Oh, perdona. Olvidaba que el Raptor estaba diseñado para lograr la superioridad aerea sobre Afganistan y sobre Libia. ¿Que me estas diciendo? ¿Que no vale enfrentarle con un enemigo que le pueda derrotar? Pues acabas de diseñar una maniobras con Raptor de las que ganan veinte a cero. ¿A que te crees que me refiero cuando suelo decir que el raptor es un avion anecdotico?
Si, como la que obtienen los EFA y los Rafale, que para otra cosa no sirven. Porque en un ambiente moderno de SAM´s, otro gallo cantaria. or ejemplo, si Israel quisiera atacar Iran con garantias si ese pas tuviera S-300, a uien recurririan? a Rafale o EFA? ja!! a F-22 (si les dejasen) o F-35:
Accordingly, the United States could deploy the F-22 to the region -- for example, to bases in friendly Persian Gulf Arab states. Although the F-15s and F-16s already deployed to the region are more than capable for the current counterinsurgency fights in Iraq and Afghanistan, they would not be able to threaten Iran's nuclear infrastructure were the Islamic Republic to be armed with the S-300. As Ambassador Nancy Soderberg pointed out recently (at the release of The Washington Institute's Presidential Task Force report, Preventing a Cascade of Instability: U.S. Engagement to Check Iranian Nuclear Progress), the United States "ha[s] lost the ability to scare" its adversaries in the region. Forward deployment of the F-22 could restore the credibility of the military option by indicating that it remains alive, and might even cause the Russians to reconsider the sale of S-300s to Iran.
Alternatively, but more problematic, is the export of the F-22 to Israel to deal with the S-300 threat. Israel has long wanted to add the advanced fighter to its arsenal, but the F-22's export to any nation has been banned for over a decade as a result of the Obey amendment, which states that "None of the funds in this act may be used to approve or license the sale of the F-22A advanced tactical fighter to any foreign government." This amendment has been included in every defense appropriations act since 1998 in order to preserve the U.S. commercial edge and technological superiority. These concerns could be overcome by advanced antitamper measures and strict export controls. And while Congressman Obey stated in 2006 that "Times may have changed, but I don't know that we are yet at the point that would justify removing these limitations," it may well be that in light of the Iranian nuclear threat and the possible introduction of the S-300 to the Iranian arsenal, the time may be ripe to rescind the restrictions and consider export of the F-22 to Israel. Repeal of the Obey amendment (which would require congressional action) would not automatically authorize an arms sale to the Israeli Air Force, but would allow the export to be decided on its merits.
Thomas D. Crimmins is visiting National Defense Fellow in the Military and Security Studies Program at at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index ... e=Page+One
Me refiero no a que el Raptor es un avion anecdotico, sino que la guerra es muy compleja, y no solo hablamos de aviones.
Si. En Nellis, no te fastidia.
No, para ni uno ni otro, en Pekin, ok? asi te gusta mas? Hay zonas indefendibles a mi entender, como Taiwan, y otras que si, como Japon.
Y nadie te esta diciendo lo contrario. Te estan diciendo que los raptor no hacen milagros como pareces creer.
Yo soy de los que creo en los milagros divinos, no de lo hombres y maquina asi que perdona, pero no creo que haga milagrs. Solo hablo en base a datos records que ningun avion ha conseguido en los Red Flag, y que se publican. Los Rafale publicaron los suyos, y no es nada del otro mundo.
Si. Por ellos. No te jode. Habla mal de ellos, a ver como se lo vendes al Congreso. Te recuerdo que esas maniobras han sido bastante contestadas y que algunos las han llegado a tildar de escandalosas en tanto que fantasiosas. ¡No te puedo repetir lo que habria dicho Mouriño de ellas porque hay señoritas leyendo!
Pero que bien!! cuando no nos gusta algo, mienten los pilotos, pero cuando nos gustan dicen la verdad. Mira, era un piloto australiano y otro americano, en una conversacion entre ellos publicada, y dicen lo que dicen, te guste o no. Es un avion increible, fuera de lo comun. O soo los pilotos de Mig-29 pueden decir que son invencibles a 10mn? eso si, que lo demuestren como los F-22. Y recuerdo que en su dia al SH lo criticaron los propio pilotos, es decir, que si algo no les gusta a lo pilotos, es lo que hay. O solo les haces caso cuando coincide con lo que piensas?
Ahora te recuerdo que si eres capaz de constestarlas tu con documentacion que diga lo contrario. A la espera estoy.
El simple hecho de que hayan publicado eso es la demostracion mas preclara de que no se lo estan tomando en serio.
Coincide con la experiencia de los pilotos que se enfrentan a ellos:
Testimonios de pilotos:
According to Lt. Col. Larry Bruce, 65th AS commander, aggressor pilots turned up the heat on the F-22 using tactics they believe to be modern threats. For security purposes these tactics weren't released; nonetheless, they said their efforts against the Raptors were fruitless.
"We [even] tried to overload them with numbers and failed," said Colonel Bruce. "It's humbling to fly against the F-22." This is a remarkable testimony because the Red Flag aggressor pilots are renowned for their skill and experience. Lt. Col. Dirk Smith, 94th Fighter Squadron commander, said the aggressor forces represent the most lethal threat friendly forces would ever face.
Remarco:
Los esfuerzos contra los Raptors fueron infructuosos.
Es humillante volar contra los F-22.
Incluso tratamos de sobrecargarlos con numeros y fracasamos.
Testimonio de piloto australiano:
"The thing denies your ability to put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it through the canopy," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, F-15 exchange pilot in the 65th AS. "It's the most frustrated I've ever been."
Y dice el piloto del F-15 que es la vez que ha estado mas frustrado. Hablamos de un piloto de se puede considerar entre los mejores de mundo.
http://www.acc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123041725
Si no te gusta, es lo que hay compañero.
¿Como? ¿Rezando? Porque te recuerdo que el Raptor no puede comunicarse con ellos.
Pues yo te recuedo que no tienes razon... una vez mas
Other than the F-22s not being needed, perhaps a more telling reason was that the limited capabilities of the Libyan air force have kept the vaunted fighter on the sidelines. Libya fields mostly older fighters and the F-22's performance and capabilities weren’t needed. The F-22 also has a very limited capability to communicate with other coalition aircraft operating in Libya by design. Radio emission from data links that would enable the Raptor to communicate with other fighters would also potentially give the position of the stealthy F-22 away.
http://www.dailytech.com/Lockheeds+F22+ ... e21208.htm
For now, the Raptor fleet can only talk to itself without breaching secure comms. This may well have been a significant factor in the decision not to include the pane in NATO’s campaign against Gadhafi’s troops.
Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/03/25/is-a- ... z1LxVUpWCd
Defense.org
El Raptor esta diseñado para sobrevivir a las modernos SAM, cosa que ni el EFA ni el Rafale tienen cotas de invisivilidad que les garantice una supervivencia aceptable. Valen para guerras con paises como Libia, Irak, etc, con pobrisimas defensas antiaereas. Y ese cometario venia en respuesta a tu grandisimo argumento:
