Except that the F-15 is no longer the best US plane. And analysis of the Soviet planes through inspection by Aviation Week and Space technologies (defector planes) showed that indeed the construction techniques were a bit crude, even though nobody could argue the effectiveness of the designs and implementation. Maybe they're built better these days.

Hey Wouter. We won the Cold War. Argument is moot :P

Interesting book: John Boyd- Fighter Pilot. This gives an interesting contrarian overview of an F-86 pilot who was actually in Korea, then flew every jet we had, and went on to do very interesting things. Boyd helped design the F-15 & F-16 for highest possible fighter performance against the wishes of the WWII bomber generals who were running the US Airforce. These generals wanted everything in the USAF to deliver tactical atomic weapons and were not interested in fighter aircraft, resulting in the (Navy-designed) F4 which had no cannon, only poorly performing rockets. And high altitude F-105s doing "Iron bombs to mud" delivery missions at low altitudes against men pushing bicycles. This book includes great stories about US vs USSR fighter aircraft comparisons originated by Boyd in which he DOCUMENTED rather alarming deficiencies, as suggested by Wouter. (One can Google up this story of John Boyd- or visit his official museum display at U.S. Marine Corps. headquarters).

Keith,

as long as we are discussing fighter planes. Which US fighter do you think is a better interceptor and air superiority fighter?

Norway is to buy new fighters soon, to replace or aging F-16s. What we need is an interceptor which is fast and has long legs. It is down to the SAAB JAS, Eurofighter and the Joint strike fighter. Personally, I think the MIG-29 or SU-27 would be better alternatives.

Out of operational US fighter types, the F-22 Raptor.

As far as what would make the best interceptor for Norway - the true answer for that comes down to more than just the outright performance of the plane, and have largely to do with the other requirements for supporting and operating the fleet. Maintenance schedules, spare parts deals, runway and facility requirements, repair capabilities, and export approval all factor in. Or it requires a nice smooth long runway to take off with ordinance and the requirements state less than that (highways, unimproved or damaged airstrips, forward deployment areas). The best peforming airplane isn't always the best choice.

For those reasons I'd say either the JAS, Eurofighter, or JSF (now F-35 Lightning II?) as you mentioned are probably better choices for the role. Which one is chosen will likely be a result of politics and support deals.

Is the F-22 in active duty? How many have been delivered?

The logistics and support are of course what makes an airforce able to fly missions. Not to knock the JSF (F-35?), but I see it more suitable in an air to ground role then as an interceptor. It's too slow to intercept and force currently operational russian planes away from our borders. Especially so for our arctic terretories.

They're trying to get your vodka, aren't they? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Norwegian vodka? Aquavit yes, but vodka? You are not thinking about Absolut, which is from Sweden (SAAB JAS and other cool military equipment like the CV90)

Yup, F-22 is in active service. Not sure how many or where they are deployed. Doubt they will see battle anywhere any time soon unless they are truly needed. Not sure of status of any export allowances.

Which version of the JSF/F-35 is being considered? If the STOVL version is used a more forward deployment could reduce the need for outright speed in an intercept. Also, for any aircraft type, the time to get in the air is crucial unless you have patrols always up. Another consideration though is whether the plane is for intercept only, or multi-role. If multi-role then you have to choose your compromises. Also, tradeoffs in speed versus range may be important, with the internal storage the JSF may have an edge there - speed may actually be comparable with a weapons load, and range may be better.

It was a jab at the Russians ... "they'll do anything for Vodka"

...nevermind...

Which may or may not be better than folks who will do anything for a quarter...

But back to the unhijacked portion of the thread - I want one of these. The commute to work would be so much more fun! Although I might be close to the no-fly zone, in which casae the conversations about intercept fighters would suddenly become important...

[hijack] We have production equipment there and are hopefully selling them a filling machine this year. They have a very nice (government owned) facility [/hijack]

<****.

Gree,
Motors are good....

Yes, and I'm not sure. There's a full wing of F-22's at Langley AFB in Virginia now, and I know the USAF plans for wings at Kadena (Okinawa), Hawaii, and New Mexico next. I just don't know how many planes they have, but I'd guess it to be 20 or so.

I wonder if they'd notice one of those engines strapped to my 430/F14? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

<****.

Vladimir,
Here's a great 5 min. movie of the Sukhoi SU-30

<****.