Cobra manouvre ain't much.
I appreciate much more the plane that is stealthy, with far better onboard computer systems, than that that could execute cobra manouvre! And the Su was made to rival the F-15. In some things it exceeded F-15, but the F-15E is much better thatn it's predecessor, even there are some experiments that are made on F-15 about 3D vectoring systems, since the Raptor won't probably get more money from Congress, and the project will probably be abandoned. It's not a very bright decission on my opinion, but the plane is still classified so maybe the Congress knows probably more than I do. Anyway the new F-15 will certainly exceed most of the planes in therms of manouverability (maybe not Gripen and the F-16).

Originally Posted by Uncle_Sam

Cobra manouvre ain't much.
I appreciate much more the plane that is stealthy, with far better onboard computer systems, than that that could execute cobra manouvre! And the Su was made to rival the F-15. In some things it exceeded F-15, but the F-15E is much better thatn it's predecessor, even there are some experiments that are made on F-15 about 3D vectoring systems, since the Raptor won't probably get more money from Congress, and the project will probably be abandoned. It's not a very bright decission on my opinion, but the plane is still classified so maybe the Congress knows probably more than I do. Anyway the new F-15 will certainly exceed most of the planes in therms of manouverability (maybe not Gripen and the F-16).

1) The cobra manoeuvre is much. It’s an indication of how controllable an airplane is. The aerodynamics on those Sukhoi fighter planes are brilliant. Don’t say “it aint much” it makes you look like you don’t know what you’re talking about.
2) there's more then one type of su, Sukhoi is a manufacturer, not a type, so it wasn't "made to rival the F-15"
3) stealth is nice, but if the enemy fighter pilot sees you with his own eyes, it's useless, a good handling, manoeuvrable plane is what you need at shorter range.
4) I know of the vectoring systems tested on f-16, and that works great, but it's not in production, so it won't do anything in real life right now.
5) I didn't know that the f-22 project would be abandoned, how do you know that?
6) What the new f-15 probably will or will not exceed is not the point, although I doubt that it will be more manoeuvrable then a new type Sukhoi. The fact that you say that it probably won't outperform the f-16 is a good indication for that.

My point is, the world isn't black & white, it's grey tones. The US isn't "the best" at everything. That's no shame, it's just that people not born in the US can be intelligent too, even if they work for a Russian aircraft manufacturer. ( Don't forget how the US became the first country to have the a-bomb) Stop pushing the US military products to be the best. Oh and Redneck warned you to provide sources. I'd like that, 'cause for now it looks like you get your facts mixed up a little.

SR-71 BlackBird and the B1-A

Originally Posted by Sgt. Nick Fury

The got your best HARDware right here.

(img edited out)

Infantry hold ground......equipment does not.

That's beside the point. people are not hardware. let's not try to turn this in a "this branch really rules!" topic.

Originally Posted by 1217

1) The cobra manoeuvre is much. It’s an indication of how controllable an airplane is. The aerodynamics on those Sukhoi fighter planes are brilliant. Don’t say “it aint much” it makes you look like you don’t know what you’re talking about.
2) there's more then one type of su, Sukhoi is a manufacturer, not a type, so it wasn't "made to rival the F-15"
3) stealth is nice, but if the enemy fighter pilot sees you with his own eyes, it's useless, a good handling, manoeuvrable plane is what you need at shorter range.
4) I know of the vectoring systems tested on f-16, and that works great, but it's not in production, so it won't do anything in real life right now.
5) I didn't know that the f-22 project would be abandoned, how do you know that?
6) What the new f-15 probably will or will not exceed is not the point, although I doubt that it will be more manoeuvrable then a new type Sukhoi. The fact that you say that it probably won't outperform the f-16 is a good indication for that.

My point is, the world isn't black & white, it's grey tones. The US isn't "the best" at everything. That's no shame, it's just that people not born in the US can be intelligent too, even if they work for a Russian aircraft manufacturer. ( Don't forget how the US became the first country to have the a-bomb) Stop pushing the US military products to be the best. Oh and Redneck warned you to provide sources. I'd like that, 'cause for now it looks like you get your facts mixed up a little.

I agree compleetly, i have never seen an aircraft do those manuvers like the sukhoi does and still make it back alive.

My point is we spend billions of dollars on equipment, while we keep the real HARDCOREware in poverty. Your average serviceman makes less then your average office clerk. Don't get me wrong I am excited by all the new military technology as the next guy. But all of that crap is useless without flesh, blood, brain cells, and determination and willpower that is motivated to use it properly. This is not about ANY one branch or service. I just think we need to stop spending all our money on Pentagon Incorperated (tm) just so some greedy vulture with brass and trumped up ribbons can enlarge his retirement portfolio, and more on the actual guys who get stuff done.

We are WAY WAY WAY ahead of the curve technologically, and equipment wise.....but we are damn short of military personal that are actually prepared to go into a theatre of operations.

Maybe I am some what biased in that I do mean specifically infantry, wether army or marines, or freakin seals or whatever.........Men with guns hold ground, planes do not.......we have dangerously become way...WAY too dependent on our airpower to solve military problems. I mean no disrespect to the Airforce and Navy pilots when I say that. Those gusy kick ass and are on teh cutting edge of American military might. But those guys can not stop terrorists in cities, they can not do anything about mass looting, and keeping streets safe from junta wanna be thugs, they can not keep security in teh streets, tehy can not gaurd political figures from snipers, we are not in an age of wars against vast armies......(thank god).....but we are in a war in close quarters, and with people's minds.

If I got to choose some ULTIMATE weapon of modern warfare in the 21st century????....and you won't let me consider teh troops themselves.....well this would be it. It's powers are DEVESTATING.

Okay,
But it's not military hardware, so it's

If you want to start another thread on that subject, go for it, Nick, but please stay on topic here.

OK....Firstly, as I allready said, humans are not hardware. So stop it. Next Human=Best hardware post will be deleted. I allready deleted one of them, because it had a large picture showing us what humans look like....WE KNOW!

Now, as to the Cobra manuver, I saw it in real life and its amazing. Shows for the power of the russian aircraft.

Now, you guys just keep calm.

How about the browning M2 machine gun? Its been in service since the 1930's and still going strong. Its a very effective piece of hardware...especially if your on the recieving end I'd imagine. Its been around for 70 years and can still take out men and equipment of today. You can use it from an armor platform, humvee platform, and 2 people could use it from a tripod. It doesnt expend fuel and only needs the CLP. Its more deadly than an AK since it can punch thicker armor, and yes, it could be a reason to use the camera. Its so deadly that troops will sit around and discuss the "only use on equipment" debate. There ya go