>What you should have posted
Or hell just post an Su-35 with the long range Vympel R77s.
>"Iraqi MiG-23s were reported to have shot down one to two F-16Cs, one Tornado and damaged two F-111s, which later were written off. All victories were scored by the ML variants. The United States stated that the losses of the F-16Cs were caused by SA-6 and SA-3 surface-to-air missiles rather than enemy aircraft."
Yep...sure did. It must be hard to get the facts right in wars that happened before you were born
One F-111 crashed itself into the desert floor while claiming it was under attack by an enemy aircraft. But it was an F1 that was supposedly attacking, and it wasn't actually there.
More likely it wasn't economical to repair them, given the USAF was beginning to phase out the F-111. The RAAF rocked god-tier F-111s up til only a few years ago.
Either way, "Herp derp totally owned a bunch of F-111s" is bullshit
Jesus, do people actually take those seriously? And before you accuse me of just defending America, go look at Iraqi claims against Iran, or for a similar Arab air force, Syrian claims against Israel. They have the same relationship with reality as a Hollywood movie with the tag "based on a true story."
Is there anything the Abrams can't kill?
>inb4 Americas obesity problem
>implying Abrams just doesn't drive up and kill the crew before they can take off, using all of Russias vodka supply as a fuel
>shell the banks
Just use your head. Raptor flies at Mach 2.2 max, MIG-25 does Mach 2.8, 3.2 if it really wants to. F-15Cs (dedicated fighter variant) with Mach 2.5 couldn't even catch it.
MIG-25 can see raptor with massive radar, spam it, and fly away like it ain't no thang.
ISIS has MiG 25s in Syria and Iraqi pilots training them.
The US is flying F-22s as escorts for F/A-18s.
If there's the slightest nugget of truth in that, we'll soon find out.
Yea, I guess it really depends. Untrained pilot in MIG-21 vs US ace and it might go to F/A-18.
I mean the MIG-21 outruns and outclimbs it, plus ATOLL is still better than AIM-9X, but it's close.
In the mod's defense, he does ban me occasionally. Try reporting me for shitposting brah. Mite b cool.
Anyway, both missiles are Mach 2.5 and everyone knows Russian missiles turn hard. At least the F-4s in Vietnam did.
Well, indeed on infinitely replaceable. Not so sure about it losing to anything short of a raptor or an F-15C, assuming F-15C and Raptor rely on extended range AMRAAM and fly mostly clean.
You know full well US and Russian pilots have never flown against each other, but here's the planes against each other.
lol, still bitter about those Shilkas USSR gave to Egypt?
Anyway, seriously, read about the operation you are referencing. Bunch of cadets out of school vs SQUADRON LEADER ACES, in an ambush, while outnumbering the Russians (yes, it was 24 or something Russian planes, but most of them never got there, and small groups were engaged).
That reminds me of the time I shot down an SU-35BM with an abrams in BF3.
Bitches don't know about my guided shell.
It was a monkey model!!!
We clearly gave a monkey model to that pilot.
Stop basing your self esteem on equipment, please. Love them or hate them, the Russians built some amazing shit.
Its got brand new Super hornets, and the regular hornets were still delivered in 84-90, so they arnt that old as far as aircraft go.
As an example the Tornado is just being retired and was introduced 5 years before f-18 came to australia, so you could presume they are at the end of life, but still effective
>MIG-25 does Mach 2.8, 3.2 if it really wants to
But it doesnt want to
Engine would melt at Mach 2,8 if it maintained that speed more than few minutes
OP, you silly fag. You posted the wrong picture.
This. Is the raptor killer.
Pretty this. Mig-31BM is integrated into network with ground radars and AWACS planes. L-band ground radars guide Mig-31 to best shooting point (automatically, btw), plane or awacs radar give guidance to missile. Pilot just push the button. Of course in 1v1 f-22 is superior. But MIg-31BM never fly alone
Why are Russian planes so ugly and poorly-built, /k/? I mean, look at this thing! It's fresh of the factory floor, and subject to regular maintenance! I don't even know if it can fly!
And don't even get me started on Russia's stealth fighter, it looks like a toy!
Meanwhile, they're putting out "state of the art" fighters that look like this
And America's about to retire things like these on account of their being too outdated. What's wrong with Russia, /k/?