Search results

Ok, if you don't want to understand, let me play your game.. eventually you won't be able to hide anymore you know. there you go, I have even underlined it for you, so you don't have to get tired looking.. My point is there is a Radar that can track a baseball sized object from 4700km away...

Not an article.. a brochure from MDA itself!

I drag bullshit? I have provided proof and your objection is that I don't quote the specific line??? You clearly are a joke.

Get used to it, that is how knowledgeable people interact at a certain level. And don't change the subject.

I acknowledge my obligation and link the MDA document. it is there for everyone to read. People who do not have my understanding are not my concern. I sympathise but I cannot help. What is my concern is people who come on public fora and claim things that are simply not real.

Why should I ? Everyone in this forum is expected to be able to read. What kind of mentality is this you have ? The proof is there, from the most official lips.. where is your arguments' proof ?

You have a hard time taking something on your own and tracing it.. I trust you don't have a hard time reading too. http://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/sbx_booklet.pdf

to prove what? tell me fine there you go, Raytheon Company: Sea-based X-Band Radar (SBX) and Sea-Based X-band (SBX) Radar - Video oh and I said a baseball sized ball ..not a stealth target , it may mean similar but don't change my words..

the only one who should be taught is you!

The radar is called SBX-1, and is part of the GMD of the MDA, what is your problem? you cannot look up things ? Do you not have sources ? Where is the proof for your arguments kid? We are all still waiting ..

No kid, sooner or later everybody has to put their money where their mouth is, and you haven't !!! Everytime you are called out, you fail to respond and you come back with nonsense such as "i am bored with this and that" .. Either you come out and you prove what you say, or you are just a...

Really ? Once again you are NOT answering anything. You are full of talk but no juice. Which argument of mine is empty ? which one? point it out ! say this is the one that is empty ! this is where you are wrong for this and this reason etc. Tell us, where your background comes from and...

In what way kid? I am asking you again, prove your background and your knowledge..

Man I had enough of this utter nonsense. He hasn't brought forward a single argument of even a true (even laughable) position. He just refutes and opposes everyone elses.. this is a childish joke. It is clear .. he has no aviation experience. he has no engineering experience he has no basic...

he served with them

Yugoslavia is not so much of a real war. The serbs did not really want to engage, actually they tried hard not to. Iraq on the other hand, was a proper war. Bagdad was one of the most heavily defended areas on the planet. I have/had no respect for the iraqi air force as a fighting total, I...

funny but alas ..our F-16s do not have F-35s "internet connection" ... no way to exchange words .. :(

agreed, but it also brings new ways to do things. Pilots flying the F-35 will have to become almost "internet warriors" with so much connectivity the avionics of this plane bring to the table.

The F-35 is a hard thing to evaluate. It is going to be and it isn't going to be at the same time. Hard to explain.

The numbers may be correct on paper ( I don't have data on Chinese weapons, apologies to Chinese friends), real combat is not like this however. on the other hand, even if you want to count it like this, the Rafale will be armed with Meteor missiles in the very near future.