Let's not forget though that Persia invented Algebra, and as for mass-production...they learned from the best (yeah China is the best, but show me an original design they are manufacturing. Yeah!!! Thought so!!!)...the good ol' USA. Not overly afraid of them though, they failed, over ten years, to defeat a government that took 6 weeks to defeat the first time, 3 weeks the second. OK...I'm getting political now. Politics off.

Actually IK, I think that's a pretty good point, and more of a military analysis rather than political.

Iran couldn't defeat a foe that another country defeated in a matter of weeks - I think that is a somwhat valid comparison of their capability, with no politics involved.

When Iraq attacked Iran, Iraq was at it's peak and Iran was still dealing with the after effects of the revolution.

When the US kicked Iraq out of Kuwait, Iraq was still recuperating from the Iran-Iraq war and was not in very good shape financially or militarily. By the time we went back there to invade Iraq was a shell of a country of no significant capability. It's military was in shambles, it's government broke and it's people devoid of the national unity required to defend itself.

Currently, Iran is respectable for what it has, under the circumstances it has operated over the past 27 years. Against the US military it won't hold-up airpower wise...but they will put up a good fight.

The F-15 and the F-14 are about equal but the USAF nows all about the F-14. They now the weakness, so shooting it down will be a piece of cake.

God, people here like to brag so much over how someone shot down old migs 21, 23, 29 of the mighty Serbia or Iraq like it proves something.

Up to date american army with F15 with awacs support and huge advantage in quantity vs old first releases of migs29 that those tiny countries had.

It is like throw first released F15 vs up to date mordern modification of migs29 or Su 30, 35 37. Would you bet on F15? I thought so. It's a common sence.

The migs Yugoslavia had would be easly handled by Russian planes. I'm guessing Serbia had mig29 delivered in USSR times, comparable to the ones that Luftwaffe had some time ago.


From Luftwaffe MiG-29 experience: http://www.aeronautics.ru/mig29site2.htm

"I should stress that I’m talking about our Luftwaffe MiG-29s, which are early aircraft. They also removed the Laszlo data link and the SRO IFF before the aircraft were handed over to us, so in some respects we’re less capable than other contemporary MiG-29s. From what we hear the latest variants are almost a different aircraft. I’d like to see our aircraft get some of the updates being offered by MiG-MAPO. The more powerful engines, better radar, a new navigation system, a data link and an inflight refuelling probe."

Mordern up to date modifications of a time of Russian and USA 4th(+) gen planes has never faced each other in a real fight, and noone here can clime that this or that plane "r0x0rs!!! wins hands down!!".

Though General Hal M. Hornburg has his thoughts on this topic, and I sure would beleive him more than to some fanboys here, the link: http://www.cdi.org/russia/313-9.cfm

First of all, nobody mentioned anything about Serbia in this thread, so I'm not sure what you're on about there. What the combat AARs prove is that one aircraft shot down another. Is there really much else to read into them other than that? What I love is when someone comes here with their first post, accuses anyone who is stating simple historical facts of being a fanboy, and then proceeds to deal in pure hypotheticals about how some mythical air force would be able to give the USAF a good fight because they'd be more modern than Iraq and Serbia. What do you have to say about the Iranian AARs in which they shot down a few of the Soviet Union's finest? Heh...I guess the Iranians had an unfair advantage over the Soviets..and THAT was back when VVS pilots actually GOT more than 20 to 30 hours per year in their jets. Its the same old rubbish..."Well, they only lost because of...insert string of excuses", or "Well, they only won because of...insert string of excuses". With all due respect to your internet "General", I wonder what he has to say about the amount of stick time VVS pilots get in a year. Perhaps he too thinks that winning a war is all about technology with no tactical experience to back it up.

Oh...that's even better!!! LMFAO! I just read that article you linked and its about Cope India?!!! Yes, the F-15 has won numerous times in actual combat, but that doesn't count (again...insert excuse), but a scripted exercise proves that a more modernized Air Force would beat them? I'm wondering...do you have any background AT ALL in military aviation? Those exercises are about training in specific skill sets, they are NOT an all-out competition. If you would like to believe they are, OTOH, feel free to...and tell Elvis I said "Hi".

I agree with the previous post about the training not being an all-out competition. If it were, the Eagles could defeat the enemy from over 40 km away with their AMRAAMs!

