Originally Posted by
USMCFLYR
I agree that the F-22 seems to be an orphan, but the F-35 , if it ever becomes to be (you can tell I have little faith in any present timelines) is already a leap in technology above the F-22 from the briefs that I saw.
I've read the -35s software is a leap but the airframe is doggy. Somewhere I read the wingloading is approaching that of the Century Series fighters. ???
. As for never flying the 'A' model of anything, i can partially agree except for later Lots of an 'A' model. I have quite a few hours in the 'A' model of Hornet and it was quite capable
Yes, quite capable but without the speed, range and lifting capability of the old -14 and if it was so capable, why the SUPER Hornet.
The Russians have a history of being less impressed with fine details and being more interested in brute power,
The history of the Russians is to build equipment that will stand up in the field, not some gold-plated hangar queen. They do not expect the equipment (or men) to last and if the air has separated at 500kts from the surface, why worry about 1/2in gaps?
There is no deate that the T-80 isn't a good tank, but in the hands of children who don't know how to employ them to their advantage they were sitting ducks.
In what must have been a double insult, reportedly one of the MiG-29's original test pilots was asked by some US pilots about the -29 in the hands of the Iraqis and why they had done so poorly. His comment was it was "...like pigs wearing a Rolex."