). 3rd gen mig 21.
Now, whether this report is true, Kissinger was involved and did indeed provide more aid to Israel.
See:operation Rimon 20
>>28356425
Strong radar and also capability to carry many BVR missiles, many of these that outrange the Rafale's BVR missiles (for now, until they get the Meteors)
They offer 3rd world countries second rate superiority fighters that pose a threat to first class fighters... meaning that resources have to be diverted away from other areas to deal with them. 3rd world countries also don't have to deal with France, which doesn't have as open/solid reputation for arms deals as Russia.
>>28347224
Both of those operations were won because of crushing strategic numerical advantage.
>>28356155
Good thing he was specifically talking about the UK then isn't it
>reading comprehension
>>28356695
Alright, fine.
>UK
>8 total C17's
Transport and air-to-air refuelling aircraft[edit]
Further information: AirTanker Services
The RAF operate the C-17 Globemaster III in the heavy strategic airlift role, originally leasing four from Boeing. These were purchased, followed by a fifth delivered on 7 April 2008 and a sixth delivered on 8 June 2008. The new aircraft entered frontline use within days rather than weeks. The MoD said there was "a stated departmental requirement for eight" C-17s and a seventh was subsequently ordered, to be delivered in December 2010.[76] In February 2012 the purchase of an eighth C-17 was confirmed;[77] the aircraft arrived at RAF Brize Norton in May 2012.[78]
Like that's enough to do jack shit with.
>hey I can move 16 Chally2's
>OR I could move a battalion of soldiers
>not both
>>28356369
> Or vs. the 200 F22's and 700ish Super Hornets the US has.
Russia has ordered over 450 new build fighters of Sukhoi Su-27 family till 2020 alone.
96 - Su-35
200+ - Su-30SM
140+ - Su-34
Not to mention modernisation of Su-27S to standard Su-27SM3. The number is around 70.
Add to this 200 modernized Mig-31 and 55+ PAK-FA and all of those aircraft will be delivered till 2020.
+around 100 of Mig-35, Mig-29SMT and Mig-29K
RuAF probably will have the most modern air force in the world and outmatch USA.
You may also ask me about strategic airlifts.
>>28356827
yep don't worry guys we will build them over night
>You may also ask me about strategic airlifts.
you mean that student cgi ?
>>28356827
Just like they're supposedly going to build an additional 10 aircraft carriers by 2020 despite not having a shipyard capable of making them?
Also:
>thread about what countries have NOW
>well russia will (probably not) have this shit in 5 years!~
Using your method, then fine.
>US
200 F22's, 700 F/A18E's, and 550 F35's by 2020
>>28356886
So far were delivered around 50 % of this order. This is long term contracts after.
>>28356894
> 550 F35's by 2020
we both know that the f35 and f22 inferior to the PAK-FA by its characteristics.
Even Su-35 can successfully fight them
>>28347224
>complains about people thinking that Soviet/Russian army solves their problems by ''throwing low cost body and equipment towards their enemy''
>Literally gives two battle examples that were won only because of numerical advantage
>>28356934
>even the SU35 can successfully fight them
Flat-out NO to the SU35 winning vs. F22. Maybe vs. the F35.
Also:
>200 F22's and 550 F35's
>vs
>96 SU35's and 55 PAK-FA
Russia could literally shoot down 5 US planes for every one they lose and still lose.
>>28356934
>we both know that the f35 and f22 inferior to the PAK-FA by its characteristics.
>Even Su-35 can successfully fight them
Vatnik imagination is trully an amazing thing to behold.
>>28347044
Russia and China are, geographically, massive. They simply need more airplanes than the froggies, krauts, & teabags.
>>28356886
> you mean that student cgi ?
Also, only Russia currently mass producing jet airliter of such heavy class. Since C17 out of production.
39 on order and mostly will be used as platform for AWACS A-100, air tankers and even for laser weapon testing A-60SE
+100 of il-76 will be modernized.
>>28356827
Sources for those order numbers? Especially the Su-35 and Su-30SM ones.
>>28357027
>source
>his imagination
Russia has already canceled their order of 12 PAK-FA's, and it's looking like production is going to be completely stopped since nobody else wants them either. So there's a third of his post that's provably false.
>mfw less than 100 combat aircraft
>>28356997
>Flat-out NO to the SU35 winning vs. F22. Maybe vs. the F35.
Lolnope. War is Boring ran a bunch of CMANO sims and despite their best efforts the F-35s stomped the Su-35s every time, at which point the writers had to grudgingly admit the F-35 actually had strengths.
>>28356997
Actually, Mig-31 should fight against F-22.
Hell, F-22 was created mostly to fight exactly Mig-31. Where do you think Americans steal the idea of S-air intake after all? Exactly, from Mig-31.
>>28356827
>>28356632
>>28356320
>>28347155
Russian spirit sure is strong in this one
>Muh russia better than every other army! No problem in army! Economy strong! No problem in modern russia!
>>28357107
>Mig-31
>S-Intake
kek
>>28357107
Except passenger jets from the '60s were already using S-ducts. The MiG-31 was not revolutionary at all in this way.
>>28357027
Here is contract for Su-35
http://lenta.ru/news/2015/08/26/su35/
Here is contracts for Su-30SM for Air Force and Navy.
http://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=388193
http://www.vz.ru/news/2015/8/21/762487.html
>>28357131
>comparing passenger jet with the fighter jet which is flying above 3000km\h speed.
