Japanese DBJ 15s are the same,striped of most avionics,Isreali F15 pilots are more reliant on strategy training with the trigger button if you know what I mean.

Originally Posted by Sukio

Japanese DBJ 15s are the same,striped of most avionics,Isreali F15 pilots are more reliant on strategy training with the trigger button if you know what I mean.

In recent years, because of the school in Fallon, NV, the U.S. aviators have regained the edge in combat tactics in all versions of fighters. You learn by doing and at the TG school, formerly in Miramar, CA there is ample time in the cocpit to hone the skills, not to mention the flight time in simulators.

Your right we are taking steps to get our pilots to be more aware,as well as less relient on avionics and missle tech.Take Veitnam for example.The United States thought missles where the future of air combat,thus ,the F4,comonly called the "Flying Turkey"by its pilots ,begged pleaded,that the Air Force Follow the Navy's and Marine Corps example,and instail guns on the new plane,eventualy crews instialed thier own guns this mistake is being prevented by todays methods.

Originally Posted by Sukio

Your right we are taking steps to get our pilots to be more aware,as well as less relient on avionics and missle tech.Take Veitnam for example.The United States thought missles where the future of air combat,thus ,the F4,comonly called the "Flying Turkey"by its pilots ,begged pleaded,that the Air Force Follow the Navy's and Marine Corps example,and instail guns on the new plane,eventualy crews instialed thier own guns this mistake is being prevented by todays methods.

Where are you getting your information? You might be right about the pilots putting guns in their planes at one times, but Vietnam was not the war that happened in. All of our jet aircraft have always had guns installed. Especially in the Phantoms.

Why,why do every time I use a referance from something,I get asked the same qustion,where are you getting your information from?I knew this for some time now,and really cant remeber how I came upon this information.And Why?Why do every time I use a realy word antic or referance I keep getting cut down in the face of others?

Am I doing something wrong?

Originally Posted by Sukio

I know this is a little odd, but will the F 35s sent to the UK and Austrailia be as advanced as the US versions?I mean they are priced the same...

As a Tier 1 participant in the development program, the F35s the British Navy get should be equally capable, but the UK is likely to tailor the platform (the source of some of the tension over this sale).

Personally, I have some serious reservations about the F35 programme. I think the French were right in wanting a naval variant of the Eurofighter, and that, indeed, the F35 is too expensive, likely to come in late, and more suited to American than British requirements.

Indeed,I had a feeling that the British Navy would fare better on the New F35 JSF beacuase they have expericance with Military avionics and hardware the rivals the United States.But the thing the makes the shipments so "tense"for the other potetial buyers is the enormous price tag for a more basic aircraft.Im not sure,and doubt anyone is ,of how the F 35 will fare once released but I am certain that changes to ential contracts will be changed due to Priceing.

Senior Chief:

Originally Posted by Fighter-Planes.com

In 1965 the first USAF Phantom IIs were sent to Vietnam. Early versions lacked any gun armament. Coupled with the unreliability of the air-to-air missiles (AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-9 Sidewinder) of the time, this major drawback resulted in the aircraft loss after they ran out of missiles. During the course of the Vietnam War, its contemporaries, the MiG-19 and MiG-21, inflicted heavy losses on the F-4s when the American aircraft were ambushed after returning from bombing assignments. This prompted the USAF to introduce an M61 Vulcan 20 mm cannon in the nose of the aircraft, below the radome (although no Navy or Marine Phantoms ever had an integral gun).

And before you ask, here's my source:
http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/f4.htm

Originally Posted by Sukio

Why,why do every time I use a referance from something,I get asked the same qustion,where are you getting your information from?I knew this for some time now,and really cant remeber how I came upon this information.And Why?Why do every time I use a realy word antic or referance I keep getting cut down in the face of others?

Am I doing something wrong?

A simple link would suffice to keep from getting the questions asked.

Originally Posted by c/Commander

Senior Chief:



And before you ask, here's my source:
http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/f4.htm

As stated before, I am not up to speed on the USAF. I do not believe that the Navy ever had Phantoms without guns.

If I generalized my comment I am sorry.

Just for the record, the AF conducts missions in differently than the Navy.