Don't get me wrong...the Indian Air Force is quite good. In fact, I think their pilots get even more stick time than USAF pilots. They ARE flying an EXCELLENT airframe, there's no doubt about that. One thing to remember is that most Indian articles about this exercise make no claims of victory or defeat, they simply state the facts of the exercise. US articles are dramatized, with comments taken out of context, all for the purpose of selling newspapers...oh...and there's that little political aspect too..."WE NEED MORE F-22s!!!" But, the airframe is only as good as the weaponry it carries. The Archer is quite possibly THE best heater in the world, but the BVR weapons available to the Sukhois and MiGs are still largely unproven.

Iking, can you clarify something for me?? The Archer is better than the 'Winder. I'm curious.


KW

Superior maneuverability. It has had this advantage for years, due to a combination of aerodynamic and thrust-vectoring directional controls. The 9X is attempting to close that gap, but it definitely has its work cut out for it. Its definitely a well-respected missile among Western fighter pilots. They basically train to recognize that getting within the launch parameters of an Archer on an opposing aircraft is pretty much a death sentence. This again comes from different warfighting doctrine, with the US heavily favoring an AWACS-supported BVR fight.

I see. Thanks IK. I was just curious about it. I always thought that the Sidewinder was one the top heaters in the A2A arena today.

KW

Usually we talk about the aircrafts only. I do like aircraft build in all part of the world, operated by any airforce, but what I really think is that while U.S. planes might seem superior one day and inferior another, or that the U.S. seems to be making stupid moves dismantling. I have the highest respect for U.S. ability, and U.S. own view of, how wars are fought and won. This goes back to the drawing board when designing new A/C. If there is a was the U.S. will show that "it can dance, or walk the walk". The armed forces like one single organism. That takes practice and experience. Practicing cost money, which the U.S. seems to have had enough of, even if the treasury isn't bottomless, it has a bottom.

I also know that even if russian A/C might look like western they did not copy, the laws of physics made them look like that, two engines = two fins, russia tried to have them inboard but didn't work well with side winds during landing so they ended up outboard the engines on most aircraft etc etc etc. But when it comes to WHY they build the planes they did I have a feeling they are just matching the U.S. all the way, doing what they does.

For example I've been thinking alot, aaaalooot, about the Su24. Why was it built, how much can it carry, what's its survivability. When during a battle can the russians send them in. Where they an answer to the F-111 or what? That Su-24 is pretty cool, but seems vulnerable so less bang for the buck.

Anyways, when U.S. goes to war it is not only the weapon systems, but intelligence command communication and logistics. When all that comes together ..... there is only one superpower.

The F-14s would have a tough time even taking off. Remember, the Iranians would be fighting the entire U.S. military not just F-15s, which by themselves are easy targets. That isn't their fight.

Yep, Iraq was weak, Gulf war one, there was an estimated 30,000 to 40,000 coalition casualties predicted before it started. After which AWACS, Stealth, high tech tanks, laser guided bombs, attack helicopters all became important, not just to americans. The excuses are old.

As is, the USAF is by far ahead of anyone. 1 vs 1 maybe not, but who cares. 1 vs 1 is rare and has been forever.

If one read the books from testpilots from 1950s 1960 one get the feeling that at least during the cold war, when the U.S. put so mucj money into the military it must have affected everyday life inside U.S. .... should have anyway ..... that any idea that was worth trying was built in real life an real men actually tested it, ANY idea that might be the tip of balance in a war .... if it was a stupid Idea it was scrapped ....

So ..... after reading all this and other sources ..... seems to me .... the U.S. (no branch no navy no airforce no nothing just U.S. government) , knows enough about aviation they are like 30 years ahead, I mean if they were 15 in the 50s, and 20 in the 70s, how about now ..... and they don't mass produce their best solutions .... they look around the world and ask themselves .... DO WE NEED TO BUILD WHAT WE KNOW WE CAN BUILD ..... and yes .... on a small scale ... U.S. always build and always test so there always will be a few copies of everything ....

Ans yes they are many many years ahead .... and also their treeasury isn't without a bottom so while coming up with something is one thing, massproducing is another,....... but if a real threat materialized, I guess the U.S. could change it's plans, start a motivation campaign, and then raise the taxes for the citizens, and start mass producing the counter weapon .... cause it's been on the drawing board the last 20 years .....