\k\-tier.
>>28357224
lol Russian news before the economy crashed. It's literally propaganda to make Vatniks think they are stronk. Don't believe a thing they say unless they actually get delivered.
You do realize that Sukhoi can only build 5-6 jets a year right?
>>28357241
He claimed the MiG-31 was one of the first jets to use s-ducts, I just demonstrated how that wasn't true.
>>28357107
>MiG-31
>serpentine inlets
>>28357107
>Hell, F-22 was created mostly to fight exactly Mig-31
Geez, we learned a lot in this topic, the F22 was build specifically to fight against an interceptor which mostly operate in North Siberia!
>>28357246
> propaganda to make Vatniks think they are stronk
Ofc, it's all lies.
Also, russia is finished.
-Obongo
>You do realize that Sukhoi can only build 5-6 jets a year right?
What jets do you mean? Su-30 or Su-35?
One factory can build 30 Su-30 per year.
>>28357389
Another factory can produce around the same number of Su-35 per year and even bigger since there a export orders.
>>28357421
and here we have a Su-34 factory which is producing 18 Su-34 per year! but they promised to produce more, because foreigners wants to buy Su-34.
>>28357241
>km/h
Fuck off with your communist bullshit measurements.
>>28347254
"One nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
>>28357786
km/h and kph are the same measurement though...
>>28357451
Are you saying that in low rate production one factory in the US is pumping out more F-35s than three factories in Russia can pump out simpler airframes?
How are you supposed to outnumber enemy, Ivan?
nooks
>>28358044
The number of production can be increased in case of war.
One of those factory producing 60 Su-30 & Yak-130
So how many USA produce F-35 (a single engine jet) per year?
>>28358088
At full rate, the facility is supposed to produce 230 F-35s (A, B, & C variants) per year, with emergency capacity to roll out a new fighter every day, for about 360 per year.
>>28358088
>>28358190
>>28358190
So it's still less then those factories.
Anyway, there will be no conventional war between USA and Russia. It's will ends in nuclear war.
>>28358274
>One of those factory producing 60 Su-30 & Yak-130
MUH TRAINERS
>Anyway, there will be no conventional war between USA and Russia. It's will ends in nuclear war.
MUH NUKES
>>28356464
eh
It was the bad training, morale, and tactics of the iraqi's that lost them the war.
And ofc, being outspent/outnumbered massively.
They could have certainly inflicted more losses if they weren't a shit tier arab army.
>>28358274
Am I missing something?
30+60+18<230...
>>28358360
You missed the part where production can be increased.
To be honestly, i don't really believe to you about 230 F-35 per year.
>>28358388
Speak fucking English, Vakidis.
>>28358388
You missed the part where the Russian military industry is a hollow shell of its former Soviet self.
>>28358388
>You missed the part where production can be increased.
Infinitely, right? Glorious mother Russia is truly unstoppable.
>>28358428
>You missed the part where the Russian military industry is a hollow shell of its former Soviet self.
Do you guys still use a nigger to load a shells?
>>28358482
>autoloaders are a good idea
love this meme
>>28358482
>ARMATA STRONK
>>28358512
Hey, reducing your crew to 3 to feel firstworld is a great idea if you can't into sustainable optempo.
>>28358598
If they can half the crew needed to run a ship with automation
You'd have to imagine they could do just as good with a tank.
>>28358735
Can you even into scaling? Whether there are 500 or 300 people on a ship doesn't matter, because during downtime you only need 10 or 15 on the bridge and another 10 in the engine room.
With 16 people in a tank platoon you're already pushing hard limits for sleep allotments while standing watch and LP/OPs. At 4 per tank, you're pushing the limits for maintenance and breaking track. Plus you need a minimum of two awake at a time if you want to reap human-ergonomic benefits (e.g. two people in a position keep each other awake, correct radio errors, etc. crunch the numbers and there's a 30-40% advantage over two people together instead of separate).
There's no room for giving up people if you want to fight at full speed and keep all your tanks in the game at the front.
Russia completely gave up on the latter in the Cold War, and evidently they still have no ambition for it.
>>28358388
Do you know how many f-35s have already been delivered and they aren't even at full speed production yet?
18 SU-34s per year is fucking pathetic. I think Boeing can make 18 737s in a week.
Russia can't out produce the west, with simpler jets.
>>28357246
Sukhoi doesn't build jets themselves.
KnAAPO builds Su-35 and IAPO does Su-30SM.
>>28357224
Thanks. Maybe we'll see Su-35s outside Dzemgi and Su-30SM in actual service use outside Domna (Lipetsk and Yeysk don't really count since it's just training).
>>28355017
>reach around the world
France and Britain don't have combat aircraft all over the world.
>>28347021
Please, they have to make up for being 10x fewer.
>>28355534
/pol/niggers gonna /pol/nigger.
>>28346816
because they are capable of using their militaries in an expeditionary role against distant targets without external logistical support, possessing a global reach.
also nukes, but even sans nukes the british and french have greater force projection than the chinese or russians, total force is less, but then so are the defensive liabilities of the british or french militaries, they have far less area to cover and far easier to defend borders
>>28347117
>As I said, it's pretty low in Western states. Less than half of German Tornado fleet is serviceable.
germans are a special case, neither the french or british are inclined to tolerate that level of bullshit in their military
